citizenry negotiation by means of radio in rural nepal

Draft19Aug09:CitizenrynegotiationbymeansofradioinruralNepal–sometheoreticalreflexions

1

CitizenrynegotiationbymeansofradioinruralNepal:sometheoreticalreflexions

JacobThorsen

Abstract

Followingacivilwaragainstthevastinequalitiesandwidespreadmisuseofpower,

Nepalexperiencesamomentofmajorsocio‐politicalchanges.Democracyhas

recentlybeenreinstated,afragilepeaceestablishedandformulationoffuture

policiesbegun.Numerousnewradiostationshavemushroomedinrecentyearsand

areenvisagedtoplayamajorroleinfacilitatingcommunitydevelopmentand

democraticprocesses.Thispaperbringsupsomeofthetheoreticalreflexionson

radioandcitizenrynegotiationinruralNepalanddiscusses,fromatheoreticalpoint

ofview,whatoccurswiththearrivalofanadditionalmediuminalocation

unexposedtoelectronicmediaanddominatedbyilliteracyandinequality,andthe

foreseeablenewcommunicationalpracticesnotpreviouslypossiblethatcouldspark

citizenrynegotiationinthecommunity.

Introduction

Nepalcurrentlyundergoesfundamentalsocio‐politicalchanges.Nepalfirstgained

democracyin1990butanescalatingviolentconflictgraduallydestabilisedthis.The

parliamentwasdissolvedin2002andtheKingclaimedautocraticleadershipin

February2005.Theconflictwasinitiatedin1996byMaoistsprotestingagainstthe

vastinequalitiesandwidespreadmisuseofpowerinthecountry.InApril2006

massprotestsofthe»JanaaAndolan«(people’smovement)spreadthroughthe

countryandasaresultaconstituentassemblywaselectedinMaylastyear.Thenew

electedparliamenthasdeclaredNepalasasecularstateandthusendedtheeraof

theworld’sonlyHinduKingdom.


2

Paralleltothepoliticalchanges,independentradiosareemerginginrapidpaceand

envisagedtoplayamajorroleindevelopingcommunitiesandfacilitating

negotiationofcitizenry.Thepathofdevelopmentanddemocratisation,however,is

longandchallenging.Asthisarticleiswritten(mid‐May2009),theNepalArmyhas

twochiefs,thepresidentisbehavinglikeachiefexecutiveandtheresignationofthe

primeministerhasmadeuncertaintyoncemoretheonlycertaintyofNepalipolitics.

AlthoughNepal’ssalienttransitionawayfromfaithdirectedandfeudaltraditions,

thecurrentsituationisoneofseveralmanifestationsthatNepal’sold‐established

hierarchicalpatterns,traditionalloyaltiesandnepotisticattitudesarestillintact.

TheApril2006movementdidprovecivilianmusclestochallengetheestablished

orderbutamajorityoftheNepalesepopulationisstillbyandlargeexcludedfrom

thepoliticalstructuresandoneofthereasonstothecurrentturmoil.

Althoughasocietyhasnumerousinfluences,thisarticlefocusesonthetheoretical

reflexionsonradioandcitizenrynegotiationinNepalfortwomainreasonsandone

practical.Firstly,Nepalexemplifiesaverytimelycaseasnewradiostationsthese

yearsemergerapidlyandareseentoplayamajorroleincommunitydevelopment

andfacilitationofcitizenrynegotiation.Secondly,Nepalexperiencesamomentof

majorsocio‐politicalchanges.Democracyhasrecentlybeenreinstated,afragile

peaceestablishedandformulationoffuturepoliciesbegun.Radioandmediain

generalhavebeeninthe»eyeofthestorm«duringtheconflict,especiallyradiosin

ruralareas,seenasmajorresourcesandsymbolicfactorstobegainedbybothsides

oftheconflict.Nepalthusprovidesanopportunitytofollowthereinterpretationof

thevaluesofcitizenrynegotiationfacilitatedbyradiointhemidstofmajorchanges.

