I am left behind
This misogynistic mindset prevails in most state bodies
The writer works with Pattan Development Organisation and can be reached at bari@pattan.org
Leave no one behind is the concept that lies at the heart of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) framework. While the SDGs are not legally binding, governments have given a commitment to form structures for the implementation of the SDGs. By 2030, according to the SDGs regime, states are supposed to achieve the targets against each goal and indicator. In particular, the member countries need to focus on the most marginalised, vulnerable and poorest of the poor.
What are these goals? In order to flag the importance of each individual in the setting of the goals, I will reel off 10 of these 17 goals. 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere. 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improve nutrition. 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote wellbeing for all at all ages. 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls. 6. Ensure availability of water and sanitation for all. 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all. 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all. 9. Reduce inequality. 10. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable.
While reading these statements, one can’t miss two recurring words — ‘for all’ which are a reiteration of the overarching concept of the SDGs regime — ‘leave no one behind’. This shows how much importance is being given to each and every human being in the future development paradigm.
Now consider this. On 16th May a team of population census visited our communal residence. I offered them cold water and tea. They reluctantly accepted my offer. I found them extremely nice. We sat around a dinner table. The census team consisted of three persons — an enumerator — a middle-aged schoolteacher, an armed army jawan and an armed policeman. The teacher opened the census register and started the interviews one by one. The first respondent was our 87 years old aunt — a highly active and alert woman, both mentally and physically. I immediately noticed something wrong in his conduct. He had asked her only three questions but had made seven entries on the register. I interrupted him promptly and questioned him why he had made more entries than the number of questions. He had filled the religion and the marital status columns from his own imagination. He had recorded her as a Muslim. She corrected him firmly. I teased him about his assumptions based on stereotypes, which trigged a little discussion. The reason I wanted to have this discussion was to inculcate some professionalism in his conduct.
Then he interviewed the rest of us. We have people of different religions, even people with no religion and ethnicity. Despite the discussion, he continued repeating the same mistake. He would not ask about religion, marital status, and disability but would not skip questions like ‘do you have radio, TV, or do you read the newspaper?’ This was indeed a very serious omission and violation of the training instructions. Column 6 of the census form is about religion and the instruction manual for recording the replies is comprehensive. It instructs enumerators to ask every individual of each household separately about his/her religion and record only what the respondent says.
Though the Supreme Court had ordered the federal government and the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (PBS) to amend the census forms to include persons with disabilities in the headcount exercise, the enumerator did not bother to ask anyone about disability. The census is not just about counting heads; It is about a range of factors like demography, housing structures, migration patterns, education, water, sanitation, mortality, mother tongue, ethnicity, disability, and minorities. The census data therefore provides the basis of future needs of the population and planning. This is not possible without having quality data for timely and adequate action.
The 1998 census shows just 2.4% disabled persons and 4.16% minorities in our country. Civil society organisations and those working for the wellbeing of minorities and disabled populations, disagree with these figures. The basis of their rejection is technical, primarily based on flawed methodology, in nature. While agreeing with them, I am convinced the real cause of the lower percentage is not just the methodology, it is also their exclusion from the count.
I should hesitate from making any gross generalisation of my encounter with one enumerator — the schoolteacher. I mitigated this risk by probing some friends about their experiences with the enumerators. Out of ten, seven had similar experiences.
An old friend of mine who was once Chief Commissioner Census in Karachi told me that in the past after every census an evaluation of its conduct was held. This practice has been abandoned. Therefore, it is highly likely that we would have flawed census data. In one of my previous articles, I had raised the issue of absence of female enumerators from the conduct of census. I had quoted PBS’s statement (still available on its website) about the importance of female enumerators. It says due to absence of female enumerators in the conduct of the 1998 census, girls and women were not counted correctly. Despite that realisation, the PBS did not deploy female enumerators in sufficient numbers.
This misogynistic mindset prevails in most state bodies. No wonder, as many as 12 million women are missing from the electoral rolls too. When FAFEN raised this issue before the 2013 general election, the ECP leadership at the time got furious and tried to frighten us by blaming us as agents of foreign powers. I am glad to note that the current ECP leadership is trying its best to register all women. However, if our population census is being conducted in an unprofessional manner, I have no reason to trust the working of state institutions.
Since 16th May I have been trying to solve the puzzle. Why did the schoolteacher not ask the respondents about their religion and disability despite repeated reminders and strict and clear instructions and why did he ask everyone about radio, TV, newspaper without any reminder? Was he acting under some verbal instructions from invisible actors? I don’t think so. Was he conditioned and driven by stereotypes? Maybe — if one asks the same questions from let us say 200 persons and everyone gives the same answer, the risk of generalisation is high. But anybody who is conducting a professional survey must not generalise and must not assume any reply. It is a great sin. He must ask every question from everyone and record the response of everyone separately — unless instructed otherwise. In my view, therefore, the fault lies not only with the enumerators but also with the PBS bureaucracy and technocrats.
Without exaggeration it may be concluded that millions of people are not only going to be missing from the count but also many of the counted ones have been incorrectly documented. Sadly, the state institutions are failing us right at the start of the counting. How could it then made us part of the action?
