Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Session 2:
Cri,cal Issues in Par,cipatory Prac,ce
Yasar A. Adanali
Structure of the day 1. Video: On the right track (20 min.) -‐Answer the quesCons on the next slide, referring to the video and any personal experience that you have or case studies you know.
-‐Plenary discussion
2. PresentaCon by YA (30 min.)
-‐Thinking of parCcipaCon and power -‐Methods & Tools
3. Group PresentaCon – Stakeholder Analysis 4. Actor Group FormaCon
Video: On the Right Track 1) Why parCcipaCon is promoted? 2) Who parCcipates? 3) Who iniCates the project?
Types of community parCcipaCon can be categorized in terms of:
1) Why parCcipaCon is promoted (as a means or an end) 2) Who parCcipates (narrow or broad secCon of the community)
3) Who iniCates the project 4) When parCcipaCon occurs (from idenCficaCon to evaluaCon)
5) How acCve the parCcipaCon is (passive or acCve) 6) What the role of the State is 7) What is the mix of incenCves, disincenCves and constraints that parCcipaCon faces
AFD (2009)
1) Goals: par,cipa,on as a means or as an end?
(Pinto da silva 2002)
2) Inclusiveness: who par,cipates?
Inclusiveness: what specific groups or individuals are significantly involved.
Need for an analysis of the community and its sub-‐groups. How they are socially differenCated (status, poliCcal, affiliaCons, assets, interests, etc.)
6 ConfiguraCons of Community Inclusiveness
“All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others” (George Orwell)
• Other stakeholders?
Golden Triangle
State
Civil Society Business
3) Origins: who ini,ates, designs and supports?
The agents of change: -‐ IniCators: originaCng agents; not saCsfied with the status quo -‐ Supporters: join the iniCators; support through networks and resources -‐ Designers: Analysis of the originaCng agents should allow parCcipatory program to be classified
as: 1.ParCcipaCon originaCng from within (i, s, d mostly from the local community; power
imbalance within the community) 2.ParCcipaCon originaCng from above (i, s, d mostly from the central government) 3.ParCcipaCon originaCng from outside (a predominance of external agents) 4.ParCcipaCon originaCng from balanced sources (mix of internal, external, above
agents)
4)Channels: Par,cipa,on in what, and when?
Channels: entry-‐points for parCcipaCon. At what level does parCcipaCon occur and when?
• Strategic planning and decision-‐making • Planning of programmes / projects / research • Management and implementaCon of programmes / projects / research
• Monitoring and evaluaCon of programmes / projects / research
Micro – Meso -‐ Macro
• ParCcipaCon in: – Micro level (project cycle) ParCcipaCon outside the project cycle: – Meso level (decentralizaCon, good governance, PB)
– Macro level (democraCzaCon, policy-‐making, PPAs)
5)Intensity: How ac,ve is par,cipa,on?
• DeliberaCve parCcipaCon • Bargaining parCcipaCon • ConsultaCve parCcipaCon • Passive parCcipaCon • Nominal parCcipaCon
Ladder of ParCcipaCon
8. Community centres 7. Participatory budgeting 6. Sariyer case 5. Board membership 4. Video Cube 3. Decision on Urban Renewal Sites 2. Signing contract 1.Naming a bridge, Forming Counter- CBOs
6) What role for the state?
Possible involvement of the state in parCcipatory projects:
1.Delegated co-‐management 2.Advisory co-‐management 3.CooperaCve co-‐management 4.ConsultaCve co-‐management 5.InstrucCve co-‐management Range of Co-‐management models:
Range of Co-‐management models:
7) Constraints and incen,ves: Why bother to par,cipate?
