Social Capital

Indicators for social capital included trust, networks, values, and cooperative norms that influenced the functioning of other forms of capital, as well as transformation of structures and processes. The indicators were evaluated and reported within community (bonding capital) and across communities (bridging capital) viewpoints. Given the research context, bridging capital was analysed with a dual focus of indigenous-Bengali and across different indigenous groups. Furthermore, community residents’ relationships to those with decision-making authority (linking capital) was also reported explicitly by research participants.

In general, research participants reported that people in BS maintained a harmonious relationship, which was reflected in the district positioning statement of ‘Sampritir Bandarban’, meaning ‘United Bandarban’. However, participants also stated that busy modern life and differing political ideologies contributed negatively to this harmonious relationship. As mentioned earlier, numerous indigenous communities and Bengali communities live together in BS. The indigenous communities reported with having more favourable social capital (trust, networks and cooperative norms) than the Bengali community for livelihood outcomes in this research. Although several participants highlighted the strength of indigenous communities’ social capital, one particular statement made by a local government representative (13_IRLG_01_NOTES) found noteworthy. The participant asserted:

I was the UNO (Upazila Nirbahi Officer) in Alikadam for eight months and I had to deal different complaints everyday regarding various social issues. In these eight months, I only found a single complaint from an indigenous community member; the rest were from Bengalis. What does it indicate? Don’t they have any problem among themselves? Surely they do, but they mitigate at lower-level or within their traditional system.

However, this could be alternately viewed as lack of trust of the indigenous communities on the imposed system governed by mostly Bengali people. This is a particular point that essentially derived from a claim made by a focus group participant (FGD_BB_12_08) who stated “… Who is the justice- Bengali; who is the member secretary- Bengali; who will give the verdict- Bengali; who will pull the chain- Bengali; who will record- Bengali; then conclusion is as simple as Paharis won’t get the justice.” All the participants identified that intra-community relationships and trust worked very well; however, they provided varying opinions on inter-community relationships. In particular, indigenous communities' relationships with the Bengali community were mostly negatively emphasised. On one

117 occasion, an indigenous community resident (02_CRIBB) said that “In the plain land, you’ll find a division in terms of Awami League, BNP, Jamat-E-Islam, but for the CHTs in general or Bandarban Sadar in particular you’ll find only two groups: Bengali and Paharis.” This was echoed in the focus group discussions, which sounded a strong political statement but reflected low social capital. In another case, one Bengali community participant (05_CRBBB_03) narrated an incident and its subsequent impact on his/her trust level:

We’re here from my early childhood since I was enrolled in class 2. My father used to come here for business purposes then settled here. At that moment, I observed there was a lack of trust on Bengali. When I used to go to the school, I observed that students were sitting in the class based on their social or ethnic orientations. Once, during an exam, I found a boy cheating in the exam and I reported to the invigilator and the boy got punished. After the school hours when I was on my way back home, I found them in an organised form and they literally tried to attack me. At that moment, my trust level fallen down towards the indigenous communities and I couldn’t make friendship with them. Over the passage of time, I recovered and after the peace treaty I found the situation much better.

From the above statement, it was observed that the social cohesion is improving although at a very low-level. This was also endorsed by a few indigenous participants (e.g., 06_CRIBB_03, 13_CRIBB_10) emphasising the business relationships between indigenous and Bengali communities. The role of education in social networking was emphasised as an important indicator, where well-educated, larger communities were reported with higher networking capacity. Apart from business and education perspectives, both community and institutional participants (e.g., 13_CRIBB_10, 04_IRTRP_01, 10_IRICI_01) reported another noticeable indicator about inter-community marriage, which indicated an increased level of bridging capital, although this was happening mostly among indigenous communities.

Though overall trust and networking among indigenous communities were reported as very positive, a clear division was evident in terms of majority and minority indigenous communities, in which the inequitable distribution of benefits was found to be the nucleus factor for such division. For example, one (minor) indigenous community participant (08_CRIBB_05) stated:

The peace treaty is what? It basically came out of a political game. Santu Larma signed the peace treaty but he does not necessarily represent all the indigenous communities. He represents only the Chakma community and this is why they are privileged. Through this process, they gain individually and for their community mostly.

A few other minor community participants also highlighted the importance of equitable distribution of benefits among indigenous communities. The equitable issue was rationalised with a hypothetical example: if the HDC executive board is represented by eight Marma and Chakma community members, then there must be at least one from each minor community (06_CRIBB_03) among the total board members.

118 Linking social capital was found to be stronger in BS for indigenous communities. All but one indigenous community participant (01_CRIBB_02) emphasised good relationships with the leaders. Such relationships were reflected through the observance of flexible political actions (07_CRIBB_04), for example for relaxed hartal (strike). The researcher experienced such flexibility while conducting fieldwork in BS.

