Municipal Rural Development Plans in Brazil: Working within the politics of participation

planotes

4949 4949 49 49 49 49 49 49

participatory learning and action

April 2004

Decentralisation andcommunity-based

planning

PLA Notes (Notes on Participatory Learn-ing and Action), formerly known as RRANotes, is published three times a year inApril, August, and December. Establishedin 1988 by the Sustainable Agricultureand Rural Livelihoods Programme(SARLs) of the International Institute forEnvironment and Development (IIED),PLA Notes enables practitioners of partic-ipatory methodologies from around theworld to share their field experiences,conceptual reflections, and methodologi-cal innovations. The series is informaland seeks to publish frank accounts, ad-dress issues of practical and immediatevalue, encourage innovation, and act asa ‘voice from the field’.

We are grateful to the Swedish Inter-national Development CooperationAgency (SIDA) and the UK Departmentfor International Development (DFID) fortheir financial support. Thanks also toKhanya-Managing Rural Change CC,South Africa for their additional supportfor this special issue.Editors: Angela Milligan, Nicole KentonEditorial Assistant: Holly AshleyEditorial Advisory Board:Nazneen Kanji, Michel Pimbert, Cecilia Tacoli, Bansuri Taneja, and JohnThompsonCover illustration: Regina Faul-Doyle Design and layout: Andy SmithPrinted by: Russell Press, Nottingham, UK

There is no copyright on this materialand recipients are encouraged to use itfreely for not-for-profit purposes only.Please credit the authors and the PLANotes series.

Contributing to the seriesWe welcome contributions to PLA Notes.These may be articles, feedback, tips fortrainers, or items for the In Touch sec-tion. A summary of our guidelines forcontributors is printed on the inside backcover. For a full set of guidelines, visit ourwebsite www.planotes.org, or contactthe editor at the address on the backcover, or email [email protected]

Subscribing to PLA NotesTo subscribe to PLA Notes, please com-plete the subscriptions form at the backof this issue, or subscribe online at

www.planotes.org. For subscription enquiries, contact Earthprint Limited,Orders Department, PO Box 119, Stevenage, Hertfordshire SG1 4TP, UK.Tel: +44 (0)1438 748111Fax: +44 (0)1438 748844Email: [email protected]: www.earthprint.com

Back issuesBack issues 1-40 in PDF format are nowavailable to download free of chargeonline. To purchase back issues of PLANotes please see the green order form atthe end of this issue. All IIEDpublications, including PLA Notes backissues and subscriptions, are availablethrough:Earthprint Limited, Orders Department,PO Box 119, Stevenage, HertfordshireSG1 4TP, UK.Tel: +44 (0)1438 748111Fax: +44 (0)1438 748844Email: [email protected]: www.earthprint.com

We regret that we are unable tosupply, or respond to, requests for freehard copies of back issues.

IIED is committed topromoting socialjustice and theempowerment of thepoor andmarginalised. It alsosupports democracyand full participationin decision-makingand governance. We

strive to reflect these values in PLANotes. For further information aboutIIED and the SARLs programme, contactIIED, 3 Endsleigh Street, London WC1H0DD, UK. Tel: +44 (0)20 7388 2117Fax: +44 (0)20 7388 2826Email: [email protected]: www.iied.org

Participatory developmentParticipatory Learning and Action (PLA)is an umbrella term for a wide range ofsimilar approaches and methodologies,including Participatory Rural Appraisal(PRA), Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA),

Participatory Learning Methods (PALM),Participatory Action Research (PAR),Farming Systems Research (FSR), MéthodActive de Recherche et de PlanificationParticipative (MARP), and many others.The common theme to all theseapproaches is the full participation ofpeople in the processes of learningabout their needs and opportunities, andin the action required to address them.

Participatory approaches offer acreative way of investigating issues ofconcern to poor people, and planning,implementing, and evaluatingdevelopment activities. They challengeprevailing biases and preconceptionsabout people’s knowledge.

The methods used range fromvisualisation, to interviewing and groupwork. The common theme is thepromotion of interactive learning, sharedknowledge, and flexible, yet structuredanalysis. These methods have provenvaluable for understanding localperceptions of the functional value ofresources, processes of agriculturalintervention, and social and institutionalrelations. Participatory approaches canalso bring together different disciplines,such as agriculture, health, andcommunity development, to enable anintegrated vision of livelihoods and well-being. They offer opportunities formobilising local people for joint action.

In recent years, there has been anumber of shifts in the scope and focusof participation:• emphasis on sub-national, national and

international decision-making, not justlocal decision-making;

• move from projects to policy processesand institutionalisation;

• greater recognition of issues ofdifference and power; and,

• emphasis on assessing the quality andunderstanding the impact ofparticipation, rather than simplypromoting participation.Recent issues of PLA Notes have

reflected, and will continue to reflect,these developments and shifts. Weparticularly recognise the importance ofanalysing and overcoming powerdifferentials which work to exclude thealready poor and marginalised.

planotesparticipatory learning and action

April 2004 <pla notes 49> 1

THEME SECTIONDecentralisation and community-based planning1. Overview: decentralisation and participatory planning

Ian Goldman and Joanne Abbot ........................................................................5

EXPERIENCES FROM THE FOUR-COUNTRY CBP PROJECT2. Linking the community to local government: action research in four African

countries Ian Goldman, James Carnegie and Joanne Abbott ......................................16

3. Experiences of CBP in South AfricaSam Chimbuya, Cecile Ambert, Marc Feldman, Teboho Maine and Tankiso Mea ........................................................................................................22

4. Experiences with CBP from Uganda Tom Blomley, Paul Kasule-Mukasa, Fiona Nunan and Charles Kiberu ..............28

5. Planning with the area council: experience with CBP in GhanaErnest Tay Awoosah, John Cofie-Agamah, BJ Oppong, Sampson Kwarteng and Francis Owusu Ansah ..................................................................................35

6. Empowering communities through CBP in Zimbabwe: experiences in Gwandaand Chimanimani Absolom Masendeke, Andrew Mlalazi, Ashella Ndhlovu and Douglas Gumbo 41

OTHER EXPERIENCES OF CBP IN AFRICA, ASIA AND LATIN AMERICA7. Experience of the Programme Nationale de Gestion de Terroirs (PNGT2) in

Burkina Faso Moussa Ouedraogo and Mohamed Drabo ......................................................48

8. Challenging and changing the big picture: the roles of participatory research in public policy planningCharles Ehrhart..................................................................................................52

9. Experiences in Panchayat-based planning in the mountains, Himachal Pradesh, India Rajeev Ahal and Silvio Decurtins........................................................................58

10. Some experiences from the Philippines in urban community developmentplanning: the participatory SAPIME approach Edna Co, Jan Velasco-Fabonan and Jeremy Nishimori ......................................64

11. The use of participatory three-dimensional modelling in community-based planning in Quang Nam province, Vietnam James Hardcastle, Barney Long, Le Van Lanh, Giacomo Rambaldiand Do Quoc Son..............................................................................................70

12. Municipal rural development plans in Brazil: working within the politics ofparticipation Glauco Regis Florisbelo and Irene Guijt ............................................................77

GENERAL SECTION13. Reducing domestic abuses against housewives of haor areas of Bangladesh:

understanding the impact of Concern’s interventionDipankar Datta and Neli Sen Gupta ..................................................................85

14. Extracts from ‘Teach Yourself Citizens’ Juries: A handbook by the DIY JurySteering Group’PEALS, Newcastle University..............................................................................91

REGULARSEditorial ....................................................................................................................2Tips for Trainers ......................................................................................................94In Touch ..................................................................................................................97RCPLA Network......................................................................................................104

CON

TENTS

planotesNumber 49April 2004

Data was broughttogether and changedinto information andideas in small groups.This approach allowedtriangulation and theevolution of individualpositions throughrigorous dialogue. (seechapter 8, page 52)

Phot

o:Ch

arle

s Eh

rhar

t

EDIT

ORI

AL

2 <pla notes 49> April 2004

editorial

that the quality of the articles is areflection of the hard work,professionalism and dedication of allparties involved.

Theme sectionThe guest editors of this special issueof PLA Notes on decentralisation andcommunity-based planning (CBP) areDr Ian Goldman and Dr JoanneAbbott.

Ian Goldman has a Master’sdegree in Tropical AgriculturalDevelopment, and wrote his thesis onenabling planning. He has workedfor long periods in Mexico, Zambia,the UK and South Africa, and onshort assignments in many countriesof Africa and Europe.

Ian was a founder of Khanya-Managing Rural Change in 1998, acollectively-owned and managedcompany working on sustainablelivelihoods and community-drivendevelopment. Since then Ian hasbeen involved in a range of workfocusing on poverty andreconnecting citizens with the state.One element of this has been oncommunity-based planning, whereIan initiated and has been the projectmanager of the four-country actionresearch project. He is currentlyExecutive Chair of Khanya.

Jo Abbot completed her PhD atUniversity College London inBiological Anthropology in 1996,combining natural and humanscience research approaches toexamine local use and managementof miombo woodlands in a protectedarea, Lake Malawi National Park. Shesubsequently joined IIED in Londonwhere she worked as a ResearchAssociate, focusing on policy andpractice issues around participation,biodiversity, and rural livelihoods insub-Saharan Africa. For the last fouryears, she has worked for CARE

International, first in Uganda andcurrently in South Africa and Lesotho,where she coordinates CARE'sprogramme on rural livelihoods,HIV/AIDS, and good governance.

As Jo used to work for IIED andcoordinated PLA Notes for three anda half years, editing eleven issues, ithas been something of a déjà vu forher to be guest editing an issue fiveyears later!

This issue on decentralisation andcommunity-based planning draws onthe four-country CBP Project, theaction-research study in Africa whichIan managed. This project is outlinedin article two, and articles three to sixgive experiences from the fourcountries – South Africa, Uganda,Ghana, and Zimbabwe. The issuealso includes other examples, outsideof the four-country CBP Project, fromfrancophone Africa, Asia, and LatinAmerica.

What is community-basedplanning? It is defined in theoverview as ‘planning bycommunities, for their communities,which is not isolated from but linksinto the local and or nationalgovernment planning systems’. Givenincreasing decentralisation in manycountries, this theme is timely. CBPattempts to be more responsive tolocal people’s needs, throughparticipatory planning and resourceallocation, by improving the qualityof services, and by deepeningdemocracy through promotingcommunity action and involvementat a local level.

The country studies in this issueseek to draw comparisons betweenthe different approaches, objectivesand scales used in community-basedplanning projects. They highlight theneed to look beyond the narrowerfocuses that have been prevalent inthe past, which have resulted in

Welcome to issue 49 of PLANotes

NewsFirstly, allow me to introduce myselfas Acting Editor of PLA Notes, asAngela Milligan is now on maternityleave. As we go to press, I amdelighted to announce that Angelahad a baby boy, Lindley, on 21stMarch. I am sure you will all join mein congratulating Angela and herfamily and wishing them well.

My name Is Nicole Kenton and Ihave been working in the DrylandsProgramme at IIED for the past 13years, and as some might say, timefor a change! I am delighted to beable to take up this new challengeand I would like to thank Angela forensuring that the handover wassmooth and thorough, and to thankher for all her work on this issue,since she did the bulk of thecoordination and editing prior togoing on leave. I am also indebtedto Holly Ashley, the EditorialAssistant, without whom I wouldnot have been able to produce thisissue. Holly, as previous Editor of PLANotes, has provided invaluableexperience and help and has workedlong hours to get this issue to print. I am also grateful to Andy Smith forhis usual high standard of designwork. I look forward to workingwith both of them on the nextissues. My thanks also go to the PLANotes Editorial Board for theirsupport and their detailed commentson the articles, with special thanksto Bansuri Taneja. And last, but notleast, I would like to thank the twoguest editors for their professionaland tireless efforts in commissioningand assisting the authors andcoordinating all the contributions,and of course I would like to thankthe authors themselves. You will see

EDITORIALED

ITORIA

L


barriers to participation for the mostvulnerable, or have been less thaninclusive in their scope andimplementation, or have failed todeliver real democratic power to thecommunities concerned.

The underlying principle of CBP,that the guest editors and authorshave sought to demonstrate in thisspecial issue, is how communities canplan for their future, as part of anintegrated planning process for anarea, thereby improving localgovernance.

General sectionFor this issue we bring you twogeneral articles. The first is byDipankar Datta and Neli Sen Gupta,and explores the effects of the workundertaken by Concern Worldwide inhaor areas of Bangladesh to promotethe socio-economic empowerment ofpoor women, principally byexamining the level of domesticviolence experienced by housewives.

Our second general article is alittle different to the usual, and wehope that you enjoy it! It comes inthe form of a series of cartoonextracts by Kate Charlesworth takenfrom Teach Yourself Citizens’ Juries: Ahandbook by the DIY Jury SteeringGroup, published by the Policy, Ethicsand Life Sciences (PEALS) Programme

at the University of Newcastle. Theseextracts look at what a citizens’ juryis, why you might want to have one,what the main ingredients of oneare, and how to get started.

Regular featuresContinuing with the special theme,this issue’s Tips for Trainers sectionbrings you two extracts from Khanya-Managing Rural Change’s ActionResearch for Community-BasedPlanning project manual.

The manual offers a practical‘how to’ approach to community-based planning, giving a backgroundto the subject, and providing usefulinformation about facilitating andorganising CBP activities. These shortextracts discuss two of the initialphases of the CBP process: how toensure the effective representation ofpeople within the planningcommunity, and how to prepare andrun a pre-planning communitymeeting.

Our In Touch section contains theusual selection of book reviews,forthcoming events and courses, andour e-participation website reviews.We always welcome contributionsfrom our readers for this section, soplease get in touch at the usualaddress.

The RCPLA Network (Resource

Centres for Participatory Learningand Action) has undergone a reviewof its vision and mission statementswith the aim of taking on a far moreproactive role within thedevelopment sector. You will seefrom the update, that in order toorient member organisation towardsthis new focus, it is organising anumber of activities this year,including a series of writeshops todocument field experiences. We lookforward to hearing more about theoutcomes of these activities in futureissues.

PLA Notes celebrates its 50thissue! The next issue will be our 50th and tocelebrate this anniversary, we will beinviting past guest editors of PLANotes to give an up-to-date pictureof developments in their particularareas, and also to look ahead andthink about – what next? And even,what will be in the 100th issue! Weare very pleased and privileged tohave Robert Chambers guest-edit thisspecial issue and welcome anycontributions for our In Touch section.In the meantime, enjoy this 49thissue of PLA Notes. We welcomeyour feedback and comments. AsAngela would say, happy reading!Nicole Kenton, Acting Editor

CorrectionsPLA Notes 48: In our In Touch section on page 82, we gave a wrong websiteaddress for PEANuT. The correct address is: www.northumbria.ac.uk/peanutOur apologies to PEANuT for this.

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NSPECIAL ISSUE


DECENTRALISATION ANDCOMMUNITY-BASED PLANNING

THEM

ESECTIO

N


IntroductionThis issue of PLA Notes focuses on community-based plan-ning (CBP)1 – planning by communities, for their commu-nities, which is not isolated from but links into the local andnational government planning systems. Thirteen years onfrom the RRA Notes theme issue on Local Level AdaptivePlanning2, it is interesting to review where debates andexperiences have and have not moved on compared tothose in the early 1990s. A review is also timely given theincreased emphasis on decentralisation in many countriesthroughout the 1980s and 1990s. We also consider therelevance of community-driven development models,including the participatory poverty analyses, beingpromoted by parts of the World Bank over the last five toten years, which typically have included a CBP component.The issue draws from an action-research study in Africa oncommunity-based planning, known as the CBP Project,undertaken in South Africa, Ghana, Zimbabwe andUganda, and outlined in article two. It also includes other

examples, outside of the four-country CBP Project, fromFrancophone Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

We believe CBP is important as it attempts to makeplanning and resource allocation systems more responsiveto local people’s needs – improving the quality of services,while deepening democracy through promoting commu-nity action and involvement in planning and managing localdevelopment. It thus aims to improve both governmentaland other services as well as to empower communities.However, different CBP processes have different objectives.Some focus more on community mobilisation, others onimproving participation in local government planning oremphasising participatory forms of information gathering

by IAN GOLDMAN and JOANNE ABBOT

Overview: Decentralisation andparticipatory planning

1Caption: villagers fromDour Yarce villagepresent their plan tovisitors from differentAfrican countries,including Ian Goldman,Hans Binswanger fromthe World Bank, andJean-Paul Sawdogo, PNGT

Phot

o:D

avid

Van

nier

,Wor

ld B

ank

1 Note that we use CBP to refer to community-based planning in general.Elsewhere we refer specifically to the CBP Project (a four-country action researchproject in Africa – see articles two to six).2 RRA Notes 11, Proceedings of the Local Level Adaptive Planning Workshop,London. 1991. In this issue, adaptive planning refers to planning that takesaccount of basic needs and promotes integrated development throughappropriate technologies.

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NIan Goldman and Joanne Abbot1

to inform national or sectoral policies. This theme issue triesto separate out the different approaches and highlightstheir objectives so that useful comparisons on methodol-ogy, scope, and scale can be made.

In the overview to the RRA Notes issue on adaptive plan-ning, Pretty and Scoones (1991) provide a good startingpoint for the current issue. They discuss some of the issuesaround adaptive planning, highlighting that traditionalland-use planning has tended to:• focus on narrow technical issues with little use of local

knowledge;• be data and information hungry;• result in maps or other outputs that local people may not

understand; and,• fail to tease out complex problems, such as vulnerability.

In discussing the institutionalisation of adaptive orparticipatory processes, they highlight:• that local people may be involved in information collec-

tion but not decision-making;• that politicians may accept participation but not democ-

racy, whereas effective participation implies the devolu-tion of the power to decide;

• the importance of local accountability;• the need to sensitise bureaucrats to be adaptive planners,

how to use the methodologies, and to how to use localinformation and link it to the formal planning system;and,

• they ask whether adaptive planning can revitalise theprocesses of government, encouraging an active bargain-ing process for external support.

The earlier issues of RRA Notes had a natural resourcebias, perhaps reflecting the emergence of adaptive plan-ning from a rural appraisal origin. However the point ofdeparture for this issue is communities planning in an inte-grated way for their future, which will include natural

resources but also many other sectors, as part of holisticand integrated planning for an area.

The drive towards community-based or drivenplanning In the move towards decentralisation there has been atendency to promote holistic development planning at localgovernment level, such as Integrated Development Plans(IDPs) in South Africa, district plans in Uganda, and munic-ipal rural development plans in Brazil.

These plans are meant to be integrated and multi-sectoral, and supposedly guide spending allocations.However in many countries there is inherent conflictbetween a planning system driven through local govern-ment, and sectoral planning aligned with nationalministries. Indeed many countries have multiple planningsystems that are not readily integrated or synchronised. Forexample, Zimbabwe’s planning systems include the follow-ing plans: development, physical, environmental, land-use,water catchment, national park, and forest area, and thisis by no means uncommon3.

So challenges remain in how to develop a vertical plan-ning system, which effectively integrates plans at commu-nity, local government, and national government levels – aswell as horizontal integration across sectors at all levels.Starting at the local level, CBP may offer some waysforward for overcoming these challenges.

End uses of and approaches to community-based planning CBP can be undertaken for the following reasons:• to improve the quality of integrated plans by

incorporating perspectives and understanding from localcommunities;


3 PlanAfric (1999), “Rural Planning – Zimbabwe Country Study”, produced aspart of an IIED study on Rural Planning and Sustainable Livelihoods.

“We believe CBP is important as itattempts to make planning and resourceallocation systems more responsive tolocal people’s needs – improving thequality of services, while deepeningdemocracy through promotingcommunity action and involvement inplanning and managing theirdevelopment”

People from Ward 19,Mangaung, South Africavote for their preferredoutcomes

Phot

o:Ia

n G

oldm

an

Overview: Decentralisation and participatory planning 1

• to improve sectoral plans and so the quality of services,once again by incorporating information generated byand with local communities;

• to promote community action, sometimes as a means ofreleasing latent energy of communities or to reduce thedemands on government by shifting responsibilities tocommunities (e.g. for maintaining infrastructure in coun-tries where government is seeking to reduce its responsi-bilities);

• to promote community control over development, eitherin improving local influence over decisions, or in manag-ing development directly; and,

• to comply with policy or legislative directives for publicparticipation in different types of plans and planningprocesses.

The current issue focuses on approaches that attempt tointegrate a number of these objectives, i.e. where plans arelinked to higher level systems, whether local or nationalgovernment or sectoral departments, but also on empower-ing communities to control their own development. Table 1shows some of the characteristics of the articles included.

One tension in the different approaches lies in the trade-offs between depth and scale. Shorter, quicker approachescan be applied and replicated more widely, and offer oppor-tunities for roll-out within the resources (human, financialetc.) of government without high levels of external support(beyond initial training). But they are inherently less inten-sive and so less transformational than those that involvemuch higher levels and longer processes of facilitation,support, and input. In this edition an example of the latteris that from Brazil (see article 12), while the community-based planning (CBP) project and the examples from South

THEM

ESECTIO

N

4 Although some municipalities can have millions of people, e.g. Sao Paolo

“The point of departure for this issue iscommunities planning in an integratedway for their future, which will includenatural resources but also many othersectors, as part of holistic andintegrated planning for an area”

Table 1: Some characteristics of the examples included in this theme issue


Case studies

CBP project

South Africa

Zimbabwe

Ghana

Uganda

Uganda/Tanzania partici-patory poverty assessments

Brazil

Philippines

Vietnam

Burkina Faso

India

Community planning unit(nos of people)

Ward (10–15,000)

Ward (6–8,000)

Area Council

Parish (5,000)

Community

Municipio (municipality)<20,0004

Barangay (village)

Commune (3–5,000)

CVGT (1000+)

Gram Panchayat(1,000–5,000)

Integratedcommunitylevel plan

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

In some cases

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Relatively short process in community

4–5 days planning, plus preplanning/ follow-up

5 days planning, plus preplanning/ follow-up




2 weeks

3-4 week profiling

10 days PRA training; followed by 12-day trainingin modelling

Long intensiveprocess

Several months,with on-goingsupport

Contribution tohigh level plans

Local government

National plans

Local government

Intended

District

In future

District and StateSeries of planning events and workshops at different levelsover several weeks

THEM

ESE

CTIO



Africa, Zimbabwe, Uganda, and Ghana are closer to theformer. The more intensive transformational approachesoften build on Freire’s work, and in Africa these include theTraining for Transformation work originating in Zimbabwe,and the Development Education and Leadership Trainingfor Action (DELTA) approach, both described in RRA Notes11 (Leach, 1991).

Another tension linked to the depth and scale relates tothe end use of the process, whether community planning ismore closely linked to community and local governmentplans (most examples in this issue) or informing nationalplanning processes (e.g. the Participatory Poverty Analyses(PPAs) or Poverty Reduction processes). Ehrhart (articleeight) outlines some of the challenges associated with PPAswhere the participatory analysis has more national thanlocal benefit and where any policy outcomes of CBP mayor may not be experienced in the communities where theassessments were undertaken. In the evolution of the CBPProject in South Africa over 2003/4, the importance of link-ages to local government planning are emphasised, andnew tools have been developed to assist with this.

Across all the examples in this issue, some key themesemerge for comparison: • approach taken and methodologies used;• evidence of impact;• replication and scaling up.

Approach and methodologyKey to the success of CBP is not just the planning itself, butthe whole system around it. We focus here on a few keyelements: the planning methodology, the facilitation, thetraining, the link with community-managed funds, account-ability/monitoring and evaluation, and the linkage to thelocal government planning system.

MethodologyThe different models all use a variety of PRA tools. Themajor difference is between those taking a long-termapproach, focused on a small number of communities,which is the case in the Philippines and Brazilian cases, andthose deliberately compromising on the depth of themethodology with the intent to have the resources to covermany communities, perhaps an entire unit of local govern-ment (e.g. municipality, district etc.). The contrast betweenthese two approaches, related to their differing objectives,is highlighted in article two, and how approaches weredeveloped that could be empowering and yet not toocostly.

Most methodologies involved a classic situation analysis,development of objectives, planning for action, typicallyusing PRA tools. In the case of the CBP project, the method-ology was based on livelihoods analysis with social groups(focus groups), specifically seeking to identify and build onthe diversity in the community, and use understanding ofpeople’s livelihoods, and their preferred outcomes to drivethe planning. The use of a strengths-based approach todeveloping preferred livelihood outcomes, and not prob-lems, is one of the most innovative features of this method-ology. In Tanzania, the emphasis was on focus groups andnot community-wide meetings, and the Brazil paper pointsto a diversity of participatory events and processes,community-wide and more focused.

In the Brazilian case study, a three-part PRA process wasused, followed by participatory formulation of a municipalrural development plan (MRDP). Note that in the Braziliancontext, the municipalities have small populations, equiva-lent to or slightly larger than the wards/parishes in the othercountries. The three elements of the PRA process includedmobilisation, typical PRA, and lastly the deepening anddeveloping of proposals, such that the overall process takes

“Key to the success of CBP is not just the planning itself, but the whole systemaround it. We focus here on a few keyelements: the planning methodology,the facilitation, the training, the linkwith community-managed funds,accountability/monitoring andevaluation, and the linkage to the localgovernment planning system”

Participantsattending a planningworkshop for theCBP project in NewEdubiase, Ghana

Phot

o:Ta

y A

woo

sah

THEM

ESECTIO

NOverview: Decentralisation and participatory planning 1


many months. In the PPA, the use of the participatory tools was prima-

rily to improve understanding of the context, and in Ugandaa community action plan (CAP) was also developed inresponse to priority problems. In Tanzania the decision wastaken not to have a CAP, as without this being linked to theformal planning system, it was difficult to support imple-mentation in the communities which had been included.

The paper on Vietnam highlights one particular tool, aform of mapping using a scaled and geo-referenced 3-Dmodel, which provides the basis for a broader participatoryplanning framework. Many of the different approachesdescribed in this edition, including the India example (articlenine), have incorporated a mapping or transect tool. In theVietnam case, the mapping has been made three-dimen-sional, and seems to have had a positive response fromcommunities.

FacilitationThe use of facilitators varies. In all cases communities weredirectly involved in the planning process, usually assisted byexternal facilitators. To promote replication, within the fourcountries involved in the CBP project, the external facilita-tors have been municipal officials, local NGOs, and otherlocal service providers. In Burkina, facilitators were from thePNGT programme. In South Africa, ward committee (WC)members were not initially trained directly, but in the rollingout this year, one WC member has been trained per wardand first indications are that ward committee members arevery positive and in most cases have had good capacity toundertake the planning.

In Brazil, rural workers unions (STRs) played a key role,as well as farmer groups, which later broadened to includethe municipal councils and other municipal-level groups. InBurkina Faso, initial work was facilitated with farmergroups, and this later expanded to village committees. InVietnam, Village Protection Teams formed as ‘legalised’wardens, now control illegal access to resources. As in thePhilippines case, an NGO provided the support for a more

intensive empowerment process. In many cases an initialchange agent facilitation role of an NGO (e.g. CAREUganda), company (e.g. Khanya), or project (e.g. PNGT)was critical in introducing the innovative approach.

Many of the examples suggest that local serviceproviders and municipal officials can facilitate a CBP process(e.g. the Core Facilitation Team at ward level in Zimbabwe,or sub-county staff in Uganda) following initial training andsupport.

TrainingA variety of training of facilitators can be seen. In SouthAfrica, this started as a pure learning-by-doing experience,supplemented by a two-day PRA training. This has nowevolved into a two-week theory and experience-based train-ing, during which facilitators work in a community to drawup a ward plan. Uganda also found that the initial trainingwas insufficient, and is now experimenting with an experi-ence-based training model. Clearly if this is to be carriedacross a whole district (for example in Uganda covering 170parishes in the pilot district, Bushenyi), some cascade modelof training has to be used. With the Tanzanian PPA, a three-week training was conducted, as well as a one-week train-ing so that faci l itator/researchers understood thepolicy-making process. The SAPIME methodology in thePhilippines used five days of training. In Burkina, villageswere not trained to undertake the planning, but village offi-cials have had training to assist with implementation (e.g.in procurement and financial management).

Community-managed fundsA complementary aspect to community involvement inplanning is the ability to make decisions about the use ofreal money. This happened in Burkina, in the four-countryCBP Project, either through funds provided by the munici-

“One of the key motivating factorsbehind CBP is to improve accountabilitybetween local government andcommunities. A key weakness in manyattempts at decentralisation is that thereis little pressure from below forperformance at local government level,often undermining decentralisationprocesses”

• empowering communities (with an emphasis on community plans,and community-managed funds);

• empowering local governments (through fiscal, administrative, andpolitical decentralisation);

• realigning the centre;• improving accountability, downwards and upwards; and,• capacity-development at all levels.

Box 1: Pillars of the community-driven developmentapproach

THEM

ESE

CTIO



pality (SA, $1,500–8,000 per ward), or through the use oflocal revenue (Uganda, Zimbabwe, Ghana). This element isstressed in the community-driven development approach(see Box 1) and is a key characteristic of many of the largecommunity-driven development projects such as in Guinea(World Bank, 2003), or Burkina Faso.

In Brazil and Uganda, as also in Bolivia (CBP, 2002), theplanning related directly to the municipal or district plan,and so to the municipal or district budget. In the CBPProject work in South Africa, Ghana, and Zimbabwe, theplanning sought to link the community plans with the localgovernment plan, and indeed in the elaboration of theproject in 2003/4, specific methodologies and training havebeen developed for municipalities so they can incorporateand use information from the community plans. InVietnam, the planning process allows the community toinfluence decisions about the use of resources, especially inthe allocation of district and provincial funds to locally iden-tified priorities.

Accountability and monitoring and evaluation (M&E)One of the key motivating factors behind CBP is to improveaccountability between local government and communities.A key weakness in many attempts at decentralisation is thatthere is little pressure from below for performance at localgovernment level, often undermining decentralisationprocesses. Improved accountability was a key element in theBrazilian example, and in the CBP project this aspect has beenemphasised in the scaling-up. Uganda offers good examplesof simple mechanisms for improving accountability. Forexample, all funds available to communities and differentlevels of government must be publicly displayed, typically onflip charts on the walls of local government offices.

Just the presence of a plan can provide a clear directionfor political representatives, and for which they can be heldaccountable. The Araponga case in the Brazil article

provides a good example of this. Another interesting aspectof the Bolivian experience is the use of civil society struc-tures to hold the municipality to account (VigilanceCommittees), made up of representatives from grassrootsorganisations (OTBs), and these participate in the planningprocess. In Vietnam, support is required to ensure theaccountability and collaboration of the local authorities,upon which the communities rely for processing casesagainst those who infringed the law in community-controlled areas.

Beyond these examples, accountability is an area whereconsiderable work is needed to assist in developing goodpractice models and approaches. Improving accountabilitycan also be viewed as part of ongoing support for theimplementation of community-based plans, and support tothe community structures during implementation.

Linkage to local government and higher-level plansIn Brazil and Bolivia, the community plan developed is themunicipal plan, i.e. the plan for the lowest level of localgovernment. In the CBP project there was direct impact onlocal government plans in Uganda, South Africa, andZimbabwe. Over the last six months, the deepening of themethodology in South Africa has included developing amethodology for the local government to incorporate anduse the information generated from the CBP project in thelocal government plan. In the Philippines, this is highlightedbut does not seem to have happened yet while in BurkinaFaso, this should happen as communes are created nextyear. The PPA process is explicitly designed to informnational planning processes, and concrete examples fromthe more advanced Uganda process are illustrated. It wouldbe useful to see how CBP in local government contextscould also lead to the benefits of the PPA, where detailedsnapshots are used to inform higher-level decision-makingand policy-setting.

“A challenge is to see how CBP can bedeepened and widened, so that themethodologies have local benefits incommunity-driven development andempowerment, but also can be appliedat a sufficient scale to deliversignificant benefits to significantnumbers of people”

A residentpresents goalsand strategies todeal with crime inMantshali, SouthAfrica

Phot

o:Ia

n G

oldm

an

THEM

ESECTIO



ImpactOn pages 6-7, we suggested a number of possible impactson:• the quality of plans at different levels;• the quality of services;• community action; • community participation and control over development;

and,• fulfilling government requirements for participation.

What evidence do we see from these examples? Inde-pendent evaluations have been conducted in South Africaand Uganda, and a multistakeholder review in Brazil. Table2 summarises some impacts that seem to be emerging.

One of the objectives of CBP was to change resourceallocations so that they are more responsive to people’spriorities, including that for poor people. There is evidence

of that happening at municipal level, e.g. in Mangaung inSouth Africa. In Uganda, the evidence that emerged fromthe PPA process led to an increased emphasis on water. InBolivia, a decision to create (very small) municipalities wasaccompanied by massive resource shifts from urban torural areas (Khanya, 2002). However we are yet to seesystem-wide changes which can be linked directly to CBP,as in terms of widespread rollout these are still at earlystages.

In terms of policy impacts, CBP has been incorporatedinto new national policy, e.g. in the rollout of theHarmonised Participatory Planning Guidelines (HPPG) inUganda, the addition of a performance indicator for theSouth African Department of Provincial and Local Govern-ment, and the addition of a community-empowermentpillar to the decentralisation approach in Zimbabwe.

Table 2: Impact of CBP

Impact

Quality of plans at:

Community level

Local government level

National level

Quality of services

Community action

Community participation andcontrol over development

Control over use of funds

Capacity-development

Accountability of localgovernment and communityrepresentatives

Evidence of impact

In most cases there were no plans previously.

In South Africa, the IDP was informed and reoriented by the inputs from CBP, as were the sub-county and districtplans in Uganda and district plans in Zimbabwe. There is a need to strengthen this, which is happening at presentin South Africa and Vietnam. CBP provided a model for developing more participatory forms of local governmentplans in Brazil (MRDPs).

From Tanzania and Uganda, PPAs seem to have promoted decentralisation, and in Uganda an increased emphasison water and sanitation.

There is little evidence around this, except the evaluation in South Africa showed that there was an impact on thequality of services where service providers participated in the planning (e.g. police).

In Burkina Faso, there seems to have been extensive action resulting and a major community contribution. In thefour CBP project countries there does seem to have been significant impact on community action, at least whileimplementing the community-managed funds. However it is not clear this is sustainable without an ongoingsystem, as in Burkina, or which is emerging in South Africa and Uganda.

Communities have had control over the use of funds allocated to the plan in many of the cases, even if these havebeen very limited in Ghana and Zimbabwe.

There has been evidence of significant capacity development in many of the examples, both in community and theirservice providers, e.g. evaluations in Burkina and Mangaung (South Africa). In South Africa and Vietnam, there isincreasing emphasis on training the ward and district committee members respectively, and greater emphasis ontraining in Uganda to promote wider replication.

Largest impact seems to be in the intensive examples such as Brazil. Should emerge in others if the work with thecommunity is sustained as intended.

THEM

ESE

CTIO



Table 2: Impact of CBP

Issue

1. Strong political commitment to decentralisation andempowerment is vital. Donors should support localchampions of community-driven development (CDD)

2. Successful scale-ups put money in the hands ofcommunities and local governments, to harness theirlatent capacity through learning-by-doing. This issupplemented by relevant capacity building.

3. Best practice in one context can be poor practice inanother. Field-testing through pilots reveals problemsand suggests adaptations that can be crucial.

4. Stakeholders require context-specific manuals,procedures, and training courses at different levels(national, state, local government, community). Theseneed constant revision in the light of new experiencesand contexts.

5. Good systems for sharing and spreading knowledgehelp inform different stakeholders precisely what theirroles are, and help create common values.

6. Incentives for stakeholders should be aligned withprogramme objectives.

7. Physical scaling-up (mass replication) needssupplementation by social scaling-up (making theprocess more inclusive) and conceptual scaling-up(moving beyond participation to embeddingempowerment in the entire development process).

8. Success depends on training tens of thousands ofcommunities to execute/manage projects/accounts.Good scaling-up logistics lower costs and improvecommunity ownership, and hence sustainability. So docommunity co-financing and contracting.

9. Scaling-up is a long-haul process that can take aslong as 15 years.

10. Ease of replication is key to rapid scaling-up. Rulesand procedures must be carefully designed, yet be sosimple and transparent that they can be replicatedeasily in tens of thousands of communities with limitedskills.

Examples from case studies

National rollout programme (PNGT, Burkina).Involving national departments and local governments in the learning process (SouthAfrica).Selecting local governments, which are committed to empowering citizens (South Africaand Vietnam).Making the plan obligatory for accessing local budgets (as suggested in Philippines).Empowering poor groups to negotiate more effectively using the information from theplan (Brazil, Philippines).

CBP in South Africa, Uganda, Burkina Faso.

Pilots in all cases.

CBP manual developed, tested, adapted for each country. Revised versions beingproduced in South Africa and Uganda, fully integrated with local government planningsystem.Training manuals developed (Uganda, Philippines, South Africa).Guides for district planners developed (South Africa).Comprehensive manuals, documentaries, and toolkits, in English and Vietnamese,accessible both in printed, CD, and downloadable electronic formats (Vietnam).

Training in all cases.

Ensuring that production of CBP part of incentives for local government (Uganda).

Social scaling-up – using social groups as basis of planning (CBP). Empowering groupsto negotiate (Brazil).Conceptual scaling up – widening the CBP agenda to include community funds,implementation (South Africa, Uganda).

Developing community financing mechanisms (Burkina, South Africa).Using local officials as facilitators as part of their normal job (Uganda).Using community representatives as part of their responsibility (South Africa).Developing local trainers to support facilitators (Uganda, Zimbabwe).

