The Necessity of Cultural Understanding: My Experience
Research Partners as Bridge to New Culture
Though my research partner, Jeffrey, never fully appropriated our research project as his own, conceiving of our work primarily as a source of income, his intimate knowledge of Nnindye from living there, and more recently from running for local office, was invaluable. Throughout my interviews with the villagers of Nnindye, humbled by the generosity of the Ugandan people, and wanting to forget my interview quota to hang around the trading centers with the locals, I struggled to focus on my objective research methods. Our research partners, highly educated, and familiar with, yet removed from, western culture, offered helpful perspectives as we sought to understand our limitations as researchers working in a foreign environment. I left with conflicting, unresolved feelings concerning the ability of westerners such as ourselves to use analytical tools to obtain practical results despite a limited understanding of local culture.
Fruitful Arguments
One symbolic conversation our group of Notre Dame students had with our research partners occurred on one of our first weekends when we were in Kampala for the Uganda Martyr's Day celebrations. In a lavishly furnished Notre Dame guest house, our group sat in a corner debating America's presence in Africa. One of the research partners, Mushua, railed against us, eyes popping, as he asserted that we were part of the problem he saw with western involvement in Ugandan economic affairs. Kristen explained that she had come to Uganda and was interested in a career in international development because she wanted to adapt theoretical knowledge to local situations, helping disadvantaged communities in measurable ways by improving food security, reducing domestic violence, or improving water quality. Mushua countered, all but accusing her of being a rich westerner who wanted to come to Uganda ostensibly to “help people,” but really to justify or ease her guilt for her fortunate life. He assured her that the economic knowledge she was speaking of couldn't be easily transferred to Uganda's circumstances, and added that as a result of western media influence, millions of Ugandans waste money on products like sunglasses, developing new desires that reinforce a self-fulfilling cycle of backwardness. Mushua believed that we could never understand Uganda well enough to make a positive difference there, and that misplaced confidence in western development approaches leads to failed projects, diminished Ugandan pride, and an overly materialistic culture. “Did you notice,” he said, “that all the manikins on the streets are white. That's part of the reason why there are products to lighten a woman's skin. Why don't you want to let Africa develop itself?”
To further illustrate his point, Mushua recalled something he had said in an earlier conversation when we contrasted the different societal conceptions of marriage in America and Uganda. He had been explained to us how, in Uganda, marriage is viewed more as a measure for ensuring economic security than as a bond of love. He insisted that it is common for marriages to persist in Uganda when parents no longer love each other because it is considered so vital to hold families together for the economic security of the children. We came to understand how culturally relative the concept of marriage is, how our notion of marriage for true love was quaint in a cultural less economically fortunate. Mushua argued that, as Americans living in Uganda, if we found a basic concept like marriage unfamiliar, or worse, absurd, we could not possibly transfer our supposed “economic knowledge” to a Ugandan setting without the culture rejecting it like a body rejecting a bad organ transplant.
What is the Role of Development Workers
This debate with Mushua has remained etched in my mind as the first time I confronted the anti-American, anti- development sentiment that I have read about in the news for years. Throughout my remaining weeks, I pondered whether western development workers could have a practical difference in Uganda, or whether, as Mushua believed, development projects produce more harm than good in local communities. I have whittled down this dilemma into two competing sentiments. My academic side believes that rigorous study of agricultural processes or scientific events can be of great use in a setting like Nnindye. An outside consultant with the academic tools to delineate the supply chain of matoke might be able to identify ways in which local producers could organize to claim a fairer share of the profits, or a civil engineer might be able to train local mechanics to more effectively maintain bore holes. If it is demonstrably provable that the water Nnindye's residents drink is tainted, then aren't outside workers who bring tools to analyze and ultimately correct this situation in the right?
On the other hand, my right brain remembers sitting in numerous houses to conduct interviews, tasting sweet mangos that villagers gave me as gifts, experiences which prompted me to spend many journal entries remarking about how happy the people of Nnindye seemed, despite their supposedly “dirty” living condition and “tedious” daily routines. “People are capable of adapting to so many situations, and I feel like the farthest thing from a learned, analytical researcher trying to offer solutions. I'm continually amazed by the grace and local knowledge of the people I get to spend time with” I wrote in one entry. If the local owner of a restaurant, who had lived in Uganda for many years, could never be, in the minds of villagers, a true Ugandan, how could any intervening development worker hope to fully understand the natural ebb and flow of Ugandan life.
