DEV-415: PARTICIPATORY

DEVELOPMENT TECHNIQUES/
METHODOLOGIES (P.R.A.)

Lecture: Julius M. Limbitu

Disclaimer: The summary in

these slides is meant to facilitate
class discussions, and not for
distribution or publication
 WHAT IS DEVELOPMENT?
• Economically, it can be defined as the capacity of a
national government to be more economically stable
for a long time to generate and sustain an annual
increase in its gross national income and productivity.
• It can also mean the process of improving the quality
of human life – social, cultural environmental,
spiritual and political aspects.
• This is called holistic sustainable development
as it encompasses all aspects, including
environmental sustainability
 WHAT IS DEVELOPMENT?
Development has four aspects
1. Raising people’s living standards in terms of their
income and consumption of basic goods and services
like food, healthy, education etc
2. Creating conditions conducive to the growth of
people’s self-esteem through establishment of social,
political and economic systems and institutions that
promote human dignity and respect.
3. Increasing people’s freedom by enlarging the range
of their choice variables of consumer goods and
services.
4. Protection of environment to ensure sustainability
 DEVELOPMENT AS POVERTY REDUCTION
• Poverty may be understood as:
• Suffering in need for basic necessities in life = poverty is pain,
suffering, anguish
• One perception of the poor people is that they are lazy; under-or-
non performers in the competitive market, which makes the poor to
blame themselves as failures = Poverty is shame, humiliation and
guilt feeling
• Corrupt systems use force to suppress efforts to promote rights of
the poor, like in peaceful demonstrations against forced removal of
slum dwellers to pave way for commercial building in the area =
Poverty is fear
• Competitive systems demand that the best performers be given
priority for advancement and the poor underperformers be
marginalized without opportunity to speak their opinions = poverty is
powerlessness
• A poor person suffering in need, feeling humiliated, fearing those in
power and feeling helpless (powerless) could be the last person to
participate in development process, unless serious efforts are made
to empower and motivate them
 Development as Freedom (Amartya Sen)
•

• Development can be seen, as a process of

expanding the real freedoms that people enjoy
• Development: enhancing the capability to lead the kind of
• lives we have reason to value.
• Focusing on human freedoms contrasts with narrower
views of development, such as identifying development
with the growth of gross national product, or with the rise
in personal incomes, or with the industrialization, or with
• technological advance, or with social modernization.
• Development consists of the removal of various types
of un-freedoms that leave people with little choice and
• little opportunity of exercising their reasoned agency.
• If freedom is what development advances, then there is a
major argument for concentrating on that objective, rather
than on some particular means, or some specially chosen
• list of instruments.
• Viewing development as freedoms looks at ends than
means to what makes development important
 SO, HOW DO WE ENABLE PEOPLE LIVING IN POVERTY-AND-
HUNGER TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS?
•

• Despite the reality of poverty and hunger, the

Chinese Philosopher Lau Tse embodies the
essence of the participatory approach to
• community development in the following words.
• "Go and meet your people, live and stay with them,
love them, work with them. Begin with what they
have, plan and develop from what they know, and
in the end, when the work is over, they will say: "we
• did it ourselves"(Dennis, 1977).
• This description of Chinese Philosopher Lau Tse
has a direct linkage with the theories, concept,
principles and approaches of participatory
community development.
DEVELOPMENT APPROACHES BEFORE PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT
•

• Since the 1950s, a diversity of theoretical and

empirical traditions has converged in the field of
• development approaches.
• Modernization theory emerged in the late
fifties and early sixties (Evans & Stephens,
• 1988).
• The theory stem from the ideas from Durkheim,
Weber and Parsons who explained the
transformation from traditional to modern societies
in terms of population growth with its divisions of
labour; personal motivation and the change of moral
• values and norms.
• According to modernization theorists, the first
world industrial countries are modern and the
third world countries are traditional.
DEVELOPMENT APPROACHES BEFORE PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT
•

• Since the 1950s, a diversity of theoretical and

empirical traditions has converged in the field of
• development approaches.
• Modernization theory emerged in the late fifties
• and early sixties (Evans & Stephens, 1988).
• The theory stem from the ideas from Durkheim,
Weber and Parsons who explained the
transformation from traditional to modern societies in
terms of population growth with its divisions of
labour; personal motivation and the change of moral
• values and norms.
• According to modernization theorists, the first
world industrial countries are modern and the
third world countries are traditional.
 MODERNIZATION THEORY LEADING TO DEPENDENCY
THEORY
• Marx claims that “the country that is more developed
industrially only shows, to the less developed, the
image of its own future” (Marx, 1867: 8-9 in Evens &
• Stephens, 1988:743).
• Marxist theory, like modernization theory, sees the role
of the market as the solvent that would break down
traditional cultures and would allow for development
• to take place (Evans & Stephens, 1988: 749).
• As the shortcomings of both modernization and
Marxist theory became more apparent, another school
of thought known as dependency theory emerged to
explain the weaknesses of the above theories.
 MODERNIZATION THEORY LEADING TO DEPENDENCY
THEORY
• The basic argument of dependency theory is that
the reliance on the international market that led to
the domination of transitional capital because of the
unequal exchange between core and periphery,
benefiting only the core (Evans & Stephens
1988:749).
• Frank (1969) argued that the major causes for
inequality are historical colonialism and western
• capitalism.
• Evans & Stephens (1988) noted that, in contrast with
modernization theory, dependency theorists regard
the state and its agents as active actors in the process
of underdevelopment.
 BASIC NEEDS APPROACH

• The basic needs approach was introduced by the

International Labour Organization in 1976, mainly
in reaction to prevalent modernisation- and
structuralism-inspired development approaches,
which were not achieving satisfactory results in
terms of poverty alleviation and combating
• inequality in developing countries.
• Basic needs approach tried to define an
absolute minimum of resources necessary for
long-term physical well-being, as in one
• dollar/day
• The poverty line which follows from this, is the
amount of income needed to satisfy those basic
needs.
 BASIC NEEDS APPROACH
• The approach has been applied in the sphere of
development assistance, to determine what a society
needs for subsistence, and for poor population groups to
rise above the poverty line.
• Basic needs theory does not focus on investing in
economically productive activities. Basic needs can
• be used as an absolute measure of poverty.
• Proponents of basic needs have argued that elimination
of absolute poverty is a good way to make people active
in society so that they can provide labor more easily and
act as consumers and savers.
• There have been also many critics of the basic needs
approach: Saying it lacks practical precision, is in conflict
with growth promotion policies, and run the risk of leaving
developing countries in permanent backwardness.
 PARTICIPATORY APPROACH/HUMANISTIC APPROACH

• According to Waishbord (2001) participatory

theories criticized the modernization paradigm
as it promoted a top-down ethnocentric and
paternalistic view of development.

