A social accountability approach ensures that the government is keen on collaborating with ordinary people for a sustainable new Bangladesh where everyone can speak freely and have a standard of living with basic human needs, writes Zahirul HoqueÌýÌýÌýÌýÌý
FOR a dispute to arise, there needs to be a critical moment — a point of crisis where a person or a collective group or groups of people decide they cannot tolerate this situation any longer. The people/group(s) express discontent with the other person/party, which is reformulated until either opinion changes or a compromise or joint decision is reached. These are the words of French sociologists Luc Boltanski and Laurent Thévenot. These two authors developed a theoretical framework, ‘Orders of Worth,’ to understand how people justify their actions and critique others in modern societies. In a recent working paper, my co-author (Joane Jonathan) and I drew on Boltanski and Thevenot’s theory of Orders of Worth to demonstrate how conflicts between parties (student union members and the university management) with different values can reach an agreement using competing logic in the context of student unions in Australian public universities.
Building on the Orders of Worth idea and Actor Ne-work (details follow) theory, in this article I aim to address why the chief adviser of the interim government of Bangladesh, Muhammad Yunus, has been facing challenges since the government recently announced ten reform commissions. The newly formed commissions focus on the constitution, electoral system, judiciary, police administration, anti-corruption measures, public administration, health, media, labour rights, and women’s affairs. ‘The central focus of these reforms is to establish a fair electoral process and good governance,’ Muhammad Yunus remarked.
Ìý
Crisis and need for politicians’ inclusion
MUHAMMAD Yunus aims ‘to build Bangladesh where all citizens have equal rights’. However, his interim government has been experiencing a crisis in enrolling diverse actors in its reform and repair agenda since its oath on August 8, 2024, following the July-August student-mass revolution, which gave birth to a new Bangladesh. On October 19, 2024, youth and sports adviser Asif Mahmud Sojib Bhuiyan, while speaking at a meeting with officials from government departments at the Chattogram Circuit House, expressed his frustration with government bureaucrats’ non-cooperation in bringing the law-and-order situation and inflation under control. The adviser said: ‘The government may no longer adhere to established rules and regulations if bureaucrats fail to cooperate in the administration’s efforts.’ Further, he said, ‘You (bureaucrats) have the expertise, education, and experience. If you cannot perform your duties, we will undoubtedly bring in fresh talent.’
The government is under attack from all sorts of stakeholders for failing to progress towards promised reforms and a road map for holding the national election to form a political government as early as possible.
Politicians are also critical actors in any reform agenda and its implementation; therefore, the government must address their representation in realising the outcome of these reforms. The absence of political representatives in the reform commissions at this time is a concern. Advocates, especially from the interim government end, argue that the absence of politicians on the reform commissions is to maintain neutrality. However, critics on several TV talk shows, social media personnel, and politicians have raised concerns about the government’s decision, arguing that it undermines the inclusivity of the reform process.
Politicians have endured significant hardships during Bangladesh’s recent political history. Their voices must be heard, especially in the current crisis of the reform agenda and its execution. This is an urgent issue that demands immediate attention and resolution by the interim government.
Our critical moment in new Bangladesh is to maintain momentum in reforming and repairing the damaged economy, establishing democratic rights, and ensuring a sustainable society with ‘no poverty.’ The Bangladeshi people expect the interim government to work towards these sustainable development goals. However, there is a common perception that the government is failing to make progress as expected. Critics believe that having inappropriate or ‘lesser-relevant’ skills and expertise in the reform commission membership significantly results in slow progress.
Several social media activists demand that some members perceived as ‘inappropriate’ or ‘incompetent’ be removed from the established commissions. So, what can be done to have an inclusive and effective ‘network’ to realise the outcome(s) of the government’s reform agenda? As a professor of accounting and public sector administration and management, I reflect on this and other related issues, building upon my research projects over the last three decades. It is clear that public trust is not just desirable but absolutely essential for the success of any reform agenda, and the active participation and support of the people are crucial in this process.
Ìý
Orders of worth and reforms
BOLTANSKI and Thévenot’s ‘Order of Worth’ theory focuses on six distinct orders of worth: (a) The inspired world, which values creativity, spontaneity, and inner guidance; (b) The domestic world, which values tradition, hierarchy, and personal relationships; (c) The civic world, which values common good, equality, and solidarity; (d) The market world, which values competition, efficiency, and pursuing self-interest; (e) The industrial world, which values productivity, efficiency, and technological progress; and (f) The fame world, which values recognition, reputation, and the pursuit of fame (namely social capital). Each Order of Worth represents a systematic and coherent evaluation principle with distinct but competing logic.
