In many cases, development actions happen in institutions and mechanisms
such as the market, tradition and cultures.
In themselves institutions and mechanisms may not be bad although
there could be bad elements in them. Looking
at development as a journey to enhance human freedom gives us an opportunity
to evaluate these institutions and judge them in the light of how they are
enhancing human freedom to make life worth living.
Institutions and mechanisms should be evaluated along the lines of their
inclusiveness, for example, how do they promote the agency of women rather
than reinforcing their alienation? Amartya
Sen puts it clearly when he says that “there is considerable evidence that
women’s empowerment within the family can reduce child mortality
significantly” (Sen 1999: 193).
In other words, institutions and mechanisms should be playing a role in
removing the iniquities that depress the well being of the under privileged
in society including the well being of women. Women
do more domestic chores than men do. Women
should be recognized, be it in political economic or in social participation
and leadership. This is indeed,
“a crucial aspect of ‘development as freedom’”(Sen 1999: 203).
DIALOGUE
ENHANCES
FREEDOM
Focusing on life from this perspective emphasizes the fact that the
process of granting people greater freedom should be through dialogue. According
to Paulo Freire (1993), humans are humans because they have a word.
It is important to indisputably
accept that an individual is a subject, a citizen, an actor with a word, capable of communicating, acting and reflecting on her or his
own acts. In other words an
individual is a free being. By
that very fact the people are entitled to express themselves freely and to
share what their thoughts and actions are.
Through dialogue people are capable of naming the world and thereby
shaping its future. Freire says
that because
dialogue is an encounter
among women and men who name the world, a situation where some name the
world on behalf of others should not arise.
The necessity of dialogue is demonstrated in various chapters of the
bible. For instance, in order to
liberate Israel from the shackles of oppression God did not airlift them from Egypt.
Instead God engaged in various
dialogue sessions, firstly with Moses at Midian as it is illustrated in
Exodus 3: 1-12, then with Pharaoh through Moses. When
God was about to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18:
16-32), God did not just send the hails of fire; God first had a discussion
with his friend Abraham, in order to ensure that justice was done and that
the proper decision was made. Abraham
negotiated on behalf of the people of Sodom and those that were not
sinful were allowed to leave the city.
To achieve something important in life, we should never be silenced by
the unknown results that we might face, but we need to insist on voicing our
thoughts. Dialogue in most cases
helps us to achieve what we want. We see this in Luke 11: 5-11, when Jesus
stresses the importance of asking even if conditions or situations are
tough. Dialogue makes it
possible to achieve whatever we want God to give us. This
is also true in real life experience as those who are humble enough to
dialogue and ask, get whatever they want. If
we want freedom, it is right to ask for it even if the road is tough and
winding.
In the healing of the blind man, Jesus did not just come and say “You
are a blind person, I am going to heal you”. Instead
he asked the blind man what he wanted from him (John 9: 1-7). The
question was important because Jesus recognized the freedom of the blind man
to express his needs so that a proper response to his needs was clear and
could be given abundantly.
DIALOGUE
AND
EDUCATION
Dialogical action is therefore necessary for noticing and bringing the
potential of women to light so that such potential is given the respect it
deserves. In order to expand
women’s potential there is a need to recognize the fact that dialogue
should be used in the process of adult education.
This is a point that Paulo Freire highlights in his book Pedagogy
of the Oppressed: A Guide to Knowledge as Power (1993).
Education should not be the process of loading the ignorant with
knowledge; assuming that the learner does not know what the teacher knows or
that the role of the teacher is to fill learners who are empty minded with
information and knowledge. This
is “ ‘Banking Education’, where ‘the students are the depositories
and the teachers are the depositors’”, (Freire 1993: 56). Education
should be dialogical where both the teacher and the learner approach the
world as a wide phenomenon with plenty of lessons to be learnt from it. Together
the teacher and the learner can then interpret it and re-form life as the
way it should be.
Klaus Nürnberger has reminded us that:
Freire develops his educational methods against the background of this
danger. The people must consider
the revolution to be necessary; they must be committed to it; they must take
responsibility for its implementation. The
people must think for themselves and act for themselves. Revolutionary
educators should not provide a new doctrine, which would again flood the
consciousness of the oppressed; they should facilitate an analysis of the
situation by the oppressed themselves. They
should not impart the contents of their own consciousness, but, together
with the people, bring into the open, and reflect upon, the ideas that are
already present in the consciousness of the people. In this process, the
people gain their own insights and develop their own motivation. In
short, revolutionary pedagogues function merely as catalysts, not as
teachers (Nurnberger 1999: 234).
As children of God, the task that we should have is to live our lives
based on the values of the Gospel that does not ask for distinctive
boundaries in
order to administer
justice in our communities. Women
should be given freedom and a chance to develop their own scope freely and
effectively. Therefore the
patriarchal societies should open up and get ready to appreciate women’s
contribution to development harmoniously.