Building a long-term agenda including CBP, e.g. Uganda Local GovernmentDevelopment Programme, PNGT in Burkina.

Improved emphasis on documentation could promote more systematic learning. Multi-language toolkits, use of the local media, and cascade training proved useful inVietnam.CBP examples highlight potential trade-off between depth and scale i.e. tensionsbetween Issues 1 (empowerment) and 10 (replication).

THEM

ESECTIO



Upscaling In order for CBP to have an impact, the approach needs tobe deepened (to increase the effectiveness of theapproach), as well as widened, so that it can have a larger-scale impact. There does seem to be early evidence of effec-tiveness, and some areas of how the approach can bedeepened are drawn out in the CBP project paper (articletwo), including: • improving linkages to the local, national, or sectoral

government planning systems and developing tools foranalysing information from the community plans (deep-ening);

• improving the quality with which the methodology isapplied (for example in some places the use of preferredlivelihoods outcomes was not systematically applied,leading to a reversion to a problem and infrastructure-based approach);

• a recognition that the use of community-managed fundsis an essential component, either through a direct fundingallocation (as in South Africa or Burkina Faso), or throughlocal revenue raising (such as Uganda), which should belinked to knowledge of the funds available;

• strengthening local government’s support for implemen-tation and plan follow-up;

• improving the use of monitoring tools, and accountabil-ity mechanisms by community structures as well as localgovernment;

• developing a mechanism for promoting budget alloca-tions for disadvantaged groups whose priorities canotherwise ‘get lost’ when plans are aggregated; and,

• effective integration of traditional leaders, opinionleaders, civil society organisations and service providers(including the private sector) in the planning process.

This sets an agenda for the deepening process, andwork on this has started in South Africa for example. TheBrazilian example also shows a more political agenda,around the solidarity of worker groups.

Another challenge is how CBP can be achieved at scale,so that impacts are significant in country terms. Table 2draws out critical issues proposed around upscalingcommunity-driven development (Binswanger, 2003), whichare relevant to CBP. Some highlights from the CBP examplesare included. These did not necessarily happen in all cases,but illustrate examples that could be followed elsewhere.

ConclusionsThe articles in the current issue show examples of attemptsto develop participatory planning systems that will empowercommunities, but are also linked to government planningsystems. In many ways the debates that arise from this issueare similar to those from the earlier RRA Notes. We see asimilar range of concerns about quality and training, andsimilar methodologies, all using PRA-type tools.

What appears to be different is the intention for systemiceffects, to influence at scale, and to ensure that the prioritiesof poor people are integrated effectively into the governmentplanning system. A key point of departure is the focus on thedecentralised planning system as well as the planningmethodology – the latter was often the only emphasis inmany early examples of RRA and PRA. All the examples in thecurrent issue emphasise an improved institutional analysis andunderstanding, positioning planning within a governancearena rather than a toolbox, and recognising the importanceof mainstream government planning processes. The emerg-ing decentralising contexts offer new and exciting opportu-nities for local participation, and much of the impetus for CBPseems to be both driven by, and drives, democratic decen-tralisation which reaches to communities. A new political liter-acy transcends many articles – obvious in many ways (as theBrazil article suggests) but a missing piece in many early PRAprocesses. While there is still room for innovation in the devel-opment of tools (as the Vietnam case illustrates), the way inwhich participatory approaches are used, facilitated,sequenced, analysed, and linkages are created betweendifferent stakeholders seems more important in determiningthe outcomes of the CBP than the exact tools themselves.

A challenge is to see how CBP can be deepened andwidened, so that the methodologies have local benefits incommunity-driven development and empowerment, butalso can be applied at a sufficient scale to deliver significantbenefits to significant numbers of people. The upscalinghappening in Uganda and South Africa, and others commu-nity-driven development (CDD) projects such as PNGT2 inBurkina, would seem to provide emerging lessons for howthis upscaling can happen. So in these articles we see examples of participation andparticipatory methodologies being integrated into main-stream government processes, which is a major step forwardon a long journey to improved local governance.

THEM

ESE

CTIO



CONTACT DETAILSDr Ian Goldman, Khanya-managing ruralchange cc, 17 James Scott Street, Brandwag,Bloemfontein 9301, South Africa. Tel: +27 51430 0712; Fax: + 27 51 430 8322; Email:[email protected]

Dr Joanne Abbot, Programme Coordinator,CARE South Africa – Lesotho, 23 JorissenStreet, 8th Floor, Braamfontein Centre, PO Box221 WITS 2050, South Africa. Tel: + 27 11 4033288; Email: [email protected]

ABOUT THE AUTHORSIan Goldman is the Executive Chair of Khanya-managing rural change, an organisationworking on community-driven developmentand sustainable rural livelihoods in Africa. He isthe project manager for the four-country CBPproject. Joanne Abbot is Programme Coordinator forCARE South Africa-Lesotho. She was alsoinvolved in the CBP Project, notably in Uganda.

REFERENCESKhanya (2002) ‘Report on Study Visit toBolivia’. Bloemfontein: Khanya-managing ruralchange cc.Leach, M (1991). ‘Delta and village levelplanning in Sierra Leone: possibilities andpitfalls.’ RRA Notes 11: Proceedings of theLocal Level Adaptive Planning Workshop,London, 11 (6) 42–44.World Bank (2003): ‘Report on Meeting ofcommunity-driven development (CDD) ProjectDirectors, Ougadougou, October 2003’.Washington: World Bank.CBP (2002): “Report on Study Visit to Bolivia”,Bloemfontein, Khanya-managing rural change.Binswanger, H (2003): Report produced formeeting of Caucus of African Ministers aboutcommunity-driven development (CDD),Burkina Faso, November 2003.

THEM

ESECTIO

N


EXPERIENCES FROM THEFOUR-COUNTRY CBP PROJECT

IntroductionThis paper introduces the work on the project ActionResearch on Community-Based Planning, providing boththe background to the topic and findings after two years.How community involvement in planning and managementcan link to decentralised delivery systems has formed thebasis of this DFID-funded action-research project coveringUganda, Zimbabwe, Ghana, and South Africa. Severalother papers in this edition focus on the experience ofparticular partner countries – South Africa, Zimbabwe,Uganda, and Ghana.

BackgroundThe CBP (community-based planning) project was devel-oped as a response to two challenges:• an analysis of the institutional issues in trying to imple-

ment a sustainable livelihoods approach; and,• a realisation of the limitations of efforts to promote

decentralisation, where these concentrated on localgovernment itself, and not also on how local governmentserves citizens.

The challenges of implementing a Sustainable LivelihoodsApproachThe Sustainable Livelihoods Approach (SLA) emerged in the

nineties from best practice as participatory holistic develop-ment approach building on people’s strengths and workingin partnerships from the community to the policy levels1.Khanya implemented a study funded by DFID looking at theinstitutional support required to implement a sustainablelivelihoods approach (Khanya, 2000). This work wasconducted in Zimbabwe, Zambia, and South Africa (in twoprovinces). The key findings are summarised in the need todevelop the following six governance issues from micro tomacro levels in order to effect a livelihoods approach:Micro level (community level)• poor people are active and involved in managing their

own development (claiming their rights and exercisingtheir responsibilities); and,

• the presence of a responsive, active, and accessiblenetwork of local service providers (community-based,private sector, and/or government).

Meso level (local government)• at local government level (lower meso) services are facil-

itated, provided, or promoted effectively and responsively,coordinated, and held accountable;

• the region/province (upper meso) providing support andsupervision to local governments.

by IAN GOLDMAN, JAMES CARNEGIE and JOANNE ABBOT

Linking the community to localgovernment: action research infour African countriesTH

EME

SECT

ION


1 For more information on the SLA refer to www.livelihoods.org

2

THEM

ESECTIO

NLinking the community to local government – action research in four African countries 2


Macro level (policy)• The centre providing strategic direction, redistribution,

coordination and oversight;• The international level supporting capacity of nations and

regions to address poverty.It is also essential to ensure effective linkages between

the different levels.This research highlighted the major gap between the

micro and meso levels, where most communities in Africado not receive many services from government, anddepend rather on community-based services such as tradi-tional healers, local crèches, advice from other farmers,local shops, local markets, and various forms of reciprocity.There are some very interesting examples of work at themeso level, and setting the appropriate macro/policy envi-ronment, e.g. the Local Government DevelopmentProgramme (LGDP) in Uganda and the Rural District CouncilCapacity-Building Programme (RDCCBP) in Zimbabwe, and

the focus on developmental local government and inte-grated development planning (IDPs) in South Africa. TheUgandan and Zimbabwean programmes have beenpioneers in how to develop effective local government, butneither has been effective in strengthening communitylevels, and both recognised this deficiency, and were keento see how to address this. Similarly while the IDP processrecognises the need for participation, it lacks the appropri-ate methodology for doing this.

The first of the governance issues above impliescommunity involvement in planning and management oflocal development. The requirement for widely dispersedand accessible services implied by the second suggests arethinking of service delivery paradigms. Addressing howcommunity involvement in planning and management canlink to decentralised delivery systems has formed the basisof this action-research project.

Action-research on community-based planningThe purpose of the project is that:

Realistic plans have been developed in each country forpolicy change, implementation or piloting of community-based planning systems, which participating institutions arecommitted to take forward.

The project has involved a range of partners in the fourcountries, including:• the key national organisation involved in decentralised

planning (to consider promoting policy impacts);• a local government where the learnings are being imple-

mented immediately; and,• a development facilitator involved in participatory planning.

In this way it has micro-macro linkages imbedded in thedesign. It is an action-research project, building on commit-ted partners for whom these questions are critical.

The project has involved in-country reviews of

“The requirement for widely dispersedand accessible services implied by thesecond suggests a rethinking of servicedelivery paradigms. Addressing howcommunity involvement in planningand management can link todecentralised delivery systems hasformed the basis of this action-research project”

A femaleparticipantpresents hergroup's work,New Edubiase,Ghana

Phot

o:Ta

y A

woo

sah,

ISO

DEC

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NIan Goldman, James Carnegie, and Joanne Abbot2

experience, cross-country sharing, development of pilot andrevised methodologies, and visits to other countries fromwhom lessons can be learnt. The design did not envisagepiloting during this project, but as a subsequent phase. Infact, piloting has happened in all the four countries andfull-scale implementation has happened across at least onelocal authority in each country.

The approach being adopted in the CBP project is thatwe need to address all the focuses of CBP in a manner thatis implementable and sustainable using the resources avail-able to local governments and in local communities. Thefour focuses include:• to improve the quality of integrated plans by incorporat-

ing more accurate information from local communities;• to improve sectoral plans and so the quality of services,

once again by incorporating more accurate informationfrom local communities;

• to promote community action, sometimes as a means ofreleasing latent energy of communities or to reduce thedemands on government by shifting responsibilities tocommunities (e.g. for maintaining infrastructure in coun-tries where government is seeking to reduce its responsi-bilities); and,

• to promote community control over development, either

in improving their influence over decisions, or in manag-ing development directly.

Therefore the CBP project has focused on the questionof what sort of community-based planning system can beimplemented which is holistic, which reflects the complexreality of people’s lives, is linked to the mainstream plan-ning system (usually local government, but also sectoral),can be empowering, and is realistic within the resourceenvelopes (human and financial) available within a localgovernment area. This is further expanded in the overview.

This article focuses on the generic approaches devel-oped in the project, and the articles on each country bringout the specific adaptations and experience of eachcountry.

Principles underlying this approach to CBPKey principles were developed that underpin the approachto CBP being followed in this project (and which emergefrom the principles of the Sustainable LivelihoodsApproach). These include:• ensuring that poor people are included in planning;• systems need to be realistic and practical, and the plan-

ning process must be implementable using availableresources within the district/local government, and must


Table 1: Proposed approach to community-based planning linked to the IDP

Pure empowerment CBP approach

Directly related to local action

Intensive, time-consuming

Process oriented

Decisions primarily on members’ ownresources

Learning process crucial

Not necessarily inclusive, initiative-based

Focus primarily on rights, strengths,opportunities, as well as needs

No consideration of municipality-wideapproaches for community needs

Proposed 3rd Way for CBP in this project

Starts with community view. Planning for localaction, municipal, provincial, and other inputs

Limited time, e.g. three to four days plus follow-upcontacts, budget cycle related

Partnership approach including capacity-buildingand empowerment

Decisions on own resource proposals, proposals forgovernment, and other resources through IDP

Mutual learning crucial

Inclusive, covering whole ward/parish/area

Strategic planning: linking people’s strengths,opportunities, needs, and local knowledge withexternal specialists’ know-how, to find effectivesolutions for many

Focus on the ward, but some consideration ofmunicipality-wide issues

Conventional participatory planning

Primarily related to municipal budgets, decisions,actions

Limited time, budget cycle related, typically twohours

Delivery oriented

Decisions primarily on government-controlledresources

Learning process as a side-effect

Inclusive, area-covering, (democratic right)

Strategic planning: linking people’s needs and localknowledge with external specialists’ know-how, tofind effective solutions for many

Consideration of municipality-wide approachesthrough negotiation across communities

Linking the community to local government – action research in four African countries 2TH

EME

SECTION

link in and integrate with existing processes, particularlylocal government planning;

• planning must be linked to a legitimate structure that cantake funds, such as a ward/parish;

• planning should not be a one-off exercise, but be part ofa longer process;

• the plan must be people-focused and empowering;• planning must be based on vision and strengths/oppor-

tunities, not problems;• plans must be holistic and cover all sectors;• the process must be learning-oriented;• planning should promote mutual accountability between

community and officials;• systems should be flexible and simple; and,• there must be commitment by councillors and officials

and there must be someone responsible to ensure theplan is implemented.

The clients of the planning are communities/interestgroups/individuals, local politicians as well as technical staffof local governments, and service providers (includingnational and provincial government departments, andNGOs).

Table 1 compares some different approaches to CBP, andillustrates the approach being undertaken in this project.

Challenges of this approachSome of the key challenges that this type of CBP raises are:• the need for a short process (and so not too resource-

intensive) and yet sufficiently in-depth to address theneeds of poor people, and to be empowering in how theplanning is conducted;

• in order to have sufficient facilitators, there is a need todevelop a facilitation capacity not just in local govern-ment, but by ward/area committee members, as well asin a range of service agencies operating within an area(e.g. departments of social development, agriculture,health, education, who also need to get to know thepriorities themselves), and who need to provide their timeat no cost;

• the need for a community budget to be available imme-diately to support local action after the planning, andavoid planning without a budget which has been acommon problem; and,

• the need to train people to undertake planning, includingward/parish committees, and developing their ability toplan and manage development in their wards.

Table 2: Planning activities

Stage

Preparation

Situation analysis (2 days)

Planning

Action planning

Implementation

Planning activities

Preparatory meetings with ward committees and opinion leaders one to two weeks prior to the planningbeing due to start.

• meeting different social groups to analyse their livelihoods.• using a Venn diagram process to analyse local support institutions, whether CBO, government, NGO, or

private sector.• mapping the resources and problems of the community.• doing a timeline of key historical events in the community.• doing a SWOT analysis of the community.

• in a community meeting all the outcomes and key vulnerabilities identified by different social groups areprioritised, and a vision statement drawn up for the ward.

• based on the top five priorities, groups then work on each of the development priorities to developobjectives, strategies, and projects/activities including what the community will do, what the localgovernment needs to do, and what others need to do.

• proposals are then made for projects to be submitted to the main local government plan, and in SA forthe approximately $2–5,000 that was guaranteed to each ward to support their process.

• the ward committee draws up an action plan to take the plans forward.

• project groups take forward implementation of community activities, in some cases with support fromlocal government.

• monitoring by ward/parish committees, and reporting to local governments and citizens.

2 This tool can be found in the generic CBP manual available at www.khanya-mrc.co.za/cbp/SA.htm


THEM

ESE

CTIO

NIan Goldman, James Carnegie, and Joanne Abbot2


The core methodologyThe core methodology that was developed involved the useof a variety of PLA tools, combined into a three to five daystrategic planning process. This was not done at the lowestlevel of organisation (e.g. a village), but rather at the nextlevel above (e.g. a ward, parish), typically of 5–10,000people. At this level all countries could conceive of thewhole country being covered using the resources availablein terms of staff and finances. Table 2 summarises theelements in the planning process.

Some of these planning methods used establishedPRA/PLA tools, such as the Venn diagram, seasonal calen-dars, mapping, timelines, etc. However, there were somecritical innovations developed across the four countries:• Basing the analysis on a participatory livelihoods analysis

of different social groups (or in some cases interestgroups) which assumes that communities are diverse andthat the interests of these groups differs. A tool developedby Khanya in the prior research was used, which analysedpeoples’ assets, vulnerabilities, preferred outcomes, liveli-hoods strategies, and also developed some semi-quanti-tative data, to avoid the generalisations which are aproblem in much PRA-type data collection2.

• Development of priorities based around outcomes, notneeds, and the use of these outcomes to develop acommunity vision.

• A fairly typical planning process based on goals, strate-gies, and then projects and activities. Many of the coun-tries focus on projects – this planning focused more onactivities which the ward/parish could undertake them-selves, as well as the support they needed from the localgovernment, or other service providers (see Table 2).

• Building on the strengths of groups in the planningprocess.

• Making proposals for larger projects for incorporation inthe local government plan.

The combination of these elements led to a strengths-

based plan based around local action, rather than aproblem-based plan usually about pieces of social infra-structure, implemented and funded by others, and usuallya fanciful wish list which can never be implemented. This ispart of the process of changing the relationship betweenstate and citizen, from one where the citizen is passive,begging for resources from a supposedly all-powerful andbeneficent state, to a more realistic and empowering rela-tionship, where the state provides a supportive environ-ment, people act on their development, and the statelistens to people’s views and supports where possible.

ResultsIn the first year of piloting, some two million people werecovered by the methodology in six local governments inthe four countries. In South Africa and Uganda this wasintegrated immediately into the local government’s plan.Some independent evaluations were carried out inUganda and South Africa. These were positive, findingthat the methodologies had worked, and had led tocommunity action as a result. In the case of Uganda therewere some questions as to how far the priorities of thepoor were incorporated and the decision was taken toupscale. A range of areas where the methodologyneeded to be strengthened were identified which havebeen the focus during 2003. These were notably:• improving the linkage to the local government plan and

developing tools for analysing information from thecommunity plans (deepening);

• improving the quality with which the methodology wasapplied (for example in some places the use ofoutcomes was not systematic, leading to a reversion toa problem and infrastructure-based approach);

• a recognition that the use of community-managed

“This is part of the process of changingthe relationship between state andcitizen, from one where the citizen ispassive, begging for resources from asupposedly all-powerful and beneficentstate, to a more realistic andempowering relationship”

Villagers fromDour Yarcevillage,Burkina Faso,presentingplans

Phot

o:D

avid

Van

nier

,Wor

ld B

ank

THEM

ESECTIO

NLinking the community to local government – action research in four African countries 2


funds was an essential component, either through adirect funding allocation (as in SA), or through localrevenue raising (in the other three countries) whichshould be linked to knowledge of the funds available;

• strengthening local government’s support forimplementation;

• improving the use of monitoring tools, and accountabilityby community structures as well as local government;

• develop a mechanism for promoting budget allocationfor disadvantaged groups (i.e. in the guidelines, use ofprioritisation criteria, etc.); and,

• integration of traditional leaders, opinion leaders andservice providers effectively in the planning process.

An important spin-off has also been the developmentof a positive relationship between participating NGOs andthe state, with a recognition by government of NGO’sknowledge of participatory methodologies, and by NGOsof the need to link to macro-level processes to make asignificant impact on systems and so on poverty.

UpscalingThe challenge of such projects is the uptake and upscaling incountry championed by government. As the project is a learn-ing project, based on partnerships from the beginning, thishas occurred. In Uganda’s case CBP methodology was incor-porated in a Harmonised Participatory Planning Guide (HPPG)for parish and subcounty planning, and an attempt was madeto the cover the whole country in one go, later scaled downto about half the country. This is part of the next phase ofLGDP. In SA’s case the decision was taken to cover eight localgovernments, covering about five to eight million people, witha range from the city of Durban (eThekwini) to a small ruralmunicipality. In Zimbabwe the wish to mainstream CBP led toa change in the approach to decentralisation, and the additionof a priority around community empowerment. One of theimportant realisations was that if this was to be upscaled atraining of trainers methodology would be needed, and amanual and training programme were developed, and arebeing applied and rolled out in Zimbabwe and South Africa.

CONTACT DETAILSIan Goldman, Khanya-managing rural changecc, 17 James Scott Street, Brandwag,Bloemfontein 9301, South Africa. Tel: +27 51430 0712; Fax: + 27 51 430 8322; Email:[email protected]

James Carnegie, Khanya-managing ruralchange cc, 17 James Scott Street, Brandwag,Bloemfontein 9301, South Africa. Tel: +27 51430 0712; Fax: + 27 51 430 8322; Email:[email protected]

Joanne Abbot, Programme Coordinator,CARE South Africa – Lesotho, 23 JorissenStreet, 8th Floor, Braamfontein Centre, POBox 221 WITS 2050, South Africa. Tel: + 2711 403 3288; Email: [email protected]

REFERENCESCBP Partners (2003) ‘Making the linkbetween micro and meso: learning fromexperience on community-based planning(CBP).’ Natural Resource Perspectives 88,October 2003. London: OverseasDevelopment Institute.Khanya (2000) ‘Institutional Support forSustainable Livelihoods in Southern Africa.’Bloemfontein: Khanya-managing ruralchange. Available at www.khanya-mrc.co.zaReports on each country and examples ofmanuals are available at:www.khanya-mrc.co.za/cbp.htm

“An important spin-off has also beenthe development of a positiverelationship between participatingNGOs and the state, with a recognitionby government of NGO’s knowledge ofparticipatory methodologies, and byNGOs of the need to link to macro-level processes to make a significantimpact on systems and so on poverty”

A resident drawinga base map formapping exercise,Mangaung localmunicipality,Bloemfontein,South Africa

Phot

o:Ia

n G

oldm

an

THEM

ESE

CTIO

N


BackgroundArticle two outlines the overall approach to community-based planning, as well as some of the experiences of usingCBP in Mangaung Municipality in South Africa, one of theearly partners in the project. This article takes this further,describing this experience in some detail, as well as thelessons that have been learnt as CBP has been rolled out toeight municipalities during 2003–4.

Participatory structures within municipalities: the role ofWard CommitteesThe South African Constitution of 1996 provides for theestablishment of three distinct spheres of government (thenational, provincial, and the municipal level), each withdedicated as well as shared competencies. Table 1 showsthe different levels of government and their roles.

Legal basis of participationThe Municipal Structure Act 117 of 1998 defines categoriesof municipalities and the institutional structures belowmunicipalities. In this system, ward committees are the onlylegally recognised structure below municipalities and act asthe formal communication link between the community

and council. Local government’s role (according to theWhite Paper on local government) is to ensure that all citi-zens have access to basic services, to promote democracyand human rights and economic and sectoral development.The White Paper urges municipalities to:• establish a culture of municipal governance that comple-

ments formal representative participatory government;• encourage, and create conditions for, the community to

participate in the affairs of the municipality; and,• build the capacity of the community, especially women

and other disadvantaged groups, to enable them toparticipate in the affairs of the municipality so as to fostercommunity participation.

by SAM CHIMBUYA, CECILE AMBERT,MARC FELDMAN, TEBOHO MAINE andTANKISO MEA

Experiences of CBP in SouthAfrica

3Ward Committeemember ConferenceMajola presenting theHIV/AIDS componentof Ward TwoMangaung's plan backto the community

Phot

o:Ia

n G

oldm

an

THEM

ESECTIO

NExperiences of CBP in South Africa 3


CBP in the context of the planning system in SouthAfricaTwo national planning processes, the nationwide MediumTerm Expenditure Framework facilitated by Treasury and theMunicipal Systems Act (MSA) specify community participa-tion requirements as part of the formulation of municipalIntegrated Development Plans (IDPs). IDPs were introducedas part of the post-Apartheid process of creating a moreresponsive public administration and to assist with the inte-gration of development at local government level. The real-isations of the participatory aspects of the IDP formulationprocess are contingent on the following:• Representation: through broadening the range of stake-

holders that need to be involved in the IDP process (e.g.the local press, NGOs, women, community leaders);

• Responsiveness: through promoting flexible planningpractices that respond to community priorities andoperate in partnership with communities; and,

• Accountability: IDPs are proposed as a means for publicassessment and prioritisation of needs within communi-ties.

CBP supports the participatory objectives of the IDP bygrounding local governance through effective linkages withcommunities. The strategic thrust of municipal level deci-sion-making in the IDPs is maintained while empoweringcommunities to take on development responsibility andmaking the local government more accountable.

The initial application of CBP in Mangaung Article two in this edition describes the four-country CBPproject. The initial partners in the CBP project in SouthAfrica were Mangaung Local Municipality, the section onDecentralised Development Planning in the national Depart-

ment of Provincial and Local Government (DPLG), and CAREwith Khanya as the project managers. Mangaung LocalMunicipality comprises urban and rural areas inhabited bysome 800,000 inhabitants spread across 43 wards.Mangaung committed its own resources to support theproject, in part through the R50,000 (US$5,000 – theexchange rate was R10 to one US$) allocated per ward insupport of ward plan implementation as well as resourcinga training process for facilitators.

The planning methodologyThe four- to five-day planning methodology used in

Mangaung aligns closely with the generic methodologydescribed in article two. A learning-by-doing process wasused to train facilitators; soon after morning classes, after-noon practicals were conducted, followed by reflectionsessions held in the evenings. This was strengthened by acascading learning-by-doing process where the first wardplan was led by a Khanya person; this was followed bytrainees taking charge of the facilitator’s roles in the next twowards while Khanya supervised the process. Finally traineesfacilitated ward planning without assistance from Khanya.

The methodology was modified based on the experi-ence in the initial wards. In affluent and commercial farmingareas time was shortened and social groups were fewer asmeetings could only be held in the evenings after work. Inpredominantly black areas there was participation fatigueand more time was needed to explain the merits of CBP inthe context of the IDP. The key elements of the initialapproach are shown below in Table 2.

Initial resultsAn independent evaluation was conducted of the impact

Table 1: The structures of government that provide services to communities

Level

Province

Metro (city)

District

Local Municipality

Ward

Approx population

1.5–9 million

3 million

500,000 to 1 million

50–800,000

5–15,000

Structure

Provincial Government

Metro (six in South Africa)

District Municipality

Local Municipality

Ward committee

Role

Major responsibility for service delivery e.g. agriculture, health, education.

Integrated local and district functions. Also play significant role in servicedelivery.

New level of local government and role emerging. Plays a support andstrategic role for local municipalities, as well as managing some services.

Responsible for local government planning, infrastructure services,services not catered for by high levels.

Only legally recognised level below local government. Very limited role atpresent but used as level for community-based planning.

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NSam Chimbuya, Cecile Ambert, Marc Feldman, Teboho Maine and Tankiso Mea3

of CBP six months after planning started. Of the wards, 42completed their plan and 41 of the 42 wards spent theirR50,000 allocation. In 18 of the 20 wards surveyed, therewere regular ward committee meetings afterwards,suggesting that ward planning enhances ward committeeactivity levels. Ward 19 (Mangaung East) failed to take offcompletely as the ward committee failed to understand theprocess.Ward levelThere were no ward plans prior to CBP. Local actionoccurred in almost all wards to implement their plans,although there were some problems with some of the proj-ects funded. In Ward 20 (a predominantly white popula-tion) there was initial hostility to participatory planning fromthe councillor who was used to working with selectedpersons from NGOs. However in the end an implementableward plan was produced. Municipal IDPsThe ward planning changed the course of Mangaung’s IDP.Economic development was overwhelmingly the top devel-opment priority rather than the traditional municipal focuson infrastructure. Other priorities emerged such as HIV andsecurity, where the municipality has to play an enabling

rather than provider role. CBP also contributed to shapingdevelopment programmes and projects, in particular foryear two of the IDP.Improved servicesWhere service providers participated in the ward planningprocess this appears to have enhanced service provision. Innorth Mangaung the municipality is now cutting grass morefrequently and broken signboards have been replaced. InWard Two, the crime rate has dropped due to the increasein police patrols.

Community empowerment, ownership, and actionCommunity empowerment and ownership of the warddevelopment agenda and process were raised as significantoutcomes of the CBP process by ward council lors,contributing to ‘proud community members and wardcommittees’.

Impact on local government There was a significant shift in emphasis from infrastructureto Local Economic Development initiatives in the municipalIDP in response to CBP results. The 30 trained municipalfacilitators found the methodology empowering, enhancing


Table 2: Elements of the initial CBP approach in Mangaung (with comments on the modified approach)

Elements

Training of lead trainers

Training of Facilitators

Community participation and ownership

Political buy-in

Stakeholder involvement

Finance

Link to local government planning process

Follow-up and community management

Approach

Through learning-by-doing. In the modified approach lead trainers from eight municipalities weretrained in the classroom and in the field. Course included PRA tools.

Through cascade learning by doing plus two-day PRA training. Training of facilitators was done by leadtrainers mentored by Khanya. Ward committee members were included as facilitators.

Social groups are used for livelihood analysis to obtain a wider spectrum of the preferred outcomes.

Ward committee members take part in the ward planning as facilitators or as working group leaders.They also ensure the ward plan reaches the municipalities.

Service providers in the ward (such as police, or home-based care CBOs) are involved in the situationanalysis and working groups and take on responsibilities in implementing some elements of wardplans.

Untied funds of US$7,000 were provided for implementing ward plans by municipality. Thecommunity itself undertakes many projects, without outside funding.

Projects identified in the ward plans that require large sums of money were submitted to themunicipality for inclusion in the IDP projects and programmes. Ward priorities used to developoverall LG priorities, as well as to inform development programmes.

Ward councillors and ward committee took on the responsibility of supervising implementation ofward plan. Almost all wards implemented their ward plans with 98% of funds used appropriatelyaccording to audit. This was done with rudimentary monitoring of implementation by municipality.

Experiences of CBP in South Africa 3

the spirit of participation and enabling sector departmentrealignment.

The financial cost of ongoing CBP facilitation is relativelylow, but the initial facilitator training costs are significant.A ten-day training for 50 facilitators will cost aboutR490,000 (about US$70,000: the exchange rate is at R7 tothe US Dollar). Ward allocations of R50,000 (US$7,000) tosupport wards taking forward their plans was critical. Thiscatalytic allocation levered substantial community volun-tary action. Initiating CBP in the early stages of the IDPreview ensures that its outcomes can be carried out veryearly in the IDP review process so that the plans and proj-ects can be included in the IDP budget.

Upscaling CBP in South AfricaA national workshop held in October 2002 reviewedMangaung’s CBP experience and agreed to establish anational steering committee to scale up this experience.The Steering Committee Members include the South AfricaLocal Government Association, the National Departmentof Provincial and Local Government (DPLG), the Free StateDepartment of Local Government and Housing, the Munic-ipalities of Mangaung, Ethekwini, Greater Tzaneen, ThaboMofutsanyane, IDT, GTZ, with Khanya as CBP ProjectManager providing the secretariat, and later the Develop-ment Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA). Based on the lessonslearnt from the Mangaung experience, the steeringcommittee recommended widening and deepening theparticipatory process and strengthening linkages to the IDP.The elements of scaling up include:• establishing a national coalition and partnership of

national government, donors, municipalities, and serviceproviders;

• developing methodological guidelines;• piloting as a learning process;• rolling out of a cascade training process including a two

week training of facilitators supported by a serviceprovider; and,

• securing resources to support rollout, including significantcontributions from municipalities themselves.

The DPLG (through Netherlands Aid), DBSA, DFID, andGTZ are supporting the process, while significant inputs arealso being contributed by participating municipalities,amounting to a total ZAR 6 million (around US$0.9 million).

During this process Khanya partnered with a serviceprovider with expertise in IDPs called Development Works.The initial CBP methodology was modified slightly, notablyto include a reconciliation process in the middle where theresults from the situation analysis are brought together toinform learnings against priorities. An additional dimensionwas introduced through the development of a manual tostrengthen linkages between the process and outputs ofCBP and IDP and ensure that information arising from oneprocess can be used in the other, so as to:• systematically consider IDP information for alignment

between the ward plans and the IDP; and,• use strategic information emerging from the ward plans

to inform the strategic and operational contents of theIDP.

To support the application of this approach additionalguidelines had to be developed and three manuals havenow been produced:• a CBP facilitators manual;• a training manual for a two-week training course for CBP

facilitators; and,• guidelines for IDP Managers to manage the CBP process

THEM

ESECTIO

N


Ward Committeemember Sampresents thehousingcomponent inWard Two’s plan,Mangaung

Phot

o:Ia

n G

oldm

an

Farmers from WardTwo in BelaBela(Warmbaths) at aLocal Municipalitymeeting as part ofthe nationaltraining of trainers

Phot

o:Ia

n G

oldm

an

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NSam Chimbuya, Cecile Ambert, Marc Feldman, Teboho Maine and Tankiso Mea3


and the use of CBP information in the IDP review process.Some revisions to the approach are shown in Table 3.

Lessons learntSome of the key lessons learnt during this process havebeen:• Emphasising the strengths-based approach to build on

local conditions and avoiding planning for the impossible(typically with massive investment requested in infra-structure) and supporting the community action-orien-tated plans. Working objectives are screened as part ofthe reconciliation exercise to identify the strengths in thecommunity that have a bearing on achieving that objec-tive and to avoid ‘shopping list’ planning.

• Ensuring linkages for integrating the ward plans with localgovernment plans. Ward plans are drawn upon to informthe priorities, objectives, strategies, and projects of theIDP. However, CBP priorities and objectives are outcomes-focused and strengths-based. This means that where thepractice of IDP is problem-based, the two are not alwayseasily reconcilable.

• Improving monitoring mechanisms so that ward/areacommittees, community members, and local government

can monitor the plans effectively. In Mangaung, after thedisbursement of process funds, their use, although moni-tored, was the sole responsibility of the ward committee.Transparency, and simple and effective monitoring mech-anisms meant that 99% of the funds were accounted for.

• Developing mechanisms to support community-basedimplementation and management, and not seeing plan-ning as an end but a beginning. This entails institutional-ising the planning and implementation process throughlegitimate structures such as the ward committees.

• Ensuring political buy-in and support role of ward coun-cillors, the mayor, municipal officials, and the municipalmanager. This needs to include institutionalising theadministrative support requirements for rolling out CBPand ‘mainstreaming’ it as part of the municipal planningand implementation process.

• Managing the role of customary/traditional authoritieswhere there is competition between them and the statu-tory authorities. Where they are operational, customaryor traditional authorities should be involved at thepreplanning stage to ensure their ownership of the planespecially where the ward councillor and committee areineffective. In practice, challenges may arise where

Table 3: The approach taken during national rollout

Elements

Training of lead trainers

Training of facilitators

Community participation and ownership

Political buy-in

Stakeholder involvement

Finance

Link to local government planning process

Follow-up and community management

Modified approach

Participating municipalities sent four lead trainers for a ten-day training course. The course combinedclassroom with practical PRA training and the implementation of a ward planning process.

Trained trainers run a training course for facilitators drawn from the ward committees in their respectivemunicipalities supported by a service provider. Facilitators were also trained through doing wardplanning.

One ward committee member is being trained to strengthen ward ownership.

Ward committee members take part in the ward planning as facilitators or as working group leaders.They also ensure the ward plan reaches the municipalities.

Service providers in the ward (such as police, or home-based care CBOs) are involved in the situationanalysis and working groups and take on responsibilities in implementing some elements of ward plans.

The cost of the pilot is borne by external funds. However costs for training and planning (as well asimplementation support costs) are provided by the municipality.

This has been much increased and training conducted on how to take this forward. This stage willhappen during the period February to May 2004.

Ward councillors and ward committees will take on the responsibility of supervising the implementationof the ward plan. More emphasis has been placed on M&E of implementation by the wards, whether bythe ward committee, by citizens of the ward committee, or by the Municipality (i.e. three different typesof M&E).

THEM

ESECTIO

NExperiences of CBP in South Africa 3


customary or traditional authorities’ areas of jurisdictionoverlap within the boundaries of a ward, in particularwhere more than one customary or traditional authorityexists within the same ward.

Some comments by facilitators and councillors onthe CBP process in Mangaung MunicipalityFacilitators found the experience of CBP very powerful. Someof the comments made were:

“I was annoyed when my Head of Department nomi-nated me. But now I am glad that I could play a role in thisprocess. My eyes were opened and I can now make bettercontributions in my department”.

“Initially, I was extremely sceptical. However, I think theprocess is an absolute necessity. We in government do notalways know what the needs of communities are. Thisprocess helped me to understand these needs and prioritiesbetter. For the first time in my life we actually asked peopletheir opinion”.

“It is the best thing that happened to Bloemfontein. Icannot see how we could have worked as councillors forsuch a long time without direct interaction with the commu-nity. Those who did not know about you will now know”.

Ways forward in the futureThis phase of upscaling finishes in August 2004, with areview of the experience of the pilots and proposals for howthis could be upscaled nationally. This will include reviewingthe methodology and guidelines, as well as making propos-als for national support. This approach would aim toprovide a methodology, which municipalities can use to giveeffect to their participation mandate. This will be based onan assessment of the rollout process, in terms of the levelsof energy released, whether community action happens,and whether improved IDPs and services result from theprocess.

