Jump to content

Participatory development

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jmmk (talk | contribs) at 09:42, 26 October 2009 (Created Page for Participatory Development). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Participatory Development

Participatory Development seeks to engage local populations in development projects. Participatory development (PD) has taken a variety of forms since it emerged in the 1970s, when it was introduced as an important part of the "basic needs approach" to development. [1] Most manifestations of PD seek “to give the poor a part in initiatives designed for their benefit” in the hopes that development projects will be more sustainable and successful if local populations are engaged in the development process.[2] PD has become an increasingly accepted method of development practice and is employed by a variety of organizations. [3] It is often presented as an alternative to mainstream “top-down” development. [4] There is some question about the proper definition of PD. One definition of PD is as follows:

"Participation refers to involvement by local populations in the creation, content and conduct of a program or policy designed to change their lives. Participation requires recognition and use of local capacities and avoids the imposition of priorities from the outside."[5]

Advocates of PD emphasize a difference between participation as “an end in itself”, and participatory development as a “process of empowerment” for marginalized populations.[6] In the former manifestation, participants may be asked to give opinions with out assurance that these opinions will have and effect or may be informed of decisions after they have been made. In the latter form, proponents assert that PD tries to “foster and enhance people’s capability to have a role in their society’s development”[7].

Variations of Participatory Development

Manifestations

There are many different manifestations of Participatory Development. PD promoted as a way to improve the “efficiency and effectiveness” of “formal” development programs.[8] This method usually involves external and local actors working together on a particular project. GZT (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit), a German development agency, describes participation as “co-determination and power sharing throughout the program cycle". [9] By involving those who will benefit from the programs in their development and having local and international groups work together, it is hoped that development projects will be made more sustainable and successful. [10]

Enabling "mutual learning" is another way that PD is conceptualized.[11] The goal is to enhance “communication, respect, listening and learning between development workers and those they serve”[12] in order to achieve more applicable, “useful outcomes”. [13] Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) is one example of mutual learning, a form of research which acknowledges that “illiterate, poor, marginalized people [can] represent their own lives and livelihoods… do their own analysis and come up with their own solutions”.[14]

Some hope that PD will be able to cause a shift in power relations by “valorizing...voices” that usually go unheard by political and development groups. [15] This speaks to the idea that PD has the potential to increase a population’s ability to be self-determining.[16]. Those who promote this view of PD would like to see local communities making, rather than only contributing to, important decisions.[17] These activists hope that PD will lead to better civil engagement, where by people are able determine the ways their own communities function. [18] In these cases, international organizations can support and draw attention to the efforts of groups working for self-determination.[19]

Implementation

Some theorists have highlighted a difference between “invited” and “claimed” spaces for PD.[20] Invited spaces are usually formal events where local communities are asked by development agencies to share their thoughts.[21] There is often a goal of coming to an agreement.[22] Conversely, claimed spaces are created when marginalized individuals step in and “[take] control of political processes”[23]. The Zapatistas movement can be viewed as an example of local people “claiming” space to advocate for political change.[24]

Benefits

Research conducted by several development agencies (World Bank, CIDA, USAID, IRDP) suggests that there are many benefits to be gained through the use of PD.[25] These studies suggest that while PD projects may have high start up costs, they will be less expensive and more sustainable in the long run [26]. These studies also found that PD projects are better at addressing local needs and are generally more relevant to local populations than traditional development projects.[27]

Criticisms

When compared with traditional forms of development, PD is sometimes criticized for being costly and slow. A project may take longer if one has to engage, work and come to a consensus with local communities, than if one did not have to do these things.[28] PD may also have higher start up costs than traditional development. In addition, PD is criticized for reaching a smaller population than traditional development. Community dialogue and augmentation may initially involve only a few individuals, where as dropped food aid reaches hundreds of people.[29]

More radical development thinkers have put several criticisms forward. PD projects have been accused of treating communities as if everyone in them is the same.[30] This issue has been raised most specifically with regard to gender. Critics suggest that while many organizations acknowledge the importance of including women in PD projects, the history of success has been limited.[31] This may be because PD projects seek to address women’s immediate needs “without addressing underlying aspects of gender subordination such as the unequal division of reproductive labour, restrictions on female mobility, domestic violence, women’s lack of autonomy and so on”.[32] Critics have also said that PD projects fail to adequately address other inequalities such as class and caste.[33] In trying to give voice to communities, development agencies may connect only with elite members of a group, thereby re-enforcing local inequalities. PD projects have also been accused of enabling tokenism, where a few “hand picked” local voices are allowed to speak as a “rubber stamp to prove…participatory credentials”.[34] This view suggests that organizations only include local voices to improve their image, without really seeking to engage the population with which they are working.

