Progress in Development Studies

http://pdj.sagepub.com Religion and a rights-based approach to development

Emma Tomalin Progress in Development Studies 2006; 6; 93 DOI: 10.1191/1464993406ps130oa The online version of this article can be found at: http://pdj.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/6/2/93

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Progress in Development Studies can be found at: Email Alerts: http://pdj.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://pdj.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.in/about/permissions.asp Citations http://pdj.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/6/2/93

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

Progress in Development Studies 6, 2 (2006) pp. 93108

Religion and a rights-based approach to development

Emma Tomalin
Department of Theology and Religious Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT , UK
Abstract: This paper is concerned with the observation that rights-based approaches to development have tended to ignore the ways in which religion and culture shape understandings of human rights. Although religious traditions often act against the pursuit of human rights, there are also areas of overlap and consensus. The rst part of the paper suggests that the absence of a research agenda within development studies on religion and development has meant that a signicant indigenous mechanism for pursuing rights has been overlooked. Drawing upon examples from India, the second part of my discussion then asks whether a language of social justice based upon the concept of duty is more appropriate than one based upon rights. Key words: Asian values, Buddhism, development, dharma, duty, gender, Hinduism, human rights, religion.

I Introduction Human rights discourse increasingly influences the way in which development organizations think about poverty reduction. An understanding of development as an inalienable human right1 was formalized by the United Nations in 1986 and it is now common for development agencies to invoke human rights as guiding their policies and programmes. Such rights-based approaches aim to incorporate the principles of equality and equity, accountability, empowerment and participation and are incompatible with development policies, projects or activities that have the effect of violating rights2 (Hauserman, 1998; Shivji, 1999; Hamm, 2001). It is argued that to explicitly approach development in terms of human rights has a number of benets. For instance, the idea of

development as a human right entails a claim on national and international resources, and obliges the states and other agencies of society, including individuals, to implement that right (Sengupta, 2000: 557). Moreover, rights-based approaches to development also include economic, social and cultural rights, which have often been treated as secondary to political and civil rights (Hamm, 2001: 1006). The idea of human rights, as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), might seem like an obvious framework to guide the pursuit of poverty reduction. However, the perception that the UDHR reects western values has generated over 50 years of heated debate about the nature, basis and scope of human rights (Little, 1999: 153).3 Nevertheless, the

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009 2006 Edward Arnold (Publishers) Ltd 10.1191/1464993406ps130oa

94

Religion and a rights-based approach to development inform the methodology of rights-based approaches to development in revealing that different moral discourses can support values such as human rights. For instance, attention is frequently drawn to the exclusion of duties in discussions about rights and that this is a crucial oversight in thinking about the formation of social ethics in many non-western cultures (Sharma, 1999, 2004). Therefore, is the very adoption of a rights-based framework too ethnocentric to have cogency for people whose cultural systems emphasize collective duty and responsibility instead of individual rights? With its emphasis upon empirical research in developing contexts, I would argue that development studies is ideally placed to benefit from and to generate new knowledge about the overlap between religiously inspired social ethics and western human rights. I am not suggesting that human rights issues in developing countries should only be considered in terms of religion, nor that development should actually endorse a religious perspective on human rights or duties. However, I am interested to investigate the benets and constraints of adopting a more participatory approach that pays attention to the ways in which religious identities and values promote values such as human rights. Religion is one basis for such an overlapping consensus, yet has been largely ignored by rights-based approaches to development. II Religion and development: the absence of a research agenda Development theory and practice has typically avoided engagement with religious discourse (White and Tiongco, 1997; Sweetman, 1999; Harper 2000; Belshaw et al., 2001; Eade 2002). This observation is conrmed by Ver Beek who carried out a survey of three prominent development journals for the years 19821998. His study reveals that religion and spirituality are conspicuously under-represented in development literature and in the policies and programmes of development organizations (2002: 68).

development establishment tends to treat these human rights as universally recognised moral values (United Nations, 2002). This paper is concerned with the claim that rightsbased approaches to development are limited because they fail to acknowledge the ways in which different religio-cultural traditions shape social ethics. I will suggest that the adoption of a model of rights that excludes other moral discourses reveals an underlying anxiety about engaging with religion, which is embedded in the assumptions and methods of the western development project. This is both reected in and compounded by the absence of any consistent research agenda on religion and development. The perception of human rights as a comprehensive doctrine (Rawls, 1996), which treats other moral discourses as parochial, has given rise to different responses. While there are those who completely reject western human rights, in favour of indigenous models,4 this paper is interested in the more moderate critics5 who point towards the potential for overlapping consensus between different cultural approaches to rights. This would not mean abandoning universals, but rather revealing the existence of convergent universal norms that can be justified from different religious and philosophical perspectives (Rawls, 1996; Taylor, 1999; Nussbaum, 2000). As Renteln suggests, by anchoring human rights via crosscultural universals, the standards are more likely to be accepted and taken seriously (1990: 138).6 This goal of arriving at universal and consensual norms, which are voluntarily enforceable across cultures (Rawls, 1996; Taylor, 1999), does raise certain questions: who would decide upon such cross-cultural universals and could a meaningful consensus ever be reached? However, my interest in the idea of overlapping consensus is less ambitious. I am concerned with uncovering existing synergies rather than actively identifying, codifying and promoting particular cross-cultural norms. I will suggest that the notion of overlapping consensus can critically

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

E. Tomalin Nevertheless, the relationship between religion and human rights, for instance, captures an important feature of the struggle for justice faced by many of the poor in developing countries. In contexts where people experience human rights abuses, these are often justified with reference to religious arguments. Consequently, it is common to nd local human rights advocates promoting alternative interpretations of religious texts in order to dismantle what they consider to be unjust, discriminatory and errant versions of tradition.7 One reason for this avoidance of religious issues is the modernist assumption that religion will disappear once people become economically advanced, and a new-found rationality supersedes primitive superstition and backwardreligious worldviews. Alongside this view we also nd the belief that religion causes people to hold beliefs that are inimical to social and economic development. For instance, Muecke (1992) reports that prostitutes in Thailand sometimes invoke the popular Buddhist view that women are a lower rebirth than men to support their reasons for turning to prostitution. Money earned in prostitution is used to support families or to make donations to monks. This provides a means for poor women to increase their religious merit and ensure a better rebirth in the future (Kabilsingh, 1991; Muecke, 1992; Satha-Anand, 1999; Peach, 2000). Thus, because of the acceptance of religious and cultural norms, supported by the Buddhist tradition, prostitution may be seen one way of maximizing ones long-term self-interest. While a religious worldview may in some cases hinder development and limit peoples life chances, discourses about religion being an obstacle to development have, at times, masked other motives. For instance, Christian missionaries in the colonies sought to replace what they considered to be inferior modes of religious belief and practice with Christianity. It was these missionaries who undertook much early development work (Shourie,

