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?