131

PART VI:Scaling up –ways ofinstitutionalisingparticipation

62132

133

Scaling up presents a huge challenge inChina, not just because of the sheer size ofthe country, but also because of thecomplex and complicated way governmentworks. Since the failure of the VillageDevelopment Planning (VDP) roll out (seePart I), there is a general understandingthat participation cannot be implementedby decree from above. It requires changesof attitudes, mindsets and behaviour – andlearning from practice.

Pilots are an integral part of policylearning in China, and it is often fromsmall-scale pilots that large scale change isinitiated. Chinese policies like to useevidence from practical demonstrationprojects to support the political agenda.What works in practice can be referred toand will be disseminated to promotefurther change.

The Kunming workshop took place at atime when experiences with participationwere emerging from a range of sectors andinstitutions. However, the critical step ofinstitutionalising practices and behaviourstill remains to be done. During the

Kunming workshop, participants notedthe potential benefits and the challengesfor scaling up participation. Centralgovernment policies are generally more infavour of citizens’ participation than theyused to be. The Kunming workshop notedthe central government’s policies on the‘new socialist countryside’/‘harmonioussociety’, the Organic Law and the shifttowards greater service orientation asenabling factors. In this issue, Wang Yue’scase study already showed how participa-tory pilots are viewed as legitimate anduseful against the background of thecentral government’s policy agenda (seePart IV). At the same time workshopparticipants highlighted the major insti-tutional challenges.

The financial resources in particular forcapacity building, but also for extensiveconsultation are often not sufficient. DengWeijie’s case study provides a compellingexample on the gap that often existsbetween government ambitions and actualresources (see Deng’s case study in thissection).

by JOHANNA PENNARZ

Introduction 26

62134

As a result, previous attempts to rollout participation have failed due to capac-ity constraints. The Guangxi case studypresents an innovative approach to over-coming capacity constraints through insti-tutionalised learning. Guangxi has placedstrong emphasis on capacity building andlearning through a decentralised and prac-tice-oriented learning approach. Partici-pation has been scaled up in Guangxi andhas started to influence another povertyreduction project (see Huang Chanbinand Zhou Qing ’s case study in thissection).

Like most policies that are passed downthrough many levels, the higher levelsprovide the basic principles and targets,while local levels retain space to define thedetails of implementation. The Guangxicase study provides a good example of howthe requirement to follow a participatoryapproach is handed down from provincialto county levels. This is done through anofficial document that is general on theprocess, but specific on how roles andresponsibilities at the interface are defined.The approach is essentially pragmatic:local government is provided the space towork out the practical details based onwhat works best for them. By providing thespace for innovative practices, the provincehas gained a wealth of experiences on

participation which they have sharedthrough their learning system.1

A major challenge for rolling out multi-sector poverty reduction programmes in aparticipatory way is how to coordinate thevarious initiatives implemented by differ-ent sector departments in a way that theyrespond to the comprehensive needs andpriorities of a community. The presentfiscal system does not support coordinationand alignment of sector programmes (alsosee case studies in Part III). The WorldBank-supported Community DrivenDevelopment (CDD) approach presents anattempt to overcome public financeconstraints through direct disbursementsof funds to communities. It tries to addressissues of financing since it disburses fundsdirectly to communities and allows themto spend them according to their integrateddevelopment plans (see Li Hui’s case studyin this section).

Issues of accountability are not yetaddressed. Local governance presents aparticular challenge for poverty reduction.Previous assessments noted the concernsabout channelling larger volumes of centralfunds to local governments, in particularthe lack of adequate financial managementsystems and monitoring and oversightcapacity to ensure that the funds are well-spent (see World Bank/DfID 2009).

CONTACT DETAILSJohanna PennarzITAD, Hove, UKEmail: Johanna.pennarz@itad.comWebsite: www.itad.com

REFERENCE`From poor areas to poor people: China’s evolving poverty reduction

agenda' An assessment of poverty and inequality in China,World Bank

1 See also Tips for Trainers, Article 33, in this issue.

135

LI HUI is deputy head of section in the Foreign Capital Project Management Centre(FCPMC) under the State Council Leading Group Office of Poverty Alleviation andDevelopment (LGOP). The LGOP is a politically influential body, guiding povertyreduction policies at central government level. The FCMC is the management armcoordinating internationally-funded poverty reduction projects at central level. Theimplementation of pilot projects, like the CDD pilots, at this level is potentiallysignificant because of the influence on policy processes. Li Hui was the coordinator ofthe CDD pilot, funded by the World Bank. Her case study investigates how theinstitutional constraints (such as those described in Part III) can be overcome by thisinnovative approach to project funding and management.

BackgroundEntering the new century, the Chinesegovernment formulated a series of policiesto ‘strengthen agriculture and benefitfarmers and social security’.1 In the follow-ing years, the process of poverty reductionwas further accelerated, and great achieve-ments were made between 2001 and 2005.But five main obstacles to poverty allevia-tion were persisting at the communitylevel: • Levels of participation were low in thetraditional poverty reduction projects and

mostly confined to cash and labour contri-butions;• Community capacity building was veryslow and skills for self-organisation, self-management, self-development and self-supervision were insufficient; • Development funds for poor communi-ties were insufficient; • Problems with targeting the poor popu-lation remained unresolved; and,• There were no permanent mechanismsfor sustainable development at communitylevel.

by LI HUI

Exploring community-driven development(CDD) in Chinesepoverty reduction 27

1 The China Rural Poverty Alleviation and Development Outline (2001–2010)www.gov.cn/english/official/2005-07/27/content_17712.htm

62136

To address these problems, the StateCouncil Leading Group Office of PovertyAlleviation and Development cooperatedwith the World Bank in the Community-Driven Development (CDD) pilot projects,starting in May 2006. The total projectinvestment was about 44 million RMB,covering 60 key poor villages in four coun-ties of four provinces (Jingxi County inGuangxi Autonomous Region, JialingDistrict in Sichuan Province, Baishui Countyin Shaanxi Province, and Wongniute Bannerin Inner Mongolia). These projects werescheduled to be finished by 30 June 2009.These projects covered three main areas:small community infrastructure and publicservices, community development fund, andcommunity natural resources managementand environmental improvement.

The specific objectives of the projectwere to apply the tools of community-driven development, explore establishingsustainable mechanisms of self-organisa-tion, self-management and self-develop-ment, by mobilising the potential socialcapital of the communities and improvinggovernance at the local level.

Innovations and main activities of theprojectBased on the principle of ‘respecting thesubject status of the farmers and givingplay to their creative spirits’, and based onboth the international experiences ofcommunity-driven development and the

Chinese domestic context, the innovationsand main activities of the project were inthe areas of the control of funds, decision-making processes, transparency, supportsystems, and capacity strengthening, whichis described in further detail below.