This research assumes that social capital expressly includes culture in the form of values, practices, rituals, languages and other similar elements. The participants in this research gave their opinion in favour of cultural preservation and protection as a way forward to community wellbeing as well as sustainable tourism development. They noted that tourism in BS should be planned and developed without any disturbances to the ethnic communities’ culture. If culture is disturbed, people will no longer support tourism. In this vein, Dyer, Aberdeen and Schuler (2003) found that when (indigenous) community people perceive some form of cultural commodification (from tourism activities), they withdraw themselves from supporting tourism. The withdrawal can be observed in various forms such as reluctance to perform cultural show, which in turn will negatively affect economic sustainability of tourism. Two major issues were identified in line with the cultural aspects: diversities and sensitivities.

All of the participants in this research acknowledged the cultural diversity in BS as a precious element or attraction for tourism development. The research participants commented that the exhibition of diverse cultural elements in BS was attracting significant numbers of tourists, which was observable during any special occasion such as ‘BOISHABI’ or ‘Raj Punnah’. At the same time, they observed acculturation by way of dress patterns, food habits and so on as negative impacts from tourism (cultural sensitivities). Moreover, cultural recognition, protection and promotion issues were found to be implicitly aligned with community wellbeing (abstract or intangible view of community wellbeing), which was especially affiliated with indigenous communities. For example, one indigenous participant (03_CRIBB_02) stated that: “The problem is the state imposes our identity on us. I must have the right to decide what will be my identity. It should not be assigned by the state. They decide that we are the small ethnic groups; we do not have the right to decide our identity.” At this point, given the current livelihood framework, the high importance of culture is recalling a separate attention within the framework. Culture is historical in nature, which essentially directs the pattern and influences the strength of social capital.

5.3.4

Built Capital

Built capital is the most tangible element among the various forms of capital comprising infrastructure, superstructures, tools and equipment that facilitate information, and communication exchange. Major issues identified in line with the management decisions of built capital from the data of BS were moderately favourable communication infrastructure, lack of activity-based tourism facilities, possibility of home stays and planning necessity.

119 Different stakeholder groups prioritised and emphasised the themes to varied degrees. Local government representatives (13_IRLG_01_NOTES and 14_IRLG_02) found the critical importance of communication infrastructures for ensuring ease of access to tourists. They raised the issue in that if tourist flow is not profitable, then it would become difficult to develop tourism sustainably or contribute sustainably towards the livelihood outcome. Local government claimed the availability of a suitable communication structure at the town (sub-district) level for tourism development. Community research participants confirmed such a claim; for example, one transportation representative (07_IRTRO_02) extended the discussion to cover remote areas and mentioned that “If you go to the remote para (village), you won’t be able to experience better communication infrastructure. This is crucial for tourism development.” It has been reported that tourists are very interested in visiting remote places, rather than staying in towns. However, developing infrastructure in hilly areas costs more and requires technical competence. This is the phase where government intervention is necessary. At this point, local people think the military could be involved with their expertise. In BS (and some other remote places), the military has previously carried out a lot of infrastructural development, such as the road from Dim Pahar to Alikadam (01_CRBBB_01). The total length of physical communication infrastructure in BS was 665 km of roads and 30 km of waterways. Out of the 665 km of road, only 93 km was metalled and 112 km was semi-metalled, while the rest was unmetalled (kacha) road (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, 2013a, p. 73).

In addition to physical communication infrastructure is telecommunication- and modern technology-based equipment, which facilitates information and communication exchange. It was found that almost all the telecommunication service providers in Bangladesh provided their services in BS. However, only a few (Grameenphone, Teletalk, and Robi) could connect remote destinations such as Boga Lake or Keokradang, and then only with poor signals. The usage rate of modern technology-based equipment in businesses and offices was low; for example, the Economic Census of 2013 revealed that in BS there were 1,168 manufacturing establishments and only 27 used computer technology (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, 2013d, p. 47). This has been observed by the researcher as being closely linked to the availability of human capital. In general, the communication infrastructure was reported moderately favourable (inferred from the researcher’s notes asking the participants to roughly rate the overall infrastructure) for the development of tourism. However, the secondary data regarding the physical communication infrastructure as well as the usage of technology-based equipment do not support such findings. In terms of tourism-based structures, participants (10_CRIBB_07, 11_IRARMY_01 and 03_IRTRO_01) emphasised activity-based facilities that would require tourists to spend and contribute to the local economy, provided the local resources were utilised. Currently, the tourism industry in BS fails to offer activities and entertainment opportunities for tourists. There are 146 restaurants and 39 residential hotels, motels and resorts (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics,

120 2013a, p. 68) providing core services (food and accommodation), but these struggle for quality as claimed by the participants. In order to attract more tourists or repeat visitors, facilities must be upgraded.

In order to contribute at a basic level to community people’s livelihoods, home stay facilities have been discussed on numerous occasions both by institutional representatives and community residents (e.g., 13_IRLG_01_NOTES, 01_CRBBB_01, 04_CRBBB_02, 12_CRIBB_09, 03_IRTRO_01 and 07_IRTRO_02). Industry representatives however have raised the issue of complex multi-institutional environments and underscored home stay arrangements to be recognised by government policies. At present, a few families in Faruk Para, Milonchari are offering home stay facilities, but these are limited to personal connections and happening as an individual initiative rather than an organised community initiative being facilitated by the local government.