Andthirdlyduetopracticalconstrains,empiricaldatarelatedtotheresearchofmy

PhDwillbecollectedinRolpadistrictduringfieldstudiesautumn2009and2010.

Thisarticlethereforeonlycontainssomeofthetheoreticalreflexionsrelatedtomy

research.


3

Bringingcitizenryoutoftheempiricalvoid

Contrarytomainstreamdebatesoncitizenship,whichtendtobedominatedbythe

commonlyuseddejureunderstandingsappliedbyconventionalstate‐centred

approachesthatconcentrateonthelegalbestowmentofthestate(Jones&Gaventa

2002),severalscholarsarguetobringthediscussionofcitizenshipoutofthe

»empiricalvoid«(Kabeer2005;Gaventa2005).Theychallengetheliberal

understandingofcitizenshipandarguetofocusonthewayspeopledefine,perceive

andactonnotionsofcitizenship.Thisallowsforanapproachofsocialization

throughcommunity‐basedinitiativesandatransformativeunderstandingof

citizenship,highlightingpeople’spossibilitiestoclaimrightsandexerciseagency

(Hickey&Mohan2004)andhowrights,responsibilitiesandentitlementsare

perceived,shapedandstruggledforbypeople.Citizenshipislinkedtosocialpolicy

andtherolepeopleplayinaffectingandrequiringservices,perceivingpeopleas

active»makersandshapers«ofpolicies(asopposedtousers)wherebythenotionof

serviceproviders(givers)isrejected(Cornwall&Gaventa2001;Hickey&Mohan

2004).

Nepal’sdemocraticexperiencesince1990hasopenedthepublicspacetoalmost

everyone.ThisisseenintheupsurgeofNGO’sfromahandfultoroughly5.000

today(Shakya2008:273)andthemassivemobilisationoftraditionally

marginalisedgroups(poor,downtrodden,ethnic,so‐calledlowcaste,women,etc.)

takingadvantageoftheopenspacetoarticulatetheiraspirationsandmake

demands.MostnotablyseenintheApril2006massprotestswhereliterallypeople

fromallwalksoflifejoinedthemovement,whicheventuallyleadtothe

reinstatementofapopularparliamentlastyear.

Nepal’sdemocraticchallenges

AlthoughanawakenedcivilsocietyandNepalsince1990hasheldmanymultiparty

electionsandexperiencedfrequentalternationofpower,thepublicremainshighly

disaffectedfromthepoliticalsystemandthereislittlerealsenseofdemocratic


4

accountability.Oneofthekeypoliticalproblemsistheblurringofthelinebetween

thestateandtherulingparty.Thestate’smainassets–thatistosaythestateasa

sourceofmoney,jobs,health,education,andtosomeextentpoliceandmilitary

powerareputinthedirectserviceoftheeliteandrulingparty.

Kumar(2008)describeshowNepalileadership–whetheratlocaloratnational

level–cannotbebuiltapartfromtheconstitutivesocialstructure,whichis

predominantlyundemocratic.Kumardescribes»leadership«inNepalassocial

categorycorrespondingtopower,authorityandhegemony/domination,ratherthan

afacilitatorofcollectiveinterests(ibid:25).AccordingtoKumar,leadershipin

Nepalsubsistswithintheconfinesoftheaphnomanche(one’sownpeople)against

arukomanche(otherpeople),thusfosteringgroupismtocompetefor(state)power

(ibid:27).Thereby,intrapartyrivalryandfactionalismhasreplacedelectionsasa

measuretoachievecommonlyacceptablepoliticalauthority,andpoliticshasbeen

subsumedintothenumbersgameinwhichthehegemonyofthemajorityprevailed

andthosewhofoundthemselvesintheminorityremainedunscrupulously

disaffectedwiththeoutcomesoftheprocess.