• Weaknesses of the above traditional

development theories lead to a re-examination of
the purpose of development towards a search for
alternative conceptual explanations by an
number of scholars, including Robert Chambers
 PARTICIPATORY APPROACH/HUMANISTIC APPROACH

• Current debates and development efforts

focus on ‘bottom up’ planning,
• ‘People-centred Development’ and the
view that ordinary people have the
capacity to manage their own
development.
• Participatory development theory
encourages the involvement of all
community stakeholders in the process of
development.
 THE CONCEPT OF PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT

• Participatory development is broadly understood as an active

involvement of people in making decisions about
implementation of processes, programs and projects that
affect them (Slocum, Wichhart, Rocheleau, & Thomas-Slayter,
• 1995).
• The basic element of participatory development is to view the
term participation as the exercise of people’s power in
thinking and acting, and controlling their action in a
• collaborative framework.
• The key concept of participatory development includes the
collaborative effort of people, taking initiatives by
themselves in terms of their own thinking and deliberations
(Rahman, 1993; Oakley, 1991).
 DEFINITION OF PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT

• There is a wide range of definitions and

interpretations of participation
1. sensitizing people to make them more
responsive to development programmes
and to encourage local initiatives and self-
help
2. involving people as much as possible
actively in the decision-making process
which regards their development
 DEFINITION OF PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT

[Link] group action to give the

excluded or disadvantaged people
control over resources, access to
services and/or bargaining power

4. promoting the involvement of people

in the planning and implementation of
development efforts as well as in the
sharing of their benefits
 WHY PARTIPATORY APPROACH
 Around the mid-seventies there was a
growing awareness that various
approaches for rural Development
 These included community
development, integrated rural
development and basic
 Needs which did not result in
substantial rural poverty alleviation
 WHY PARTIPATORY APPROACH
 Even subsequent efforts made in some
countries such as rural works,
concessional credit, rural employment
programmes did not improve the plight
of the poor on a sustained basis

 Economic growth was insufficiently

combined with equity or just
distribution of benefits.
 WHY PARTIPATORY APPROACH
• International, government & NGOs realized
the cause of unsuccessful development
projects was (and still is) the lack of active,
effective and lasting participation of the
intended beneficiaries

• Consequently, several agencies started to

promote the participation of people, in
particular disadvantaged women and men,
in development through various
programmes, mostly on a pilot basis
 PRINCIPLES OF PARTICIPATION
• The ability of participatory development
to fulfil its promise rests in part on the
manner in which it is undertaken.
• Effective participation needs to be
undertaken in a manner of:
• The mode of participation;
• The participants to be involved and the
manner in which they should be
involved;
• The institutional structure within which
local people operate.
 PRINCIPLES OF PARTICIPATION
• Effective participation rests on respecting a
number of key principles, such as those
identified by Egger and Majeres (1998):
1. Inclusion - of all people, or representatives
of all groups who will be affected by the results
of a decision or a process, such as a
development project.
2. Equal Partnership - recognizing that every
person has skill, ability and initiative and has
equal right to participate in the process
regardless of their status.
 PRINCIPLES OF PARTICIPATION
3. Transparency - all participants must help
to create a climate conducive to open
communication and building dialogue.
4. Sharing Power - authority and power
must be balanced evenly between all
stakeholders to avoid the domination of one
party.
5. Sharing responsibility - similarly, all
stakeholders have equal responsibility for
decisions that are made, and each should
have clear responsibilities within each
process.
 PRINCIPLES OF PARTICIPATION
6. Empowerment - participants with special
skills should be encouraged to take
responsibility for tasks within their specialty,
• But should also encourage others to also be
involved to promote mutual learning and
empowerment.
7. Cooperation - cooperation is very
important; sharing everybody’s strength
reduces everybody’s weaknesses.
• These principles for effective participation can be
applied to all aspects of the development process
or project
 DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION
• (Adapted from Arnstein 1971; Pimbert and Pretty
1994; Wilcox 1994; Lane 1995; Pretty et al. 1995;
UNDP 1997; Jeffrey and Vitra (eds) 2001).
1. Manipulation: Participation is undertaken in a manner
contrived by those who hold power to convince the
public that a predefined project or program is best.
2. Passive participation: Participation by the local people
is by being told what is going to happen or has already
happened. It is based on information provided, shared
and assessed by external “experts.” Therefore, the
information being shared belongs only to external
experts.
 DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION
3. Participation in information giving : This is a
one-way approach to participation whereby
participation is by answering questions posed by
extractive researchers using questionnaire
surveys or similar approaches.

• Participants are informed of their rights,

responsibilities and options, but are not given
the opportunity to influence proceedings, as
the findings are neither shared nor checked for
accuracy.
 DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION
4. Participation by consultation: This is a two-way
way flow of information in which local people
participate by being consulted and external agents
listen to their views.
• Although participants have the opportunity to
provide suggestions and express concerns, their
input may or may not be used at all or as originally
intended. The external agents define
• problems and solutions, both of which may be
modified in light of information provided by the
participants.
• Such a consultation process does not concede
any share in decision-making and professionals
are under no obligation to take on people’s view.
 DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION
5. Participation for material incentives: People
participate by providing resources, for example
labour, in return for food, cash, or other material
incentives.

• Much on-farm research falls into this category, as

farmers provide the fields but are not involved in
experimentation or the process of learning.

• In this type of participation people have no stake

in prolonging activities once the incentives end.
 DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION
6. Functional participation: People participate by
forming groups to meet predetermined
objectives related to the initiative.

• Local people’s involvement however occurs

after major decisions have been made rather
than at an early stage in the project cycle.

• The established groups are dependent on

external initiators and facilitators, but over time
may become more self-sufficient.
 DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION
7. Interactive participation: People participate in joint
analysis, which leads to action plans and the
formation of new local institutions or the
strengthening of existing ones.
• It tends to involve interdisciplinary methodologies
that seek multiple perspectives, and make use of
systematic and structured learning processes.
• As local people take control over decision-making
process, they gain a greater stake in maintaining
the structures and practices they have established.
• A common drawback is that vulnerable individuals
and groups tend to remain silent or passively
acquiesce
 DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION
8. Partnership: Through negotiation, power is
redistributed between local people and power
holders in an equitable manner.
• Decision-making takes place through an
exchange between equally respected
participants who are working towards a
common goal and seeking to optimize the
well-being of all concerned.
• There is mutual responsibility and risk-sharing
in the planning and decision-making process.
 DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION
9. Self-mobilization/active participation
• People participate by taking initiatives
independent of external institutions to change
systems.
• They develop contacts with external institutions
for resources and technical advice that they
need, but retain control over how resources are
used.
• Such self-initiated mobilization and collective
action may or may not challenge existing
inequitable distribution of wealth or power.
Participatory Poverty Assessment

