An Argument for Communal Development
By: Aidan Stern
Inspired by: The Capacity to Aspire by Arjun Appadurai, 2004
In 2004, Mumbai’s slums housed 6 million people and the government had largely given up on helping the communities inside them. However, this provided an opportunity for a different kind of development approach. NGOs championed by Slum/Shack Dwellers International (SDI), an organization that has combatted urban slums in 2 dozen different countries, stepped in to test their luck alongside three other local NGOs. However, their strategies didn’t involve grand investment plans, providing food security, or trying to improve the material conditions of the community – classic developmental goals. Instead, they offered a new way to think about change.
They argued that efforts should focus on developing a strong communal voice which could become self-sufficient in addressing local problems. This process required empowering communities to debate and challenge the barriers that inhibited their goals. Only by fostering an active civil society could aid agencies understand the cultural context and practices needed to help communities achieve advancement, whether by building coalitions to lobby the government, applying for grants, or constructing amenities to increase their livelihood. In their philosophy, it had to come from the community itself.
A major part of their strategy was to build savings groups, which not only accumulated credit, but established community networks used to muddle over joint problems. SDI connected these savings groups to similar groups across different countries, building a dialogue about what worked and didn’t. For new groups, it was a vision board to help them envision their own deigns for the future. The opportunities gave the Mumbai communities chances to see what was possible from vastly different international solutions, and adapt what they liked to fit their situation. What did each person want their house to look like? What did “the good life” mean to them?
The alliance of NGOs then facilitated communal action, organizing exhibitions of ideas alongside newly hosted events and festivals with the express purpose to attract people who wouldn’t usually be involved in the burgeoning movement. Exhibitions showcased members’ housing designs made from commonly accessible materials. For example, a community event focused on installing public restrooms demonstrated the ability of the community to cheaply add sewer systems to a neighborhood that the government had deemed not worthy of investment. These public exhibitions became a space to legitimize the efforts that communities undertook. What followed was an established precedent of self-determination. Many members gained self-taught expertise as designers, plumbers, carpenters, and group organizers. Eventually, the revitalization of the slum attracted the attention of the government, which now felt confident to invest in the communities that displayed their active stewardship.
It is important to note that the NGOs maintained relationships with all stakeholders in Mumbai to make sure the communities actions were not met with arrests or stopped by bureaucracy. This group included statewide civil servants, the railway administration, the port authority, the Bombay Electric Supply and Transport Corporation, and bureaucrats of structures regulation, water supply, sanitation, and licensing of residential structures. The alliance also maintained connections with the police and aspects of the organized criminal underworld. Creating relationships with all interest groups made it easier to work without political holdups or miscommunications that could end a project before it started.
This is a template to start grassroots movements that connect disparate groups of people previously uninterested in common goals — a movement lacking around the globe, and especially at a competitive, stratified, and isolated university like UVA.
In communities around Charlottesville, these processes are already taking place. Housing programs under Habitat for Humanity build homes for those in trailer parks and teach new homeowners to build houses and learn financial literacy tools, but where is the local student activism? Everyone can organize in our communities, but too often a blind eye is turned to the things that can be changed because we don’t think it’s our problem to solve.
We don’t need to fix things on our own, but we can learn a new skill and be part of the solution.