95

2000; Harnetty, 2001; Manji and OCoill, 2002). Consequently, poor communities experienced advancement at the expense of abandoning or at least weakening their reliance upon traditional cultural and religious systems (Eade, 2002). It can be suggested that a further reason for the cautious attitude towards religion within development is due to an attempt to avoid repeating such instances of cultural imperialism. However, to reject or ignore religion is to adopt a secular agenda by default, and does little to mitigate postcolonial critique. Although development professionals may wish to avoid accusations of interfering in religious matters, which they consider to be private or sensitive, it seems contradictory that the development arena is willing to address other emotive areas such as gender, race or ethnicity. The politicization of religion can make it difficult for secular development agencies to enter into partisan debates or alliances, which might jeopardize development goals or exacerbate existing tensions. However, it is arguable whether this means that they should never support the work of religious groups. Instead, common sense suggests the adoption of a careful and informed approach when building alliances with religious organizations. This should be the case when development agencies enter into a relationship with any NGO or civil society group. There are many situations where faith-based organizations have a signicant representation at the grassroots level and, particularly during emergency and disaster situations, it would act against the interests of development to avoid working with religious organizations.8 Although there might be very good reasons in many cases for not directly working with faith-based organizations, no such constraint exists with respect to engaging in research around the issue of religion and development. Yet, even this has failed to attract signicant interest within development studies. For instance, development anthropologists have made some progress in deconstructing development discourse (Escobar, 1995: 45; Grillo, 1997),

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

96

Religion and a rights-based approach to development The avoidance of thinking about religious issues within rights-based approaches to development is unlikely to improve the ability to predict when the promotion of human rights might create tensions. Moreover, development professionals, working on rights implementation in sensitive contexts, can risk expulsion or threats to their personal security. The promotion of rights in many countries runs the risk of backlash, particularly where womens rights are concerned (Amin and Hossain, 1995). Rising forms of fundamentalism and extremism seek to control and limit the gains that have been made at both local and international levels. Others have suggested that although it is common to use international human rights norms to suppress religious views that act against human rights, this approach may in fact be limited since it fails to account for the often greater power and persuasiveness of religion than law in a country (Peach, 2000: 72). As Peach (2000) suggests, the use of international human rights instruments in tackling the problem of sex trafficking in Thailand is constrained by the substantial role that Buddhism plays in shaping womens identities as well as social attitudes about women. She invokes the religious feminist position that a tendency to see religion as monolithic, fixed, rigid and unchanging (Peach, 2000: 74) obscures the ways in which the same religious traditions that have legitimated womens oppression also may include resources for their liberation and empowerment (Peach, 2000: 74). A reinterpretation of religious traditions, she argues, can have the benet of not forcing adherents to choose between their religiously-received identity and the individualistic conception of self that is the subject of international human rights . . . [I]t minimises the potential for opposition and backlash from conservative and anti-feminist elements within the society which may regard international human rights strategies as inappropriate meddling by Western outsiders (Peach, 2000: 74; see also Satha-Anand 1999).

as well as promoting the value of local knowledge and bottom-up development (Croll and Parkin, 1992). However, there is still a substantial avoidance of specically religious issues within even these development circles. Research, which is broadly relevant to the relationship between religion and development, has been carried out in other disciplines, such as religious studies, sociology or anthropology. Nevertheless, there has been little attempt to consolidate this material or to promote a research agenda that is concerned with faith and development issues. While this is not the place to begin to map out such a research agenda, its absence is a limitation and a barrier to developing the type of careful and informed approach secular agencies might adopt in dealing with religious groups. It would seem that the emergence of a research agenda on faiths and development has been limited by a view of religion as outdated, irrational and a source of prejudice and conict. Convincing arguments can be put forward to at least partially support such a view. However, religious traditions and faith-based organizations can also promote social capital through linking people together in a common belief as well as supporting initiatives that generate higher levels of education, literacy, health, employment and other public goods that increase social opportunity (Candland, 2000: 357). Moreover, others point towards the ways in which belonging to a religious tradition can contribute towards human ourishing. Nussbaum, for instance, considers that religious belief and practice can enhance the search for an understanding of the ultimate meaning of life (2000: 179), whereas Verhelst and Tyndale suggests that as all religions would conrm, to become fully human is more than a matter of improving ones material condition (2002: 3). While the right to choose to belong to a religious tradition, as well as to change ones faith orientation, is recognized as a fundamental right within the UDHR, this aspect of life is frequently treated as an epiphenomenon within development discourse.

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

E. Tomalin Peachs discussion strongly resembles the key theme of this paper. There is much that can be said about the considerable disparity that often exists between religious views and the idea of universal human rights (as well as the challenge this poses to equitable development) (Van der Berg, 1995; Juergensmeyer, 1996). Nevertheless, I am concerned to investigate the relevance of the idea of overlapping consensus to a rights-based approach to development. However, while the type of textual exegeses carried out in religious studies, for instance, might tell us that particular traditions could be interpreted to support human rights, what would this mean in practice for development? How would development actually take these ideas on board, considering the need to avoid siding with particular religious factions? Would these values be widely held or do they represent elite perspectives? As Peach herself asks with respect to her own theorizing:
Who is doing the reinterpreting, and for what audience? Would the reinterpreted texts be taught in school? If not, how would the reinterpretations be disseminated? Do Thai women especially mothers and prostitutes read Buddhist texts? If not, is it reasonable to assume that Buddhist monks will recite reinterpreted scriptures in religious services? What other mechanisms are available within local communities to communicate these new understandings to women? More generally, it may not always be possible to empower women using a local cultural strategy such as textual reinterpretation, in part because of explicit religious or cultural restrictions on womens autonomy to engage in such practices, including womens basic literacy skills (2000: 80)