PPA
Participatory Poverty Assessment
• Participatory Poverty Assessment (PPA) is “an
iterative participatory research process that
seeks to understand poverty from the
perspective of a range of stakeholders,
especially the poor” (Narayan, 1996).
• PPA provides an instrument for including poor
people’s views in the analysis of poverty so as
to improve the effectiveness of public policy
related to poverty reduction strategies.
 Theoretical Background and Guiding
Principles
• The approach is rooted in a belief that the
development and implementation of a given
poverty reduction strategy will be more
effective if the views of poor people are taken
into consideration.
• Doing so should help ensure that initiatives
address issues that the poor themselves
consider important and are implemented
through institutional channels that they value.
 Objectives of PPA
• Enhance conceptualization and
understanding of the multi-dimensional
nature of poverty and its causes. This requires
not only a strong presence and participation
of the poor but also an understanding of what
the causes of poverty and deprivation are
from the perspective of poor people;
 Objectives of PPA
• Improve participation, providing for wider
ownership and for a broader cross-section of
society (and particularly the poor) to influence
policies and programs that would benefit them in
the long-run;
• Enhance policy effectiveness. The effectiveness
of poverty reduction policies are more likely to
be enhanced with the inclusion of a broad range
of stakeholders, particularly the poor and
voiceless, and also if such policies address the
issues that the poor value most
 Objectives of PPA
• Increased local capacity as the process enables
previously disenfranchised people to directly
engage in analysis and monitoring of poverty and
policy impacts
• Ultimately, PPA is promoted as a mechanism for
expressing the aspirations of people, especially
for those who are excluded, voiceless and
marginalized, so as to enhance their
empowerment and autonomy, and the
effectiveness of policies intended to support
these aspirations.
 Techniques
• The methods used within a PPA have varied
depending on time constraints, availability of
funds, local research capacity and level of
government interest in poverty issues.
• However, the basic elements of the design of a
Participatory Poverty Appraisal may be
identified as:
 Techniques
• 1. Select technical assistance. Project
implementers need to identify the technical
assistance required throughout the life of a
PPA and identify the individual able to provide
this assistance in a responsive and consistent
manner
 Techniques
• Identify implementation partners. Given the
diversity of activities involved in a PPA,
including financing, policy influence and
analysis, technical skills in design and analysis,
training, dissemination, and logistics and field
management, the involvement of a variety of
partners is often required.
• These partners may come from various levels
of government, NGOs (local, national and/or
international), research institutions and the
private sector
 Techniques
3. Identify objectives and the research agenda.
Together, all partners engaged in a PPA should
work to determine the fundamental objectives of
the assessment and its key elements of
implementation.
• Involving all partners in this process helps
ensure greater long-term commitment to the
exercise.
4. Identify members for the field team. These
individuals may be drawn from key partner
institutions or from consultants.
 Techniques
5. Identify sources of financial support. Potential
sources include donors, governments and
participating NGOs.
6. Select field research sites and participants.
Various approaches may be used to identify these
locations, including selection of candidate
locations that fit identified criteria and random
sample selection guided by certain criteria.
• Whichever method is used, it is important to
ensure that the criteria for selection are
consistent with the objective of the PPAs
 Techniques
7. Develop a methodology for research, synthesis
and analysis. PPA designers may develop a
methodology that reflects a chosen conceptual
framework, such as the Capability Approach.
• It is advisable that the methodology selected
incorporate tools and approaches already known
within the country and that a clear plan for
documenting the research findings and process
at all stages be generated.
• Implementation of the PPA can be undertaken
through a number of different activities,
including the following:
 Techniques
• gathering of existing secondary information
for context, background and triangulation
of findings;
• a review of existing analysis and research
carried out in poor communities using
participatory approaches;
• field research in poor communities
involving travelling research teams engaged
in participatory research at the community
level
 Tools used by research teams
• unstructured and semi-structured interviewing
of individuals and groups;
• facilitated thematic group discussions;
• direct observation;
• case studies and biographies; and
• structured, task-based analytical exercises
carried out by research participants
• individually or, more commonly, in groups, and
illustrating their priorities,
• judgments, understandings, analysis or
experiences
 PPA Techniques
• policy analysis using inputs from PPAs and
other sources of information and analysis to
influence policy development;
• training of NGOs, research institutes,
central/local level government staff in methods
and approaches for engaging with people in
poor communities for research, consultation,
planning and action; and
• creating new networks and relationships within
the processes of policy formulation and poverty
assessment
 Dangers and Drawbacks
• The reliability of the information generated
and the policy inferences drawn.
• There is a risk that the conclusions reached
may be biased by the researchers own
views and by participants responding to an
inquiry so as to reflect what they think the
researcher wants to hear or to derive some
potential advantage from the anticipated
outcome of the assessment
 Group Tasks
• Discuss the following:
1. The role of PPA in addressing historical
injustices (marginalization with extreme
poverty) in Kenya
2. The challenges facing application of PPA
in addressing the poverty problem of
historical injustices in Kenya
 Rapid Rural Appraisal
• Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) is a qualitative
survey methodology in which a
multidisciplinary team is used to formulate
problems for agricultural research and
development.
• The approach emerged in the 1970s as a more
efficient and cost-effective way for outsiders to
learn about communities, and particularly
about agricultural systems, than through
classical techniques such as large-scale social
surveys or brief rural visits by urban
professionals.
 Rapid Rural Appraisal
• RRA consists of a series of techniques for
“quick and dirty” research undertaken in the
belief that the results generated, while of less
apparent precision, will have greater evidential
value than classic quantitative survey
techniques.
• The method does not need to be exclusively
rural nor rapid, but it is economical of an
outsider researcher’s time.
 Theoretical Background and
Guiding Principles
• Optimizing trade-offs – researchers are
expected to carefully balance the quantity,
relevance, accuracy and timeliness of the
information acquired, as well as optimize
actual use of the data collected.
• Triangulation – researcher use more than one
technique/source of information to cross-
check answers and undertake research as part
of multi-disciplinary teams so as to increase
the range of information collected.
 Theoretical Background and
Guiding Principles
• Learning rapidly and progressively – although
research is undertaken rapidly in comparison to
classical survey methods, RRA should be
conducted in a relaxed manner that emphasizes
creativity, curiosity, and conscious exploration.
• RRA should be undertaken on an iterative basis
through the flexible use of methods, be open to
improvisation, take advantage of opportunities
as they arise and cross-check findings.
 Theoretical Background and Guiding
Principles
Learning from and with local people- this
means learning directly, on-site, and face-to-
face, gaining from indigenous physical,
technical and social knowledge.
Farmers’ perceptions and understanding of
resource situations and problems are important
to learn and comprehend because solutions
must be viable and acceptable in the local
context.
They posses vast knowledge about their
environment.
 Techniques for Rapid Rural
Appraisal
RRA responds to the different contexts in which
it is used, enabling researchers to take a
systematic rather than a standardized approach
to understanding problems and identifying
opportunities for improvement
A common design for RRA may include a series
of the following:
1. Selection of a multi-disciplinary research team
 Techniques for Rapid Rural Appraisal
2. Training of research team members in the
techniques to be used as part of the
research—this step is essential for achieving a
consistent set of approaches to data collection
3. Development of a checklist of issues to serve