Consequently it is “only when the descender has reached the bottom
and the ascender has reached the top can equality of dignity be
established” (Nurnberger 1999: 251).
To sum up the thinking of Sen (1999) and Freire (1993) we can line up
with Korten (1990: 4-5) that the critical development issue for the 1990s
was not intensification. It was
transformation. Our collective
future depends on achieving the transformation of our institutions,
technology and our values. This
should include our behaviour being consistent with our ecological and social
realities.
BASIC NEEDS
This transformation must address three basic needs of our global society.
These basic needs include
justice, sustainability and inclusiveness. Justice,
Korten affirms, does not require equality of income, nor does it require
that the productive be required to support the slothful. It
does require, however, that all people have the means and opportunity to
produce minimum decent livelihoods for themselves and their families.
Korten also put it clearly that sustainability does not require that
nature be left untouched. It
does require, however, that each generation recognize its obligation for
stewardship of earth’s natural resources and ecosystem on behalf of future
generations. The transformed
society must use the earth’s resources in ways that will assure
sustainable benefits for our children.
Finally Korten outlines that inclusiveness does not mean that everyone
must enjoy equal status and power. It
does mean that everyone who chooses to be a productive, contributing
community member has a right to the opportunity to do so and to be
recognized and respected for these contributions.
The transformed society must assure everyone an opportunity to be a
recognized and respected contributor to family and society. This
is the reason we appreciate Korten’s concept of an equity-led sustainable
growth strategy where it inverts the popular concept of growth with equity
and growth with a redistribution strategy (Korten 1990: 73). This
is where justice plays its role. A
just society is necessary for the growth of every member of the community
who should respect one another and feel for each other.
What Korten has written makes us conclude that women’s potential in any
given society can only be achieved if the women have been given freedom to
do things that make them appreciate and enjoy their lives as equal partners
in development at all levels.
FREEDOM AND LIVELIHOODS
Looking at the importance of freedom, we can therefore say that the
notion of freedom and the aspect of sustainable livelihoods go hand in hand
in enhancing the potential of women. As
freedom demands that peoples’ lives need values so does sustainable
livelihoods. This is because a
livelihood is only sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stress
and shocks. It maintains or
enhances its capabilities and assets and provides sustainable livelihoods
opportunities for the next generation and thus contributes net benefits to
other livelihoods at the local and global levels with the short and long
term (Chambers and Conway 1992: 37).
When people experience unfreedom in their livelihoods, they will never
sustain their living standards. The
most important thing here is to understand that “greater freedom enhances
the ability of people to help themselves and also to influence the world,
and these matters are central to the process of development” (Sen 1999:
18). Women in a patriarchal society, find it hard to sustain their
livelihoods because of lack of freedom to exercise their potential.
For the potential in people to be utilized, they need freedom.
And for sustainable development to take place, people also need inner
peace, which is guided by freedom. With this in mind, we concur with Steve
De Gruchy when he gives the insight of Sen and Freire that:
Sen argues that freedom creates the space in which dialogue can occur so
that people can be agents in shaping not only the struggle for development,
but also the very vision of what that “development” might be... Sen
recognises, like Freire, that if agency means anything, then it is not just
a question of mindless action, but also of a contribution at the level of
theory to “values and priorities”, so that the preferences for
political, social and economic life can be shaped by all the citizens,
including the poor, and not just the dominant elites.
Subjugated women will be able to accomplish and put into effect their
ability to sustain livelihoods if
freedom is accorded to
them by society. To develop
therefore is to identify that people’s freedoms are lengthened in order
that they can be able to create a life that they have reason to value.
This is a fact that affirms the agency aspect of the individual. Sen
put it openly when he says:
With adequate social opportunities, individuals can effectively shape
their own destiny and help each other. They
need not be seen primarily as passive recipients of the benefits of cunning
development programmes. There is
indeed a strong rationale for recognizing the positive role of free and
sustainable agency -- and even of constructive patience (Sen 1999: 11).
This rationale should help the society to strengthen people’s freedom
so that their livelihoods can be sustained and appreciated at all levels.
CONCLUSION
Women, especially those in a patriarchal set up, have lagged behind in
terms of social and economic development because they lack freedom. The
scriptures from the bible emphasise the importance of granting people
freedom. This is shown by the
way God set the children of Israel free through his servant Moses. I
have also shown in this article how Jesus’ life demonstrated the
importance of dialogue.
It is necessary to recognize that true development must be based on the
love of God and our neighbour. We
must help to promote the relationships between individuals and society.
Happy Patrick Mzumara, S.J.
Lilongwe Jesuit Community
Lilongwe