The right to control fundsThis pilot project was the first poverty alle-viation project in China that directlyhanded over the right to control projectfunds to communities. Their right tocontrol these funds was the key to commu-nity-driven development. To ensure thatthe communities could control the fundsand safely use them, the project developedrules and regulations for the use of funding,based on the following principles: 1. The villagers autonomously discussedand formulated the fund managementmethods, and democratically elected themanagers. 2. Special community supervision groupswere established to inspect how the fundswere used at any time. 3. In natural villages or villagers’ groups,the communities established their ownproject accounts to manage the funds. 4. Subject to the communities meeting allthe necessary requirements, the countyPMOs have to grant the funds uncondi-tionally to the community accounts on alump sum basis. 5. The account, passbook and passbookpassword are held by three different

Box 1: Community-driven development in the World Bank

Community Driven Development (CDD) is an approach to development that supports participatorydecision-making, local capacity building, and community control of resources. The five key pillars of thisapproach are community empowerment, local government empowerment, realigning the centre,accountability and transparency, and learning by doing. With these pillars in place, CDD approaches cancreate sustainable and wide-ranging impacts by mobilising communities, and giving them the tools tobecome agents of their own development. Support to CDD usually includes: Building capacity ofcommunity groups; promoting an enabling environment through policy and institutional reform(decentralisation, sector policies, etc.); and strengthening local governance relationships, includingforging linkages between community based organisations and local governments. Within the WorldBank, CDD programmes are usually financed through Social Funds. Social Funds directly finance smallcommunity managed projects and allow poor people to become actively involved in the development oftheir communities. http://tinyurl.com/2epuxzp

137l Exploring community-driven development (CDD) in Chinese poverty reduction

people, and money must be withdrawnjointly by the three people to ensure itssafety. 6. The community must be notifiedpromptly that money has been used andthey must supervise its use.

The right to make decisions The CDD project was also the first povertyalleviation project in China in which all thedecisions were made autonomously by thecommunities. It was up to the communi-ties to decide what to do and how to do it.The communities established projectorganisations through democratic elec-tions. These organisations comprised theproject implementation group, the projectsupervision group and the project manage-ment committee of the natural villages.They were responsible for implementing,organising, managing, and maintaining theprojects as well as for project supervisionand assessment of projects during theselection process and decision-making.The communities formulated the systems,supplemented with a publicity andcomplaint mechanism, and all majormatters had to be discussed and decidedthrough plenary meetings.

Open and transparent publicity and complaintmechanismThe publicity system ran through the entirecourse of the pilot project, and was able to‘publish everything that needs to bepublished.’ During project design, the useof funding and the major decisions werepublished in the community, to ensure thecommunities’ right to know and decide.Secondly, a special complaint mechanismwas established. Responsibility to handlecomplaints was allocated to named indi-viduals at the World Bank, Central PMO,Provincial PMO and County PMO, and therelevant details (contact address, telephoneand fax) were made available to thecommunities. The channels for complaintswere made public. There were also proce-dures and regulations for the handling of

complaints, which protected the legitimateinterests of those making complaints andgave prompt feedback to the communitieson the actions taken and outcome.

Community service system to support capacitybuildingThe CDD project was aware of the gapbetween the ideal of community-drivendevelopment and the realities of commu-nity capacity. The project established andimproved a service system for community-driven development to strengthen commu-nity capacities for self-organisation,self-management, self-development andself-supervision. The project allocated afacilitator to each administrative village fordisseminating project rules and informa-tion, and to provide assistance in carryingout work in the community. The key func-tions of the County PMOs were service,coordination, tutoring and supervision andbeing responsible for examining andaccepting the facilitators’ work. Also, theproject creatively introduced internationalNGOs to provide training and technicalguidance to the County PMOs and facilita-tors, such as Plan International, Action Aidand World Vision. Project supportinggroups at county and township level, drawnfrom relevant government departments,provided the communities with technicalsupport and training.

Exploring new mechanisms to improvecapacities The CDD project explored new mecha-nisms to build capacity throughout theprocess. Through continuous practice, thecommunities and farmers accumulatedexperiences and gradually built their capac-ities for self-organisation, self-management,self-development and self-supervision. Theproject was implemented in cycles, and thepurpose was to gradually improve thecapacity of the community by repeating theprocess of project application, evaluationand selection, implementation, manage-ment and supervision. Community organi-

Figure 1. Comparison of participation levels between traditional poverty approach anda community-driven development approach.

Nianli village (CDD project)

100% involved

98% interviewed villagers are clearon the project objectives, contentsand investment

100% involved in by discussion

98% agreed

98% satisfied with thetransparency

High participation by 83%interviewed

100% agreed for their priority only

98% involved in the monitoring,and 100% are clear the fund iswell monitored by the independentcommunity monitoring team

100% agreed

96% knew the telephone number,85% knew where to find thenumber, and 85% satisfied withthe treatment

Qilong village (traditional project)

69% involved

31% interviewed villagers are clearthe project objectives, contents andinvestment

24% involved in different ways

35% agreed; but 27% just follow theone assigned by higher authorities

35% satisfied with the transparency.27% knew nothing about the fundmanagement

High participation by 24% interviewed;but general by 37% interviewed.

14% agreed, but 45% disagreed orthought it was too difficult

24% involved in the monitoring, and29% are clear the fund is wellmonitored by the independentcommunity monitoring team

31% agreed

27% knew the telephone number,22% knew where to find the number,and 33% satisfied with the treatment

Contents

1. Planning

Interviewed villagers involvedin the planning process

Baseline survey

Development of projectmanagement rules

2. Implementation

The priority of local villagers?

The project fundmanagement

The interest of localparticipation

The fund raising bycommunity

Monitoring

Ownership

Complain channel

62138

sations became stronger and they graduallyimproved their self-organisation and self-management capacities.

Project effects and impactsAfter almost three years of piloting, theproject has achieved significant results,with improvements in living conditions,and enhancement of productivity andfarmers’ standard of living. Community

cohesion and the desire of the wider popu-lation for participation were reinforced,and the self-organisation, self-manage-ment, self-supervision and self-develop-ment capacities of the communitiessignificantly improved.