Why UPFORD Works
Although the driving ethos of the UPFORD program in Nnindye is to implement locally-driven and operated programs, the people running these programs work at UMU, not Notre Dame, and are thus far more tuned in to the local customs and geography than anyone at Notre Dame. Observing the UPFORD program's projects this summer made me acutely aware that the success of development projects depends primarily on the motivation of local participants. Thus, programs must be designed with local traditions, geography, and daily routines in mind. This makes implementing large scale programs extremely difficult, especially in Uganda, where over 40 local languages are spoken. I never knew what Ethnography was about, but after my immersion in the UPFORD program, it was apparent why development programs need to be designed with this local perspective in mind.
Nesting Programs in Local Culture
My ultimate conclusion is that rigorous, theoretical planning of development projects is important, yet any development project which is not carefully designed to nestle into local cultural rhythms runs a great risk of failure. Macro visions,often driven by deep compassion for humanity, need to be grounded in small, everyday, trust-building communications with local people. Implementing a development program naturally into a local setting is a gradual process. The extra cost associated with this step, which does not produce measurable results attractive to donors, deters many organizations from investing in programs which build local relationships. This may be a partial reason why development is an especially wasteful industry. My course of study, Economics, struggles in accommodating this holistic cultural understanding. Economic analysts are adept at running regressions to identify causal factors of poverty or declining agricultural productivity, yet have to be careful to consider the importance of small relationships in producing change. Thus, as I mull future plans, this summer inspired me to use my analytical skills while taking a stake within a specific community, working for the common good while understanding on a personal level the people and the issue that I am working with. These casual, friendly interactions are important for the success of development projects, but, more importantly, respect the dignity of local communities. In the context of development, anthropologists are well-suited to be the bridge between development organizations and the local level.
Though my research partner, Jeffrey, never fully appropriated our research project as his own, conceiving of our work primarily as a source of income, his intimate knowledge of Nnindye from living there, and more recently from running for local office, was invaluable. Throughout my interviews with the villagers of Nnindye, humbled by the generosity of the Ugandan people, and wanting to forget my interview quota to hang around the trading centers with the locals, I struggled to focus on my objective research methods. Our research partners, highly educated, and familiar with, yet removed from, western culture, offered helpful perspectives as we sought to understand our limitations as researchers working in a foreign environment. I left with conflicting, unresolved feelings concerning the ability of westerners such as ourselves to use analytical tools to obtain practical results despite a limited understanding of local culture.
Fruitful Arguments
One symbolic conversation our group of Notre Dame students had with our research partners occurred on one of our first weekends when we were in Kampala for the Uganda Martyr's Day celebrations. In a lavishly furnished Notre Dame guest house, our group sat in a corner debating America's presence in Africa. One of the research partners, Mushua, railed against us, eyes popping, as he asserted that we were part of the problem he saw with western involvement in Ugandan economic affairs. Kristen explained that she had come to Uganda and was interested in a career in international development because she wanted to adapt theoretical knowledge to local situations, helping disadvantaged communities in measurable ways by improving food security, reducing domestic violence, or improving water quality. Mushua countered, all but accusing her of being a rich westerner who wanted to come to Uganda ostensibly to “help people,” but really to justify or ease her guilt for her fortunate life. He assured her that the economic knowledge she was speaking of couldn't be easily transferred to Uganda's circumstances, and added that as a result of western media influence, millions of Ugandans waste money on products like sunglasses, developing new desires that reinforce a self-fulfilling cycle of backwardness. Mushua believed that we could never understand Uganda well enough to make a positive difference there, and that misplaced confidence in western development approaches leads to failed projects, diminished Ugandan pride, and an overly materialistic culture. “Did you notice,” he said, “that all the manikins on the streets are white. That's part of the reason why there are products to lighten a woman's skin. Why don't you want to let Africa develop itself?”
