Research Initiatives Bangladesh (RIB) aims to contribute towards (a) promoting an understanding of poverty and poverty-related structures and processes in all their dimensions, and (b) encouraging the efforts of the disadvantaged people of Bangladesh to imbibe their lives with positive social values, through developing their own creativity with the non-dominating support of professionals where considered helpful. This is in tune with what has been called demand driven research i.e. 'research from below', which meets the concerns that exist in society. It encourages the active participation of different stakeholders in the various stages of implementation. One of the more effective ways in which to operationalise such research is through the use of the Participatory Action Research (PAR) method with corresponding capacity building networking and social mobilization. This is why RIB has chosen the theme of Participatory Action Research as the theme of its first international workshop.

Many development research, however, use the terms 'participation' and 'participatory research' as involving the people in research in various ways, by way of consultation or giving them 'assignments', tasks and tools to work with, but where the 'ownership' rests with external researchers. Such research does not meet or articulate the independent concerns of people except incidentally or by chance knowledge or understanding of their concerns by external researchers, which in any case remains 'nvalidated' by the people. Nor does such research unite organically with people's actions to advance their lives - people generally wait upon service 'deliveries' by others to advance their lives. The 'participation' content of such research, therefore, needs to be distinguished from participation in PAR in which people participate as full subjects of research and hence own such research as a part of their very own process of inquiry and action.

Obviously, PAR requires special skills/orientation of external agents (variously called "catalysts", "animators", "facilitators"), to stimulate and facilitate people's self-research processes without imposing their own thinking and preconceptions upon the people. There is thus a question of methodology for creating/orienting/sensitizing such agents as well.

The broad objective of the current workshop was therefore to promote understanding of PAR as a methodology of development research in which people themselves participate as full subjects, and own such research. This understanding will distinguish between PAR and other approaches to research (such as PRA or Participatory Research Appraisal) that involve people's participation in the research process without granting them ownership of the process.

Among the participants of the workshop were researchers of RIB and other institutions, members of voluntary organisations and research institutions, scholars and some international resource persons. Among the foreign delegates were Professor Peter Reason of the University of Bath, UK, Professor Yoland Wadsworth of Swineburne University of Technology Australia, Professor Akke Van der Zijpp of Wageningen University, the Netherlands Diana Espinoza of ADESO " Las Segovias", Nicaragua and David Obot of NURRU, Tanzania.

The keynote paper of the workshop Participatory Action Research: Learning from the School of Life by Professor Md. Anisur Rahman presented the philosophical basis of PAR. One of the fundamental notions of PAR is to emphasize 'that a people however short of resources they may be, can keep moving forward by mobilizing whatever they have'. Courses of action suggested by a large section of development economists tend to suggest that the accumulation of external resources should be delivered (philanthropically'/strategically/expediently) to them who have less. The keynote idea of the workshop was to reinforce a stand, now almost forgotten that even with meagre material resources, in response to appropriate stimulation, self-reliance awareness can emerge in a people traditionally given to dependent thinking and therefore prone to a culture of dependence.

Ideas contained in the keynote paper were elaborated and extended by some instances from home and abroad and a synthetic cohesion prevailed. The theoretical underpinnings of the PAR approach were discussed. The intellectual environment of the workshop emphasized critical thinking to address the issues of the poor. It critiqued the shortcomings and failures of various endeavours directed towards poverty alleviation, but this did not form the main body of discussions.

Poverty was defined in a humane way. Exploration of the inherent causes of poverty was also a process where the participation of the people would be envisaged. Researchers have been probing into the origin, history and construction of notions of poverty. This kind of research cannot be unilateral. It cannot be accomplished merely with the collection of data or analysis of some curves and identifying of statistical variations at diverse conjunctions. The key word is participation. Here, the researcher and the 'researched' interact together to discover new knowledge, which ironically could be considered to be very old. This knowledge resides within the marginalized and disadvantaged people themselves. This potential should be brought out to benefit those who by virtue of their position or situation can then transmit it further.

The deliberations in the seminar had a tendency to focus on situations in Bangladesh and quite reasonably so. Some of the research projects conducted with the support of RIB were presented in the workshop. They contained a feature of inclusiveness, which through the application of the PAR method offered a space to the disadvantaged, as well as allowed researchers to play the role of animators enhancing the potential inherent in peoples' indigenous resources. The self-esteem of the poverty group has been highlighted creating again a standard that treats the disadvantaged not as objects but subjects. In the process, both the empirical knowledge and epistemology behind PAR was thoroughly discussed and debated with a view to contribute towards the viability of the method. An elaborate list of the issues that came up and generated enthusiasm, instances of experiences and intensity of feelings, were presented in the concluding session. Not only did this summing up enumerate what went on in the workshop, but it also graphically recorded the comprehensiveness of the voice and support for the PAR process.

Placing the disadvantaged centrally ensures their ownership, which in turn, helps to build up an effective collectivity. People organized in this manner are the basic force that PAR attempts to create. The collective energy generates a confidence, which is likely to percolate into the communities and neighborhood. PAR is not to be compared with the type of quantitative research that emphasize only on volume. The intellectual component of PAR constitutes its value. Animators/leaders/champions are the transmitters of this value. The animator's work is substantially connected with initiation of the local people to the understanding of their own problems. However, his/her journey to a rural place from an urban centre has an inherent risk, which has been unfortunately confused and amplified by some humanitarian ventures of NGOs operating all over the country. The difficulties of the job of the animator to facilitate the PAR process were discussed elaborately.

The various presentations in the workshop sought to formulate the necessary answer to all these doubts and uncertainties. The research projects discussed included the running of pre-school among children of poverty groups, learning centres among the river-gypsies, the livelihood concerns of people living in the very low tiers of society, the pig-rearers,-a very neglected section of society in Bangladesh. What emerges from these and other presentations is the rediscovery of the strengths of the disadvantaged. All of these studies have one uniform note that hopes are more powerful than the voices of concern, the mobilization of own resources are more effective than external aid; collectivization of efforts is the right way to encounter the ills of so-called local politics and divisiveness; leadership of the 'poor' people should not be undermined and 'poor' should not be a word with some pejorative connotation. The people whose images surfaced during the presentations belong, in the theoretical stratification of the social scientists, to the margin of margins, but in the conference room, the participants could reinvent them as people with a Promethean heritage.

Inaugural Session

Chair : Dr. Qazi Kholiquzzaman Ahmad, President, Bangladesh Economic Association

The session opened at 9:45 am.