as the basis for questions
4. Random selection of interviewees from
various households/farmers and key
informants
 Techniques for Rapid Rural Appraisal
5. Recording data in a form that will be useful to
subsequent surveys over the longer term;
6. Discussing and analyzing data with team
members in order to reach a consensus on
what has been learned and what remains
unclear.
7. Rapid report writing in the field, as any delay
may result in loss of valuable information and
insight.
 Useful tools in PRA
• Review of secondary sources, such as aerial
photos;
• Direct observation, foot transects,
familiarization, participation in activities;
• Interviews with key informants, group
interviews, workshops
• Mapping, diagramming, brief aerial
observation;
• Biographies, local histories, case studies;
 Useful tools in PRA
• Ranking and scoring, as a quick means of
finding out an individual’s or a group’s list of
preferences and priorities, identifying wealth
distribution and understanding seasonal
changes;
• Time lines
• Short simple questionnaires, towards the end
of the process
 Advantages of PRA
RRA provides researchers with a quick, efficient
and cost-effective approach for quantitative
and qualitative data collection, analysis and
interpretation
this helps to cope with the complexity, diversity
and interdependency of factors influencing
various development issues.
 As an iterative(cyclical) process, it provides
researchers with an opportunity to ask relevant
questions as an interview progresses
 Advantages of PRA
 the use of triangulation allow researchers
to:
use a variety of tools and techniques to
understand a common issue;
 integrate different disciplines within the
same team;
 draw information from a range of people
representing different segments of a
population.
 Dangers and Drawbacks
It is an extractive, externally-driven process
where the information collected is retained,
assessed and used by the outsiders rather
than by the individuals and communities
involved in the research
Many of the researchers that use standard
RRA methods claim that they are using (PRA),
when the “participation” is restricted to
provision of information to the researcher by
the community.
 Group task
• Using suitable examples for illustration,
discuss:
1. The challenges facing PRA in a
community context of your choice
2. The solutions to the challenges facing
PRA in rural community development
 Participatory Rural Appraisal
Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) emerged in
the 1980s and involves the direct participation
of community members in rural planning using
different techniques such as diagrams and
maps
PRA builds on Rapid Rural Appraisal, but
moves much further towards a more holistic
approach to participatory development,
adding some more radical, activist
perspectives. Originated in Africa & S. Asia
 Defining PRA
• PRA has been defined as a family of
approaches, methods and tools designed to
enable local people to formulate and analyze
their situation in order to plan, act, monitor
and evaluate their actions
• The underlying concept is that local people
are capable of analyzing their own realities
 Defining PRA ctd.
• the outsiders “do not dominate and lecture;
they facilitate, sit down, listen and learn…they
do not transfer technology; they share
methods which local people can use for their
own appraisal, analysis, planning action and
evaluation” (Chambers 1997)
• Development experts are mere facilitators in
the development process
Guiding Principles for PRA by Narayan
 Capacity building – by empowering the local
community.
 Utilization of results – collected data is useless
unless it is utilized.
 Short-cut methods – short-cut methods may yield
reliable and relevant information under time and
financial constraints.
 Multiple methods – inclusion of different
perspectives and various methods can help ensure
that the collected information is complete and
reliable.
Guiding Principles for PRA by Narayan
• The expertise of the non-expert – usually
local people are more knowledgeable about
their environment than the external experts.
• Their interest, abilities, preference and
knowledge needs to be acknowledged and
used accordingly during the entire life cycle of
the project.
 Techniques for PRA
PRA uses various systematic methods to
enable people to express and share
information, stimulate discussion and analysis,
and assist participants to organize and initiate
changes to a particular problem.
The choice of methods or techniques used
depends on the issue being examined and the
context in which the PRA is taking place; there
is to prescribed method for conducting a PRA
 Sample methods
• They could be categorized as follows:
– group and team dynamics methods;
– sampling methods;
– interviewing and dialogue methods; and
– visualization and diagramming methods.
 Interviewing and dialogue
• Semi-structured interviewing
• Direct observation
• Focus groups
• Key informants
• Ethno histories and biographies
• Oral histories
• Local stories, portraits and case
• studies
Methods in Group and team dynamics
• Team formation, agreements, contracts
• Team reviews and discussions
• Interview guides and checklists
• Rapid report writing
• Group activities and energizers,
• Work sharing (taking part in local activities)
Villager and shared presentations,
• Process notes and personal diaries
 Sampling methods
• Transect walks
• Wealth ranking and well-being ranking
• Social Maps
• Interview maps
 Group Tasks
• Using suitable examples for
illustration, assess the implications of
PRA on:
1. The domestic aspect of gender
equality
2. The BBI process in Kenyan society
 Visualization and diagramming
methods
 Mapping and modelling, Social maps and wealth
rankings
 Transects, Mobility maps, Seasonal calendars
 Daily routines and activity profiles
 Historical profiles
 Trend analyses and time lines
 Matrix scoring
 Preference or pairwise ranking
 Venn diagrams
 General considerations
For given problem, a researcher or facilitator
should seek methods that:
have specific and positive impacts—
techniques that energize, empower and
mobilize the relevant people;
optimize cost and time, while also providing
ample opportunity for analysis;
 emphasize teamwork, bringing together a mix
of outsiders and insiders, women and men,
and experts from various disciplines
 General considerations
• Are systematic, to help ensure validity and
reliability (such as through partly stratified
sampling and cross-checking); and
• Enable facilitators to measure and evaluate
the impacts of the techniques applied using
quantitative, qualitative and participatory
methods
 Guidelines for PRA by Brown and
Wyckoff-Baird (1992)
• 1. Select a site and gain approval from local
administrative officials and community
leaders;
• 2. Conduct a preliminary site visit (steps 1 and
2 could include a community review and a
planning meeting to share the purpose and
objectives of the PRA and initiate dialogue
between all parties as well as full participation
 Guidelines for PRA by Brown and
Wyckoff-Baird (1992)
3. Engage in preference ranking, which can be
used to focus the intervention and as an ice-
breaker for groups interviews; and
• undertake wealth ranking once participants
are confident with the process.
 Guidelines for PRA by Brown and
Wyckoff-Baird (1992)
4. Synthesise and analyze data;
5. Identify problems and opportunities to
resolve them;
6. Rank opportunities and prepare land maps
and resource management plans (a basic
work plan for all members of the community);
7. Adopt and implement the plan; and
8. Follow-up, evaluate and disseminate any
findings
 Advantages
PRA allows researchers and development
workers to learn about a community and
develop appropriate interventions through the
use of an approach that is flexible and highly
responsive to individual difference, situational
changes and emerging information.
Quieter individuals are involved through
participatory methods. Also enables to collect
a lot of informatiom in a short period of time
 Dangers and Drawbacks
• The process is externally driven, with the PRA
being undertaken to justify intervention plans
determined by outside project managers,
agencies, NGOs and government officials;
• It is formulaic and not responsive to or
respectful of the specific context in which the
PRA is being undertaken;
 Dangers and Drawbacks
The approach raises expectations that
something will be done to address a problem,
which, if no follow-up occurs, can lead to local
communities seeing PRA as a transient,
externally-driven development process; and
It does not respond to the potential threat to
less powerful members of communities
resulting from a PRA that challenges local
vested interests through the social analysis
conducted.
 Guidelines for PRA (Brown and
Wyckoff-Baird 1992)
3. Collect both secondary and field data (spatial,
time-related, social, technical), and
share information with selected communities. In this
stage, facilitators may:
• start with a mapping exercise to stimulate
discussion and raise enthusiasm
and interest, providing an overview of the
area/community, and helping to
deal with non-controversial information;
• undertake transect walks and seasonal and
historical diagramming exercises;
 The Reality of Participatory Rural Approach

