Oftentimes, internships are an opportunity to apply classroom knowledge in a practical setting. Interns are able to see how general ideas or theories play out within a distinct cultural or national context. I certainly witnessed this concrete application in my internship in Bangladesh. Before arriving I had learned (a few things) about how the international food regime and climate change more seriously disadvantage the Majority World. This internship, however, allowed a focused study on what this actually means within one country.

I was better able to see how essential environmentally-sustainable methods are in a country where as much as 1/3 of its total land area could be submerged in the coming decades. I was better able also to see how the prices of chemical inputs and the importation of seed can seriously hinder a country. I was better able to see how government support for agriculture (or the lack thereof) impacts smallholder farmers. Indeed, in rudimentarily studying Bangladesh’s agricultural context it was clear that there are a multitude of complex and interrelated factors (both domestic and international) which are leading to the high levels of food insecurity in the country.

When it comes to solutions to food insecurity the only conclusion I could draw (as is often the case in development interventions) was that there is no single answer. For instance, a technical solution, such as efforts to increase agricultural productivity, can be a partial remedy that produces tangible and quantifiable results. Indeed, I have been able to more clearly understand how even these types of projects can enhance livelihoods. But it’s also been reinforced to me how these interventions are never neutral. I learned how the introduction of supposedly more productive seeds can end-up detracting from women’s power in the household by erasing the role of women as being responsible for preserving seed.

Similarly, in my work on microfinance, it was clear that as a technical fix, it can serve an immediate need. Yet, it’s also constrained by a variety of social, political and economic influences, amongst others. For instance, gendered impacts can result in situations where a male head-of-household retains control over the loan instead of the female beneficiary. Plus, credit alone can be insufficient given other forces determining profit such as infrastructure, demand, etc.

These scenarios suggest the importance of carefully planned interventions. We all know this, but it’s a task that’s always easier said than done. Identifying the myriad effects and factors involved in implementing a project is not a simple task. For this reason, there is a persuasive argument against development efforts altogether. But, as long as programs continue, at least a step in the right direction is to recognize the faulty logic behind standardized, blueprint interventions. Another move could be a shift away from rotating development practitioners from country-post to country-post; it isn’t possible to understand a country in three months, one year, or three. Rather, it takes a long-term commitment to one area, both practically and academically, in an attempt to understand the intricacies of that locality. Only by taking these into account can a more effective solution be developed. And so despite the inherently messy nature of development, a greater appreciation of local circumstances and thus a commitment to one place might be a good way to start.

Category: Bangladesh, Category, Country, Upon return // Add Comment »