Rural development and communication: a community media project in Uttar Pradesh (India)

Loaded with 16% of the world’s population, India is a challenged country. More than a third of its citizens live below the poverty line - on less than a dollar a day. These people have no proper electricity, no proper drinking water supply, no proper sanitary facilities and well over 40% are illiterates. More than 65% live in rural areas and 60% earn their livelihood from agriculture. Only a meagre 3.63% have access to telephone and less than 1% have access to a computer. Therefore, providing access to timely information on agriculture, weather, social, health care, employment, fishing, is of utmost importance to improve the conditions of rural poor. After some introductive chapters, whose function is to provide a comprehensive framework – both theoretical and practical – of the current rural development policies and of the media situation in India and Uttar Pradesh, my dissertation presents the findings of the pilot project entitled “Enhancing development support to rural masses through community media activity”, launched in 2005 by the Department of Mass Communication and Journalism of the Faculty of Arts of the University of Lucknow (U.P.) and by the local NGO Bharosa. The project scope was to involve rural people and farmers from two villages of the district of Lucknow (namely Kumhrava and Barhi Gaghi) in a three-year participatory community media project, based on the creation, implementation and use of a rural community newspaper and a rural community internet centre. Community media projects like this one have been rarely carried out in India because the country has no proper community media tradition: therefore the development of the project has been a challenge for the all stakeholders involved.

La salute: un diritto o un lusso?

Il diritto a un minimo decente di assistenza sanitaria – spesso chiamato, più semplicemente, diritto alla salute – fa parte dei cosiddetti diritti di seconda generazione, cioè quelli che richiedono un impegno attivo da parte dello stato per assicurare ad ogni cittadino la possibilità di una vita dignitosa. Il diritto alla salute si trova enunciato nei più importanti documenti internazionali, a partire dalla Dichiarazione universale dei diritti dell’uomo (1948), e nella maggior parte delle costituzioni nazionali, compresa quella italiana. Tuttavia, nel Sud del mondo, la sua applicazione è ostacolata da un gran numero di fattori (povertà, guerre, corruzione politica, ecc.); cosicché la maggior parte degli esseri umani vive in società prive di un sistema sanitario nazionale, cadendo vittima di malattie facilmente curabili o prevenibili. Per affrontare questo problema, la cooperazione sanitaria internazionale ha sperimentato nel tempo due diverse forme di intervento: una incentrata sulla diffusione dell’assistenza sanitaria di base (come raccomandato dalla Conferenza di Alma-Ata del 1978), l’altra sui cosiddetti “programmi verticali”, i quali agiscono su singole malattie o branche della sanità. Nessuno dei due approcci però ha prodotto i risultati sperati. L’Ong italiana Emergency propone un modello di cooperazione sanitaria per molti aspetti innovativo: esso si fonda su progetti autogestiti e totalmente gratuiti (che vanno dalla pediatria alla chirurgia di guerra alla cardiochirurgia) ed è capace di incidere sul tessuto sociale nel quale si inserisce, fino ad influenzare le scelte politiche delle autorità locali. Solamente intervenendo in un modo simile sui determinanti sociali della salute, sembra possibile migliorare realmente lo stato di salute delle popolazioni più povere e garantire così la prima delle condizioni necessarie perché ogni persona abbia la possibilità di vivere una vita decente.

Development Aid to Water Management in Mali: The Actors, ‘Global’ Paradigms, and ‘Local’ Translations

Development aid involves a complex network of numerous and extremely heterogeneous actors. Nevertheless, all actors seem to speak the same ‘development jargon’ and to display a congruence that extends from the donor over the professional consultant to the village chief. And although the ideas about what counts as ‘good’ and ‘bad’ aid have constantly changed over time —with new paradigms and policies sprouting every few years— the apparent congruence between actors more or less remains unchanged. How can this be explained? Is it a strategy of all actors to get into the pocket of the donor, or are the social dynamics in development aid more complex? When a new development paradigm appears, where does it come from and how does it gain support? Is this support really homogeneous? To answer the questions, a multi-sited ethnography was conducted in the sector of water-related development aid, with a focus on 3 paradigms that are currently hegemonic in this sector: Integrated Water Resources Management, Capacity Building, and Adaptation to Climate Change. The sites of inquiry were: the headquarters of a multilateral organization, the headquarters of a development NGO, and the Inner Niger Delta in Mali. The research shows that paradigm shifts do not happen overnight but that new paradigms have long lines of descent. Moreover, they require a lot of work from actors in order to become hegemonic; the actors need to create a tight network of support. Each actor, however, interprets the paradigms in a slightly different way, depending on the position in the network. They implant their own interests in their interpretation of the paradigm (the actors ‘translate’ their interests), regardless of whether they constitute the donor, a mediator, or the aid recipient. These translations are necessary to cement and reproduce the network.