The primary focus of sociological research is people and working for their welfare, while human society is considered its laboratory. A particularly interesting field of study is the slums located within the city or marginalised communities living on its outskirts. The Korail slum—along with other slums that have developed in the heart of our capital—is one such area that has become a major site of work for researchers and NGO workers. It would be difficult to find a researcher working on various sociological topics—especially public health—who has not had to visit Korail to collect data for their research. For researchers, residential areas of such marginalised groups located in the city centre are ideal research sites. Activities of local and foreign researchers, donor agencies, and NGOs are widespread in Korail.
Bangladesh was once called the “paradise of NGOs.” From that perspective, their presence in slums like Korail is only natural. Various activities and institutional involvement of the private sector surrounding such communities continue to work for improving their living conditions. In comparison, the presence of government institutions is relatively low—almost negligible. Added to this are recurring disasters such as fires, which create risks in their daily lives. Although the state does not prioritise improving their quality of life, private organisations, despite their efforts, cannot solve the broader infrastructural issues of areas like Korail. Given their limited resources and capacity, expecting them to do so may not be realistic.
For this reason, the state should formulate special plans for the overall development of such lagging communities. Political parties, in turn, can prioritise these marginalised groups in their election manifestos. Although election manifestos contain grand promises, proposals specifically focused on marginalised communities are often missing. Many say they want to build an equal society, but they do not present a detailed roadmap or action plan for how they intend to achieve it. As a result, ordinary people do not feel hopeful about these promises and often remain uncertain. We always see that during elections the value of these voters increases—marginalised voters suddenly gain importance. But to what extent their interests are considered afterward remains a question. Yet improving the living standards of marginalised communities should be a key goal of development.
As long as we fail to integrate the interests of marginalised people into national priorities, the benefits of development will not fully reach even those of us who are relatively privileged. If we look at many developed countries, we notice that they design their infrastructure with the interests of marginalised communities in mind. From healthcare services to other facilities, everything is kept accessible to them. In contrast, here we often have to exhaust our resources just to secure basic healthcare. Looking at the costs of major hospitals in Bangladesh, it feels as though falling ill is a lifelong curse in this country.
In this regard, we may consider the BNP’s proposal on healthcare, which aims to bring services to people’s doorsteps. If they can turn this into reality, it would be a groundbreaking step. However, they must move away from the idea of fully replicating the model of the United Kingdom’s National Health Service (NHS). Experience shows that Western models cannot be applied wholesale to the context of Bangladesh. To benefit from these models, they must be adapted to our national circumstances. This is similar to what China has shown through the success of its distinctive socialist system—they did not apply Marxist ideas verbatim; rather, they built a sustainable system suited to their own context. We must also take good examples from global systems and apply them in line with our social realities. Otherwise, large investments may be made, but the benefits will not reach marginalised communities. Instead, such projects will become questionable.
In our development thinking and planning for marginalised communities, we often rely heavily on an “imposed from above” or “top-down” approach. Such approaches frequently fail to produce accurate or positive outcomes. Therefore, poverty alleviation and development projects must be designed based on the needs of the poor and marginalised. Their own narratives of poverty should also be taken into account in development planning.
In this regard, we may recall the proposal of renowned researcher Robert Chambers, who argued that the poor define poverty differently—seeing not only deprivation but also mental stress, fear, insecurity, and the absence of a dignified social life as central concerns. These factors intensify the risks associated with poverty. This is why poor or marginalised groups remain invisible in the mainstream, even though their contributions to making urban life easier are undeniable.
For these reasons, we must first identify their key problems through the participation of marginalised communities themselves. Poverty should be viewed from a “bottom-up” perspective and understood through the lived experiences of those affected. It is also important to remember that although the problems of rural communities differ from those of urban marginalised groups, some issues remain common to all, such as lack of employment and inadequate housing. We especially need to focus on creating new employment opportunities. In this context, the BNP’s emphasis on job creation in its election campaign is noteworthy; other political parties may follow this approach. However, when expanding employment, the needs of marginalised groups must be considered alongside those of the educated population. Instead of prioritising “mega projects,” practical and sustainable initiatives should be undertaken that serve the interests of local communities.
We must remember that poverty is not an individual failure; rather, it is produced by the structural limitations of the state system. Anthropologist Paul Farmer therefore identified poverty as a structural issue. In addressing this challenge, the state is an essential stakeholder, as are political parties. Both must play a leading role here. Given the erosion of public trust in political parties over the past two decades, adopting this perspective will also be crucial in rebuilding public confidence. With the election approaching, we hope political parties will commit to playing a positive role in improving the condition of marginalised communities by incorporating such commitments into their election manifestos. Only then will the benefits of development reach the doorsteps of all disadvantaged groups.
#Bulbul Siddiquee is professor at Department of Political Science and Sociology, North South University
#The opinions expressed are the author’s own.