97

The following section of this paper will seek to address some of these concerns. III Asian values and human rights: the challenge of cultural relativity and negotiating the religious voice A few months before the Vienna World Conference on Human Rights in 1993, a regional meeting for Asia was held in Bangkok. Participants argued that the UDHR

needed to be updated and revised to reect Asian values (Cumaraswamy, 1997; Bauer and Bell, 1999; Jacobsen and Bruun, 2000; Waltz, 2001, 2002; Peerenboom, 2002). The western champions of human rights were challenged for their perceived double standards: for not consistently pursuing human rights causes when to do so compromised their interests; for not being honest about human rights problems in their own countries; and for denying responsibility for a colonial legacy of rights abuses in the Asian countries over which they now sat in judgement (Peerenboom, 2000: 296). Not surprisingly the Bangkok Declaration has been criticized for only paying lip-service to widely accepted principles of human rights (Tang, 1995; Lee, 1998: 1). While the typical Asian values debate rejects the spirit of human rights as a form of resistance to western hegemony (Sen, 2005: 134), there is a more moderate critique. This perspective aims to demonstrate that there is overlapping consensus between Asian values and western human rights (Renteln, 1990; An-Naim, 1992; Parekh, 1999; Taylor, 1999; Bauer and Bell, 1999). Sen, for example, argues against the idea that universal human rights only have western roots. Instead, he points out that support for freedom, tolerance and equality can be found within a broad spectrum of Asian traditions where the roots of modern democratic and liberal ideas can be sought in terms of constitutive elements, rather than as a whole (1999: 234; 2005). He concedes that these values often existed side by side with their opposites, and were in general not applied equally to women or slaves. However, he emphasizes the uidity of the boundary between non-western traditions and human rights thinking: freedom, tolerance and equality are not values and concepts invented or discovered by the west. We might, nonetheless, question the extent to which this discussion is useful to the development process. After all, the typical Asian values debate would suggest

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

98

Religion and a rights-based approach to development Theravada tradition, which is followed in Sri Lanka and Thailand (Kabilsingh, 1991; Lekshe Tsomo, 2000). In Thailand, for instance, where women have little voice in the Buddhist tradition, perceptions such as the view that women are a lower rebirth than men can have an impact upon womens social status and, as I have already discussed, this particular view is considered by some to be a factor in sustaining the sex industry (Muecke, 1992; Satha-Anand, 1999; Peach, 2000). Nevertheless, it is by no means clear that this view is unequivocally supported by the Buddhist texts and it is possible to highlight passages that contradict the belief in womens kammic decit (Owen, 1998). This is the type of enterprise recommended by Peach when she writes that strategies such as narrative interpretation and reinterpretation may offer more effective alternatives for empowering and liberating women than international human rights, especially in countries lacking an established tradition of individual rights, as in Buddhist Thailand (2000: 80, emphasis added). However, she also raises the concern that because women are marginalized from the public domain in which textual interpretation and transmission occurs, it is difcult to see how such readings of the tradition could actually have an impact. My own, current, research in Thailand, with women who have joined the campaign for full ordination, goes someway to addressing this concern. As Khuankaew10 writes, one of the core causes of violence against women has not yet been touched upon the beliefs, attitudes, traditions, and values that come out of a patriarchal society influenced by Buddhism itself . . . In the discussions . . . the root causes of prostitution have always been poverty, Western models of development and modernization . . . Hardly mentioned as a cause of prostitution are the lack of leadership roles for women in Buddhism (2002: 16).11 This research is still at its early stages, but it does suggest the existence of an indigenous

something quite different. Moreover, Sens position reflects an elite, scholarly voice emerging from the same liberal, individualistic and western context that is under scrutiny by many critics of human rights. I would argue, however, that the elite voice issue is less worrying in this instance. Sens position reects the way that religion is frequently invoked at the grass-roots level in pursuit of equality and equity, accountability, empowerment and participation.9 This is an important dimension of the way in which the poor may choose to secure greater human rights, particularly in attempting to counter forms of religious fundamentalism, extremism and patriarchy. Yet the absence of a research agenda that is concerned with religion and development has meant that this indigenous mechanism for the realization of rights has been largely obscured. The reinterpretation of religious traditions to enhance womens social status, for instance, is popular amongst religious feminists who wish to employ religious rather than secular narratives to guide their politics of empowerment. While there is a sophisticated and scholarly underpinning to much debate within this area, with educated women engaging in textual exegesis to counter the gender bias found in all religious traditions, such an enterprise can have relevance at the grass-roots level. For example, the impact of feminism upon the Buddhist tradition has resulted in a global network of female Buddhists, with representatives from both the North and the South. This network has strongly voiced the opinion that the denial of full ordination to women in many Buddhist countries has made it difcult for them to challenge negative stereotypes supported by the Buddhist tradition (Kabilsingh, 1991; Lekshe Tsomo, 1999, 2000; Banks-Findly, 2000). The Buddhist texts reveal that the Buddha did establish an order of nuns, called bhikkhunis, alongside an order of male monks, known as bhikkhus (Owen, 1998). While this tradition has survived in Mahayana Buddhist contexts, such as Taiwan, it died out in the

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

E. Tomalin mechanism for enhancing womens rights in Thailand. This type of research has an explanatory value in suggesting reasons for the absence of womens rights (eg, the view that they are lower rebirth than men), yet it also suggests that such barriers to rights might be more likely to be overcome if they are approached in culturally appropriate ways. To what extent, however, is such knowledge about the pursuit of rights relevant to the development project beyond its explanatory potential? It could be potentially undiplomatic for development agencies to show avowed support for this Buddhist feminist strategy considering that the Thai establishment is deeply opposed to it. Buddhism is the state religion and the male Buddhist Sangha wields considerable power at a political level (Reynolds, 1994). Nevertheless, while it might be difcult for development agencies to actively support and endorse this rights strategy, it can legitimately encourage a research agenda that offers a voice to culturally embedded struggles for rights. Such an enterprise is arguably already implied in the commitment and responsibility of the development project to document and disseminate information about the various ways in which the poor aim to improve their socio-economic condition. All religious traditions are internally diverse and subject to multiple, often conflicting interpretations, and it is only as an insider that one can make claims that a particular way of viewing the tradition is more authentic than any other. For this reason, as well as the political considerations discussed above, I am not suggesting that rights-based approaches to development actually appropriate and endorse particular religious views that support the pursuit of human rights. However, the rights framework is a tool to guide the policies and practices of development agencies, yet at the same time to enhance equality and equity, accountability, empowerment and participation.12 Thus, one dimension of a more participatory rights-based approach to development must include an understanding

