A hobbled Phoenix

Pierre Landell-Mills

Next year, Bangladesh celebrates its 40th year of independence. It is a good moment to pause and reflect on what has been achieved. In 1971, Bangladesh arose Phoenix-like from the ashes of civil wara new nation ravaged but full of hope. Despite the carnage and betrayed trust, Bangladeshis step by step rebuilt their economy.
Over the past four decades of Independence, this remarkable country has raised its per capita incomes ever more rapidly, outstripping almost all of the other least developed countries. It also dramatically improved almost all its social indicators. The status and education of women have radically improved. This outcome is all the more surprising in the absence of significant mineral or oil wealth.
These achievements are well illustrated by the findings of a researcher, a colleague of mine, who had tracked the conditions of a village in southern Bangladesh in the twenty-year period between 1977 and 1997.
In the mid-1970s, this village was extremely poormost people wore no shoes, the men had only one new lungi a year, the women were rarely seen, farmers harvested only one crop a year and were forced to travel to Sylhet to seek seasonal employment at pitiful wages. The village was so isolated it took almost two days to reach it travelling in part by boat and part by walking.
Returning in the mid 1990s the researcher found conditions in this village transformed. The place was no longer isolated; he could drive all the way into the village. Even the children wore shoes and everyone seemed much better dressed. Women greeted him openly with smiles. The farmers were now quite prosperous, harvesting three crops a year.
He found life expectancy had risen by 15 years and infant and maternal mortality had more than halved. And the birth rate had fallen dramatically, so that each child could be much better cared for. I imagine that if he returned again today he would find the conditions even better though those living through these great changes in living conditions often fail to notice them, so preoccupied is everyone with day to day challenges.
What is so surprising to outside observers is that these improvements in people's welfare have been achieved despite abysmal governance problemsmisguided nationalisation in the 1970s, followed by military rule in the 1980s, and then two decades of divisive and bickering "democracy" where the winners of each election saw power as a means of self-advancement and refused to respect the basic principles of parliamentary government. Not surprisingly the electorate, every time they had a chance, without exception, threw out the ruling party.
How can one explain this paradoxan above average development performance despite being hobbled by a corrupt, incompetent and self-serving ruling class which placed Bangladesh constantly close to the bottom of the World Bank's league table for governance and the Transparency International corruption perception index? Scholars have struggled to find the answer.
Economic researchers have argued that Bangladesh's relatively good economic performance was primarily because the country embraced market economics, after an initial bleak period of socialist planning, allowing private firms over the years an increasingly free hand. Ministers of finance were mostly prudent, never allowing too much debt to accumulate and husbanding the country's foreign exchange reserves.
Some social scientists attribute Bangladesh's progress in education, literacy, health and nutrition in large part to the dynamism and entrepreneurship of its remarkable NGOs. In truth, despite all their faults, successive governments did invest over the years in health, education and rural infrastructure, supported strongly by Bangladesh's development partners. And credit must also go to the governments for allowing NGOs the space to contribute. The reality was an effective if somewhat wary partnership between government agencies and the NGO community.
My own conviction is that the most important contribution to economic and social development has come from ordinary Bangladeshi citizens who have shown again and again great enterprise and resilience, working extraordinarily hard to better themselves. The political class has failed them.
With wise policies, integrity and a consensual approach to solving national problems, Bangladesh could have grown much faster, may be even as fast as China. Instead, successive governments have served the narrow interests of the elite in power and the bureaucrats who support them.
The outcome has been a power sector that has been allowed to degrade disastrously, a port system so inefficient it costs the economy several billion dollars a year, a self-serving statist approach to telecommunications that has hobbled Bangladesh's entry into the digital age, management of public services that has been stunningly inefficient, a state enterprise sector that was a major drain on the exchequer and an obstacle to private enterprisethe list of governance failures is long indeed.
I vividly remember in my first month as head of the World Bank Office in 1994 being visited by a delegation from the delta area to complain that the Flood Action Plan we supported was devastating the lives of the local villagers. This Plan, full of good intentions, was typical of large-scale projects dreamt up by ambitious engineers, favoured by government and aid officials, and imposed on populations that were given little opportunity to participate in decisions that would have a profound impact on their welfare.
