We continue to develop resources related to the COVID-19 pandemic. See COVID-19 initiatives on Appropedia for more information.

Difference between revisions of "Community participation"

From Appropedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(20 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
#redirect[[:Category:Community participation ]]
+
{{topic header| default.png |Community participation}}
 +
== Community participation in development ==
 +
 
 +
In recent years development work has shifted from a [[top-down]] approach to a [[Glossary_of_sustainability_terms#B|bottom-up]] approach. While sometimes this is rhetoric, there is also a recognition that participation (and preferably initiation) by the community is essential to an effective project.
 +
 
 +
This approach is more costly and time-consuming, but is also more cost-effective as it gives much better and longer-lasting results.
 +
 
 +
==Participatory rural appraisal==
 +
 
 +
'''Participatory rural appraisal''' is a term describing the incorporation of the knowledge and opinions of rural people in the planning and management of development projects and programs. [[Robert Chambers]], a Fellow at the [[Institute of Development Studies (UK)]],<ref  name="IISD">See the IIDS page [http://www.iisd.org/casl/CASLGuide/PRA.htm Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)].</ref> has written on this topic, and it is described in the World Bank Participation Sourcebook.<ref>[http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/sourcebook/sba104.htm Participatory Rural Appraisal. Collaborative Decisionmaking: Community-Based Method]. (From ''[http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/sourcebook/sbhome.htm The World Bank Participation Sourcebook], [http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/sourcebook/sba1.htm Appendix I: Methods and Tools].''</ref>
 +
 
 +
The Institute of Development Studies explains that it builds on [[rapid rural appraisal]] (RRA),[http://www.iisd.org/casl/CASLGuide/RapidRuralAppraisal.htm][http://www.fao.org/docrep/W3241E/w3241e09.htm] and highlights five central additional concepts and three dangers and drawbacks.<ref name="IISD"/>
 +
The five central additional concepts are
 +
* Empowerment
 +
* Respect
 +
* Localization
 +
* Enjoyment - the emphasis is no longer on being "rapid" but on the process.
 +
* Inclusiveness
 +
 
 +
Dangers and drawbacks
 +
* "Hijacking" - being used to create legitimacy for an external party.
 +
* Formalism - an abrupt and exploitative approach is common where there is a deadline to meet.
 +
* Disappointment - when expectations are raised and nothing tangible emerges.
 +
 
 +
See [[Wikipedia:Participatory rural appraisal|the Wikipedia article]] for more information and links.
 +
 
 +
''See also [[Wikipedia:Participatory rural appraisal]]''
 +
 
 +
==Three caveats==
 +
 
 +
Three warnings regarding participation:<ref>based on [http://www.southbound.com.my/communication/parcom.htm Participatory Communication for Development], 2004, citing White, S.A. (1994). "The concept of participation: transforming rhetoric to reality" in White, S.A. et al (1994) Participatory communication: working for change and development. New Delhi, India: Sage Publications. p.18</ref>
 +
*Participation is not a panacea, and does not suit every circumstance. The mother of a child dying of diarrhea does not want to "participate".
 +
*Beware of manipulation - conscious or unconscious, e.g. when a "participatory social communicator" has preconceived ideas.
 +
*Remember the opportunity cost - villagers do not have endless free time, and may be giving up time on productive work in order to participate.
 +
 
 +
== Community power in Turkmenistan ==
 +
 
 +
:<tt>In [[Turkmenistan]]'s Karra Kum desert, one of the themes to emerge from early participatory video work was a strong local desire for electricity to improve people's lifestyles and enable them to stay in the desert. Participatory video is again being used as a tool for documenting the challenges and decision-making processes involved in the community-led installation of solar power within different shepherding villages. The solar panels are neither sold nor given to the communities; instead, villagers decided that each family should exchange one ewe and one female lamb for their solar lighting system - these animals become the collective property of the village and are used as a "community action fund"...</tt><ref>from [http://www.comminit.com The Communication Initiative]'s newsletter, ''Environment & Communication - DB Click'', October 31 2006. For more, see [http://www.comminit.com/experiences/pds2006/experiences-3896.html Programme Experiences: Solar Power = Community Power - Turkmenistan], 2006</ref>
 +
 
 +
== References ==
 +
<references/>
 +
 
 +
== See also ==
 +
 
 +
* [[How to fake a good process]]
 +
* [[Deep-democracy]]
 +
 
 +
== Interwiki links ==
 +
 
 +
* [[Wikipedia:Participation (decision making)]]
 +
* [[Wikipedia:Orangi Pilot Project]]
 +
 
