Unquiet on the Grameen front
By Hossain Zillur Rahman
Once derided as a basket-case, Bangladesh now enjoys global attention for its economic resilience and social progress. Problems remain but the achievements speak for themselves. Gender parity has already been achieved in primary and secondary enrollment. Child mortality has been brought down from 146 in 1990 to 65 in 2008.
An annual outlay of $1.6 billion in safety net programmes has virtually eliminated post-disaster secondary cycles of hunger and epidemics. Access to microcredit has seen a quantum jump in women's gainful self-employment. Stable and broad-based growth in excess of 5% was achieved even in the wake of the global recession.
None of the above was achieved automatically. The essence of the Bangladesh model of upward change has been its initiative-driven and multi-driver characteristics. People at large, successive governments, pioneers in social development, businessmen, farmers, NGOs, workers, women, political leaders all have played a role. Progress accelerated when the inclusive and pluralistic approach prevailed. Conversely, there were setbacks when intrusive control mind-sets arbitrarily stifled the initiative space.
Against this backdrop, we have watched with increasing dismay an initially explainable concern with a Norwegian documentary on Grameen Bank (since then cleared by the Norwegian government) and a burgeoning debate on microcredit graduate into a brute assertion of bureaucratic supremacy over the social initiative ethos. The Grameen impasse is of mounting concern not only because our lone Noble laureate is being unfairly vilified but for the larger signal of a control mindset attempting to assert its will over the social space.
Professor Yunus and Grameen Bank have not merely lent money. Through their pioneering approaches, they have galvanised a succession of social initiative frontiers. Many others, including the state, have gone on to build on these initiatives. Women's empowerment has come into focus. Rural households have strengthened their economic resilience. Durable housing for the poor has got an impetus. Entry into many other areas such as solar energy has become possible.
We thus find it deeply disturbing that such potentials are in danger of being compromised by ill-conceived ideas of government take-over and intrusive control. We have seen the consequences of such moves at Biman, Milk Vita and Basic Bank, to name some recent examples, all of which have rapidly gone into red in the past one year. The record is not unique to this government. In the early 2000s, erstwhile star performer the Rural Electrification Board (REB) rapidly lost its shine consequent to over-bureaucratised control.Our unease has been heightened by the string of frivolous cases against Professor Yunus with manifest hoirani intent. The debate on microcredit and rates of interest is a healthy one and needs to be continued. Further improving the Bangladesh model of inclusive and pluralistic development approach is a legitimate objective. But we do disservice to our abilities and our aspirations by putting proven successes like Grameen in jeopardy.
The aspiration for middle income status which this government has championed demands that we make the best use of our assets and further strengthen the inclusive and pluralistic model. Professor Yunus is both a brand asset and a continuing driver of social initiatives, including at Grameen. Other Yunuses will surely emerge and contribute to cement our place on the global stage. But it makes little sense to jettison the one we already have.
The writer was an Adviser to the last caretaker government.
Source: http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=175231