OneoftheleadinganthropologistsinNepal,DonBahadurBista(1991),describes

howfatalismisdominatingmostspheresofNepalesesocietytoanextentpeople

believetheyhavenosenseofresponsibilitytowardssocietyatlarge(ibid:80)or

personalcontroloverone’slifecircumstancesasthesearedeterminedthrougha

divineorpowerfulexternalagency.Fatalism,hesays,hasconsequencesonthe

senseoftimeandinparticularsuchthingsastheconceptofplanning,orientationto

thefuture,senseofcausality,humandignityandpunctuality,whichagainisrelated

tothevariousformsofdependency(ibid:4).Helinks»dependency«withthe

harmoniouscooperativesocialbehaviourwithintheindigenousgroupsandtheir

senseofcollectiveness(ibid:99).

InNepalcollectivismalsomanifestsinthesocialinstitutionofaphnomanche,which

hasthepotentialofbeingconstructivelyusedasanaturalformofsocial


5

organisation,butitcanalsoreadilybesubvertedasseenintheHinducastesystem

andexperiencedintoday’spolitics.Inparticularitencouragesproblemsof

inclusion‐exclusion,asgroupmembersgainparticularprivileges.Adesiredcircleof

aphnomanchecanevenbepurchasedthroughtradedprivilegesorbychakari

(sycophancy)flatteringinfluentialpersons(Bista1991:89).Withaphnomanche

onefindsexclusionarytendencies,factionalism,failureincooperation,and

corruptionsinvariousformsleadingtomalfunctioninganddissatisfactionatevery

level.

Theconsequencesofthelittleagreementbetweencompetinggroupsandcollectives

toabidebytherulesofademocraticpoliticalsystemhaveconsequencesatalso

locallevel.Intheabsenceofanyrealdelegationofpower,localbodiesremains

overtlydependentoncentralauthority.Theoutcomeisnodevelopednational

consciousnessanda»democracywithoutcitizens«tousePfaff‐Czarnecka’s(2008:

73)terminology.Acountrythatenactsshallowpoliticalreformsbuthasnotfully

conceptualisedhowtoinvolvecitizensintheongoingtransformationofthecountry.

Hence,toalargemajorityofthepopulationthepublic,citizenry,thestate,thenation

areallbutabstractconcepts.

Electro‐magnetisationofpublicspace

Newandindependenttelevisionchannelsandradiostationsdidalsotakeadvantage

oftheopenpublicspaceafterthecomingofdemocracyin1990.Inparticularnew

radiostationsmushroomedinrapidpaceintheslipstreamoftheApril2006

movementandcountstodaymorethan200comparedto45(Onta2006:116)

beforethemovement.Asignificantproportionofthenewradiossurfaceinrural

areasnotpreviouslyexposedtoelectronicmedia.Theseareasareingeneralthe

poorerandlessdevelopedregionsofNepalwhereadultliteracyratearound30

percentisn’tunusual(UN:2005),andwheretheconsolidationofpoliticaland

economicpowertypicallyisinterlinkedwiththesocialinstitutionofaphnomanche

andtheHinducastesystemcharacterisedbydominance/subordinance.


6

Thearrivalofanadditionalmediuminalocationunexposedtoelectronicmediaand

dominatedbyilliteracyandinequalityimpliesachangeofthecommunicational

platforminthecommunityandachangeallowinganumberofnew

communicationalpracticesnotpreviouslypossible.Inasocietywithdominanceof

primaryoralityallsoundisinherentlypowerful(Ong1982:32).Speechisaformof

soundthatsharesthiscommonpower.Likeothersounds,itcomesfromwithina

livingorganism.Atextcanbeignoredasitjustissomewritingonpaper.Butto

ignorespeechcanberiskyasourbasicinstinctscompelustopayattention.

Writing,incomparison,ispowerfulinadifferentway:itpermitspeopletogenerate

ideas,storethem,andretrievethemasneededacrosstimeinahighlyefficientand

accurateway.InNepalittraditionallywerethepriestlyBrahmansatthetopofthe

Hinduritualorderthatmanagedthemantras,ritualsandsacredliteratureandhas

beneaththemkings,warriors,merchants,peasantsandlabourers.Beneath

everyonearetheoccupationalgroupsconsideredthesocalled»impure«and

»untouchables«.Officiallyabolishedin1963,caste‐baseddiscrimination,while

diluted,remainseventodayinNepal.Thefactonlyveryfewhaveaccesstowriting

technologylimitsthedevelopmentofcomplexideasandtheinstitutionsthat

dependonthem.Instead,sustainedthoughtinoralsettingsdependson

interpersonalcommunication,andstoringcomplexideasoveralongperiodoftime

requirespackagingtheminhighlymemorableways,generallybyusingmnemonic

tools(Ong1982:284)suchastheHindumantrasforexample.