CONTACT DETAILSSam Chimbuya, Senior Consultant, Khanya-managing rural change. Email: [email protected]

Cecile Ambert, Development Works. Email:[email protected]

Teboho Maine, IDP Manager of MangaungLocal Municipality. Email:[email protected]

Tankiso Mea, Head of the Speaker’s Office inMangaung Local Municipality. Email:[email protected]

Marc Feldman, Development Works. Email:[email protected]

Groups fromWard 4 BelaBelameeting using alocal house anddoing a SWOTanalysis

Phot

o:Ia

n G

oldm

an

THEM

ESE

CTIO

N


BackgroundThe Government of Uganda is strongly committed to decen-tralisation, as evidenced by the devolution of responsibilitiesfor local planning, resource allocation and budgeting, andinvestment management to local governments. It is a statu-tory requirement for each local government to produce athree-year integrated rolling development plan.

The Local Government Act 1997 created five tiers of LocalCouncils (see Table 1). The highest level is the District/CityCouncil (lower council level five, or LC5). This is followed bythe county/municipal council (LC4); the sub-county/munici-pal division/town council (LC3); the parish/ward council (LC2);and the village council (LC1). The table below summarisesthe nature of local council structures, their populations, androles.

Prior to the introduction of the Community-based Plan-ning project in Uganda, there were a number of participa-tory planning models in use, ranging from the use ofParticipatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) techniques for identifyingcommunity needs, to the involvement of communities in theprovision of services and maintenance thereafter. Uganda hashad an innovative Local Government DevelopmentProgramme (LGDP) that has made great strides in the devel-opment of local government and lower level structures.However the Ministry recognised that it did not sufficiently

address the strengthening of the lowest levels (LC2 and LC1)and so was keen to be a partner in the four-country project,and see how CBP could complement what Uganda wasalready undertaking.

A steering group was formed to oversee the implemen-tation of the CBP project, which consisted of the Office ofthe Prime Minister, the Local Government DevelopmentProgramme, Plan for Modernisation of Agriculture (PMA),CARE International, Bushenyi District Local Government1,United Nations Capital Development Fund (UNCDF), andUganda Participatory Development Network (UPDNet).

From CBP to Harmonised Participatory PlanningGuidelines (HPPG)This CBP steering group commissioned a study to review thediverse approaches to CBP in Uganda within the context ofdecentralisation, which was funded by DFID under the four-country CBP project. A national workshop was held to discussthe lessons emerging from the study, which were then sharedwith other partners in the four-country project. Key policy

by TOM BLOMLEY, PAUL KASULE-MUKASA, FIONA NUNAN and CHARLES KIBERU

Experiences with CBP fromUganda

4

1 It was decided to include one local government where CBP would beimplemented, and Bushenyi is an active and innovative local government in thesouth west of Uganda, which was already being supported by a range of CAREInternational initiatives.

THEM

ESECTIO

NExperiences with CBP from Uganda 4


issues that emerged included: • The current basis for local government planning (developed

in 1998) was based on PRA principles and emphasisedidentification and solutions of problems. Constraint-basedplanning methods can lead to simply addressing symptoms(and not root causes) of poverty, and rarely raise or addressissues such as gender, environment, or HIV/AIDs.

• Despite efforts by government to issue a single set of plan-ning guidelines for community level, there was a multiplic-ity of planning approaches and systems being implementedby a range of actors. NGOs were particularly guilty of ignor-ing local government planning cycles, by leading the facil-itation process themselves, and undertaking‘project/sector-specific’ planning to fit in their own projectschedules.

• Planning at the community level was still viewed as a mech-anism by which lower level stakeholders could voice theirneeds to higher-level authorities. It was rarely used as ameans to mobilise local resources, influence local decision-making, and identify opportunities for lower level devel-opment.

• Planning within local governments remained highlysectoral. This sectoral thinking discouraged opportunitiesfor multi-disciplinary action, reinforced project structures,and meant that sectors outside of the five national priorityprogramme areas (roads, water, health, education, andagriculture) were frequently missed out.

To begin the development of a CBP approach to lower

level local government planning in Uganda, it was decidedto pilot the approach in Bushenyi District, which hadagreed to be an implementing partner in the project.Bushenyi was supported by the DFID-funded IntegratedLake Management project, which provided significantresources to support Bushenyi. This initiative stronglysupported the subsequent development of governmentguidelines for planning at lower local government levels,the Harmonised Participatory Planning Guidelines (HPPG).

The initial experience in BushenyiBushenyi District had decided to implement CBP in all 170parishes (covering approximately 1,000 villages). TheUgandan partners adapted the core CBP manual developedunder the four-country CBP project to produce a version forBushenyi, modifying the methodology to a three-day plan-ning process (see Table 2). A training of trainers was imple-mented in February 2002, and the planning processundertaken in March and April, linking into the overalldistrict planning process. The piloting of the CBP processwithin Bushenyi District attracted considerable interest fromnational government institutions as well as donors and proj-ects supporting decentralisation.

An evaluation2 was commissioned under the four-countryCBP project for the Bushenyi experience in 2002 some fourto six months after CBP had been conducted. The evaluation

Table 1: Levels of local administration in Uganda and their roles

Level

District/city Council(LC5)

County/ municipal(LC4)

Sub-county (LC3)

Parish (LC2)

Village (LC1)

Approx population

1.5–2.5 million

50–200,000

60–120,000

4–20,000

2,000

Structure

District local government/city council (Kampalaonly)

County council/ municipal council

Sub-county council

Parish council

Village council

Role

Primary local government structure. Elected council appoints and overseesexecutive staff. Major responsibility for service delivery e.g. agriculture,health, education, water/sanitation. Increasing emphasis on out-sourcingservice delivery.

County councils within the rural areas are an administrative structure.These include Municipal councils in urban areas.

Integrated local and district functions. Lowest legal level of LG that canmanage and disburse funds. It also includes town councils and municipaldivisions in the urban areas. This level plays a significant role in servicedelivery.

Not a legal level of local government – but has administrative communitylevel functions. Council members elected from village levelrepresentatives.

Not a legal level of local government – but has administrative communitylevel functions.

2 This was carried out by an independent consultant selected by the CBP workinggroup in Uganda.

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NTom Blomley, Paul Kasule-Mukasa, Fiona Nunan and Charles Kiberu4

itself adopted a participatory approach to ensure a widerange of views and concerns were taken into account andto enable the evaluation to be used as a learning experi-ence for those involved. The conclusions included (Androa,2002):• more training was needed for facilitators on cross-cutting

issues (gender, environment and HIV/AIDS), as these werenot prioritised and adequately covered, and on some ofthe tools;

• more feedback to the communities is needed, such asapproval of the plan being announced on radio, publicnotices and other media;

• refreshments at meetings are a good way of showingappreciation for the time and input people have given;

• the process was too hurried and more time should ideally

be given in the future; and,• documentation of the process would be useful so that

lessons can be learnt and shared. The evaluation report was used in the review of the

HPPG and learning from the experience of Bushenyi wasfurther facilitated by the District being represented on thesteering group.

Taking forward the HPPGThe Bushenyi Pilot was run in 2001–2 and the district hascontinued with CBP since then. Following the South AfricaCBP Workshop in August 2001, the Ministry of LocalGovernment worked with the Northern Uganda SocialAction Fund, the Office of the Prime Minister, and the UNCapital Development Fund, to initiate a process to review


Table 2: Application of the CBP methodology in Bushenyi District

Element

Planning unit

Methodology

Facilitation of parish plans

Training

Financing of planning process

Funding of the plans

Linkage to sub-county and district plans

Implementation of the parish plans

Monitoring of implementation at parish level

Adaptation in Bushenyi

Parish and sub-county

Visioning and livelihoods analysis, including interest groups, such as women and people living with adisability) rather than social groups found within communities.Less emphasis was put on outcomes in the first round.

By sub-county staff (sub-county chief, community development, agricultural extension).

Three-day training session by district staff of sub-county staff, supported by CARE Uganda and theIntegrated Lake Management Project.

District local government, sub-county local government, community contribution in kind, LocalGovernment Development Programme, Poverty Action Fund, CARE, four-country CBP project.

From local revenue for community projects.

LGDP system• Sub-county local government plans integrated in the district plans.• Sub-county local governments seek guidance from district local government. before implementing

projects that will have recurrent cost on the district local government budget.• District informs sub county local governments in writing of projects to be implemented in their

respective areas.Introduced with CBP• The parish and sub-county planning manuals under the HPPG were 60% adopted under CBP. The

sections/ideas included visioning as opposed to problem approach, used livelihood analysis andthe programme for the planning process.

Implementation of parish plans is either contracted out to the private sector or implemented directlyby the community through self-help programmes, with targeted support from sub-county or districtlevel staff. Non-governmental organisations may be contracted to implement certain components.

• By parish executive and parish council.• District and sub-county local government officials.• NGOs, CBOs, and civil society organisations.• The parish residents themselves as key stakeholders.

Experiences with CBP from Uganda 4

the investment and planning guidelines for lower localgovernments, which had been in operation since 1998.Considerable input was provided by the Uganda CBP part-ners and from the experience of Bushenyi Local Govern-ment. In 2002, an initial version of national guidelines wasprepared, known as the HPPG, which was a combinedmanual for villages, parishes, and sub-counties.

After an internal review by MoLG, the draft HPPG weredistributed to all local governments and town councils inthe country, and five two-day regional workshops held inwhich local government staff (planners, administrative offi-cers, and civil society) were presented with the guidelinesand provided guidance in their use. The guidelines wereused at village, parish, and sub-county levels.

This rollout enabled widespread piloting of the guide-lines, providing essential feedback for the finalisation of theguidelines. The rollout was reviewed in the first half of2003. This indicated that 50% of the 14 local governmentssampled had applied some aspects of the HPPG, but thatdespite the considerable efforts made to ensure widespreaddissemination, capacity gaps existed at local level, restrict-ing the adoption of these guidelines, and its rather bulkyand ‘user-unfriendly’ format restricted uptake. As a resultthe guidelines have been simplified, and some key decisionsmade:• It was acknowledged that detailed planning at village

level was too resource intensive and unsustainable. It wasagreed that village priorities, from a range of stakeholder

groups, would be incorporated into Parish DevelopmentPlans, rather than undertaking CBP at village level.

• It was split into two manuals: one for parishes/wards, andanother for sub-counties/municipal councils, so that eachgroup had a shorter more focused manual.

• In addition, greater effort was to be placed on providingfocused skills-based training for local government facili-tators. This coincided with efforts by the four countries todevelop generic CBP training of trainer guidelines, whichcould be adopted for use locally. The generic guidelineswere produced in January 2003.

• It was decided to reduce the scale of the rollout, to only26 districts for 2003–4, to have a better control on thequality, and to ensure that this would be accompanied bythe training above.

The approach used in the revised HPPG is shown in Table 4.

Innovations in the use of participatorymethodologiesThe CBP programme in Uganda introduced some of thefollowing attributes to the participatory planning process inUganda:• a shift in approach to complement the ‘needs-based’,

with the ‘vision-based’ focus of planning; • a new emphasis on the parish planning level for partici-

patory planning, as previously more emphasis was placedon the sub-county level of planning;

• planning based on social/interest groups, recognising that

THEM

ESECTIO

N


Table 3: Comparison between CBP and problem-based planning

Local Government and Planning Guide1998 and March 2002

Investments based on identification ofconstraints and problems.

Focus on community meetings at villagelevel with no effort to disaggregatepopulation, particularly the poor andmarginalized.

No explicit poverty focus as emphasis is oncommunity priorities.

No effort to identify assets or opportunitiesfor investments.

No efforts to mainstream environmentalissues.

No analysis of community strengths orweaknesses.

Community-based planning approach

Investment identification based on negotiation of shared vision.

Livelihoods analysis identifies different groups, including poor and marginalized households andsolicits their views directly. Views of women solicited and gender sensitive investments identified.Checklists for screening investments gives higher rank to those investments that impact upon poorhouseholds.

Livelihoods analysis promotes better understanding of poverty and project profile incorporatesquestion on linkages between investment and poverty eradication.

SWOT analysis of livelihoods looks at natural resources as investable assets.

Checklist for screening investments that encourages consideration of environmental impacts.

SWOT analysis part and parcel of planning process.

THEM

ESE

CTIO



communities are diverse with differing interests;• involvement of non-council stakeholders (NGOs, CBOs,

PSOs) in the planning process;• inclusion of methodological issues in the guidelines (i.e.

description of the ‘how to’) in relation to the various toolsproposed; and,

• harmonisation of planning activities with the LocalGovernment Budget Framework Paper (LGBFP).

All of these attributes have supported the integration ofthe approach and subsequent plans into mainstream localgovernment development planning. Finally, efforts are nowunderway to ensure that the rather ad-hoc nature of theCBP working group is more formally institutionalised withregard to the Ministry of Local Government and othercentral government structures. A working group estab-lished by MoLG to advise on participatory planningprocesses from parish to district level is currently beingmerged with the CBP working group to ensure that CBPlessons are mainstreamed within government.

Lessons learntMany lessons were learnt from the initial implementation andreview, which have led to an improved and agreed set ofguidelines. These lessons include:• The original guidelines were too long and complicated and

the revised version has made the guides simpler, shorter,and more user-friendly.

• The importance of the strong sense of ownership, interest,and momentum by the Government of Uganda with a highdegree of ownership from LGDP in the Ministry of LocalGovernment and the adoption of the CBP principles inthe design of the Northern Uganda Social Action Fund(NUSAF).

• The necessity to build incentives within facilitating agen-cies (particularly local governments) if local-level planningis to be institutionalised across Uganda. Participatoryplanning criteria are now included in the annual perform-ance assessment process conducted by central govern-ment on local governments. Those local governmentsthat score highly on these annual assessments stand togain greater funding allocations from the centre, and areaccorded greater flexibility in how the funding is allocatedin support of local planning needs.

• The participation of non-governmental actors in the devel-opment of government guidelines strengthened theprocess. The interaction of government with the NGOsector resulted in a healthy debate and even somechanged perceptions regarding the respective roles andcontributions that each can make to the other, both atlocal and national levels.

• Piloting and review have enabled the development of wellthought through and practical guidelines. The process wasfield tested in the whole country, beginning with BushenyiDistrict, allowing opportunities for review and finalisation

Table 4: Approach to planning in the revised HPPG

Element

Planning unit

Methodology

Facilitation of parish plans

Training


Funding of the parish plans

Linkage to district plans

Implementation of the parish plans

Monitoring of implementation at parish level

Adaptation for HPPG

Parish and sub-county.

Situation and livelihoods analyses, service provider analysis, timeline mapping, SWOT analysis,developing a vision and a budgeted action plan.

By sub-county staff (including, for example, community development and agricultural extensionstaff) plus parish chief.

Being finalised – training of training and then training by district staff of sub-county staff planned.

By district.

Implementation of Parish Development Plans is through implementation by local communities,funding from local revenue, national government, NGOs, and donors.

Parish Development Plans are incorporated into sub-county Development Plans, which are in turnincorporated into District Development Plans.

Implemented through communities, all levels of local government and through SDPs and DDPs.

By sub-county.

THEM

ESECTIO

NExperiences with CBP from Uganda 4


following a structured review process, involving bothgovernmental and non-governmental institutions. Thereis an appreciation that the process is a long term initia-tive, requiring corresponding training and capacity build-ing, as well as adjustments in the methods used as theprocess evolves and develops.

• It takes time and patience to change how planning takesplace, and to put local institutions and communities in thedriving seat. It requires changes in attitudes of localgovernments, as well as modifications in the systems andstructures at district and national levels. Development ofnew nationally approved guidelines is an important stepin the right direction – but it requires a parallel process oftraining and capacity building, which is now being devel-oped and implemented.

• The new planning approach challenges parallel planningsystems within local government, as it should incorporateall planning needs (see below).

Way forward In addition to an extensive capacity building programme tosupport the adoption of the HPPG manuals, there are threekey challenges ahead for effective implementation of theCBP approach and of its resultant plans. These are inte-grating the results of parish and sub-county plans withdistrict level plans, the existence of parallel environmentalplanning, with the challenge of integration of the environ-mental plans into mainstream development plans, and thechallenge of ensuring that CBP results in immediate ratherthan deferred action.

Community-based planning is a cross sectoral, multi-disciplinary process that works from the bottom up. This

approach does not fit well with the existing approach todistrict development planning. District level planningremains highly sectoral – with sectoral plans providing thefoundation for a final district development plan. The forth-coming revision of guidelines for district development plan-ning provides an excellent opportunity to influence thedevelopment of a new approach to planning at districtlevel, which should facilitate improved integration of PDPsand SDPs into district development plans.

Currently the planning under the HPPG is for the subse-quent financial year. This can result in many months sepa-ration between the planning process and implementation,while communities are implementing what they plannedlast year. For CBP to be fully effective in promoting commu-nity action, it is important that the planning leads to imme-diate implementation. This suggests a differentiationbetween sub-county planning, which primarily uses exter-nal resources and so needs to be part of the annual budg-eting process, and parish level planning which primarilyuses a community’s own resources and some of whichcould be implemented in the current financial year.

The existence of separate guidelines for environmentalaction planning, and subsequently, separate plans, hasconfused the integration of environmental and naturalresource (ENR) issues into mainstream planning. As somany people within Uganda are directly dependent on thenatural resource base, full integration of ENR into main-stream planning, rather than separate planning, wouldimprove resource allocation and hence management. TheNational Environmental Management Authority (NEMA)has begun to become engaged in the new planningprocesses being developed within Ministry of Local

Phot

os:M

alik

hang

Mas

ia (e

x-K

hany

a,no

w ID

T)

Planning inKatookaparish

Group meetingunder tree inKatooka parish

THEM

ESE

CTIO



Government, but there is more work to be done in improv-ing integration of approaches. Ultimately, a community-based planning approach within local government is

needed to improve the sustainability of planning by requir-ing fewer resources than those needed for multiple plan-ning processes.

CONTACT DETAILSTom Blomley, Participatory Forest Manage-ment Adviser, Forest and Beekeeping Division,Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism,PO Box 420, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Email:[email protected]

Paul Kasule-Musaka, Senior Programme Engi-neer, Ministry of Local Government, PO Box7723, Kampala, Uganda. Email:[email protected]

Fiona Nunan, Institutional and Social Devel-opment Advisor, Integrated Lake Manage-ment, PO Box 29829, Kampala, Uganda.Email: [email protected]

Charles Kiberu, Deputy Chief AdministrativeOfficer, Bushenyi District Local Council,Bushenyi, Uganda. Email:[email protected]

REFERENCESAndroa, GR, (2002). ‘Evaluation of Commu-nity-Based Planning in Bushenyi District,Kampala.’ Report. Kampala, Uganda: Ministryof Local Government. Bushenyi District Local Government (2002)‘Bushenyi Participatory Planning Manual.’Report. Bushenyi, Uganda: Bushenyi DistrictLocal Government.Mentor Consult (2003) ‘Testing and Review-ing the Harmonised Participatory PlanningGuide for Lower Level Local Councils, ProcessReport July 2003.’ Report. Kampala, Uganda:Ministry of Local Government.

THEM

ESECTIO

N


IntroductionThe concept and practice of participatory planning (alsocalled variously bottom-up planning, sub-district planning,etc.) is not new in Ghana, however the link to the nationalplanning system is either weak or non-existent. This articlehighlights the experiences of two projects which aim todeepen community participation in planning and link it tothe existing planning system of the country. It also discussesGhana’s experience in planning at the sub-district level,reviewing approaches by the communities, NGOs, projectinterventions, etc. and outlines Ghana’s local governmentsystem, CBP and its lessons, and the way forward.

BackgroundThe Local Government Act of 1993 (Act 462) established thecurrent local government system, while the National Devel-opment Planning (Systems) Act of 1994 (Act 480) providesfor a decentralised planning system in Ghana. However anumber of factors hamper their effective implementation,including limited financial and human resources. As a result,structures like the town/area councils, which provide the linkbetween the community and District Assembly (DA), areeither functioning poorly or do not exist. In practice, partici-patory planning has usually not been applied in sub-district

planning, except in planning for specific projects.Ghana has a four-tier system. It consists of a Regional

Coordinating Council on the first tier, the Metropolitan/Municipal and District Assemblies on the second tier,Town/Zonal/Urban/Area Councils on the third tier and theUnit Committees on the fourth tier.

Traditionally, social and project participation is promotedthrough public fora or by representation. Public fora aremainly open community meetings to which invitation is bypublic announcement (beating the gong-gong). Discussionsat these meetings are open to all, but in practice a few vocalindividuals dominate the discussions. In most cases womenand the marginalised, though they may be present, may notmake any contribution or challenge any decision. Repre-sentation is based on the traditional structure and is limitedin most cases to male family and tribal heads. Where NGOsare involved, all-inclusive participation approaches haveoften been adopted, e.g. separating discussants by gender,livelihood and age.

The legal basis of participation is through representa-tion at the Assembly level, with elections held once everyfour years. The Local Government Act provides for the elec-tion of 70% of the membership of the Assembly and 30%

by ERNEST TAY AWOOSAH, JOHN COFIE-AGAMAH, BJ OPPONG, SAMPSON KWARTENGand FRANCIS OWUSU ANSAH

Planning with the area council:experience with CBP in Ghana

5

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NErnest Tay Awoosah, John Cofie-Agamah, BJ Oppong, Sampson Kwarteng and Francis Owusu Ansah5

by appointment. At the sub-district level representation isalso by election and appointment (with the same70%/30% formula).

Therefore there is a challenge to have a participatorysystem where all members of the community can partici-pate effectively in decision-making.

The way the formal planning system functions is shownin Table 1. In practice, this system has only been appliederratically with district plans prepared in 1996, and then inresponse to the Poverty Reduction Strategy in 2003.

In Ghana, the chieftaincy institution is highly respected,wields a lot of power and influence in local processes andresource mobilisation, and presides over community meet-ings where development is discussed. Community-initiated

projects that have the personal involvement of the chief arelikely to succeed and be sustained. Conversely, situations ofunity or disunity at community level can often be traced tothe role played by chiefs. However, the outcomes of theselocal processes do not necessarily link with the formal plan-ning system, despite there being legal provisions for theparticipation of chiefs in the local government system2.

NGOs’ experience in participation has moved on fromthe era where NGOs implemented projects with little or noconsent of the communities, to a situation where mostNGOs are consciously increasing community participationin the formulation, implementation, management and eval-uation of their projects. NGOs have used a number ofapproaches to enhance community participation, usually


Step Involves

1. Sensitisation of all stakeholders1 in the planning and resource-mobilisation system to give inputs to the preparation of the five-yeardevelopment plan.

2. Collection, collation and reviewing of data/information from the above sources including questionnaires necessary for producing districtprofiles on education, health, agriculture, commerce, industry, poverty, etc. which aid in the plan preparation.

3. Every Unit Committee submits its plans to serve as input for the composite plan of the Assembly through the area councils

4. All Unit Committees’ plans are then harmonised into a holistic unit. Together with the inputs from departments, NGOs/CBOs and other donoragencies, a district profile is built to serve as the basis of fashioning the Five-Year Development Plan of the district.

5. Critical review of the profile by the District Planning and Co-ordinating Unit and a consultant employed for that purpose.

6. From the reviewed profile a Statement of Plan/Project Proposal is prepared.

7. The Project Proposal is then submitted to sector heads for their technical assessment.

8. The Statement of Plan is then submitted to appropriate sub-committees for ranking. Ranking is important because of the limited finances ofthe Assembly.

9. All proposals from sub-committees are then submitted to the Executive Committee for debate.

10. The first Draft Document is then prepared and sent to all the Area Councils for public hearing.

11. After the public hearing the second Draft Document incorporating comments from the Area Councils is prepared.

12. The second Draft is again sent back to the Executive Committee and then General Assembly for debate.

13. It is then subjected to a public hearing at the Area Councils.

14. The final document is prepared and submitted to the Regional Co-ordinating Council for onward transmission to the National DevelopmentPlanning Commission.

Table 1: Steps in the formal local government planning process (abridged)

1 The stakeholders include the decentralised departments and the relevant sub-committees of the District Assembly. Other stakeholders include the local privatesector operators, NGOs/CBOs and ordinary citizens within the district.

2 Government appointees to the general District Assembly and the sub-structuresare appointed by the District Chief Executive (DCE) in consultation with the chiefsand 6% out of the 30% government appointees to the general assembly areallocated to the chiefs. They are also represented at the RCC.

Planning with the area council: experience with CBP in Ghana 5

based on modified PRA principles and tools. Some NGOshave also been engaged in capacity building of localgovernment structures providing skills, knowledge andlogistics to enhance participation in planning and manage-ment processes. Despite this, the linkage between theAssembly’s development planning process and NGO activi-ties is still usually very weak.

The application of community-based planningsystems in GhanaPrior to the two projects highlighted later, there have beenexamples of the application of CBP-type approaches inGhana. Organisations like ActionAid, Pronet, Plan Interna-tional and ISODEC, just to mention a few, were involvedin building capacity at the district and sub-district level topromote participatory planning and decision making.

The Community-based Planning ProjectBoth ISODEC and Action Aid were involved in the develop-ment of the CBP project in Ghana, which started in May

2001, and was l inked to partners in South Africa,Zimbabwe and Uganda. The initial partners in Ghana werethe Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development(MLGRD), the National Development and Planning Commis-sion (NDPC), ISODEC as facilitator, and two DAs selectedfor pilots, Asante Akim South and Adanse East.

The first step in the action-learning process was a reviewof Ghana’s experiences in participatory planning processesin the country. The findings of this research were dissemi-nated to all stakeholders. This was then debated at a stake-holder workshop3 with participants from the MLGRD,District Assemblies, Unit Committees, NGOs and donors.The idea of forming a Technical Committee4 to foreseeGhana’s participation in the four-country action research inCBP was agreed at the workshop.

Two area/town councils were chosen to host the pilotproject. These were the New Edubiase and Morso/Kurofa

THEM

ESECTIO

N


3 Making the link between micro and meso - learning from experience oncommunity-based planning and management.4 Members were drawn from MLGRD, NDPC, ISODEC and the two participatingdistricts.

Community mapof New Edubiase

Chief and eldersduring a groupdiscussion;(bottom) A section of the township

Phot

os:A

dans

i Eas

t D

istr

ict

Ass

embl

y

THEM

ESE

CTIO



in Adansi East and Asante Akim South District respectively.Local facilitators from the two town/area councils were

trained to facilitate the planning processes in their councils.The generic four-country CBP manual was used as the basisfor the facilitators, which was adapted, with a five-day plan-ning process. Facilitators were drawn from the District Plan-ning and Co-ordinating Units (DPCU) of the two DistrictAssemblies. Their roles consisted purely of guiding andproviding technical information and advice. They were alsoresponsible for writing up of the final plan using the infor-mation generated from the process. The result was a five-year development plan for each of the councils.

After successful piloting in one area council in eachdistrict, a decision by the Technical Committee was taken toextend CBP activities to cover the rest of the town/areacouncils in the two districts. This activity was suspended forsome time for the districts to respond to the government’sinstruction to develop a three-year development plan basedon the Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy (GPRS) guidelines.After this, all area councils were covered in the two districts,a total of nineteen town/area councils, and about fifty facil-itators were trained. All of the nineteen town/area councilsnow have a five-year development plan.

Implementation of these plans has started, and therehas been extensive community action, effects of which canbe seen in the first two area councils covered.

The Village Infrastructure Project (VIP)The Village Infrastructure Project (VIP) is a second project,which has been using elements of CBP approach in Ghana.In contrast to the CBP Project, which only has very limitedfunds for learning and sharing, this is a US$60 million five-year poverty reduction and community-driven developmentinitiative of the Government of Ghana with support fromthe World Bank, the International Fund for AgriculturalDevelopment (IFAD) and Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau(KFW). It closes in June 2004 and a follow-up project isbeing planned at present. The project aims to enhance thequality of life of Ghana's rural poor through increased trans-fer of financial and technical resources to develop andsustain basic village level infrastructure. Its specific objec-tives are to:a) Empower local communities and beneficiary groups to

identify, plan, implement and maintain small village-levelinfrastructure investments;

b) Increase rural communities' access to developmentresources to leverage the implementation of rural devel-opment priorities set by beneficiaries;

c) Strengthen institutional capacity at community and

Table 2: Application of the CBP methodology in Adansi East and Asante Akim South Districts

Element

Planning unit

Methodology

Facilitation of area plans

Training of facilitators


Funding of the plans


Implementation of the area council plans

Monitoring of implementation at areacouncil level

How applied

Area/town council

Visioning and livelihoods analysis, using interest groups rather than social groupsLess emphasis was put on outcomes in the first round

By local facilitators drawn from the area council, the decentralised departments and some retiredcivil servants

By facilitators from the DPCUs

District Assembly with some support from the four-country project

From local revenue5

Supposed to be first tier of plans towards district plan. However timing of PRSP process meant thatdistrict plans were produced without area inputs, except for the first two area councils

Implementation of town/area plans is supervised by the town/area council committee with supportfrom the Traditional Authority

By area council committee

5 The locally generated revenue is derived from six main sources. These are Land,Fees (cattle ponds, market dues, slaughter houses etc.), Licences, Trading Services,Rates (basic, property and special rate) and miscellaneous sources.

THEM

ESECTIO

NPlanning with the area council: experience with CBP in Ghana 5


district levels in order to improve the efficiency of ruraltransfers and to ensure sustainability of poverty reducinginterventions, and;

d) Support the government's strategy of decentralisation ofdevelopment responsibilities to District Assemblies andother local government entities.The project focuses primarily on infrastructure (water,

post-harvest, and transport), but also has an institutionalstrengthening and capacity building component whichfocuses on "learning-by-doing". It also has a small enter-prise development (micro-credit) component. The project isbeing implemented in all the 110 districts of the country.The project has used NGOs and consultants to strengthenthe capacities of the districts in areas such as participatoryplanning, financial management, procurement, and facili-ties management. Key elements in the methodology areshown in Table 3.

To further support the deepening of the decentralisa-tion process, VIP has embarked on building the capacities ofsome 61 selected area councils on a pilot basis (usually oneper district) by assisting them in producing a plan, makingappropriate decisions and then implementing the projectsresulting. As well as area council members, others havebeen trained, including opinion leaders from various iden-tifiable groupings, traditional authorities, identifiablewomen’s groups and leaders. This approach has helped to

build consensus between the various factions of the ruralsocieties within the area councils’ jurisdiction.

At this stage some area councils have signed contracts,and prioritised projects are being implemented, with somesupport, by the District Assemblies.

Innovations in the use of participatorymethodologiesOne of the innovations introduced by both projects inGhana has been the inclusion of traditional rulers in theplanning process. Chiefs and elders were individuallycontacted during the pre-planning stage to discuss andexplain the modalities of the process, and in both caseswere part of the training and planning process. Apart fromthe chiefs participating in all subsequent meetings, they alsoplayed the role of mobilising the communities to attendthese meetings. The participatory methodologies (includinguse of livelihoods analysis) have also enabled the full partic-ipation of disadvantaged groups including women.

In the CBP project, a plan hearing was also introducedas part and parcel of the planning process whereby the firstdraft plan was subjected to public discussion at area/towncouncil level. Inputs from the first public meeting are incor-porated in the plan for a second public hearing. The finalplan is adopted as a working document at a public hearing,thus making the process outlined in Table 1 a reality.

Table 3: Key elements of the VIP methodology

Element

Selection of pilots

Training

Planning methodology


Financing of implementation

Implementation

M&E

Involved

Development of criteria based mainly on agricultural production, the state of rural infrastructure inthe districts, poverty levels and population. The most deprived districts were then selected for thepilot programme.

Development of training manuals using consultants.Recruitment of training consultants who were passed through "Training-of-Trainers" workshops.Training of area council and unit committees in roles, groups, planning, participatory M&E,community-based procurement and financial management.

Use of area council members, opinion leaders from identifiable groupings, and traditionalauthorities. Development of Community Action Plans culminating in area council plans withprioritised sub-projects for implementation.

By VIP.

Procurement of services and works for the prioritised projects already determined by the areacouncils.Funding by VIP through area council accounts.

At the area council level. Some support is provided by District Assemblies.

Project monitoring by area council.

THEM

ESE

CTIO



CONTACT DETAILSJohn-Cofie Agamah, Ministry of LocalGovernment and Rural Development, Accra,Ghana. Email [email protected]

Ernest Tay Awoosah, Integrated SocialDevelopment Centre (ISODEC), email:[email protected]

Francis Owusu Ansah, Adansi East DistrictAssembly, email: [email protected]

Sampson Kwarteng, Asante Akim SouthDistrict Assembly, email:[email protected]

BJ Oppong Programme Manager, VillageInfrastructure Programme, email:[email protected]

REFERENCESMinistry of Local Government and RuralDevelopment (1996): “The New LocalGovernment System”The Technical Committee (2002)“Community Based Planning in Ghana”ISODEC (2001) “Community-BasedWorkshop Report – Ghana”

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSSpecial thanks to Francis Owusu Ansah formaking the photos available.

VIP provided training of the area councils, made fundsavailable directly for them to manage, and assisted them withparticipatory M&E. In Adansi East and Asante Akim, thedistricts have decided on revenue sharing with the area coun-cils, and the introduction of community-managed funds is asignificant innovation.

Lessons learnedThe experience from both CBP and VIP is that area councils areable to develop effective long-term plans, and that local facil-itators can be trained to do this. In the two CBP districts, wherethe whole districts were covered, there was a major commit-ment from the DAs to support the process. The experience wasthat a mixed team of local facilitators drawn from thetown/area council with frontline staff of the decentraliseddepartments performed better than town/area council facili-tators alone. This may be due to the fact that the frontlineworkers brought external influence, experience and resourcesto bear on the process.

Planning at the town area council level has assisted withdeveloping consensus amongst different stakeholders, helpingto iron out their differences and agree on a common approachto solving their developmental problems.

On the VIP, encouraging and giving preference to identi-fiable women’s groups and leaders has enhanced genderparticipation. To enhance participation in the planning

process, both community forum and representationapproaches should be adopted with enough time allowedfor the various livelihood group representatives to consulttheir members for feedback and inputs. Public hearingsincluding acceptance of the final plan are a crucial step for ahigher sense of community ownership.

The involvement of the town/area council in plan facilita-tion, implementation and evaluation could be one way of resus-citating the town/area council concept, which has largelybecome defunct in Ghana. As VIP experience rolls out we willalso be able to assess the capacity at this level to manage funds.

Ways forward in the futureFor Ghana four issues are paramount. These are:• Advocating for reactivating the town/area council concept as

an effective level for managing community-driven develop-ment;

• Harmonising various approaches to CBP and CDD by govern-ment and NGOs for best practice and adoption by DistrictAssemblies;

• The need for an effective champion in the national Ministry,MLGRD, and also allies to advocate for CBP to be included inthe national planning process.

• Institutionalising a steering committee of experienced playersin participatory planning as a think tank to advance the courseof CBP in the country.

A focused groupdiscussion

Preference rankingon flipcharts

The DCD addressingthe workshop

Phot

os:A

dans

i Eas

t D

istr

ict

Ass

embl

y

THEM

ESECTIO

N


This article briefly describes the experiences and lessons ofcommunity-based planning (CBP) in two pilot districts(Gwanda and Chimanimani) in Zimbabwe. The CBP processcreated the need to revitalise the planning and develop-ment structures in the pilot districts and engaged govern-ment throughout the process, which resulted in themainstreaming of community empowerment principles inthe decentralisation framework of the government ofZimbabwe.

Background

Systems for participation and local governmentZimbabwe has a long history of autocratic national andlocal political systems, including the kingdoms and chief-tainships of pre-colonial times, the colonial and UnilateralDeclaration of Independence (UDI) regimes, and the defacto one-party state system of the 1980s.

From 1980 to 1988 the system of rural local govern-ment comprised the poorly resourced District Councils inthe Communal Areas (formerly known as tribal trust lands)administered in terms of the District Councils Act (1980)and richer Rural Councils in the commercial farming areas,

administered in terms of the Rural Councils Act, 1966. In1984, the Prime Minister’s Directive was issued to establishplanning structures from village level to national level toensure a more participatory and bottom-up approach todevelopment planning. This was one giant step towards thedecentralisation process taken by the government. In 1988,the Rural District Councils Act resulted in the amalgama-tion of Rural Councils and District Councils in 1993. Someof the key legislative changes after this include the confer-ring of statutory planning powers to Rural District Councilsthrough Statutory Instrument 175 of 1999 and in 2000 theTraditional Leaders Act, which sought to strengthen the roleof traditional leaders over local planning and developmentissues.

The structures of sub-national government in Zimbabweare shown in Table 1.

The Traditional Leaders Act (2000) gave the chiefs,headmen, and village heads the powers to co-ordinatedevelopment, allocate land as agents of the Rural DistrictCouncil, manage natural resources, preserve and maintainfamily life, culture, health and education, keep populationrecords, try a range of crimes, and collect all levies and taxespayable to the council. This act gives traditional leaders a

by ABSOLOM MASENDEKE,ANDREW MLALAZI,ASHELLA NDHLOVU and DOUGLAS GUMBO

Empowering communitiesthrough CBP in Zimbabwe:experiences in Gwanda andChimanimani

6

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NAbsolom Masendeke, Andrerw Mlalazi, Ashella Ndhlovu and Douglas Gumbo6

wide range of powers in the planning system. It is however,still debated whether the Act will manage to link traditionalleadership to the democratically elected rural district councilstructures in a manner that will remove rivalry, tensions, andconflicts in the planning process.