Dr. Meghna Guhathakurta, Executive Director, Research Initiatives Bangladesh welcomed the guests in the inaugural session. In addition to the workshop participants, a good number of intellectuals, scholars, civil society members and NGO leaders were present. Dr. Guhathakurta underlined RIB's objectives and the process in which it works. She said that RIB has been consistently trying to contest the conventional definition of poverty. Most of the people consider lack of economic resources as the only element of poverty. A group of economists and NGO leaders have prescribed and put to use the micro-credit and other ways to alleviate poverty. In spite of good intentions behind them, we have not moved significantly ahead to empower the poor. The poor should be empowered in a way so that they can themselves come forward to improve their state. RIB is committed to the promotion of participatory action research as a means to achieve that. This workshop will deliberate on that process. I would now request Dr. Shamsul Bari, Chairman RIB to welcome guests from home and abroad in this inaugural meeting.

Dr. Shamsul Bari, Chairman, Research Initiatives Bangladesh, made some introductory remarks to enlighten the audience about the context and rationale of the Workshop. He briefly described the scope of RIB's activities, the principles that work behind the planning and implementation of such activities and the process of its operation. He focused on the nature of RIB's work.

Primarily, this organisation offers support to research activities undertaken by others. However, all these research projects must have, as their primary concerns, emphases on and connection with the of state of poverty and problems of development. But RIB insists on a knowledge-based approach that seeks to investigate specifically on areas of education to find some strategic answers to alleviate poverty. The conventional definition of poverty has some practical specificity related to material possession and problems of economic stress that suspends the access of poor people to the basic demands of living. RIB claims a fundamental deviation from such a commonly-accepted attitude. People are not to be pointed out as poor since they do not have the purchasing power. Poverty of most of the people who are grouped as 'poor' lies in their ignorance of so many practical aspects of life and the underuse of their dormant capabilities. What they seriously lack is the knowledge about themselves and their conditions.

It was incidentally fortunate and meaningful to find out that our efforts do have identical features with the views on development of the Dutch foreign ministry which concentrates on a knowledge-based approach. We came to know of MMRP-a special kind of Dutch development programme, which is being implemented in various Afro-Asian countries. We understand the logical and intellectual validity of the programme with emphasis on three major areas.

1. The need to rethink about the viewpoints of the so-called poor in order to do what it is important to devise appropriate strategies.
   
2. The need to involve the poor in the programmes of poverty alleviation.
   The right answer to this point can be found in the process of participatory action research (PAR).
   
3. The need to undertake research in selected areas.
   This requires valid research approaches to be applied by a new breed of researchers.

RIB has undertaken such research projects in which some 200 young people are involved in the process of participatory action research (PAR).

Dr. Bari expressed his hope that the dialogue that would take place among the participants of home and abroad during various sessions of this Workshop would generate some new thoughts to strengthen the process of PAR in our context.

He said that the sharing of experiences with foreign delegates present in this Workshop about the application and impact of MMRP would open new grounds of survey and experimentation. He hoped that in these three days some very useful deliberations would take place. He then introduced the foreign participants.

Mr. Jaap van der Zeeuw, Deputy Head of Mission, Royal Netherlands Embassy presented his remarks. He wanted to look into the process and prospects of participatory action research from a broader view. He said that the most positive aspect of PAR is that it negates the systematic and silent exclusion of the poor in the development process. PAR emphasizes on the holistic approach to poverty alleviation and that offers validity to the process itself.

Mr. Zeeuw said that the notion of involving people fully in action research implies recognition of the dynamic environment in which they live. And dynamism in this context means taking into account all of the social, political, economic, cultural and environmental factors that influence their lives. It sets out the pros and cons. They understand why the perfect solution to a problem cannot be enough for them. They are the people who understand the dynamics. It also forces us to look differently to concepts like sustainability and feasibility.

Mr. Zeeuw is of the opinion that doing the right things mean starting with a clear vision of the context in which you work. Being flexible so that you can adapt to new situations. Knowing where you are headed to and how to get there. I believe this notion is one of the keys to successful poverty reduction. It is also one of the bottlenecks.

So what are the right things to do in capacity building and technical assistance? A few answers spring to mind.

Before a country can begin to build its capacity, it has to define what its goals are and how it plans to get there. We call it ownership. Every country has to answer this question on its own. That is why PRSP's are so important. But let us not forget that institutional development is not just a matter of government and good government structures. There is also a vibrant private sector and civil society that provide primary impulses, checks and balances. The core message of our Minister for Development Cooperation is very clear on this: less government and more society. Shifting from ownership towards genuine partnerships because of shared interests and shared responsibilities. We should all take an active stance in that.

He looks at capacity building as a synthetic training that begins with listening, talking, analyzing and mapping out the problems. To respond is to ask questions, questions that may bring out potential technical assistance. But it is not the only one. We should also consider entirely different forms of knowledge transfer and exchange. By acknowledging that it is not enough for organizations to be well-organized, to work efficiently and have enough people to run it. In many developing countries we see a process of systematic but silent exclusion of the poor.

Mr. Zeeuw concluded with these words:
RIB has shown us that for effective development applied research should also be conducted at the micro-level, calling for a more integrated or holistic approach to poverty alleviation and involving the people directly, making them the experts and researchers. Because often there are no ready-made solutions from one angle only, given that poverty has so many faces and dimensions. The success of the PAR approach rightly reminds us about the limitations of technical assistance and top-down directed research, irrespective of its origin either from foreign or home-grown experts and researchers. I compliment RIB for doing the right things right and would like to express the hope that you will be having a successful workshop.

The first part of the inaugural session was concluded in a unique way. All the persons present lent spontaneous voice to a song written by Dwijendralal Ray, a renowned Bengali dramatist and lyricist. The composition emphasizes on the beauty of and love for the motherland. The foreign delegates were supplied with English transliteration of the Bangla words. Prof. Md. Anisur Rahman led the chorus.

After a short tea break, the session resumed and it went straight into business.

Prof. Md. Anisur Rahman, a leading economist and member, Board of Directors, RIB presented the keynote paper.

He noted that the liberation war of Bangladesh in 1971 virtually prompted him to look into the application and possibilities of participatory action research (PAR). The impulse was individual but it originated from the commitment to community. He referred to initiatives of self-reliance as against the outsiders' assistance in the field of development. He also referred to his feeling of inspiration ignited by the charismatic leadership of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman who led the country to independence through a long and strong resistance movement.

