Prof. Jagannath Dash
Whenever we raise the matter of culture and development we come
across a four dimensional picture with reference to (i) interface between
culture and development, (ii) development of culture, (iii) cultural dimension
to development, and (iv) development dimension to culture. In a different vision, one can also discuss the matter
emphasizing both the concepts in an integrated manner. It may be (i) development
of cultures, (ii) cultures of development. However, it is not possible to decipher
them as individual concepts or ideas isolated from each other. If someone says
- culture and development as concepts move in two different directions or they
are all the time remain away from each other, in reality, it is impossible. Both the
concepts are born integrated. Simply we have to find out different contexts for
their manifestations.
First of all, one needs to explain both the concepts individually
which will greatly contribute to their integration in the context of tribal
development. A very popular definition comes from UNO which says that "the
ultimate purpose of development is to provide increasing opportunities to all
people for a better life "(1975 ). This may be further simplified as
creating conditions for wholesome living of the members of a community .Very
briefly social scientists explain it as the rise in the standard of living. The
development specialist Flammang (1979) has equated 'growth’ with development.
One can analyze that all developments may be ‘growths’ but all growths are not
development. Development may be applicable to individual and society both. When
we are discussing about the interface of culture and development, we are bound
to bring the social or group oriented development situations. Most often
development is understood as economic development. This may be a priority area
which is also well applicable to rest other aspects of society and culture of
man. But the famous scholar E. F. Schumacher being an economist has defined
development in a very scientific manner where economic dimension has never been
emphasized. To him, "Development does not start with material goods, it
starts with the people, their education, organization and discipline" (1971
).Perhaps this is the most befitting definition for development. However,
anthropologically speaking, development may be a progressive change in a
desired or required direction of the people.
Culture, on the other hand, is the way of life of a social group.
With holistic nature, it pervades into all aspects of social life controlling
the people through various prescriptions and proscriptions as well as
maintaining the customs and traditions for the future. Culture embodies all the
major social institutions like economic, social, political and religious
organizations. Therefore, culture is always the master variable, which creates
the ground for all types of activities related to maintenance as well as
promotion or development.
Under such circumstances, it is obvious that culture always experiences
direct interface and interaction with development. Though development is
understood as economic development, it is also to be casted in terms of
non-economic development in the context of culture. However, both the
dimensions always keep in view a total improvement or development in all spheres of social life.
At the national level, development planning in India is mostly governed by an
economic ethic which is productive and surplus oriented to facilitate capital
accumulation. In this context, development has two major dimensions. It is either
externally induced through technology and development programmes, or internally
desired, indigenously and endogenously designed. But for the sake of cultural
development, we have to go beyond economic realms. If cultural development
refers to all round development in all aspects of a society's life, it is
impossible mainly because culture cannot be sustained apart from an adequate
economic base. Therefore, cultural development cannot ignore economic dimension
and vice versa.
But in view of the development of simple or backward communities or
especially the development of tribal communities, we have to examine
culture-development interface in a different way. Most often it happens that
---
(i) Culture, with its traditional values becomes an obstacle to
development.
(ii) Culture of simple society becomes a victim of development.
Due to the impact of modern technology and modern cultures, the
culture gradually loses its core values and structures leading to the ultimate
collapse of cultures. Sometimes due to acculturation and other aspects of
change, along with the way of life, the language or mother tongue of a tribal
community also changes. If language, the
carrier of culture, changes, the culture is drastically affected. It also
happens with religious, social and other traditions of the society which
ultimately result in the structural changes of the tribal society. As a result,
the tribal cultures develop reactions against development or modernization and
most often they are expressed as barriers. The anthropologists who study the
development process in so called primitive or economically backward tribal
communities, they always intend to --(i) preserve the tribal culture and maintain
their ethnic identity and (ii) protect the customs, traditions, values,
beliefs, etc. of a tribal community. Therefore, anthropologists vividly study
development both as an obstacle as well as promoter of cultural values and
traditions. Such obstacles within the culture are taken as barriers and
promotive factors as stimulants. Anthropologists also classify them universally
as -psychological, social and cultural barriers as well as stimulants to change
or development.
At the end, it is needless to state that the above-mentioned
conceptual discourse on the culture and development are the realities of
socio-cultural traditions of tribals all over the world. In most cases by
accepting the values of modern society, the tribals lose their own values and
traditions and in some cases they also accept and encounter a complete change
of their tribal identity. However, the process of change turns back and the so
called tribals after losing their traditional values internally develop a
desire to revive their traditional culture. Through revivalistic attitude or
sometimes revitalization movements the culture reappears and survives even
though the modern values in the field of economic transactions exist simultaneously
adding to the quality or standard of life at par with modern society.
REFERENCES
1. Dash,Jagannath-1998-Human
Ecology of Foragers, Commonwealth Publishers, New Delhi.
2. Flammang, Robert A.-1979-Economic
Growth and Economic Development: Counterparts or Competitors?,In Economic
Development and Cultural Change, Vol.28,No.1.
3.
Madan, T. N.-!983- Culture and
Development, Oxford University Press, Delhi.
4. Schumacher,E. F.-1977-Small Is
Beautiful: A Study of Economics asif People Mattered,Radha Krishna, New Delhi