99

of the ways in which people attempt to pursue these goals. For instance, research that investigates the role of faith-based NGOs in the area of human rights would enable development professionals to support and complement this work where appropriate. Although the rst part of this paper has suggested that the idea of overlapping consensus can positively inform the methodology of rights-based approaches to development, perhaps more is at stake. As Renteln argues even if non-Western societies do not express moral concerns in a framework of human rights, they may nonetheless address them in some other framework (1990: 11). One aspect of the Asian values debate that has a particular relevance here is the assertion that Asian traditions emphasize collective duty and responsibility rather than individual rights. Thus, the very articulation of a rights-based approach to development in contexts where people are more likely to conceptualize social ethics in terms of duties becomes contested. In the remainder of this paper, I will look more closely at the duty and rights debate and its consequences for development with respect to India. For instance, as OFlaherty and Derrett write, ancient Indian ethics knew nothing of rights, only duties (1978: ix). This being the case, is the idea of duty a useful starting point from which to re-think a rightsbased approach to development from an Asian, or more specically Indian, perspective? Is there an argument for suspending talk of rights and adopting a language of social justice that is less culturally constrained? IV The rights and duties debate: whose cultural theory of duty are we talking about? (Bhatia, 2000: 303) The suggestion that modern human rights discourse has sidelined duty and responsibility is not conned to the Asian values debate (Laws, 2003). ONeil, for instance, introduced this discussion into her 2002 Reith Lectures, arguing that Declarations of Rights ostensibly offer something to everybody, but they do it without coming clean about the

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

100

Religion and a rights-based approach to development for instance, indicate consistently low levels of education, health and income compared with higher castes (Robb, 1996). Increasing numbers are also converting to other religions in order to improve their status (Fitzgerald, 1997; Patel, 2003). Moreover, the divisive politics of the Hindu Right invokes the idea of duty to bharat mata (Mother India) in attempting to create a Hindu rashtra (Hindu nation).17 However, it does not support a model of duty that is inclusive and universal (Hansen, 1999; Zavos, 2002). For instance, it articulates a clear vision of stridharma (womans dharma) as typically defining women in terms of their capacity as wives and mothers, and as subservient to their husbands (Sarkar and Butalia, 1995; Jeffery and Basu, 1998; Sarkar, 2001). Thus, in suggesting that duty can be a structural equivalent for rights (Renteln, 1990: 11), we must rst ask, whose cultural theory of duty are we talking about? (Bhatia, 2000: 303). Advocates of the position that Hinduism supports values like human rights, point to the fact that the tradition distinguishes another type of dharma, which is common to all human beings: everyday or sadharana dharma (Sharma, 2004: 14), also known as sanatana dharma (eternal) and samanya dharma (equal) (Lipner, 1998: 22325).18 Khare, for instance, in a paper that discusses state-administered programmes to ensure food-for-all, tells us that the notion of sadharana dharma was invoked by his informants as a basis for sharing food with the poor. Moreover, they argued that sadharana dharma should take precedence over the restrictive and exclusive rules of jatidharma (caste dharma) that might otherwise result in uneven food entitlements. While in practice people do not always uphold this aspect of sadharana dharma, he suggests that state food programmes are more likely to be successful if they are sensitive to the ways in which Hindu culture can both impede and support the goal of a hunger-free society. He draws our attention to the feeding of strangers during religious festivals irrespective

costs and demands of respecting the rights they proclaim (2002: 3). A similar critique of rights has also been forwarded by some members of religious communities, who typically argue that the idea of duty is intrinsic to all religious social ethics and that to conceive of rights without duties is illogical and ineffectual (Kung and Kuschel, 1993; Sharma, 1999: 539; Runzo et al., 2003).13 However, this totalizing claim that all religious traditions offer a better way of pursuing rights, through their recognition of the importance of duties, is overambitious and misleading. Such interfaith discourse can make it seem as though different faith groups share more in common than they actually do. It is essentially theological14 in nature, maintaining the authenticity and veracity of particular overlapping interpretations of religious traditions and excluding others. Moreover, we must recognize that the conventional form that the rights and duties debate has taken assumes a version of duty reecting western thought (Bhatia, 2000: 303). Just because a religious tradition upholds duty as an important social ethic does not mean that it is a homeomorphic equivalent for rights (Renteln, 1990: 11). For instance, whereas modern advocates of a shift towards duties and responsibilities consider all humans to be moral equals, the traditional Indian expression of duty (dharma) is found within a highly stratied social order. People are considered to have unequal duties and differential value by virtue of their past actions (karma) (OFlaherty and Derrett, 1978). In particular, people have their own duty (svadharma) according to their sex (stridharma is a womans dharma) (Knott, 1996) or caste (jatidharma) (Bayly, 1999; Sharma, 1999). While discussions about dharma in the Hindu texts reect an ideal religious position, the caste system and the inferior position of women are both deeply engrained within Indian society. They limit peoples life-chances and opportunities for development, as well as their realization of human rights.15 Studies on dalit16 communities,

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

E. Tomalin of the condition and status of the recipient (1998: 261). He argues that although religious charity alone could not wipe out hunger and poverty (1998: 258), it is sociologically relevant to ask what keeps the traditional Indian food-gifting charity and philanthropic initiatives isolated from those that the state launches? (1998: 258). Indian reformers and critics of the oppressive hierarchies inherent within Hindu tradition have been attracted to the notion of sadharana dharma as the basis for a universal and egalitarian ethic. They argue that it has the capacity to bridge the gap (in culturally appropriate ways) between a stratied tradition of svadharma and modern human rights (Khare, 1998).19 In a recent book, Sharma, a Hindu theologian, argues that sadharana dharma offers a basis for rights in the Hindu tradition. However, it has tended to live under the shadow of a hierarchical model of dharma and to be often considered as secondary to it (2004: 14). In an earlier volume, he explores the idea of a Hinduism for our times (1996). Here, he reinterprets aspects of the Hindu tradition that seem problematic in this modern age of human rights, including karma and rebirth, caste and dharma. For instance, he suggests that seless performance of duty ought to be accompanied by seless assertion of rights. He argues that this principle applies to Hindus as individuals, as husbands and wives . . .; and communities within Hinduism, such as Harijans . . .; and to the Hindus as a community (1996: 37). Sharmas discussion is interesting from a theological position, and perhaps even mirrors the way many educated Hindus might interpret their tradition today. However, to what extent does it have currency at a grass-roots level? The poor are less likely to be in a position to challenge traditional orthodoxy, yet to be more affected by its negative outcomes. As he points out himself, he is unsure how the insight that selfless performance of duty ought to be accompanied by seless assertion of rights could actually be operationalized (1996: 37). Thus, evidence that there is

