In a recent essay I wrote on the Inclusive Society course, I was faced with the challenge of choosing which case study fit best for the title challenge. Apparently, I wanted to elaborate on some projects in healthcare in Nigeria that could portray an inclusive one, but most of the ones I turned to were heavily demonstrating strong social exclusion. Hence, I ended up talking about the EndSars protest because of its significance. However, this is not discussing the EndSARS case study, but picking out some central points from a few case studies I have come across during my studies.

Beaming my focus on the EndSARS movement, some important insights I derived included that social exclusion denies people agency to participate in making change. Drawing this back to the course in the first semester, Exclusion and Inequality, this becomes more like structural violence. This is because the major actors in social exclusion are people in privileged positions, making decisions that affect the major underprivileged people. However, by denying these groups of disadvantaged people their voice, they are further reinforcing inequality.

One notable way to address this was demonstrated by Dorathy Kidd in her work on counter-mapping. Dorthy’s work was one of the readings in the second semester that directed my attention to the methods by which exclusion and inequality can be addressed. She showed how indigenous communities used counter-mapping against the Canadian government’s extraactivism through the active participation of the community. A salient point in this reading was that this presented an opportunity for deliberation on the issues facing the communities. While the government continued to exert its force in denying the community their rights, proper representation propelled by community participation also gave the people a voice from their end.

Apparently, the decentralisaion ironically, was the empowerment of people. This was something I observed during the EndSARS case study, as it helped the people to conduct a successful inclusive movement. Bringing this down to my futures project, it reminds me of the need to create an opportunity for people to engage with their voices. For instance, if I want to identify the challenge people are facing with regards to a central challenge, it may be important to consider giving them a voice. But then the issue of this boils down to allowing them to trust me. Recalling the intensive class where the Deputy Director of Data for Children Collborative spoke, he emphasised that projects, including those that involve vulnerable or disadvantaged groups, require trust; he called it social license. I guess that was the reason both  EndSARS and the action of the Indigenous people were successful. The social license builds confidence and freedom to organically participate. As such, it makes the leader of the project accountable. According to Currie and her colleagues, social capital ensures involvement, transparency, and accountability. Hence, social license is important for the projects I want to carry out in the next few weeks.

Further elaborating on its importance, I recall in my last blog, the one before this, I recounted how the well-thought-out urban planning concept of the 15 Minutes neighborhood (15MN) for the citizens of Paris was met with protest. Reflecting on this social license, this is possibly an instrumental tool for government and non-government projects like the 15MN. I think it opens up a new kind of engagement, or, better put, ensures proper inclusivity. Now it also reminds me that people are also stakeholders, and one way to earn or maintain their trust is through being accountable.

As I am looking forward to starting off with my project, I am already thinking about how I can guarantee its success through “collaborations.” How would involving people in my work inspire a better approach to addressing the issues I have identified? Till then…

Reference

Farmer, P. (2004). An Anthropology of Structural Violence. Current anthropology, 45(3), pp. 305-325. DOI: 10.1086/382250

Dorothy Kidd (2019) Extra-activism: counter-mapping and data justice, Information, Communication & Society, 22:7, 954-970, DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2019.1581243

Seyfang, G. (2004). Working Outside the Box: Community Currencies, Time Banks and Social Inclusion. Jnl Soc. Pol., 33, 1, 49–71. DOI: 10.1017/S0047279403007232

Considering Inclusivity in my Futures Project / Onyebuchi Enechukwu / Knowledge Integration and Project Planning: Data, Inequality and Society (2023-24) by is licensed under a