Including the excluded: Marginalised poor communities and development practices in rural Nepal Ganga Dutta Acharya B.Sc. Agriculture, MA Sociology MA Development Studies A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2018 School of Agriculture and Food Sciences, Faculty of Science Abstract The participation of beneficiaries in development programs is widely seen as a potential means for empowerment and inclusion of socially marginalised peoples, and democratisation of the grassroots. International development agencies such as the World Bank and the United Nations Development Program, and critics of conventional centralised ‘top-down’ development approaches, emphasise the role of participatory practices in social transformation through inclusion and empowerment. However, some empirical studies scrutinising the unequal power relationships between external development experts and marginalised peoples in participatory development processes, point out the potential risks of strengthening unequal power relationships, despite the emphasis on empowerment and inclusion. A key research gap was identified: that the experiences of the socially marginalised people themselves, who have increasingly been involved in participatory development programs are generally underexplored in development research. This research set out to examine whether participatory development programs targeted at socially marginalised poor communities of Nepal did in fact contribute to their inclusion and empowerment. A qualitative multiple case study research design was employed in three highly marginalised rural poor communities – Madhesi Dalits, landless fishers’ community (Fishers), and Chepangs of South- Central Nepal. An actor-oriented perspective and social interface analysis approach was adopted to comprehend the marginalised peoples’ experiences of development interventions in their particular contexts. The case study methodology involved in-depth interviews, focus groups and observation. The study findings showed that various state and non-state agencies have increasingly adopted and promoted participatory approaches and invested resources for the socio-economic development of marginalised peoples; however, the equity and empowerment implications of these efforts for the local communities were limited. Collaboration of marginalised peoples’ organisations with external development agencies, particularly non-governmental organisations (NGOs), provided opportunities for them to access development resources, engage in networks and develop leadership. On the other hand, NGOs also contributed to the ‘professionalisation’ of community organisations by valuing leaders with professional or academic knowledge, rather than those with indigenous wisdom. In several instances NGOs advocated on behalf of those they considered ‘ignorant’ people and displaced them from their prior collective participation in social struggles against systemic discrimination and oppression. Interactions of community groups with NGOs led to the co-option of community leaders, creating elite groups and turning them into local brokers – a different social category – rather than facilitating their roles as active agents to encourage grassroots mobilisation for social transformation. i The study results indicated that in their efforts to empower marginalised people, NGOs promoted neoliberal notions of empowerment that focused on individual capacities and needs. The poverty and voicelessness of the marginalised peoples were viewed as an issue of inadequate individual capacity rather than outcomes of a long socio-cultural and historical process of subordination that resulted in reduced power and limited access to resources and opportunities. Local people were encouraged to focus on personal gains rather than the collective welfare. This became an incentive for local leaders and community elites to be co-opted within the existing power structures, where they would derive personal benefits rather than mobilise active citizenry for social transformation. Development programs emphasised managerial and technical solutions for the problems of poverty and exclusion, diverting attention from collective struggles against socio-cultural and political oppression. The individualistic approaches undermined the potential of collective struggles for equity and justice. This, in effect, limited the scope of community development to economic reductionism, ignoring complex socio-cultural and political barriers for empowerment of the marginalised peoples. These effects, though unintended, contributed to marginalised peoples becoming passive recipients of development aid, reduced dissenting voices against socioeconomic inequalities and discrimination, and weakened community solidarity and agency. This reproduced unequal power relations and perpetuated the status quo. ii Declaration by author This thesis is composed of my original work, and contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference has been made in the text. I have clearly stated the contribution by others to jointly-authored works that I have included in my thesis. I have clearly stated the contribution of others to my thesis as a whole, including statistical assistance, survey design, data analysis, significant technical procedures, professional editorial advice, financial support and any other original research work used or reported in my thesis. The content of my thesis is the result of work I have carried out since the commencement of my higher degree by research candidature and does not include a substantial part of work that has been submitted to qualify for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution. I have clearly stated which parts of my thesis, if any, have been submitted to qualify for another award. I acknowledge that an electronic copy of my thesis must be lodged with the University Library and, subject to the policy and procedures of The University of Queensland, the thesis be made available for research and study in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968 unless a period of embargo has been approved by the Dean of the Graduate School. I acknowledge that copyright of all material contained in my thesis resides with the copyright holder(s) of that material. Where appropriate I have obtained copyright permission from the copyright holder to reproduce material in this thesis and have sought permission from co-authors for any jointly authored works included in the thesis. iii Publications included in this thesis “No publications included” Submitted manuscripts included in this thesis “No manuscripts submitted for publication”. Other publications during candidature “No other publications”. iv Contributions by others to the thesis “No contributions by others” Statement of parts of the thesis submitted to qualify for the award of another degree “No works submitted towards another degree have been included in this thesis”. Research involving human or animal subjects The research involved community people as research participants. Therefore, an ethical approval was obtained from School of Agriculture and Food Science (SAFS) Ethics Committee (Approval ID: SAFS/H15/01) on 18 February 2015. The approval letter is attached in the appendix 3 of this thesis. v Acknowledgements I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to my advisory team: Professor Helen Ross, Professor Jim Cavaye and Dr Gomathy Palaniappan for their constant guidance, constructive feedbacks, advices and encouragements during this research process. I am indebted to my principal advisor Professor Helen, for her valuable suggestions and critical feedback on my written works, and encouragements. Without her efforts this dissertation would not have progressed as it has. Her contributions have been invaluable to my professional development. I am profoundly obliged to Professor Jim Cavaye, who took me on board in this endeavour until the middle of the journey as principal advisor. Professor Jim guided me to frame the overall structure of the study and also constantly provided valuable advice and motivation throughout the study. Academic staff at the School of Agriculture and Food Sciences – Dr Carl Smith, Dr Miranda Mortlock, Dr George Doug, Dr Philip Curry and Dr Anoma Ariyawardana – deserve special thanks for their constructive feedbacks as members of the milestone review panels. Thanks are due to Kaye Hunt and other administrative staffs in the Graduate School for their help to manage academic affairs during my candidature. Thanks to Holly Roberts and Claudia Morales at UQ International Scholarships who were immensely supportive to provide necessary advice regarding scholarships matters. I am thankful to Ms Juliet Middleton for her editorial assistance on my thesis. I would like to express my sincere thanks to all people from the study communities for their unconditional support and involvement in the research process, and for sharing their development experiences relevant to this research. Special thanks go to Soamt Ghimire, Ravi Shrestha, Kumar Guragain, Badri Ojha, Ram Lakhan Harijan and Amar Bahadur Majhi for their support during my field work. I thank the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) for granting me prestigious Australia Awards to pursue this landmark academic degree of my life. The Government of Nepal, Ministry of Agriculture Development, where I am employed, deserve