101

potential for overlapping consensus between particular readings of Hinduism and values such as human rights, does not in itself provide a satisfactory answer to the problems raised by the question whose cultural theory of duty are we talking about? We also need to consider who is voicing the particular theory of duty and the extent to which it is more than abstract theological reection. Sharmas theology is, however, reective of a broader movement to reform Hinduism, which has its roots in the thinking of nineteenth-century intellectuals such as Ram Mohan Roy (Killingley, 1993), Mahatma Gandhi (Gandhi, 1978; Sharma, 2004) and Swami Vivekananda (Radice, 1998). This transformation in Hindu social thought was stimulated through contact between educated Indians and the west, largely via the colonial British and the inuence of Christian missionaries (OFlaherty and Derrett, 1978; Coward, 1991b). Nevertheless, these Hindu reformers were all inuential gures in the emergence of interpretations of Hinduism that were both self-critical and innovative, and which aimed to bridge the gap between tradition and modernity. Gandhis campaign against untouchability (Parekh, 1997; Fischer, 2002), Ram Mohan Roys involvement in the anti-sati movement20 (Killingley, 1993) and Swami Vivekanandas formation of the Ramakrishna Mission21 (Miller, 1999; Beckerlegge, 2000; Copely, 2003) all indicate that Hinduism has played a socio-political role in the campaign for human rights at the grass-roots level.22 However, in tandem with the rise of reform Hinduism a competing intellectual and modernizing trend was found in secularism (Madan, 1987; Nandy, 1990; Sen, 1996). There were those who believed that progress, including the pursuit of rights, could only be achieved through replacing a hierarchical religious world-view with secular values. However, when India eventually gained independence as a secular democracy in 1947, not everyone was happy. Antisecularists felt that secularism was a foreign

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

102

Religion and a rights-based approach to development the rights-based concerns of the development project. However, what are the implications of this observation for rights-based approaches to development? I began this section by asking if the notion of duty was a useful starting point from which to re-think a rightsbased approach to development from an Asian, or more specically Indian, perspective. The notion of duty, or dharma, does capture the way in which social ethics are formed in a Hindu context. However, to swap rights for duties could give the impression of privileging a Hindu concept and, moreover, a particular interpretation of that concept that is not held by all Hindus. The presence of different and competing models of dharma (eg, traditional, nationalist, reformist) limits the viability of duty as a structural equivalent for rights in India. The very fact that we need to ask whose cultural theory of duty are we talking about? points towards a level of uncertainty that human rights discourse endeavours to dispel through appeals to universality. It is the universalism of human rights frameworks that makes them appealing as well as problematic. Human rights are an obvious vehicle to support the underlying premise of the development project that all humans have equal moral value and deserve a good life. Nevertheless, the particular history, expression and method of approaching human rights in the west leaves out important dimensions of the experience of securing social justice in other cultures. The idea of overlapping consensus can address the negative perception of human rights as a comprehensive doctrine (Rawls, 1996), yet it retains the important notion of a shared conception of social justice as a universal goal. However, overlapping consensus does not imply that western human rights advocates need to translate their language of rights into different religio-cultural dialects. Such a process of translation is essentially theological and potentially political, and can only be carried out by insiders. Instead, I have

import to India and that this approach was unlikely to radically transform society (Nandy, 1997; Madan, 1992). After all, as Varshney writes, religion was, and remains today, the ultimate source of morality and meaning for most Indians (1993: 243). It has been suggested that there is an unresolved clash between the modern Western presupposition of the right to equality and the traditional world view in which equality at the highest level is not a legal right but a hard won achievement resulting from good ethical choices the doing of ones dharma in this and previous lives (Coward, 1991a: 3). This, it is argued, has led to a failure of modernity in India (Bhatia, 2000: 312), where it has proved extremely difcult to use the force of human rights to dislodge customs such as child marriage, dowry or caste, which are rooted in tradition. Within the debate about duty and rights, apologists for Hindu reform have argued that the failure of the secular constitution to refer to dharma, and to accommodate the ways in which it shapes social ethics, limits the efcacy of rights-based models in India (Bhatia, 2000; Sharma, 2004). However, since dharma is a Hindu concept, some might be suspicious that such critiques of secularism actually mask support for the Hindu Right. Nevertheless, to consider all expressions of Hindu-based anti-secularism as supportive of the Hindu Right is premature and essentialist. For many in India Hindu has become a dirty word and there are political constraints for development agencies working with religious groups in the country. However, the debate about sadharana dharma and the justice concerns of reform Hinduism indicate an attempt to subvert features of the tradition that are considered to be unjust and to act against human rights. Reform Hinduism has not stimulated a total transformation in traditional hierarchical Hinduism, nor does it provide complete protection from the extremism of the Hindu Right. Nevertheless, the movements that it inspires do suggest an overlapping consensus with

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

E. Tomalin argued that the idea of overlapping consensus can inform a research agenda that asks questions such as: how are faith-based NGOs promoting values such as rights through their work with the poor? and in what ways does this complement or obscure the rights-based strategies of secular development agencies?. V Conclusion Sen writes that the idea of human rights has gained a great deal of ground in recent years, and it has acquired something of an ofcial status in international discourse . . . Human rights have also become an important part of the literature on development. And yet this apparent victory of the idea and use of human rights coexists with some real scepticism, in critically demanding circles, about the depth and coherence of this approach (1999: 227). Despite the popularity of rights-based approaches to development, the implications of such critiques have not really been addressed within development studies. While critiques of human rights discourse have been voiced from a range of different perspectives, this paper has been concerned with the claim that human rights discourse marginalizes people in the global South because it does not take into consideration the ways in which religious values shape social ethics. I suggested that one key reason why this particular critique has been virtually ignored is because development studies has an uneasy relationship with religion. This has not only meant that there is a wariness about working with religious groups but also that a research agenda on faiths and development has failed to emerge. However, the fact that religious values are frequently invoked in struggles for rights by the poor, sometimes in direct response to the oppressive tendencies of religious traditions themselves, suggests the relevance of religion to rights-based thinking within development. The discussion in this paper will not satisfy those critics of rights discourse who believe that it is a fundamentally western enterprise

103

and that the suggestion of overlapping consensus reects the manipulation of indigenous moral discourses. I have not, however, attempted to provide a comprehensive defence of rights discourse in the light of such critiques (this is more properly the job of philosophers). Instead, I have emphasized that there is substantial empirical evidence of attempts to subvert the chauvinism inherent in extreme versions of the Asian values debate or the agenda of the Hindu Right from within religious traditions themselves. Moreover, while I would argue that it is inappropriate to abandon rights for duties, it is possible that with serious reflection and consideration of the consequences, a secular theory of duty could usefully enhance rights thinking in development. Quite apart from the religious critique of human rights discourse, this does seem to be a limitation in current approaches to rights. This paper has not questioned the rightsbased approach to development per se. The moderate religious critique of human rights supports the view that human rights are not a western invention, but that there is considerable overlap between religious ethics across the globe and western human rights. Instead, I have questioned the extent to which the development project is really committed to the pursuit of rights since it fails to take seriously indigenous strategies for securing equality and equity, accountability, empowerment and participation23 when they draw upon religious values. To encourage research and reection upon cultural attitudes towards rights at a grass-roots level will aid our understanding of the ways in which rights are approached in different contexts, it will help to avoid backlash and will suggest reasons for barriers to the realization of rights. Notes
1 The United Nations Declaration on the Right to Developmenthttp://193.194.138.190/ html/menu3/b/74.htm (last accessed 25 June 2005).