According to Prof. Rahman, participatory action research is a kind of an organic process. The primary spirit of the process is to contest the conventional and widely-talked of definition of the poor as the population that suffers from chronic shortage of resources. This ideological departure is characterised by the ways of practice too. The roles of the researchers and of the people covered in the process of participatory action research should be reframed. However, it is important to note that PAR is not simply limited to research; it is a sympathetic treatment of the issue of poverty. It has concerns about outside help but that is not necessarily material in nature, rather this is a process to help the poor to understand their own situations in a better way. The process would not create a sense of alienation as is experienced in the receiver-giver methodology. In fact, PAR has no set methodology. It develops in the situational order through the dialogical interaction of the researchers and the people. In the process, some ideas and patterns emerge and through mutual sharing, a course of action is developed. Eventually, the process leads to action and while it gets translated into some action, we can say that participatory action research has taken place.

The basic idea is that nothing should be presented to people as abiding, proven and sacrosanct. The role of the people is emphasized in order to encourage them to contribute their input in the process and thereby to produce output. However, PAR cannot absolutely exclude the element of subjectivity since this is connected with the social sector. Objectivity is usually the demand of modern scientific research. But participatory action research concentrates on indigenous knowledge and not on texts written or compiled by authorities. People's experiences are what really matter.

But inspite of the comprehensive integration of the people, the role of a kind of 'leadership' cannot be totally ignored. The researcher plays the role of an animator who infuses in the people a sense of confidence so that they can better scan the situations in which they live. Once they are rightly encouraged to examine their own state and to explore the causes behind it, their dormant talents do surface in a proactive way to push them into the process of action. The animator is the key person who unlocks age-old doors that barred the people to look into the reality they live in. S/he animates people without becoming a virtual teacher. This is a difficult task, but if this is done, it successfully removes the rust from people's brain.

The successful animator works in a two-way approach. S/he tries to understand the various viewpoints that are put up by the people and at the some time enables them to internalize the gaze that s/he wants to underline.

According to Prof. Rahman,

"The term 'animation', with its specific connotation in grassroots work, means, in the very literal spirit of the word, animating the underprivileged people to regard themselves as the principal actors in their lives and not as subordinates to other social classes, to stand up with self-esteem, to develop a critical understanding of the conditions of their lives and to express and assert themselves through collective action to meet life's challenges."

He says that the term 'poor' should not be used. The people should be led to understand that poverty is a particular situation. The people may not have security in the economic significance of the term, but these 'poor' people may be rich in various other resources. Similarly, those who suffer from the lack of cultural resources, they should also be grouped as poor. The 'poor' usually have some rich experiences of life. The animator is supposed to enrich herself or himself with the learning that is contained in their experiences. Listening to these experiences will provide some new ways of thinking. One will be excited to discover that people's language contains profound conceptualization of the problems that common poverty alleviation programmes seek to address. Their experiences offer reflections on a macro situation, which may lead to the agenda of revolution. Participatory action research (PAR) is directed to contribute to the actions of people to the ends of revolutionary achievement.

Prof. Peter Reason, University of Bath, UK.
Prof. Reason, the main discussant on Prof. Md. Anisur Rahman's keynote paper, gave a detailed written response to the key issues raised by Rahman. He emphasized on the communicative space that may open out multiple ways of knowing. One of the major areas of PAR, according to Reason, would be to help people explore their effective role in governance. But that necessitates a confident-looking response to the problematic situation. He says, "a people, however short of resources they may be, can keep moving forward by mobilizing whatever they have, while those waiting upon outside resources may be wasting their time and energy and/or falling into the trap of patron/client relations with outside quarters surrendering their self-determination."

Prof. Reason referred to one of his experiences in conducting action research in his home country, in a rural location distant from all kinds of services. The experience was a disappointing one. However, his experience prompted him to point out some of the important issues in action research.

Prof. Reason underscored three important points :

Participatory action research attempts to form a commitment among the people themselves. This is likely to lead to a kind of mutual understanding to deal with issues. Two important questions are usually raised as to the sustainability factor and legitimacy of conclusions. Repetitive occasions of democratic dialogue provide good answers to these questions. Dialogues gradually proceed to form small institutions of democratic inquiry. To elaborate on the point of democratic inquiry, Prof. Reason said in a digressive note that even today the world has two super powers, one is the US and the other is world public opinion.

According to him, in action research, there is little space for tools. Rather it depends on pre-positional and practical knowing through which we can identify good ideas and conventional thinking. People's national participation in research can give birth to a new economic movement. What is essentially important is the objective approach to conduct all the experiments. Continual checking can be of good help. The experiments should hold up some evidences to point out that the poor really become self-reliant for some worthwhile purposes.

Prof. Reason noted the emphasis made by Prof. Md. Anisur Rahman on the role of the outsider or animator. The animator's role of persuading the people to self-inquiry is very important in PAR. This has similarity with the self-reflective practice advocated by Reason and his colleagues. He referred to a good number of articles by various authors.
(His elaborate analysis can be seen in RIB's website)

Open discussion followed after the remarks made by Prof. Reason.

Mr. Arifur Rahman
The challenges of the PAR process should not be underestimated. People can identify their problems and they can be enabled to see and understand their problems in a clearer way with the help of the animator. But there exist other social forces in the society. There are enemies of social progress. Thoughts should be given about the ways to tackle them. The animator has to face big challenges there and s/he must show abilities to address those challenges.

Dr. Monirul Islam Khan
One important point should be included. We find that external organisations usually intervene in the rural areas. One answer to it may be the conscientization approach. But it also has some limitations. It may not work while it is initiated without some kind of approval of the local forces. The common experience is that the NGOs want to have working relationship with the local power structure. Take the example of the micro-credit programme. It is a popular strategy. There is a framework of compromise. It does not face any kind of conflict with the prevailing power structure. So in PAR, the challenge to cope with the local forces remains a big question.

M M Akash, Professor, Department of Economics, Dhaka University
We must remember that we live in a world where enemies also live. The society largely depends on the power structure determined by the ruling power. It is a reality that whenever you initiate something, however noble and benevolent it may be, you have to be ready to face the obstacles of law and the state itself. One is easily reminded of the Marxist approach. The odds and obstacles are there, they are seen and unseen. No one can skip them. I understand the necessity of dialogue, but mere dialogue is weak enough to undo the power structure that exists in the society and that protects the interests of some people. Popular struggle means much more than dialogic process and the revolution is much more away. The animator has so many good and well-meaning agenda in his pocket, but dissemination of those may be difficult since there will be the opposing forces. Unless the animator is able to cope with these forces, s/he is even under the risk of abandonment by the people. This really is a very difficult task. S/he can create some good followers, some new leaders in the local context, but eventually they can leave him/her. There are two ways to combat this situation. One is transparency coupled with accountability. That can disarm the enemies morally. And the second is continuation of the democratic dialogue in a more inclusive way, which may weaken the enemies.