Fortunately, we were successful in halting this misconceived mega project despite the vested interests. This experience demonstrated the need for more accountable government, as well as more accountable donors.
Development "experts" increasingly accept two fundamental propositions: first, that good governance is central to achieving rapid and sustainable improvements in living standards and, second though equally important, that good governance will only come about if citizens demand it to the point where those in power are forced to listen. Good governance can never be imposed from outside; the pressures on politicians to reform must come from within a society.
So, how might this happen in Bangladesh? In many ways the trend in the past 20 years has been retrograde. Bangladesh appears to have become an increasingly polarised society as a result of the highly divisive and disruptive strategies adopted by the two main political parties.
In the 1990s it seemed as though the one state institution that was respected for its integrity was the Supreme Court. When the country needed someone utterly trustworthy to head the new caretaker government in 1996, people turned to the then most recently retired chief justice, a man of impeccable reputation. Today, it seems the public would not have the same degree of trust in their retired chief justices.
The Court has been dragged into the struggle for power and, as a consequence, the political elite have even succeeded in undermining peoples'' faith in the justice system. This rupture urgently needs to be repaired by ensuring that those appointed to the Supreme Court are chosen by an independent judicial commission based only on their legal skills, their independence of the political class and their unquestioned integrity.
Another instrument that is key for accountable government is citizens' right to information. Across the world historically those in power have almost always preferred to keep their citizens in the dark precisely because this made it far more difficult for civil society to hold political leaders and their bureaucrats accountable.
Important progress was made in January 2009 when the new Parliament passed an RTI Act confirming the 2008 RTI Ordinance of the caretaker government. But this Act will only serve its purpose if the government puts in place all the necessary measures to make it effective and if the courts are ready to punish officials who withhold information, as the courts have in India.
The present government's proposed Digital Bangladesh programme could improve the amount and accessibility of information on public programmes and policies, while also supporting the introduction of a variety of e-government systems. If pursued with determination these would greatly enhance governance.
Achieving accountable government is inevitably a long-term process requiring the progressive dismantling of the whole apparatus of political patronage which underpins the present political system, undermines professionalism, and drives corruption.
This can only happen if all the elements of civil societyprofessional associations, business organisations, independent policy research centres, and NGOs, as well as the independent mediasystematically participate in demanding a truly independent judiciary and transparent and accountable agencies staffed by officials selected and promoted on merit alone. This will not happen overnight but a start can be made today by each adopting and pledging to adhere to ethical Codes of Conduct.
So long as patronage politics works and the main political parties are wedded to mastaans and goons, Bangladesh will remain hobbled by poor governance. Take, as an example, this press report: "Frustrated over car requisition, business leaders have said they would rather provide the police with vehicles than see their vehicles requisitioned. The leaders of the apex trade body, the Federation of Bangladesh Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FBCCI) also vented their frustration over extortion and mugging, and suggested a special cell on prevention" (September 17, bdnews24.com). Bangladesh has still a long way to go to establish the rule of law.
Only when citizens start to assert their right to honest, transparent and accountable government will Bangladeshi politics start to change. Those with resources are best placed to lead this challenge to the existing debilitating political practices. Up to now the business leaders have sought to placate or join the political class rather campaign for reform.
Instead the FBCCI, for example, should assert its independence, refuse to be dictated to by the regime in power and give a lead in seeking reforms in the port, the power sector, the courts, and all the other dysfunctional parts of the state that obstruct development.
Of course, the business community alone cannot bring about the changes even if they were motivated to try. If Bangladesh is to rise to the new challenges of the 21st century and transform the lives of its people, then all elements of society must work together for good governance.

(By courtesy of Prothom Alo) Mr. Pierre Landell-Mills is a former Permanent Representative of the World Bank to Bangladesh.