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

104

Religion and a rights-based approach to development

World Faiths Development Dialogue(WFDD) was set up by James D. Wolfensohn, President of the World Bank, and Lord Carey of Clifton, then Archbishop of Canterbury, to help to promote a dialogue on poverty and development (http://www.wfdd.org.uk/aboutus. html last accessed 25 June 2005). More recently, the UK Governments Department for International Development (DfID) has listed Faiths in Development as a research priority under their 20052007 Research Funding Framework and is funding a ve-year research programme consortia on Faiths in Development. There is a degree of scepticism about such initiatives, however, with some voicing concerns about the underlying motives or the extent to which they are little more than political rhetorical gestures. 9 The United Nations, Human Rights in Development Rights based approaches. http://193.194.138.190/development/ approaches-04.html (last accessed 25 June 2005). 10 Co-ordinator of the Women and Gender Programme of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. 11 In 1998 the bhikkhuni tradition was revived in Sri Lanka and a number of Thai women have travelled there for ordination. See the Thaibhikkhunis website at http://www. thaibhikkhunis.org/english/englishindex.html (last accessed 25 June 2005). 12 The United Nations, Human Rights in Development Rights based approaches. http://193.194.138.190/development/ approaches-04.html (last accessed 25 June 2005). 13 See, for instance, A Universal Declaration on Human Rights by the Worlds Religions which incorporates the idea of duty into each article of the original UDHR. Thus, Article 18 is enhanced with the sentence: everyone has the duty to promote peace and tolerance among different religions and ideologies (Sharma, 1999: 542; Runzo et al., 2003). 14 The word theology is normally used to refer to the Christian tradition. However, I am using the term more broadly here to talk about the process of exegesis which takes place within all religious traditions, and which can have the effect of shaping belief and practice.

2 The United Nations, Human Rights in Development Rights based approaches. http://193.194.138.190/development/ approaches-04.html (last accessed 25 June 2005). 3 For a discussion of myths about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), including a challenge to the assumption that the declaration was drawn up without the participation of small states, see Waltz (2002). 4 For instance, the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam was adopted by 50 member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) in August 1990. Mayer points out that this declaration, in contrast to the UDHR, states that, the Islamic Shariah (Islamic law) is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarication of any of the articles in this Declaration (Mayer, 1994: 329). See also the discussion of the Asian values debate below (Kausikan, 199596, 1997; Chan, 1995). 5 For a discussion about the contribution of different religious traditions to human rights thinking see An-Naim (1992); An-Naim (1995); Bloom et al. (1996); Little (1999); Bauer and Bell (1999); Sharma (2004). 6 Renteln, although a philosopher, argues that human rights cannot be derived philosophically, but can only be established by empirical demonstration (1990: 12). Her project is to establish that the existence of cross-cultural universals is a more solid foundation for international human rights frameworks than the assumption that universals exist which transcend particular cultural systems. 7 For instance, the Malaysian organization Sisters in Islam describes itself as a group of Muslim professional women committed to promoting the rights of women within the framework of Islam . . . based on the principles of equality, justice and freedom enjoined by the Quran as made evident (http://www. sistersinislam.org.my/home_mission.htm last accessed 25 June 2005). 8 There might seem to be evidence that a commitment to understand the relationship between religion and development is slowly influencing the work undertaken by international development agencies (Bonney and Hussain, 2001). For instance, in 1998 The

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

E. Tomalin
15 Around 85% of the Indian population are Hindu and although caste is strictly speaking a Hindu tradition, it does also cut across religious boundaries and is in effect a pan-Indian institution. For a discussion of how caste has affected other religious groups see Shaw (2000); Ahmad (1973); Ballard (1994). 16 Mahatma Gandhi gave the name harijan (born of god) to those who stood outside the caste system and were otherwise known as outcastes or untouchables. Today the term dalit is used and preferred in self-designation, variously translated as crushed, stepped on or oppressed. 17 The Hindu Right formally opposes the caste system, actively courting the support of the dalit community and discouraging them from conversion. However, many would argue that this is an expedient strategy and does not reect a deeply held sense of social equality. 18 OFlaherty lists the ten-limbed dharma for all classes as non-injury, truth, purity, not stealing, charity, forbearance, self-restraint, tranquillity, generosity, and asceticism (1978: 96). 19 However, it is important to note that in the Hindu texts the contradictions between these two systems of svadharma and sadharana dharma are not satisfactorily resolved, as the tradition gives no clear instructions as to which should take precedence. See OFlaherty (1978: 96ff) and Lipner (1998: 22831). For example, with respect to the ethic of ahimsa/non-violence (part of sadharana dharma) problems arise with respect to the kshatriya (warrior) class whose svadharma (personal dharma) permits violence. 20 Sati is the tradition of widow burning, where a widow self-immolates upon her husbands funeral pyre. Support for this practice within the Hindu tradition is tenuous, although it is often portrayed as the ultimate fullment of a womans stridharma (Mani, 1998; Sen, 2002). 21 The RKM is a socio-spiritual welfare organization, that is still active today. According to Beckerlegge, Vivekananda was a mentor to the rst prime minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru, influencing his support for human rights in the Indian constitution (1990: 131). 22 The extent to which the ideas of these reformers exactly map human rights thinking deserves closer scrutiny. For instance, although Gandhi spoke out against untouchability he

105

favoured the retention of a hereditary class system based on occupation as integral to the Hindu tradition. While he did not see the classes (varnas) as a necessary basis for discrimination, others have criticized him for, in effect, endorsing a hierarchical vision of society. Moreover, as Rustau (2003) illustrates, while the Ramakrishna Mission may advocate equal rights for women, positions of leadership tend to be occupied by men. However, such critique is also relevant to the use of human rights discourse in the west, where rights are frequently invoked while masking their opposite. 23 The United Nations, Human Rights in Development Rights based approaches. http://193.194.138.190/development/ approaches-04.html (last accessed 25 June 2005).

