This video draws on the experience of an Australian funded participatory rural development project in the Philippines, to examine the challenges, risks and benefits of adopting a participatory approach. It takes the form of interviews with project staff, including foreign project consultants, provincial and local project staff, community development workers and agricultural extension workers. A range of issues is discussed, include potential factors causing conflict or distrust, the need for and obstacles to empowering farmers, the need for and resistance to a very slow learning process, transparency and agendas of various stakeholders, and the need to recognise and share constraints and strengths. These issues are discussed from the perspective of bilateral agency staff, NGOs, local government and community partners.
Measuring participation: its use as a managerial tool for district health planners based on a case study in Tanzania
This paper looks specifically at how a framework that was developed to measure the level of community participation within district health projects can be implemented. The introductory section describes the evolution of the development of the framework designed by Rifkin et al in 1988. The framework basically centres on the identification of five main factors that Rifkin believed to most strongly influence the breadth of community participation. These were identified as: a) needs assessment b) leadership c) organisation d) resource mobilisation and e) management. The article goes on to describe how research was carried out to find out how health programme staff utilised the framework to assess community participation levels. A major reason for this research was to assess exactly how valuable a tool this framework is by asking project managers to apply it in their own specific contexts. The article gives a detailed description of the setting in which the research took place before discussing the study procedure in some detail and briefly reporting the results. The main strengths and weaknesses of the framework were highlighted and the implications of these findings discussed in some detail.
This article addresses criticisms that PRA raises too many expectations, and that communities should not simply be used as guinea-pigs for testing methods. It argues that these criticisms are only valid when planning is inadequate and there is a lack of transparency in groups working with communities. Further, it argues that raising expectations is actually an objective of the PRA process.
This note describes the use of force-field analysis, a technique originally used to analyze the forces which keep an institution in its present state. It was used in a modified form in two projects - a non-formal education project in Bangladesh and an urban environmental project in India - to provide a way of drawing staff and stakeholders into the planning process, defining possible objectives and how to attain them. It was found to be a useful way of involving different people in the analysis of objectives and how they can be achieved.
'Learning to Unlearn' as a Tool to Reverse the Bureaucratic Attitudes: a Case Presentation on Experience with the Facilitation Approach
Two key aspects are identified to the success of a programme: (i) change in bureaucratic attitudes and (ii) organisation of beneficiaries for self-help. Bureaucrats focus on targets, especially financial targets, refuse to see problems through the people's eyes, refuse to listen, and are unconcerned with the needs of the poor. Hence, a need for reversing bureaucratic attitudes. One way is to put officials in an environment in which they become sensitised through learning from farmers/villagers (e.g. through overnight stays in villages). It is important that department heads provide support and role models for such activities. Resistance by officials is possible. The application of PRA/RRA methods to reversal exercises are described, and learning steps listed. If facilitating is to be successful, officials have to be committed to the process and open to villagers' ideas. Organisations in India for which the process would be suited are suggested. The author's personal experience is that the process changed his personal as well as professional approach to interaction with others.
Planning Pre-Phases as an Instrument in Project Planning: experiences gained from the planning process in Indo-Swiss Project Orissa and Indo-Swiss Project Sikkim
This document suggests the uses of pre-phases as a participatory planning tool in development projects. Pre-phases can be used to enhance mutual understanding among project partners. Such understanding is a precondition for successful planning of relevant, need-based and area-specific project interventions. They can also serve as a framework to developing partnership. Characteristics include: a workshop-culture, joint planning exercises, continuous interaction and dialogue and decentralised decision-making. Potential drawbacks are also listed. The first part discusses the planning process in an animal husbandry project in Orissa (Chs. 3-4) and in Sikkim (Chs. 5-6). The second part provides a comparison of the two planning approaches. The potentials and risks of pre-phases as instruments in project planning are discussed in Ch. 8. Ch. 9 suggests areas for improvements.
This book is the outcome of a workshop on participation organised by Duryog Nivaran, a South-Asian network of individuals and organisations concerned with large scale disruptions in society due either to natural disasters or conflicts. This introductory chapter gives a glimpse of papers included in the above book. The papers come from a group who have not only encountered the notion of participation in different capacities but have also understood it in different ways. Four of the seven papers included in the book look at participation primarily in the context of development and development projects; two of the papers look at the link between participation and political process at the macro level and raise questions about the relationship between development projects and political processes in wider society. Finally, one paper attempts to straddle these two worlds. The book contends that it is important to promote healthy critical debates on the concept and the experience of participation in various contexts. However, the emergence of participation as a new development orthodoxy needs to be questioned.
This book intends to provide participatory development tools that will enable those traditionally excluded - particularly women - from decision-making processes and control over resources to have a voice and to play an active role. The authors contend that the tools described increase the capacities of local communities, NGOs and public sector agencies by integrating applied and analytical methods. To illustrate, examples from field experience in urban, rural and agrarian communities from around the world are described. A brief overview of participatory approaches to development is described, including issues such as power relationships within a community and between local institutions and outsiders. Its explores the opportunities for using multi-media tools to strengthen the impact of other tools in conscious-raising, data-gathering, advocacy, and community decision-making and action.
This book reviews contemporary campaigns for community participation and empowerment with examples from all over the world. It critically assesses developments in the 'mixed economy of welfare' in terms of their relevance for self-help and community participation. It also considers the concept of empowerment and its relation to public policy and development within social movements.