Boltanski and Thevenot suggest that it is challenging to manage the ordering of priorities amongst different ‘worlds’ rather than one world dominating and replacing another. Hence, a change agent must understand how diverse actors, despite having competing values, can attain a compromise. This theory not only helps us understand the dynamics among diverse actors (eg, the country’s chief executive, advisers/ministers, public servants, law-enforcement agents, social activists, politicians, the general public, and other stakeholders) but also underscores the potential for collaboration. Each actor plays a vital role in forming and translating each value in the network, highlighting the importance of their contributions to the reform agenda.
Recently, the news media highlighted how the politicians feel misplaced and frustrated because of the interim government’s negligence in recognising their significant contribution to rebuilding a new Bangladesh. Critics on various social media, including TV talk shows, echo politicians’ sentiments in this space, underscoring the power of these platforms in shaping public opinion. Several social activists with millions of followers/viewers on YouTube have been advocating and crying for a sustainable anti-discrimination civic society in Bangladesh; they are now frustrated and expressing their concerns about the government’s slow progress in every aspect of the reconstruction agenda. Echoing with critics and commentators, I also urgently call for politicians’ inclusion in the government’s various reform commissions. Politicians are ‘true’ practitioners in their political fields, and they have the power to convince people to join their clubs with political rhetoric. Hence, politicians, along with academics, social elites, civil servants, and other actors with potentially different core values, can cooperate, coexist, and secure acceptable compromises to benefit society.
Ìý
Exemplify ‘reality’
A NUMBER of journalists and other professionals have rightly viewed that without political representation in the reform commission, it will not be accepted by an elected political party when tabled for parliamentary approval. I fully support this idea and argue that diverse actors should be integrated into the interim government’s reform agenda in a pluralistic society like Bangladesh. Including politicians, among others, will speed up the process and execution of the reform packages.
Boltanksi and Thevenot have argued that for differences, disputes, and disagreements to be resolved, we need the active participation of the individual/group, which feels misplaced. Therefore, the government’s appropriate actions are essential because the parties must communicate and voice their opinion before any change, influence, or disagreement is reached. According to Boltanksi and Thevenot’s ‘Orders of Worth’ theory, organisations in complex and dynamic settings, as in our current political context, containing actors with competing values, can mobilise language and discourse leaders and administrators to implement change and assist successful diffusion. Boltanski and Thévenot argue that a single social order does not govern modern societies but rather multiple, coexisting ‘orders of worth.’ This view can apply to Dr Yunus’s current advisory group, which critics label ‘NGO Gram’ because of several advisers coming from NGOs and his former institution, Grameen Bank.
An urgent call is made from all quarters of society to reshuffle Yunus’s advisory group by removing ‘controversial’ (politically biased) and ‘incompetent’ persons (lack of boldness and personality in initiating strategic actions and measures) and replacing them with competent and neutral persons to minimise or repair the reputation damage of the government. Otherwise, the general public has already started to demonstrate their frustration with the slow progress of this government in bringing social unrest into order and fixing inflation.
Ìý
Social capital and Yunus
PROFESSOR Yunus and his advisers in the interim government cabinet are a kind of social capital. Pierre Bourdieu, another French sociologist, suggests that social capital allows a society or organisation to work together through trust and shared identity, norms, values, and mutual relationships. Boltanski and Thévenot identified this idea as ‘the fame world,’ which values recognition, reputation, and fame. Professor Yunus’s fame world has the potential to achieve a common goal — a discrimination-free Bangladesh — an expectation from the people who can die for democracy and save the country from any foreign aggression.
Social capital has three dimensions: interconnected networks of relationships between individuals and groups (social ties or social participation), levels of trust that characterise these ties, and resources or benefits that are both gained and transferred by social relations and social involvement (Margarita Poteyeva in Encyclopaedia Britannica, October 10, 2024). Politicians, among others, in the interim government’s reform commissions and other development projects benefit the government reconstruction plan. Following Pierre Bourdieu’s notion of ‘habitus,’ diverse actors in our social setting (such as reform commissions) possess the necessary powers as social capital in their fields to influence reform’s outcomes, as expected. We need trust, integrity, inclusion, and anti-discrimination practices to achieve this common goal.
It is worth acknowledging the government’s initiative to continue dialogues with political parties to discuss the draft action plans. Some politicians on TV talk shows express their concerns about the limited time allocated for each meeting. While some politicians welcome this dialogue, they and other social actors called for politicians’ inclusion in the formal committee of each reform commission.
Ìý
Actor-Network and reforms
IN HIS Actor-Network Theory, Bruno Latour (1947–2022), a French philosopher, anthropologist, and sociologist, argues that any new idea or system’s systematic and successful development and implementation depends on an effective ‘network’ of human and non-human (various resources) actors. A network comprises a team of heterogeneous people with distinct ethical and moral values. Therefore, the leader of this network (the change champion) recruits likely-minded ‘allies’ to produce a favourable outcome.