Village-based decision-making has led tostronger motivation and ownershipSince communities were given the right to

3. Monitoring and Evaluation

139l Exploring community-driven development (CDD) in Chinese poverty reduction

discuss and decide, they became moreengaged and active. They changed from thetraditional mentality of ‘waiting, depend-ing and begging’, and developed an increas-ing sense of responsibility. As one villagerof Jingxi, Guangxi said, ‘In the past, it wasthe government who built the roads, andthey wanted me to participate in theiraffairs, so I wanted to be paid for working.Now it is us who are building the road, andthe government helps us, and it is thegovernment who participates in our affairs.Therefore, it is our responsibility to buildthe road properly.’ A comparison of partic-ipation levels between a village that imple-mented the traditional poverty reductionapproach project in Qilong Village and avillage that implemented the CDD project(Nianli Village) in Jingxi, Guangxi, illus-trates the high levels of participationachieved through the CDD approach.2 (SeeFigure 1).

Village-specific decision-making has reachedthe poor and addressed their needsThe communities controlled the resourcesand made the decisions, which changed thetraditional top-to-bottom decision-makingmechanism. It was people-oriented,respected the farmers’ wishes, and solvedthe most relevant, urgent and immediateproblems of the farmers. It made thegovernment’s public products and servicesbetter aligned with people’s needs. Ourinquiries at Guangxi found that 98% of theinterviewees believed that the projectsimplemented were the most needed proj-ects that they selected by themselves and100% would actively raise the funds tosupport them. Hejiazhuo villagers inBaishui, Shaanxi Province pointed out that

the project procedures were way too exten-sive, but that the process could solve therealistic problems for the people.

The village-based fund management has beenmore cost-efficientBy directly handing over the managementof project funds to the communities, thesense of responsibility and ownership ofthe communities was reinforced. Thecommunities actively mobilised the inter-nal resources, including contributions oflabour, money, technology and other socialassets. There were more self-constructedprojects, which led to lower costs and moreefficient use of funding. For example, inGuangxi the construction of a water pondwould normally cost 150,000 RMB. Withlabour contributions by the villagers, itwould cost only 40,000 RMB, less than30% of the original budget. The technicaldepartment commented positively on thequality of construction.

Both internal and external supervision hasensured safe use of fundsThe complaints system highlighted arange of challenges: Some communityfunds were controlled by a few peopleinside the Implementation Groups, funduse was not transparent, the quality ofproject implementation was rather poor,the process for the selection of contractorswas not transparent, and people weresuspicions about the construction works.The PMOs at the national, provincial andcounty levels undertook detailed investi-gations into the reported problems andresolved them promptly, so that thecommunity’s interests were safeguarded,and confidence restored.

2 The survey was carried out by the Foreign Capital Project Management Centre of thePoverty Alleviation Office of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region by questionnaireson 23-24 September 2008. The two villages are located in two adjacent towns. Theirbasic village conditions are similar, for example, the geological conditions, the national,production and living conditions, the level of poverty, the living habits, etc. The twocommunities had both implemented road projects. 49 questionnaires were sent and47 were returned in Nianli village, and 50 questionnaires were issued and 49 werereturned in Dragon Village The sample household is about 15% of the whole villagehouseholds. The questionnaires are done by the rich, medium and poor householdsrandomly.

62140

The process approach has strengthenedcapacities for self-development The communities have undertaken a widerrange of management tasks as part of theproject cycle. They established a communitymonitoring group and publicity andcomplaint mechanisms, and practicedsupervision. The communities alsoimproved their self-development capacitiesthrough financial management training,tendering, engineering design, supervi-sion/management and other managerialskills, and planting and breeding technolo-gies. The Implementation Group of naturalvillage, Baishui County, Shaanxi Provincereported that ‘we can create our own projectproposals now, and we have gained a lot offinancial, tendering, purchasing and engi-neering knowledge. In future, we canconduct projects by ourselves without eventhe assistance of the community facilitators.’

The process has strengthened grassrootsdemocracyThe use of practices such as democraticelection, decision-making, democratic andautonomous management and supervisionhas strengthened governance and capaci-ties of grassroots organisations. Moreover,more honest and capable people keen toadvance public welfare were encouraged toparticipate in the public affairs of commu-nities, and the project management organ-isation eventually became part of thevillagers’ committee and party committee.Thus, more extensive democratic engage-ment was achieved and the wider commu-nity became involved.

CDD has reduced conflicts and promotedharmonious development Principles of openness, equity and trans-parency were followed and the publicitysystem and complaint mechanism wereapplied during the process. It was alsoensured that there were rules to follow forthe community decision-making, projectmanagement and supervision. Thus theproject prevented individuals promoting

their private interests under the guise ofserving the public. Through this, theproject has built mutual trust, especiallytrust in the project organisations, thegovernment and those implementing theproject. The government did not makedecisions for the masses, but insteadprovided the communities with supportand services. The party secretary of NianliVillage, Jingxi said, ‘Through this project, Ihave become more authoritative in thevillage. The project was open and trans-parent, the masses trusted in us, and nolonger scolded us anymore. With theimplementation and managementcommittee and implementation group inplace, my job become a lot easier, as it wasthey who organised the masses to holdmeetings and implement the project.Moreover, everybody came up with the ideathrough discussion.’ Many villagers saidthat future projects should also adopt theCDD ideas and methods.

Lessons learntAfter three years of practice and explo-ration, we believe that the application ofcommunity-driven development ideas andmethods in poverty alleviation can effec-tively solve the problems of targeting,participation and insufficient capacity inChina. These experiences are worth repli-cating and rolling out. The main experi-ences of the pilot projects were that:

Good communication and dissemina-tion are crucial. The CDD project usedvarious means to disseminate project ideas,methods and contents to the communities,such as calling for villagers’ meetings,publicity boards, radio broadcasting, door-to-door interviews, group discussions,mobilising CPC members and key teams.By extensively disseminating information,the community was informed of theessence and core of the project, and thecommunity was motivated to participate.

Substantial efforts must be spent ontraining: The national PMO trained thecounty PMOs and NGOs, NGOs trained

141l Exploring community-driven development (CDD) in Chinese poverty reduction

county PMOs, and community facilitatorstrained the community-based grassrootsorganisations, while the community facili-tators trained the communities. Multi-perspective and multi-content training wasconducted, including ideas for andmethods of community-driven develop-ments, project flow charts and require-ments, participatory working methods,technologies, management, finance andprocurement. Training was done in manydifferent ways; such as special-topic train-ing classes, meetings as training, fieldinvestigation, field training, and partnereducation.

Mindsets have to change on all sides:The government had to consider themasses and establish a service-orientedawareness. It also needed to clarify theduties of all stakeholders, strengthen theirrelationships, and ensure standards. Thefarmers also had to change their mindsets.By transferring the right of financialcontrol and management and introducinga competitive mechanism, the ‘waiting,depending and begging’ mindset of thefarmers became ‘I make my own decisionsfor my own businesses.’ 3

A system has to be in place to safe-guard the principles: Clear rules about thecore content and project procedures haveensured the smooth implementation andextension of the CDD project. Thisincluded clarification of the duties of all

parties as an institutional guarantee tohand over the right of decision-making tothe communities. It was also necessary toformulate definite fund managementmethods, and to ensure rights of financialcontrol for the communities. Finally, it wasnecessary to ensure the implementation ofsuch systems as competition, publicity andcomplaint, and to ensure equity, opennessand transparency.