References
Ahmad, I., editor 1973: Caste and social stratication among the Muslims. Manohar. Amin, S. and Hossain, S. 1995: Womens reproductive rights and the politics of fundamentalism: a view from Bangladesh. The American University Law Review 44, 131943. An-Naim, A.A., editor 1992: Human rights in cross cultural perspectives: a quest for consensus. University of Pennsylvania Press. An-Naim, A.A., Gort, J.D., Jansen, H. and Vroom, H.M., editors 1995: Human rights and religious values: an uneasy relationship? Editions Rodopi; W.B. Eerdmans. Ballard, R., editor 1994: Desh Pardesh: the South Asian presence in Britain. Hurst. Banks-Findly, E. 2000: Womens Buddhism, Buddhisms women: tradition, revision, renewal. Wisdom. Bauer, J.R. and Bell, D.A., editors 1999: The East Asian challenge for human rights. Cambridge University Press. Bayly, S. 1999: Caste, society and politics in India from the eighteenth century to the modern age. Cambridge University Press. Beckerlegge, G. 1990: Human rights in the Ramakrishna Math and Mission: for liberation and the good of the World. Religion 20, 11937. 2000: The Ramakrishna Mission: the making of a modern Hindu movement. Oxford University Press. Belshaw, D., Calderisis, R. and Sugden, C. 2001: Faith in development: partnership between the World Bank and the Churches of Africa. Regnum Books International. Bhatia, S. 2000: Can we return to the concept of duty in a culture of rights? Implications for morality and identity. Culture and Psychology 6, 30316.

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

106

Religion and a rights-based approach to development

Harper, S.M.P . 2000: The lab, the temple and the market: reections at the intersection of science, religion and development. International Development Research Centre. Hauserman, J. 1998: A human rights approach to development: rights and humanity. Department for International Development. Jacobsen, M. and Bruun, O., editors 2000: Human rights and Asian values: contesting national identities and cultural representations in Asia. Curzon. Jeffery, P . and Basu, A., editors 1998: Appropriating gender: womens activism and politicized religion in South Asia. Routledge. Juergensmeyer, M. 1996: Hindu nationalism and human rights. In Bloom, I., Martin, J.P . and Proudfoot, W.L., editors, Religious diversity and human rights. Columbia University Press, 24361. Kabilsingh, C. 1991: Thai women in Buddhism. Parallax Press. Kausikan, B. 199596: An East Asian approach to human rights. Buffalo Journal of International Law 2, 26383. 1997: Governance that works. Journal of Democracy 8, 2433. Khare, R.S. 1998: The issue of right to food among the Hindus: notes and comments. Contributions to Indian Sociology 32, 25378. Khuankaew, O. 2002: Thai Buddhism, womens ordination or more prostitution? World Fellowship of Buddhists Review 39, 1217. Killingley, D. 1993: Rammohun Roy in Hindu and Christian tradition. Grevatt and Grevatt. Knott, K. 1996: Hindu women, destiny and stridharma. Religion 26, 1535. Kung, H. and Kuschel, K. 1993: A global ethic: the declaration of the parliament of the worlds religions. SCM Press. Laws, J. 2003: Beyond rights. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 23, 26580. Lee, M. 1998: Human rights: perspectives: call for a new Asian rights charter. Asian Human Rights Commission Website, http://www.ahrchk.net/hrsolid/ mainle.php/1998vol08no12/1870/ (last accessed 25 June 2005). Lekshe Tsomo, K., editor 1999: Buddhist women across cultures: realizations. State University of New York Press. editor, 2000: Innovative women in Buddhism: swimming against the stream. Curzon Press. Lipner, J. 1998: Hindus: their religious beliefs and practices. Routledge. Little, D. 1999: Rethinking human rights: a review essay on religion, relativism and other matters. Journal of Religious Ethics 27, 15177. Madan, T .N. 1987: Secularism in its place. Journal of Asian Studies 46, 74759. 1992: Religion in India. Oxford University Press.

Bloom, I., Martin, J.P . and Proudfoot, W.L., editors 1996: Religious diversity and human rights. Columbia University Press. Bonney, R. and Hussain, A. 2001: Faith traditions and the development agenda. London: DfID. http://www. dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/faithdevcomagenda.pdf (last accessed 25 June 2005). Candland, C. 2000: Faith as social capital: religion and community development in Southern Asia. Policy Sciences 33, 35574. Chan, J. 1995: The Asian challenge to universal human rights: a philosophical critique. In Tang, J.T .H., editor, Human rights and international relations in the Asia Pacic region. St Martins Press, 2538. Copely, A., editor 2003: Hinduism in public and private: reform, Hindutva, gender and Sampraday. Oxford University Press. Coward, H.G. 1991a: Introduction. In Coward, H.G., Lipner, J.J. and Young, K.K., editors, Hindu ethics: purity, abortion and euthanasia. Sri Satguru Publications, 17. 1991b: Purity in Hinduism, with particular reference to Patanjalis Yoga Sutras. In Coward, H.G., Lipner, J.J. and Young, K.K., editors, Hindu ethics: purity, abortion and euthanasia. Sri Satguru Publications, 940. Croll, E. and Parkin, D. 1992: Anthropology, the environment and development. In Croll, E. and Parkin, D., editors, Bush base, forest farm: culture, environment and development. Routledge, 310. Cumaraswamy, D.P . 1997: Human rights and universality: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Is it universal? Asian Human Rights Commission Website http:// www.ahrchk.net/hrsolid/mainle.php/1997vol07no07/ 2082/ (last accessed 25 June 2005). Eade, D., editor 2002: Development and culture. Oxfam. Escobar, A. 1995: Encountering development: the making and unmaking of the third world. Princeton University Press. Fischer, L., editor 2002: The essential Gandhi: an anthology of his writings on his life, work, and ideas. Vintage Books. Fitzgerald, T . 1997: Ambedkar Buddhism in Maharashtra. Contributions to Indian Sociology 31, 22551. Gandhi, M.K. 1978: Hindu dharma. Orient Paperpacks. Grillo, R.D. 1997: Discourses of development: the view from anthropology. In Grillo, R.D. and Stirrat, R.L., editors, Discourses of development: anthropological perspectives. Berg, 134. Hamm, B.I. 2001: A human rights approach to development. Human Rights Quarterly 23, 100531. Hansen, B.T. 1999: The saffron wave: democracy and Hindu nationalism in modern India. Princeton University Press. Harnetty, P . 2001: The famine that never was: Christian missionaries in India, 19181919. The Historian 63, 55575.

