By Siri Hettige –

Prof. Siri Hettige

Introduction:

Sri Lanka has been under the influence of neoliberal, open economic policies and authoritarian political tendencies over several decades, followed by political populism in the recent past. As is well known, poor governance has been an integral part of the political landscape of the country during this period. The adverse economic, social, political, cultural and environmental issues that arose as a result of the above policies and increasing mismanagement of public affairs have been widely discussed and, in the run up to the recently concluded Presidential and Parliamentary elections, most of the above issues drew the attention of many critics and activists. Now the national elections are behind us, and a new regime is in place, it is the expectation of the wider public and many people outside Sri Lanka that the country will find the policy space to address the persisting and emerging issues and create conditions that would be conducive for inclusive and sustainable development and providing adequate social protection to vulnerable individuals and families in the country. But, such a rapid turn around is not easy as some of the adverse changes that have taken place in the economy, society, public institutions, popular culture, and the social sectors like health, education and transport cannot be easily reversed. Yet, a large majority of people who undergo various hardships cannot wait for too long as their day to day problems are acute and need to be addressed within a reasonable period of time. In fact, what is necessary to recognise by all is the fact that it is the the unprecedented hardships created by the economic crisis that largely prepared the ground for the subsequent, peaceful political transformation we witnessed over the last few months.

It is true that, with the election of a new government, many people tend to have high expectations regarding a rapid improvement of social and economic conditions in the country. Yet, it should not be difficult for any independent and rational observer to see the deep rooted nature of the serious economic and social issues. This is true not only for the massive debt burden that the country continues to face and the highly distorted and imbalanced nature of the country’s economy but also the serious issues in the social sectors. These cannot be resolved within a short period of time, though this is very much the desire of a large majority of people. All economic and social indicators clearly attest to this fact. While there is an urgent need for the country to rapidly embark on a path towards inclusive and sustainable development based on an integrated, evidence based policy framework, it is equally urgent to come up with a well thought out national programme to respond to the pressing needs of a large segment of the underprivileged population. The Challenge is to overcome the limitations of a highly centralised state bureaucracy and find a way to reach out to people in need at the periphery. On the other hand, it is not difficult to make use of the existing Human Resources within the relevant state institutions for this purpose. But, what is also urgently needed  is to make arrangements at a local or community level to ensure whatever interventions that are initiated touch the lives of the target population.

A Community -based Monitoring and Intervention System:

As is well known, most of the state interventions aimed at addressing social issues such as poverty, child protection and elderly care are driven by highly centralised state institutions far removed from the intended beneficiaries. Yet, today, in the SDG parlance, we talk about ‘leave no one behind’ but it is obvious that this cannot be made a reality unless relevant agencies get closer to people. So, the gap between the intervention agency and the service recipient needs to be bridged. It is in view of the recognition of this need that we propose the establishment of a community-based monitoring and intervention system at a local level. This would not only help keep track of the individuals and families being served in real time, monitor their changing needs and facilitate timely interventions to meet such needs. A regularly updated data base on all relevant households at the GN and Divisional Secretariat levels can not only facilitate the activities of local officials and institutions but also help aggregate such data at higher levels of administration at District, Provincial and National levels, helping to streamline institutional level planning and intervention processes across the country.

On the other hand, a community based monitoring and intervention system cannot be very effective unless the people at a community level are mobilised and empowered to be active participants in their own development rather than remaining as passive recipients of public services. Hence the need for community mobilisation and empowerment in order to make them active partners in the management of public affairs.

Community Mobilisation and Empowerment:

Introduction of universal adult franchise in Sri Lanka even prior to political independence resulted in an unprecedented broadening of the democratic system in the country. But, the highly centralised administration established in the country tended to make the citizens passive recipients of various services. Despite the subsequent establishment of local government institutions and provincial councils, people did not become active stakeholders in the public system. Though in the immediate aftermath of independence, successive governments enacted legislation and established institutions to promote public engagement in the management of local affairs such as rural development, multi-purpose cooperative movement, etc, these institutional arrangements became degenerated over time or even dormant in most parts of the country. It is against this background that it has become necessary to not only revive such institutions but establish community centres around which local people can be mobilised and organised in order to support local development and social welfare programmes. Such community centres can help deepen democracy by enabling local people, i.e. youths, adults, elders and locally based professionals play a constructive role by contributing to the management of local affairs including local level development and public welfare.

As is well known, beyond voting at regular local and national elections, the vast majority of citizens in the country have become atomised individuals, trying to take care of their own personal matters, without being active participants even at a community level. This is true not only in urban neighbourhoods but even in many villages. This is a very different situation in comparison to what was going on in rural areas and even in disadvantaged urban neighbourhoods some decades ago. This situation is the result of rapid spatial mobility of people, both intra-nationally and internationally. Many people in both rural and urban areas are on the move  for diverse purposes.

The above developments have adverse impacts on all aspects of the lives of people, in particular, their quality of life, life chances and social cohesion. This situation needs to be changed with a view to creating a more conducive living environment at a community level. In some countries like Australia, governments and philanthropic institutions have supported the establishment of neighbourhood centres to cater to the needs of different segments of the community such as children, women, youth, people with disabilities, senior citizens, etc. It we establish community centres as part of what I have proposed above to mobilise and empower communities, community centres can be an extension of the same initiative. This will naturally help ensure ‘no one is left behind’, in particular, the most vulnerable, even in a remote village or a tea plantation in Sri Lanka.

What is proposed and outlined above cannot be done in a vacuum. The larger global and national  picture is as important, if not more. Hence the last few comments on the larger context. But, I will be brief to save space.

Sustainable and Inclusive Development in a Troubled World:

2030 Sustainable Development agenda was initiated by the United Nations in 2015 and many of the SDG’s in most countries are unlikely to be achieved by 2030. Sri Lanka is not an exception. But, we have many more challenges to face right now thanks to very poor governance we have had in the country in the recent past. These challenges are too many and cannot be discussed here for want of space. These relate to the economy and employment, social sectors like health, education, transport and social development, cultural landscape, governance and the environment. The issues in each of these areas are long standing and cannot be easily resolved. But, the adoption of sound public policies and well thought out state interventions can pave the way for their eventual resolution. But, as discussed earlier in the article, many pressing day to day problems faced by a majority of people need to be and  can be addressed through bottom up interventions outlined above. On the other hand, global climate crisis is impacting on Sri Lanka today in a highly significant manner, as people in many parts of the country experienced this year by way of major floods, storms and landslides with serious consequences.

What is obvious today is that we have no time to waste, in trying to find fault with each other. Many people who are vocal about various problems today should ask themselves whether these issues fell from the heavens or they are the result what our rulers have done or failed to do in recent decades in the name of politics and governance. If we were to find who have been responsible  or are implicated in many adverse things that happened in the country in the recent past, there are many people in almost all spheres. But, what is needed is to deal with the problems at hand in order to create better condition of life for the happiness masses.

*Siri Hettige, Emeritus Professor of Sociology, University of Colombo