Possible range of constraints: 1. Individual costs and their distribuCon
2. IncenCves and compensaCons 3. Agtude of external actors 4. Social structures and capital
A power analysis The meanings of power are diverse and ohen
contenCous: • Powerholders vs. have-‐nots • Web of relaConships and discourses • Zero-‐sum concept > power struggles • Fluid and accumulaCve • NegaCve trait • PosiCve (capacity and agency) • Power over • Power to (capacity to act) • Power within (self-‐idenCty, confidence and
awareness) • Power with (synergy with partnership and
collaboraCon with others)
Power Cube A power cube to assess the possibiliCes of transformaCve acCon:
The Spaces for Par,cipa,on
The concept of power and the concept of space are deeply linked. Power relaCons help to shape the boundaries of parCcipatory spaces, what is possible
within them, and who may enter, with which idenCCes, discourses and interests. How they were created, with whose interests, what terms of engagement? Closed Spaces: Decisions are made by a set of actors behind closed doors. Aim is to
open up such spaces through greater public involvement, transparency and accountability.
Invited Spaces: Those into which people (as users, ciCzens or beneficiaries) are invited to parCcipate by various kinds of authoriCes
Claimed / created spaces: organic spaces or as a result of popular mobilisaCon
Levels of par,cipa,on
Forms of Power
Visible Power: Observable decision making Hidden Power: Segng the poliCcal agenda Invisible Power: Shaping meaning and what is acceptable.
The dynamics of power depend very much on the type of space in which it is found, the level at which it operates and the form it takes.
Any sustained and effecCve change strategy must concern
itself with how to build and sustain effecCve change across the full conCnuum:
• Three forms of power • Levels of power in which they occur • How spaces for engagement are created
Challenges to ParCcipaCon • Structural obstacles
– the poliCcal environment: E.g. open socieCes vs. closed ones, centralised vs. decentralised.
– Legal system: inherent bias of legal system and not being aware of ones rights. • AdministraCve obstacles
– Centralized administraCve structures – Centralized planning and procedures of development programmes and
projects. • Social Obstacles
– Mentality of dependence which is deeply and historically ingrained in people’s lives.
– People are not homogeneous economic and social units. Need to disaggregate and acknowledge diversity.
– Women parCcipaCon
Group Work: Climbing up on the ladder
• Reflect on the Ladder of
ParCcipaCon as a conceptual tool.
• Simplify or re-‐arrange the steps if you find necessary.
• Try to come up with one example for each step from your personal experience or case studies you know.
• Try to include examples from different countries.
• Present your findings
Venn Diagram • To study institutional relationships. • This method uses circles of various sizes to represent
institutions or individuals. • The bigger the circle, the more important is the institution or
individual. • The distance between circles represents, for example, the
degree of influence or contact between institutions or • individuals • Overlapping circles indicate interactions, and the extent of
overlap can indicate the level of interaction.
Task Your actor group: QuesCons to be addressed: • How does your stakeholder interact with different groups and organisaCons / insCtuCons?
• What is their importance to the well being of your actor?
• How do the organisaCons work together? • What is the level of access? • What are the constraints to access and parCcipaCon?
Method
• Construct a Venn Diagram. • Use circles to depict the different groups. • The larger the circle, the more important the group.
• The extent to which the different groups interact with each other is shown by the degree of overlap shown in the diagram.
Focus Group Discussions –FGD
is a cost-‐effecCve qualitaCve research technique generally used to discuss a specific topic in detail and probe into people's feelings, opinions and percepCons of the topic. What are the main problems and needs? How do they imagine a be6er future?
To verify and obtain more in-‐depth details about informaCon collected during the parCcipatory planning process with other tools.
Group dynamics generated during FGD produce rich responses and allow new and valuable thoughts to emerge.
It provides an opportunity for you to observe a group's non-‐verbal reacCons and discover their feelings and agtudes towards the issue under discussion.
Materials -‐ Notebooks and pens. ParCcipants -‐ Groups selected from the community, moderators and note takers.
FGD -‐ Procedure
1) Be clear about the purpose of the study. Appoint moderators and note takers for the discussions. -‐ Moderators must be good listeners who can link and follow-‐up issues as they emerge during the discussions.
2) Prepare a topic guide to be used during discussions.