 Chambers (1997) identified that bad practice,

can be analyzed under three heads:
 top-down fashion and spread
 behavior, attitudes and training
 field practice and ethics.
 These are not unique to PRA but have been
highlighted by it.
 They are detailed in the following sections.
 The following sections use the publication of
Chambers (1997) as the main source.
 TOP DOWN FASHION AND SPREAD
•

• PRA has been demanded by donors on projects and has been

made to go to scale too fast, resulting in the label being spread
without substance.
• Quality has suffered from the very top-down centralized system,
which PRA seeks to modify and reverse.
• The behavioral, professional and institutional implications of
PRA have not been understood, or if understood not
internalized.
• According to Chambers, for PRA and it’s principles to be truly
adopted by organizations, executive members need to be
included in the learning process along with the field workers, who
need the organizational support to be effective in responding to
the communities needs.
• The reason for major changes, such as; longer time-frames; use
of software as opposed to hardware indicators and program
rather than project funding need to be fully understood at all
levels of the organization.
 Behavior, attitudes and training
• In ideal PRA, participatory
behavior and attitudes matter
more than methods.
• To confront behavior and attitudes is
harder than to teach the methods.
• These involves behavior and
attitudes of facilitators and local
community members
• Think of examples in both of these
 BAD PRACTICE HAS BEEN PROPAGATED BY TWO
COMMON TRAPS
•
• “Training has been didactic rather than participatory, in
classrooms or hotels rather than in and with communities,
through teaching rather than experience, and through
lectures rather than practice.
• Behavior and attitudes should be stressed more than
methods and approaches.
• Manuals have been written.
• Source-books with examples and ideas can be useful.
Stepwise sequences also make sense for some topic PRA
processes.
• But the formalization of manuals with set procedures can
fossilize and codify, often in the name of quality.
• Manuals are called for and composed. Paragraphs proliferate
as intelligent authors seek to cater for every condition and
contingency.
 BAD PRACTICE HAS BEEN PROPAGATED BY TWO
COMMON TRAPS
•
• Big manuals and bad training go together.” (Chambers,
1997, p212)
• In other words, training should provide participants
with a guide (e.g. demonstrating the use of types of
tools in relation to the project cycle) but should
emphasize facilitation not dominance, also creativity,
flexibility and innovation as opposed to rigid exercises
to tick off boxes.
• This places more responsibility and control to the field
workers.
• This decentralization of power may be obstructed by
cultures, personalities, accounting systems in the aid
chain etc.
 BAD PRACTICE HAS BEEN PROPAGATED BY TWO COMMON TRAPS
• Effort should be made to avoid the following bad practices during
training:
1. Dominating
• “Dominant and superior behavior is the most widespread error
damaging participatory processes as trainings, capacity building
and decision making cues are dominated by the rich and the
powerful, leaving the poor under-represented
• Verbally, through lecturing, shouting down, interrupting, criticizing,
contradicting, preaching, pontificating and putting forward their
own ideas, telling the poor unnecessary details of what they
should do to develop lowers what they ought to think, and
becomes overbearing.
• Non-verbally, through dress, body language, facial expressions or
hiding behind dark glasses.” (Chambers, 1997, p213)
• In the author’s experience as a PLA trainer, this was one of the
most difficult things to transfer from theory to practice.
 DOMINATING BY THE RICH & THE POWERFUL
• Recognition of a person’s status by position, education, age etc is
culturally significant, but intimidating the poor who shy away from bold
participatory tendencies is bad
• Asking them to set aside their usual behavior which asserts their
authority in order to pave way for participatory approach may appear
threatening and uncomfortable.
• Time spent during a single training course may not be sufficient to
change years of autocratic, behavior and attitude.
• Partnering with government field staff to the NGO and collaboration on
programs were considered as ways to reinforce good practice in
facilitation.
• Even NGO staff (who may be used to a more didactic teaching style)
need to be reminded frequently of the principles of facilitation.
• The open management style within the NGO can make it seem less
threatening, by showing by example that respect does not have to be lost
when a facilitation rather than dominance is adopted.
 FACTORS OF CONTINUED DOMINANCE
• Four common factors, which sustain and reinforce the dominance at the top of
the aid chain are:
• Sacred Text – Organizations have rule books which lay down authority of
managers over managed, of seniors over juniors, of those qualified over
unqualified.
• Manuals and Rituals – In teaching and training for development, the same text-
books and manuals have been used year after year.
• They express and reinforce upper-lower distinctions, elevating those who know
and perform the sequences of actions over those who do not.
• Hierarchy and Control – Levels of seniority, ladders of promotion, distinctions
in grade, privilege, dress, workplace, place of eating and food, and top-down
punitive controls for standardized activities.
• Privileged Access and Secrecy – Supposed, pretended or actual are a key to the
dominance of uppers.
• Secrecy hides error and abuse and protects uppers from lowers. Knowledge is
power (Adapted from Chambers, 1997, p221)
• These four factors which are issues to be faced when using the DRA can be
compared to the barriers to PLA as seen in table 2.2.2 below.
 2. RUSHING
• “In practice, PRA facilitators often, perhaps usually, take too little time:
they fail to explain who they are, why they have come, what they can do,
and what they cannot do; they hurry to get on with the ‘methods’, not
taking time to earn trust and gain rapport.
• Later they fail to make time to ‘interview the map’ or ‘interview the
diagram’.” (Chambers, 1997, p 213)
• The reasons found by Chambers to contribute towards taking too little
time were:
• Pressure to cover a certain number of tools a day due to limited, project-
based funds.
• Pressure from the community to finish early (particularly for the women)
to allow them to return to work and household duties (even in the less
busy seasons for farmers).
• A lack of enthusiasm amongst the NGO staff in response to the
occasional lack of enthusiasm in the community.
• Training needs to cover strategies to recognize and deal with this.
 3. GENDER AND UPPER-UPPER BIAS
• Differences between genders, groups, ages and occupations
are easily overlooked.
• Those left out are the lowers – women, the poor, the very
old, children, those of inferior status, the marginal, the
destitute, the disabled, refugees, out-casts.
• It is then the reality of local uppers that comes to count in
decision making: participation by the rich/powerful alone.
• Having separate groups of men, women, youth proved
effective in creating a safe environment for them to express
their views openly.
• When the groups come together to compare findings, the
women and youth had the confidence to present their
findings because they spoke as a group rather than as
individuals.
• This was a starting point for capacity building amongst
marginalized groups.
 4. ROUTINES AND BORING FIXED PROCEDURES
• “Especially in going to scale repetition breeds regular habits.
• Routines dig ruts, PRA facilitators have shown signs of
slipping into unvarying standard practices, overlooking other