Concluding remarksCommunity-driven development hasstarted to show effects in poverty allevia-tion, development and even in theconstruction of new socialist rural areas inChina. It has been widely popular amongstfarmers, scholars and government at differ-ent levels. In just three years, the CDDproject has gone from pilots in 60 villagesin four counties of four provinces, andexpanded to almost 1,000 villages in morethan 140 counties of nine provinces. It hasbeen extended from the field of povertyalleviation to other agriculture-related andsocio-economic fields, and it has beenexpanded from the use of aid funds to theuse of government funds. However, as towhether it could be extensively rolled outand applied in poverty alleviation, devel-opment and the construction of the newsocialist rural areas, even to upgrade it topolicy level, would require more study andextensive practices.

3 As CDD project funds are directly transferred into administrative village accounts, theprocess of project application, evaluation and selection at the level of the naturalvillage is in competition with the whole administrative village.

CONTACT DETAILSLi HuiForeign Capital Project Management Centre (FCPMC)Email: sarahui@sina.com

142

BackgroundIn 2005, the Guangxi Poor Rural Commu-nity Development Project (PRCDP) usedparticipatory ideas and working methodsthroughout the course of designing, plan-ning, implementing and managingPRCDP. One of the main objectives of thisproject is developing participatory skills ofproject organisations and the localvillagers. By organising and establishing aparticipatory learning system, participa-tory ideas and methods were continuously

applied to project construction, and playeda significant role in project implementationand management. The following are somedescriptions of how this participatorylearning system was established and howit functioned during and after the projectperiod.

Building capacities and establishing ateam of facilitators: Since project prepa-ration, the project implementation andmanagement organisations at all levels ofprovince, county and township in Guangxi

by HUANG CANBIN, ZHOU QING

A participatorylearning system inGuangxi28

HUANG CANBIN is the deputy director of the Foreign Capital Project ManagementCentre (FCPMC) of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region and project manager of thePRCDP in Guangxi. ZHOU QING is a project officer in the same centre and she worked onPRCDP from the preparation stage and has organised a series of trainings andworkshops. The FCPMC prepared several manuals on participation, including: (i)Handbook for participatory village planning, (ii) Handbook for participatory projectimplementation and monitoring and (iii) Handbook for participatory check foracceptance and evaluation These books have been widely referred to and used as themain guidelines for participatory project management in Guangxi. In this article,Huang Canbin and Zhou Qing summarise how FCPMC has institutionalised learning,using a decentralised and practice-oriented approach. Through this approach, theFCPMC has successfully scaled up participation throughout a large project area and isnow starting to influence the national poverty reduction projects.

143l A participatory learning system in Guangxi

PRCDP were extremely concerned aboutteam building, and adopted multiple meas-ures to consolidate and stabilise the teamof facilitators within the leadership. As aresult, despite the administrative changes,all counties and township organisationswere able to keep their group of key facili-tators of participation within their projectmanagement positions.

Training of the facilitators’ team andimproving their participatory and profes-sional skills: This included formal trainingon participatory skills, facilitation skills,planning skills, participation in the courseof project implementation and manage-ment, monitoring and evaluation. Equallyimportant was talking about the participa-tory approach at all types of meetings andtraining sessions. Nowadays, talking aboutproject participation has become part ofthe working routine in the developmentsector.

Learning, sharing, and promotingparticipation throughout the projectarea: The participatory village planningexperiences and case studies weresummarised, shared, and documented asmethodologies for dissemination, like theParticipatory Village Planning OperationManual for Project Areas in Guangxi toguide participatory village planning in theproject areas. Similarly, experiences withparticipatory project implementation andcase studies were summarised, shared andformulated in the paper, ParticipatoryProject Implementation and ManagementOperation Manual for Guangxi PRCDP(Proposed), which was officially issued toall relevant project organisations to stan-dardise participation in project implemen-tation.

Establishing a platform for participa-tory information exchange andconstantly promoting the construction ofa participatory learning system: Meas-ures such as compiling participatoryproject implementation cases, publishingproject work bulletins, exchanging infor-mation on the poverty alleviation informa-

tion website, organising working meetings,exchange meetings, special workshops,inter-province and inter-county learningtours, and holding training classes, hadbeen applied to constantly promote theconstruction of a participatory learningsystem.

Reinforcing co-operation with theinternational organisation, and drawparticipatory working experiences fromforeign countries: Before this projectGuangxi had no previous experiences withparticipatory approaches. The cooperationwith international organisations like ITADand Hong Kong-based NGOs such asOxfam, Partnerships for CommunityDevelopment (PCD) and World Vision wastherefore important. They organisedvarious training sessions and supportedpilot projects on community-based devel-opment through which the facilitatorsgained a lot of practical experience. Sincemost trainers and experts from these inter-national institutions possessed previousexperience in rural China, they were ableto provide the local participants the infor-mation and skills they mostly needed.According to the feedback, most partici-pants agreed that the ideas and methodsthey had learned from the trainingsprovided by international organisations,such as risk matrix and priority setting,semi-structure interview, question tree,etc., could be adapted to the local contextvery well.

The project promoted empowermentand capacity-building, mobilised theinitiatives of the people in the communi-ties, and strengthened the sense ofproject ownership and responsibility ofthe farmers in the communities: Thefarmers were provided with communica-tion platforms and channels through whichthey could express their opinions andsuggestions, such as routine village meet-ings, group discussion, informal gather-ings, etc. and directly participate indecision-making on project components.Villagers claimed that they were willing to

involve into these activities because theycould receive and confirm some usefulinformation through communication, suchas the contents of the project, who and howto benefit from the project, and how tomake sure the project was effective.

During project preparation, the farmersin the local community actively contactedthe PMO, and applied to start projects asearly as possible. They also actively coordi-nated land use and organised workers.During the implementation stage, theyactively provided labour and raised fundsfor the work to be undertaken by thecommunities. Simultaneously, they activelyconsulted each other on issues arisingthroughout the course of implementation.For example, the community of XiaojiangVillage, Longsheng County held more thanten internal meetings on a single roadissue. After completion of the project, theyall agreed that the community should havea management and maintenance system inplace to guarantee that the project results

could be sustainably utilised. Later, thelocal villagers contributed labour andmoney for maintenance and management.

