Public Participation In Development Planning And Management

Cases From Africa And Asia

Jean-claude Garcia-zamor

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• Print ISBN: 9780367284749
• eBook ISBN: 9781000308662
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Business Development
• Index: Politics & International Relations

This book examines the position held by most development administrators that citizen participation in the planning and management of development projects is crucial to their lasting success. The contributors view inadequate participation as part of the larger problem of ineffective management, policies, and planning. They show that development obje

Part I. Introduction

Introduction to Part I

Jean-Claude Garcia-Zamor

The introduction of this book is comprised of two chapters. The first, by the editor, defines the conceptual framework in which participative planning and management (PPM) is examined. Several requirements for successful PPM are enumerated. But PPM is also described as a difficult practice subject to failure when poorly applied, and some of the major constraints to genuine PPM are reviewed.

The chapter by Theodore Thomas argues that development objectives have been hampered by serious failures in the implementation process. Assistance agencies often fail to provide effective services, and clients often fail to sustain "delivered" development activity. Thomas states that considerable promise for more effective, sustainable development activity exists in engaging intended beneficiaries in project planning and in their continued active participation throughout the implementation stages. Client communities that have shared in planning and implementing development projects maintain and extend development activity more effectively than those that have not. According to Thomas, client-centered development strategies require new administrative response capabilities, unlike the normal bureaucratic, control-oriented procedures of most existing central governments. The challenge for the development planner therefore is reorienting the behavior of both technical and administrative personnel in central government agencies toward collaborative planning with development clients, toward responding to rather than directing or planning for those clients.

1. An Introduction to Participative Planning and Management

Jean-Claude Garcia-Zamor

An examination of the development strategies of several developing countries reveals that most plans are formalistic documents that are totally Ignored by the agencies responsible for implementing them. The planning ministries of these countries generally pursue a "project-by-project" approach with several of the projects related neither to the national development plan nor to each other. Furthermore, most of the technical ministries do not have personnel who are qualified to identify, evaluate, and implement projects. In addition, resource utilization is not usually specified by development planners at the national level. They identify resources only indirectly in their national plans. At the project level, where funding is mostly assured by foreign donors or international lending institutions, planning may by necessity be more specific about resource allocation. Thus, the entire planning process in developing countries is not yet perfected and depends on the continuous technical assistance of external advisers.

Despite the obvious deficiency of the national planning agencies, "bottom up" planning is advocated as an ideal approach to development in these same countries. This approach is encouraged by foreign donors and international lending agencies in the hope that grassroots participation in the projects they finance will increase their success. Academicians have recently Joined them in advocating some type of people centered planning and a reorganization of bureaucracies to carry out more effectively special development projects. The theory and practice of empowering people and communities to participate in development projects have advanced in recent years. However, as Theodore Thomas points out in the following chapter, less attention and, consequently, less progress are evident in perfecting the linkages between empowered communities and existing government structures. The community empowerment process, according to Thomas, appears to be aided substantially by external assistance provided through newer social intervention methodologies.

Although the concepts of participation have been around for quite some time, little is known about real participatory public program management. This book is an attempt to explore, research, and document cases of participatory public program planning and management and to relate program outcomes to such managerial practices. Numerous scholars have been studying and reporting on participation in planning and management, but their works deal primarily with labor management in industrialized societies and their findings are not always relevant to developing countries.¹ This book was written by people who have themselves participated in the development of the projects about which they write and in many instances have initiated the participatory approach in the implementation of these projects. Most of them view participation as the involvement of the projects' beneficiaries in decision-making, implementation, and evaluation.

An international training handbook published in 1976 identified two basic kinds of delivery systems: a "push" system and a "pull" system. By the "push" system the deliverer of the product or service triggers the delivery; in the "pull" system the recipients of the goods or services seek out and trigger the delivery. The "push" system requires less effort on the part of the beneficiaries and more effort on the part of the program deliverer, since the deliver must seek out the people to whom to give the service or product. The "pull" system Implies that the beneficiaries must seek out the service or product and do whatever is necessary (travel, complete forms, etc.) to receive this product; hence they have manifest interest in it.² Similarly, there are two forms of participative planning and management; one Induces participation and the other merely encourages that suggestions for program operations be expressed. Participation can be Induced formally through committee or boards, who encourage local community people to make known their views on policy Issues that affect their work and welfare. Project managers can also enlist local involvement in defining the objectives of the project, determining the methods taken to reach objectives, and seeing and participating in the results.

The other form of participative planning and management merely encourages suggestions without institutionalizing participation.

Participative planning and management often results in a complex scale of activities and organization, so that people without sophisticated management training can work together. Despite the complexity, PPM's potential benefits merit consideration.

This introductory chapter will analyze the concept of participation by reviewing both its positive and negative implications in the context of development projects in the Third World.

The notion of participation was brought into focus in the 1930s. The idea was that the more involved people were in the challenges of production, the more productive they would be. Since then, a burgeoning literature on participation has developed in the United States and abroad. But the term "participation" continued to gain currency primarily in decision-making processes in industrialized societies. It is only since the late 1960s and the 1970s that the concept started to be used in the context of the newly, developed subdiscipline of "development administration."