Planning in Zimbabwe is usually initiated at national ordistrict level, to achieve national or district objectives, andis often linked to particular sectors or types of project.However, due to recent resource limitations, central govern-ment agencies, including local authorities, have not beeninitiating planning processes. Following the TraditionalLeaders Act in 2000 there has been a shift from localauthority-driven planning to a planning process driven bytraditional structures. Many stakeholders are now unclearon the planning system and how it works and despitevarious local government legislative provisions since Inde-pendence, these only provide for community consultation,not participation. Attempts to develop an effective bottom-up system have been frustrated by factors includingresource limitations, donor funding conditions, and changein government policy directions and planning proceduresthat are often developed from above. Hence there is still alot of work needed in local government legislative reformin Zimbabwe to uphold principles of participation andpeople’s empowerment.

Experience of participation in the NGO sector Many NGOs in Zimbabwe are engaged in community-baseddevelopment activities and most involve some form of

community participation. CBP in Zimbabwe meant drawingon this experience and linking it to the local governmentplanning system. Building CBP on existing forms of partici-pation enabled various stakeholders to present their experi-ence and input on the content, process, and implementationoptions. Developing training materials created a high level ofcommitment for both district and community facilitators todrive this process. These NGOs included SNV, the ZimbabweDecentralised Cooperation Programme, Intermediate Tech-nology Development Group Southern Africa and the AfricaCommunity Development Publishing Trust. UNICEF, an inter-governmental body, was also involved, using the Commu-nity Capacity Development Approach (CCD).

Developing CBP in Zimbabwe

EvolutionThe CBP project evolved from engagement and reflectionbetween government, NGOs, and development practition-ers, with interaction with Khanya, the South African organ-isation facilitating the CBP project. There was a commonobservation that despite heavy investment of resources andtime at district and community level, three key concernswere evident:• People’s participation in determining their future and

developing their own areas was far from satisfactory.People were still not exercising their basic rights andlacked the freedom to organise themselves to improvetheir livelihoods.


Table 1: Structures of government in Zimbabwe

Level

Province

Local Authority

Ward

Village

Approx population

1–1.3 million

300,000–500,000

6,000–8,000

600–1,000

Structure

Provincial DevelopmentCouncil (political) andProvincial DevelopmentCommittee (technical)

Rural District Council andRural District DevelopmentCommittee.

Ward Assembly and WardDevelopment Committee.

Village Assembly andVillage DevelopmentCommittee.

Role

Consolidation of district plans and providing a link for local government tocentral government.

Planning and development authority at local level. The Rural DistrictDevelopment Committee provides technical support to the Council and ischaired by the District Administrator who is national government’srepresentative at local level.

Unit of planning which coordinates village plans and links them with localgovernment planning processes. The Ward Development Committeeprovides technical support to the Ward Assembly and is chaired by aCouncillor who sits on the Rural District Council.

The Village Assembly is the point where plans are generated and arechaired by the Village Head. The Village Development Committee providestechnical support to plans at village level through an elected Chairperson.

Empowering communities through CBP in Zimbabwe: experiences in Gwanda and Chimanimani 6

• Communication lines between communities and ruraldistrict councils and other support institutions remainedrelatively closed. Lack of open dialogue tended to limitopportunities for promoting accountability and trans-parency.

• Planning at district level remained dominated by top-down strategies and RDCs lacked clearly developed mech-anisms for responding to community priorities.

CBP was seen as an opportunity for addressing some ofthese emerging concerns, and there was consensus to useexisting knowledge and experiences to pilot a more effec-tive approach to community-based planning in Zimbabwe,linking it with resource allocation systems. A number ofpossible benefits were identified, notably:• creating opportunities for promoting community empow-

erment and ownership in the development process;• developing a reliable method for obtaining realistic, inte-

grated, and focused plans from ward level;• increasing potential for integrating ward and local author-

ity level plans;• helping to identify additional sources of revenue for

implementing local plans;• creating opportunities for capacity-building for institu-

tions operating at subdistrict level;• bringing transparency to the selection and prioritisation

of projects at all levels; and,• creating opportunities for improved accountability during

project and programme implementation.In 2001 a review of experiences was conducted in

Zimbabwe using participatory planning (Conyers, 2001) anda national workshop held to discuss the emerging findings,funded by the four-country CBP project. A decision wastaken to pilot CBP in the Gwanda and Chimanimanidistricts. A core steering group was formed including the

Ministry of Local Government, Public Works and NationalHousing (MLGPWNH), IT Southern Africa, ChimanimaniRDC, Gwanda RDC, and Development in Practice (aconsultant organisation focusing on local governance andcommunity empowerment in Southern Africa) to monitorthe implementation and knowledge-sharing process. Theteam met regularly with implementation teams on theground. The implementation team consisted of multisec-toral teams who underwent rigorous training in commu-nity-based planning building on their own experiences.

District Training Teams (DTTs) were established andtrained to support the planning from district level, and CoreFacilitation Teams (CFTs) were established at ward level,which included the Councillor, Technical extension staff,Ward Coordinator, and a respected person from each ward.Sharing results at district level involved electing communityrepresentatives, who later provided feedback to the broadercommunity. Emerging lessons were then shared by commu-nity representatives at the national level. Comparativeregional experiences from the four-country CBP projectwere also shared to stimulate national debate. The CBPnational dialogue process led to the production of briefingpapers that were targeted at key decision makers anddonors such as the Permanent Secretary for the Ministry ofLocal Government and National Housing and DFID. Anational workshop in 2003 shared the emerging resultswith stakeholders at both national and district level whowere convinced of the need to roll out CBP in other partsof Zimbabwe. The steering group was then formalised as anational steering committee to spearhead the process.

The CBP approach used in ZimbabweThe CBP system in Zimbabwe was process-based andinvolved:• adaptation of four-countries CBP training manual;• training district training teams;• training core CBP facilitators.

THEM

ESECTIO

N


“Comparative regional experiencesfrom the four-country CBP project werealso shared to stimulate nationaldebate. The CBP national dialogueprocess led to the production ofbriefing papers that were targeted atkey decision makers and donors”

Mr Siziba presents to thebroader community in Ward17 in Gwanda. Many cameand contributed towardssetting ward priorities

Phot

o:D

ougl

as G

umbo

,IT

Sout

hern

Afr

ica

THEM

ESE

CTIO



• CBP manual trial runs and review• actual ward planning• community documentation of plans• integration of ward plans at RDC level• community feedback meetings• district training team review meetings• budget allocations and ploughing back of development

levies• knowledge sharing and information dissemination work-

shops Table 2 summarises the methodological approach used inZimbabwe.

Innovations in the use of participatorymethodologiesSome of the innovations, which were introduced inZimbabwe in the application of the CBP approach, included:• Setting up a local and trusted Core Facilitation Team

(CFT), which inspired a lot of confidence in fellowcommunity members and unlocked their full participation.

• The creative involvement of respected leaders such aschiefs and councillors as facilitators;

• The establishment of the DTT, with periodic review andknowledge sharing meetings;

• The use of 50% of the levy paid by each ward in Gwandaproved to be a key innovation in sustaining communityparticipation and financial contribution;

• CBP was applied in a manner that allowed divergentgroups to build consensus and visions for the ward. Thestrength of the approach was seen when it was acceptedin new resettlement areas and convinced groups such asthe war veterans who had previously seen themselves asa superior groups in any community (see Box 1).

Impacts and outcomesSome interesting impacts and outcomes have emerged: • The DTTs brought a new level of commitment and new

modes of institutional behaviour at district level, with afocused and shared vision. In the two pilot districts, 33DTT members were trained and 75% of these can confi-dently drive the whole process without external support.The decision to focus on DTTs helped to promote greaterintegration by various stakeholders operating at districtlevel in their approach to community planning and devel-opment processes. However, developing a shared long-term working framework proved challenging due todifferences in institutional culture, resources, and fundingconditions.

Table 2: CBP approach in Gwanda and Chimanimani districts

Element

Planning unit

Methodology

Facilitation of ward plans

Training

Financing the planning process

Funding the plans


Implementation of the ward plans

Monitoring of implementation at ward level

Adaptation in Zimbabwe

Ward.

Five-day planning session facilitated by a core team chosen by the community. Emphasis of themethodology was more on developing a shared vision rather than dwelling on problems andconstraints.

By ward staff, part of Core Facilitation Team (CFT).

An intensive ten-day training of District Training Team members by experts followed by three-daytraining sessions of the ward core facilitation teams by the DTT.

Rural District Councils and participating NGOs including transfer of funds from the CBP projectmanaged by Khanya.

Use of 50% of the levy paid by each ward in Gwanda.

Ward plans are used as a basis for preparing district annual plans and budgets.

Implementation occurs at two levels: first, the interest groups are responsible for implementing therelevant sections of the plan. Secondly, the support agencies, including the RDC, implement the restof the plan with community participation.

An internal monitoring system has been developed in conjunction with the monitoring of councilbudgets on a quarterly basis. In practice, monitoring is initiated at ward level and then followed upby a similar exercise at district level – the impact of this monitoring system is still being evaluated.

THEM

ESECTIO

NEmpowering communities through CBP in Zimbabwe: experiences in Gwanda and Chimanimani 6


• The CFT concept worked well in all participating wards inGwanda, while the process in Chimanimani was affectedby the prevailing political climate of that district whichresulted from parliamentary elections in which the elec-torate was highly polarised. Of the 184 CFT memberstargeted, 169 were successfully trained in facilitating CBPat community level. This helped communities to inter-nalise a range of participatory methodologies, facilitatingthe participation of over 120 community representativesin each ward planning session, i.e. a total of over 2,700people who participated in the CBP process in eachdistrict.

• The community felt more empowered and inspired toparticipate in planning processes than ever before. Thishas been the central message in community reviewworkshops and monitoring visit reports, demonstrating asense of ownership of the ward plan by the community.However, community documentation and monitoringand evaluation skills emerged as key challenges towardsensuring full local ownership and control of the process.

• The plans produced are all based on strengths, opportu-nities, and a collective vision for the ward rather than ashopping list of problems they face in the ward. However,this process needs to be carefully facilitated to avoidfalling into shopping list trap. Thorough training ofcommunity-level facilitators backed by targeted refreshercourses is key to the success of this process.

• The CBP process has promoted inclusiveness of margin-alized and vulnerable groups in the planning process as itenabled different socio-economic groups that had notpreviously been involved in planning to come togetherand formulate a shared vision for the ward.

• The process has convinced politicians who had earlier

resisted it after realising the process was non-partisan,people-focused, and empowering communities torespond more effectively to their livelihood needs.

• The CBP process has made the role of the traditional leaders,councillors, and the local authority more visible in the ward,and given local people the conviction that CBP has createda new generation of leaders interested in their well-being.

• The use of legitimate structures has given different socio-economic groups and the wards an opportunity to inter-act, link up, and influence service provision. More serviceproviders, particularly government departments, are nowresponsive to community priorities, e.g. the District Devel-opment Fund (DDF), AREX, and the Department ofNatural Resources (DNR) have restructured their servicedelivery approaches in response to community demands.

• Accountability between the Gwanda Rural District Counciland the wards has improved as the communities partici-pate in deciding how the levy is to be used and are awareof how much they will receive from the local authority. Alot of councillors are reporting that it is now easy to collectdevelopment levy.

• The CBP process went beyond the district boundaries andcreated the need to revatilise the planning and develop-ment structures in Matabeleland South Province. Otherdistricts (six) have shown interest in the process.

• The creative engagement of government throughout theprocess resulted in the mainstreaming of communityempowerment principles in the decentralisation frame-work of the government of Zimbabwe, although as yetthere is no new legislation to reflect this.

Lessons learntThe adapted CBP methodology, training, and facilitation

Ward 22 is a former commercial area which is now a resettlementarea following implementation of the fast-track land reformprogramme in Gwanda District. There has always been a tendency inthe new resettlement areas for war veterans to be the mostprominent and visible group. When the initial CBP meetings wereorganised, 28 socio-economic interest groups were identified andinvited to participate in the planning process. Although dominantgroups such as the war veterans association were quick to showthemselves, most participants felt that the CBP visioning process hadbrought them to the same level of understanding. CBP is now widelyregarded as a powerful peace-building tool in this ward of Gwanda. Ithas also shown a lot of potential in unlocking the participation ofpreviously marginalized groups in a peaceful manner. Interestingly,there is no difference in application and impact of CBP in communalor resettlement settings in Zimbabwe.

Box 1: Community-based planning and peace-building inWard 22, Gwanda District

The community of Ward 1 in Gwanda review andreflect on the CBP process, including representativesfrom NSC, Mr Andrew Mlalazi (standing), Mr RonnieSibanda (Gwanda Rural District Council, second fromleft) and Ms Ashella Ndhlovu (third from left)

Phot

o:D

ougl

as G

umbo

,IT

Sout

hern

Afr

ica

THEM

ESE

CTIO



CONTACT DETAILSAbsolom Masendeke, IT Southern Africa.Email: [email protected]

Andrew Mlalazi, Development in Practice.Email: [email protected]

Ashella Ndhlovu, Ministry of Local Govern-ment, National Housing and Public Works.

Douglas Gumbo, IT Southern Africa. Email:[email protected];[email protected]

REFERENCESConyers, D (2001): ‘Decentralization andCommunity-Based Planning: A critical review.Unpublished discussion paper.ITDG and MLGNHPW, (2001) ‘Community-Based Planning National Workshop Report:moving towards a common approach.’Unpublished report.ITDG and MLGNHPW, (2002) ‘National NGOConsultation Workshop Report.’ Unpublishedreport.ITDG and MLGNHPW, (2002) ‘Community-Based Planning Adapted Facilitation Manualin Zimbabwe.’ Unpublished report.ITDG and MLGNHPW (2003) ‘Community-Based Planning Country Report.’ Unpublishedreport.

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONSACDPT Action Community

Development and PublishingTrust

AREX Agriculture Research andExtension

CBP Community Based PlanCFT Core Facilitation TeamDDF District Development FundDFID Department for International

DevelopmentDNR Department of Natural

ResourcesDTT District Training TeamITDG SA Intermediate Technology

Development Group SouthernAfrica

MLGNHPW Ministry of Local GovernmentNational Housing and PublicWorks

NGO Non-GovernmentalOrganisation

NSC National Steering CommitteeRDC Rural District CouncilUDI Unilateral Declaration of

IndependenceZDCP Zimbabwe Decentralised Co-

operation Programme

manuals/guides were well received in pilot districts. Thetraining process resulted in useful inputs by stakeholderson the content, process, and implementation options. Theprocess of developing the training materials created a highlevel of commitment for both district and community facil-itators to drive this process to its ultimate end.

The concepts of the Core Facilitation Team and DistrictTraining Teams seem to be useful institutional models inimplementing CBP. However the documentation capacityand the participatory monitoring and evaluation process ofCFTs needs to be strengthened to enhance learning andinnovation in communities.

The CBP plans that emerged in Gwanda triggereddebate on the need for basing the district plans on commu-nity priorities. There is now consensus among councillorsto build the district strategic plan and budget on thecommunity submitted plans. SNV Zimbabwe (a non-governmental organisation focusing on promoting localgovernance) is working with local authorities to come upwith strategic plans. It is this opportunity that the CBPprocess would like to link and collaborate with.

Ways forward in the futureThe implementation team only managed to consult with thetargeted districts that expressed a lot of interest in the CBPmethodology. Consultations with various stakeholders haveindicated the existence of a huge demand for CBP inZimbabwe. Despite this interest it has proved difficult to raiseresources for CBP activities in the current economic and polit-ical environment prevailing in Zimbabwe. The National Steer-ing Committee (NSC) in collaboration with IntermediateTechnology Development Group Southern Africa have put ontheir agenda the need to mobilise resources and share withstakeholders nationwide so as to scale up the process to ensurethat lessons and experiences gained in this project are not lost.

Through continued dialogue with government there is aneed to fully mainstream community-based planning intothe decentralisation process. National guidelines are neededto support all these initiatives, and it is important to createand consolidate forums for sharing CBP lessons and experi-ences at community, district, provincial, and national levels.The NSC has been given the mandate by the governmentto look at the modalities of forthcoming national guidelines.

THEM

ESECTIO

N


OTHER EXPERIENCES OFCBP IN AFRICA, ASIA

AND LATIN AMERICA

THEM

ESE

CTIO

N


IntroductionIn promoting sustainable economic and social developmentfrom the mid 1980s, the Burkinabe government haspromoted strategies and approaches that are participatoryand decentralised. The implementation of these approacheshas been supported by a political and legal environmentthat favours the adoption of appropriate legal instruments.In regional/land management, the law 014/ADP of23/05/1996 and the associated decree 96-208/PRES of30/06/1996 have introduced land reform and land tenurereform in Burkina Faso. In terms of good governance, thegovernment has, since 1997, undertaken to define andimplement a legislative system which encourages the emer-gence and growth of civil society in the conception andimplementation of development policy. The decentralisa-tion process since 1998 has involved the transfer of roles,functions and resources from the state to other actors. Inrural areas, the process is still in its early stages.

The implementation of these different regulations andlaws has required improvement in the management of allactors to ensure appropriate coordination and synergy ofdelivery. Over the last fifteen years there has been increas-ing coordination between agencies that are external to thevillage with rural communities, based on pressure from thestate and its bilateral and multilateral partners. This has

given rise to a diversity of approaches.It is in this context that the government adopted the

policy on Decentralised Rural Development, as part of itsstrategy to promote the capacity of communities to takelocal action, and to integrate the different programmes andprojects that are promoting poverty reduction and improvedquality of life in rural areas.

The implementation of this approach has been basedon the establishment of the structures outlined in Table 1.

The experience of the second Programme National deGestion des TerroirsFrom 1986 Burkina has been developing the use of anapproach called Gestion de Terroirs (participatory landmanagement1). From 1991 the approach was widened withthe first phase of the National Programme for “Gestion deTerroirs” from 1992-1996. The approach is based on the partic-ipation and handing over of responsibility to rural communitiesfor managing their area. The approach is multisectoral, multi-disciplinary and flexible and based at village level.

Burkina is only now developing a system of local

by MOUSSA OUEDRAOGO and MOHAMED DRABO

Experience of the ProgrammeNationale de GestiondeTerroirs(PNGT2) in Burkina Faso

7

1 This is actually a difficult term to translate – it also has the sense of participatorymanagement of local areas.

THEM

ESECTIO

NExperience of the Programme Nationale de Gestion de Terroirs (PNGT2) in Burkina Faso 7


government, which should come into place withcommunes established in 2005. Meanwhile it has a well-developed system of legally recognised community struc-tures called Village Committees for Area Management(CVGT). These can receive funds, and manage developmentin their area. Some are as small as 1,000 people. Accordingto legislation the CVGTs have a general assembly composedof all members of the community, an executive committee,specialised subcommittees depending on need, a subcom-mittee responsible for monitoring, and one on land issues(which is generally mainly elders and traditional authori-ties). There is not a fixed number of men/women on thecommittees, but for example in Dour Yarce there were twowomen on the executive, and this rises in some places tofour or five, including some Chairpersons.

PNGT works in all 45 provinces, in some cases throughcoordination agreements with other donors. At regionallevel there is a Consultative Council for Development(CCRD) which coordinates regional services of governmentdepartments, promotes government policies, and ensurescoordination amongst services.

In all PNGT2 has a budget of US$ 114 million. 12% ofthe budget is for training of local communities, 48% forthe local development funds, 26% for technical support,4% for promoting secure land rights, 11% on programmemanagement.

PNGT approachSome of the components of the programme include:

• Establishment of the CVGTs (over 2000); • Provision of technical support for the CVGTs, partly by the

private sector or NGOs;• Support for development of local development plans by

CVGTs;• Provision of local development funds to CVGTs based on

the plans, linked with a system of credit for productiveinvestments;

• Efforts to ensure coordination of actors at different levels• Preparing for decentralisation.

The major elements are shown in Table 2.The participatory diagnosis is undertaken by a multidis-

ciplinary team and local people, using the acceleratedmethod for participatory research (MARP). After the situa-tion analysis, the team identifies the constraints, difficul-ties, key problems of the community and also the potentialof the area, covering social, cultural, environmental andeconomic issues. This is not a sectoral but a holisticapproach to development.

Major efforts are made to coordinate the activities ofdifferent agencies with and between communities. It isessential that actions identified are taken forward quickly toimplement what is planned.

The CVGTs make their own choices as to the projectsthey would like funded, while having to make a local contri-bution in cash and in kind. They develop their communityplans, and manage the projects which are implementedthrough them.

At the level above the CVGT (called a province, which

Table 1: Levels and roles of government in Burkina

Level

National

Region

Province

Village

Structures

National Team for Coordination ofRural development Partners

Regional Council

Provincial Technical CoordinationTeam

Commission Villageoises de Gestiondes Terroirs (CVGT)

Roles

- Promote an overall strategy of decentralised rural development- Ensure learning from experiences in the field- Implement a M&E system with agreed performance and impact indicators

- Defines development approaches for the region in accordance with national policy - Harmoise the different development plans from within the region

- Harmonise the approaches of different agences in the province - Support communities in the development of their development plans- Promote coordination at all levels- Capture and disseminate learnings from experience- Establish priorities for investment at the level of the province in relation to the region

- Coordination and lead on development actions at local level- Manage funds effectively- Mobilise funds needed to implement its programmes- Plan development at local level, both in terms of time and space- Act as the interface between different development partners

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NMoussa Ouedraogo and Mohamed Drabo7

will become the level of local government, through aCommune), there is a technical coordination frameworkbetween government and NGOs who have a role in rela-tion to investments that need to be approved at higherlevels, and in M&E.

Box 1 gives a case study from Dour Yarce village, nearTendogogo.

ResultsPNGT1 covered 8 provinces of the country, including 486villages, or around 150 000 people2. The main investmentswhich resulted included:- Social and economic infrastructrure (roads, schools,

dispensaries, dams..)- Land management in the villages (stone bunds..)- Support for agricultural production- Support for management of classified forests

At the end of PNGT1, a study was undertaken ofimpacts on communities3, also using participatory method-


Table 2: Elements of village land management approach

Elements

Information/senstitisation

Joint analysis (identification of problems, opportunities,and research into solutions)

Planning of activities in time and space and elaboration ofa Village Development Plan

Organisation and skills development to implement theplan

Action-research

Mobilisation of finance

Implementation of village micro-projets

M&E

Tools and approach

- Use of media including drama, radio and press - Focus group meetings

- MARP PRA tools (mapping, transect, wealth ranking, direct observation, Venndiagrammes, flows , etc

- MARP tools, maps, focus groups

- in situ training, study visits, action-research, experimentation with management ofworks, etc

- Tests at small scale

- Development of partnerships - Development of negotiation skills- Promotion of local savings

- Technical and management training - Promotion of specific working groups- M&E

- Obligation to account to the wider community- Field visits to projects

Dour Yarce is a village where agriculture is the predominant economicactivity. The people are Morse, with some Peulh, and total 1133inhabitants. They were helped under PNGT1 and now 2. They did nothave a CVGT during PNGT1, when the programme worked withfarmers’ groups.

The CVGT was established in December 2002. A plan for “Gestionde Terroir” was developed, covering 5 years. The main problemsidentified were water and they now have two wells and a small dam.Food security is also a problem, and other interventions planned werefor stone lines, composting and other soil conservation activities.

They have a map of the CVGT, which is embroidered on cloth. Thisshows no school, with the nearest 8 km away, and the nearest clinic 12km away. They have a literacy centre. In the rainy season the mainvillage is inaccessible due to the flooding of the river, confining themto the village. Generally children are on holiday during this period, theycannot access markets and women use stores of dried and leafvegetables as foodstuffs. They have to use traditional healers duringthis period.

The contribution in cash and kind from the community is 29% ofthe total planned spend of 4.6 million CFA. Generally the communitycontribution is 20%, including contributions in kind.

The CVGT has two general assemblies per year and the committeemeets monthly. Subcommittees have been established of the CVGT toaddress particular tasks, including one for agriculture, livestock,education, environment, health, domestic water, land and M&E. Tenmembers of the committee have had a 5-day training on procurement.

Box 1: The CVGT of Dour Yarce

2 A village in Burkinabe legislation must have a minimum of 100 inhabitants or 20family units. The average for villages covered by PNGT is 300 people. 3 This included only a sample of 40 or so villages out of 486, but those chosenwere amongst the most impoverished in terms of food supply during PNGT1.

Experience of the Programme Nationale de Gestion de Terroirs (PNGT2) in Burkina Faso 7

ologies (MARP), including wealth ranking. Five years laterthis showed that the situation in terms of food security ofvulnerable households, with 73% of beneficiaries estimat-ing that they had improved their production, and 80% theirfood security. In terms of impact on natural resources, themain impacts were improved soil fertility, increased vegeta-tion cover, increased biodiversity and increased yields.4

Participatory management of classified forests is in itself alsoa real revolution.

There were also significant impacts on local capacities,through training and study visits. New village organisationswere created, and there was an improvement in decision-making. National government is referring to the CVGTs asa conduit for resources to support local development. Moreand more, where CVGTs exist they are becoming the keyinstitutions for development actors, local and nationalgovernment.

THEM

ESECTIO

N


A map of Dour Yarcebeing shown bymembers of the CVGT

A group of villagers fromDour Yarce villagepresenting their plan to agroup of visitors fromdifferent African countries,including Ian Goldman,Hans Binswanger fromWorld Bank and Jean-PaulSawdogo, PNGT.

Phot

os:D

avid

Van

nier

,Wor

ld B

ank

CONTACT DETAILSMoussa Ouedraogo is Head of the Unit forSupport to Local Governance with the PNGTand can be contacted at 01 BP 1487Ouagadougou 01, Burkina Faso. Email:[email protected]

Mohamed Drabo is the Coordinator of PNGTin the province of Kouritenga. He can becontacted c/o PNGT2, 01 BP 1487,Ouagadougou 01 Burkina Faso. Email:[email protected]

For further details visit: www.pngt.gov.bf

REFERENCESPNGT (2001): “Presentation du deuxièmeProgramme National de Gestion de Terroirs,PNGT2”, Ouagadougou, PNGT.Diallo, S (2003): “Communication du Ministred’Etat, Ministre de l’Agriculture, del’Hydraulique et des Ressources Halieutiquessur l’Experience du Burkina Faso”, presented atMeeting of African Ministers on Community-Driven Development, November 2003,Ouagadougou, Ministère de l’Agriculture, del’Hydraulique et des Ressources Halieutiques.

4 It should be noted that rainfall was plentiful during this period, which explainswhy the results are particularly good.

THEM

ESE

CTIO

N


This article examines the guiding ideas and ultimate realitiesof government-led participatory research in Tanzania andUganda. It considers the extent to which research resultshave influenced meso- (e.g. district) and macro- (e.g.national) level planning for poverty reduction and why; thedegree to which research processes have contributed todemocratisation and citizen empowerment; and implica-tions for the future of participatory approaches to policy-oriented research.

IntroductionThe World Bank and similarly powerful institutions havecome to acknowledge that their ideas about developmentcannot be imported and applied wholesale irrespective ofthe different circumstances faced by people in poor coun-tries. At the very least, information about local specificitiesis now regarded as a prerequisite to: • customising conventional development proscriptions/

rationalising public policy decisions; and,• monitoring their implementation.

The interest in data to inform Poverty Reduction Strate-gies is now merging with the need to monitor progresstowards Millennium Development Goals and bilateraldonors’ wish to streamline development assistance/improve

the performance of sector ministries. As a result, there isunprecedented pressure for poor countries to generate up-to-date, detailed socio-economic data.

In East Africa, this has led to many changes. The mostcomprehensive response to the demand for developmentdata has been in mainland Tanzania, where the govern-ment’s Poverty Monitoring System is quickly becoming aregional model. Though less sweeping, important changeshave also been made in Kenya, Uganda, and Zanzibar. Ineach case, changes include:• enhanced coordination by central government (typically

under the ministry responsible for preparing PovertyReduction Strategy Papers) in order to improve informa-tion flows and reduce duplication of efforts;

• an emphasis on practical ‘partnerships’ involving centralgovernment, donors, CSOs and, to a lesser extent, theprivate sector; and,

• the use of participatory research methods to inform,monitor, and advance public planning for poverty reduc-tion.

This article looks at the biggest examples of participa-tory, policy-oriented research in East Africa; namely, theTanzania Participatory Poverty Assessment (TzPPA) and theUganda PPA Process (UPPAP).

by CHARLES EHRHART

Challenging and changing thebig picture: the roles ofparticipatory research inpublic policy planning

8

THEM

ESECTIO

NChallenging and changing the big picture: the roles of participatory research in public policy planning 8


Participatory Poverty Assessments The first Participatory Poverty Assessments (PPAs) wereconducted in Africa during the early 1990s. Together withinformation generated through surveys and individual inter-views, their findings were meant by the World Bank toshow the complex relationship between poverty profiles,public policies, expenditures, and institutions.

PPAs quickly spread beyond the Bank to other agencies,where they continued to evolve and develop in terms ofmethodology and objectives. As a result, there are manydifferent definitions of what a PPA is and no apparentagreement on what a PPA is not. In the midst of continuingdebate, the many goals of PPAs have grown to include:• providing critical information (especially qualitative data

inaccessible to surveys) on which to base effective plansfor poverty reduction;

• building poor people’s capacity to analyse and solve theirproblems;

• stimulating local activities for poverty reduction (i.e. wide-spread community-based planning);

• raising poor people’s awareness of their rights andresponsibilities;

• changing policy makers’ understanding of and attitudestowards poor people by involving government officials inthe research process;

• building governments’ capacity for poverty analysis andpolicy design; and,

• ensuring that Poverty Reduction Strategies reflect thepriority needs of poor people.

Not all PPAs aim to meet all these goals, nor do all PPAsmeet their goals. However, many are realised and havemade important contributions to poverty reduction effortsat local, national, and international levels.

The Tanzania Participatory Poverty Assessment andthe Uganda PPA ProcessThe 2002-3 TzPPA explored the causes, consequences, andpolicy implications of ‘vulnerability’ in thirty sites. Locationswere spread throughout the country and selected on thebasis of representing diverse livelihood (agriculture, live-

Data was broughttogether and changedinto information andideas in small groups.This approach allowedtriangulation and theevolution of individualpositions throughrigorous dialogue.

Phot

o:Ch

arle

s Eh

rhar

t

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NCharles Ehrhart8

stock-keeping, fishing, and town-based work) conditions.Research teams were composed of six people from localand central government, as well as national and interna-tional civil society organisations, and they lived for up tothree weeks in each site.

The first round of UPPAP lasted from 1998 to 2001.During this time, it worked in 36 communities – most ofwhich were selected because they were especially poor. Thisapproach to site selection maximised opportunities for thecountry’s poorest people to communicate their experiencesand priority problems. Nonetheless, it also meant thatUPPAP’s research results were less representative of condi-tions in Uganda as a whole. Three-person teams spendingup to two weeks per community conducted research. Aswith the TzPPA, these teams were multi-sectoral andinvolved people from local government. This strategyworked well in both cases and was retained in UPPAP’ssecond cycle, which began in 20011.

Methods and methodologyMany aspects of the TzPPA and UPPAP – including their corebeliefs, principles, and methods – are typical of good partic-ipatory research in general. Thus, their approaches werefounded upon: • the belief that ordinary people are knowledgeable about,

and are capable of particularly reliable and insightfulanalysis of their own life-circumstances;

• the principle that all people – irrespective of age, gender,level of formal education, etc. – have a fundamental rightto participate in informing the decisions that shape theirlives;

• the use of visual methods, such as seasonal calendars,Venn diagrams, etc. to facilitate the meaningful involve-ment of people in the research process; and,

• a commitment to sharing ownership of research resultswith local people and facilitating – through community

and district workshops – the identification of practicalmeasures people can take to improve their lives.

In both Tanzania and Uganda, researchers wereprovided with an extended residential training programme.In the case of UPPAP, this lasted three weeks and focusedon PRA principles and methods as well as improving report-writing skills. In Tanzania, training was composed of: • a one-week course examining how public policies are

made, the scope of poverty-oriented public policies inTanzania and specific features of key policies;

• three weeks learning about the ideas and methods ofparticipatory research (including two special sessions onworking with hard-to-reach social groups and research-ing sensitive subjects like substance abuse and domesticviolence); and,

• three weeks jointly planning implementation (includingsessions on comprehensive note-taking and report-writing).

The TzPPA’s extended preparatory period paid dividendsin the long run as it led to (a) more informed assessment ofpolicies and (b) smoother implementation becauseresearchers themselves had been part of the decision-making process that established reporting procedures, stan-dards of behaviour etc.

Methodological differences The two most significant methodological differencesbetween the TzPPA and UPPAP surround their engagementin community-based planning and the size of research activ-ities.

Community-based planningThough the primary objective was to improve district- andnational-level planning processes, UPPAP also establishedCommunity Action Plans (CAPs) and committed itself toassisting in their implementation.

This decision was value driven. Indeed, members ofUPPAP’s Implementing Consortium (IC) feared that withoutinstituting CAPs their work would have been fundamen-tally extractive and exploitative. While well meant, the prac-tice of combining a nationwide research project withcommunity-based action plans proved to be a majorproblem because: • Some IC members (such as the National Bureau of Statis-

tics) were ill suited to helping implement CAPs. Those thatcould found their human and other resources incapableof dealing in a timely manner with the scattered nature ofpartner communities and the diverse problems they priori-tised. Moreover, attending to CAPs was at odds with


1 More information about the TzPPA can be found at www.esrftz.org/ppa andabout UPPAP at www.uppap.org

“While cases of change at the local levelare plentiful, the impact of the TzPPAand UPPAP on national-level policiesremains less clear. It is, perhaps, tooearly to tell whether or not the 2002–3TzPPA will have an important effect”

Challenging and changing the big picture: the roles of participatory research in public policy planning 8TH

EME

SECTION


expectations for IC members to remain in political centreswhere they could contribute to advocating pro-poorpolicy changes.

• Due to the irreconcilability of these tensions, the lagbetween CAP formulation and implementation wasexcessive. In the meantime, many local priorities hadchanged, some community members had forgottenabout UPPAP and others had grown bitter with thecertainty that researchers had never intended to returnand fulfil people’s expectations of aid.

As a result of this experience, as well as consultationswith local authorities and community members during itsdesign phase, the TzPPA chose not to engage in CAPs.Besides the difficulty of doing otherwise, it was argued thatPPA-incited CAPs would duplicate the responsibilities ofothers’ under the Local Government Reform Programme(LGRP). Also, community members said the research wouldnot be exploitative if the results were shared with them and

if researchers used it to advocate their interests. For thesethree reasons, the TzPPA opted to make just one promise;that is, to wholeheartedly try challenging and changingpublic policies in light of information and insights from thegrassroots.

From village assemblies to focus groupsUPPAP aimed to involve as many community members ineach of its activities as possible. In contrast, the TzPPA onlysought large, community-wide meetings as venues in whichto introduce itself and feedback/triangulate research resultson the last day. Depending on their subjects, interveningactivities aimed at involving between eight to sixteen partic-ipants in order to maximise the likelihood that all presentwould have a meaningful chance to share, debate, andrefine their inputs.

This approach suited the TzPPA’s needs. When the goalis participatory planning, facilitators typically seek a rela-

The TzPPA initiated work in eachcommunity with a videopresentation. The novelty drewhuge crowds who listened to aconsistent, dramatised explanationof what the TzPPA sought to do,what opportunities it offered anddidn’t, and what the researchprocess would be like. Thissubstantially reduced the risk ofraising false expectations

Phot

o:Ch

arle

s Eh

rhar

t

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NCharles Ehrhart8


tively small number of inclusive meetings wherein a criticaldegree of consensus can be fashioned around a specificcourse of action. In the process of pursuing this worthwhilegoal, marginal perspectives and agendas for change arefrequently left behind.

In contrast, the TzPPA did not need to develop ‘commu-nity consensus’. In order to fulfil its mandate and contributeto well-informed policies at various levels of government,it sought to learn about the range of conditions peopleface, as well as their concerns, competing priorities, successstories, etc. Instead of determining a single course of action,it could – on the basis of such rich information – recom-mend hundreds. This is an ideal outcome that would under-mine the likelihood of community-based planning leadinganywhere at all.

BenefitsParticipatory Action Research in general, and PRA/PLA inparticular, typically seek to benefit participants in two ways.These are:• improving the material and/or social conditions in which

they live; and,• enhancing people’s power to shape their lives.Therefore, it is worth asking how the TzPPA and UPPAP livedup to these goals.

Policy impactBoth UPPAP and the TzPPA generated a large amount ofhigh quality, practical information that could not have beendeveloped through conventional survey-based research. Byfeeding these results back to policy makers at meso- andmacro- levels in a variety of easily accessible formats theywere both able to have immediate, significant impact onpolicies at local (district and community) levels.

While cases of change at the local level are plentiful, theimpact of the TzPPA and UPPAP on national-level policiesremains less clear. It is, perhaps, too early to tell whether ornot the 2002-3 TzPPA will have an important effect. Yet anumber of important policy changes have been attributedto UPPAP. Of these, the highest in profile are: • the decentralisation of budget-item decisions to districts

(allowing local government to decide how to spend theirhealth or infrastructure budgets, for instance); and,

• a substantial increase in the proportion of Uganda’snational budget allocated to water and sanitation serv-ices.

These changes are important. However, valid questionsremain. First is the extent to which these and other policieswere, in fact, influenced by findings from UPPAP. Second is

why equally important (if not more important) findingsabout insecurity, corruption, and macroeconomic policieswere not addressed.