options and missing the creativity of inventive interaction.
• The author found that just telling participants during training
that they could be creative and invent their own tools or
adapt existing tools was not sufficient to make this happen in
practice.
• This was due maybe to a lack of confidence with the new,
unfamiliar technique. However, innovation did not naturally
develop later as they became more familiar with the PLA
process.
• The initial training should provide the opportunity for the
participants to increase their confidence in experimenting
with designing and creating their own tools, before maybe
showing them existing tools.
 5. TAKING WITHOUT GIVING
• “PRA methods have frequently been used for extractive research.
• As uppers, outsiders can often induce local people to give up time
to processes from which it is the upper who will mainly benefit.
• It is true that the lowers, the analysts, may enjoy and be
empowered by discovering their own abilities and knowledge.
• But as with all research involving local people, there are ethical
questions about unequal relationships and the cost of people’s
time.” (Chambers, 1997, p 214)
• The author found in their experience that fostering local ownership
of the PRA process was very important to try and address this
issue of unequal relationships.
• This was done through facilitators believing that ‘they can do it’
and ‘handing over the stick’; encouraging the groups to make their
own record of the activities; and encouraging the community to
use the records as active planning tools (e.g. using the social map
to plan and record changes in the community over time)
 6. AROUSING UNMET EXPECTATIONS
• “PRA methods and processes can engage local people for long periods
in intense and creative activities, these lead to expectations of future
action, especially where appraisal and planning are involved.
• Again and again, outsiders and outside agencies have been unable to
respond, or have failed to honor their pledges.
• Country where the government has money but has problems managing
it, there is an opportunity for NGOs to play an advocacy role.
• If the priorities of the community fell outside the sector that the NGO
was involved in (i.e. Primary Health Care (PHC) with Water, Sanitation (W
& S) and hygiene promotion) then attempts were made to link members
of the community (Women, men and youth) with the chairman of the
local government (with whom, the major decision making lay).
• This was aimed to contribute to the capacity building in the community,
empowering them to do continue for future needs they may identify.
• Result in a lack of local ownership.
• This in turn may lead to a lack of maintenance where the state is unable
to undertake this themselves. Unsustainable programs are likely to
result under these conditions.
 Group Task
• Using suitable examples for illustration,
describe:
1. How you would manage the African attitude of
poverty mentality so as to promote
participatory community development practice
for local ownership and sustainability
2. The dynamic nature of gender based inequality
in PRA: what has been achieved, challenges
pending and way forward
 DEMAND RESPONSIVE APPROACH (DRA): DEFINITION AND THE
THREE PILLARS AND DRA
• Chambers (1997, p220) notes that DRA paradigm
demand changes, which are based on the pillars of
institutional, professional and personal.
• All represent points of entry and are capable of
provoking and reinforcing changes in others.
• Institutional change needs a long-term perspective,
with patient and painstaking learning and
reorientation.
• Professional change needs new concepts, values,
methods and behaviors, and new curricula and
approaches to learning.
• Personal change and learning to enjoy change are
fundamental (Chambers, 1997, p210)
 THE OVERARCHING PRINCIPLES OF DRA
• There are four overarching principles of DRA
(UNDP, 1998):
• Water should increasingly be managed as an
economic as well as a social good.
• Management should be focused at the lowest
appropriate level.
• A holistic approach to the use of water resources
should be employed.
• Women should play a key role in the management
of water.
 THE RHETORIC OF THE DEMAND RESPONSIVE APPROACH
• “The ideal demand-responsive model (DRA)
• demand from households in a community for improved services to meet
identified needs.
• Communities organize themselves to express demand, choose services
and take ownership and responsibility for sustaining, operating and
managing their services.”(Sara, 1998).
• This definition places the community at the center of the process, with
other institutions facilitating or supporting (not directing) the process.
• Although organizations at all levels of the chain appear to subscribe to
this on paper, (usually due to demands for participation from the top of
the chain with associated agendas) it does not necessarily translate to
practice.
• This is due to a combination of reasons explored later in this chapter but
maybe largely due to an ignorance or lack of confidence in the
advantages which the DRA can bring to the development process.
 THE REALITY OF THE DEMAND RESPONSIVE APPROACH
• “In reality additional actors are introduced into the market model of the
demand-responsive approach in the form of government, NGOs, and external
support agencies.
• This distorts the ideal DRA model as the external actors try to provide
communities with the information, training and financing to improve their
services whilst also creating an enabling environment for providers.
• In most cases, communities merely contribute ideas and sometimes funds
rather than truly manage them.
• They do not procure materials or make hiring decisions, and have few options
regarding who provides services in their community.
• In some cases they do not even supervise or sign off the completed works that
belong to them” (Sara, 1998).
• Here the institutional support is directing as opposed to facilitating and
supporting a people-centered approach.
• They parade the label of participation, using the methods without making
institutional changes or adapting the behavior and attitudes of staff.
 REASONS CONTRIBUTING TO THE ABOVE SITUATION ARE:
1. They may not believe in the participatory process
but simply use it to access funds, without
essentially changing the ethos of their approach.
2. (PRA becomes a set of tools they use on the
community to extract information instead of with
the community to share information.
3. They may not be aware of the fundamental
changes necessary to change from an
implementing to a facilitating agency.
4. They may feel threatened by the loss of power,
without being sure of what their new role entails.
5. They may not have access to resources (financial
and/or professional) to make the transition.
 Barriers to the Ideal Model of DRA
• The power to make and act on decisions usually lies with those at the top
of the aid chain.
• As a result, the opportunity to place ownership and responsibility of the
program with the primary stakeholders i.e. the community, is lost.
• “Normal bureaucracies of NGOs, government departments and donor
agencies, are confronted by participatory approaches in many ways:
1. By revealing local people’s priorities that differ from theirs.
2. By generating diverse actions and demands to which top-down packages
do not fit.
3. By making planned targets hard to meet.
4. By slowing disbursements of funds.
5. By spending more on personnel and logistics, and less on hardware.
6. By generating benefits like capabilities which are hard to inspect,
measure or count” (Chambers, 1997, p221)
• “Questions of ‘whose reality counts?’, are raised by the misfit between the
logical framework analysis (LFA) and participatory approaches.
•Tools such as LFA can be instruments for the imposition of uppers’
realities”. (Chambers,1997, p223)
Barriers to DRA Barriers to PRA