Participatory working practicesenabled project staff at all levels to acceptthe participatory idea and practices,promoting project development. Thisproject had an influence on the attitudes ofthe project officers from the local govern-ment. By participating in the participatoryplanning process, the county and townshipproject facilitators had a new understand-ing about the significance of the participa-tion of the local communities and poorhouseholds in project implementation.Eventually, their attitudes have changed -from disbelieving the analytical capacity ofthe local communities to acknowledgingand respecting the capacities of thecommunities; from being unwilling tocommunicate with the local communitiesto conscientiously learning from the localvillagers and listening to their wishes; fromdaring not to empower local people to

144 62

Yao community in Guangxi – Yao are among the poorest groups in Guangxi, living at higher altitude and inremote locations.

Phot

o: G

uang

xi F

CMC

allowing them to make autonomous deci-sions. The facilitators’ roles changed aswell. Through the participatory povertyanalysis and participatory planningprocesses, county and township facilitatorsfelt that rather than dominating the wholeprocedure, project facilitators should haveseveral roles: namely as assistant, catalyst,and servant. They should adopt a positivedriving role to participatory project imple-mentation.

Project practices had an impact onimproving domestic poverty alleviationapproaches and formulating a new devel-opment mechanism: The participatoryideas and methods were so widely acceptedby government leaders that they made arequirement that those working on povertyreduction must learn from the project’sexperience. Therefore, in Guangxi, the

practice of farmer participation in procure-ment was adopted widely. Farmers’ partic-ipation in supervision and acceptancechecks of infrastructure projects waspromoted. Communities were encouragedto settle disputes over compensation forland losses through participatory discus-sions.

The Guangxi PRCDP participatorylearning system also applied more capacitybuilding tools such as training, actual oper-ation, sharing experiences, summarisinggood practices and extending implementa-tion. By doing so, the team of facilitatorswas enlarged, and the participatoryapproach was constantly scaled up asproject implementation progressed. Forthese large, comprehensive, community-driven poverty alleviation projects with aloan-based nature, the establishment of a

l A participatory learning system in Guangxi 145

Box 1: How roles and responsibilities were defined in Guangxi

The Guangxi Project Operation, Implementation and Management Manual clarified the basic principles andrequirements for participation, and the county and township PMO staff believed that ‘these requirementswere reasonable, and what they actually did were more than these requirements.’ Moreover, all six projectcounties explored specific operation methods for the farmers to participate in the implementation process.

The way roles were defined depended on the project contents, but the following arrangements wereused: – The county PMOs led the contracting and the contractors implemented the project, while the township

PMOs and farmers’ representatives from the communities participated in calling for tenders, inspectionand acceptance;

– Township PMOs led the contracting and the contractors implemented the project, while the county PMOsand farmers’ representatives from the communities participated in calling for tenders, inspection andacceptance;

– The communities led the contracting and the contractors implemented the project, while the county andtownship PMOs offered assistance and participated in inspection and acceptance;

– The communities were responsible for implementation, while the county and township PMOs offeredassistance and participated in inspection and acceptance. Regardless of the means of implementation, there was the participation of the farmers and farmers’

representatives from the communities. Moreover, all counties had been exploring and summarising thedifferent management arrangements and different ways of participation. In the villages where the projectscale was small and there were many people with technical abilities in the community, they autonomouslyimplemented the project, such as building a clinic.

A system for the community to participate in quality supervision and acceptance was established. Duringthe course of implementation, somebody from the community management group participated insupervising the schedule and quality. For critical technical links, the county sent technicians for supervisionand control. During the course of community supervision, if any problem was found, they could call thecounty and township PMOs directly, who would then send facilitators or technicians to investigate andhandle the issues reported by the villagers.

The PMOs assisted the communities in establishing systems for final check and acceptance, and thesubsequent maintenance. The contracted component had to be assessed and accepted by the communitiesbefore the county and township PMOs could organise official acceptance. This institutionally guaranteed theright of farmers to participate in monitoring.

62146

multi-layered participatory learningsystem was a positive experience. Withseveral years of practice, we have noted thefollowing insights:• It is very important for a project to engagewith governments at all levels. Well-designed and stabilised project manage-ment structures have helped to ensure theapplication and sustainability of the partic-ipatory approach. • The project conducted a lot of advocacyand mobilisation; it allowed farmers toactively participate in needs assessment,planning, implementation, and monitoringand evaluation-related decisions andactions. As a result, it made true changes tothe local communities with regards to theirincreased knowledge, abilities and theirself-development. • The project established a platform for all

kinds of information exchanges, reinforc-ing training efforts, constantly promotinga participatory learning approach andimproving the capacity of project manage-ment organisations and local communities,which are the keys to guaranteeing thesustainable use of participatory approachesin the project. • The formation of official documents andguidelines such as the Participatory VillagePlanning Operation Manual for ProjectAreas in Guangxi, the Guangxi ProjectOperation, Implementation and Manage-ment Manual, and the Participatory ProjectImplementation and Management Opera-tion Manual for Guangxi PRCDP, providedan institutional guarantee for scaling up theparticipatory approach and replicatingtogether large, comprehensive, community-driven poverty alleviation projects.

CONTACT DETAILSHuang CanbinDeputy DirectorForeign Capital Project Management CentreGuangxi Zhuang Autonomous RegionGuangxi ProvincePR ChinaEmail: hcanbin@yahoo.com.cn

Zhou QingProject OfficerForeign Capital Project Management CentreGuangxi Zhuang Autonomous RegionGuangxi ProvincePR China

147

BackgroundI have been working as a trainer on partic-ipatory methods in China for a long time. Ialso have worked with the government onpoverty reduction over many years. Iworked on both the PRCDP and CWMPwhich are presented in this issue. Bothprojects are presented in this issue. But itwas only recently that I was invited to carryout training on participatory methods forgovernment staff, funded by the PovertyAlleviation and Development Office(PADO). This was a new experience, whichrequired adaptation of common participa-tory methods to the government context.

Adaptation of training methodsThe PADO has been exposed to participa-tory training methods for more thantwenty years, and I have being involved in

this process. However, the use of participa-tory training methods was usually confinedto projects funded by international donors,which provided more enabling conditions(see Table 1) than the national governmentfunded projects. Under those conditions,common participatory training toolsinclude: group exercises, role play, warm up(energisers), games and organised debates.All these tools require time and space.

However, the conditions for trainingwithin the government system are verydifferent. They are mostly determined byambitious government training targets,which aim to stretch limited funding tocover a large number of participants withina very limited time. Also, there are limitedcapacities for organising and facilitatingadult learning processes and trainingworkshops. This means that there is

by DENG WEIJIE

Adapting participatorymethods to thegovernment system: theWenchuan EarthquakeRehabilitation Project

29

DENG WEIJIE is associate professor at Sichuan Agricultural University. He has beenworking on participatory development in China for more than ten years. He hasworked as trainer and facilitator on both national and international projects. In hiscase study he highlights the differences of approaches to capacity building in nationaland international projects, which require adaptation of participatory methods.