Notes

  1. ^ Cornwall,A.(2002)'Beneficiary, Consumer, Citizen: Perspectives on Participation for Poverty Reduction.'Sida Studies,pp 11.
  2. ^ Cornwall,A.(2002)'Beneficiary, Consumer, Citizen: Perspectives on Participation for Poverty Reduction.'Sida Studies,pp 11.
  3. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 45.
  4. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 45.
  5. ^ Jennings, R. (2000). ‘Participatory Development as New Paradigm: The Transition of Development Professionalism’. Community Based Reintegration and Rehabilitation in Post-Conflict Settings Conference. pp 1-2.
  6. ^ Mohan, G. (2007) “Participatory Development: From Epistemological Reversals to Active Citizenship”. Geography Compass. pp 781
  7. ^ Japan International Cooperation Agency. 1995
  8. ^ Mohan, G. (2007) “Participatory Development: From Epistemological Reversals to Active Citizenship”. Geography Compass. pp 781
  9. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 46.
  10. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 46.
  11. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 46.
  12. ^ Cornwall,A.(2002)'Beneficiary, Consumer, Citizen: Perspectives on Participation for Poverty Reduction.'Sida Studies,pp 21.
  13. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 46.
  14. ^ Chambers,R. (1997).'Whose Reality Counts: Putting the First Last'. London:Intermediate Technology Publications
  15. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 46.
  16. ^ Cornwall,A.(2002)'Beneficiary, Consumer, Citizen: Perspectives on Participation for Poverty Reduction.'Sida Studies,pp 21.
  17. ^ Cornwall,A.(2002)'Beneficiary, Consumer, Citizen: Perspectives on Participation for Poverty Reduction.'Sida Studies,pp 21.
  18. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 49.
  19. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 49.
  20. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 46.
  21. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 46.
  22. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 46.
  23. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 47.
  24. ^ Mohan, G. (2007) “Participatory Development: From Epistemological Reversals to Active Citizenship”. Geography Compass. pp 782
  25. ^ Jennings, R. (2000). ‘Participatory Development as New Paradigm: The Transition of Development Professionalism’. Community Based Reintegration and Rehabilitation in Post-Conflict Settings Conference. pp 3.
  26. ^ Jennings, R. (2000). ‘Participatory Development as New Paradigm: The Transition of Development Professionalism’. Community Based Reintegration and Rehabilitation in Post-Conflict Settings Conference. pp 3.
  27. ^ Jennings, R. (2000). ‘Participatory Development as New Paradigm: The Transition of Development Professionalism’. Community Based Reintegration and Rehabilitation in Post-Conflict Settings Conference. pp 3.
  28. ^ Jennings, R. (2000). ‘Participatory Development as New Paradigm: The Transition of Development Professionalism’. Community Based Reintegration and Rehabilitation in Post-Conflict Settings Conference. pp 4.
  29. ^ Jennings, R. (2000). ‘Participatory Development as New Paradigm: The Transition of Development Professionalism’. Community Based Reintegration and Rehabilitation in Post-Conflict Settings Conference. pp 4.
  30. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 46.
  31. ^ Mayoux, L. (1995) ‘Beyond Naivety: Women, Gender Inequality and Participatory Development.” Institute of Social Studies. pp 242.
  32. ^ Mayoux, L. (1995) ‘Beyond Naivety: Women, Gender Inequality and Participatory Development.” Institute of Social Studies. pp 242.
  33. ^ Mohan, G. (2007) “Participatory Development: From Epistemological Reversals to Active Citizenship”. Geography Compass. pp 784
  34. ^ Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 48
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Participatory_development&oldid=322102987"