Sacred Text Gender and upper-upper bias

Manuals and Rituals Top down fashion and spread

Behaviour, attitudes and
training
Rushing
Routines and Ruts

Hierarchy and Control Field Practice and Ethics

Privileged Access and Taking without giving

Secrecy Arousing unmet expectations
 STRATEGIES FOR DRA & PRA
• The following are strategies to break the above barriers: text or manual as
source of authority.
• The one-sentence manual ‘Use your own best judgement at all times’ makes
the individual community member the authority.
• Action does not have to follow fixed sequences. Each time can be different.
There are contexts in which broad sequences make sense (for community
planning, for forest nurseries, for focused programs). But generally, the lack of
ritual and formal procedure give space for freedom of interaction,
inventiveness, creativity and fun.
• Power and control are decentralized. Hierarchy is flattened and weakened.
Controls and rules from above are minimized. Uppers facilitate enabling lowers
to generate their own power and control, to fit local conditions and needs, and
taking different forms in different places.
• Transparency replaces secrecy. Facilitators explain who they are, their
purposes, and what they can and cannot do. Local people are encouraged to
share their knowledge and analysis with each other and with uppers. Trust
replaces suspicion.
• These are statements of ideals. The problem is how in the real, messy,
magnetized and hierarchical world, to work towards them, and do so on a
growing scale (Chambers, 1997, p222-223).
 INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE AND PARTNERSHIP
• There are many different actors involved in DRA (communities, development
agencies, government bodies and the private sector) and links between them can
be complex and direct and/or indirect.
• The term ‘partnership’ has been used in the development field to describe a whole
range of different types of relationships between different actors.
• The term ‘think globally, act locally’ has been used in the development field in
recent years to promote a more holistic approach, tackling global issues such as
poverty by strengthening local institutions contributing to civil society.
• So globally: “Partnerships contribute to the ‘social capital’, which enables civil
society to better deal with the states and markets at all levels of their operation
• Social capital is a term used to identify the self-willed webs which connect
individuals, groups, communities, societies and other forms of human association at
all levels of politics and economy)” (Fowler,1997).
• And locally: “Typically a true partnership exhibits full, mutual support for the
identity and all aspects of the work and the well being of each organisation.
• It is holistic and comprehensive, with no limits – in principle- as to what the
relationship would embrace.
• Though not common, this type of interaction can be found in ‘natural’ partnerships,
exemplified by religious denominations, professional associations, etc.” (Fowler,
2000)
ADDITIONAL METHODS OF
COMMUNITY PARTIPATION
 ADDITIONAL METHODS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
1. Community Asset Mapping; This is mapping to
identify and plan for the natural resource or social
assets available for the support of participatory
community development work
2. Ranking: This has two levels of application: 1.
Preference ranking, which involves participatory
brainstorming of development ideas and ranking
them in order of priority; and 2. Wealth ranking of
assets in the community;
3. Analysis: This involves participatory community
development trend analysis, including the historical
analysis
4. Venn diagram: This is a participatory community
development planning and implementation tool
 ADDITIONAL METHODS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
5. Seasonal calendar: This is calendar of livelihoods and
community development activities, for example in an
agricultural crop farming community, rain seasons and
patterns are key.
6. Community Action Plan: This is the plan of action for
participatory community development
7. Secondary data review: This involves review of the
available written information about an issue being
addressed through participatory development method
or technique
8. Key informants: These are key community stakeholders
who have key information on the issue being
addressed, or the method being applied.
 ADDITIONAL METHODS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
9. Structured and Semi-structured interviews: This is a technique
of community participation through interview to get the views of
community members about their development felt needs, and
the appropriate methods
10. Workshops and brainstorming: This is calling community
members in workshops where brainstorming methods is
applied to get the development felt needs and the appropriate
methods
11. Stories, portraits and case studies: This is building participatory
community development on the community legacies captures
in the success stories, community heroes, and other
successful case studies.
12. Team management and interactions: This method is applicable
where specialized teams are tasked with a participatory
community development responsibility.
 PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT AND GOOD GOVERNANCE

• Governance is the exercise of power and authority in

public revenue collection and the general distribution
of development resources
• This includes planning of development activities and
executing those plans
• Governance is done through government ministries
and sectors through which public services for large
scale development are offered
• Most of the government ministries and sectors utilize
public resources to offer large-scale development
services, like health, education, agriculture, etc
 PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT AND GOOD GOVERNANCE

• Since 1980s the global trend has been on political

democratization and pluralism, economic liberalization, and
transitions to a market-oriented economy.
• In 1989, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) released a "Policy Statement on
Development Cooperation in the 1990s, a strategy citing
sustainable development, protecting environment, and
participatory development as important issues on the
development aid agenda for the 1990s. This strategy is
premised on four essential approaches:
• Investment in human resources in the broad sense,
including education and training, meeting the needs for food
and health care, and efforts to eradicate AIDS and narcotics
problems;
 PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT AND GOOD GOVERNANCE

• Strengthening of political systems, government mechanisms,

and legal systems in which democracy and respect of
human rights are secured;
• Effective use not only of central governments, but also of
local organizations and self government, nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs), and the private sector;
• The establishment of open and competitive market economy
structures to mobilize individual initiative and dynamic
private enterprise.
• Good governance as a function of government does not
refer solely to support for participatory development, but as
participatory processes evolve, good governance develops
into such functioning that supports wider and more mature
people's participation.
 THE POINTS TO EXAMINE IN PROMOTING GOOD
GOVERNANCE FOR PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT
• Whether local societies, the assumed beneficiaries of
development, have adequately reaped the rewards, and
whether the capability of local people and communities
to participate has been fostered in such a way as to
compensate for the deficiencies of the government-led
approach,
• If arrangements within the framework of top-down
decision making and the government functions that
support it could have worked to narrow gaps and
promote participation by local societies,
• Whether development aid has stimulated developing
countries themselves to remedy the distortions at
their roots,
• Whether the system promotes democratization,
securing human rights, and reducing excessive
military expenditures.
 Issues and considerations in aid implementation

• Emphasis on dialogue between developing

countries and other donor agencies
• Establishment of a basis for strengthening ties
between local & international NGOs,
• Development of standards and methods for
evaluating participatory development and good
governance aid,
• Training of participatory development and good
governance staff,
• Introduction of social analysis to promote
participatory development in the aid project
cycle.
CONTEMPORARY PARTIPATORY
APPROACHES
CONTEMPORARY PARTICIPATORY
APPROACHES
• Induced involvement
• Transitory mobilization for community
development
• Group formation:
 INDUCED INVOLVEMENT
• The strategy, design and work plan of a
project are predetermined and the
intended beneficiaries are encouraged to
participate in its activities and obtain
certain benefits.
• In various projects people are invited to
make contributions of labour and/or other
resources which is also seen as a form of
cost sharing .E.g. food for work program
 TRANSITORY MOBILIZATION FOR COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT

• The people participate in certain specific

temporary (transitory) tasks mainly for the
development of their community,
• but there is no institutional base or structure
(groups or organizations) for more
sustained participation.
• Like the ‘Kazi kwa vijana’ initiative in Kenya
 Group formation
• The project has a specific objective to help
create new or strengthen existing self-formed
and self-run groups and organizations through
which the rural poor gain access to resources,
inputs and services and participate actively in
the project, also by means of self-proposed
actions
 Group formation
• This latter type of full participation leads also
to empowering of the poor: through their
groups and organizations they obtain not only
access to resources, but also decision-making
and bargaining power as well as a base for
sustained self-development efforts.
• Self-development and self-reliance should in
fact be an outcome of participation
 BENEFICIARY PARTICIPATION
• Various foregoing points highlight that the
participatory approach gives advantages to
the rural poor as well as to the agencies which
implement or support a project. The main
reasons are the following:
• 1) Coverage: to reach and involve on a wider
scale the disadvantaged rural people through
institution building, that is the creation of
adequate “receiving” systems at grassroot
level as well as of corresponding “delivery”
systems
 BENEFICIARY PARTICIPATION
• 2) Efficiency: to obtain a cost-efficient design
and implementation of a project.
• The beneficiaries will contribute more in
project planning and implementation by
providing ideas, manpower, labour and/or
other resources (cost-sharing).
• Consequently project resources are used
more efficiently;
 BENEFICIARY PARTICIPATION
• 3) Effectiveness: the people involved obtain
a say in the determination of objectives and
actions, and assist in various operations like
project administration, monitoring and
evaluation.
• They obtain also more opportunities to
contribute their indigenous knowledge of the
local conditions to the project and thus
facilitate the diagnosis of environmental,
social and institutional constraints as well as
the search for viable solutions;
 BENEFICIARY PARTICIPATION
• 4) Adoption of innovations; the beneficiaries
can develop greater responsiveness to new
methods of production, technologies as well
as services offered
• 5) Production: higher production levels can be
achieved while ensuring more equitable
distribution of benefits;
 BENEFICIARY PARTICIPATION
• 6) Successful results: more and better
outputs and impact are obtained in a project
and thus longer-term viability and more solid
sustainability.
• By stressing decentralization, democratic
processes of decision-making and self-help,
various key problems can be better solved,
including recurrent costs, cost-sharing with
beneficiaries as well as operation and
maintenance;
 BENEFICIARY PARTICIPATION
• 7) Self-reliance: this broad, ultimate
objective embraces all the positive effects of
genuine participation by rural people.
• Self-reliance demolishes their over-
dependency attitudes, enhances awareness,
confidence and self-initiative.
• It also increases people's control over
resources and development efforts, enables
them to plan and implement and also to
participate in development efforts at levels
beyond their community;
CONSTRAINTS OF PARTIPATION
 1) The political conditions/power structures of the
country and project area.
• These may vary in different forms and degrees
from a decentralized, laissez-faire and/or free
enterprise system to a fully centralized, strongly
planned and/or controlled one.
• They may vary furthermore in regard to their
degree of stability.
• Accordingly, widely differing situations can be
found ranging from full support of the central
and/or local government to participation of the
poor to indifference and hostility versus this
approach.
 2) Legislative obstacles.
• In various countries freedom of association
either does not exist or only formally;
• in other ones where the right of association,
including of small farmers, labourers, etc., is
recognized in the laws, the labour legislation is
inadequate and/or scarcely applied in practice.
• Under the influence of vested interest groups
the laws might further be interpreted and/or
applied in such ways that (part of) the rural poor
are prevented from organizing themselves.
 3) Administrative obstacles.
• Centralized public administrative systems that
control decision-making, resource allocation
and information, may ostracize participation.
The staff in such structures frequently disdain
people's involvement
• complex, bureaucratic procedures impede
genuine participation as well as one-way, top-
down planning performed solely by
professionals
 4) Socio-cultural impediments.
• A serious obstacle is the widespread mentality
of dependence, sense of frustration as well as
distrust in officials among low income rural
people. The latter are frequently dominated by
local elites to whom they have to leave key
decision-making.
• All this forms part of the “culture of poverty” of
the silent, excluded majority for whom survival
is the sole aspiration
 4) Socio-cultural impediments
• Furthermore, the poor form a heterogeneous
“group”: there are various categories with
class, caste, tribal and religious differences
and also with different interests, needs,
access to resources as well as potentials.
• Accordingly, also participation must be
planned and promoted according to different
local contexts and factions.
 5) Other impediments
• their low levels of living and heavy workloads
especially of the women isolation and
scattered habitat of the poor
• their weak health conditions
• low level of education and of exposure to
non-local information ignorance
• of their rights to self-organize groups lack of
leaders and know-how to move in this
direction in order to promote their interests.
 Constraints of supporting and
implementing agency
• 1) There is often pressure from the side of
implementing institutions and/or of supporting
government or donor agencies to produce visible
results quickly:
• quantity of funding and results prevails over
quality. Unlike tangible physical infrastructure
works and production outputs, most of the
arduous participation efforts remain less visible
and measurable as they have to focus principally
on training, changes of attitudes etc
 Constraints of supporting and
implementing agency
• 2) Many implementing agencies are designed
for centralized planning, decision-making and
implementation; such set-ups do not favor
participation
 Constraints of supporting and
implementing agency
• 3) There is usually lack of skilled staff to
promote participation.
• It is indeed often problematical to find well-
motivated and capable animators for group
formation and action.
• And yet the latter are the key women and
men to make a project successful as they live
and work directly with the intended
beneficiaries
STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE
PARTICIPATION
 Political will
• This basic problem can be overcome by
means of various strategies at international,
national and lower levels
• The strategies should all aim at informing,
sensitizing and motivating various categories
of key persons in one way or another involved
with rural development efforts
• These strategies should focus on:
• (a) politicians and governmental policy- and
decision-makers
 Political will
• (b) the top and other staff of government, UN
and donor agencies as well as of NGOs;
• (c) the (field) staff of development projects;
and (d) the elites and better-off people in
rural areas.
• The practical outcome of the strategies must
be that politicians, officials, experts and elites
become motivated to accept, support or at
least tolerate effective forms of participation
of the disadvantaged rural people in
development
 Sensitizing Governments
• 1) organizing ad-hoc conferences, seminars
and missions. These are so far occasionally
arranged by UN bodies, donors and NGOs
• 2) inviting key government officials in field
trips and workshops of participatory projects
and also in inter-country workshops dealing
with participation issues
• 3) using mass-media and audio-visuals:
distributing and showing of concise
promotional materials: pamphlets, slides etc
 Promoting policy dialogues
• Promoting dialogue between key officials,
planners and decision-makers of national and
international development agencies at country
level is important.
• The latter may include one or more UN bodies,
international and regional development banks,
donors, aid consortia and voluntary
organizations such as international NGOs
 Promoting policy dialogues
• They could encourage, organize and/or
participate in policy dialogues with selected
governmental agencies in order to obtain rural
poor-oriented economic and social policies and
institutional arrangements that are required for
participatory projects.
• The most important policies required for
participatory development regard appropriate
legislation for rural people's organizations
including full freedom of association or group
formation
Promoting policy dialogues Cont…
• Other special policies required include full
integration of women in development,
decentralization of decision-making, planning
and resource allocation, rural poor-oriented
input supply, extension, credit and marketing,
enhancing non-agricultural income-generating
activities as well as just fiscal and pricing
systems
 Promoting the planning and implementation
of participation in larger-scale projects
• In a project cycle various institutions are
involved such as one or more government
agencies, international development, funding
and/or donor organizations, NGOs, etc.
• The lack of understanding, sympathy and/or
experience regarding participatory projects of
one or more of these cooperating institutions
often makes it particularly difficult to render a
project or at least some of its components
participatory
 Promoting the planning and implementation
of participation in larger-scale projects
• The institutions involved may have different, e.g.
predominantly macro-economic and/or
technocratic views and approaches regarding
rural development efforts.
• Furthermore, experience on how to attain
effective beneficiary participation may be
lacking as the country's projects are either not
participatory or do not properly monitor and
evaluate beneficiary participation.
 Systematic sensitization
• Practice shows that the support of village
leaders is crucial for a participatory project.
• Many villages, especially in Africa, still form
very traditional communities which have a
closely knit social system of clans, lineages and
extended families.
• The indigenous chiefs are powerful and “their”
poor people over-dependent upon them
• Will such chiefs give their consent and support
for a project designed for the poorer people?
 Systematic sensitization
• In order to obtain their support, the local
traditional, administrative and other influential
leaders in the project's entire action area have
to be systematically sensitized and motivated
beforehand on the participatory project
approach through meetings, initiation
workshops and other actions.
• The local leaders have to become convinced
that it is in their own short- and long-term
interest to support the project
 Increasing support
• The increasing support of donors and
development agencies and banks for
participatory projects.
• Efforts to obtain this support aim mainly at the
following
• to convince donors and agencies which support
participatory projects, to continue this
assistance until they yield sufficient successful
results for demonstration to governments
 Increasing support
• to insist that donors, development banks and
agencies will only support a project if a
participatory approach is incorporated in it;
• to attain more assistance to developing
countries for participatory projects on a large
scale up to the point of creating a critical mass
Thank you