62148

limited space and opportunity to applytools such as group exercises, role plays andgames. However, there are still someparticipatory learning tools that can beused within such a constrained setting.

The Wenchuan EarthquateRehabilitation ProjectThis case study describes how participatorymethods were used in the context of train-ing government staff working on the recon-struction after the Wenchuan earthquake.

In 2008, a devastating earthquake hitWenchuan county and the neighbouringareas; more than 20,000 people died andmore than 10 million people were directlyaffected. The international communityprovided timely aid and support not onlyfor the immediate rescue operations, butalso for the rehabilitation. In additiongovernment and civil society mobilisedsubstantial resources. In an attempt tointegrate rehabilitation efforts the nationalPADO initiated Participatory Reconstruc-tion Planning, Implementation and Moni-toring in 19 impoverished pilot villagesaffected by the earthquake in Sichuan,Gansu and Shaanxi Provinces in late 2008.In order to share the experience andlessons learnt from that and to improve the

effectiveness of reconstruction in another40 poor villages for the second phase, thenational PADO organised a meeting on theSecond Demonstration of Poor Villages onthe Post Wenchuan Earthquake Recon-struction Planning & Management inSichuan Province on 4 March 2009.

I was invited to facilitate a session onparticipatory monitoring and evaluation(PM&E). The conditions for this trainingwere as follows:• More than two hundred participantsfrom national, provincial, municipal andcounty PADO attended;• Some participants had experience onparticipatory approaches; most of themhad no previous experiences with partici-pation;• Only two hours was allocated for a ‘Partic-ipatory Monitoring and Evaluation’ sessionin a big meeting room, where all facilitiesare immovable;• Only a flipchart was provided as trainingmaterial; a blackboard and printing paperwere also available for this meeting.

The national PADO requested clearlythat participatory methods should be usedin this two hour event, in order to promoteparticipation and effective sharing. ThePADO particularly emphasised the impor-

Table 1: A comparison of training in international and government projects

Training within the government system

Too many participants for each workshop, sometimesmore than hundred;

Participants with a broad range of backgrounds;

Staff from different levels (county, municipality,province and national) all lumped together into onetraining event;

Limited time allocated for working meetings such astraining workshops;

Standard meeting venues are big meeting roomswhere tables and chairs are fixed and cannot bemoved.

Training in international projects

Small number of participants for each workshop,usually less than 40;

All participants with a similar background, such asvillagers, township government and countygovernment staff;

Junior officials as main target groups, only a fewsenior officials;

Generous time for training, around 3-5 days;

Generous (physical) space for training and groupexercise; movable furniture, including the tablesand chairs.

149lAdapting participatory methods to the government system: the Wenchuan Earthquake Rehabilitation Project

tance of achieving a consensus on partici-pation in planning, monitoring and evalu-ation for the post Wenchuan earthquakereconstruction in China. It was obviousthat the national PADO understood thebenefits of participation and wanted othersto learn and apply a participatory approachin the second phase of village reconstruc-tion. The purpose of the workshop wastherefore to raise awareness and accept-ance of participation; it understood thatthis would not be sufficient for an effectivetraining on participatory methods. Despitethe large number of participants, they didnot want this to be a formal lecture. Typi-cally in these kinds of events the trainerwould speak for most of the time andparticipants would be in a passive listeningmode only. We wanted to facilitate an inter-active process, which would enable partic-ipants to actively contribute.

Based on those requirements, Idesigned the two hour training on PM&Efor post-earthquake reconstruction andconducted it through the following steps,using participatory methods:

1) The participants were seated in rows, theusual seating order for official meetings(shown in photo above);2) As an icebreaker I started with a mathsexercise; each participant had to select athree-digit number which through somecalculation steps was turned into the sameresult for all. Everyone did the calculationby itself, without talking to each other.Once completed, all participantsannounced their result at the same time.People were thrilled and they wanted tounderstand, why everyone had the sameresult. The atmosphere had warmed upimmediately;3) This was followed by brainstormingwithin the plenary. Participants discussedwhy all had the same answer despite start-ing from different data? Then we made thelink to understanding poverty data and theroot causes of poverty. Participants under-stood that the appearance of poverty mightbe the same, but the root causes leading topoverty are very different. Therefore, onlythe poor will know what the exact rootcauses are, which is similar to the individ-

Large groups of participants and formal seating arrangements provide challenges for a participatory trainingevent.

Phot

o: D

eng

Wei

jie

ual participant who knows which numberhe/she selected initially. The participantstherefore agreed that the poor know moreabout their lives than outsiders (officials).This means that target groups must beinvolved in the planning, monitoring andevaluation process;4) Then the topic moved on to PM&E forreconstruction, and we had a plenarydiscussion on ‘Are communities able tomonitor and evaluate the reconstruction’(Yes or No, but Why)? Most of participantssaid No since the villagers are not knowl-edgeable on PM&E, and that techniciansor specialists should take on this role ratherthan local villagers, while other partici-pants said that villagers do know what theywant and what they already benefittedfrom even if they are not formally educated.5) Towards the end of the plenary discus-sion the participants were divided into twogroups; the ones who said No in the righthand group and conducted a facilitateddebate with the ones who said Yes in theleft hand group; then the ones who said Noin the left hand group argued with the oneswho said Yes in the right hand group. Thiswas a challenging process which brought

up all the arguments about PM&E for post-earthquake reconstruction. In the endconsensus was achieved that villagers areable to monitor and evaluate the recon-struction in their own ways. I pointed outthat the participatory approach had beenactually applied in the First Demonstrationvillages in 2008, and some of practitionershad participated in this meeting so we wereable to share and learn from each other;6) Then the participants from Sichuan,Gansu and Sha’anxi Provinces were dividedinto provincial groups to discuss the expe-riences from the first phase of pilot recon-struction villages. The participantsrecognised that the amount of money spentdoes not make a pilot, but planning, imple-mentation, monitoring and evaluationprovided valuable experiences. Participantsagreed that there should be more participa-tion in M&E. The participants from theFirst Pilot Villages then presented theirexperience and lessons learnt in 2008, andthey explained that it is easy to conductPM&E with a skilled facilitator, but localPADO staff still need to learn how to facili-tate this process;7) Finally, I presented a photo slide show

150 62

Group presentations during the training workshop.

