TY - JOUR
T1 - Ethnography of a policy process: A case study of land redistribution in Bangladesh
AU - Devine, J
N1 - ID number: ISI:000180106100006
PY - 2002
Y1 - 2002
N2 - Throughout the developing world, Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) are involved in various aspects of an increasing number of policy interventions. The donor community has lent considerable support to this strategy. One of the key assumptions behind the strategy is that the greater involvement of NGOs in policy processes will result in more resources being distributed to the poor, and will also facilitate the establishment of a policy process which is more inclusive and egalitarian. Here the involvement of NGOs in an important land redistribution policy initiative is used to examine both these assumptions. While there is strong evidence that more land was redistributed to the poor as a result of NGO involvement, the actual mechanism or process for deciding the distribution of land was not found to be all inclusive or completely egalitarian. This ambivalence serves as a timely critique to the naive optimism and simplified assumptions underpinning development thinking and practice. Copyright (C) 2002 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.
AB - Throughout the developing world, Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) are involved in various aspects of an increasing number of policy interventions. The donor community has lent considerable support to this strategy. One of the key assumptions behind the strategy is that the greater involvement of NGOs in policy processes will result in more resources being distributed to the poor, and will also facilitate the establishment of a policy process which is more inclusive and egalitarian. Here the involvement of NGOs in an important land redistribution policy initiative is used to examine both these assumptions. While there is strong evidence that more land was redistributed to the poor as a result of NGO involvement, the actual mechanism or process for deciding the distribution of land was not found to be all inclusive or completely egalitarian. This ambivalence serves as a timely critique to the naive optimism and simplified assumptions underpinning development thinking and practice. Copyright (C) 2002 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0036926286
U2 - 10.1002/pad.245
DO - 10.1002/pad.245
M3 - Article
SN - 0271-2075
VL - 22
SP - 403
EP - 414
JO - Public Administration and Development
JF - Public Administration and Development
IS - 5
ER -