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

E. Tomalin
Mani, L. 1998: Contentious traditions: the debate on sati in colonial India. University of California Press. Manji, F . and OCoill, C. 2002: The missionary position: NGOs and development in Africa. International Affairs 78, 56783. Mayer, A.E. 1994: Universal versus Islamic human rights: a clash of cultures or a clash with a construct? Michigan Journal of International Law 15, 307404. Miller, D. 1999: Modernity in Hindu monasticism: Swami Vivekananda and the Ramakrishna movement. Journal of Asian Studies 34, 11126. Muecke, M.A. 1992: Mother sold food, daughter sells her body: the cultural continuity of prostitution. Social Science and Medicine 35, 891901. Nandy, A. 1990: The politics of secularism and the recovery of religious tolerance. In Das, V ., editor, Mirrors of violence. Oxford University Press, 6993. Nussbaum, M. 2000: Women and human development: the capabilities approach. Cambridge University Press. OFlaherty, W.D. 1978: The clash between relative and absolute duty: the dharma of demons. In OFlaherty, W.D. and Derrett, J.D.M., editors, The concept of duty in South Asia. Vikas; University of London, School of Oriental and African Studies, 96106. OFlaherty, W.D. and Derrett, J.D.M., editors, 1978: The concept of duty in South Asia. Vikas; University of London, School of Oriental and African Studies. ONeil, O. 2002: Reith lectures 2002: lecture 2 trust and terror. http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/reith2002/ lecture2.shtml (last accessed 25 June 2005). Owen, L.B. 1998: On gendered discourse and the maintenance of boundaries: a feminist analysis of the Bhikkhuni order in Indian Buddhism. Asian Journal of Womens Studies 4, 860. Parekh, B. 1997: Gandhi: a very short introduction. Oxford University Press. 1999: Non-ethnocentric universalism, in human rights in global politics. In Dunne, T . and Wheeler, N.J., editors, Human rights in global politics. Cambridge University Press, 12859. Patel, A.S. 2003: Dalits exodus: a way out. Indian Journal of Social Work 64, 489505. Peach, L.J. 2000: Human rights, religion and (sexual) slavery. Annual of the Society of Christian Ethics 20, 6587. Peerenboom, R. 2000: Human rights and Asian values: the limits of universalism. China Review International 7, 295320. 2002: Beyond universalism and relativism: the evolving debates about Values in Asia. University of California, Los Angeles School of Law Research Paper Series 0223. http://ssrn.com/abstract331340 (last accessed 25 June 2005). Radice, W., editor 1998: Swami Vivekananda and the modernization of Hinduism. Oxford University Press.

107

Rawls, J. 1996: Political liberalism. Columbia University Press. Renteln, A.D. 1990: International human rights: universalism versus relativism. Sage Publications. Reynolds, F . 1994: Dhamma in dispute: the interactions of religion and law in Thailand. Law and Society Review 28, 43343. Robb, P . 1996: Dalit movements and the meanings of labour in India. Oxford University Press. Runzo, J., Martin, N.M. and Sharma, A., editors 2003: Human rights and responsibilities in the world religions. Oneworld Publications. Rustau, H. 2003: The Hindu womans rights to samnyas: religious movements and the gender question: the Sri Sarada Math and the Ramakrishna Sarada Mission. In Copely, A., editor, Hinduism in public and private: reform, Hindutva, gender and Sampraday. Oxford University Press, 14372. Sarkar, T . 2001: Hindu wife, Hindu nation: community, religion, and cultural nationalism. Hurst & Co. Sarkar, T . and Butalia, U., editors 1995: Women and rightwing movements: Indian experiences. Zed Books. Satha-Anand, S. 1999: Looking to Buddhism to turn back prostitution in Thailand. In Bauer, J.R. and Bell, D.A., editors, The East Asian challenge for human rights. Cambridge University Press, 19311. Sen, A. 1996: Secularism and its discontents. In Bhargava, R., editor, Secularism and its critics. Oxford University Press, 45485. 1999: Development as freedom. Oxford University Press. 2005: The argumentative Indian: writings on Indian history, culture and identity. Allen Lane, Penguin. Sen, M. 2002: Death by re: sati, dowry death and female infanticide in modern India. Phoenix. Sengupta, A. 2000: Realizing the right to development. Development and Change 31, 55378. Sharma, A. 1996: Hinduism for our times. Oxford University Press. 1999: Letter. Journal of Religious Ethics 27, 53949. 2004: Hinduism and human rights: a conceptual approach. Oxford University Press. Shaw, A. 2000: Kinship and continuity: Pakistani families in Britain. Harwood Academic. Shourie, A. 2000: Harvesting our souls: missionaries, their design, their claims. ASA Publications. Shivji, I.G. 1999: Constructing a new rights regime: promises, problems and prospects. Social and Legal Studies 8, 25376. Sweetman, C. 1999: Editorial. Gender and Development 7, 26. Tang, J.T .H., editor 1995: Human rights and international relations in the Asia Pacic region. St Martins Press. Taylor, C. 1999: Conditions of an unforced consensus on human rights. In Bauer, J.R. and Bell, D.A., editors, The East Asian challenge for human rights. Cambridge University Press, 12446.

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009

108

Religion and a rights-based approach to development

Vershelst, T . and Tyndale, W. 2002: Cultures, sprituality and development. In Eade, D., editor, Development and culture. Oxfam, 124. Waltz, S. 2001: Universalizing human rights: the role of small states in the construction of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Human Rights Quarterly 23, 4472. 2002: Reclaiming and rebuilding the history of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Third World Quarterly 23, 43748. White, S. and Tiongco, R. 1997: Doing theology and development: meeting the challenge of poverty. St Andrew Press. Zavos, J. 2002: The emergence of Hindu nationalism in India. Oxford University Press.

United Nations 2002: Draft guidelines: a human rights approach to poverty reduction strategies. http:// 193.194.138.190/development/povertyfinal.html (last accessed 25 June 2005). Varshney, A. 1993: Contested meanings: Indias national identity, Hindu nationalism, and the politics of anxiety. Daedalus 122, 22761. Van der Berg, C.J.G. 1995: Fundamentalist Hindu values and human rights: two worlds apart? In An-Naim, A.A., Gort, J.D., Jansen, H. and Vroom, H.M., editors, Human rights and religious values: an uneasy relationship? Editions Rodopi: W .B. Eerdman, 10919. Ver Beek, K.A. 2002: Spirituality: a development taboo. In Eade, D., editor, Development and culture. Oxfam, 6077.

Downloaded from http://pdj.sagepub.com by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2009