Phot

o: D

eng

Wei

jie

about the PM&E (baseline survey) processin August-September 2008 whichprovided some practical illustration of thePM&E steps. This has further reducedbarriers and helped to convince partici-pants that PM&E is practical and doable. The feedback from participants andnational PADO was that participatorytraining is much better than formallectures, which were used previously. Someparticipants said that previously there wasno interaction with participants during thetraining events. The experience of partici-pation in training made people understandthat it is much easier to embrace newconcepts such as PM&E if this is donethrough active learning rather than justlistening. Practical examples and reflectivediscussions helped to create a basic under-standing and overcome mental barriers onparticipation. This could hardly have beenachieved through a conventional lectureapproach.

The international experience showsthat participatory approaches could func-tion more effectively by using only a limitednumber of trainees and having abouttwenty participants in each training work-shop. But it is almost impossible for theChinese government at different levels toorganise such a small conference or train-ing workshops, since ‘Meeting as Training’has been the norm for governmentalauthorities for many important events,such as the ‘Reconstruction Meeting’ wherethere are more than a hundred partici-pants. I am convinced that participatory

approaches should be tried even underchallenging conditions and tools can beeffective if they are adapted to the condi-tions. I found the following tools useful inthe context of large training events:• Icebreakers: for encouraging all partici-pants’ participation at the beginning;• Brainstorming: for enabling all partici-pants to share their experiences and ideason specific issues;• Cards: for all participants to share theirpersonal perspectives;• Paired discussion: for sharing among theparticipants;• Mosaic group discussion: for the partic-ipants who sit together but usually comefrom the same organisation or region toshare their different perspectives;• Argument: for clarifying some key issueseasily as well as promoting the atmosphereof participation;• Case study: presentation of experienceand lessons learnt;• Voice of photo: for providing participantswith the opportunity to understand thestory and evidencing the case which waspresented by the facilitator.

A major lesson from this event is thatthe facilitator must be confident and takeup the challenge to apply participatorymethods even under less than favourableconditions. It is important that the trainerknows the background of participants, thetraining facilities and especially the spaceprovided for the training, so that he/shecan devise an effective training strategy anddesign.

lAdapting participatory methods to the government system: the Wenchuan Earthquake Rehabilitation Project 151

CONTACT DETAILSDeng WeijieAssociate ProfessorNo.288, Jianshe Rd. DujiangyanInstitute of Tourism Study (ITS)Sichuan Agricultural UniversitySichuanPR ChinaEmail: dweijie2007@yahoo.com.cn

62152

LILA BUCKLEY is senior researcher on China at the International Institute forEnvironment and Development. Previously, she was assistant executive director of theGlobal Environmental Institute in Beijing. She has studied in the EnvironmentalChange Institute at the University of Oxford, IUP Tsinghua University, Beijing andMiddlebury College, USA. This paper draws upon an article that first appeared in theChina Environment Series, Issue 8, in 2006, published by the Woodrow WilsonInternational Center for Scholars under the title ‘Public Participation in EnvironmentalImpact Assessments in China’.

In resource scarce China, people’s ability tomove – and stay – out of poverty relies heavilyon their ability to participate in the sustain-able management of their resources. This isespecially true in rural areas where themajority of residents rely on agriculture andother land-based practices for their liveli-hoods. Tackling resource scarcity and degra-dation in China has therefore long been bothan ecological issue and an arena for publicparticipation – often at the interface betweenwealthy and impoverished. Within thiscontext, the development of environmentallegal frameworks such as China’s Environ-mental Impact Assessment (EIA) law hasprovided opportunities to strengthen policiesfor public participation as well.

Like other cases of participatory povertyalleviation approaches explored in thisissue, developing China’s EIA law involvedpragmatic use of international experienceand financial support (from the WorldBank), as well as unique piloting andexperimentation with participatoryprocesses, even involving a local non-governmental organisation (NGO) in thedrafting of the law itself. This processresulted in a series of public participationrequirements within China’s EIA legalframework that remain an ongoing arenafor experimentation around the role ofparticipation in poverty alleviation. Partic-ipatory in its creation, this EIA lawprovides an example of how participatory

by LILA BUCKLEY

EIAs go public:creating new spacesfor participation30

153

approaches are gaining traction beyondsmall-scale pilot projects to be integratedinto the structure of China’s developmentinstitutions.

In this article I share insights into theparticipatory policymaking process fromthe founding director of the Chinese NGOinvolved in the drafting of the EIA frame-work. This organisation was the GlobalEnvironmental Institute (GEI), where Iworked as Assistant Executive Directorfrom 2005-2008. Though there are stillgovernance questions surrounding publicparticipation practice in China, the lawhelps to address some of the accountabil-ity issues facing participatory processes inother levels of development and povertyalleviation work in China.

Grounding China’s EIA rhetoric in publicparticipationThough the concept of conducting assess-ments of the environmental and socialimpacts of development projects hasexisted in Chinese policy circles for morethan three decades, avenues for publicparticipation in this process have laggedbehind. Where they have been introduced,Chinese and international NGOs haveplayed an important role.

One of these NGOs was GEI, a Beijing-based Chinese environmental NGOfounded in 2004. GEI’s founding director,Mrs. Jin Jiaman, recalls that when the EIAconcept first entered policy in 1979 as partof China’s national Environmental Protec-tion Law (EPL), proponents saw it as animportant tool for achieving sustainablepoverty alleviation and diffusing conflictsbetween local people and developers overresources. However, explains Jin, early EIAlaw proved to be pure rhetoric, providingno concrete stipulations or methodologiesfor its implementation. A channel forapplying this law was theoretically openeda decade later with the first mention ofindividual environmental rights in therevised version of China’s EPL, in whichArticle Six clearly stated, ‘All companies

and individuals have a duty for environ-mental protection, and have the right andauthority to report and bring suit to thosecompanies and individuals committingenvironmental damage and pollution.’Unfortunately, this too lacked clauses forimplementation and, according to Jin, wasthus largely ignored. Nearly anotherdecade later, then, when the concept ofEIA’s was reintroduced by the State Councilin a 1996 Article Two of the ‘Rules andRegulations for Management of Environ-mental Protection in Construction Proj-ects’, there were still no provisions forpublic input.

Despite this slow start, the policy rhet-oric finally began to achieve some ground-ing under a 1994 law that permitted theregistration of NGOs. The first groups to beformed focused on environmental issues,and according to Jin, these groups begandrawing links between Chinese policiesand communities affected by China’sincreasingly severe pollution and degrada-tion. In this way, the creation of officiallyregistered NGOs gave public participationin the environmental sphere its first legiti-mate access point. ‘Growing activism ofNGOs and increased pollution protestsaround China during the 1990’s’ recalls Jin,‘further contributed to the push towardsmore specific provisions for public partici-pation in EIA legislation.’

