Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
Role of social networks and power relations in vulnerability
dynamics
Social status and access to social and political networks, including trading
networks, are important in explaining the distribution of vulnerability in
the study area, and form an integral part of the vulnerability context of the
households. In this section, we discuss how social and power relations influence
households' access to land, trade or development advantages - and, in turn, local
vulnerability dynamics.
In Upper Humla, access to trade networks within and outside the district
is a major factor distinguishing the better-off from the poorer families. For
trader families of Khaagaalgaon, almost all had one or more family member
living in Kathmandu. In Lower Humla, where households engage less in
trade, interviews reveal that high priority is given to networking with political
parties, local decision-makers and development/humanitarian organizations.
Those active in political parties are mostly men from more prosperous Thakuri
families; none of the Dalit households consider themselves part of political
networks. A Thakuri informant of Khankhe put it this way:
'We must engage in
politics so that we do not remain poor' and a Dalit said: 'We do not engage in
politics because we are not heard, and so we remain poor.'
Likewise, many informants regard lack of access to quality land and other
resources as determinants of vulnerability that are caused by unequal power
relationships. Dalit interviewees in particular recounted many instances of
'elite capture' and oppression, where unequal access to land and water, as well
as lack of education and information about development work and decision-
making processes, were seen as major barriers to improving their livelihoods.
Limitations and stress caused by the oppression of one group by another
(Dalits versus Thakuri; men versus women; poor versus better-off) was clearly
expressed by most Dalits, poor and women during informal interviews, but the
sensitivity of this topic is shown by the fact that this was not mentioned in
formal household interviews.
Nevertheless such unequal power relations were frequently referred to and
observed during fieldwork. For example, some better-off households in Khankhe
had access to improved varieties of wheat and rice from the District Agriculture
Development Office, but none of the Dalits interviewed. The Dalits explained
this by the fact that they have no lands suited for the improved seed varieties and
had received no information from the authorities about the seeds. One Dalit
recounted how he, hearing that the local authorities were providing irrigation
systems to some villagers, applied - but that high-caste families (Thakuri)
with fields close to the river blocked his application. Another Dalit described
how government funds earmarked for the improvement of Dalit livelihoods
never arrived, as the Dalits had not been aware of the existence of such funds.
A similar narrative from the village of Syaandaa came from a poor old man:
'We [the poor] do not get to know what the development organizations do in
Search WWH ::
Custom Search