‘Ownership’ in the aid architecture and the tension in the approach of governance: A case study of Bangladesh

A claimed paradigm change from Washington Consensus to Post Washington Consensus era, as a response to the inefficiency and lack of legitimacy of the structural adjustment period, has initiated a range of socially inclusive policies with a commitment to ensure local control by policy ownership. Its rearranged framework of governance has involved a divergent group of actors in policy process to materialize ownership. The paper argues that the present governance framework is more technocratic targeting to management of ‘problem-driven’ politics in most developing countries and, this technocracy attempts to sugarcoat a long-term contentious aspect of development. Standing on this argument, the study investigates whether the techno-managerial form of governance can materialize ‘local ownership’ in the policy design by reflecting local needs and aspiration. The study examines through the case of Bangladesh the allocated and manifested role of different actors in the PRSP policy process against the claim of materializing local ownership. This study further inspects the emergence of new interest maximising elite and the convergence of interest of both donor and this group with a careful observation of its effect on ‘local ownership’ by means of Bangladesh experience. The paper finds that: firstly, in the space of technocratic form of governance, the role of different actors has been mechanised conforming to ‘one-size fits all’ policies and, this squeezed role makes ‘local ownership’ as empowerment impossible. Secondly, a group of interest maximising local elite emerges and a convergence of their interest with technocratic reform is realised. This convergence and their interest set the embargo to materialize ‘local ownership’.