1.3 Media – A missed opportunity

Our research discovered a consensus on the role of media in terms of its potential for ensuring broader participation in the PRSP of Bangladesh. The media has its own (commercial) interest but there is probably also a knowledge gap, and scope to generate a national debate on issues such as poverty reduction. Unfortunately, in the PRSP process media played a very limited role, but it was widely accepted that the media could play a larger role in this regard. The entire process was not beyond the reach of the media. If it was thoughtfully done, the media could have been a useful tool for ensuring broader participation, and this has felt by people in the media.

There are arguments both in favour and against the role of media in the preparation of Bangladesh 's PRSP. The people who led the PRSP process complained or were unhappy because they thought the media did not give proper coverage to the PRSP which could have initiated further awareness within the society but actually sometimes misinterpreted the PRSP process.

“…the commentaries published in the media were not very substantial, mostly claiming ‘ nothing is happening ' or the whole process is ‘ donor driven ', therefore there were not enough components to consider” (Rahman H. Z. 2006).

In contrast to such an argument, it has been claimed that the media had brought forward many critical and constructive views on the PRSP. Economists and other people wrote critical articles which could have been fed into the PRSP, but this did not happen.

“….I had written a few articles in the newspapers, I have seen a few other people who wrote in the newspapers on PRSP too, but I doubt whether the PRSP committee read them at all. I agree that these articles could have been filtered into the PRSP but I must say this did not happen” (Ahmad Q. K. 2006).

Nevertheless, if there was a will from the people who formulated the PRSP, the visual media could have also done better coverage if it had been well thought out and properly designed.

“…media could have played a very strong role in the PRSP making process, but the media have been ignored by the people who were in charge. We could have broadcast and made more programmes on poverty and PRSP if we were requested. Newspapers could have published more commentaries if they were sensitised properly. This has not been happened; what happened is that it just went through without any massive awareness and involvement of the print or electronic media” (Seraj S. 2006).

1.4 Policies are not enough

National development is now framed in one unique framework that has been chosen by external actors. Nevertheless, there is widespread scepticism about the strategic priorities incorporated into the PRSP, and in whose interest and discretion these strategies have been prioritised. Who would benefit most from these priorities and how truly these would accelerate poverty reduction, and will these priorities open up the local market for multinational companies?

It has been observed that the problem does not reside only on the policy level but also on implementation. If participation becomes a fundamental issue or keypoint in the preparation of a policy, then we also need to make sure that people play a role and actively participate in the implementation of such policy. To make a poverty reduction policy work, it has to be very clear that this will not happen only with theoretical understanding and policy exercises; rather the policies have to be people-oriented and accordingly implemented. In Bangladesh the main problem is not the process of making a document; instead the problem is in its implementation. This was a strongly held view expressed by civil society representatives. To illustrate, let's imagine the PRSP had been prepared with enough or sufficient participation: there would still be serious doubts about whether even the popular point of this strategy would be implemented with due importance and time. Previous experience suggests that this is very unlikely to happen. The policy-makers prepare something like this for the sake of preparing a new thing. It is more likely that this will be merely another document (that may have been discussed and tabled in a slightly broader arena than previous practices) but will not create any huge difference; it will be business as usual. Policies will be prepared with not much concern about their implementation. The PRSP may not have been very participatory; even so there are many good points in this PRSP which if implemented properly would lead to significant progress. If we completely reject the PRSP, we will then also discard those good points in it. For example, the PRSP suggests that instead of subsidising fertiliser production the government should focus on training and influencing farmers to cultivate in environment friendly ways, without using much chemical fertiliser or pesticides but rather make more use of organic products. But the government seems pretty reluctant and the ministries are not really bothered about this issue. This is something people would really appreciate as was found in local meetings in almost every district in the country but sadly no one is really interested to implement this (observed by SUPRO, a campaigner for popular participation in the country focusing on the PRSP). The PRSP also proposes creating a foundation to promote small and medium enterprises (SME). The implementation time for this PRSP is now nearly over but there is no sign of introducing an SME foundation that could help a lot of people and could create a great impact on the livelihoods of the poor. The PRSP has outlined a programme to promote solar energy but in reality the government is not acting in favour of it; rather the policies are going against it. The idea of participation in making such policy (while neither the government and experts nor the donors even try to include participation in implementation) is therefore a show-off, an attractive tactic for spectators who are watching the game (the people). It is like the common myth of, I love my mother , that sounds nice and similar to the idea of developing a policy with all possible stakeholders' participation but at the end of the day the implementation of such policy depends entirely on the government, or to be more specific, the bureaucrats, the most non-participatory sector in Bangladesh. Ultimately it is the government that makes things happen, and at this point if they do not have an intention to implement whatever is outlined in the policy, then it would not mean anything even if the PRSP had been prepared in a participatory way. Priority, therefore, should be given to establishing a culture of implementing the policies targeted towards increased poverty reduction. Along with the genuine intention of implementing the pro-poor programmes, an effective monitoring mechanism should also be in place to make sure that everything is on-track and nothing is unchecked. Such a mechanism is important. It needs to be understood what the previous status was and what the present condition is and where things should be in a certain timescale. Furthermore, with limited resources a good tracking system is required to observe the utilisation of funds. For example, it is hard to find any village in Bangladesh where an active NGO cannot be found. Possibly they have been working for some years, but we are unlikely to find a village in Bangladesh which is free from poverty. It is now time to evaluate how much money has been spent, how much has been directed to different programmes, and what is the output from that money. These points lead to the conclusion that shifting to a new framework or formulating a new strategy for poverty reduction with or without broader participation from the society will not be enough to eradicate poverty. However, we have learned that nowhere in this world has poverty been reduced or removed by the suggestions or framework of any external actors. So it will be thoroughly misleading if the government of Bangladesh takes it for granted that poverty will be eradicated or reduced to a significant level via external aid and prescriptions. Formulating a strategy and implementing it are two different sides of a coin. It is no good however perfect a strategy is unless it is implemented. It is very important to keep the focus on trying to implement policies that have been designed to eliminate poverty from Bangladesh . This sadly has not happened although poverty reduction policies have been floating for ages, as observed by the civil society representatives. Moreover, statements like ‘ throughout the implementation process the space for including the poor will be broadened if there is any tiny scope for it and should be created if there is no such option ' appears to be the sole effort to implant the policy that had already been prepared. But the actual possibility of implementation and therefore success (involving the poor and others in the society) of this strategy can be understood from the following quote from the Chairman of the National Steering Committee for the PRSP.