These included a 2002 amendment tothe EPL which stipulated that, ‘the countrywill support companies, experts and thepublic in using appropriate methods toparticipate in environmental impactassessments.’ It also addressed the conceptsof stakeholder forums, public hearings andother methods of public participation forthe first time. Then in 2003, China passeda new stand-alone EIA Law that was asignificant departure from the earlierdrafts. The new law broadened the scope ofEIAs to include all development andconstruction projects, and legally securedthe public’s right to conduct analysis,prediction, and evaluation of environmen-

62154

tal impacts from all development projectsand plans. With EIAs now required for allprojects and procedures, and protectionsfor the right to public participation in theassessment process, the conceptual frame-work was set for a meaningful implemen-tation of EIAs with public input.

International engagement andparticipatory policy-makingWith this initial framework in place, GEIfound itself in the middle of a much widerpolicy-making process which engaged awide range of actors, from Chinese govern-ment officials and construction companies,to other NGOs and the World Bank. In2006, the World Bank reached an agree-ment with China’s EIA Centre of the StateEnvironmental Protection Administration(SEPA, now the Ministry of EnvironmentalProtection) to carry out a programme on‘Public Participation in China’ and invitedGEI to take part.

In a series of meetings to draft the law,participants discussed the value andapproach of public involvement in the EIAprocess. Jin remembers negative reactionto her suggestion that true public partici-pation must include multiple stakeholders.‘It felt very lonely,’ recalls Jin, findingherself the sole NGO in an environmentwhere her organisation and ideas wereviewed as a threat to development andprogress. ‘I began to wonder how we couldreally help the government achieve its goalswhen the very concepts of NGOs andpublic involvement in environmental regu-lations were so foreign.’ She explains thatmany in the group felt that her emphasison public participation in the developmentprocess was unrealistic, leaving her feelingfrustrated in the initial meetings. ‘While Ifelt the central government had very goodintentions in writing these regulations,’ sheremembers, ‘I knew that actually creating

and enforcing strong public participationregulations would be a very long process.’

This initial team dynamic was a micro-cosm of the challenges such regulationsface in China, in an atmosphere whereNGOs and the general public can feel theyhave little voice. Despite the team’s steeplearning curve, it did succeed in producingdraft regulations, which themselves weresubject to wider public feedback andfurther editing before being issued bySEPA in March 2006.

The resulting ‘Interim Public Participa-tion Law for Environmental ImpactAssessments’ formulated the goals andscope of public participation in EIAs andclarified the rights and obligations of thedevelopers, environmental groups, and thepublic.1 These were then followed a yearlater by a clause on ‘Environmental Infor-mation Disclosure Measures’ providing thenormative framework for informationdisclosure on environmental impacts ofdevelopment projects.2

Remaining challenges in China’s EIA Despite the significant progress made toinclude public participation in the EIAprocess, many challenges still remain.While today’s law provides clear andconcrete steps and requirements for publicparticipation, many grey areas in theimplementation process need clarification.For example, the law fails to formally dele-gate authority or clarify the jurisdiction ofthe public in the process of participation.Nor does it define the scope and jurisdic-tion for true veto or policymaking power onthe part of participants. Furthermore, thereare no provisions for supporting humanresource and other expert assistancerequired for public participation in hear-ings and monitoring of the EIA process.

At the institutional level, the organisa-tional structure for EIA enforcement

1 For more information on the Interim Public Participation Law for Environmental ImpactAssessments see Moorman J.L. and Z. Ge, 2006.2 For an unofficial translation of the disclosure measures, seewww.law.yale.edu/documents/pdf/Intellectual_Life/Ch_OGI_Regualtions_Eng_Final_051607.pdf

155l EIAs go public: creating new spaces for participation

continues to be weak, understaffed, andinadequately centralised. MEP’s EIACentre, which is composed of highly expe-rienced environmental scientists, is respon-sible for writing EIA-related regulations,licensing independent EIA agencies, andoverseeing the work of regional EIA offices.These regional offices depend on fundingfrom local governments, which generallyprioritise economic development over envi-ronmental protection. Independent EIAagencies are dependent on developmentcontractors for their survival, which opensthe door to corruption during the assess-ment process, as these agencies are free todemand higher prices to downplay envi-ronmental problems.

Road ahead for institutionalisingparticipatory poverty alleviationThus, while these documents represent animportant step forward for China’s sustain-able and equitable development, the hardwork of institutionalising participatoryprocesses and building participatory capac-

ity – especially among impoverishedgroups – is still ongoing.

Over the past several years multipleactors have continued working to put pres-sure on destructive companies and fosterparticipation capacity among localcommunities. For example, capacity build-ing workshops targeting journalists andgrassroots NGOs have involved mockpublic hearings for EIAs to build capacityand explore avenues for engaging residentsin environmentally damaged regions toparticipate in development decisions. Inaddition, NGOs have worked to directlytackle industry through information disclo-sure and litigation. One coalition of NGOsknown as the Green Choice Alliancefocuses on global supply chains to pressurelarge corporations towards environmentalperformance-based sourcing.

News media has also proven itself auseful mechanism for empowering citizensand NGOs on EIA issues. For example,news journalists drew attention to ecolog-ically destructive development in the Old

Conflicts around resource use are becoming a critical feature of development and it is important thatcommunities are able to engage with government decisions.

Phot

o: S

imon

Lim

62156

Summer Palace (Yuanmingyuan) and awetland reserve outside Beijing, soon afterthe laws were passed. In both cases,informed citizens, NGOs, and scientistsrallied to stop the development projects.

This brief essay has provided a glimpseinto one NGO’s experience engaging inChina’s legal infrastructure. GEI’s inclusionin the drafting of the EIA law is a positiveattempt to create space for multi-stake-holder involvement in the country’s policy-making. NGO involvement in the draftingof future laws, however, should not be seen

as an end goal in and of itself. Indeed, NGOsthemselves cannot be assumed to representthe voice of the public. Rather, GEI’s experi-ence highlights the potential – and the need– for a much more participatory policymak-ing process. China’s EIA law and regulatoryframework needs to be strengthened. Butimproved regulation alone is not going toachieve equitable development. The chal-lenge now is to create wider space for publicpolicy-making and provide all people – notjust one NGO – the opportunity forinformed participation.

CONTACT DETAILSLila BuckleySenior Researcher on ChinaAgroecology and Food Sovereignty TeamNatural Resources GroupInternational Institute for Environment and Development (IIED)80-86 Gray’s Inn RoadLondon WC1X 8NH, UKEmail: lila.buckley@iied.org

REFERENCESMoorman J.L and Z. Ge (2006) `Promoting and Strengthening Public

Participation in China's Environmental Impact Assessment Process:Comparing China's EIA Law and U.S. NEPA’, Vermont Journal ofEnvironmental Law, Vol 8.