 +
== External links ==
 +
 
 +
*[http://web.archive.org/web/20090114020844/http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/sourcebook/sbhome.htm The World Bank Participation Sourcebook] (archived web pages, via ''Archive.org'')
 +
*[http://www.scn.org/cmp/modules/a-mod.htm Communities Empowerment]
 +
*[http://www.how-matters.org/2010/09/13/spotting-community-ownership/ Spotting Community Ownership] and [http://www.how-matters.org/2011/04/27/not-your-project/ Sorry but it's not YOUR project] which contains a useful community participation ladder on [http://www.how-matters.org how-matters.org]
 +
*[http://www.how-matters.org/links-resources/#orgdev Links & resources on working with community-based organizations] on [http://www.how-matters.org how-matters.org]
 +
*[http://www.gsb.uct.ac.za/clpv/default.asp?intPageNr=37 The Poor philanthropist: how and why the poor help each other], research monograph and tools to value in-kind contributions from community members
 +
*[http://www.crin.org/docs/testoftime.pdf Community action and the test of time: Learning from community experiences and perceptions], case studies of community mobilization and capacity building to benefit vulnerable children in Malawi and Zambia
 +
 
 +
[[Category:Community]]
 +
[[Category:Principles of development]]
 +
[[Category:Participation]]
 +
[[Category: Community participation]]

Latest revision as of 11:06, 18 April 2013


Default.png    See also the Community participation category.
for subtopics, how-tos, project pages, designs, organization pages and more.


Community participation in development[edit]

In recent years development work has shifted from a top-down approach to a bottom-up approach. While sometimes this is rhetoric, there is also a recognition that participation (and preferably initiation) by the community is essential to an effective project.

This approach is more costly and time-consuming, but is also more cost-effective as it gives much better and longer-lasting results.

Participatory rural appraisal[edit]

Participatory rural appraisal is a term describing the incorporation of the knowledge and opinions of rural people in the planning and management of development projects and programs. Robert Chambers, a Fellow at the Institute of Development Studies (UK),[1] has written on this topic, and it is described in the World Bank Participation Sourcebook.[2]

The Institute of Development Studies explains that it builds on rapid rural appraisal (RRA),[1][2] and highlights five central additional concepts and three dangers and drawbacks.[1] The five central additional concepts are

  • Empowerment
  • Respect
  • Localization
  • Enjoyment - the emphasis is no longer on being "rapid" but on the process.
  • Inclusiveness

Dangers and drawbacks

  • "Hijacking" - being used to create legitimacy for an external party.
  • Formalism - an abrupt and exploitative approach is common where there is a deadline to meet.
  • Disappointment - when expectations are raised and nothing tangible emerges.

See the Wikipedia article for more information and links.

See also Wikipedia:Participatory rural appraisal

Three caveats[edit]

Three warnings regarding participation:[3]

  • Participation is not a panacea, and does not suit every circumstance. The mother of a child dying of diarrhea does not want to "participate".
  • Beware of manipulation - conscious or unconscious, e.g. when a "participatory social communicator" has preconceived ideas.
  • Remember the opportunity cost - villagers do not have endless free time, and may be giving up time on productive work in order to participate.

Community power in Turkmenistan[edit]

In Turkmenistan's Karra Kum desert, one of the themes to emerge from early participatory video work was a strong local desire for electricity to improve people's lifestyles and enable them to stay in the desert. Participatory video is again being used as a tool for documenting the challenges and decision-making processes involved in the community-led installation of solar power within different shepherding villages. The solar panels are neither sold nor given to the communities; instead, villagers decided that each family should exchange one ewe and one female lamb for their solar lighting system - these animals become the collective property of the village and are used as a "community action fund"...[4]

References[edit]

  1. 1.0 1.1 See the IIDS page Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA).
  2. Participatory Rural Appraisal. Collaborative Decisionmaking: Community-Based Method. (From The World Bank Participation Sourcebook, Appendix I: Methods and Tools.
  3. based on Participatory Communication for Development, 2004, citing White, S.A. (1994). "The concept of participation: transforming rhetoric to reality" in White, S.A. et al (1994) Participatory communication: working for change and development. New Delhi, India: Sage Publications. p.18
  4. from The Communication Initiative's newsletter, Environment & Communication - DB Click, October 31 2006. For more, see Programme Experiences: Solar Power = Community Power - Turkmenistan, 2006

See also[edit]

Interwiki links[edit]

External links[edit]