Report R3.8 Reflections and Mobilisations: Development as Global Responsibility and the Vision of a New Action Research Seminar Leader: Ananta Kumar Giri, Madras Institute of Development Studies, Chennai ananta[at]mids.ac.in The seminar sought to focus on reflection and mobilisation as key elements of action research. In the process, different notions relating to development were discussed, such as self-reflection, multidimensional growth, responsibility, etc. The discussions highlighted the role of reflection and mobilisation in the process of development. Action research was presented as a relevant form of engagement in the context of development. In the course of the discussions, various questions were raised: What is the need for local or global approaches to development? How exactly does one classify local responsibility or global responsibility? What is the unit for responsibility? Could development mean problematising? What is the difference between deconstruction and reconstruction? The discussions started with the seminar leader making a brief opening remark about reflection. Reflection has often been understood as a purely isolated practice and an act of solitude. The seminar leader sought to differ by stating that reflection is a "mutually implicated process" that generates "resonance" in a given social context. By mutually implicated, he referred to the elements (people, processes) outside the individual that facilitate what goes on within the individual, and also vice versa. In practice, the possibility of reflection is enhanced when all the parties involved in some process help each other to understand themselves (quite like one holding up a mirror in front of another person). This reporter could relate the idea of reflection to the notion of "genidentity" in the research thinking of Kurt Lewin (http://www.psychcentral.com/psypsych/Genidentity), where we go beyond the absolute existence of an object or phenomenon to appreciate the existence of multiple entities over a period of time. An object or individual could exist in reality as multiple entities as it were the phases of the same object over a period of time. Two objects are not identical necessarily because they have the same properties in common, but may be because one has developed from the other. Reflection might include appreciation of the development history of various entities and processes. Reflection in the social context could refer to a self-sustained cycle of evaluation, action, and critical thinking wherein the entities could be functionally independent but mutually dependent for evolution. This follows a typical cycle of intervention in some real world system followed by the evaluation of its effects. Each functional entity goes about its function in a clinical way with no intervention whatsoever from other entities, but in order to achieve a group-level goal (social goal) the entities intervene in (or complement) each other. Development as a process could be studied in the light of the above. The word mobilisation could have different connotations. "Socio-political mobilisation" is driven by the idea of development and the need for new social imagination. "Socio-spiritual mobilisation" is driven by the need for good foundations for a satisfying life. "Reflective mobilisation of self" is driven by the idea of self-development. Mobilisations help us explore new avenues in the world of action. Mobilisation in any given context is governed by a host interrelated factors (social, cultural, political, etc.). Mobilisation could require new ways of thinking that emerges out of various practices of life. For example, political mobilisation is not only related to politics but also driven by cultural practices and social norms. In most contexts mobilisation could be multidimensional in nature and governed by several interwoven factors. Reflection and mobilisation are useful in studying the practice of development. The word development has a positive connotation in most contexts. The process of development is triggered by an act of intervention in the normal cycle of occurrences. It is a form of action research that aims to generate a "space for resonance" in the society. Resonance refers to a communicative process involving the triggering of dormant dimensions. An example of this was discussed in the light of the “bhakti-pheri” process in Swadhyay socio-spiritual movement as a form of intervention that aims at creation of public spaces and identification of links between them. Development can be studied through various frameworks. It could be interpreted as a relationship that facilitates multidimensional growth of self and others. It could also be interpreted as a notion of freedom. The French Revolution helps us study development in the framework of rights and the Industrial Revolution pictures development in the framework of justice. Frameworks of rights and justice have their own limitations and might not be able to sustain a full-fledged model of development. The inability to properly address the environmental challenges we face today could be an example of the inadequacies of the frameworks of rights and justice. It becomes critical to fit development to a framework that would privilege and promote sustainability. In this context, the relevance of studying development in a responsibility framework emerges. The issue of development being a global responsibility was debated at length. The notions of local and global responsibilities were compared and the discussions failed to arrive at a consensual classification of responsibility as global or local. The same responsibility could be local and global as well in different contexts and to different people. A lot of contemporary development thinkers have employed the analytical device of deconstruction to expose the foundational inadequacies of development practice. In this, development is criticalled examined by unbundling the constituent constructs and questioning the assumptions and interpretations of development. This means that the process of development itself could be questioned. The idea of deconstruction was then contrasted with the idea of reconstruction. Reconstruction is a conscious effort to form alternative wholes or units (entities). While a deconstructive approach merely lays bare the constituents of an existing model and questions its legitimacy and sustainability, a reconstructive approach seeks to provide alternative models. The seminar leader introduced the participants to Swadhyay, another approach to development which entailed the development of self. Swadhyay literally means the study of self. It is a socio-spiritual movement which stresses on self-reflection and harmonious co-existence. It is a network of interacting individuals and communities. The time and labour put in by the participants becomes the wealth generator in Swadhyay. Swadhyaya transcends the boundaries of nations and has been found in different forms in India, England, Caribbean, USA, and Africa. The seminar leader claimed that the Swadhyay movement could be an example of development practice where self-study and self-development are connected to being with others in many experimental ways. In the present world-order, development can be studied as a relationship that facilitates multidimensional growth of self and others. Development could be a form of action research whose aim would be to generate spaces for constructive resonance in the society. Action research could be a disciplined practice for intentional learning from experience. The seminar leader highlighted the spirit of improvisation as important in action research. Involving aesthetics and inculcating mutual forbearance could be the necessary conditions for improvisation. Reported by Adwaita Govind Menon with inputs from C. D. Kuruvilla, D. P. Dash, and Jacob D. Vakkayil (14 October 2005). Copyleft Xavier Institute of Management, Xavier Square, Bhubaneswar 751013, India Research World (ISSN 0974-2379) http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/Home |