“I do admit, at this stage the PRSP seems like ‘the document'. The thing is, preparing a document is not that important; rather it is more important to implement it. The document will never be implemented unless the poor are involved in it and empowered both in access to resources and in political terms. We tried our best to go to the people, to listen to them and not to impose anything but the sad thing is they are not present in the implementing level. They are just nowhere and that is the fact” (Siddiqui K. 2006).

Preparing a PRSP with participation is one thing but reducing poverty is completely the other side of the spectrum. A PRSP requires participation for its formulation but implementation depends on the will and capabilities of the implementers. Participation is no use without continued involvement. The strategy, of course, is of great importance but if it is prepared by one group and implemented by a different group who have no involvement in the earlier stage and are detached from the other group or lack communication, then it is problematic to have such a document and it becomes worse in the implementation phase.

“…a central poverty reduction strategy offers a framework so it is better to have views and suggestions on the widest possible options, but the government in our country faces the problem that they had to prepare such a document within a set time line (due to pressure from the donors). Only a handful of fieldworkers (along with some designated officers/coordinators) go to a few rural areas and arrange a few consultation meetings both at local and national level – these are the best efforts that can be seen to achieve participation. Attempts to reflect of those views cannot be found in the policies generally. The parliament as a formal institution and as a politically representative body should have played a crucial role in the formulation of a national poverty reduction policy. There were no talks about the PRSP in the parliament, however, neither are most parliamentarians interested in it nor are they capable of becoming so. The reason is that the PRSP is not attached to political benefits (as perceived in our country). Therefore, political leaders are not interested in issues that are not related to their politics. Their slogan tells us that they will reduce poverty in the country if they are voted into power. How they will do this or whatever is in favour of the national interest and is laid out in a public policy, if they are not really bothered about it” (Yunus M. 2006).

I would like to conclude by agreeing with the country's sole noble laureate Muhammad Yunus's above quote where he pointed out the importance of implementing a policy, and further stresses the need for political will and awareness to implement policies towards poverty reductions. If we genuinely want to cut poverty from our society then we need to think like ‘us' – not through any externally offered or provided glasses. We should find out about our own problems as well as the remedies. Finally, we will have to make our plans work, and to do so a strong political vision and commitment are musts from our political leaders who must see their own futures and interests as rooted in Bangladesh, not in any other country or in any other organisations.