The answer to both questions points to the sameconclusion; that is, PPAs are more ‘consultative’ than ‘partic-ipatory’ because government is under no obligation to taketheir findings into account in policy decisions. This does notimply governments should adhere verbatim to recommen-dations coming from community members. To the contrary,one of government’s responsibilities is to balance theconcerns of individuals and particular social groups/regionswith others and all of this against financial constraints, etc.But the majority of policy makers still see themselves ashaving no obligation to either negotiate or explain theirdecisions to the public. Until this changes, it seems likelythat they will continue to use research results that supporttheir positions and disregard those which are, for whateverreason, unpalatable.

EmpowermentThe methods through which the TzPPA and UPPAP gener-ated their findings contributed to participants developing adeeper understanding of local realities. As evidenced by theways in which they sometimes took these insights andtransformed them into action, a degree of ‘empowerment’took place at the grassroots. Nonetheless, this should notbe overstated.

Because the presence of PPAs in each community wasfleeting in comparison to the long-term partnerships thatcharacterise effective community-based planning, theextent to which they shifted perceptions and power rela-tions was almost certainly far less. This is not to say that theTzPPA and UPPAP failed to challenge or affect power rela-tions. To the contrary, these projects invested a great dealof resources into training team members in research and

Some of the best examples of local change set in motion by the TzPPAare in Ilala Municipal District, Dar es Salaam Region, where municipalstaff and community members planned responses to research results.These included:• Provision of counselling and other forms of targeted assistance (e.g.

training in alternative employment and soft loans) to commercialsex workers.

• A new strategy to encourage equal provision of schoolingopportunities to girl and boy children. This strategy, unlike those inthe past, begins from an understanding of local ideas about genderand education.

• The creation by community members of transparent criteria forpriority support to especially poor households.

Box 1: Local change due to participatory research

THEM

ESECTIO

NChallenging and changing the big picture: the roles of participatory research in public policy planning 8


advocacy skills. Moreover, these urban-based professionalsgained a great deal of information and insights from, aswell as invigorated sympathy for, people at the grassroots.

Without doubt, this has contributed in both Tanzaniaand Uganda to the capacity of civil society to understand,communicate, and exert political pressure for positive socialchange. It has also helped improve understanding anddialogue between civil society and governments – thesignificance of which should not be understated. This mayamount to empowerment of poor people by proxy and, assuch is surely less than ideal. Yet realistic alternatives areunclear since effective advocacy – especially at macro levels– requires contacts, planning, and a command of relevantinformation that is simply inaccessible to most poor people.

Conclusions PPAs have their potential pitfalls and limitations. Forinstance:• It would be counterproductive (and logistically impossi-

ble) to involve all stakeholders. Thus, good representationis necessary – and dangerous because some points ofview may (wittingly or not) be excluded.

• Not everyone in a community will want to invest theirtime in the process of participatory research – especiallywhen they expect a welfare relationship to governmentor lack faith that their efforts will be heard and listened to.

• Many development issues are extraordinarily complex andfar removed from the direct experience of ordinarypeople. Therefore, it may be impossible for PPAs to rigor-ously examine some issues without demanding too muchof people’s time.

• PPAs can generate quantitative and qualitative develop-ment data. However, they cannot identify the scope ofcertain conditions or practices across a region or country.

• Participatory research does not ‘help’ conventional deci-sion makers. To the contrary, it is much easier for them todraw conclusions without the information provided byPPAs. Good research exposes competing interests, chal-

lenges orthodox assumptions, and reveals complexitiesthat make decision-making very, very difficult.

• PPAs are time-consuming and expensive in comparisonwith the process of elites meeting behind closed doors,speculating about citizens’ lives, and setting policy.

• Many of the forces causing and perpetuating poverty inEast Africa are rooted in the policies of distant countriesand institutions. Though PPAs may demonstrate suchlinkages, there is a tragic disconnection between thesefindings, advocacy efforts, and policy change.

Despite these hurdles, the TzPPA and UPPAP haveshown the potential of participatory, policy-orientedresearch to improve policy-making processes andoutcomes. Ironically, one of the greatest threats to partici-patory policy research as a whole may be the success ofthese and comparable initiatives. Indeed, there is the riskthat governments will be satisfied with their contributionsand neglect to explore how other innovations – includingcitizen report cards, participatory service assessments, andpolicy relevance tests – could add to development data andfurther democratisation. In the future, these and otheroptions should be routinely integrated into national povertymonitoring and evaluation strategies to ensure the bestpossible contexts for community-based planning.

CONTACT DETAILSCharles Ehrhart, Coordinator, ParticipatoryEnvironmental Management (PEMA)Programme, PO Box 110220, Dar es Salaam,Tanzania. Email: [email protected]

“Without doubt, this has contributed inboth Tanzania and Uganda to thecapacity of civil society to understand,communicate, and exert politicalpressure for positive social change. Ithas also helped improve understandingand dialogue between civil society andgovernments – the significance of whichshould not be understated”

THEM

ESE

CTIO

N


Background to Himachal PradeshHimachal Pradesh (HP) is a rural mountainous State of India,lying in the western Himalayas. With two-thirds underforest management1, only 10.5% is devoted to cropproduction. But 67% of the owners have a plot size of lessthan 0.4ha and thus non-farm resources are important inpeople’s livelihoods. The increasing population is furtherfragmenting the hilly terraced croplands. Socially, themountain communities are composed of people fromdifferent caste backgrounds, involving a complex social hier-archy of castes, connoting a differential status, with theScheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) beingaccorded the lowest status in practice although constitu-tionally, all citizens of India enjoy an equal status.

The mountain areas are both inaccessible and fragile,leading to restricted opportunities for growth as well ashidden poverty. Welfare investments through grants fromCentral Government and loans from financial institutionsmade some impacts from 1960s to 1980s. But with theshrinkage of Central Government funding and the poorrevenues generated, the state of HP is now facing a finan-cial crisis. In this context, there is a real need for an effec-

tive, local methodology for identifying and funding commu-nity priorities and reducing wastage. This article documentsthe trials undertaken in this direction, the approaches used,and their impacts.

Structures of Panchayati Raj Institutions in HPThe state of HP embraced the key elements of the 73rdConstitutional Amendment2, leading to the 1994 HPPanchayati Raj Act, which strengthens the devolutionaryprocess through the following Panchayati Raj Institution(PRI) structures as shown in Table 1.

In HP, the Panchayati Raj and Rural Development Depart-ment (PRRDD) is the department responsible for PRIs andcaters for training, administrative, and support needs of theabout 3037 Gram Panchayats, 75 Panchayat Samitis, and12 Zila Parishads with about 26,532 elected office bearersworking within them. All PRI bodies are elected on a non-party basis for a five-year term and include the mandatoryreservation of seats for some sections of society with a tradi-tionally lower social status to ensure equity in political oppor-tunity. One third of all seats, including those of Chairs of thedifferent tiers, are reserved for women. For the SCs and STs,

by RAJEEV AHAL and SILVIO DECURTINS

Experiences in Panchayat-basedplanning in the mountains ofHimachal Pradesh, India

9

1 Of the 67% forest, almost 29% is for grazing and pastures. A third of forestlands have not yet been demarcated through surveys and settlements.

2 After almost five years of debate and the introduction of Bills by successivegovernments in Parliament, the PRIs were accepted with the 73rd Amendment tothe Indian Constitution providing them with the basis on which to act as statutorybodies for local self-governance.

THEM

ESECTIO

NExperiences in Panchayat-based planning in the mountains of Himachal Pradesh, India 9

April

seat reservation is in proportion to their population. Line departments suffer from a narrow approach to

development that has discouraged partnership and partic-ipation by the communities. Historical experiences from allover India show that people-based planning is an effectivemechanism for strengthening local self-governance, as itentails the implementation of activities as directed by aPeople's Plan, in the form of a Panchayat Micro Plan (PMP).

History and background to PMPPanchayat Micro Planning (PMP) came into HP in 1996,with the first trials conducted by the NGO Rural Technol-ogy and Development Centre3(RTDC). Subsequently, manyother organisations piloted PMP processes. State-levelworkshops were held to promote experience sharing andstrengthen PMP processes. Due to this advocacy, in 1999the Government emphasised the promotion of PMPs,adding a further legitimacy and fresh impetus.

The Indo-German Changar Eco-Development Project(IGCEDP)4, a bilateral project between the governments ofGermany and HP, and implemented by GTZ and the ForestDepartment, had simultaneously built up a village-levelplanning approach called Integrated Resource ManagementPlanning (IRMP). Recognising the importance of main-streaming natural resource-based development planning,IGCEDP initiated trials in eight Panchayats (45 villages). Theresult was the evolution of IRMPs into a methodology forvillagers to make Panchayat-level PMPs.

The impact of these was limited as they were imple-mented in a project mode. RTDC, whose core staff hadbeen working with IGCEDP, decided to initiate communityblock-level trials in direct collaboration with the PRRDD,involving staff from the line departments at the block.Finally, the Government agreed to and initiated the Bhatiatpilot PMP block trials in Chamba District in 2003, one ofthe poorest districts of the country.

4 Contact: Dr. Rajan Kotru, current Team Leader GTZ-PSU, [email protected]

3 Contact: Sh. Sukhdev Vishwapremi, Co-ordinator, at [email protected] or moreinformation on www.navrachna.org

Table 1: Structures of Panchayati Raj Institutions in HP

Level

The Zila Parishad

The PanchayatSamiti

Gram Panchayat

Gram Sabhas andUp Gram Sabhas

Constitution

Constituted for each District, they consist of directlyelected members representing a group of Panchayatswith a population of 20,000. Elected members electfrom within themselves an executive committee.National parliament members are also Zila Parishadmembers.

Constituted for each development block andconsisting of a directly elected member representinga Gram Panchayat(s) with a population of about3,000. Elected members elect from withinthemselves the executive committee. Members ofnational parliament, whose constituency falls in thatblock, are also members. One fifth of GramPanchayat presidents are members by rotation.

Executive of the Gram Sabha. It consists of wardmembers elected by each Up Gram Sabha and adirectly elected Panchayat president. Each Panchayathas at least one trained secretary/assistant paid bythe PRRDD.

A village or a group of villages with a population of1,000–5,000 (an average of 1,200–1,800 inpractice). Each Gram Sabha is further subdivided into5–13 Up Gram Sabha (wards), where thecommunities can meet and participate more easilyand effectively.

Role

Plans and implements economic development and social justiceschemes. Financed by Central and State governments. Controls,coordinates, and guides the Panchayat Samitis & Gram Panchayats.

Plans and implements developmental projects and schemes based onspecified roles and functions and subject to funds received from stateand central government. Also acts as a coordination body between theGram Panchayats and the block level departments.

Meeting twice a month, it is responsible for 29 civic functions e.g.maintenance of village roads, public wells, culverts, sanitation etc.Prepares and implements schemes for economic development and socialjustice. Receives grants from State and Central Government.

Working as the common platform for all voters, the Sabhas provide thefoundation for direct democratic control and accountability by thecommunities over their elected PRI representatives. Each Gram Sabhameets four times a year, while the Up Gram Sabhas hold their meetingstwice a year.

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NRajeev Ahal and Silvio Decurtins9

The objective was to: • develop a team that could take the planning process

forward for implementing the PMP, and expand it inphases into neighbouring Panchayats and the whole block;

• develop a model that can later be replicated by PRRDD inthe whole state;

• involve line departments (such as agriculture, horticulture,irrigation, forests etc.) in the preparation and implemen-tation of PMPs;

• promote convergence between watershed committees5

and the Panchayats using PMPs as a common plan;• part-finance PMPs through funds already available (untied

funds, watershed funds, and some lapsing tied funds atthe block and district levels); and,

• enhance local livelihoods based on natural resources andexisting livelihood skills identified through PMPs.

The process has now been demonstrated in six Panchay-ats and is currently underway in 11 more. In eachPanchayat, a minimum of 30–45 volunteers from the localvillages learn and conduct the process without payment ofany kind.

PMP methodology and approach The process is initiated through one trained facilitator foreach Panchayat using a detailed methodology manual andtwo planning workbooks, one for Up Gram Sabha (village)planning and one for integrating them all into thePanchayat plan. All these are in the local language.

Initiation and organisation formationPoor communications and the limited capacity of CBOsundermine participation and allow vested interest groups totake control of any new initiatives. PMP volunteers workedto form community groups and provide information aboutthe PMP process (objectives, methodology, roles, and bene-fits) through Up Gram Sabha meetings. A Gram Sabhameeting was then held to seek public endorsement for theinitiation of the PMP process in each Panchayat. The involve-ment of the block and district administration was ensured.

Ward-level participatory data collectionEach Up Gram Sabha met and nominated a team of volun-teers called the ward planning team (WPTs), which includedsemi-literate men and women (one third of the team). Theywere introduced to the cadastral maps6 of their wards andtaught how to mark the households, hamlets, infrastruc-ture, and physical features (roads, rivers, gulleys, temples,spring wells etc.). The WPTs went back to their wards andcompleted the forms and the maps at village meetings. Thelisting of existing infrastructure (buildings, roads, wells etc.)and their preference ranking for services provided by thedifferent line departments were ascertained by WPTs usingparticipatory tools.

In a second training session, the WPTs learnt to identifythe different land uses and mark them on the cadastralmap, as well as how to catalogue basic information abouttheir ownership (including both individuals and communi-ties), size, and status, leading to the identification of prob-lems and potentials. Watershed boundaries and drainagelines were identified and marked on the maps by the WPTs,each working simultaneously in the seven to thirteen wardsmaking up each Panchayat (each ward consists of five toeight villages on average).

Ward-level data interpretation and planning bycommunities and support agenciesThe data collected was presented and verified by thecommunity in an Up Gram Sabha meeting and correctionsmade. The problems and potentials for each ward wereanalysed. Each Up Gram Sabha discussed in depth theissues related to natural resources, social justice, and infra-structural needs.


6 Each revenue village in HP has been surveyed. Cadastral maps showingboundaries, ownership etc. of each private and Government land parcel areavailable at the office of the Land Revenue official for that revenue village. Mapswere last updated in 1976. Each revenue village in HP has been surveyed.Cadastral maps showing boundaries, ownership etc. of each private andGovernment land parcel are available at the office of the Land Revenue official forthat revenue village. Maps were last updated in 1976.

5 The Central Government in India provides direct support to watershed projectsin degraded districts. Funds are routed through the deputy commissioners atdistrict level, with BDOs as project implementing agencies. Watershedcommittees play the role of executing the works, but they are often formed bypolitically-motivated individuals and act as parallel institutions to PRIs, especiallythe Panchayats. Sixteen of the Bhatiat block’s 64 Panchayats have watershedprojects.

Volunteers of one ofthe seven wardplanning teams ofthe Panchayatlearning how to readtheir ward map usinga standard 1:1000cadastral map tracedfrom the revenuerecords.

Phot

o:Ra

jeev

Aha

l

Experiences in Panchayat-based planning in the mountains of Himachal Pradesh, India 9

With the help and support of specialists and field stafffrom the line departments, technical solutions to the prob-lems and potentials identified in each ward were analysed.Some proposed activities fitted into the existing depart-mental schemes while others had to be supported throughinnovative grants. Putting together the problems and theirsolutions, along with the technical details, resulted in theward draft plans (WDPs). The community collectivelydiscussed the options and solutions generated in theseplans. In an open meeting, all the members of the Up GramSabha reached consensus on priorities and approved thefinal ward plan. A typical WDP consists of:• self-help activity list – to be implemented by the commu-

nity with its own resources;• line department lists – priorities for line departments that

they must respect;• works to be done by the Panchayat with its own funds

that it receives; and,• activities to be taken up through other projects working

in the area – special schemes from Central Government,bilateral projects etc.

Panchayat-level plan formulationThe WDCs of all of the wards falling in each Panchayatcame together in a two-day conference. Each ward actionplan was presented by the Ward Development Committeeand was sectorally integrated at Panchayat level to formthe draft PMP whose outputs consisted of three veryspecific sets of activities:Activities to be undertaken by Panchayat from its own fundsEach Panchayat has some untied funds (from Central andState Governments) and its own revenue. Allocations weredetermined by the priorities of PMP and an annual plan ofoperation was made. Activities to be undertaken by concerned line departmentsThese are department-specific lists that integrate the prior-ities from each ward plan at the Panchayat level. Thedepartments are expected to implement their activitiesusing these priorities over the next five years, as these hadalready been verified at community level during the plan-ning process.Project packagesSpecial activities were developed into packages for CentralGovernment, bilateral schemes, or project funds.

THEM

ESECTIO

N


A ward land-use map prepared by the eightmembers of the ward planning team, two ofwhom are women. They are semi-literate,local villagers with no prior training. Theassociated Land Status Register containsinformation about the ownership,production, and status (good, moderate, orbad) of each plot of land in the ward. Theland-use planning identifies problems andpotentials with each landscape element.

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NRajeev Ahal and Silvio Decurtins9


In addition, the prioritised lists of individual beneficiar-ies for the different state- and central-level welfare schemeswere also collated at the Panchayat level. This made theselection of beneficiaries fully decentralised and commu-nity-driven.

At a special Gram Sabha meeting called by thePanchayat, the draft PMP was tabled and approved. Thisdraft plan was a strategic tool that ensured communitycontrol and ownership of their negotiated developmentalpriorities. The Panchayat-level standing committees werealso formed from members nominated by Up Gram Sabhas.The next task was to send the relevant parts of the plan tothe relevant agencies to act on, including the deputycommissioner’s office at district level.

The guidelines and procedures for activities to be imple-mented by village-level works committees were based onthe HP Panchayat financial rules to ensure conformity andease in implementation. Actions to integrate Panchayat-and block-level plans are now underway. Significantly, theBhatiat pilot block has encouraged other State-level insti-tutions wanting to develop and demonstrate their sectoralplans as parts of PMP to converge and undertake their trialson a common platform in Bhatiat (including the health andfamily welfare department and the HP Forest SectorReforms Project).

Positive impacts of the PMP process• The strategic role of the Up Gram Sabha village commu-

nity as a basic unit planning has been demonstrated.Marginalized sections of the communities (women, sched-uled castes, and the poor) who were earlier excluded in theGram Sabha meetings have found a community platformand have become active in accessing schemes and voicingtheir problems.

• The previous planning processes of the Panchayats often didnot include natural resources or social justice, core concernsfor sustainable development. The new PMP process empha-sises these in order to build Panchayats as institutions withsocial equity and long-term assets – and not merely bodies

providing infrastructure. For example, the Panchayats arenow supporting reforestation and soil and water conserva-tion works through the standing committees.

• The listing of genuine beneficiaries for the Governmentwelfare schemes and their prioritisation by the differentvillage communities sitting together as an Up Gram Sabhawas a novel innovation. The beneficiaries were selected onmerit and not on political considerations, demonstratingthe strength of planning at village/community level to allparticipants.

• Panchayats and ward planning teams are trained in partic-ipatory tools and planning processes, with 35–65 trainedvolunteers in each Panchayat. This is a long-term humanresource investment. Selected volunteers from these teamsare now working as facilitators in other nearby Panchayats,meaning the PMP has the potential for self-replication. Theinvolvement of the Panchayat Samiti and the Zila Parishadmembers throughout the PMP process has sensitised andprepared them to play a supportive role in sanctioningfinancial allocations for the PMP at block- and district-level.

• The Panchayats have formulated their annual plans ofoperation (APOs) for 2003–04 using their own funds basedon the micro-plan priorities. This is unique because previ-ously, the secretary (a Government employee) would makethe plan with no involvement from the Gram Sabhas. ThePanchayat executives are now able to formulate APOsreflecting ward-level priorities themselves. The communi-ties can crosscheck the APOs, which serves as a usefulcheck for accountability.

• Documents outlining five-year plans for the Panchayats arenow ready as PMPs. They articulate clear needs for thedifferent user groups in different wards for each of the linedepartments. This document can (and should) be used asa reference (with complete household-level and baselinedata) by all external agencies, without them having tocontinue their parallel investigations.

• The hitherto inactive statutory Panchayat standing commit-tees are now armed with the citizens’ approval and thePanchayat’s support, and are working to assist and monitorthe Panchayat in implementing the PMPs. The allocation offunds from the block level is now based on the needs ofthe people and not at the selective discretion of bureau-crats and politicians.

• Civil servants were relieved that the major problems ofmobilising communities and of consensus formation were toa large extent resolved by the PMP process. Politicians, whowere initially reserved, now find that this process does notundermine their authority; instead it helps them to focus onmajority-based priorities instead of on the pressures from

“This is a long-term human resourceinvestment. Selected volunteers fromthese teams are now working asfacilitators in other nearby Panchayats,meaning the PMP has the potential forself-replication”

THEM

ESECTIO

NExperiences in Panchayat-based planning in the mountains of Himachal Pradesh, India 9


minority groups that had previously led to the splitting oftheir votes and rampant infighting within communities.

Limitations of PMP• There is a need to enhance the involvement of line depart-

ments in the process through using their specialist advice tocommunities on technical solutions to the problems andpotentials emerging from the initial plans.

• The PMP process needs to be made more participatory byfacilitating it as a mass campaign involving all sections ofthe society, instead of as a top-down Government-runactivity. The participation of women and other vulnerablegroups can be enhanced by having specific and separateconfidence-building meetings and activities with them.

• The integration of the emergent PMPs into block- anddistrict-level planning systems must be addressed, as this iscurrently a key weakness in the process. The district leveloffers a platform for the convergence of community-basedplanning processes with the more strategic and centralisedprocess of macro planning from the top. For this, theongoing engagement with the Panchayat Samitis and ZilaParishads will have to be accelerated.

• More people-friendly systems of fund routing, agreements,and audits have to be tested to strengthen implementationof the PMPs.

• Documentation of successes and constraints need to beshared with the government, the PRIs, and the NGOs/bilat-eral agencies for them to advocate changes to the relevantprocedures and statutes.

Lessons learntThe process of decentralisation is a long-drawn one and itsimpacts are incremental and not always tangible. Commu-nity-based planning approaches like PMP provide an imme-diate remedy to some of the problems arising out ofcentralised planning and implementation. Political will,commitment from the Civil Service, and the mobilisation ofcommunities to use the process of decentralisation for betterlocal governance increases the speed at which theseprocesses can be core-streamed to positively affect Govern-ment planning and allocation systems. The experiences ofdesigning and introducing PMP in Himachal show that it ispossible for semi-literate communities in the mountains towork in a participatory mode and deliver community-basedplans into the hands of PRIs, making them better institutionsof local governance.

“The process of decentralisation is along-drawn one and its impacts areincremental and not always tangible.Community-based planning approacheslike PMP provide an immediate remedyto some of the problems arising out ofcentralised planning andimplementation”

CONTACT DETAILSRajeev AhalDecentralisation Adviser to the Ministry ofLocal GovernmentGTA LesothoPO Box 988Maseru 100LesothoEmail: [email protected] [email protected]

Dr Silvio DecurtinsProgramme CoordinatorLesotho-German Decentralised Rural Devel-opment ProgrammePO Box 988Maseru 100LesothoEmail: [email protected]

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe authors wish to thank the RTDC andIGCEDP for the use of written materials ondifferent aspects of PMP and decentralisation.The authors are responsible for theconclusions drawn in this paper.

THEM

ESE

CTIO

N


Introduction

The legal background and structuresLocal autonomy is enshrined in the 1987 Philippine Consti-tution. The Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC) providesthe legislative basis for people’s participation in governance.Under the LGC, the local government units (LGUs) assumebroader responsibility and greater accountability to theirconstituents. Each local government unit (LGU) must have amulti-sectoral development plan to be developed by its corre-sponding Local Development Council (LDC). The Local Devel-opment Council is the mechanism through which the localcouncil, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), people’sorganisations (POs), and the private sector participate in localdevelopment planning, including budget planning and localresource allocation. At least 25% of the seats of the localdevelopment council should come from non-governmentalgroups, people’s organisations, or the private sector. Table 1shows the composition of the Local Development Councilsat different levels.

The case study: participatory situational analysis,planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation(SAPIME) in three urban barangaysECPG (Empowering Civic Participation in Governance) is an

NGO working on village-level local governance. Participa-tion of NGOs and POs in participatory development plan-ning has been more common in rural areas than in urbanareas, and so it was a challenge for ECPG to venture intoparticipatory local development planning in urban areas,and it is now working in three barangays (villages) inQuezon City, the capital of the Philippines (Culiat, Sauyo,and Santa Monica, with populations of 27–50,000 people).The city holds the largest number of informal urban dwellersin metropolitan Manila and probably in the Philippines. Oneof the basic qualities shared by the three barangays is thepresence of strong people’s organisations, with whomECPG works.

The SAPIME methodologyECPG is committed to the improvement of urban participa-tory local development planning as opposed to narrowtechnical planning. ECPG’s strategy is called BarangayDevelopment Planning Through Participatory SituationalAnalysis, Planning, Implementation, Monitoring, and Eval-uation (BDP-Participatory SAPIME). In this participatorymethodology community members themselves identify andanalyse their problems, the situation within which theseproblems are embedded, and the possible solutions. Table2 summarises the approach.

by EDNA CO, JAN VELASCO-FABONAN and JEREMY PHILIPPE NISHIMORI

Some experiences from thePhilippines in urban communitydevelopment planning

10

THEM

ESECTIO

NSome experiences from the Philippines in urban community development planning 10


Key elementsSocial preparation and capability-building interventionsUpon establishing the partnership between the barangayand ECPG, the barangay officers went through a three-daycapability-building workshop called an Empowering LocalGovernance Seminar (ELGS) on management and planningissues, as well as the role of civil society, and emphasisingthe engagement of the barangay officials with people’sorganisations. A Technologies of Participation (TOP) partici-patory methodology was used to engage participants in thediscussion and planning. Smaller workshop sessions enabledall participants to speak out, others were empowered toshow their leadership by serving as small group facilitators,and others reported on the outcomes of the group discus-sions. By doing this, the leadership skills of the individualswere honed, the ability to articulate and communicate withothers on issues that matter to them is strengthened, andself-confidence built among these potential leaders. More-

over, unity and group cohesion emerged as another inspir-ing outcome of this technique.

To help start the participatory planning process, ECPGran a social preparation programme, specifically for the POsand other community associations in the barangays to rein-troduce the barangay as a venue for people’s participation,specifically through the formulation of a comprehensivedevelopment plan.

Later on, the ECPG organised a seminar called Citizens’Legal Capability-Building Seminar (CLCBS), which introducedPOs to the laws, policies, and citizens’ rights that are rele-vant to their interests. Multi-sector assembliesMulti-sector assemblies comprising of different interestgroups such as transport groups, the urban poor, the elderly,youth, the various homeowners associations, and otherinterest groups were initiated by ECPG’s community facilita-tors as a venue for sharing experiences and concerns, to

Table 1: Structures and roles of local government

Local Governmentunit

Province

City/municipality

Barangay(barangayDevelopmentCouncil)

Approx.population

• Not less than250,000

150,000+25,000 +

2,000+ formunicipality5,000+ for city

Role of the Local Development Council

• the formulation of annual, medium-term, and long-term socio-economic development plans and publicinvestment programmes

• the evaluation and prioritisation of socio-economicprogrammes and projects

• the formulation of local investment incentives thatwill promote the inflow of private investment

• the coordination, monitoring, and evaluation ofdevelopment programmes and projects beingimplemented in its jurisdiction

• The formulation of annual, medium-term, and long-term socio-economic development plans and publicinvestment programmes

• The evaluation and prioritisation of socio-economicprograms and projects

• The formulation of local investment incentives thatwill promote the inflow of private investment

• The coordination, monitoring, and evaluation ofdevelopment programmes and projects

• mobilisation of people’s participation in localdevelopment efforts

• preparation of local development plans based onlocal requirements

• implementation, monitoring, and evaluation ofnational and local programmes and projects in theirlocality

Composition of the Local Development Council

• governor• mayors of the component cities and municipalities• the chairperson of the Committee on

Appropriations of the Provincial Government(budget committee)

• the congressman or his representative• NGO/PO representatives operating in the

province, who should constitute no less than one-fourth of the members of the fully organisedcouncil

• mayor• All of the punong barangays (village heads) in the

city/municipality• The chairperson of the Committee on

Appropriations of the City/Municipal Government• The congressman or his representative• NGO/PO representatives operating in the

city/municipality, who should constitute no lessthan one-fourth of the members of the fullyorganised council

• punong barangay (village head)• members of the barangay council• The congressman or his representative• NGO/PO representatives operating in the

barangay, who should constitute no less than one-fourth of the members of the fully organisedcouncil

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NEdna Co, Jan Velasco-Fabonan and Jeremy Philippe Nishimori 10

bring out the common agenda in local development amongcommunity associations. The multi-sectoral assembly alsoprovides a forum for community members to validate thedevelopment programme initially drafted through theseminar-workshops. Preparation for and mobilisation of BDP-participatory SAPIMEThe community is prepared for the development planningprocess through a combination of the initial groundwork byECPG’s community facilitators and a two-day training forparticipatory planning facilitators (PPFs) and barangay partic-ipatory planners (BPPs).

The planning methodologyThe overall process of participatory situational analysis, plan-ning, and budgeting takes three to four weeks, with most ofthe work done during the weekends. The planning method-ology used is shown in Table 3.

Once familiarised with the tools, the planners and thefacilitators work with sector-based and geographic group-ings to produce a corresponding situational analysis foreach, which is later consolidated into a comprehensivemulti-sectoral development plan. Subsequently a two-week process of validation, enrichment, and refinement is


Table 2: Elements of the community-based planning process

Elements

Planning unit

Methodology

Facilitation of barangay plans

Training


Funding the plans

Linkage to city and provincial plans

Implementation of the barangay plans

Monitoring and evaluation ofimplementation at barangay level

CBP in Quezon City, Philippines

Barangay (village)

• three- to four-week process mostly at weekends including barangay• profiling (situation analysis) by sector and area, development plan • multi-sector assemblies developed as forums• acts as guide for a Local (Barangay) Development Investment Plan (LDIP)

By community facilitators.

• three-day training for barangay officers by NGO on empowering local governance• social preparation programme for POs, highlighting role of development plan, as well as legal

capacity-building• two-day training for participatory planning facilitators from the community• capacity-building on implementation, M&E, and legal rights for barangay structures

The budget allocation includes support for workshops and similar activities that would engagecommunity participation through POs’ participation in the Barangay Development Plan.

Stakeholders forum:• National Government agencies • NGOs – provide organising, training/seminars, and medical missions• Local Government officials Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) for footpaths, sanitation, livelihood

training /seminars, medical missions, improvement of PO participation in barangay affairs • City Government for financing of infrastructure and human development projects such as rip-

rapping, barangay roads, micro-relending, parks and recreation, improvement of rivers/creeks• the Community Development Fund of district representatives for barangay roads, park, and

recreation centres.• People’s organisations – can work on the implementation and financing aspects of the plan

The Local Development Investment Plan is adopted as a component of the barangay plan, which inturn is forwarded to the higher level of local government, for budget consideration and support bythe higher local government level.

Through the leadership of the barangay as the LGU concerned, the projects in the development planare cooperatively implemented with the concerned National Government agencies, LGUs, and otherpossible stakeholders.

For monitoring and evaluation needs, the participatory planners who participated in the participatoryplanning process are transformed into participatory monitoring and evaluation teams.

Some experiences from the Philippines in urban community development planning 10

undertaken through sector and area assemblies.

Some responses to the process

Reactions from the communitySome of the initial reactions from the community regardingthe process were:Situational analysis• Most community members were surprised that they were

being invited to participate in the process of planning forthe development plan, and thus, were eager to participate.

• Some participants found the planning tools initially diffi-cult to use but eventually found the visual and participa-tory nature of the tools attractive and encouraging.

• Barangay officials were generally supportive of the partic-ipatory process being implemented. A few others with

traditional leadership backgrounds were hesitant to moveinto a terrain of planning that involved people’s participa-tion and power-sharing structures.

• Some members of the community were not interested.Participatory planning• Some community members found the process difficult and

hard to sustain, specifically in some sectors and certainareas.

• Community members from homeowners’ associations andorganisations that manage the affairs of private subdivi-sions were often outnumbered by the informal settlers inthe community. In the past, issues such as peace and orderand waste management, have been the focus of develop-ment planning; the current process being introduced hasbalanced the focus on other urban poor issues e.g.housing and basic services.

THEM

ESECTIO

N


Table 3: Planning methods used in SAPIME

Stage

The Technologiesof Participation(TOP) tools forthe PPFs and theBPPs

Situation analysis(SA)

SWOT Analysis

Reconciliation

ParticipatoryPlanning (P) tools

Planningimplementation

Tool

• the discussion method: objective, reflective, interpretative, and decisional (ORID) mode of discourse, for situations whereparticipants have a common experience

• the workshop method: a mode of discourse for situations where there might be differences of experiences, but with acommon ground

• resource and social mapping: including ‘community walks’ where PPFs and BPPs walk through geographic sub-areas ofthe community to take note of its social and resource characteristics

• historical transect map: including political, social, and economic transitions• Venn diagram: measuring the degrees of influence and persuasion that community leaders, organisations, government

agencies, and personnel have in different arenas and issues• service map of all the services that can be found within the community, which are given a rating • organisational ratings matrix assessing all organisations and institutions within the community, including the barangay

council

• SWOT for each SA tool and a Grand SWOT which takes into consideration the SWOT results of each SA tool

• development of situation analysis by sector and area

• problem tree: participants identify the main problems, the root causes, the extensions and their interrelations, asexperienced by the barangay

• objective tree: participants transform the problems outlined in the problem tree into ideal situations and the actionsnecessary to achieve that situation

• alternatives analysis: participants analyse and prioritise the different possible projects based on necessity, acceptability, andthe availability of funds

• participation analysis: through this process, the participants evaluate the motives, interests, and possible contributions ofall the stakeholders for specific projects. As such, a strategy for each stakeholder can be constructed

• development of sectoral/area plans• validation, enrichment, refinement over two weeks• development of consolidated multi-sectoral plan with short-, medium-, and long-term sectoral goals

• Preparation of a Local (Barangay) Development Investment Plan (LDIP),• Preparation of the barangay’s annual budget

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NEdna Co, Jan Velasco-Fabonan and Jeremy Philippe Nishimori 10


• Some barangay officials felt that participatory planningencroached on what is essentially the terrain of barangayofficials.

Implementation • The three barangays are in the process of setting the plan

into an ordinance.• The various POs in the three communities are currently

lobbying for the passage of the ordinance.

Reactions by local governmentThe commitment and support of the Local Governmentunits concerned towards the participatory planning processis also important. On many occasions during the planning,the barangay officials opposed some of the proposals raisede.g. citing budgetary restrictions that already limit the provi-sion of basic services. Previously, local development planningoveremphasised infrastructure projects. While LGUs canprovide support for the participatory planning process, it isequally important that they redirect their priorities towardsmore responsive and people-centred programmes and proj-ects. The involvement of barangay officials in the planninghelped to ensure a better balance between physical andsocio-economic projects.

At present, the use of participatory planning in the threebarangays has been given legal status through ordinances,incorporating participatory development planning into thebarangay’s budget system. A pledging session is also under-way with the higher Local Government units, NationalGovernment agencies, and funding agencies, to supplementthe limited financial capacities of the barangays.

Currently, the on-going BDP has to be integrated with theCommunity Development Plan of Quezon City to tap budgetallocations to support the projects at the barangay level thatwould eventually lead to direct improvement of the QuezonCity dwellers as a whole. These include budgets for education,the Social Development Fund, and other related resources.

Issues and challengesThere were tendencies among some people’s organisationsto use the newly gained planning skills as a tool to challengebarangay officials on issues pertaining to transparency andmanagement. Some barangay officials felt threatened by theempowerment of POs and saw PO leaders as potentialcompetitors in the next elections. To avoid this jeopardisingtheir willingness to support the plans, participants have to bereminded to focus on the planning goals and not personalattacks.

The majority of inhabitants in the three barangays arepoor and marginalized, and in the process the developmentplan must be continuously challenged to check how itresponds to the needs of this majority. For example theissues of basic services and housing rights are given priorityby the BPPs over other demands such as peace and order.However, the other needs cannot be ignored and shouldalso be addressed.

Besides social preparation (information dissemination,coordination, collaboration, and consultation), funding is thebiggest hurdle for the participatory development plan as theavailable funds are likely to be less than the requirements ofthe projects planned for. Prioritisation is therefore an essen-tial process, as well as ensuring that funds already allocatedfor Local Governments by the National Government areactually disbursed to them on time. The late disbursement ofthese funds causes the Local Governments to use their fundsfor these devolved functions, thus further reducing thebudget available for LGU projects.

Another issue is the lack of coordination among thebarangay and their parent cities or provinces in their plan-ning processes. For example, the City Government draftstheir own plans and LDIP to comply with the prerequisite forreceiving their annual funding but without considering theindividual BDP’s from their localities. More often than not,these city plans would advocate the political agendas of thecity’s leaders. This has resulted in poorly synchronisedprogrammes, and the formulation of community develop-ment and land use plans that do not reflect the felt needs ofthe barangays.

Replication and scale-upThe experience of these three barangays illustrates that thesystem is workable and practical and can be replicated inother barangays. However, the three pilots are essentiallypoor urban communities. Another set of pilots may have tobe conducted in dissimilar communities so that a morecomprehensive set of guidelines and performance indicatorscan be developed.