Thedevelopmentofnewwaysofcommunication–inthiscasebymeansofradio–

impliesatremendousincreaseinculturalinteraction,includingthoseexcluded

beforeduetocasteorilliteracyforexample,andhencehomogenisationbetween

previouslylessconnectedandhencemoredivergentcultures.Sincecommunication

canonlytakeplaceifacommonplatformemergesanddevelops,communication

implyakindofbridge‐building,resultinginthedevelopmentofsharedcodesand

meansofcommunication.SusanDouglas(1999)describes,forexample,howthe

emergenceofradiointheUSAinthe1930’splayedapivotalroleinhelpingpeople

toimaginethemselvesandtheirrelationshipsdifferentlyandconstructedimagined


7

communitiesandcultivatedbothasenseofnationhoodandvalidationof

subcultures.Withtheradioitispossibleforthefirsttimetoenteraspacethatis

outsidethe»normal«limitforinteraction.AccordingtoMcLuhan(1967)theradio

mediumcreatesanintimaterelationbetweentheradiohostandthelistenerandhas

especiallyinthebeginningasuggestiveimpact(ibid:330).AnexampleiswhenThe

WaroftheWorldswasbroadcastedintheUSAin1938andpeoplewerefleeingtheir

homesaroundthecountrytoescapetheinvadingMartianssorealisticallyportrayed

(Douglas1999:165).Inotherwordsradioaswellasotherelectronicmedia

transformsthe»immediate«(takenforgranted/noobjectorspaceintervening)into

mediatedpossibilityofwhattoknowandtothinkbyshapingtheindividuals

attention,emotionsandthesemioticnatureofindividuals’relationshiptotheworld

aroundthem.

Spacerestructured

Electronicmediasuchasradiocircumventtheinvariantrelationshipbetween

informationandspaceastheyassimilateasubstantialpartoftheknowledge

previouslyreservedtoanexclusivegroupinadeterminedlocation,suchas

Brahmanpriestsintemplesforexample.Insocietiesdominatedbyprimaryorality,

communicationthroughwritingandbooksis»automatically«restrictedtothose

whoknowtherequiredaccesscode,andevenamongthosewhohaveknowledgeof

thebasiccode,messagescanbedirectedatdifferentgroupsbyvaryingthe

complexityofthecodedmessage.Societybecomesdividedintothedistinctsetsof

informationsystemsonthebasisofdifferentlevelsofreadingabilityandilliterates

arethereforeexcludedfromallprintcommunication(Meyrowitz1985:75).

Electronicmedia,however,hasnosuchconstrainsandinvolvesanaccesscode

appearingmore»realitylike«thansentencesandparagraphsdo,wherebyitisnot

requiredtopenetrateacomplexsuperimposedfilterofprintedsymbolsto»enter«

thecommunicationsituation(ibid:76).


8

»Listeningforgedpowerfulconnectionsbetweenpeople’sinnerthinking

selvesandotherselves,otherselvesfromquitefarawayplaces.Thisinterior

“I”beganoscillatingwiththevoicesofthosenevermet,neverevenseen«

(Douglas1999:31).