People usually identify themselves, with some affiliation to a place, a class or a political party. This involves differences. And this is a threat to the inclusive process. But they have some identical wants, similar experiences of repression by the privileged class. Such a context gives the opportunity to unite them for the cause of self-emancipation. There lies the importance of the role of the animator.

Dr. Halida Hanum Akhter, Health Promotion Ltd.
I think through the participatory action research process, RIB can contribute to capacity building. In our country, we have some able and talented researchers, but unfortunately, they are lost in various NGOs and other different organisations. These researchers are trained and directed to do research in some stipulated fields determined by others, say the donors. But the researchers should find some independent spaces to utilise their creativity. RIB's support to indigenous organisations is a great initiative. The definition of poor that RIB insists on is a big departure. This is very encouraging. I wish RIB will give some attention to technical assistance issues to ensure success of their research projects.

Dr. Badiul Alam Majumdar, The Hunger Project
The poor people existed before the NGOs intervened. But now with NGO interventions, they are in a greater mess. We should review the work of the NGOs. Many of them have really trained themselves into conventional contractors and businessmen. They have been quite successful to create a dependence on them. In the way, what they have produced is a culture of ownership and not partnership. We have to think of the animator. Who is he? Is he an insider or an outsider? Would the work of animation be a continuous process? How do we measure the success of them?

Can you give some thoughts to the role of the local government leaders? Can they play the role of the catalyst? The problems of people have a local nature and these should be better solved locally. A better relationship between the local leaders and the poor is the key and that should be meaningfully exploited.

Professor Muinul Islam, Department of Economics, Chittagong University
We have seen some wonderful experiences documented in the booklet authored by Prof. Md. Anisur Rahman. Some points have been raised regarding sustainability. But the issue of sustainability as it existed in the 70's of the last century is not of similar nature now. Bangladesh started with pro-people economy after its emergence in 1971 and the post-1975 situation showed some strategic diversion. The case of Bhumisena of India has been referred to, but it used to enjoy some kind of subsidy.

Importance of the role of the animators should be certainly emphasized. His or her role as a sensitizing agent is so crucial. The process involves complex layers. They have to address the people. Poverty binds them together. But the points that have been raised about the role of political parties in the local situations and of the local government agencies should be seriously taken into account. The role played by various NGOs should also properly be examined and assessed.

The question of dependence on others including the NGOs has created a different mindset among the people. So, in PAR, the involvement of people has been logically and intellectually motivated. External help has established itself as a necessity in the rural areas. While the animators remove rust from the brains of the people, they should give serious attention to these characteristics of socio-economic relations present in the rural areas of Bangladesh.

At this point, Prof. Md. Anisur Rahman responds.
Illustrations of experiences have been given as documents of the reality in which PAR can be executed. Notable points have been raised and there cannot be any easy answer to all of them. But sharing of experiences is one good avenue. The question of sustainability has been raised. But there can be no guarantee of this aspect of the issue.

Can we just go back a little? We saw some glorious and epoch-making revolutions in the 20th century. The success of these revolutions created so much enthusiasm in us, so much excitement spread all over the world, so many new directions were prescribed and all hopes seemed to be on the way to fulfillment. We all are aware of the success stories and many of us walked in an identical path. But have we sustained the success of the efforts and struggles and agenda of these revolutions?

So what I ask, is the mental make-up to reformulate our ideas. We have to take people on our side; together we should feel strengthened. Our duty is to encourage popular awareness, to enable them to understand their own situations not just from the context of belief they have never questioned so far, but from the context of reality and rationality.

Peter Reason referred to the US and world public opinion as two existing super powers. But the recognized third world has its place too. And here, the animators have a great role to play. I do understand the difficulties that have been pointed out regarding the success of an animator in the existent social structures of our country or say, the third world. I again say that there is no easy or only answer. Experiences and the uniqueness of the difficulty faced in a particular situation will guide the animators to the right path.

Mr. Kh. Mozammel Haque, Grameen Bank
Participatory action research is one of the best tools in the programme of poverty alleviation. We have seen the narration of life-stories of poor women. We have heard about the power structure that stands in the way of poverty alleviation. The stories enlighten us about the deprivation of which the poor are the victims. We know about discrimination. This is a reality throughout the world. In a world, which is characterized by utter poverty of a large population, we can find ministry of war and defence. We know huge funds are allocated for the business of spying. All kinds of available means of verification are used in this business. We hear of the global financial system, which has failed to generate employment. Reference has been made to the possible confrontation of rural power structure. The structure exists because of maldistribution of available resources. We should think whether we can make investment capital available in the villages.

The rational background of PAR is very praiseworthy. It tries to indicate that the poor is a person who is unable to use his/her inherent capacity. We must have faith in the possibilities of people. People may be illiterate but they are not uneducated. PAR is a process to listen to people. I think that the survival scheme is the most important PAR tool. PAR encourages and believes in the collective ownership of the disadvantaged and that is the sure answer to development.

Prof. Dalem Ch. Barman, Chairman, Dept. of Peace and Conflict Studies, Dhaka University
We may take our lessons from the Comilla experience. Most of the distressed people do not come forward on their own. Many of them cannot realize the reasons behind the state of their poverty. But they need to be strengthened. They look at the NGO persons as elites or outside agents. In the PAR process, this feeling of strangeness should be removed.

Dr. Akhter Sobhan Khan, Integrated Development & Research Foundation
We should also give attention to the methodological issues. This is very important for success in any research work. We should not maintain that PAR is the only way to acquire knowledge. That would lead to a kind of methodological orthodoxy. Reference was made to the German philosopher Heidegger who emphasized on individual perception as a key to instrumental use of knowledge.

Mr. David Obot, Executive Director, NURRU, Uganda
Research Initiatives Bangladesh and NURRU of Uganda are using similar ways. I can smell some flavour of political element in PAR. And the process depends intensively and extensively on the active participation of people. But since it concerns people who are poor and not literate, the projects should be handled with care. Prior thoughtfulness is required in matters of planning. The implementation is always a good test. The ways of operation should be decided upon in a meeting. Preference should be given to the expectations of the poor.

We experience pervasive poverty in Africa. We are trying to solve it through partnership. Experience says that people can mobilize their own local resources, but the need of help is there. The US, UK and UN usually come forward with help. They want to improve situations, but the developmental process is never smooth. There are so many shortcomings in real-life situations and conflicts are endless. Now-a-days, we find civil society interventions which have left some positive impact. Participatory action research can be one very important way to promote development in a successful way. It encourages the investment of energies for the undertaking of welfare activities.