“Besides social preparation (informationdissemination, coordination, collaboration,and consultation), funding is the biggesthurdle for the participatory developmentplan as the available funds are likely to beless than the requirements of the projectsplanned for. Prioritisation is therefore anessential process”

Edna Co Jeremy Philippe‘Nishi’ Nishimori

Jan Velasco-Fabonan TH

EME

SECTION

Some experiences from the Philippines in urban community development planning 10


Barangay officials are sensitive to the threat of beingunseated by members of the participating organisations orbeing subjected to severe criticism. Therefore, unless theprocess is made a mandatory annual exercise for allbarangays, e.g. for the release of the barangay’s budget, itwill not be easy to ensure widespread adoption of thisprocess.

The city or provincial level should also benefit from theparticipatory process. Should the provincial plan not be theamalgamation of the plans of the subordinate Governmentunits? This cannot simply be the case, because the social andeconomic requirements of a province or a large city are morethan the sum of the requirements of its subordinate units.Nevertheless, the concept of participatory planning is veryrelevant using representatives from the planning units of the

barangays in the city or provincial planning process, andavoiding the arbitrary selection of planning members andthe non-representation of some sectors in the planningprocess.

Local governments as enablers should provide a levelplaying field, role definitions, advice on workable courses ofaction and priorities, and they should set up monitoring andevaluation units to promote transparency in the budget allo-cation for community activities.

CONTACT DETAILSEdna Co, Associate Professor, University ofthe Philippines National College of PublicAdministration and Governance, University ofthe Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City, Philip-pines. Email: [email protected]

Johanna ‘Jan’ L. Velasco-Fabonan,Programme Officer, Urban Local GovernanceTeam, ECPG, University of the Philippines,Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines. Email:[email protected]

Jeremy Philippe ‘Nishi’ Nishimori, ProgrammeOfficer, Policy Research and PublicationsTeam, ECPG, University of the Philippines,Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines. Email:[email protected]

REFERENCESVelasco-Fabonan, JL and Pilorin, MLM. (2001)Trends, opportunities, and challenges in thecontext of New Capital Migration: a case study,San Fernando City and Municipality of Mexico.School of Urban and Regional Planning,University of the Philippines.

GLOSSARYBDP Barangay development planBPP Barangay participatory plannersECPG Empowering Civic Participation in

Governance (the lead NGO)LDC Local Development CouncilLGC Local Government Code of 1991LDIP Local (Barangay) Development

Investment PlanLGU Local Government unitsPO People’s OrganisationsPPF Participatory planning facilitatorsSAPIME Participatory Situational Analysis,

Planning, Implementation, Monitor-ing, and Evaluation

TOP Technologies of Participationmethodology

THEM

ESE

CTIO

N


Vietnam has set a course for political and economicchange. Decentralisation has allowed individual provinces inVietnam significant autonomy to interpret national lawsand policy. These changes are opportunities to harness thelegal framework for change into community-based plan-ning and participation in natural resource management.The MOSAIC programme in Quang Nam province, centralVietnam, has adopted innovative planning tools at the localcommunity level, such as participatory three-dimensionalmodelling (P3DM). MOSAIC is building experiences,lessons, and partnerships to frame provincial policy forsustainable land-use planning. The programme is navigat-ing the complex State administrative structure to magnifysite-based results into wider-scale policy and planning atprovincial, regional, and up to national levels.

IntroductionIn Vietnam environmental problems are mounting as thecountry develops the economy and rural infrastructure afterdecades of war, instability, and social upheaval. With a highproportion of the rural-based population dependent onforest resources (Baker et al. 2000), sustainable develop-ment and poverty alleviation are seen as priority, and are

intrinsically linked to forest resource conservation.Towards this recognition, the Vietnam government has

attempted to switch its focus to community-based plan-ning approaches. There is an evolving policy framework forcommunity participation in the natural resource manage-ment sector. The decree Strengthening Democracy at LocalLevel1 and the recent circular on Strengthening UrgentMeasures on Forest Protection and Development2 call forgrassroots participation in Local Government issues, withspecific reference to the management of natural resources.In Quang Nam province, a logging ban decree details theimportance of local collaboration in forest protection meas-ures. Despite supportive legislation and wider macro-economic decentralisation policies, the on-the-groundreality is a lack of political credibility, resources, communi-cations, and capacity. However, in Quang Nam province,political willpower has allowed for a coherent attempt at

by JAMES HARDCASTLE, BARNEY LONG, LE VAN LANH, GIACOMO RAMBALDI andDO QUOC SON

The use of participatory three-dimensional modelling incommunity-based planning inQuang Nam province, Vietnam

11

1 Decree No. 29 (‘The Democracy Decree’) was issued in 1998 by theGovernment of Vietnam with the aim of strengthening democratic mechanismsat the local level. It stipulates increased consultation and participation of citizensin Local Government issues.2 Circular number 12, 16 May 2003 challenged the effectiveness of currentnatural resource management, protection and enforcement, and urged forcontinued reform.

THEM

ESECTIO

NThe use of participatory three-dimensional modelling in community-based planning in Quang Nam province, Vietnam 11


strategic land-use planning for long-term natural resourcemanagement, with communities involved in the decision-making processes. This is in part due to recent nationalcirculars highlighting forest protection as a key factor inreducing the impacts of flooding, to which Quang Nam isparticularly prone. The last catastrophic inundation, in1999, cost millions of dollars and hundreds of lives.

The focus area: Quang Nam province, central VietnamQuang Nam province is rated as one of the poorest inVietnam. The Committee for Ethnic Minorities and Moun-tainous Areas (CEMMA) has ranked 60 communes in the sixmountain districts as highest priority for poverty alleviation.The population of these six districts is 87% ‘ethnic minority’,from 12 different ethnic groups, predominantly Ka Tu. In theSong Thanh area, transport, market access, education, basicinfrastructure, health care, and social services are all minimal,whilst the effects of decades of war still have ongoing reper-cussions.

Upland communities in Quang Nam exhibit strongpotential for effective forest governance through local insti-tutions (Hardcastle, 2002). However, open-access resourceregimes are rapidly depleting local forests, with the indige-nous communities powerless against outsiders, despiteprovincial plans to accelerate the allocation of forestland tolocalities.

The MOSAIC ProgrammeThe MOSAIC (Management of Strategic Areas for Inte-grated Conservation)3 programme is a partnership betweenWWF, the Vietnam Forest Protection Department (FPD), andother key stakeholders in Quang Nam Province. The aim ofMOSAIC is to provide for appropriate and long-termmanagement of important natural resources throughoutthe province and it supports the pilot forestland allocationprogramme through innovative approaches to community-based planning.

MOSAIC works at three administrative levels (see Table1): firstly, with a coordination unit at the provincial level,directly linked to key government departments. Secondly,MOSAIC is active in all 16 districts of Quang Nam province,working through the relevant sub-departments. Finally,MOSAIC works within the Commune level, initially withintwenty-one prioritised Communes, liasing with the

Commune People’s Committees, whilst working on theground with villages and communities.

One of MOSAIC’s goals is to help develop a provincial-level strategy for effective forest management includingsustainable natural resource harvesting. MOSAIC hasworked with all stakeholders to prioritise forest units forconcerted conservation effort in order to mitigate and offsetcurrent and potential threats, and act on the varied oppor-tunities. Towards this effort, innovative approaches tocommunity engagement in conservation action are beingpiloted. Three of the priority Communes, including Tabhing(described below), were selected as pilot sites according tobiological, socio-economic, and political contexts.

Tabhing commune and Song Thanh Nature ReserveThe primary MOSAIC pilot site, Tabhing Commune supports379 households in nine villages. The terrain is steep, inac-cessible, and cut by many rivers and streams. Natural forestcover is high, apart from the inhabited valleys and swiddenagricultural plots. Tabhing Commune is partly includedwithin the boundary of Song Thanh Nature Reserve (STNR).

Participatory planning for Tabhing commune

Reaching the grassrootsA series of multi-stakeholder workshops provided crucialsupport and approval for the MOSAIC programme. ForTabhing, a draft action plan was compiled based on detailedparticipatory research, with twenty key activities to be initi-ated over a six-month period. Participatory three-dimen-sional modelling was one of the primary tools to beemployed, primarily to facilitate forestland allocation andresolve tenure conflicts. The action plan was then taken to

3 The MOSAIC concept was developed by the primary authors, based onexperience of community-based conservation activities in northern Vietnam, yet inresponse to the Quang Nam provincial call for assistance in strategic planning fornatural resource management. It was developed to match the WWF Indochinasupport for landscape-level conservation in the Central Truong Son area.

Community consultationunderway in the Ka TuGuorrl’ meeting house

Phot

o:Le

Van

Lan

h

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NJames Hardcastle, Barney Long, Le Van Lanh, Giacomo Rambaldi and Do Quoc Son11

the Commune and villages for public scrutiny. A series ofconsultation meetings preceded village-level ‘citizen’s juries’(called ‘people’s forum’ in Vietnamese). Each item on theaction plan was presented for questioning by local villagers,using the discussion forum and also a household responsesheet. The aim of the action plan is to clarify local land-useissues and develop a coherent land-use plan for each villagewithin the Commune. The final action plan for thecommune was approved at the district level, where all stake-holders had a chance to review the plan. Budgets and time-frames were linked to milestones and indicators, and theplan was officially recognised by the District Government.

Participatory three-dimensional modelling One particular element of the methodology is the use ofparticipatory three-dimensional modelling (P3DM), buildingon experiences gained in Pu Mat National Park (Rambaldi etal., 2003). The method leads to the manufacture of accu-rate 3-D models of a chosen area, upon which to hingediscussions, communication, and planning. The P3DM activ-ity was introduced to the Quang Nam provincial authoritiesin an orientation seminar, with participants from all relevantdepartments.

The coordinating team and twenty ‘trainees’ fromprovincial departments travelled to Song Thanh NatureReserve in Tabhing, where the P3DM exercise was carriedout between 6-16 May 2003. The area covered by themodel totals 300km2. A base map at 1:10,000 scale with

20m contours was used. Carton sheets, 4mm thick, werecut for each contour, resulting in a vertical scale of 1:5,000.After a preparatory day, students and teachers from Tabhingsecondary school were invited to attend, over two days, tohelp manufacture the blank model, before preparing toinvite the local Ka Tu people to take the stage.

Once the model was completed, locals from ninevillages in Tabhing, and two from neighbouring Ca DyCommune were invited, in two groups, to transfer localknowledge onto the model. In total, 125 villagers activelyparticipated in producing the model, with orientationconducted in Ka Tu language.

Villagers selected the features they would depict on themodel, using coloured paint, yarns, and pins provided bythe facilitators. In this way, intellectual ownership of theoutput was ensured and an insight into the relative localvalue of land features was gained. For example, the riversand streams were marked very prominently, before forestareas, roads, or mountaintops were identified. With five orsix people from each village, there was enough ‘peer discus-sion’ to locate, identify, and name features accurately. Theseincluded paths, streams, households, traditional meetinghouses, different types of forest, shifting cultivation land,cinnamon plantations, artisanal gold mine workings, andeven wartime helicopter bases.

Animated discussion arose between villages and severalminor conflicts, such as village boundaries, were resolvedthrough debate focused around the model. Other issues,such as illegal gold mining, were identified and discussed.As the model began to take shape, more specific issuesemerged.

4 Rural areas have significantly lower populations than the coastal strip andlowland plains.


Table 1: The administrative structure in Vietnam

Level

Provincial level

District level

Commune

Village

Approx population

1 million to 3.5 million

300,000 to 500,000

3,000 to 5,000

100 to 1,000

Structure

Provincial People’sCommittees

District People’sCommittees

Commune People’sCommittees

Village leader

Role

Administrative authorities. Broad decentralised legislative powers withinthe overall national policy and legal framework.

Administrative authorities at local level. Legislative power within anallocated budget and provincial policy and legal framework. Degree ofdecentralised powers depends on the particular situation, and especiallyon individual leadership.

Sub-committee reporting to the district authorities. The commune haslegislative power at the local level, but all decisions must be approved bya relevant department at the district.

No legislative power, yet an officially appointed leader reports to thecommune people’s committee. However, often de facto leadership (such asvillage elders) lies outside the state institutions with limited reach and nolegal recognition.

The use of participatory three-dimensional modelling in community-based planning in Quang Nam province, Vietnam 11

Foremost was the placing of the boundary of the NatureReserve by the STNR vice-director. It was instantly clear thatit conflicted with local agricultural and forest resource use.The villagers from both groups challenged this boundary,and after discussion, demarked a preferred boundary, towhich the STNR vice-director agreed in principle – a signif-icant breakthrough.

MOSAIC is currently working with STNR and the provin-cial authorities to facilitate an assessment of the reserveboundary. Due to the legal status of the reserve, this ispossible at provincial level. However, the boundary issue isalso under discussion at national level for a separate issue,gold mining. The model has shown clear conflicts betweenlocal resource-users and illegal gold miners. The model hasallowed MOSAIC to raise these topics directly with the rele-vant authorities, following local community identificationof hot issues during the modelling process, in an official andrecognised planning activity.

Lessons learnt from P3DM as a tool for community-basedplanningFeedback from the participants, both trainees and localpeople, allowed for an initial stock-take of lessons from thewhole planning exercise. Five common themes emerged:• The model was a powerful tool to use as the basis for

discussions and planning for the local area, and to assessthe importance of issues.

• The model, including the legend identifying which datais represented by the model, must be ‘owned’ by thecommunity participants, accurately reflecting the valueslocal people attach to landscape features and resources,and giving them confidence.

• Local people are capable resource persons, with a goodknowledge of the lay-of-the land, and are well capable ofmaking models and using spatial representation.

• It is important to listen to the local interpretation andpresentation of the detailed model in plenary discussion,and reflect these lessons in future activities. Women and

THEM

ESECTIO

N


Table 2: Methodology applied in Tabhing

Element

Planning unit

Methodology

Facilitation of commune plans

P3DM exercise

Financing the planning process

Funding the implementation of the plans

Linkage to district and provincial plans

Implementation of the community plans

Monitoring of implementation at communitylevel

Community-based planning in Quang Nam

Commune.

Action planning. Special emphasis on 3-D modelling as a form of participatory mapping.

By local Forest Protection Department and other partner departments, supported by WWF, andendorsed by the district People’s Committee.

P3DM exercise covering the Tabhing area (30,000 ha) and involving 125 representatives from localcommunities. The event has also served as a hands-on training ground for a wider audience and laythe ground for adoption of the P3DM method elsewhere.

Largely through MOSAIC, with funds from a range of WWF sources, as well as local governmentcontributions and mobilised resources.

Principally from local revenue for community projects, backed up by national programme budgets,such as the ‘5 million hectare’ reforestation programme. Focused support from MOSAIC is ongoing.

Direct linkage to district development plans and to provincial strategy for conservation andsustainable use of natural resources. It is also a pilot for the provincial forestland allocationprogramme, which will be replicated across 60 upland Communes in Quang Nam, allocating nearly500,000ha of forest land to local management regimes.

Identified responsibilities and finances are clearly outlined. Much of the support is for the communityitself to carry out and monitor activities.

Community groups, such as the ‘village protection teams’, with external monitoring from a set ofrelevant departments and individuals. Monitoring will be based on a set of mutually definedindicators, with many data collated at the household level.

THEM

ESE

CTIO



children made an invaluable contribution to the modeland to the discussions.

• It is important that authority representatives are presentduring the modelling activity, as well as local representa-tives from across the locality, to quickly settle disagree-ments and ensure that the local perspectives are wellunderstood by all.

Initial follow-up in TabhingVillage protection teams: Tabhing commune People’sCommittee passed two decrees establishing village protec-tion teams, which are recognised under national and provin-cial laws. The teams were granted powers of arrest toapprehend, for a period of twelve hours, ‘outsiders’ caughtin any act of illegal access or forest crime, and anyone elsein transgression of a series of agreed terms on local forestprotection. This provides sufficient power to enable violatorsto be handed over to the appropriate authority. They usedpatrol zones, based on markers placed on the 3-D model.

The number of arrests to date are estimated at around sixty.Boundary reassessment: the reserve boundary will be

reassessed over the coming two years and demarcated onthe ground in partnership and with consensus of localcommunities.

Forestland allocation programme: data extracted fromthe 3-D model through digital high-resolution photogra-phy5 have been merged with topographic data and elabo-rated in a Geographical Information Systems (GIS)environment. The resulting information has been used todraft thematic maps to be used in a consultative processmeant to support forestland allocation.

Village and Commune land-use plans: based on theinformation and issues visualised on the 3-D model, landuse plans are being collated in collaboration with theCommune authorities and relevant departments. A series

5 More information on the extraction process is found in issue 46 of PLA Notes,2003 (Rambaldi et al. 2003) and at www.iapad.org/participatory_p3dm.htm

‘Tell me, I forget.Show me, I remember.Involve me, I understand.’(Moore and Davis, 1997)

Ka Tu girls tracingcontour lines duringthe manufacture ofthe blank model

Phot

o:W

WF

/ Jam

es H

ardc

astl

e

THEM

ESECTIO

NThe use of participatory three-dimensional modelling in community-based planning in Quang Nam province, Vietnam 11


of local-level meetings will confirm the plans and link themto other activities (reforestation, forestland allocation).

Clear steps for co-management arrangements: SongThanh Nature Reserve(STNR) is currently preparing amanagement plan, based on an operational plan for theperiod 2003–2008. This operational plan outlines steps tobe taken to devolve relevant management responsibilitiesto the local communities in and around the reserve.

Proposed modelling activities to the east (Cha Val) andSouth (Phuoc Duc-Phuoc My) to cover the full boundary ofthe STNR.

Transfer of the model to the Commune office: the modelwill be moved to a Commune office after the Têt New Year,to allow for wider use of the model for local-level issues.

Replication and scaling-upMOSAIC will continue to foster pilot sites, with a fourth siteencompassing the A’Vuong watershed area, consisting offive Communes. Elsewhere, the MOSAIC model is providing

lessons for the newly listed Phong Nha-Ke Bang NaturalWorld Heritage Site, in north-central Vietnam. MOSAIC alsohas a ‘sister’ programme underway in the Mondulkiriprovince in Cambodia. As the Central Truong Son Initiativegathers momentum, the MOSAIC lessons in community-based planning will be tested across the central mountainsof Vietnam.

ConclusionThe MOSAIC results show community-based planning as atool for framing action at a ‘provincial’ scale and howefforts to link landscape-level planning into micro-levelconservation action have benefited from P3DM as a learn-ing, planning, and mediating tool. The P3DM method6 hasproved to be cost effective in terms of collating and visual-

6 P3DM has been used in Thailand and the Philippines for many years in thecontexts of natural resource management planning and Indigenous Peoples’ rights.It has been recently introduced in Nepal, India, Colombia, Ecuador, and Vietnam.

Conflict resolutionduring local planningdiscussions based onthe 3D model

Phot

o:W

WF

/ Jam

es H

ardc

astl

e

THEM

ESE

CTIO



CONTACT DETAILSJames Hardcastle, Programme DevelopmentCoordinator, WWF Indochina Programme, 53Tran Phu, Hanoi, Vietnam. IPO Box 151. Tel:+(84) 4 7338387; Email: [email protected];Website:www.panda.org/about_wwf/where_we_work/asia_pacific/where/indochina/mosaic_project/

Barney Long, WWF MOSAIC ConservationBiologist/Manager, MOSAIC Office, QuangNam Forest Protection Department, 9, TranQuy Cap, Tam Ky, Quang Nam, Vietnam. Tel:+(84) 510 810735; Email: [email protected] [email protected]

Le Van Lanh, Secretary General, VietnamNational Parks and Protected Areas Associa-tion, 114 Hoang Quoc Viet St., Cau Giay,Hanoi, Vietnam. Tel/Fax: + (84) 4 5760233;Email: [email protected]

Giacomo Rambaldi, Programme Coordinator,Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation(CTA), PO Box 380, 6700 AJ Wageningen, theNetherlands. Email: [email protected] [email protected]; Website: www.iapad.org

Do Quoc Son, Save the Children Japan,Vietnam Programme. Hanoi. Email:[email protected]

REFERENCESBaker J., McKenney B., & Hurd J. (2000) InitialAssessment of Social and Economic FactorsAffecting Biodiversity Conservation Efforts:ecoregion-based conservation in the LowerMekong sub-region. WWF Indochina/IUCNLaos. Hanoi, Vietnam.Hardcastle, JE. (2002) ‘Red Books and VillageArmies: Opportunities for indigenous landmanagement in the uplands of centralVietnam.’ MSc thesis, Durrell Institute forConservation and Ecology (DICE), Universityof Kent at Canterbury, UK.Moore, C. N. and D. Davis (1997) Participa-tion Tools for Better Land-Use Planning: Tech-niques and Case Studies. 2d ed. Sacramento:Center for Livable Communities.Rambaldi G., and Le Van Lanh (2003). ‘TheSeventh Helper: the Vertical Dimension. Feed-back from a training exercise in Vietnam.’ PLANotes No. 46: 77–83, IIED, London, UK.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe primary authors would like to dedicatethis paper to Mai Dang Khoa, a friend,colleague, and inspiration behind theMOSAIC. An enthusiastic example to all whowork in conservation in Vietnam, he wastragically killed in a motorbike accident inHanoi on 22nd April 2003.Acknowledgements are due to Thai Truyen,Tran Van Thu; the Quang Nam provincial anddistrict authorities; all the people of TabhingCommune; Tom McShane; Kristin Clay;Nguyen Thi Dao; Mike Baltzer; Phan VanTruong and the WWF MOSAIC team; theCETD team; all at WWF IndochinaProgramme; Nigel Dudley; Professor NigelLeader-Williams and the Durrell Institute forConservation and Ecology (DICE); the Nether-lands Development Agency (DGIS); the UnitedStates Agency for International Development(USAID); and the United States Fish & WildlifeService.

ising community knowledge in an accurate andclearly understandable manner. The cost ofcompleting a 1:10,000 scale 3-D model involving alarge number of informants and exporting thedisplayed data into a GIS environment, corre-sponds to approximately US$4/km2 or fourcents/hectare. Compared to alternative data gath-ering methods, P3DM is cost effective. Investing init also has many additional non-monetary benefits,when P3DM is seen as a method for efficientlysupporting learning, planning, and communityempowerment.

The Ka Tuvillageprotectionteams plantheir patrolroutes

THEM

ESECTIO

N


BackgroundIn Brazil, recent years have seen the growth of the munici-pal level as a critical focus for action. At State and nationallevels, municipalities represent a strategic unit of interven-tion for local development. Representing the lowest levelof elected Government (see Table 1), municipal initiativesand partnerships are increasingly the focus of investmentby Federal and State Government policies and programmesand the arena of NGO action. The elaboration of municipaldevelopment plans and implementation of municipalmanagement councils are preconditions for receivingcertain resources from national or State-level agencies.

One organisation at the forefront of developing partic-ipatory municipal rural development plans (MRDP) is theCentre for Alternative Technologies (CTA), a local NGOworking on alternative futures for and with rural small-holders in the Zona da Mata of Minas Gerais, Brazil.Founded in 1987 by marginalized farmers, their tradeunions, and committed agricultural professionals, CTA nowencompasses many activities, one of which is the LocalDevelopment Programme (LDP) that focuses on MRDPs.CTA staff work on this programme in three municipalities:

Araponga, Tombos, and Acaiaca. This article compares thethree municipal planning processes, offering them as anexciting alternative methodology for local development inthe Brazilian context.

Municipal development plans as a social innovationin Brazil

CTA’s working context The Zona da Mata of Minas Gerais covers 143 municipali-ties, of which 128 have a population of less than 20,000.

by GLAUCO REGIS FLORISBELO and IRENE GUIJT

Municipal rural developmentplans in Brazil: working withinthe politics of participation

12

1 Centro de Tecnologias Alternatives – Zona da Mata (Centre for AlternativeTechnologies of the Zona da Mata).

Meeting of CTA-ZM’s LocalDevelopmentProgramme tosystematiseexperiences in threemunicipalities ofparticipatorymunicipal planning

Phot

o:CT

A-Z

M

THEM

ESE

CTIO

NGlauco Regis Florisbelo and Irene Guijt12

Smallholder agriculture represents a large proportion ofproduction and of the number of properties, although notof total land area given the skewed land tenure relation-ships. The region is marked by chronic environmentaldegradation – deforestation, soil erosion, poor sanitationand waste disposal, and intense use of agrotoxins – threat-ening livelihood security for poor households. Smallholdersgenerally expect little or no support from municipal coun-cils as, in most cases, mayors and secretaries have beenlarge landholders or their supporters and most voters livein the towns and have urban rather than rural concerns.

CTA has worked for 15 years in developing viable alter-natives with rural workers unions and their smallholdermembers (CTA, 2002). Legally a non-profit civil association,the organisation aims to strengthen smallholder organisa-tions, promote equity of social relations, and influencepublic policy by promoting public debate about sustainableagriculture and documenting good practices.

CTA’s evolution to municipal planningCTA has not always focused on the municipal level. Origi-nally working through farmer groups but with limitedimpacts, in 1997 it deliberately chose to concentrate on ahandful of municipalities to understand how this largerscale of action could lead to more sustained and wide-spread improvements. By facilitating municipal dialogue

and analysis, the idea is to establish more diverse civilsociety-government partnerships that can increase the voiceof poor local rural communities in designing rural develop-ment public policies.

The first steps were taken in Araponga in 1996, whenthe rural trade union Sindicato dos Trabalhadores Rurais(STR)2 of Araponga turned its attention to the theme of‘local development’ moving beyond the traditional role ofensuring pensions and documents for its members. Theirfirst participatory rural appraisal (PRA) in 1994 (Fária, 1994),facilitated by CTA and local university students, resulted ina 28-point STR-specific plan of action. But the absence ofvictories for union leaders in municipal council electionsprovoked an analysis of the limitations of a developmentplan that was only supported by the union. They recognisedthe need to collaborate with municipal authorities if a localdevelopment plan was to gain a significant level of supportand resources.

Two years later, the LDP process started in Tombos whenCTA signed a convention with the municipal council andfarmers’ organisations to facilitate the formulation andimplementation of an MRDP and provide technical assis-tance to farmers. The process in Acaiaca started in 2000,where the embryonic STR invited CTA to help facilitateparticipatory appraisal and planning for developing amunicipal plan that could help guide the newly installedpro-poor municipal council (CTA, 2001).

Currently, CTA sees the LDP work it supports as prima-rily a ‘learning laboratory’ to understand, document, and


2 STRs are membership organisations, operate at the municipal level (and arefederated at State/national levels), and are the most accepted, democraticallyelected body that represents smallholder agriculture.

Table 1: Levels of local administration in Uganda and their roles

Level

National

State

Municipal

Approx population

170 million.

Ranging from 325,000to 37.3 million.

From several hundredto 10.5 million (SaoPaulo city, the world’sfifth largestmunicipality).

Structure

Directly elected president with anational constituency and abicameral National Congress (an81-seat Federal Senate and a 513-seat Chamber of Deputies).

26 administrative states and theFederal District of Brasília.

5,581 municipalities, with four-yearly hotly contested electionsdetermining which of the 26 officialpolitical parties will provide the(deputy) mayor (who appoints thedepartmental secretaries) andcouncillors that form the municipalcouncil.

Role

National policies for all sectors, national budgeting.

Strong Federalist system gives strong powers to State, especiallyto governors (directly elected) who control budgets andthousands of jobs, with few checks and balances.

The only level of local government. Responsible for its ownmunicipal development planning and implementing urban andrural services (health, agriculture, environment, education,infrastructure). Can seek State/national funding. The mayorholds executive power (supported by municipal secretaries) andis considered the local political boss. Legislative power isexercised by the municipal council.

Municipal rural development plans in Brazil: working within the politics of participation 12

disseminate different political-methodological experiencesthat could inspire other municipalities in the region andother NGOs in Brazil in pro-poor local development.

CTA’s vision for pro-poor municipal planningCTA’s core strategy is to support pro-poor farmers’ organi-sations in developing and facilitating participatory processesfor formulating and implementing an MRDP. Both CTA andits local partners see these plans, and in particularly theprocesses they require, as practical ways to improve theimplementation of State and Federal-level programmes ofsmallholder support. They emphasise methodologies thatcan improve the often-polarised inter-institutional relation-ships and help smallholders to articulate needs in forumswhere decisions are made.

CTA’s local development work is based on a deep-rootedpolitical vision of rights, the value of societal debate, envi-ronmental sustainability, and the urgency of practicaloptions for poor smallholders. Working initially with PRAand farmer participatory research, CTA and its partners hadperceived a ceiling to the impact they were having. Waitingfor a pro-poor political party to win council electionsbecame a problematic strategy for scaling-up impact. Thisfed the idea of MDRPs based on wider partnerships thatrequired creating space for critical reflection, negotiation,and conflict management. Today, the MDRP processesinvolve continual and elaborate consultation and strategicrealignment in which PRA is but one of several importantmethodologies. Other approaches include political strate-gising in diverse coalitions, using facilitation skills for engag-ing effectively with community members, leadershipdevelopment, participatory popular education programmedevelopment, cooperativism and associativism, participa-tory evaluation and systematisation of experiences, andparticipatory on-farm technology development.

Building blocks of the CTA-supported MDRP

Participation as a (learning) processSome critics of PRA paint a caricature of the sloppy andmechanical application of tools within a few days. The prac-tice of CTA staff shows a more elaborate and consideredapproach to participatory development. They invest up toone year in collective research, negotiation, and debatebefore priorities for action are formulated.

Many methodologies are woven together – farmerparticipatory research, PRA, participatory monitoring andevaluation (including socio-economic self-monitoring byfarmers) – to develop and implement municipal plans. Eachmethodology contributes its part, depending on the issue athand, and is implemented through different structures,which may be more or less permanent.

For example, in Acaiaca, an executive committee wasformed to coordinate the PRA and resulting municipal plan.Representatives included EMATER (State agricultural exten-sion agency), CTA, STR, Municipal Council, and the Secre-taries of Agriculture, Social Work, and Health. Anotherexample is the participatory systematisation that has beenconstructed as a temporary series of meetings betweenlocal leaders in the three municipalities, facilitated by CTA.It aims to critically review CTA’s support to MRDPs and givesunion leaders opportunities to refine their strategies ofmunicipal intervention.

Planning process and methodologyDespite the uniqueness of each experience, Araponga,Tombos, and Acaiaca all started with an elaborate three-phase PRA and participatory formulation of an MRDP.

First is a process of getting in touch with potentialactors, farming households, and groups in all communities.This ‘mobilisation phase’ involves contacting communities,

THEM

ESECTIO

N


Meeting with RuralWorkers union,Municipal Council,councillors andother organizations– Local DevelopmentProgramme, CTA-ZM.

Phot

o:CT

A-Z

M

Meeting of CTA-ZM’sLocal DevelopmentProgramme tosystematise experiencesin three municipalitiesof participatorymunicipal planning

Phot

o:CT

A-Z

M

THEM

ESE

CTIO



and negotiations and networking between partners toagree on the guiding principles for the local developmentprocess and each partner’s role. In Acaiaca, this phase tookabout two months, which led to an executive committeebeing established and agreement on the methodology.

The second phase, which most people would identify asthe ‘typical PRA’ phase, involves all communities (but notall people!) in the municipality in group meetings andsubsequent family interviews. A smaller group, with repre-sentatives of various partners, then undertakes the first(sectoral) analysis of issues. In Acaiaca, this took place overa two-month period.

Phase three closes the planning cycle, which involves: • Providing feedback to each of the communities for addi-

tional insights, corrections, debate, and the start ofconvergence around priorities. In Acaiaca, each commu-nity elected three representatives to sit on the Plan Elab-oration Committee (a youth, a woman, and a man).

• Deepening, with the committee, the analysis of key prob-lems identified by communities during the initial appraisalphase, identifying causes and consequences of the prob-lems.

• Identifying proposals to resolve problems related to agri-culture, environment, infrastructure, health, education,and social assistance.

• Prioritising proposals.The process and results are documented in a municipal

rural development plan, outlining the partners involved,methodology, timeframe, the sector-specific analysis ofproblems, causes and consequences, and the agreed prior-ity actions. This document becomes the official agreementbetween civil society organisations and the municipalcouncil.

Working with new partners In CTA’s work, the main players have always been the tech-nical team, the rural workers unions (STRs), and farmergroups. The technical team acted as conveners, methodol-ogy-suggesters, and documenters. The STRs take centrestage in the LDP although each has a unique history, matu-rity, and membership, and maintain different relations withthe municipal council (Table 2). Within the LDP, the farmergroups helped research the issues and are now implement-ing aspects of the plans.

Table 2: Comparing the three municipalities

Area (km2)

Inhabitants - %rural

Year STRestablished

Growth in STRmembership

Role of CTA withSTR

Relationship CTA-STR

Main local driverof LDP

Year of (first)municipal PRA

General state ofSTR

Tombos

875

11,000 – 30% rural

1985

875 (1985) to 2,500 (2002)

Independent of CTA

Good, long, close ties of mutualhelp, helped in each other’sfoundation

APAT (farmers’ cooperative createdby STR)

1998

Centralisation of leadership aroundsame individuals (causing tensions)

Araponga

304

8,000 – 68% rural

1989

29 (1993) to 805 (2001)

Established with CTA’s help

Long and close, often with blurredboundaries about respectiveresponsibilities of the two entities

STR

1994, updated in 2001

Stable, no factions, diversifyingleadership (to include youth and women)

Acaiaca

102

3,900 – 39% rural

1990 (registered in 1994)

50 (1990) to 416 (2003)

Independent of CTA

New, with cooperation limited to specificissues. Close, intense links during LDP process.

Municipal council

2001

Young and fragile, low membership, fewleaders

THEM

ESECTIO

NMunicipal rural development plans in Brazil: working within the politics of participation 12


However, as a result of casting the net more widely, thecircle of actors has broadened to include a diverse andmunicipality-specific range of other groups, including in allthree cases, the municipal councils themselves. The idea ofpartnership between a pro-poor union leader and munici-pal councillors often of the political right has changed somuch that in Araponga, the current (right-wing) mayor hasinvited one of the STR leaders to consider a more formalalliance, already anticipating the votes this may bring in thenext elections. While this partnership can be dangerous, italso offers previously unheard of opportunities.

Building accountability structuresA plan, without follow-up, can remain on paper. To ensurecontinued debate and implementation, CTA and its part-ners invested in establishing a municipal council for ruraldevelopment (MCRD), making use of national legislationthat encouraged such bodies. The council is responsible forimplementing the plan, thus holding everyone accountableto their commitments and monitoring progress. The councilalso provides a forum where the municipal policies andproposals for rural investment are discussed. The council iscomposed of representatives from the town council, coun-cillors, agricultural/forestry extension and research services,CTA, STR, and any women’s groups or smallholder cooper-atives that might exist. Following national guidelines, atleast 50% of MCRD members represent smallholder agri-culture.

Non-neutral facilitationCTA was not neutral in the MDRP processes, choosing toinvest in pro-poor farmer organisations. During all phases ofthe appraisal and planning, CTA and the STRs and associa-tions were in constant communication, with CTA working

to build union leaders’ capacity to act as effective localprotagonists in municipal debates. Various strategies wereadopted to enable community representatives, with CTAfinancial support for transport, to participate in meetings.The participatory methodologies used were designed tofacilitate access by farmers to information and enable themto express their concerns.

Learning from diversityDespite these similarities, the differences were – andcontinue to be – considerable between Araponga, Tombos,and Acaiaca in terms of initial conditions and evolution. Theinitial motivation came from different players and involveddifferent numbers of partners, although the STRs were keyplayers in all three. Although PRA and subsequent MRDPswere common methodological elements, the moment atwhich they were undertaken and the roles of partners ineach case varies.

While CTA has maintained the same basic strategy ofworking via the STRs, local conditions and capacitiesmoulded its role in each process. In Araponga, CTAprovided much technical assistance on agroecological inno-vations and subsequently in the PRA work while, in bothTombos and Acaiaca, the CTA technical team invested morein facilitating the PRA and MRDP processes.

Differences in political relationships, socio-economic, andbiophysical variations led in each case to a different role forthe plan in terms of rural development (Table 3) and todifferent opportunities for funding. The Araponga MRDPwas viewed by the union movement as an opportunity tohold the municipal council accountable to earlier promises ofpolicies and actions, no longer accepting excuses like ‘thiscan’t be done’, ‘there isn’t enough money’ from public officeholders. In Tombos, the municipal plan was grasped as an

Table 3: Key elements from the three MRDPs

FocusFunding sources

Araponga

The MRDP is being used by STR to holdthe municipal administrationaccountable to its policies and actions.Agroecological alternatives played arelatively important role in discussionsand in formulating proposals.

1st CTA budget for technical agricultureperson.2nd Municipal budget.

Tombos

Income generation via processing andmarketing of organic produce (sugarcaneand dairy products, coffee).

1st Municipal budget.2nd InterAmerican Foundation grant(initially CTA budget for technicalagriculture person which later fell underIAF grant).

Acaiaca

First attempt to define integrateddevelopment strategy. In agriculture,livestock development was key, as wasdefining the focus of the Secretary ofAgriculture and other agriculturalpartners.

1st Municipal budget.2nd Local Agenda 21.

THEM

ESE

CTIO



opportunity by the union movement to translate their ruralincome priority into concrete action. In Acaiaca, certainsectors had never had clear policies and actions, so the planhas defined priority actions for the different secretaries.

Key impacts and challengesFrom unique beginnings unrolled different processes, eachwith successes and challenges. Impacts can be found at thepolitical/methodological levels, but also at the concrete interms of livelihood improvements (see Box 1).