Groupidentityisbasedonsharedalthoughspecialinformationonehasinregardto

othersinthegroup.Themoreseparateinformationthemoreseparategroups,

whichinitsextremeismanifestedintheHinducastesystem.Theabilityof

electronicmediatocoalescencemanyseparatesituationshomogenisesgroup

identities.Electronicmediablurthelinesbetweenphysicalencountersand

mediatedonesandgiveaccesstoinformationonlyattainablebeingphysically

presentinasituation.AccordingtoMeyrowitz(1985)theyprovideasortof»side

stageview«inrevealingbackstageinformationofperformers.1Insuchoverlapping

offrontandbackregionsnewregionalbehaviourdevelops,whichMeyrowitzcalls

middleregionbehaviourwhenthedividinglinebetweenonstageandbackstage

behaviourmoveineitherdirectionwherebythenatureofthedramachanges

accordingly.Themorerehearsalspacethatislost,themoretheonstagedrama

comestoresembleanextemporaneousbackstagerehearsal;whenthebackstage

areaisincreasedinsize,thentheonstagebehaviourcanbecomeevenmoreformal

(ibid:47).Theelectronicmedia’smergingofprivateandpublicspheres,alongwith

itsabilitytorevealbackstageinformation,leadsnotonlytonewregionsbutalso

moreimportantly,newbehavioursandnewroles.Asplaceandinformationaccess

becomedisconnected,place‐specificbehavioursandactivitiesbegintofade(ibid:

148).

1MeyrowitzisinfluencedbyErvingGoffman’s(1990)writingsandhisdramaturgicalperspectiveinwhichheportrayslifeastheatre,usingthismetaphorasatolltoanalyseanddescribesocial

interaction.


9

Animportantfactorinthischangeisthemedia’sabilitytorevealteam’ssecrets,

hichwereformerlylinkedtoitsbackstage,inthesenseofplacement.Increased

accesstogroup’sinformation‐systemhasboththeeffectofdecreasingimportance

oftraditionalgroupstiesandincreasingimportanceofothertypesofassociation

(Meyrowitz1985:131).RadioinNepalhasinthisregardauniqueposition,taking

intoaccountthecountry’smountainousandinaccessibletopography,highlevelsof

illiteracy,multipleethnicities,castesandlanguagesandaradioreceiver’srelatively

lowprice.Radio,alongwithotherelectronicmedia,restructurestimeandspaceso

tospeak,astheperceptionofdistanceisredefinedbecauseauralperceptionsmedia

arerepresentedinparallelspacessimultaneouslynomattergeography,caste,

gender,age,etc.Thisgivesscopeforadecreaseinthelocalbodiesdependencyon

centralauthorityanddelutetheaphnomancheandcastebasedgroupconsolidation

ofpoliticalandeconomicpowerinfavourofnewandinclusivegroupformations.

Senselessnessandimagination

Theblurringofsocialrolesthroughmedia’sdemystifyingeffectallowtheexposure

ofbackstagebehavioursandgroupsecretsthatotherwiseshouldhavebeenlearned

throughsocialisation–orneverlearnedatall.Thisleadstoadecreaseinextreme

behaviourandinMeyrowitz’viewmorehomogenisedbehaviouralpatterns,which

mightoffersomeanswerstowhytheindividualdealswithgrowingfeelingof

displacementandmediocrityinthemodernsociety.Theelectronicmediahas,soto

speak,alteredthesociallandscapeandtheworldmightsuddenlytomanypeople

seemsenseless,asitforthefirsttimeinmodernhistoryisrelativelyplaceless

(Meyrowitz1985:308).

Onecouldarguethecivilwar,politicalvacuumandtheincreasingnumberof

electronicmediaarerudimentarytowhymanyNepalesepeopletheseyears»sense

senselessness«anda»questforidentity«.Aspeoplebyandlargestillareexcluded

fromthepoliticalstructuresandculturalidentitiesthusarefeltdeeperandstronger

thanpoliticalones(Lal2002:115),severalgroups–manyalongethniclines–claim


10

autonomyandrighttoself‐determination,asespeciallyseeninthelowerbeltof

Nepal,Terai.Beforetheeraoftheelectronicmediathisquestwasalmostunheardof

inpublic,suppressedornegotiatedandstruggledforinphysicalspace.Withthe

emergenceofradio,however,numerousrepresentationsofsocialsituationsand

positionsarepossibleinanalteredspace.Theelectromagneticspectrumtoavast

majoritystillisanabstractconceptinlinewiththepublic,thestateandthenation.

Anetherealdimensionusuallyoccupiedbyoraclesandanimaginatoryrealitywith

hopes,dreams,aspirationsorfantasyobjectssuchasMartians.

Appadurai(1996)describeshowconceptionsofthefutureplayafarlargerrole

thanideasofthepastgrouppoliticstodayalthoughprimordialistprojectionsonto

thepastarenotirrelevanttothecontemporarypoliticsofimagination(ibid:145).

Agencyisnotonlystructuredbycollectivenorms,values,experiencesandprevious

practisebutisalsoguidedbyafutureelementandpeople’simagination.Asradio

hasbothlocalphysicalrepresentation(buildingwithstudiofacilities,antennaand

localstaffs)aswellas»etherealrepresentation«(»invisiblevoice«fromfaraway

places)radiobecomes,incollaborationwithothermediaandcivicandstateagents,

avitalagentfortransformationofimaginatoryandabstractconceptssuchasthe

public,thestateandthenationintoreal‐lifepractise.

Discrepancyexposure

Asradiograduallybecomesembeddedinpeople’sday‐to‐daylifeandmergethe

spheresofbackstageandfrontstagebehaviour,discrepancyandhypocrisyis

exposedwhichovertimewillleadtothebirthofnewbehaviouralpatterns.I

hypothesisetheexposureofdiscrepancyhighlights(Bourdieuian)fieldsrequiring

furthercapital(economic,culturaland/orsocial)toachieveconsistency.These

»fields«mightatfirstglanceappear»Meyrowitziansenseless«becausetheyalter

space,subjectivetimeandsensitiveboundsastheyarenotnecessarilyboundtoa

certainplace,caste,familyorface‐to‐facecollectivismsuchasmanifestedinthe

socialinstitutionofaphnomanche.However,maybe»senselessness«actually


11

containelementsthatareindisguiseofexactlytheoppositeandwhatparadoxically

andhenceshouldbelabelled»purpose«asthesefieldscontainelementsofreason

andasketchoftheabstractand(needfor)moderncompositionofindependent

institutionsandseparationofpowers.

A»field«inaBourdieuiansenseischaracterisedbyacertainstructureandinner

autonomywithnormsandhierarchiesinwhicheachactorhasacertainpositionin

relationtooneanother.However,nofieldiscompletelyautonomousandis

influencedbyotherfieldsandBourdieudistinguishesbetweenafield’sautonomous

andheteronomouspole.Theautonomouspoleisdefinedasthefield’sownlogicin

whichactorsoperateaccordingtothefield’sownassessmentcriteriawhereasthe

heteronomouspoleisinfluencedbyotherfieldssuchasthemarket,politicsandthe

media.

Mediahasalsoanautonomousandheteronomouspoleinwhichtheautonomous

polehasnormsforprofessionaljournalismandpressethicswhereasthe

heteronomouspoleisinfluencedbyforexamplecommercialsfromthemarketand

legislationbythepoliticians.Highprofessionalstandards,autonomy,community

representationandminimaleditorialinfluencefromthestateandmarketare

obviouslyallinfluentialontheradio’sabilitytofacilitatecitizenrynegotiation.

Inadditiontomedia’ssidestageexposurediscloseinconsistency,Iarguethemedia

increasinglywilltakeaprominentpositioninanincreasingnumberoffield’s

Autonomouspole(jield’s

ownassessmentcriteria)

Heteronomouspole(injluencefromotherjields)

Figure1:Bourdieuianfield


12

heteronomouspoleandtherebychallengethefield’sautonomouspolebyfacilitating

publicdialogue,publicaccessandexposuretothedifferentstateinstitutionsaswell

aschallengethemanydifferentsocialinstitutionsofaphnomanchethatinfiltrate

today’spoliticsinNepal.Radioaswellasothermediaensuresconsistency

(neutralisation/exposureofinconsistencyandhypocrisy)andspaceforcivicand

facilitativepublic‐servicepractitionerstoassureNepalwithitsmultiple

communitiescanpursuedifferentexperiencesofandaspirationsfordevelopment.