Mr. Mohammad Zakaria, Action Aid Bangladesh
Answer to problems should be sought out through experiences in the field. The central aim of the animator would be to build up the capacity of the people. They have talents in themselves. The task is to make them aware of their possibilities. S/he will create an urge in them. Eventually, in the process of animation, a collective vision comes out. This vision is unique and inspiring. This vision cannot be brought out in a donor-driven context. The traditional donor-funded programmes have failed to offer the people a feeling of self-confidence. In the process, so many wrong things creep in and these hold back people's development.

This is a graphic picture of our system. The teachers of the universities teach development in the classrooms, they do not teach poverty. PAR emphasizes on an empirical as well as experimental process. That is its strength.

Ms. Farida Sheikh, Consultant, Directorate of Public Health Engineering
I am interested to know that how is monitoring work conducted in PAR and whether there is any emphasis on the gender element.

Prof. Peter Reason,
The debate is on as to the comparative emphasis on micro versus macro. The levels are interconnected, micro leads to macro. The need for social movement is a priority. This can be achieved through activisation of various networks. Longer social trends can be accommodated while networks become operative at different levels. Participatory research should also promote inclusiveness.

Dr. Qazi Kholiquzzaman Ahmad, Chair of the session
During the deliberations, power structure has been identified as the major obstacle to the realization of the ends of participatory action research. The reality of the society is known to us all. We are increasingly experiencing the power of money and muscles over other social and moral values. The social leaders get entangled in the system. Politics, rather partisan politics dictates terms of development both at the national and local levels. Most of the political leaders are elected or selected for their capability to deliver monetary or muscular power. The question of morality has visibly subsided. PAR is a very good move. It may provide some substantial input in the society to save the degeneration of social values and to lead people in building up self-confidence, which is the key to their emancipation. This ultimately matures into a social movement.

We are talking of action and research. We have a very disappointing experience in this area. What we see is that some people are trained in research, they acquire some skills in the area but eventually they are lost to others. They get more money in World Bank, Asian Development Bank, USAID and other large organisations. They lose their initial creativity and work in the framework of the organisations they work in and serialize their findings as per their prescriptions.

PAR is unique in the sense that it attempts to involve all segments of the society, particularly the poor. The animators have a very responsible role to play here. They will discover the latent quality of the poor people and encourage them to use them for their own benefits. They must look into the nature of human relationship.

In fact, we have two sets of relationship. Men relate one to other in a vertical way, but when they all combine, it acquires a horizontal nature. The animator should use it accordingly.

Experience says, micro-credit programme looks very large in our country, but it has not yet reached the very bottom.

PAR seeks to correlate human and environmental relationship. In spite of the constraints, it is a very meaningful process. There is everybody's contribution in it and all factors indicate that the output is achievable.

Working Session-I

Moderator : Prof. M.M. Akash, Department of Economics, Dhaka University

First presentation was made by Prof. Yoland Wadsworth, Institute for Social Research, Swinburne University of Technology, Australia

The theme of her presentation was PAR for Professionals.

She spoke at length and made a comprehensive presentation. She started with the illustration of a pineapple. She tried to show how different parts of a pineapple correlate with relationships of power. In Australia the term is used 'the rough end of the pineapple' - denoting how the so-called 'poor' end up being offered the spiky spines while the non-poor have already grasped the juicy fruit part. From this can be understood the idea from Vygotsky (the Russian psychologist) regarding how the facilitator or professional can help construct a 'scaffolding' of new ideas from the people's self-knowledge and self-understanding, so the people can come to see themselves as equally worthy of the juicy fruit pineapple. In this way the issue of presumptive knowledge can be countered. Professor Wadsworth quoted from Lilla Watson, an Australian native educator and activist.

If you've come to help me,
you're wasting your time.
But if you've come
Because your liberation is bound up with mine,
Then let us work together.

These beautiful words virtually set the tune of the session and effectively delivered the message of PAR. Epistemology, methodology all these characteristics of research become a little indistinct when it is connected with action and popular participation. The keywords contained in her paper are action research, participation, collaborative inquiry, human services, professionals and capacity building. She maintains that research plays an important part in the works of most professionals since most professionals base their claims to having special expertise on research that shows an effective connection between theory and practice.

Prof. Wadsworth noted with importance the paradigm shift in the new approaches of research in the field of social sciences and connects it with the change of understanding of the world around.

She noted that :

• Our observations of the world are always a result of our human perception, bound up by both our physical sensing apparatus and our sense-making of social and psychological 'lenses' and 'filters';
  
• Our perceptions and interpretations are inevitably relative to our past experience, accrued concepts, theories and value-driven purpose-conscious or not conscious, and
  
• Our individual, personal as well as group, organizational, community and social conditions are inevitably so complex, changing and uncertain, as to always mean the possibility that our current stock of knowledge might not be right for even the next situation we encounter.

Prof. Wadsworth raised a crucial concern?research for whom? All persons involved in the business of research whether it is of professional or consultative nature should identify the relation of their work to the critical reference groups and all other potential parties to research. It may or may not be a conscious effort. She emphasized that "the empowerment that comes from ... active participation is a crucial indicator of achieving resonance with the interests and life worlds of critical reference groups-whether it takes place at the small 'r' micro level of the client, group or community being interested in inquiring into the best way forward in their personal or particular situation-or whether it is at a more medium 'r' or macro level of a group of clients in inquiring into the best way forward in their collective situation.

Prof. Wadsworth wanted to deal with the work of research in a precise way. She puts the question whether this is a justifiable proposition to do research on people. Many researchers find it worthy of endeavours and they have real good intentions. However, persons like Professor Yoland have found that even the most apparently 'reprehensible subjects'-if researched with-have stories to tell which cast important light on a situation, supply essential insights or intelligence or even suggest (or result) in saving graces-any of which may contribute to critical reference groups' situations by informing them for future actions in longer term.

She furthers her proposition. She says that if research on people uses one-way questions to get answers, research for people may not ask them directly what their views are at all. Instead it may examine examples from other people's research into people like them, or it may ask other professionals for their opinions or knowledge of 'a case' and extrapolate from those other settings and views to speculate for these people, or it may be working on population data or historical or other written documents.

Such an argument quite naturally leads to research by and with the people. There are a range of ways the researchers can work to strengthen the voice of the people they are working for and to take the direction of the research more towards being with these people. These include meeting with the people in a group (strength in numbers); helping them form and meet as a group if they are not already one; or even doing so on their own (peer-facilitated) to work through their views or report back on their findings for a discussion with the professionals working with them. The participation of the people in the process of research work which is done on them, with the purpose of creating benefits for them, more particularly the critical reference groups is virtually the crux of the matter.

