In my previous post, I discussed the community with which I
will be engaging and my role within my accompaniment of that community, mostly
pertaining to the community-driven primary school development project in Bwera.
As I previously mentioned, Bwera is managing to overcome the pernicious effects
of the collective action problem. In community development projects where the
end result is a public good, the most logical action for an individual is to
opt out of committing time or money to a project, according to game theory. I
mentioned, that despite the logic of collective action problems, Bwera has had
strong initial success with the development of the school and has plans to
enact future community driven projects. They have managed to do this through the
application of the community organizing practices of PICO, primarily one-to-one
interactions with members of the community. If this model of development proves
to be sustainable and replicable, it could provide an alternative to the
inefficient and ineffective development practices currently being implemented
by most of the international community. However, as I also mentioned, there are
several reasons why this method’s effectiveness may be specific to the Rwandan
context and not replicable in other countries. In this post, I will expound upon this
point and delve into the possible factors that may prevent this method from being
widely implemented.
Social Institutions
There are two societal institutions in Rwanda that may be improving the effectiveness of this method. The first of these is the country’s
traditional practice of pooling together resources that could be given to community
members in their time of need. While this practice is not specific to the
Rwandan people, this institution provides a historical precedent of cooperation
for the promotion of community welfare within the country. Additionally,
despite the ethnic violence known as the Rwandan Genocide, the culmination of
ethnic conflict that arose during Rwanda’s independence in 1960, precolonial
Rwanda was a relatively homogeneous society ruled by a strong central authority.
According to Nicola Gennaioli and Ilia Rainer’s
Precolonial Centralization and Institutional Quality in Africa
have shown that strong precolonial political institutions have led to greater
rule of law in post-colonial African States. This research superficially backs
up the assertion that the strong centralization and political institutions of
precolonial Rwanda may facilitate modern cooperation within the Rwandan state
and within Bwera specifically. Additionally, approximately 80% of Rwandans
today participate in a practice known as Umuganda. Umuganda is a countrywide
institution that involves community members working together on community
improvement projects (cleaning communal areas, improving church or mosque
infrastructure, etc…) and it occurs on the last Saturday of each month.
Umuganda effectively creates several iterations to the collective action
problem. The addition of multiple trials to the game facilitates cooperation by
reducing uncertainty. As a result, collective action becomes less of a problem
and is more likely to be seen as a realistically achievable goal.
Legacy of Genocide
In addition to Rwandan institutions, the legacy of genocide
in the country may be aiding the success of community-driven development
projects in Bwera. In the aftermath of the genocide, the RPF transitioned into
the dominant political coalition within Rwanda. A highly structured
organization, the RPF’s transition from a military organization to a political
group led to the development of a strong bureaucracy within the country.
Additionally, in the wake of the bloodletting, the new Rwandan government
prioritized reconciliation, and later, economic development. The highly
structured bureaucratic system put in place after the genocide in 1994 is one
of the highest functioning governments on the continent. Strong political
institutions have the ability to permeate through society and beget and
reinforce other beneficial institutions. Perhaps the strong capacity of
Rwanda’s central government has led to stronger local capacities. Additionally,
the consequences and scars of the genocide are a stark reminder of the cost of
noncooperation within the country. Furthermore, these community projects are
associated with the Lutheran Church, which did not exist during in Rwanda until
after the genocide. As a result, the Church does not bear the stigma of
genocidal collaboration that mars several other faith groups (Muslims excluded)
in the country. This too may facilitate the community-building and development
projects of the Lutheran Church by painting the faith in a better light than
some of its contemporaries.
Development Externalities
The last major factor that could explain why this project
has been so successful is related to the massive economic development that
Rwanda has experienced over the last decade. Over the past few years, Rwanda
has continually had one of the highest rates of economic expansion in the
world. It is possible that the community-driven projects are merely a positive
externality of this larger trend of the state-led and aid-based economic
development initiatives within the country. Just as institutions beget
institutions, so too does development beget development. For example, an increase in the
country’s economic production can lead to greater prosperity and more expendable
income, thus mitigating time inconsistency problems and lowering the
opportunity costs of participating in community development projects. Additionally,
the government and aid-led economic progress in their country allows Rwandans
to see the tangible effects of development projects. The sight of success
alongside the promise of success can help illuminate the benefits of engaging
in community-led development projects, like the primary school in Bwera.
While all of these factors may facilitate the implementation of the development
projects in Bwera, it is not possible to discount the replicability of this
method of development without further information. Throughout the year, I hope
to gain a more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of Bwera, the Rwandan
context, and the methodology of the community-led development approach. In the
end, however, I feel that it is impossible to truly discount the replicability
of this approach without empirical evidence and evaluation. While that may be
infeasible during this year, I sincerely intend and hope to acquire empirical
analysis of the Bwera model.
