Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
PLANNING for PARTICIPATION
•Community and Public Participation has become increasingly important.
•Participation has been recognised as being one of the fundamental elements of effective local development.
•Increased Participation in Government is an essential part of all types of Government reform.
•Participation is a key element of good Governance and it also increases the effectiveness of decision-making.
•Enhanced participation has also been required as Local Governments have become the facilitators of all kinds of relationship -building.
What is Public Participation?
There is no official, authorised definition of 'public participation" in Local Government. In one sense there has always been some form of participation in Local Government as there have always been people taking part - the question is more usefully "which people and how do they take part?".
'Public Participation' can be called many things :
• 'Community Involvement', • 'Public Consultation', • ‘Research', • ‘Public relations'.
All of these terms may relate to the involvement of people in the decision-making processes, and they imply different levels of public involvement in the processes of "Governance".
Governance is the process by which we collectively solve problems and meet our society’s needs - Government is the instrument that we use. Osborne and Gaebler (1993) , Reinventing Government
Other definitions of Public Participation could include:
the way that people take part in public life, even if their roles are relatively passive or seemingly powerless,a way in which communities can participate and become involved.... using different methods and processes and in varying degrees. can range from minor and infrequent comment to active and powerful influence.
The Citizens
elected representatives...whocollectively form....
The Local Authority (e.g. Council or Committee)...which sets policy and determines courses of action
who...as voters, choose...
...and employs staff to plan,manage and deliver appropriate
programs and services to....
The Traditional Model
Why have Public Participation ?
Public participation in Local Government can be viewed as both a MEANS and an END – i.e. as both a way of carrying out Local Government and also as a goal to be achieved in itself. However, these two perspectives are not mutually exclusive.
MEANS:• Utilises the widest range of collective expertise and experience when dealing with an issue
• The local authority shares the processes of making judgements in sometimes difficult situations -community has to share some of the responsibility.
• Means that community and stakeholder opinions are known “up-front’ and do not appear as “a surprise”.
• Allows the development of all sorts of useful relationships and partnerships.
MEANS.• Can help change and shift community attitudes.
• Can help people understand the “bigger picture”
• Increases accountability and transparency
• Is an educational and learning process
• Brings together a variety of different (and sometimes conflicting) viewpoints and can assist people to understand and empathize with others.
END:• Is a fundamental aspect of democratic good governance
• Validates the local authority as a legitimate forum for local decision making
• Can be the ‘glue’ that bonds a community together.
• Is a critical indicator of program effectiveness.
• May often improve the quality of public debate & the quality of elected representative performance.
• Is a key to empowerment of citizens and communities.
EXERCISE:
List down some of the drawbacks and/or difficulties that may arise because of the use of public participation.
Types of Public Participation.
• What do we want to do? – to ask?, to convince?, to persuade?, to soothe and placate?, to sell an idea?, to raise awareness?, to consult?, to get feedback?, to clarify? to validate?, to educate? to solve conflict?
Types of Public Participation.
• What can we do? – what are the constraints or limitations in terms of: time, money, political support, public support, government regulations, power structures, funding donor guidelines etc?
Types of Public Participation.
• Who is going to participate? – what do we know about the participant’s: culture, language, power, background, education, literacy skills, attitudes etc?
ParticipationIs……
Persuasion
Self-determination
Education
Delegated Authority Information Feedback
Joint Planning
PartnershipConsultation
Adapted from Connor, D.M., (1985) Constructive Citizen Participation, Catalina Press, Victoria BC .
A Variety of Approaches to Public Participation
A Persuasion or Influence exerciseBroad Definition – Community involvement in order to persuade or influence them that “our idea is a good idea”
Objective – to convince the public that our idea is a good idea.
Key Features – organised and orchestrated presentation of our preferred option – make it look as good as possible.
A Variety of Approaches to Public Participation
An Education and Awareness-Raising exercise
Broad Definition – using information and general instruction to create awareness of programs and/or issues.
Objective – to enhance program effectiveness, to create a foundation for further and future work, to enhance community awareness and consciousness.
Key Features – a planned and managed process to raise awareness but not necessarily linked to any particular program
A Variety of Approaches to Public Participation
An Information- Gathering or Feedback exercise
Broad Definition – to disseminate information effectively and to gather feedback
Objective – to get feedback on a preferred option.
Key Features – presentation of all the details, an organised and orchestrated presentation of our preferred option – make it look as good as possible.
A Variety of Approaches to Public Participation
Consultation with a Flexible Position
Broad Definition - a formal dialogue on options available to meet agreed objectives
Objective - to facilitate the development of an agreed option that meets the agreed objectives
Key Features - no preferred option, flexibility and openness to suggestions.
.
A Variety of Approaches to Public Participation
Joint PlanningBroad Definition - a shared decision-making process with public involved in setting objectives as well as formulating options
Objective - to evaluate issues and develop a policy response
Key Features - the public is invited to join local authority representatives in working through the whole planning process.
A Variety of Approaches to Public Participation
PartnershipsBroad Definition - a mutually agreed arrangement with obligations and control shared by all the partners. Partners may be civil society, public or private sector
Objective - to build a working partnership and utilise the resources and expertise of all the partners
Key Features - the partners are clear of their obligations as well as what control they have of the process. Key phrase is 'mutually agreed arrangement - may include some form of "contract".
A Variety of Approaches to Public Participation
Delegated Self-Management
Broad Definition -the transfer of responsibilities (and sometimes resources) to a group outside the local authority.
Objective - to utilise the existing expertise within the community and provide some real empowerment.
Key Features - the recognition that the best expertise for decision-making may lie outside the authority itself. This may entail the complete transfer of both responsibilities and resources.
A Variety of Approaches to Public Participation
Self-DeterminationBroad Definition - the public are given as much responsibility as possible for the planning and management of issues.