Prof. Wadsworth suggests a course, which she has drawn on the views of French philosopher Michael Foucault. The path of the researchers (for her it is always interchangeable with professionals) is to act with critical reference groups to (a) assist them to find their voice, (b) facilitate them deciding on their preferred courses of action and (c) support them in their decisions, and learning from what happens next. It is an experience that when the people belonging to, what Prof. Yoland says, the critical reference groups feel initiated to speak out, they actually begin to deliver their own theory of their situations and experiences. By nature this is a 'discourse that ultimately matters, a discourse against power.'

In her attempt to suggest new approaches to include the critical reference groups, Prof. Yoland says that the professionals should try to :

• Assist all parties speak and be heard,
  
• Ensure the exchange of participants' perceptions and the reaching of new and improved understandings (as many times as is necessary, possibly over an extended period of time),
  
• Facilitate deciding on new actions, the taking of them and their monitoring for further observation and action during the research process.

Prof. Yoland Wadsworth offered a detailed analysis of the process of research. She refers to situations of multiple experiences. The important aspects that claim attention of research work, which seeks to incorporate the views of the poor through their participation are:

(a) organisational cultural pressures
(b) insider/outsider issues and
(c) collaborative research.

The floor was then open to discussion.

Prof Dalem Ch. Barman
What has been said in the presentation of Prof. Yoland Wadsworth is very interesting. But when it comes to application, say in the countries like Bangladesh, there are problems. The experience with our people may be similar. But our policy level process is not congenial. It is not helpful to people.

Dr. Monirul Islam Khan, Department of Sociology, Dhaka University
It has been a wonderful presentation. The arguments are so interesting. But I want to know how we negotiate the losses. Problems arise in the process of power relationships, which naturally leads to conflicts. As a result, there should be efforts to find out ways of conflict resolution.

And the second thing is that participatory action research also involves some set targets. It is not only important to ensure the participation of the people for whom the research project has been undertaken, it is equally important to fulfill the targets which really can bring some benefits for concerned people.

Ms. Farida Sheikh
The reference to and visual illustration of the pineapple convey a lot of understanding. We understand how different parts of the pineapple correlate. I think we should be careful to indicate the issue of participation of women. It is important to include gender in any participatory action research.

Dr. Rushidan Islam Rahman, Director-Research, Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies
We may try to define more precisely what actually is action research. How is it different from the structured kind of research that we are usually engaged in? We must understand what kind of changes it undergoes as it includes the participation of them for whom the research really is. There are set activities in PAR. The recipients can be clearly grouped or categorized. But I am of the opinion that certain groups of people may be interested in certain methods. We must find out which is the right way of research. Is it when the target individuals undertake it or when the independent groups try to involve the target group into it?

Dr. Hameeda Hossain, Vice Chairman - RIB
Participatory action research may face different kinds of problems. The objective is certainly to contribute to the well-being of the community, but experience says that it becomes very difficult since there are groups within the community and they are often involved in conflicts among themselves. They have their own affiliation to various parties and their interests clash. In our country, bureaucracy is also a major problem even in the rural areas. They may create problems even for research programmes involving the people.

Prof. M M Akash, Chair of the session
The comments and interventions made by the participants are really worth taking particularly in our country. We all have many negative experiences in this regard. The conflicts are not homogenous. So many problems come up owing to the interference of local bodies, local political organisations. However, the ways to resolving of conflicts have to be different because of the variety of contexts. However, it is not impossible. In fact, the solution can be best devised through the participatory process. Some techniques come out inspite of the dangers even of some violent kind involved in the process.

Mr. A.K.M. Maksud spoke of the action research project involving the Beday (river gypsy) community of certain areas of Bangladesh. This community represents a way of living, which is nomadic in nature. The very special thing about them is that they roam around the country by boat. More than 80% of the Beday people live below poverty line. Maksud stated that-

The development objective of the action research is to test some strategies for inclusion of Beday community in mainstream development process of Bangladesh and to suggest some innovative ways of human development for this community. The specific objectives of the project are: to ensure participation of Beday community in designing interventions for their human development; to introduce mobile school facility within the nomadic groups of Beday community for eradication of illiteracy and awareness building on health and human rights; to impart skill training for individual capacity building and income generation and to establish innovative and replicable intervention models of development of this particular marginalized community.

The action research was preceded by a baseline survey. Some development programmes aimed at the extension of assistance to the community were primarily reviewed. The major thrust of this move was to find ways of including the Bedays in the popular stream of life with emphasis on mobile school programmes. Education' is thought to be one important factor of motivation. In the gradual process, education is most likely to provide them with some necessary skills of capacity building. Leadership and entrepreneurship development of the women was emphasized.

Then the floor was made open for the participants for brief interventions. There was a serious time constraint since participants, specially the foreign delegates were supposed to make a field visit to river gypsy school and women's centre at Savar.

Dr. Badiul Alam Majumdar
The river gypsy school is a good project. We have just heard of it. It is interesting and the endeavour in very worthy. The research has also underlined about the replicability of the model. But I am anxious whether such models would be used by some NGOs who have already some education programmes. Many of these NGOs are at work but not with a sincere mission, rather they provide some delivery services. The government initiatives are also implemented by some selected and appointed agencies. This ultimately brings no benefit to the people.

Dr. Lenin Azad, Unnayan Gabeshona Foundation
We all know about the Beday community. They are simply marginalized. They have no voice. They live without education, primary healthcare and basic facilities of life. I do not know how much good can be done with the schools on boat. But my point is that whether the Beday community had any kind of active participation in this action research and whether any kind of motivation could be achieved. I think that was not there.

The open discussion part was short. Prof. M.M. Akash, the Chair of the session did not offer any concluding comments. He hoped that many of the comments could be raised later in connection with various presentations to be made in the forthcoming working sessions.

Working Session II

The session started at 9.00 a.m.

Chair : Prof. Muinul Islam, Department of Economics, University of Chittagong

At the very beginning Prof. Md. Anisur Rahman talked about the format of discussion. He said that generally we have a tendency to ask questions to the presenter only. But in the PAR method, we think the problems should be discussed by everybody. He proposed that it was better not to ask question to the presenter only. Rather people should raise issues, which the whole house can address. That would give to it a more interactive character. And in the process, participants would become more conversant with the PAR approach.

Prof. Muinul Islam
I would like to relate what Prof. Md. Anisur Rahman has just said. People who are really involved in the projects should enlighten us more about the animators. We would like to hear from them. What is the nature of field experience of the animators? What really happened when she/he is withdrawn. The animators, as we have heard, should not end up as agents of some donor agencies. We must have a rewarding experience. We really insist on some kind of interactive discussion.

Mr. Akhtarul Habib Tuhin (RIB) : Presentation of RIB' s research on PAR

In his introduction, Mr. Akhtarul Habib Tuhin mentioned that they have actually started an unconventional and alternative journey through participatory action research to explore and unravel the prospects and potentials of PAR along with its pitfalls and other hindrances in Bangladesh. All of the field level experiences on PAR carried out so far over a short span of time, in fact, have extracted some valuable learning and insights for future experiments.

The impulse behind PAR has originated, to a large extent, from a response to conventional top-down development approach and its subsequent effect. The people of Bangladesh have a long history of witnessing conventional development and poverty alleviation approach practiced over decades and its aftermath as well as effect on their own lives. So the people themselves are the beholders and appropriate evaluators of those top-down approaches that, in fact, have implicitly and explicitly ignored people's own potential, value of indigenous system of knowledge and the tenacity, strength and resources of people's psychology. Under this context, it is quite rational to search for an alternative paradigm, which will consequently lead to actualization of people's potential and reveal the covert strength of people for some dignified self-development efforts. Another deep-rooted impulse concerned with an epistemological stand propels us to Participatory Action Research.

Mr. Akhtarul Habib Tuhin mainly explained Gono Gobeshona (People's research). He presented three experiences :

1) Collective analysis of poverty in Parbatipur.
2) Participatory Action Research Experience in Nilphamari : A participatory Learning Center and a movement conducted by Gono Gobeshoks and
3) Learning from a failure : experience of PAR with a Marma community.

The aim of project 1 was to sensitise the local animators and people themselves to simultaneously conduct participatory action research with underprivileged people's researchers with the help of people themselves. It was their first experience in PAR. The animators thus sensitised in this project are now working in different areas of the country. 228 Gono Gobeshoks (people's researchers) involved in this research are working in the field to accelerate the programmes poverty alleviation. The process of people's self development issues has been triggered in the rural areas. The basic objectives finalized by the people themselves were to promote collective understanding of their situations, exploring causes of their poverty, identifying the origin of poverty as well as the reasons of its perpetuation and reviewing its background, different dimensions of poverty and identifying existing potentials, which can be used to eradicate poverty. The people of the community had some bitter experiences regarding their initiatives of large-scale fish and crop cultivation. Due to some resistance from different vested interest groups they failed to run the projects. Individual and collective failures to combat their sufferings and adversities had given them an impetus to analyze it through group activities and search for an alternative way to poverty alleviation.

The people's researchers with external animation completed all aspects of the exploration in a number of brainstorming discussions and workshops.

People's researchers were suspicious about the research at the beginning, but subsequently they earned the confidence. In particular, women's participation was quite exemplary. The women researchers who did not feel free to discuss at the earlier workshops turned out immediately as very active participants. Even they began to take some initiatives to reduce their common problems such as gambling, dowry and torturing against women. They expressed their raised awareness and courage in a large public rally where hundreds of male and female researchers (Gono Gobeshok) gathered together to declare their research results. Many assertive women took active part in presenting the research results.

He also focused on the weaknesses of the research. He said that during the research some expectations for external aid was induced in the people's researchers due to some misdirected conversations of a research personnel. From the experience they realised that animator's conversation and interaction with people can negatively affect the spirit of people's self development achieved through PAR. It is really a new experience in Bangladesh. People's searching of social, cultural, economic and psychological origin of poverty and their action for removing the causes is exemplary for poverty alleviation practices. This has happened due to their changes in intellectual understanding. At the beginning of the research, Gono Gobeshoks perceived poverty as a lack of work, and of cultivable land, absence of just wages and not owning a house-lack all these material resources was perceived as poverty. The more participatory discussions went down the deeper level, the more their understanding of poverty changed to a different direction. As a result of these changes, they increasingly began to understand that poverty is not an economic condition but a humane condition. They began to emphasize on human values, their potential and ability to promote their own conditions rather than focusing only material aspects in explaining poverty.

Mr. Akhtarul Habib Tuhin narrated their experience in a Bandarban village. A participatory action research was conducted with local groups in seven Marma (an ethnic community in the Chittagong Hill tracts region of Bangladesh) villages in Naikhonchori Thana Under Bandarban district. Most of the people of these villages are severely deprived of formal education, health facilities, communication and other facilities. The underprivileged Marma people are dependent on local hilly resources and Jum cultivation, which cannot mitigate the needs of the people. Being geographically separated by hills from the main lands and inheriting different culture and language they live a closed life.

The animator conducted the participatory action research with the help of a formally educated Marma young man. The basic objectives of the research were to develop a people's plan for self-development and poverty alleviation by discovering people's own potential and using existing hilly resources available to them.

The basic impetus and core values of participatory action research are congruent with the traditional values of the Marma community These elements in cultural, social and geographical areas have been very congenial for participatory action research. But the animator was more inclined to seek external financial aid rather than liberating people's own potential for self-development. The animator, who coordinated the process, in fact, did not internalize the core values of self-development, nor was he properly sensitized to the PAR process prior to the process of animation. This drawback in the animator's orientation diminished and misdirected the spirit of self-exploration, self-development and the community's sense of dignity.

He said that the role of the animator is very important. The animator can construct and even destroy the whole spirit of research. Lack of animator's orientation to PAR made the people expectant for external aid.

Prof. Muinul Islam
Prof. Islam expressed his immediate reaction to this presentation. He particularly referred to the Marma animator seeking financial aid. He raised two important points.

We should concentrate our efforts to see whether we can establish a regular institution to sensitise the animators.

What is more important is the issue of orientation of the animator since the question of bringing external aid has been pointed out.

Prof. Md. Anisur Rahman
At the end of research, people told that they do not really want money; they just want regular contact. That speaks of the success of PAR. But we cannot have similar experiences at all places. The researchers have been working with sincerity and commitment to bring in a change in the understanding of poverty.

Prof. Peter Reason
I am interested to learn more about the animators' experiences.

Dr. Lenin Azad
He was also involved in the project. He made an elaboration of the learning through experience in an attempt to respond to the points raised:

At the very beginning, people did not have the confidence to challenge the conventional mode of thinking.

Rather all of them discussed the problems in small groups and a representative from each group shared it in a large group. They became very excited and charged as they realized the fact that now they have the knowledge and they can read and perceive things with clarity.

They discussed issues from their own life, issues, which retard their path to self-development.

At the beginning, it was a little difficult to understand the animator's role properly but later on people could follow him/her and could feel the importance of such a person.

But gradually, people were encouraged and asked to discuss various issues separately in intimate situations.

