Empowerment and Participation in Community Development

EMPOWERMENT AND PARTICIPATION IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT A Term Paper Presented to Dr. