Umuganda

Umuganda is the Kinyarwanda for Community Service. It is a cultural practice that began well before the Westerners ever came to Africa where in the community would regularly come together to care for the common needs of the village or for the needs of individuals within the village. They would make roads in and out of the village or help build houses for the elderly or orphans. It was a way of building community pride and unity. As individuals worked together, they grew together. Everyone in the village participated.

 After Genocide, the government believed that Umuganda was a way of recovery. Instead of it being voluntary as the community saw the need, it became a program of the government to enable rebuilding of the society. The last Saturday of every month has been declared Umuganda. Projects include rebuilding roads and school building as well as houses for survivors of the Genocide. The difference is that the government decides when which projects will be done, on a national level. Every family in the village is expected to participate. If they do not, they can be fined by the government. Usually one family member attends, while the others remain at home, attending to the family’s issues.

Dr. Uwimbabazi of PISAA making
presentation on Umuganda

 Umuganda was a topic of discussion at the recent Scientific Week at PIASS. The Faculty of Development conducted a scientific study in the local area to determine participation in Umuganda and attitudes toward it. The findings were most revealing. It seems that no one objects to the practice at all, but there is a deep desire for it to return to a community organized activity, so that the local folks have ownership in the decisions of what projects will be done. Many of those interviewed felt that this would increase participation and reduce the need for fines. A healthy debate resulted at the PIASS conference around this topic. There was a conscientious that Umuganda is and should be a part of the cultural fabric of Rwandan culture. It is part of who Rwandans are. No one questioned the need for it. The question was about the organization of it. There was strong support on both sides – government oversight verses community direction. Those in favor of the government oversight championed the comprehensive nature of the projects, the unity these gave to the whole country and the reconciliation that the present system builds. Those for community direction lifted up the sense of ownership in the community and the increased participation that would bring as well as the local knowledge of the community needs.

As I sat listening, I was struck by the obvious differences between American and Rwandan cultures. In America, we struggle to get people to work for community projects. When they happen, the projects are written up in the local news papers as striking examples of charitable spirits of citizenship – local groups that picked up litter or helped to plant trees or community gardens. In Rwanda, community service is a given. The discussion is on what projects to do and who should organize them, not if they should be done. Here it is a part of life. In America, it is a sacrifice of time and energy. Cultures and cultural expectations are different. The senses of community and individuality are different. It is not an issue of right or wrong, but of cultural differences. I am always struck by those cultural differences.