Finalremarks

Asradioentersintopeople’sday‐to‐daylifeandmergethespheresofbackstageand

frontstagebehaviourthelistenerexperiencestheprivatesituationismorphedwith

thepublicasanextendedspacewhereradioprovidesa»horizonofknowledge«that

assiststheindividualtoexerciseagencyinapublicdomain.Thereby,potentialsfor

diversityandmultipleperceptionsoftheworldarefurtheredandimminentand

immanentformsofdevelopmentgraduallytranscendintoakindofsocialcontract

betweencitizensandauthoritywhereeachstakeholderhashisorhershareinthe

transformationalprocess.


13

Listofreference

Appadurai,Arjun(1996):ModernityAtLarge:CulturalDimensionsofGlobalization.UniversityofMinnesotaPress,MinneapolisAppadurai,Arjun(2004):TheCapacitytoAspire:CultureandtheTermsofRecognitioninCultureandPublicAction:ACrossDisciplinaryDialogueonDevelopmentPolicy.VijayendraRaoandMichaelWalton(editors).StanfordUniversityPressBista,DonBahadur(1991):FatalismandDevelopment:Nepal’sStruggleforModernisation.OrientLongman,PatnaCornwall,A.andGaventa,J(2001):Fromusersandchooserstomakersandshapers:repositioningparticipationinsocialpolicy.IDSWorkingPaper127.IDS,SussexDouglas,SusanJ.(1999):ListeningIn:RadioandtheAmericanImagination.RandomHouse,NewYorkGaventa,J.(2005):ForwordinInclusiveCitizenship–MeaningsandExpressions.N.Kabeer.IDS,SussexGoffman,Erving(1959):ThePresentationofSelfinEverydayLife.PenguinBooks,LondonHickey,Samuel&Mohan,Giles(2004):Participation:fromtyrannytotransformation?ZedBooks,LondonJonesE.&GaventaJ.(2002):ConceptsofCitizenship:areview.IDSDevelopmentBibliography19.IDS,SussexKabeer,N.(2005):Introduction:thesearchforinclusivecitizenship:MeaningsandexpressionsinaninterconnectedworldinInclusiveCitizenship–Meaningsandexpressions.IDS,SussexKumar,Dhruba(2008):ObstaclestoLocalLeadershipandDemocracyinNepalinLocalDemocracyinSouthAsia.DavidN.GellnerandKrishnaHachhethu.Sage,NewDelhiLal,C.K.(2002):CulturalflowsacrossablurredboundaryinStateofNepal.KanakManiDixitandShastriRamachandaran.HimalBooks,KathmanduMcLuhan,Marchall(1967):UnderstandingMedia:TheextensionofMan.GingkoPress,Berkeley


14

Meyrowitz,Joshua(1985):NoSenseofPlace:TheImpactofElectronicMediaonSocialBehaviour.OxfordUniversityPressOng,WalterJ.(1982):Orality&Literacy.Routledge,OxfordOnta,Pratyoush(2006):MassMediainPost1990Nepal.MartinChautari,KathmanduPfaff‐Czarnecka,Joanna(2008):DistributionalCoalitionsinNepal:AnEssayonDemocratisation,Captureand(Lockof)ConfidenceinLocalDemocracyinSouthAsia.DavidN.GellnerandKrishnaHachhethu.Sage,NewDelhiShakya,KeshabMan(2008):ForeignAid,Democracy,andDevelopment:PersonalExperiencesinLocalDemocracyinSouthAsia.DavidN.GellnerandKrishnaHachhethu.Sage,NewDelhiUN(2005):RolpaDistrictMap.www.un.org.np/health/district‐profiles/data/midwestern/rolpa.htm

Theauthor

JacobThorsenisPhDstudentatDepartmentforInformationandMediaStudiesat

AarhusUniversityandhisresearchtopicisNegotiatingcitizenrybymeansofradio,

poorandmarginalisedpeople'saspirationsandstrategiesinruralNepal.Beforehis

PhDhehasworkedwithdevelopmentandcommunityradioinLatinAmericaand

recentlyfouryearsinNepal.

citizenry negotiation by means of radio in rural nepal

Documents