The process of building partnerships and dealing withconflicts, appraisals, and planning is a form of political andmethodological capacity-building that is not skill- or issue-specific. These capacities have proven vital to ensure conti-nuity of the participatory spaces needed to implement theMRDP as well as strengthening the management and effec-tiveness of organisations involved in these participatoryprocesses. Other impacts include: enhancing political matu-rity beyond the narrow party-bound perspective pervasivethroughout Brazil, making viable what were hithertounlikely partnerships, making the municipal councilaccountable, developing a collective vision, and increasingthe scope of community action to new and more complexissues.

As with any political process, challenges abound. Allthree municipalities continue to deal with the political,organisational, and financial challenges that they nowrecognise as shared responsibilities between previouslydivergent partners. The key political challenge is to ensurethat promises are fulfilled, and to maintain alliances (despitethe difficulties) and partnerships established during thephase of elaborating the MRDP. The main organisationalchallenge is to maintain the mechanisms by which familiescan continue participating in decision-making processes.Financially, they all struggle with ensuring sufficientresources to enable ongoing implementation of the plan.

ConclusionsCTA is now investing considerable effort in ensuring thatthese lessons learnt are carried, not just by the technicalteam, but by all partners. This collective sense-makingprocess has helped to value the unique differences, andthereby avoids the idea that there is a single formula ormodel that can be followed.

Clearly, the participatory municipal-level planningdescribed here is shaped by the dynamics of politicalprocess and the existing social and historical patterns ofcommunication and domination. Of course, one says! Butthis is significant for those trying to standardise the experi-ence into a set of steps, as will inevitably happen as effortsto scale up such localised experiences emerge. It cannot be‘methodologised’ nor can a model be set down for othersto follow – beyond the level of some general principles,inspiring examples, and cautions.

Nevertheless, several elements have been effective inthese three cases:• the value of participatory visioning, problems appraisal

and solution identification (PRA) when well prepared andembedded in an ongoing planning and implementationprocess;

• the importance of some form of supervision and decision-making body in which the elected councillors are but oneof the actors (in these cases, this body is the MCRD);

• the need for patience by all to ride the ups and downs ofconflict between municipal actors and within each group,including the union movement;

• slow but steady capacity-building of leadership, facilita-tion, and negotiation skills; and

• the need for clear facilitation at the onset of the process,external in these cases, and the gradual transformationof the role of external bodies (such as CTA) to advisorybodies (technical, strategic, or methodological).

For CTA and the STRs of Tombos and Araponga, it is

Work on an LDP accelerated when CTA contracted a local farmer totake on full-time work for them. As a native of Araponga and familiarwith CTA and the STR, he helped close the gap between CTA, STR,and the municipal council. Focusing on a non-political issue – wastedisposal – opened the door for other topics to be broached. The STRhas grown in respect and is now considered a legitimate civil societypartner – resulting in the STR being invited by the municipal council in2001 to participate in making a MRDP and be a key driver of theMCSRD. Key tangible impacts include: establishing a farmers’ marketfor organic products and a micro-credit association, increased uptakeof organic agriculture, developing a Family Agriculture School, as wellas promoting environmental education in 11 primary schools.

Box 1: Changes in Araponga

Meeting to detailone of the municipallevel plans in thecontext of the LocalDevelopmentProgramme of CTA-ZM

Phot

o:CT

A-Z

M

THEM

ESECTIO

NMunicipal rural development plans in Brazil: working within the politics of participation 12


clear that simply creating and occupying strategic and phys-ical spaces for participation or taking up existing spacesdoes not mean that there is participation. Ensuring clearand active diverse voices in these spaces is critical. On theother hand, people’s absence does not necessarily repre-sent lack of participation. During a recent evaluation of theLDP process in Araponga (January 2003), the MCRDmembers noted that no-one can be expected to participatein or even keep track of all the 25 activities they undertake.What is more important is that some strategic players main-tain linkages across the activities and communicate keyissues to the different social groups.

The three MRDP processes illustrate that participation isinherently about conflict. Dissent forms an opportunity fornegotiation and creative inputs in identifying actions. Clearlynot everything can be resolved by consensus. Each processincludes moments when majority decisions, by voting, haveto suffice although this does not close the door to creatingconsensus in future.

The LPD, with PRA as a critical ingredient, is fundamen-tally a pedagogic process. The learning is institutional atmunicipal level in people’s organisations and in the seat ofmunicipal power. The participatory processes in Araponga,Tombos, and Acaiaca are examples of democracy in action.

CONTACT DETAILSGlauco Regis Florisbelo, Centro de Tecnolo-gias Alternatives, Zona da Mata, Caixa Postal128, CEP 36570-000, Viçosa, MG, Brazil. Tel:+55 31 3892 2000. Email: [email protected]

Irene Guijt, Learning by Design, Bredeweg 316668 AR Randwijk, The Netherlands. Tel. +31488 491880. Fax. +31 488 491844. Email:[email protected]

REFERENCESCTA (2001). Relatório do DiagnósticoParticipativo do Município de Acaiaca.Viçosa, MG, CTA (2002). Revista 15 Anos CTA. Viçosa, CTA: 26.Fária, A. A. d. C. (1994). Uma Visão doMunicípio de Araponga, Minas Gerais.Informações sobre o diagnóstico realizado.Viçosa, CTA: 41.

NOTESThe chapter from which this article is drawnis called ‘Participatory Municipal DevelopmentPlans in Brazil: divergent partners construct-ing common futures.’ Forthcoming in Hickey,S and G. Mohan (Eds). (2004) Participation:From Tyranny to Transformation? ExploringNew Approaches to Participation. Zed Books,London.

GEN

ERA

LSE

CTIO

N


GENERAL SECTION

GEN

ERAL

SECTION


IntroductionThe haor basin takes up the greater part of the northeastregion of Bangladesh. The area remains flooded for aboutsix months of the year and looks like an enormous lake inwhich villages resemble islands dotted through the land-scape. The flooding erodes the edges of these ‘islandvillages’ and the villagers have to construct various formsof erosion barriers to preserve their village land from thefloodwaters. Travel is by boat for six months of the year. Inthe dry season, the area is a vast plain of rice fields. NationalNGOs and Government services are rarely visible in thisarea. However, this area has been targeted by a few inter-national NGOs, such as CARE and Concern Worldwide.

Concern Worldwide in Bangladesh has been imple-menting integrated rural development projects in threeremote sub-districts – Khaliajuri, Itna, and Gowainghat – ofthe haor area for the last ten years. Key project activitiesinclude the formation of community-based groups with thepoor for raising awareness, human development training,skill training, non-formal education, savings and creditschemes, and rural infrastructure development. At present,about 96% of the group members are female. These activ-ities aim to contribute to the socio-economic empower-ment of poor women, an inherent part of which is raisingawareness of their own rights, as many women suffer from

abuse in their households and communities.To understand the effectiveness of Concern’s

programme towards empowering poor women in haorareas, research was undertaken early in 2003. The keyresearch questions were:• what are the socio-economic factors contributing to

abuses against housewives in the family? • what are the most common types of abuse? What are the

health consequences?• as a result of Concern’s interventions, what has been the

extent of the reduction of physical and mental abuse ofhousewives?

Research methodologyThe study was conducted in 12 haor villages (Table1) overa period of three days in each village.

To begin with, poor and non-poor households wereidentified in every village by using a social map. In thecontrol villages, 20 women from poor households wereinvited to participate in PRA sessions. In the Concernvillages, the poor households were further categorised asConcern and non-Concern households, from which 15 and10 women were invited to participate in PRA sessionsrespectively. Participants were invited considering their avail-ability.

by DIPANKAR DATTA and NELI SEN GUPTA

Domestic abuses againsthousewives in haor areas ofBangladesh: understanding theimpact of Concern’sintervention in reducing abuses

13

GEN

ERA

LSE

CTIO

NDipankar Datta and Neli Sen Gupta13

Next, two groups were formed, a housewives group anda mothers-in-law group. This division was to facilitate opendiscussions within peer groups.

With the mothers-in-law group, a Focus Group Discus-sion was held, focusing on major changes that the mothers-in-law noted between their being housewives and thehousewives of the present generation. This was followedby a discussion on the issues of dowry, polygamy, divorce,the abuse of women, and the impact of Concern’s inter-vention in empowering housewives.

With the housewives group, a Family Relationshipdiagram was used to analyse their relationship with otherfamily members (Chart1). Next, a Venn diagram (Chart 2)was used to facilitate discussions to ascertain the causes ofpoor or abusive family relationships. Discussions were alsoheld on the nature of abuse, the related health conse-quences (Chart 3), and defence strategies at times of severeabuse. This was followed by a discussion about women’sfeeling about power. In Concern villages, an Impact-Flowdiagram was used to understand the overall impact ofConcern’s intervention (Charts 4 and 5).

Towards end of the exercise in each village, findingswere presented to other housewives living in that village fortriangulation.

Household relationships analysis

The fabric of inter-household relationshipsThe housewives considered and evaluated differentperceived virtues like obedience, honour, dignity, duty,affection, subordination, etc. in describing their relationshipwith other family members.

In all cases, the son is considered to be the closest in therelationship network, followed by the daughter, and thenthe husband. Housewives generally have a better position

if other family members are in some way dependent on heror her husband.

Both the sosur (father-in-law) and the sasuri (mother-in-law) play a vital and subtle role in the family. The sasuri’srole is like a catalyst, particularly in family decision-makingrelated to housewives and in exerting influence over herson. The sosur is more like a father, an ultimate decisionmaker, and one who can rebuke or even physically assaulta housewife.

The vasur (husband’s elder brother) is more like a sosur.However, it is a social norm for a housewife to wear a longveil before a vasur and not to touch him for any reason. Itcould be extremely embarrassing if a vasur abused her,either verbally or physically. The vaz (vasur’s wife) oftencommands adoration and respect, the depth of whichdepends on many interrelated factors, such her husband’seconomic status and her relationship with the sosur/sasuri.Usually, housewives share their emotions and feelings anddiscuss personal issues with the vaz, as she is also a familyhousewife.

Housewives normally have a more friendly relationshipwith debors (husband’s younger brothers) than with nanads(husband’s sisters). Nanads usually have unrestricted accessto the housewives’ cosmetics and clothes, which can be asource of annoyance to them.

Analysis of abuse in family relationshipsFactors contributing to poor or abusive relationships withinfamilies and which often result in mental and physical abuseare most commonly related to financial problems within thehousehold, neglecting household chores, or socio-religiousdiscrimination. The health consequences of physical torturehave been summarised in Chart 3.

Dowries were a repeated theme. In Muslim-dominatedvillages, a dowry is considered to be an investment to


Table 1: Distribution of selected villages

Name of sub-district

Khaliajuri

Itna

Gowainghat

Total

Concern village(Concern working

areas)

2

2

2

6

Control village(where Concern and

other NGOs havenot worked)

2

2

2

6

Total

4

4

4

12

A triangulation sessionin Mehendipur villageof Khaliajuri

Phot

o:D

ipan

kar

Dat

ta

Domestic abuses against housewives in haor areas of Bangladesh: understanding the impact of Concern’s intervention 13

strengthen the husband’s livelihood. Like Muslim women,Hindu women get no share of their paternal properties aftermarriage. A bride’s parents’ inability to pay a dowry meansthat her parents risk being stigmatised and the bride herselfrisks being violated. The most common dowry-relatedabuses include physical torture, forced eviction from themarital home, a second marriage or the threat thereof, andbeing denied adequate food.

Causes of poverty like seasonal unemployment orworking family members being unable to work due to long-term illness directly affect the household income flow,putting intense psychological pressure on male familymembers. The most common poverty-related abuses werebeatings and verbal abuse. These abuses were alsocommon if housewives failed to do household chores ontime or take care of male family members. In contrast, inrecent years, housewives have not only been involved inhousehold activities but also in most cases directly involvedin income-generating activities. Even this is not withoutproblems: some Concern members also work on project-related activities in addition to their household work.However, because of heavy workloads, they can sometimesbecome bad-tempered with their husbands or other familymembers, often resulting in domestic violence.

In Muslim-dominated villages, socio-religious discrimi-nation can occur because of a housewife’s free movementin the community. Formal complaints by religious or villageleaders made to male family members can result in physi-

cal abuse and/or the restriction of a housewife’s freedomof movement. Infertile wives and those who fail to givebirth to a son also encounter socio-religious discrimination,usually facing neglect by their husbands, opposition fromin-laws, and denial of access to their husbands’ property.

Other significant factors in abusive family relationshipsinclude the unjust distribution of property and goods/serv-ices among family members, issues relating to children’supbringing, a husband’s unwillingness to repay loans whichhis wife has taken from groups, a housewife’s inability tosatisfy her husband’s physical needs1, or a husband’sinvolvement in antisocial activities.

Defence strategiesFrom the study it became evident that many housewivesresort to silence as a self-protecting strategy when havingfew socio-economic options available to them. Accordingto the participants, most husbands who married a secondwife initially hid this fact from them. Once discovered, theyhad no choice but to accept it. Participants noted that most

GEN

ERAL

SECTION


Chart 1: Relationships between housewives and otherfamily members in Nuralipur village, Khaliajuri

Key:Arrowhead sizes indicate the degree of obedience and respect.Two-way arrows indicate two-way dependency.Arrow length indicates the relative closeness between family members.

Chart 2: Factors responsible for poor or abusiverelationships in Dhanpur village, Itna

Key:Oval cards show factors common to most households.Rectangular cards show factors common to a few specific households.Rounded rectangular cards show factors common to households of acertain class.Card distance from the centre denotes the gravity of the problem.

1 This study did not focus on sexual abuse. However, sometimes this issue arose inthe discussions. About 90% of marriages take place before a woman’s firstmenstrual period. The average housewife marries at the age of 12 and theaverage inter-spouse age difference is 15 years. Discussions revealed that most ofthe newly married housewives were not physically mature enough for sexualintercourse and as a result they became ill. Failure to satisfy their husband’sphysical needs sometimes resulted in torture or divorce. In addition, husbandsignored these factors during their menstrual period and after giving birth. Painfulsituations occurred when they were forced to fulfil the physical needs of theirhusbands at those times.

Inability to givebirth to a son

Restriction offree movement

GEN

ERA

LSE

CTIO



second wives were divorced or widowed women, choosingto marry again for their livelihood security, knowing thattheir new husband already had a first wife.

However if, after their second marriage, their husbandsmisbehaved or tried to divorce them, the first wives gener-ally appealed to the salish (village court) to try to reclaimtheir dowry or filed suits against their husbands in a judicialcourt, though usually with limited success.

Over time however, a lot of Concern women membershave begun to resist physical abuse through variousconcerted actions, including:• discussing issues with others group members;• arranging shelter for the victims (abused women) in other

houses; and• women’s group members intervening to help resolve

the crisis.Participants acknowledged their husbands’ moral

support in arranging shelter for these victims. The actionsof women members and their husbands’ behaviouralchange have not only reduced the incidents of physicalabuse but have also provided strong moral support, helpingthem to resist abuse and protest against the oppression ofwomen socially.

Analysing the effectiveness of the Concern Project

Housewives’ feelings about power Housewives felt that one form of power was that of theirhusband attaching importance to their opinion. They alsofelt that having sons earning a wage2, an education, intel-ligence and commonsense, the ability to speak with others,some money, their own assets, respect for their opinionfrom family members, being able to participate in settling

family disputes, and the ability to buy necessities wereforms of power. In addition, some participants thought thata housewife was powerful when she could make decisionsin the absence of her husband.

Achieving power: not an elusive goalIn the control villages, the incidence of abuse has notreduced over the last decade. Instead, the rate of divorce,polygamy, and the demand for dowries and related abuseshas increased over the last ten years. The mobility of house-wives is restricted. Usually they are not allowed to vote atelections according to their choice. Housewives referred toabuse against them as an accepted behavioural norm. Withincreased economic hardship and rising male unemploy-ment, housewives in poor families are working outside thehome (but within the village) in larger numbers than ever tosupplement, sometimes very substantially, householdbudgets. Housewives’ rising economic responsibilities,however, do not automatically give them greater power andsecurity in their households. Housewives working outsidethe home violate social norms – a source of tension andshame for their menfolk, especially if the primary reason isher husband’s unemployment. These sweeping changesplace an enormous stress on households.

In contrast, as a result of Concern’s interventions, thedecreasing number of incidents of abuse experienced byConcern housewives since joining the programme revealedmany gradual and positive changes, towards a moreelevated social status for women. The reduction of physi-cal abuse was particularly noted.

2 Women perceive that sons will take care of them in their old age. Besides, onlysons have the right to perform the last religious rites.

Chart 3: The health consequences of domestic abuseagainst housewives

Chart 4: Impact of group formation in the family inLengura village, Gowainghat

GEN

ERAL

SECTION

Domestic abuses against housewives in haor areas of Bangladesh: understanding the impact of Concern’s intervention 13


Previously, women’s mobility, especially in Muslim-domi-nated villages, had been very restricted. More recently,women are not only working outside of the village but alsovisiting the Concern office and bank for various purposes.They have been able to create a situation within their fami-lies where they are able to share their opinions. Now, if ahusband physically abuses his wife publicly, other women inthe village protest against this. Both divorce and polygamyare still prevalent but women have intensified their protestsagainst these incidents. Despite many efforts to raise aware-ness, the intensity of dowry-related problems has increasedover the past decade, but incidents of related physical abusehave reduced significantly. There have been cases whereConcern members have mobilised villagers to raise themoney for a dowry where a poorer family has been unableto pay in full, and thus settle a marriage.

A number of positive factors were found to havecontributed to the levels of influence and control overfamily-related issues gained by the Concern womenmembers.• Concern's human and skill development training has

empowered women by increasing their ability to generateincome and by raising awareness of their own rights.

• Concern’s credit programme has proved to be an effectivetool for empowerment, enabling women to achieveeconomic freedom and to fulfil basic family needs throughself-employment, increasing their transactions with othermembers of society, enabling them to provide credit totheir husbands, and by reducing fear and uncertainty.

• Increased organisational strength, increased mobility, andfree interaction with outsiders has contributed signifi-cantly to the empowerment process.

Key lessonsThere are multiple dimensions to domestic abuse. Thecombinations of abuses are specific to individual housewives,households, and villages. In the control villages, the increasein domestic abuse is linked to an increasing demand fordowries, an increase in male unemployment, the violationof traditional norms, and the threat to men’s sense ofmasculine identity, etc. The restricted socio-economic mobil-ity of housewives limits their choices and increases theirvulnerability within their households as well as in the village.

In the Concern villages (with the exception of dowry-related cases) the decrease in the incidence and severity ofdomestic abuse has been linked to the greater organisa-tional strength of both the female and male groups andhousewives’ income-earning ability. The highest reductionof abuse has been observed in the incidence of physicaltorture compared to the incidence of verbal abuse or thedeprivation of basic needs.

Although dowries are regarded as a harmful practice,participants were not sure how these problems could beresolved. Despite there being a law against them, discus-sion groups did not see it as an effective tool able to addressthis problem. Discussion groups in some villages suggestedbroadcasting radio and television programmes to raiseawareness of the problems associated with dowries.

The findings about linkages between decreased abuses,housewives’ increased economic roles, and the benefits ofsupportive actions to reduce abuses give hope. Building onthis, participants emphasised the need for more directinvolvement of male family members in micro-credit activ-

Chart 5: Impact of Concern’s activities in Purbo-Gramvillage, Itna

Analysing the impactof Concern’s activitiesin Rustampur village,Gowainghat

Phot

o:D

ipan

kar

Dat

ta

GEN

ERA

LSE

CTIO



CONTACT DETAILSDipankar Datta, Partnership and CapacityBuilding Adviser, Policy Development andEvaluation Directorate, Concern Worldwide,52–55 Lower Camden Street, Dublin 2,Republic of Ireland. Email:[email protected]

Neli Sen Gupta, Field Monitor, North EastRegional Programme, Concern, House 58, 1st Lane Kalabagan, Dhaka 1205,Bangladesh. Email: [email protected]

ities. According to the Concern group members, 96% ofwhom are women, the women who had access to micro-credit were solely liable for this fund, though in reality mostwomen hand over this money to their husbands and stilldepend on their husbands’ willingness to repay the loan.They suggested making their husbands jointly (and legally)liable for any financial credit. This approach would encour-age their husbands to work more closely with them, e.g.discussing business opportunities, repayment proceduresetc. It would also improve the wife’s position both sociallyand within the household, and remove the humiliation ofhusbands only having access to credit through their wives.The immediate outcome of putting this recommendationinto practice is promising. Women now find that theirhusbands take more interest in understanding the func-tionality of groups, help in group-related activities, andshare the responsibility of repaying loans on time.

Local institutions did not serve the needs and interestsof poor women. Neither village institutions (like the salish)nor legal institutions (police, judicial court) supportedhousewives contesting incidents of polygamy and divorce.To improve access to village institutions, discussion groupssuggested promoting and expanding the number of malegroups, to help build organisational strengths and createopportunities for male family members to participate in

human development training, such as the social and legalrights of women.

Concern has already taken steps to put the above-mentioned learning into practice.• Instead of just the housewife, the whole family will be

considered to be Concern’s beneficiary. This will enableother family members to participate directly in manygroup-related activities.

• Both husband and wife will be equally liable for loanmoney.

• The number of male groups will be increased. Women’sgroup leaders will facilitate the formation of new malegroups in association with Concern project staff.

• A popular theatre will be formed with interested groupmembers. This theatre will perform shows about dowriesand other social issues in every village.

• Concern has increased the number of training sessionson legal and women’s social rights issues for the groups.Husbands and other male family members will be encour-aged to participate in this training.

These studies show that processes of change in genderrelations and attitudes are ongoing and take time and thatit is equally important to work with both woman and mento change attitudes. Though it is a good start, Concern willneed to be in for the long haul.

GEN

ERAL

SECTION


Extracts from ‘Teach YourselfCitizens’ Juries: A handbook bythe DIY Jury Steering Group’

14

Have you ever thought about running your own citizens’ jurybut were not sure how to go about it? The following extractsare taken from a new handbook ‘Teach Yourself Citizens’Juries: A handbook by the DIY Jury Steering Group’. Using aseries of cartoons as a guide, it takes you through a step-by-step process on how to plan, implement, and follow-up acitizens’ jury. The cartoons illustrate what a citizens’ jury is,why you might want to have one, what the main ingredi-ents of a citizens’ jury are, and how to get started.

“A citizen is a person who feels responsible for the area in whichthey live and would like to have some say in the running of it.”Resident, Newcastle, UK

GEN

ERA

LSE

CTIO

NExtracts from ‘Teach Yourself Citizens’ Juries: A handbook by the DIY Jury Steering Group’14

Made to accompany the video ‘Teach Yourself Citizens’Juries: Making a difference’ the manual explains the originsof citizens’ juries, and provides examples of some of the situ-ations in which you might feel it would be worthwhile tohold a citizens’ jury for yourself.

This 22-minute video shows how a citizens’ jury wasformed 2003 in Newcastle, UK, to explore health issuesaffecting older people. The video takes you through eachaspect of the processes that were involved, from organisingthe first meeting, where people explored and prioritised theissues of concern, to selecting a steering group, oversightpanel, expert witnesses, and jury members, to meetingswhere jury members could debate and analyse the‘evidence’. The result was a set of practical recommendationsidentified by the jurors that were then presented at a high-profile launch to policy makers and the media.

This video demonstrates how to find common groundbetween people from diverse backgrounds, and how ordi-nary citizens’ can make complex, informeddecisions based on the informationpresented to them by expert witnessesand from their own deliberations. It alsoincludes commentary recounting theexperiences of some of the peopleinvolved.

The handbook and video arepublished by the Policy, Ethics, and LifeSciences (PEALS) Programme, University of

Newcastle, 2003. These extracts were reproduced with kindpermission from PEALS. The cartoons are by Kate

Charlesworth, and the accompanying video wasproduced by Swingbridge Video.

A single copy of the handbookand video are available free ofcharge to community groups onrequest – thereafter all additionalcopies as priced. The handbook andvideo cost £10.00 per copy pluspostage. ● To order, please contact:PEALS, Centre for Life,Times Square, Newcastle, NE1 4EQ.Tel: +44 191 241 8614.


“You think of a jury, you think of acourtroom, and it was that type ofsetting that I thought I would becoming into – but this is different, it’smore friendly, and an atmosphere iscreated where you can openly askquestions and get answers.”Steering group member

Extracts from ‘Teach Yourself Citizens’ Juries: A handbook by the DIY Jury Steering Group’ 14G

ENERA

LSECTIO

N


TIPS

FO

R TR

AIN

ERS

94 <pla notes 48> December 2003

Tips for trainers

As part of this special issue oncommunity-based planning, Tips forTrainers brings you two extracts fromKhanya-Managing Rural Change’sAction Research for Community-BasedPlanning project manual.

The development of the manualwas funded under the project foraction-research on community-basedplanning on which several of thepapers in this special issue are basedand represents the collective work andexperience from this broad group.

The two examples selecteddemonstrate two aspects of thecommunity-based planning process:ensuring the effective representationof people within the communityconcerned in the planning activities,and how to prepare and run a pre-planning community meeting inadvance of the main planning events,in order to mobilise leaders fromdiverse sections of the community.

Extracts from the Action Researchfor Community-Based Planningproject manual

Ensuring effective representationIt is important to ensure the effectiveparticipation of people, including sub-planning unit structures, in theplanning process. The variousgroupings within the community mayhave organised structures, which canbe used for representation purposese.g.• Economic groups such as market

women, bakers’ associations, andpalm oil producers’ associations.

• Social groupings such as youthassociations, student unions, andboy scouts.

• Religious organisations such asCatholic associations, Muslimassociations, and Pentecostalsgroups.

• Traditional associations such as

cultural groups.• Environmental groupings: these

include both groups of naturalresource (NR) users as well asenvironmental interest groups.Groups of NR users include farmers’associations (livestock and crop),gatherers of water, beekeepers, andtraditional healers groups (whooften gather herbs and other plantand animal products from wildareas and thus have valuableknowledge of the state of naturalresources). Environmental interestgroups include waste managementgroups (e.g. clean-up campaigns,recycling organisations, wastepickers), environmental clubs atschools, and other CBOs concernedwith environmental issues.

There may well be groups who arenot organised, and these will typicallybe marginalized groups like thedisabled, widows, and orphans. Thesegroups also need to be represented.

The principles of effectiverepresentation are based on theassumption that every community ismade up of a diversity of groupswhose interests might either coincideor be at variance, and as CBP is ademocratic process, there needs to beeffective representation of thesedifferent groups, and someconsensus-building about priorities. Ina small unit such as a village inUganda, all adults are members ofthe Village Council. However as unitsget larger, such as a ward in SouthAfrica with 10–20,000 people, somerepresentative structure is needed toensure that the voices of importantgroups are heard. Some of the issuesinclude the following:• resources are generally limited and

there is the likelihood that thosewho are not effectively representedwould have their interests overtakenby the more aggressive;

• if a representative structure isneeded, each social, economic, orlivelihood grouping should berepresented by a leader who isexpected to articulate theaspirations of the people s/he isrepresenting;

• leaders that are chosen must betruly representative and notpersonally motivated;

• there must be scheduled feedbackmeetings for the represented andthe representatives in between theplanning events to ensureaccountability of those leaders; and,

• the number of feedback meetingsshould depend on time, availabilityof resources etc.

A way to improve participation,ownership, and representation is tocarry out sufficient communityfeedback processes and mechanisms.The importance of feedback duringthe CBP process cannot be stressedenough. Feedback helps to increaseaccountability and transparency, thusensuring improved representation.

The amount of time available forfeedback obviously depends on thetime the CBP process takes in thecommunity. It stands to reason thatthe more the basic five-day CBPprocess is spread out, the greater theneed for feedback to keep thecommunity on board.

There are several main areaswhere feedback is necessary duringthe CBP process:• at the pre-planning phase – to

increase community awareness andelicit questions and suggestedimprovements, and ensure interestand participation;

• at the community launch meeting –further awareness raising, but alsosharing the information gathered inthe pre-planning phase;

• at the community meetingundertaking the strengths;

Tips for trainersTIPS FO

R TRAIN

ERS

weaknesses, opportunities, andthreats (SWOT) analysis for theplanning unit, after the livelihoodsanalysis with groupings;

• at the meeting of the community todevelop visions and objectives;

• at the community meeting toconfirm and verify the plan;

• once the plan has been reviewed bythe local authority; and,

• during regular meetings to monitorthe implementation.

Pre-planning community meeting

BackgroundThis meeting is held a week or twoprior to the main planning week,initially just with unit committeemembers . This could also include abroader session with opinion leaders(such as teachers, clinic staff, religiousleaders, youth leaders, leaders ofunemployed groups, trade union,women’s groups etc.). The aim is tomobilise the leaders of many differentsections of the community. It is also toensure broad ownership of the plan sothat people realise that this is abouttheir process, that one of the outputsneeds to be local action and not justdemands for resources from others. Itis important to ensure that from thisearly stage, participants withenvironmental knowledge orcompetence are involved in theprocess. This could includerepresentatives from CBOs dealingwith environmental matters and otheradvocates for specific localenvironmental issues.

ObjectiveBy the end of this meeting localleaders should:• understand the planning process

and outputs;• be committed to supporting an

inclusive planning process (which

prioritises the needs of marginalizedgroups);

• be ready to mobilise theirconstituencies ready for theplanning phase;

• have defined the main socio-economic and interest groups totake forward the planning process;

• have begun collecting existingbackground information; and,

• have developed a timetable for theplanning week and the firstmeetings will have been scheduled.

What part of the plan does this feedinto?Use in Section 1, ‘How did we makethis plan?’ (See Box 1)

Tools/methods Group discussionTiming Two hours Facilitators Core facilitation teamParticipants Elected leaders e.g.

planning unitcommittee, possiblyjoined by opinionleaders, traditionalleaders, interestgroups, etc.

Process Introductions andensuring electedleaders understandthe planning process;roles; social analysisand organising theweek; resourcesneeded; andcomments/tips.

ProcessIntroductions and ensuring electedleaders understand the planningprocess• introduce facilitation team and

elected leaders;• discuss overall planning process

within which the community plans fit;• discuss expectations and concerns;• discuss content of the plan (use flip

chart which is left with thecommittee);

• discuss overall shape of the week(assume here that there has beensome introduction to councillorsprior to this meeting); and,

• discuss availability of any existinginformation that can be used tohelp with the plan.

RolesDiscuss who is in the core facilitationteam and who is supplementary, andwhat their roles are (including thatsome committee members/councillorswill become trainers).Social analysis and organising the week


Documentation of the plan is a key issue.Not all the meetings and discussions needto be documented (although one maydecide to keep minutes of all planningmeetings).

Cover and/or endorsement page (withkey signatures)Section1 How did we make the plan? The process

we went through.2 What is the situation in our community?

Detailing background, different groups,state of the natural environment,services, and SWOT analysis.

3 What do we want to achieve? The vision,goals, and strategies andprojects/activities to reach the goals.

4 Implementing our plan. Summary of whoneeds to do what for our projects andactivities. Detailed project proposalsshould be included in the plan Annex.

AnnexProject profiles: project summaries thatmust be completed for projects submitted toCouncil or sectoral departments.The plan should act as the communityrecord book, enabling decisions to bereviewed and information to be updated indue course. It is a tool for monitoringprogress in plan implementation and can beupdated annually as projects move forward,and new priorities emerge.

Box 1: The main sections of acommunity-based plan

Tips for trainersTI

PS F

OR

TRA

INER

S

96 <pla notes 48> December 2003

• Discuss what are the socio-economicand interest groups in the area,using the question ‘what are thedifferent groups that you recognisein the area who have different levelsof well-being?’ Give one or twoexamples (e.g. unemployed, youth,elderly women, business people,farmers, salaried people etc.).

• Tell people that you would like tomeet representatives from thesegroups, and that all these groupsneed to participate in the broadcommunity meetings (wardplanning forum).

• Arrange a timetable for the weekand in detail for first day.

• Agree how to obtain theparticipants for first communitymeeting and who will organisethem (e.g. do we have some

meetings in villages/sections atwhich representatives areelected/selected for the communitymeeting/ward planning forum?).

Resources needed• A flipchart with contents of the

plan. • A flipchart with a table showing the

week.

Comments/tipsDiscuss what form of representationwill be used for the broadercommunity meetings to create arepresentative planning forum. Thereare two main possibilities:• people are selected from different

parts of the planning unit to form arepresentative structure forplanning; and,

• those people who participate inother meetings who are invited tojoin in the broad communitymeetings.

There could also be acombination. However it must bestressed that the group selectingvision and goals should be seen to berepresentative of the community, anda ten-person committee is notenough.

The extracts have beenreproduced with kind permission fromKhanya-Managing Rural Change. Formore information, to download theAction Research for Community-Based Planning Project manual, or todownload other CBP-related materialpublished by Khanya, visit thecommunity-based planning page atwww.khanya-mrc.co.za


IN TO

UCH

Book reviews & videos

Participatorycapacity building: afacilitator’s toolboxfor assessment andstrategic planningof NGO capacity● Jouwert van Geene,PSO Capacity Building in

Developing Countries, Case Studies andTools, Issue Paper 1. The Institute of CulturalAffairs, Zimbabwe, 2003.

Developed in collaboration with theNational Association of NGOs(NANGO) in Zimbabwe and ICCO-Psaand PSO in the Netherlands,Participatory Capacity Building is apractical toolbox for internal orexternal facilitators of capacitybuilding of NGOs. The tools can beused to assess an organisation'scapacity and plan for strategic andinnovative directions fororganisational improvement.

After an introduction to theprocesses involved and a discussion ofthe broader perspective, the manualintroduces two methodologies:Participatory Organisational EvaluationTool (POET) and Technology ofParticipation (ToP). There are then sixchapters which focus on: participatorycapacity assessment (PCA); analysingand reporting PCA scores; informationabout feedback and runningworkshops; and, monitoring andevaluating capacity building systems.The Toolbox also includes experiencesof using the Toolbox as it wasdeveloped and applied with NGOs inZimbabwe.■ Available in both hard copy and CD-ROMformat from: ICA Zimbabwe, PO Box CY 905Causeway, Harare, Zimbabwe. Email:[email protected]

Welcome to the In Touch section ofPLA Notes. Through these pages wehope to create a more participatoryresource for the PLA Notes audience,to put you, as a reader, in touch withother readers. We want this sectionto be a key source of up-to-dateinformation on training, publications,and networks. Your help is vital inkeeping us all in touch about:• Networks. Do you have links with

recognised local, national orinternational networks forpractitioners of participatorylearning? If so, what does thisnetwork provide – training?newsletters? resourcematerial/library? a forum for sharingexperiences? Please tell us about thenetwork and provide contact detailsfor other readers.

• Training. Do you know of anyforthcoming training events orcourses in participatorymethodologies? Are you a traineryourself? Are you aware of any keytraining materials that you would

like to share with other trainers?• Publications. Do you know of any

key publications on participatorymethodologies and their use? Haveyou (or has your organisation)produced any books, reports, orvideos that you would like otherreaders to know about?

• Electronic information. Do youknow of any electronic conferencesor pages on the Internet whichexchange or provide information onparticipatory methodologies?

• Other information. Perhaps youhave ideas about other types ofinformation that would be usefulfor this section. If so, please let usknow.

Please send your responses to: PLA Notes, IIED, 3 Endsleigh Street,London WC1H ODD, UK. Fax: + 44 20 7388 2826; Email: [email protected] Notes is published in April,August, and December. Please submitmaterial two months before thepublication date.

in touch

Books and videosIN

TO

UCH


Stakeholderincentives inparticipatoryforestmanagement:a manual foreconomic analysis● Michael Richards,

Jonathon Davies and Gil Yaron. ITDGPublishing/Overseas Development Institute,London, UK, 2003

This manual stems from a widespreadconcern that there is insufficientunderstanding of the costs andbenefits to local communities andsmall farmers of participatory forestmanagement (PFM) and a realisationthat this has contributed to thelimited success of many PFMexperiences.

This manual provides a toolbox ofeconomic methods, which will helpmaximise the understanding andownership of local people. Designedfor use at the project or micro level,the book integrates economic analysiswith other decision-making criteria toprovide a systematic yet flexibleapproach to analysing stakeholderincentives in PFM. Part I introducesthe economic concepts to PFM, andPart II sets out a step-by-stepapproach to economic stakeholderanalysis – from the identification ofstakeholders to establishing aparticipatory monitoring system.■ Available from: ITDG Publishing, 103-105Southampton Row, London, WC1B 4HL.Website: www.itdgpublishing.org.uk

Community-basedanimal healthcare:The how-to-do-itvideos● CAPE Unit, OAU/IBAR,2003

These ‘how-to-do-it’

videos describe thekey issues toconsider whensetting up acommunity-basedanimal healthsystem. The videoswill be useful for

veterinarians who work forgovernment, NGOs or the privatesector and who want to establish acommunity-based project, orimprove an existing project.

The first video in the series coverscommunity participation,sustainability and the role of vets.The second video coversparticipatory approaches to adultlearning, project monitoring andevaluation, and how to influencepolicy.

Community-basedanimal healthcare:issues for policymakers (video)● CAPE Unit, OAU/IBAR,2003

Community-basedanimal healthcare systems arebecoming increasingly popular as ameans to improve primary-levelveterinary services in marginalizedareas. Ultimately, the success ofcommunity-based approachesrequires support from policy makers.