Actor-network theory and scholarly research suggest that the initially formed network can be unstable due to unexpected socioeconomic and political crises, resulting in the risk of its failure to realise the intention. Therefore, the network formed must be continually monitored and replaced by new members. Latourian philosophy suggests that the change champion must pay attention to the overall structure of the network as well as its plans, actions, and dynamics within the network.
From the actor-network theory lens and given the current socio-political crisis in New Bangladesh, I urge Professor Yunus (the change champion from the actor-network theory perspective) to review the composition of all reform commissions and replace controversial members with acceptable and competent personnel to translate the interim government’s reform package successfully.
It is vital to have a process for managing, resolving, and stabilising potential conflicts and controversies within the reform commissions (networks). As mentioned, politicians can play a significant role if enrolled in the network, formally or informally, in binding the reform package successfully.
The political parties have already started to criticise the interim government heavily for failing to make expected progress towards the nation’s shared goal of creating an environment for a fair election and initiating plans for repairing the economic, social, and political damage caused by the former government.
The newly formed ten reform commissions have been working towards that goal or intention since their establishment through formal meetings. However, some commissions also hold informal meetings (one recent example is the Electoral Reform Commission, led by Badiul Alam Mazumdar) for short briefings at the media gathering. This initiative can also be extended to political stakeholders to seek their input into the terms of reference and action plans. This would reduce the typical ‘resistance to change’ by people who feel misplaced.
A compelling actor-network is apt for the interim government, as increasingly large numbers of stakeholders with varying interests, powers, and issues must be organised to successfully implement the government’s reform packages.
Ìý
Types of reforms
THE organisational change literature focuses on several dimensions of ‘change’: a) Revolutionary change — a significant disruption to the existing institutions and routines; (b) Evolutionary change — an incremental change with limited disruption to existing institutions and routines; (c) Regressive change — a change that relates to behaviour that reinforces ceremonial dominance (relating to power) that in effect restricts institutional change; (d) Progressive change — the displacement of ceremonial behaviour by instrumental behaviour (relating to knowledge and technology).
Commentators have expressed their views concerning the type(s) of reform or change the interim government should focus on. Some say the interim government should concentrate on creating an environment for a fair national election rather than a heavy-weight revolutionary reform/change initiative, such as a complete rewrite of the original constitution. Some argue for amending areas where appropriate based on the experiences of the former governments’ misuse of the constitutions to remain in power forever.
Not only the constitution but also other sectors need reforms or changes. Given this government’s limited period, it is worth noting that whatever reforms take place or are in progress, an elected government will decide whether to ratify these changes in the parliament or completely disregard them and restart from zero. Therefore, it is time to rethink whether the interim government will continue its dialogue with political parties to reach a consensus and form a ‘network of alliance’ during the development and execution stages. Pinaki Bhattacharya and other commentators have also stressed continual dialogues between the interim government and politicians in his recent YouTube episode to stay connected with people.
Ìý
Public interest and accountability
THE sociology literature views ‘society’ as composed of individuals whose actions and performance predominate in social choices. Because of self-interest, values, power, and conflicts, individuals in a social network, such as a reform commission, may try to influence decision-making in that social setting. The leader can make the alliance or network work effectively to realise their strategic goal. The interim government has already lost over two months since taking on the role of rebuilding the damaged country from all sectors (social, economic, and political). Further urgent actions are needed to speed up the development and execution of the reform plans and sustain their popularity before it is too late. Further, critics also raised concerns about the conflicting interests of several members of the advisery team of the interim government over various socio-economic and political policies, including recruiting multiple personnel. It is crucial to gain and sustain public trust in order to succeed overall.
Ìý
Stay connected with public
THE government should stay connected with the general public by updating them regularly on their progress through short briefings via TV and other media. This social accountability approach ensures that the government is keen to collaborate with them for a sustainable new Bangladesh where everyone can speak freely and have a standard of living with basic human needs. People will then not be ‘misplaced.’ The inclusion of all stakeholders in any form cannot be overstated.
While regular briefings/updates on government plans and actions from relevant departments/ministries are a good initiative of the government, Professor Yunus should set aside some minutes from his busy schedule to appear on TV at least once a month, preferably fortnightly (given the expected overall duration of his government), to exemplify his work in achieving his government’s strategic goals. People like to see and listen to their leader’s voice as much as possible. This strategic action may help the government address people’s frustration and anger due to current ‘economic, social, and political crises,’ where all the blame goes to the chief adviser.
Ìý
Dr Zahirul Hoque is a professor of business at Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia, and an adjunct professor at the La Trobe Business School of La Trobe University, Australia.