Participants from local government have acknowledged the necessity of a master plan to integrate all components within a policy framework to ensure sustainable development through tourism. For example, one representative (17_IRLG_03) from the local government said:

There is no proper planning for infrastructural development and tourism establishments in Bandarban at present. Here, tourism is developing on whimsical basis, say - for our community members or higher officials went to visit Nepal or Vietnam and fascinated by some architectures/structures. They’ll try to imitate that after coming back. So, the concept of tourism is not clear. If everything is done according to a master plan, then it will instil a long-term focus, which in turn entails the sustainable aspects of development.

Local community residents also found accommodation establishments for tourists (hotels, motels and resorts) to be unsystematically developed, based on individual’s capabilities. Lack of planning has allowed accommodation to develop randomly without effective and efficient monitoring of systems. This is also impacting the transportation industry, as one interviewee (08_CRIBB_05) mentioned: “The current facilities are not tourism or tourist-friendly. In terms of tourism, Bandarban is costly. There is no public bus services or tourists’ vehicle available to visit nearby sites in Bandarban Sadar. The transportation sectors sometimes irrationally charge the tourists, which is unethical. Local government should monitor these.” However, the researcher’s field observation notes (as of 10 May 2016) taken from the district law-order and coordination committee meeting (for more about the nature and functioning of such committee refer to Chapter Six, Box 6.1) organised by the Bandarban DC office indicate that the committee fixed some varying rates for different types of vehicles used by tourists. During the session, one civil society representative attending the meeting raised the issue that although the committee decided a fixed fare chart for the vehicles carrying tourists, in practice, it was not followed. The participant thereby emphasising the monitoring needs. The chair (DC) of the committee then asked for the attention of a representative from district police to take necessary actions on this issue. This incidence typically signifies the composite nature of tourism industry, which requires active involvement of multiple agencies.

121

5.3.5

Financial Capital

Financial capital was examined under two broader themes of availability and accessibility. It was found that community people did not receive financial help or loans for tourism and/or development projects. Loans are only available against security or mortgaged property, which is not accessible for root level community people (a view holds by all the participants from tourism organisations and community members). Additionally, it has been argued that acquiring a loan sometimes requires good networking with bank officials. Such a requirement was also emphasised in the focus group session (FGD_BB_12_08).

It was noted that government has declared three hill districts as ‘special economic zones’ and that the people of Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHTs) were entitled to receive loans at a reduced interest rate of 5 percent (lower than the usual rates, which varied between 8 percent and 10 percent). In addition, a special facility was announced for women entrepreneurs, though this is far from practice. A woman entrepreneur (05_IRWCC_01) claimed that “The government has directed to sanction up to 2.5 million BDT to the women entrepreneurs without any mortgages. In reality, our women are not getting more than 2 to 3 lac BDT (0.2 to 0.3 million) and that also requires submission of huge documents and lengthy procedures to follow.” Such a claim emphasises the lengthiness associated with the red-tape bureaucratic practices. However, a few community residents reported that tourism development and provision for livelihood means do not require large investment and discouraged external investments (external to Bandarban), strongly emphasising the economic leakage issue (income flowing out of the region).

Conflicts of investment among private, public, and people was highlighted. For example, a community member (04_CRBBB_02) critically assessed that:

Right now, in Bandarban Sadar, we are not in a position to welcome bulk investment from outside because this will take the money out of this region. The ownership creation should be the focus. We should be cautious at this point, as the Nilachal tourism project was funded by the DC office or Nilgiri by the army. Now, if individual and/or a particular community financing started fighting against institutional/government funding, then ensuring sustainability would be a concern… Hence, the cell (indicating a joint forum of community members and institutional representatives) as I mentioned earlier should take the responsibility in this regard and finance the community as an entity on shared basis, say for the Boga Lake or Nafakum community.

The involvement of non-government organisations i.e., NGOs (both local and international) was emphasised for micro-credit and small scheme loans by local government representatives (13_IRLG_01_NOTES and 14_IRLG_02). However, unfortunately in BS no NGOs are working or even interested in working in the tourism sector (01_CRBBB_01 and 08_IRNGO_01_NOTES). Two basic reasons were pointed out as background causes: firstly, NGO operations are influenced by the demand of donor agencies and they are apparently not interested in tourism; and secondly, NGO

122 activities are over-monitored in the CHT, which indicates a lack of a conducive working environment. Dictaan-Bang- oa (2004, p. 15) claimed that many of the development efforts by NGOs (especially one with foreign funds) in the CHT region were restricted by the National NGO Bureau. It was further claimed that although central government encouraged leading national NGOs (e.g., Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee, Proshika, etc.) and Islamic NGOs (e.g., Bangladesh Islamic Foundation) to work in the CHT, they (CG) remained distrustful about the indigenous peoples’ organisations to grant permission for an NGO. The researcher’s interpretation critically linked this phenomenon to the political distrust as prevailing historically within the CHT context (see Chapter Four, Section 4.1).