This video presents the key issuesfor policy makers to consider whenassessing community-based animalhealth systems. The video alsodescribes ways to involve policymakers in learning more aboutcommunity-based approaches andformulating appropriate policies.■ Available from:Andy Catley, CAPE Unit,OAU/IBAR, PO Box 30786, 00100 Nairobi,Kenya. Tel: +254 2 226447; Fax: +254 2212289; Email: [email protected]

Guidelines onparticipatorydevelopment inKenya: criticalreflection on training,policy, and scaling up.● Edited by Eliud

Wakwabubi and Hudson Shiverenje.Participatory Methodologies Forum of Kenya(PAMFORK). Kenya, 2003

Based on field experiences of researchersand practitioners, this book is intendedprimarily to be used as a practical guidefor participation as applied in training,policy, and scaling up. The underlyingassumption in the guidelines is a rights-based approach that seeks to achieveequity, social justice, empowerment, andcitizen participation in development.Case studies with lessons and challengesby actors with diverse experiences onparticipatory development in Kenya formbuilding blocks for the guidelines.

A follow-up to Participatorydevelopment in Kenya: lessons andchallenges, Volume I, this book buildson this earlier volume taking intoconsideration current trends andthinking on participation. It focuses oncritical and essential issues aimed atimproving the quality of participation intraining and facilitation, policyprocesses, and scaling up ofdevelopment work. ■ Available from: Participatory MethodologiesForum of Kenya (PAMFORK), PO Box 2645,KHN Post Office, Nairobi, Kenya.Tel: +254 2 716609. Email: [email protected] is a member of the RCPLA Network.

Challengingwomen’s poverty:perspectives ongender and povertyreduction strategiesfrom Nicaragua andHonduras.● CIIR Briefing Paper.

Books and videos


IN TO

UCH

Sarah Bradshaw and Brian Linneker. CatholicInstitute for International Relations (CIIR),2003.

The World Bank and the InternationalMonetary Fund now require poorcountries seeking debt relief to outlinetheir plans for reducing poverty inPoverty Reduction Strategy Papers(PRSPs). This CIIR briefing paperexamines the extent to which womenand gender issues are included in thesepoverty reduction strategies.

Combining an incisive review of thePRSP policy context and of women’sexperiences of poverty with detailedanalysis of the PRSP process inNicaragua and Honduras, the authorscritically examine the ability of PRSPs torecognise women’s needs andchallenge women’s poverty. Theirfindings and conclusions will beessential reading for anyone involved inPRSP processes or interested in povertyand gender issues in Latin America andbeyond.■ Available from: Catholic Institute forInternational Relations (CIIR), Unit 3,Canonbury Yard, 190a New North Road,London N1 7BJ, UK.Tel: +44 20 7354 0883 or+44 20 7288 8600; Fax: +44 20 7359 0017;Email: [email protected];Website: www.ciir.org

Community integrated pestmanagement in Indonesia:institutionalising participation andpeople-centred approaches● Mansour Fakih,Toto Rahardjo, and MichelPimbert. Institutionalising Participation Series 5.IIED, 2003

Integrated pest management (IPM)emerged in Indonesia in the late 1980sas a reaction to the environmental andsocial consequences of the GreenRevolution model of agriculture.Focusing on farmer field schools (FFS),the FFS aimed to make farmers expertsin their own fields, enabling them to

replace their reliance on external inputs,such as pesticides, with endogenousskills, knowledge, and resources. Overtime the emphasis of the programmeshifted towards communityorganisation, community planning andmanagement of IPM, and becameknown as Community IPM (CIPM). Thisstudy assesses the extent to whichCommunity IPM has beeninstitutionalised in Java (Indonesia), andthe dynamics of institutionalising peoplecentred and participatory processes.

State versus participation: naturalresources management in Europe● Andréa Finger-Stich and Matthias FingerInstitutionalising Participation Series 2. IIED,2003

The participation of the public, localcommunities, indigenous peoples, andvarious other stakeholders in naturalresources policy-making, planning,and/or management has beenincreasingly promoted in internationaland national policies. This book analysesand discusses how participation does –or does not – occur in the managementof forest and water resources at variousinstitutional levels in European contexts.The authors critically analyse how theState has, over time, strengthened itsown development interests by removingdecisions over the management ofnatural resources from local users andcommunities’ hands and today tends toinstrumentalise peoples’ participationfor its own legitimacy purposes. Thisevolution is considered in light of twomore recent trends, namely theglobalisation of economic interests andthe demands for democratisation,decentralisation, and accountability. Thebook highlights the strategies variousState agencies use to controlparticipation in decision-makingprocesses relating to forest and waterresource management.

Mind the gap:mainstreaminggender andparticipation indevelopment● Nazneen Kanji, withpreface by MichelPimbert.Institutionalising

Participation Series 4. IIED, 2003

Mind the Gap draws out lessons fromgender mainstreaming work for thosewho seek to institutionaliseparticipation. It begins by discussing theshift from women in development(WID) to gender and development(GAD) and the conceptual frameworksthat contributed to this process. Itexamines the strategies used tomainstream gender, the achievementsand the challenges involved, and theshifts from participation per se togovernance, suggesting a greater focusin both on a relational perspective,policy processes, and institutions. Itexplores the tensions between gendermainstreaming and participatorydevelopment, suggesting ways ofbridging the gaps between ‘gender’and ‘participation’. The author arguesthat renewed alliances with emergingmovements and more criticalperspectives are required to prevent thecooption of visions and weakening ofvalues which underpin efforts tomainstream both a gender perspectiveand participatory approaches todevelopment and social change. ■ Available from: Earthprint Limited,Orders Department, PO Box 119,Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 4TP, UK.Tel: +44 (0) 1438 748111; Fax: +44 (0) 1438748844; Email: [email protected];Website: www.earthprint.com.These andother publications in the InstitutionalisingParticipation series are also available in PDFformat on the IIED websitewww.iied.org/sarl/pubs/institutpart.html

Workshops and eventsIN

TO

UCH


Workshops andeventsIntroduction to ParticipatoryAppraisal courses21st–25th June 2004PEANuT Project, NorthumbriaUniversity, UKThis course, coordinated andfacilitated by Northumbria University’sParticipatory Evaluation and Appraisalin Newcastle upon Tyne (PEANuT)project, is designed to further theability of local people in identifyingand effecting the changes they desirein their communities. The courses areopen to anyone with an interest inthe communities in which they liveand/or work, focus on learning-by-doing, and run over five full days.Participants learn about thebackground and philosophies ofparticipatory appraisal and how touse the tools and techniques withconfidence. Pre-arranged fieldworkplacements enable students (in teams)to practice their skills in an ongoing,real-world project. Themes ofprevious placements have includedhomelessness, consulting youngpeople, and financial exclusion.

Full cost places are £380, andvoluntary/not for profit sector placesare £190. Places are strictly limited (16participants) and are allocated on afirst come, first served basis. There willbe further courses in 2005. ● For more information and how to bookcontact: PEANuT (Participatory Evaluationand Appraisal in Newcastle upon Tyne),Lipman Building, Northumbria University,Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. Tel: +44 (0)1912273951; Fax: +44(0)191 2274715;Website: www.northumbria.ac.uk/peanut

Environmental Consensus andConflict Resolution Workshop26th–28th October 2004

University of Edinburgh, UKThis training course is designed fordecision makers actively involved inenvironmental or other public policymatters or with managing conflictsconcerning natural resources.

The workshop provides afoundation in consensus building andthe thinking that underlies publicparticipation and mediation, whichhave previously been perceived asseparate specialised disciplines. Itdemonstrates how the skills of bothdisciplines can be combined to enablestakeholders to participate effectivelyin community planning or conflictresolution. It advocates a strategicapproach to selecting the appropriatetechniques to get effectiveparticipation and enables you todetermine when outside expertise maybe required to design a consultationexercise or to initiate mediation.

The cost for this three-dayworkshop is £395 and a specialdiscount rate of £295 is available for alimited number of volunteers (aspecial application must be made forthese places).

Participatory Appraisal Workshop6th–10th September 2004University of Edinburgh, UKThe term Participatory Appraisal (PA)describes a growing family ofapproaches and methods, whichenable local people to appraise andshare their knowledge of life and localconditions, in order that they cananalyse, plan, and act on these ideas.Through PA, local groups are able toidentify their own priorities and maketheir own decisions about the future.This workshop will concentrate on thepractical application of PA and willconsist of five days of intensivetraining, with three days spent onpractical exercises and other methodsfor learning about PA. The remaining

two days will include placements inEdinburgh and the surrounding area,and will provide an opportunity for apractical application of the approach.

The cost for this intensive five-dayworkshop is £475 and a specialdiscount rate of £325 is available for alimited number of volunteers (aspecial application should be madefor these rates).● For more information about thesecourses, contact Vikki Hilton, School ofGeoSciences Ecology and ResourceManagement, The University of Edinburgh,Darwin Building, Mayfield Road, EdinburghEH9 3JU, UK. Tel: +44 (0) 131 650 6439;Fax +44 (0) 131 662 0478;Email:[email protected]; Website:www.ierm.ed.ac.uk/shortcourses/eccrw.htm

Results-based Management,Appreciative Inquiry, and OpenSpace Technology12th–16th July 2004MOSAIC, CanadaThis new workshop introducesparticipants to results-basedmanagement, appreciative inquiry andopen space technology. This course willshow you how to demonstrate theeffectiveness of your programmes withresults-based management, masterresults, developprogramme/organisational plans that areresults-based, and design performance-monitoring systems based on indicatorsand participatory methods. Participantswill also learn how to apply genderanalysis to your work, expand theirrepertoire of tools, and learn aboutappreciative inquiry and open space andhow they can be applied to anyorganisation, programme, and/orproject. These increasingly popularapproaches are being used around theworld to tap into new ways to work thatare more results-oriented, moreappreciative, less problem-focused, andmore self-organised.

Workshops and events


IN TO

UCH

Participatory DevelopmentConcepts, Tools, and Application inPLA/PRA Methods19th–24th July 2004MOSAIC, CanadaThis workshop focuses on coreparticipatory concepts, tools, andtheir application. This is an intensivesix-day workshop set in thecommunity to maximise learning,group interaction, and networking.Topics include: the origins ofparticipatory development; learningand application of PRA/PLA tools; theapplication of participation to projectdesign; monitoring and evaluation;PLA interventions that are gendersensitive; developing effectivefacilitation skills; building action plans;and, team-building. Two-daycommunity assignments proposed bycommunity-based organisations in theOttawa region will allow participantsto apply tools learned in theworkshop to real-life situations.

The cost for this course isCAD$895.00/US$695.00 forinternational participants. A 10%discount is given to NGOs, communitygroups, and full-time students.

Participatory Monitoring andEvaluation26th–31st July 2004MOSAIC, CanadaParticipatory monitoring andevaluation (PM&E) involves a differentapproach to project monitoring andevaluation by involving local people,project stakeholders, anddevelopment agencies decidingtogether about how to measureresults and what actions shouldfollow once this information has beencollected and analysed. This intensivesix-day experiential workshop ispractically focused with dailyexcursions into the community and athree-day community assignment.

Topics covered at the workshopinclude: origins of PM&E, skills andattributes of a PM&E facilitator,learning PM&E tools, designing amonitoring and evaluation frameworkand actions plan, and much more.

The cost for this course isCAD$895.00/US$695.00 forinternational participants. A 10%discount is given to NGOs,community groups, and full-timestudents. ● For more information about these threecourses contact: Françoise Coupal,Mosaic.net International, Inc., 705 RooseveltAvenue, Ottawa, K2A 2A8, Canada. Tel: +(613) 728 1439; Fax: +(613) 728 1154;Email: [email protected];Website: http://mosaic-net-intl.ca

ICA:UK ToP Facilitation TrainingcoursesGroup facilitation methods ICA:UK, UK20th–21st May 2004, Cambridge,UK; 24th–25th June 2004, Exeter, UK;6th–7th July 2004, Manchester, UKA structured introduction to the basicToP Focused Conversation andConsensus Workshop methods, thiscourse presents the foundations ofthe ToP methodology in a practicaland participatory way, demonstrating,discussing, and practicing eachmethod. Includes how to conductpurposeful, productive focusedconversations; capture the wisdom ofthe group; stimulate feedback; and,reach shared awareness in meetings.Participants become familiar with afive-step process that moves from thecollection of data and ideas, throughthe organisation of the data intomeaningful groupings and to a pointof consensus, resolution, and product.

Group facilitation skills ICA:UK, UK8th July, Manchester, UK

This course enables participants toexplore the role and skills of thefacilitator. Facilitating participatoryprocesses goes beyond being able todesign events and knowing whichmethods to use. There is a wholerange of skills that a facilitator needsto bring into play both before, during,and after the event itself in order toensure that the process and themethods employed are effective. Thecourse enables participants to shareactual experiences and challenges;explore ways of addressing these infuture; reach a deeper understandingof what it means to facilitate; and,experience the ToP FocusedConversation and ConsensusWorkshop methods. This one-daycourse is scheduled back-to-back withGroup Facilitation Methods to allowfrom one to three days of training.

Participatory Strategic PlanningICA:UK, UK10th–11th May 2004, Manchester,UKThis course presents a structuredlong-range planning process, whichincorporates the ConsensusWorkshop method for buildingconsensus, the Focused Conversationmethod for effective groupcommunication, and animplementation process for turningideas into productive action andconcrete accomplishments. GroupFacilitation Methods is a pre-requisitefor this course. The course enablesparticipants to: enhance theircapacity for creative strategybuilding; experience the completestrategic planning process; learn toenable a group to come to acommon vision and create aparticipant owned plan that dealscreatively with the realities that areblocking the group; and, explore thevariety of applications for these skills.

Workshops and eventsIN

TO

UCH


Team LeadershipICA:UK, UK3rd–4th June 2004, Manchester, UKThis course is for team leaders whoare committed to participation indeciding tasks and implementingthem. It offers tools and methods tohelp a team through difficult times.This course will show participantshow to: enhance teamwork on thejob; develop effective task forces andcommittees; motivate and sustaincoalitions and partnerships; launchand complete short and mid-termtasks; and, gain the confidenceneeded to let a team do its job.Group Facilitation Methodsrecommended but not a pre-requisitefor this course.

Participation ParadigmICA:UK, UK7th–8th June 2004, Manchester, UKToP methods are based on years ofcross-cultural research into humanpatterns of perception andexperience. This course focuses onthe underlying assumptions thatprovide the framework for creative,powerful usage and understanding ofToP methods. This course will showparticipants how to: enhance theircapacity to use and adapt ToPmethods to specific challengingsituations; develop their ability torespond appropriately to individualand group struggles; deepen theirunderstanding of the compellingnature of the ToP processes; and, see

through the techniques of facilitationto grasp the human drama ofparticipatory processes.

Future dates are also available foreach course. Course costs per person,per course: £385 for private andpublic sector organisations (exceptGroup Facilitation Skills, £195); £275for large voluntary sectororganisations (except GroupFacilitation Skills, £145); £195 forsmall voluntary sector organisationsand individuals (except GroupFacilitation Skills, £105).● For more information please contact:ICA:UK ToP Coordinator, Tel: +44 (0)161 2328444 or (local rate, UK only) 0845 450 0305;Email: [email protected] or [email protected];Website: www.ica-uk.org.uk


IN TO

UCH

e-participation

Renewal.netwww.renewal.net

This is a UK-based online guide towhat works in neighbourhoodrenewal. Documents on the siteinclude ‘how to’ guides, case studies,project summaries, and much more.Wherever possible, the documents arebased on evaluated evidence. The sitealso includes a Local StrategicPartnerships (LSPs) toolkit, designed tosupport all LSPs in producing credibleplans for neighbourhood renewal,putting in place their means fordelivery, and reviewing and improvingexisting strategies. The toolkit containsa number of useful tips and case studyexamples that are drawn fromresearch into neighbourhood renewalstrategies.

The Decentralised Livestock Servicesin Eastern Indonesia (DELIVERI) www.deliveri.org

This website describes projects aimingto improve rural services in Indonesia,with information on how to improveservices by government and non-government organisations byincreasing participation andcommunity empowerment, throughdecentralisation, government reform,privatisation, and establishingcommunity-based services. Thewebsite has a database which includesbasic information about a wide rangeof organisations that have beeninvolved in community development inIndonesia, summary informationabout relevant audiovisual materials,literature and training materials, andcontact details of relevant institutionsand libraries.

Khanya-Managing Rural Changewww.khanya-mrc.co.za

This is the website for Khanya,where one of our guest editors forthis issue is based. The websiteincludes downloadable publicationsand reports, and includescommunity-based planning manualsfor Zimbabwe and South Africa, twoof the four country projects that arediscussed in this special issue. It alsoincludes Khanya’s regular newsletter‘Sustaining Livelihoods’ online. Thesite also includes useful links toother, CBP-relevant organisations,and information and documentsrelating to community-basedworkers and service delivery.

Olive (Organisation Developmentand Training)www.oliveodt.co.za

Olive ODT is a not-for-profitdevelopment organisation based inDurban, South Africa. Olivepublishes and produces a widerange of publications and periodicalscovering various aspects oforganisation development,management, and change.ODdebate, published quarterly, is ajournal of ideas for all peopleinvolved in change and organisationdevelopment. The site also has manyworking papers on different topicsavailable online, such asorganisational development, toolsand approaches, funding, NGOs,and development issues.

Oneworld.netwww.oneworld.net

The OneWorld partnership brings

together more than 1,500organisations from across the globeto promote sustainabledevelopment, social justice, andhuman rights. This website has avast array of current news and morein-depth reporting on issues ofimportance to those working in thearenas of sustainable developmentand empowerment, including manyresources such as tools for non-profits, capacity-building and civilsociety, women’s empowerment,and much more. It has countryguides, topic guides, and handyresource links to other relevantorganisations for each topic andcountry.

Development Gateway Foundationwww.developmentgateway.org

The Development GatewayFoundation aims to improve people’slives in developing countries bybuilding partnerships andinformation systems that provideaccess to knowledge fordevelopment by increasingknowledge sharing, enabling aideffectiveness, improving publicsector transparency, and buildinglocal capacity to empowercommunities.

The Development Gateway is anindependent not-for-profitorganisation, initially developed bythe World Bank in 2001. The siteincludes news and updates ondevelopment activities across theworld, a search engine, country-specific Development Gateways, andmany online documents relating toparticipation and development.

RCPL

AN

ETW

ORK


RCPLANetwork

In this section, we aim to update readers on activities ofthe Resource Centres for Participatory Learning and ActionNetwork (RCPLA) Network (www.rcpla.org) and itsmembers. For more information please contact the RCPLANetwork Steering Group:RCPLA Coordination: Tom Thomas (Network Coordinator),Director, Institute for Participatory Practices (Praxis), S-75South Extension, Part II, New Delhi, India 110 049. Tel/Fax:+91 11 5164 2348 to 51; Email: [email protected] [email protected] Boston, Director of Communications, Institute forEnvironment & Development (IIED), 3 Endsleigh Street,London WC1H 0DD, UK. Tel: +44 20 7388 2117; Email:[email protected]; Website: www.iied.orgAsian Region: Jayatissa Samaranayake, Institute forParticipatory Interaction in Development (IPID), 591Havelock Road, Colombo 06, Sri Lanka. Tel: +94 1555521; Tel/Fax: +94 1 587361; Email:[email protected] Africa Region: Awa Faly Ba, IIED Programme Sahel,Point E, Rue 6 X A, B.P. 5579, Dakar, Sénégal. Tel: +221824 4417; Fax: +221 824 4413; Email: [email protected]

European Region: Jane Stevens, Participation Group,Institute of Development Studies (IDS), University ofSussex, Brighton BN1 9RE, UK. Tel: + 44 1273 678690; Fax: + 44 1273 21202; Email: [email protected];Participation group website: www.ids.ac.uk/ids/participLatin American Region: Fernando Dick, Dirección deProgramas de Investigación y Desarrollo (DPID),Universdad Nur, Casilla 3273, Ave Cristo Redendor No.100, Santa Cruz, Bolivia. Tel: +591 3 363 939; Fax: +5913 331 850; Email: [email protected]; Website:www.dpid.nur.edu North Africa & Middle East Region: Ali Mokhtar, Center forDevelopment Services (CDS), 4 Ahmed Pasha Street,Citibank Building, Garden City, Cairo, Egypt. Tel: +20 2 795 7558; Fax: +20 2 794 7278;Email: [email protected]; Website:www.neareast.org/explore/cds/index.htm Southern and Eastern Africa Region: Eliud Wakwabubi,Participatory Methodologies Forum of Kenya (PAMFORK),Jabavu Road, PCEA Jitegemea Flats, Flat No. D3, P.O. Box2645, KNH Post Office, Nairobi, Kenya. Tel/Fax: +254 2 716609; Email: [email protected]

vast geographical spread as well as anincreased skill and capacity base.Although, strong institutions will addto the value of the network, thequality of the joining members ismore important than numbers.Consequently, RCPLA is analysing itsapplication and recruitment processto ensure that qualified organisationsjoin the network and to guaranteethat they are ideologically in tunewith the new vision and mission ofthe group.

RCPLA has a number of activitiesplanned that will mobilise themember organisations towards itsnew focus. Regional programmes areset to commence in the beginning of2004. This includes a series ofwriteshops that RCPLA members willimplement throughout the world. Ina concerted effort to provide thedevelopment sector with moredocumented field experiences,RCPLA members are organising threewriteshops to take place in Asia,

RCPLANetwork

Vision: A just world thatempowers all of the human race toparticipate and positively impact uponprocesses and decisions that affecttheir lives and collective destiny.

Mission: Bring together a diverse,international network of developmentpractitioners to strengthen impact onprocesses of social change. By sharingfield experiences, facilitating capacitybuilding, and encouraging the use ofparticipatory practices, RCPLA willpositively influence developmentinitiatives, while working towardsqualitative social advancement, equityand justice.

In conjunction with taking acritical look at our vision and missionstatements, it also was a logical timeto reassess our membership base.RCPLA network would also like tofocus on forging alliances across newnetworks and organisations tobroaden its influence on policyprocesses. Ideally, the network willexpand to have a global niche with a

News from PraxisGreetings from RCPLA! I hope all ofyou have had a fruitful and productivefirst quarter of 2004. RCPLA has beenbusy in 2004 strategising about howthe network can have a strongerpresence within the developmentsector. In 2004, the network isconsciously working to broaden itsscope and transition from beingsimply a resource base and become amore influential voice in thedevelopment field. Presently, RCPLA isworking on a few key initiatives forthe network to successfully reorientits focus.

As a first step, RCPLA decided torevise the vision and missionstatements of the network to reflectits changing focus. We all saw this asa critical component in formulatingRCPLA’s next step as network. Afterextensive consultations amongst ourmember organisations, the followingare the new vision and missionstatements for the network:

RCPLA NetworkRCPLA

NETW

ORK


Africa and the UK in 2004. RCPLAwould like to utilise its extensiveresources and scope to emphasisethe importance of documenting thefield experiences of developmentprofessionals. These writeshops willfacilitate theoretical debatessurrounding the use of participatorymethods, while also providing aspace for development practitionersto reflect upon their own personalexperiences. With a diverse group ofparticipants and a wide-range ofhigh-profile resource people, RCPLAwill bring together an accomplishedgroup of development workers tocontribute to existing scholarship onParticipatory Practices andDemocracy. This will not only providedevelopment practitioners with thespace to reflect upon theirexperiences, but it will also build their

capacity to document their own fieldexperiences. RCPLA is dedicated todocumenting these important fieldexperiences and we look forward tosharing our case studies and findingswith all of you in future issues of PLANotes. If you are interested inadditional information on the RCPLAwriteshops or the network in general,please contact Catherine Kannam [email protected].

News from IIEDWe welcome Dr Camilla Toulmin asDirector of IIED from February 2004.Dr Toulmin had been Acting Directorof IIED since July 2003 after theresignation of Nigel Cross on thegrounds of ill health. Prior to that,she was a Senior Fellow of theDrylands Programme, having beenDirector of the Programme since she

established it in 1987. An economistby training, Dr Toulmin has workedmainly in francophone West Africa,on agricultural, pastoral, and tenureissues. She was a member of theInternational Expert Panel supportingthe preparation of the Convention toCombat Desertification.

Janet Boston was appointedDirector of Communications at IIEDfrom March 2004, replacing LillianChatterjee. Ms Boston will continueto be Executive Producer of EarthReport (www.tve.org/earthreport), amajor series that is part of theportfolio of Television Trust for theEnvironment (TVE). Her previousexperience includes the position ofMedia Manager at the IntermediateTechnology Development Group(ITDG). IIED welcomes her to thepost.

PLA Notes is published three times a year, and is available free of charge to non-OECD organisations and individuals based in non-OECD countries.‡

Prices: OECD† Individual One year – £25 or US$40 Two years – £45 or US$72 OECD† Institutional One year – £75 or US$120 Two years – £140 or US$224

Free CD ROM offerSubscribe for two years and receive a free copy of the PLA Notes CD-ROM. Available whilst stocks last. Offer applies toall new subscribers (paying and non-paying), and existing paying subscribers who renew with a two-year subscription.

Please note that all free subscribers will be contacted every two years/six issues to renew their free subscription. We request thatwhere possible, organisations share a free subscription or ask their organisation’s library or resource centre to subscribe.

Please indicate what type of organisation you work for:

Please indicate what your area of work/interests are:

pla notes subscriptions

order formReturn to: PLA NotesSubscriptions, EarthprintLimited, Orders Department,PO Box 119, StevenageSG1 4TP, UK.

Tel: +44 (0)1438 748111Fax: +44 (0)1438 748844Email: [email protected] at www.planotes.org

For more information aboutthe series please contact us atthe above address or visitwww.planotes.org

First Name: Surname:

Organisation:

Address:

Postal Code/PO Box: Country:

Tel: Fax: Email:

† OECD countries are: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Mexico,The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, U.K., U.S.A. ‡ Non-OECD: Due to cost restrictions this excludes branches or regional offices of Northern-based organisations in non-OECD countries and non-OECDorganisations and individuals based in OECD countries.

Quantity Price at individual/ institutional rate* Total Price

Payment information■■ I am from a non-OECD country and would like a free subscription‡

■■ I enclose an international money order or US$ cheque drawn on a US bank account to the value of:

■■ I enclose a UK cheque to the value of: Cheques should be made payable to Earthprint Limited

■■ Please debit my credit card to the value of: ■■ VISA ■■ Mastercard ■■ American Express

Credit Card Number: Expiry Date:

Holder’s Name: Signature:

Card Address (if different from above):

■■ Please send my institution an invoice

*Individual subscriptions are those paid from individual’s own pockets and not reimbursed by an institution.

Save 25% with a bulk subscription discount Take out five or more institutional one- or two-year subscriptions and save 25%. Please note that all copies will be sentin bulk to one address.

£

£

US$


Order no: Quantity required

PLA Notes 49: Apr 2004 US$22.50 9312 IIED Decentralisation and community-based planning ....................................■PLA Notes 48: Dec 2003 US$22.50 9284 IIED Learning and teaching participation ..........................................................■PLA Notes 47: Aug 2003 US$22.50 9260 IIED General issue (Mini-theme: parti-numbers) ..............................................■PLA Notes 46: Feb 2003 US$22.50 9224 IIED Participatory processes for policy change ..................................................■PLA Notes 45: Oct 2002 US$22.50 9218 IIED Community-based animal health care........................................................■PLA Notes 44: Jun 2002 US$22.50 9216 IIED Local government and participation ..........................................................■PLA Notes 43: Feb 2002 US$22.50 9133 IIED Advocacy and citizen participation ............................................................■PLA Notes 42: Oct 2001 US$22.50 9113 IIED Children’s participation – evaluating effectiveness ..................................■PLA Notes 40: Feb 2001 US$22.50 6345 IIED Deliberative democracy and citizen empowerment ................................■PLA Notes 39: Oct 2000 US$18.00 6344 IIED Popular communications..............................................................................■PLA Notes 38: Jun 2000 US$18.00 6341 IIED Participatory processes in the North ..........................................................■PLA Notes 37: Feb 2000 US$18.00 6335 IIED Sexual and reproductive health ..................................................................■PLA Notes 35: Jun 1999 US$18.00 6154 IIED Community water management ................................................................■PLA Notes 34: Feb 1999 US$18.00 6150 IIED Learning from analysis ................................................................................■PLA Notes 33: Oct 1998 US$18.00 6143 IIED Understanding market opportunities ........................................................■PLA Notes 32: Jun 1998 US$18.00 6137 IIED Participation, literacy and empowerment..................................................■PLA Notes 31: Feb 1998 US$18.00 6131 IIED Participatory monitoring and evaluation ..................................................■PLA Notes 30: Oct 1997 US$18.00 6129 IIED Participation and fishing communities ......................................................■PLA Notes 29: Jun 1997 US$18.00 6123 IIED Performance and participation ..................................................................■PLA Notes 28: Feb 1997 US$18.00 6115 IIED Methodological complementarity ..............................................................■PLA Notes 27: Oct 1996 US$18.00 6114 IIED Participation, policy and institutionalisation ............................................■PLA Notes 25: Feb 1996 US$18.00 6099 IIED Children’s participation ................................................................................■PLA Notes 24: Oct 1995 US$18.00 6093 IIED Critical reflections from practice ................................................................■PLA Notes 23: Jun 1995 US$18.00 6092 IIED Participatory approaches to HIV/AIDs programmes ..................................■RRA Notes 21: Nov 1994 US$18.00 6090 IIED Participatory tools and methods in urban areas ......................................■RRA Notes 20: Apr 1994 US$18.00 6089 IIED Livestock ........................................................................................................■RRA Notes 19: Feb 1994 US$18.00 6088 IIED Training..........................................................................................................■RRA Notes 16 Jul 1992 US$18.00 6085 IIED Applications for health ................................................................................■RRA Notes 15: May 1992 US$18.00 6084 IIED Wealth ranking ............................................................................................■For a full list of RRA/PLA Notes back issues available to buy please visit our website www.planotes.org or contact Earthprint Ltd

Return to: Earthprint Ltd. P.O. Box 119, Stevenage, Hertfordshire SG1 4TP, UK. Tel: +44 (0)1438 748111; Fax: +44 (0)1438 748844; Email: [email protected]; Website: www.planotes.org or www.earthprint.comFirst Name: Surname:

Organisation:

Address:

Postal Code/PO Box: Country:

Tel: Fax: Email:

Save 15% by ordering a full set of back copies (PLA/RRA Notes 1-49 US $780.00)Please note that due to cost restrictions we are unable to supply, or respond to requests for, free copies of back issues.Shipping charges: UK US$5 for the first item; US$2.50 for each additional item; Europe US$6 for the first item; US$3 foreach additional item Rest of the world US$10 for the first item; US$5 for each additional item.

Payment information■■ I enclose an international money order or US$ cheque drawn on a US bank account to the value of: ■■ I enclose a UK cheque to the value of (use an exchange rate of US$1.50 to £1):

Cheques should be made payable to Earthprint Limited

Please debit my credit card to the value of: ■■ VISA ■■ Mastercard ■■ American Express

Credit Card Number: Expiry Date:

Holder’s Name: Signature:

Card Address (if different from above):■■ Please send my institution an invoice

planotes theme issue order form

planotes

4646 4646 46 46 46 46 46 46


February 2003

Participatory processes

for policy change

planotes

4747 4747 47 47 47 47 47 47


August 2003

General issue

planotes4848 4848 48 48 48 48 48 48


December 2003

Learning and teaching

participation

£

£

US$

Do you wish your details to be disclosed to others? Yes/No


NOTES


Guidelines for contributorsFor a full set of guidelines, visit our web-site www.planotes.org or contact us atthe address below.

Types of material accepted • Articles: max. 2500 words plus illustra-

tions – see below for guidelines.• Feedback: letters to the editor, or

longer pieces (max. 1500 words) whichrespond in more detail to articles.

• Tips for trainers: training exercises, tipson running workshops, reflections onbehaviour and attitudes in training,etc., max. 1000 words.

• In Touch: short pieces on forthcomingworkshops and events, publications,and online resources. We welcome accounts of recent expe-

riences in the field (or in workshops) andcurrent thinking around participation,and particularly encourage contributionsfrom practitioners in the South. Articlesshould be co-authored by all those engaged in the research, project, or programme.

In an era in which participatory ap-proaches have often been viewed as apanacea to development problems orwhere acquiring funds for projects hasdepended on the use of such methodolo-gies, it is vital to pay attention to thequality of the methods and process ofparticipation. Whilst we will continue topublish experiences of innovation in thefield, we would like to emphasise theneed to analyse the limitations as well asthe successes of participation. PLA Notesis still a series whose focus is method-ological, but it is important to give moreimportance to issues of power in theprocess and to the impact of participa-tion, asking ourselves who sets theagenda for participatory practice. It isonly with critical analysis that we can fur-ther develop our thinking around partici-patory learning and action.

We particularly favour articles whichcontain one or more of the following elements: • an innovative angle to the concepts of

participatory approaches or theirapplication;

• critical reflections on the lessonslearned from the author’s experiences;

• an attempt to develop new methods,or innovative adaptations of existingones;

• consideration of the processes involvedin participatory approaches;

longer able to provide a document deliv-ery service. However, practical informa-tion and support on participation indevelopment is still available from thevarious members of the RCPLA Network.

This initiative is a global network ofresource centres for participatory learningand action, which brings together 15organisations from Africa, Asia, SouthAmerica, and Europe. The RCPLA Networkis committed to information sharing andnetworking on participatory approaches.

Each member is itself at the centre of aregional or national network. Membersshare information about activities in theirrespective countries, such as trainingprogrammes, workshops and key events,as well as providing PLA informationfocused on the particular fields in whichthey operate.

As part of the devolution process, TomThomas, of Praxis, India has beenappointed as network coordinator by theRCPLA steering committee. Moreinformation, including regular updates onRCPLA activities, can be found in the InTouch section of PLA Notes, or by visitingwww.rcpla.org, or contacting:

Praxis, Delhi Office, C-75 SouthExtension, Part II, New Delhi, 110 049,India. Tel/fax: +91 11 5164 2348-51; Email: [email protected] [email protected]

Participation at IDSParticipatory approaches andmethodologies are also a focus for theParticipation Group at the Institute ofDevelopment Studies, University of Sussex,UK. This group of researchers andpractitioners are involved in sharingknowledge, in strengthening capacity tosupport quality participatory approaches,and in deepening understanding ofparticipatory methods, principles, andethics. It focuses on South-South sharing,exchange visits, information exchange,action research projects, writing, andtraining. Services include a ParticipationResource Centre (open weekdays) with anonline database detailing materials held.The Group also produces a newsletter andoperates an email distribution list.

For further information please contact:Jane Stevens, IDS, University of Sussex,Brighton BN1 9RE, UK. Tel: +44 1273 678690;Fax: +44 1273 621202;Email: [email protected]: www.ids.ac.uk

• an assessment of the impacts of a participatory process;

• potentials and limitations of scaling upand institutionalising participatory ap-proaches; and,

• potentials and limitations of participa-tory policy-making processes.

Language and style Please try to keep contributions clear andaccessible. Sentences should be short andsimple. Avoid jargon, theoretical terminol-ogy, and overly academic language. Ex-plain any specialist terms that you do useand spell out acronyms in full.

AbstractsPlease include a brief abstract with yourarticle (circa. 150-200 words).

ReferencesIf references are mentioned, please in-clude details. PLA Notes is intended to beinformal, rather than academic, so refer-ences should be kept to a minimum.

Photographs and drawingsThese should have captions and the name(s)of the author(s)/photographer clearly writ-ten on the back. If you are sending elec-tronic files, please make sure that thephotos/drawings are scanned at a highenough resolution for print (300 dpi) andinclude a short caption and credit(s).

FormatWe accept handwritten articles but pleasewrite legibly. Typed articles should bedouble-spaced. Please keep formatting assimple as possible. Avoid embedded codes(e.g. footnotes/endnotes, page justifica-tion, page numbering).

Submitting your contributionContributions can be sent on paper, byemail, or on disk. We use Word 6 for Win-dows, but can read most other word pro-cessing packages. If you are sending adisk, please include a hard copy of the ar-ticle as well. Contributions should be sentto: The Editor, PLA Notes, IIED,3 Endsleigh Street, London WC1 0DD, UK.Fax: +44 20 7388 2826 Email: [email protected] Website: www.planotes.org

Resource Centres for Participatory Learningand Action (RCPLA) NetworkSince June 2002, the IIED Resource Centrefor Participatory Learning and Action is no

planotesparticipatory learning and action

4949 49 4949 49 49 49 49 49

ISSN: 1357-938XISBN 1 84369 504 9

International Institute for Environment and Development3 Endsleigh StreetLondon WC1H 0DD, UK

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7388 2117Fax: +44 (0) 20 7388 2826Email: [email protected] Notes website: www.planotes.orgIIED website: www.iied.org

PLA Notes is the world’s leading informal journal on participatoryapproaches and methods. It draws on the expertise of guest editorsto provide up-to-the minute accounts of the development and useof participatory methods in specific fields. Since its first issue in1987, PLA Notes has provided a forum for those engaged inparticipatory work – community workers, activists, and researchers –to share their experiences, conceptual reflections andmethodological innovations with others, providing a genuine ‘voicefrom the field’. It is a vital resource for those working to enhancethe participation of ordinary people in local, regional, national, andinternational decision making, in both South and North.

Municipal Rural Development Plans in Brazil: Working within the politics of participation

Documents

Transcript of Municipal Rural Development Plans in Brazil: Working within the politics of participation