I am left behind — but I am not alone, we are millions, we should name and shame those who have killed the spirit of the SDGs and leave us behind.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 6th, 2017.
What are these goals? In order to flag the importance of each individual in the setting of the goals, I will reel off 10 of these 17 goals. 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere. 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improve nutrition. 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote wellbeing for all at all ages. 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls. 6. Ensure availability of water and sanitation for all. 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all. 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all. 9. Reduce inequality. 10. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable.
While reading these statements, one can’t miss two recurring words — ‘for all’ which are a reiteration of the overarching concept of the SDGs regime — ‘leave no one behind’. This shows how much importance is being given to each and every human being in the future development paradigm.
Now consider this. On 16th May a team of population census visited our communal residence. I offered them cold water and tea. They reluctantly accepted my offer. I found them extremely nice. We sat around a dinner table. The census team consisted of three persons — an enumerator — a middle-aged schoolteacher, an armed army jawan and an armed policeman. The teacher opened the census register and started the interviews one by one. The first respondent was our 87 years old aunt — a highly active and alert woman, both mentally and physically. I immediately noticed something wrong in his conduct. He had asked her only three questions but had made seven entries on the register. I interrupted him promptly and questioned him why he had made more entries than the number of questions. He had filled the religion and the marital status columns from his own imagination. He had recorded her as a Muslim. She corrected him firmly. I teased him about his assumptions based on stereotypes, which trigged a little discussion. The reason I wanted to have this discussion was to inculcate some professionalism in his conduct.
Then he interviewed the rest of us. We have people of different religions, even people with no religion and ethnicity. Despite the discussion, he continued repeating the same mistake. He would not ask about religion, marital status, and disability but would not skip questions like ‘do you have radio, TV, or do you read the newspaper?’ This was indeed a very serious omission and violation of the training instructions. Column 6 of the census form is about religion and the instruction manual for recording the replies is comprehensive. It instructs enumerators to ask every individual of each household separately about his/her religion and record only what the respondent says.
Though the Supreme Court had ordered the federal government and the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (PBS) to amend the census forms to include persons with disabilities in the headcount exercise, the enumerator did not bother to ask anyone about disability. The census is not just about counting heads; It is about a range of factors like demography, housing structures, migration patterns, education, water, sanitation, mortality, mother tongue, ethnicity, disability, and minorities. The census data therefore provides the basis of future needs of the population and planning. This is not possible without having quality data for timely and adequate action.
The 1998 census shows just 2.4% disabled persons and 4.16% minorities in our country. Civil society organisations and those working for the wellbeing of minorities and disabled populations, disagree with these figures. The basis of their rejection is technical, primarily based on flawed methodology, in nature. While agreeing with them, I am convinced the real cause of the lower percentage is not just the methodology, it is also their exclusion from the count.
I should hesitate from making any gross generalisation of my encounter with one enumerator — the schoolteacher. I mitigated this risk by probing some friends about their experiences with the enumerators. Out of ten, seven had similar experiences.
An old friend of mine who was once Chief Commissioner Census in Karachi told me that in the past after every census an evaluation of its conduct was held. This practice has been abandoned. Therefore, it is highly likely that we would have flawed census data. In one of my previous articles, I had raised the issue of absence of female enumerators from the conduct of census. I had quoted PBS’s statement (still available on its website) about the importance of female enumerators. It says due to absence of female enumerators in the conduct of the 1998 census, girls and women were not counted correctly. Despite that realisation, the PBS did not deploy female enumerators in sufficient numbers.
This misogynistic mindset prevails in most state bodies. No wonder, as many as 12 million women are missing from the electoral rolls too. When FAFEN raised this issue before the 2013 general election, the ECP leadership at the time got furious and tried to frighten us by blaming us as agents of foreign powers. I am glad to note that the current ECP leadership is trying its best to register all women. However, if our population census is being conducted in an unprofessional manner, I have no reason to trust the working of state institutions.
Since 16th May I have been trying to solve the puzzle. Why did the schoolteacher not ask the respondents about their religion and disability despite repeated reminders and strict and clear instructions and why did he ask everyone about radio, TV, newspaper without any reminder? Was he acting under some verbal instructions from invisible actors? I don’t think so. Was he conditioned and driven by stereotypes? Maybe — if one asks the same questions from let us say 200 persons and everyone gives the same answer, the risk of generalisation is high. But anybody who is conducting a professional survey must not generalise and must not assume any reply. It is a great sin. He must ask every question from everyone and record the response of everyone separately — unless instructed otherwise. In my view, therefore, the fault lies not only with the enumerators but also with the PBS bureaucracy and technocrats.
Without exaggeration it may be concluded that millions of people are not only going to be missing from the count but also many of the counted ones have been incorrectly documented. Sadly, the state institutions are failing us right at the start of the counting. How could it then made us part of the action?
I am left behind — but I am not alone, we are millions, we should name and shame those who have killed the spirit of the SDGs and leave us behind.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 6th, 2017.