To further illustrate his point, Mushua recalled something he had said in an earlier conversation when we contrasted the different societal conceptions of marriage in America and Uganda. He had been explained to us how, in Uganda, marriage is viewed more as a measure for ensuring economic security than as a bond of love. He insisted that it is common for marriages to persist in Uganda when parents no longer love each other because it is considered so vital to hold families together for the economic security of the children. We came to understand how culturally relative the concept of marriage is, how our notion of marriage for true love was quaint in a cultural less economically fortunate. Mushua argued that, as Americans living in Uganda, if we found a basic concept like marriage unfamiliar, or worse, absurd, we could not possibly transfer our supposed “economic knowledge” to a Ugandan setting without the culture rejecting it like a body rejecting a bad organ transplant.
What is the Role of Development Workers
This debate with Mushua has remained etched in my mind as the first time I confronted the anti-American, anti- development sentiment that I have read about in the news for years. Throughout my remaining weeks, I pondered whether western development workers could have a practical difference in Uganda, or whether, as Mushua believed, development projects produce more harm than good in local communities. I have whittled down this dilemma into two competing sentiments. My academic side believes that rigorous study of agricultural processes or scientific events can be of great use in a setting like Nnindye. An outside consultant with the academic tools to delineate the supply chain of matoke might be able to identify ways in which local producers could organize to claim a fairer share of the profits, or a civil engineer might be able to train local mechanics to more effectively maintain bore holes. If it is demonstrably provable that the water Nnindye's residents drink is tainted, then aren't outside workers who bring tools to analyze and ultimately correct this situation in the right?
On the other hand, my right brain remembers sitting in numerous houses to conduct interviews, tasting sweet mangos that villagers gave me as gifts, experiences which prompted me to spend many journal entries remarking about how happy the people of Nnindye seemed, despite their supposedly “dirty” living condition and “tedious” daily routines. “People are capable of adapting to so many situations, and I feel like the farthest thing from a learned, analytical researcher trying to offer solutions. I'm continually amazed by the grace and local knowledge of the people I get to spend time with” I wrote in one entry. If the local owner of a restaurant, who had lived in Uganda for many years, could never be, in the minds of villagers, a true Ugandan, how could any intervening development worker hope to fully understand the natural ebb and flow of Ugandan life.
Why UPFORD Works
Although the driving ethos of the UPFORD program in Nnindye is to implement locally-driven and operated programs, the people running these programs work at UMU, not Notre Dame, and are thus far more tuned in to the local customs and geography than anyone at Notre Dame. Observing the UPFORD program's projects this summer made me acutely aware that the success of development projects depends primarily on the motivation of local participants. Thus, programs must be designed with local traditions, geography, and daily routines in mind. This makes implementing large scale programs extremely difficult, especially in Uganda, where over 40 local languages are spoken. I never knew what Ethnography was about, but after my immersion in the UPFORD program, it was apparent why development programs need to be designed with this local perspective in mind.
Nesting Programs in Local Culture
My ultimate conclusion is that rigorous, theoretical planning of development projects is important, yet any development project which is not carefully designed to nestle into local cultural rhythms runs a great risk of failure. Macro visions,often driven by deep compassion for humanity, need to be grounded in small, everyday, trust-building communications with local people. Implementing a development program naturally into a local setting is a gradual process. The extra cost associated with this step, which does not produce measurable results attractive to donors, deters many organizations from investing in programs which build local relationships. This may be a partial reason why development is an especially wasteful industry. My course of study, Economics, struggles in accommodating this holistic cultural understanding. Economic analysts are adept at running regressions to identify causal factors of poverty or declining agricultural productivity, yet have to be careful to consider the importance of small relationships in producing change. Thus, as I mull future plans, this summer inspired me to use my analytical skills while taking a stake within a specific community, working for the common good while understanding on a personal level the people and the issue that I am working with. These casual, friendly interactions are important for the success of development projects, but, more importantly, respect the dignity of local communities. In the context of development, anthropologists are well-suited to be the bridge between development organizations and the local level.