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