Objective - to empower the community to identify and deal with issues themselves. To enhance and maintain the capacity of the community for self-determination
Key Features - local authority often cannot delegate everything but this option attempts to maximise the self-determination capacity of the community and provide as much resource as possible.
Citizen control
Delegated power
Partnership
Placation
Consultation
Informing
Therapy
Manipulation
Degrees of citizen power
Degrees of tokenism
Degrees of non-participation
Sherry Arnstein (1969) -"Ladder of Citizen Participation"
Manipulation / Therapy. Both are non-participative. The aim is to cure or educate the participants. The proposed plan is best and the job of participation is to achieve public support by public relations.
Informing. A most important first step to legitimate participation. But too frequently the emphasis is on a one-way flow of information. No channel for feedback.
Consultation. Again a legitimate step - attitude surveys, neighbourhood meetings and public enquiries. But Arnstein still feels this is just a window dressing ritual.
Placation. It allows citizens to advise or plan ad infinitum but retains for power holders the right to judge the legitimacy or feasibility of the advice.
Partnership. Power is in fact redistributed through negotiation between citizens and power holders. Planning and decision-making responsibilities are shared e.g. through joint committees.
Delegated power. Citizens holding a clear majority of seats on committees with delegated powers to make decisions. Public now has the power to assure accountability of the programme to them.
Citizen control. Citizens handle the entire job of planning, policy making and managing a programme e.g. neighbourhood corporation with no intermediaries between it and the source of funds.
What kind of public participation process are you
going to facilitate?
Planning the Process
There are different levels of participation appropriate for different situations, and it is important to decide where you stand.
• There isn't one `community' but many interests - or stakeholders - to consider.
• Participation takes time.
David Wilcox The Guide to Effective Participation (1996)
Wilcox adds two other dimensions to the idea of the level of participation on a ladder:
· The Phase or stage of the participation process.
· Different interests - or stakeholders - may be involved in different ways & at different levels or stages of participation.
The Level of Participation - where do you stand?
Supporting
Acting Together
Deciding Together
Consultation
Information
Substantial Participation
Phases of Participation project
•Initiation - The phase at which something triggers the need to involve people, and you start to think what that involves.
•Preparation - The period when you think through the process, make the first contacts, and agree an approach.
•Participation - The phase in which you use participation methods with the main interests in the community.
•Continuation - What happens in this phase will depend very much on the level of participation - you may be reporting back on consultation, or at another level setting up partnership organisations.
Some key questions at the initiation phase
1.Who is going to champion the process?
2.Who pays? Who administers? Who convenes ?
3.What are you trying to achieve through participation?
4.Who are the key interests in the community?
5.Who are the key interests within any organisation promoting participation, and what are their attitudes? 6.What level of participation is likely to be appropriate and acceptable?
7.How will you know when you have succeeded?
Initiation
Preparation
Initial groundwork with whoever is promoting the process.
Agreeing the approach with key interests .
Developing a strategy.
Groundwork with the promoter - the internal agenda?:
What does the organisation want to achieve from the participation process?
What are the boundaries of the task? What is fixed, and what is still open?
What level of participation is appropriate with the different outside interests?
Can the organisation respond to the outcomes of the process or are they intending to manipulate the participants towards pre-determined outcomes? What is the `real' agenda? Are there any hidden agendas?
What is the history of the issues, and what are the positions of the various parties?
Groundwork with the promoter - the internal agenda?:
Who owns the process within the organisation? Is there more than one owner and if so how will this be managed?
Are the senior officers and politicians prepared to make a public commitment and to be accessible to the participants?
Who is involved internally? Have they got their internal act together?
Are they really committed to the process? Will they stick at it ?
What resources are available? How much time is there?
How does this measure up to the support or involvement expected by community interests?
Understanding key interests and identifying stakeholders
• There are usually four main groups of participants: politicians; decision makers and resource holders; activists; and ordinary people.
• Not everyone has an equal stake- build in different levels
• Research the availability of resources and the immovable constraints such as time and distance
• Start the initial work to design your process and strategy
Strategy checklist
The aims of the process and how progress will be evaluated. ·The `feel' of the process: the style and tone. ·Timing and location of sessions·The groupings, forums and decision cycles to be employed. ·Precisely what authority is being delegated to whom. ·The appropriate approaches and techniques, taking into account time scale, objectives, resources, openness of information sharing etc. ·The ground-rules: how are we going to deal with each other? ·The resources available and any conditions attached. ·The technical and administrative services available. ·The mechanisms for recording and disseminating information. ·The level of support and resources to be made available.
Participation
•Don't underestimate people. Give them tools to manage complexity don't, shield them from it.
•Divide the issues into bite-sized chunks.
•Start with people's own concerns and the issues relevant to them.
•Help people widen their perceptions of the choices available and to clarify the implications of each option.
•Build in visible early successes to develop the confidence of participants.
Participation
•Direct training for participants may not be appreciated - it may be better to develop skills more organically as part of the process.
•Set up an iterative learning process, with small, quick, reversible pilots and experiments.
•Continuously review and widen membership.
•Help people to build their understanding of complex and remote decision processes which are outside the delegated powers of the participation process but which are affecting the outcomes.
•Nurture new networks and alliances.
Participation
•Plans must be meaningful and lead to action.• Manage the link between the private ability of the various interest groups to deliver on their commitments and the public accountability and control of the implementation. • Build in opportunities for reflection and appraisal. • Try to make it a rewarding and enjoyable experience!
Continuation - keeping going
Checklist
Did we achieve what we set out to do in the process?
Were the key interests happy with the level of involvement? Have we reported back to people on the outcomes? Are responsibilities clear for carrying projects forward? Are there major lessons we can learn for the next time?