-‐ Make sure the quesCons are notes concerning important issues. -‐ Ensure you have probe quesCons for digging for more detailed informaCon -‐ Avoid leading quesCons and biases
FGD -‐ Procedure 3) Form homogenous groups of six to ten people who share the problems concerned
with the topic to be discussed. Use the following factors to determine the composiCon of each group: -‐ Gender -‐ Age -‐ EducaConal background -‐ Socio-‐economic status -‐ Religion -‐ Life cycle, etc.
4) Select interview loca,ons that provide privacy for the parCcipants. Select a locaCon where the discussion can be carried out without having external observers or potenCal intruders. -‐ Avoid locaCons with a noisy surrounding. -‐ Select non-‐threatening locaCons where parCcipants can air their views without reservaCons or inCmidaCon. -‐ Select locaCons easily accessible to all respondents.
Conduc,ng focus group discussions is not an easy craR, Talbiyeh, Jordan
People had a difficulty to comprehend the logic of focus groups, other than the Women Program Centre whom have used the tool before, and even aher we finished conducCng the discussions, some of them sCll didn’t get the idea of a group of people with certain similariCes coming together to discuss a parCcular issue. When we started some of them in the Working Group (WG) helped us to create focus groups and we faced a specific problem accessing youth. The focus group they created for us where all comprised of adults not youth. And they didn’t get the idea of talking to children about children issues or talking to youth about youth issues. The WG sCll perceive themselves as guardians and the source of informaCon for these parCcular groups. IniCally, some of them did not like our presentaCon of the findings from those focus group discussions, they thought of it as a commiqee responsible for a task. They called it commiqees and we kept telling them no they are focus groups. However, aher many presentaCons and discussions on the focus groups, now the majority of people understand the tool.
Volunteers conduc,ng focus group discussions, Hassan Camp, Jordan
In Hassan now we have volunteers conducCng the focus groups. They wanted to do it and we didn’t want to say no. Although we like the focus groups in a certain way, we thought Ok, why not. We sCll go to the field, do our focus groups and volunteers come with us to see how we manage them. Focus groups are not only about collecCng prioriCes and needs but also about talking the assets of the people. Every focus group starts with talking about what people are proud of in their camp, as refugees in that camp, what makes their camp special. We try to focus on that and then how can we improve this posiCve case. Whenever we discuss the negaCve issues we also try to emphasize something posiCve. We noCce that there is a very negaCve view of everything, and if you are in a camp that is really “bad”, there is no hope, there is nothing good you have this very negaCve agtude.
Focus Group Mee,ng with Women, Nahr El Bared, Lebanon
“The women were asked to come at 10 a.m. on that day. Some of them were noCfied the day before, by personal visits to their houses and prefabs. Most of the women didn’t come on Cme. Some of them we had to bring personally from their prefabs, with some persuasion. In total around 18 women aqended the focus group, some of them with their children that we had at some point to entertain”. Impressions and Thoughts: • The reasons why most of the women seemed to be against the idea of having
courtyards in their blocks might be that they were not able to actually visualize the spaces and they were thinking of larger scales than what we trying to explain to them.
• Another reason might be that there was a peer effect that happened during the workshop; in a sense that the first people who talked and were against the courtyard influenced the opinion of the others.
• A third reason might be that since the elderly were the women that shouted against the courtyard, the younger women didn’t dare to contradict them, out of respect. Especially that we could hear among the crowed, some younger women mumbling that courtyards were an excellent idea.
Group Work You have been assigned by the city government to conduct a focus group
discussion with the community members of the transformaCon area to find out:
What are the main problems and needs of the community? How do they imagine a be6er future in the area? 1) Be clear about the purpose of the study. Appoint moderators and note
takers for the discussions 2) Prepare a topic guide to be used during discussions. 3) Form homogenous groups of six to ten people who share the problems
concerned with the topic to be discussed. 4) Select interview locaCons that provide privacy for the parCcipants.
Stakeholder Analysis?