At the International Conference on Improving Public Management and Performance, held in Washington in 1979, one of the discussion groups accepted the notion that to manage a program is to- make things happen through people. Therefore, management involves human as well as technical systems. The human systems extend well beyond the human resources available to the program manager to include the recipients of program benefits. The issue of internal and external participation became central to the group's discussions. Participation was viewed as helpful to managers in validating the premises on which programs rested and thu3 contributing to program effectiveness. With the emergence of the issue of participation, the group moved away from an input orientation to program management and towards an output emphasis, where the recipient of program benefits occupies a focal role. It was suggested that managerial sciences traditionally focused on the input side of program management, the improvement of which is invariably associated with upgrading input components. The focus on the outputs and the relationships with the recipients of program services, according to the group, posed a new question for which the established notions of management sciences were inappropriate. The group's discussion concluded with the realization that participatory requirements of public program management called for a body of,theory and informed practice yet to be fully developed.³

But the limited timespan of the international gathering and the diversity of the topics discussed there did not permit an in-depth look at participation in project planning and management. However, enough was said to point out that the term "participation" needed to be more broadly defined in such a context. The following is an attempt to come up with several definitions that could redefine and expand the boundaries of participative planning and management (PPM). Although the following definitions of PPM are not exhaustive they do cover the main objectives of project promoters (both international and bilateral donors) who have been trying to implement the concept.

1. PPM promotes integration. It is important that the beneficiaries understand their roles and the objectives of the projects and that they receive sufficient information on which to base their decisions. As a form of communication, PPM helps prevent misunderstanding and provides for the discussion of various points of view that must be accounted for if integration is to exist. PPM is a practical way of integrating local communities' interests and development project goals.

2. PPM increases performance and stimulates a greater acceptance of performance criteria. Beneficiaries become emotionally involved and gain feelings of pride and accomplishment from the projects and become committed to their goals and standards. PPM also increases job satisfaction because, as the beneficiaries become committed, they naturally derive more satisfaction. Research by early social scientists has concluded that satisfied workers are productive workers and are far more prone than others to generate ideas that can benefit their projects. PPM also leads the beneficiaries to stronger perceptions of shared characteristics with project managers, generating further commitment to the projects' objectives. In this context they more readily accept final decisions, feel more responsibility for carrying them out, and exhibit less resistance to change. PPM motivates beneficiaries to contribute. They are given the opportunity to release their own resources of initiative and creativity toward the objectives of the project. It serves to clarify the effort/performance linkage and generates clear and effective action plans for task performance. Finally, by encouraging PPM, donors can increase both the probability that change will be accepted and the overall effectiveness of that change. PPM also increases the beneficiaries' motivation to Implement the project managers' decisions, since they feel that their collective voice is heard before the decisions that affect them are made.

3. PPM helps deal with the significant problem of the lack of sensitivity and effective response to local community feelings, needs, problems, and views, which often characterize the relationship between donors and beneficiaries in developing countries. PPM may require time for the beneficiaries to learn to handle their newly found responsibility and time for the project managers to learn to trust the beneficiaries. In the end however, PPM will help to establish a self-sustaining and expanding reservoir of skills in the community, as well as improve the local people by helping them become more productive and more creative. PPM permits local needs to be met more effectively, because local people are involved in identifying and working to address these needs. One possible effect of PPM could be the creation of new objectives for the projects which fit the needs and objectives of the beneficiaries. PPM prevents alienation, dissatisfaction, and the possibility of opposition to the project, which deflects time and energy from the pursuit of shared objectives to the waging of local conflict. The opportunity to participate in the planning and management of the projects might prevent minor irritations from developing into major incidents by providing occasions for individuals to express minor forms of conflict. PPM could change the total atmosphere so that people share their concerns about the projects, allowing grievances to be aired and discussed openly. It may also reduce conflict and mitigate many of the unintended and dysfunctional results of hierarchy. While in certain cases the conflicts may not necessarily be reduced, PPM will tend to move them from latent to overt and will stimulate efforts to deal with them. PPM is particularly appropriate when the nature of certain decisions requires substantial local input, when a decision will have broad impact in the community, or when there is a known divergence of opinion on the Issues among local residents. Furthermore, the fear of insecurity felt by local residents when outsiders move in dissipates as the interpersonal trust increases between residents and project managers.

PPM brings higher and better-quality output. In certain types of projects the quality of improvement alone is worth the time invested in participation. Beneficiaries often make suggestions for both the quality and quantity of improvements. Although not all the ideas might be useful, there would be enough valuable ones to produce genuine long-range improvements. PPM helps develop better action plans by increasing the input of ideas which will lead to better decisions. Actual task success is enhanced when the total amount of participation is Increased and when that participation comes from all or most of the potential communicators. The built-in feedback mechanism of PPM will translate broad goals into criteria that are meaningful and operational for local residents.

5. PPM increases the amount and the accuracy of Information that project managers have about work practices and the environmental contingencies associated with them. It also increases the beneficiaries' positive feelings toward their work practices by developing a network of support for these practices.

6. Finally, PPM allows a more economical operation by permitting a greater use of local human resources and eliminating many expensive transportation and management that outside services require. It also provides the community with a cushion against the effects of externally induced economic changes. It helps to reduce economic, social, and political dependency between individuals and between regions by recognizing that people can and still will do things for themselves. Of course, the complexity of a particular project and the personality orientation of local residents will contribute to determine the degree to which a participative approach is functional.

PPM is now widely advocated as a management technique by donors and recipients, both on ideological grounds and as a direct means of increasing project effectiveness. PPM is often necessary becau...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• Preface
• PART I. INTRODUCTION
• PART II. THE AFRICAN EXPERIENCE
• PART III. THE ASIAN EXPERIENCE
• PART IV. CONCLUSION
• Index
• About the Editor and Contributors