Mr. Mohammad Zakaria, Action Aid Bangladesh
We shared experiences on peoples' initiative/research in Jessore area. Our experiences say that it is always a very slow process to reach somewhere. If we really want to do something together with people we should care for their opinion.

The people usually suffer from problems of land and property distribution. These problems often create quarrels and feuds. But they may be motivated to find a settlement in these issues. All we need to do is to create an environment of people's participation. We had been quite successful to conduct a participatory village survey. We understood that it is helpful if we can involve the local government officials. More often we find that they are not co-operative. But when they can read our good intentions, they also come forward. We received some useful help from them. There is one important point I want to raise. In spite of all the hard work that the animators do and in spite of some steps to mobilize people and their resources, PAR should be strengthened with some scientific and technical information at regular intervals. The mission of collectivization of villages is an ambitious objective, but with the gradual empowerment of people, we think we can achieve success. As leadership in the rural contexts is consolidated, the initial tensions may give way to productive negotiation.

Dr. Shamsul Bari, Chairman- RIB
The experiences that we have heard is quite heartening. However, we do not have any room for complacence. We must be ready to uphold the initial outcome. Some depression has taken place in the rural areas consequent to some programmes of some NGOs. With all its publicity, micro-credit has not clicked for the rural poor. It has, in some instances, created family feuds. The women borrow, the men persuade them to borrow. In the end, sometimes the responsibility of repayment comes over to men. People are now resistant to such help.

So we should outline the role of RIB as an institution to see that people do not become dependent on any external support?

Mr. Alauddin Ali
I worked with a different organisation called GSS for 11 years. I have quite a long experience in organising the landless poor. I worked with people very closely and that experience in GSS helped me a lot to do my present work. In the end, the decision and planning must come from the people. People should decide on the context of their own situation and they should not work with the persuasion of any external force. I am not saying that people know everything but at least they know better about their own conditions. There are some aspects of information such as technical, scientific, which they may not know. The animator will help them take decisions in those areas.

By its nature, the responsibility of the animator is a very demanding one. But it has been further complicated by the interventions of NGOs for years in the rural areas. The micro-credit programme has some attraction since it remits cash to the people. There are stories of success. Primarily, micro-credit programme is very encouraging, but often it brings in disasters. At the psychological level, it takes away the self-esteem of the poor. It creates an environment of dependence. With the predominance of this, it is very difficult to motivate people with good ideas. People shrug off ideas and advice on awareness. The animators face a great challenge here. People are living in a culture of receiving. The animators have to be patient and even tactful to form groups. They have to move to places and prepare to look for causes behind the reasons of problems or lacking and also to identify and mark such reason. They have to continue with their efforts till some success surfaces. As an animator I have found that earlier men were reluctant and women were very much enthusiastic but now men's participation is improving. Women are helping to form men's group.

Dr. Lenin Azad
There are some poor areas where people do not want micro-credit. The people's researchers encountered a background of suffering with their very unwelcome experiences from money-lenders and micro-credit programmes. People of this area saved approximately Tk. 25 lacs. There are some local leaders who are interested in it. They are also connected with some NGO workers. The micro-credit givers and money-lenders have brought in miseries to the lives of common people. People consider them as enemies. An area called Devidoba is an example of positive experience. They have now developed their local leadership. They can now preside over family and social feuds and can settle them.

Dr. Badiul Alam Majumdar
My experiences say that the University educated people are preachers of high ideas and they are agents of exploitation of people. Micro-credit programme has been widely talked of. It is true. Whenever a penny is delivered thereupon a dependence originates.

In the Hunger Project, they have been going through the same experience for the last couple of years. People sometimes say what the animators want to hear. This 'give and take' habit is deeply rooted now. There is the issue of the importance of the role of animator. It is very difficult to animate people. He asked the house, 'who are the people we want to be the animators?' RIB has started a great job. More animators should be created. The problem now is that-are they sensitized? What does RIB do to empower them. This is the core aspect of the intervention. We have to bump into the areas of micro-credit interventions. He concluded saying that we need to create a social movement for a collective action since individual success does not matter much for the general welfare of the society.

Mr. Dewan Akhtaruzzaman
The male members become encouraged by the female members to participate in the group. The animator's role is very important here. S/he sits down with people, discusses things with them. In the process, the participatory action takes place. And the villagers find it convenient to use this in their family and social life. If the animator is always there, it transpires that things have not improved. There must be a saturation of the animator's job. The leadership issue is of permanent nature. The successful animator is supposed to create local leaders who may eventually take charge of the responsibilities.

Mr. Alauddin Ali
We should not fix the animator's definition. He said, if we want to know who is the animator, we cannot come to a closed definition since it varies. Animators can work at different levels and tiers. They may be paid or unpaid. The poor people may also become animators. RIB is providing a model that is simply flexible. That flexibility works because of the diversity of situations.

Prof. Md. Anisur Rahman
The animator's role is a self liquidating process. The process demands that the animators should gradually withdraw. The mission stays with people, but the animator liquidates his or her self.

Mr. Monwarul Islam
The local process should go with the local initiator. He added that we would have to analyse the success factors and causes of failure. There comes the question of RIB's role, whether it should continue with its project with animators or not. One may put the issue of sustainability. These should be seriously examined as apriori observations. It is for certain that our fundamental thrust is on poverty alleviation. To address this issue in an unconventional and rather comprehensive way, we have thought of the emergence of the champion who stays in the village, participates in the struggle of the villagers, tries to encourage and strengthen them and actively waits for the achievement. S/he also knows that nothing succeeds like success. Now comes the next question. Does s/he organise a strong institution? S/he must. Without that the animator may get lost. Individual leadership is not just enough. There should be some tangible proofs that the groups can work on their own. There lies the strength.

RIB does not want to prescribe any final thing. At one level, it is true that our task is to identify the leader. We try to assist in the process of the emergence of the leader. But in the end, it should be spontaneous.

Dr. Shamsul Bari
What is RIB's role? Our efforts might get lost without a structure. It may be a cooperative or any institution where the group may feel confident. In RIB, should we identify the leader? There cannot be one answer to it. The success stories have naturally created a pressure on us to continue the work of animation. We still believe in it. But it has been rightly pointed out that the external animators cannot stay back permanently, nor is it wanted. Our help and resources will be available as long as we can survive and sustain.

Prof. M M Akash
Lenin Azad earlier said that people saved Tk. 25 lacs. Now the question is what do they want to do with this money?

Dr. Lenin Azad
People are saving and giving credit to the members. They are trying to build a financial institution. We have constituted a federation. There are seven committees, which deal with socio-political problems of the areas including leasing of land. There is a co-operative b