Stop Inventorying Problems

How is it possible if there are more than five external inputs in a village and the village does not experience significant changes but an acute dependency on external agencies? Anything that the community wants to do then builds a perspective which is almost typical; the need of capital support from outside. The basic question is: What has happened so that there is no change in the community? The ‘provocative’ and ‘reflective’ question was raised in Reflection Workshop of DRR (Disaster Risks Reduction) Program Field Experiences: Insist-Cordaid partnership, in October 27-29 2008 in Perdikan Campus, Pakem Yogyakarta.

DRR has, indeed, become a ‘new spell’ in disaster management programs. There are many various theories and approaches applied on DRR and DRR is also framed in ‘participation’ paradigm. Therefore, the spell turns out to be “Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction” or “Community Based Disaster Risk Management” and so on. The “Community Based” term must be included to efficacious the spell. There are not many conceptual explorations toward the approach; how we see the community, how an approach on problem-solving will be, and where all those things go. Insist’s networks in six areas, at the beginning, implemented DRR program and they were enchanted by the spell and a little bit careless to see further on how the program was implemented in fields especially in relating them to sustainable village vision.

In the workshop, a reflective insight emerged to seek an answer for the above problems; that there was something wrong with the approach. We always see a village as a source of problems (problem-based analysis) rather than a place having potencies and strength which can be used by the villagers to solve their own problems without any dependency on external agencies if they are well organized and coordinated. Regarding to the vision and also sustainable village vision, a contingency plan in DRR should not only be considered as a part of long-term solving (development plan) but it should also apply a cross-cutting issues approach. A food vulnerability reduction action, for example, must be related to clean water, health, local wisdom, and land availability issues. It will be hard to imagine to establishment of a sustainable village without any sovereignty of the community on potency, strength, and resources.

That kind of sustainable village will be a strong fortress which can filter or prevent the external inputs to the community. Therefore, on its turn, the whole process will turn out to be a ‘delinking’ process which cuts or changes the chain link of the hegemonic external circle.

Related to the external inputs factor, delinking process and tendency of problem-based analysis, a local wisdom (of the community) strengthening process is needed since the danger of rational knowledge which leads to a development rationalism will abrade the development spiritualism. Development rationalism, slowly but surely, will lead to communal ownership individualization which is commonly found in Indonesian traditions. Rationalism is still needed as long as it does not break the established social structure and it brings benefits to communal lives.

Problem-based analysis is elitism and going to make us busy with a number of argumentations and finally we will end up forgetting to practice changes. (SA-DN)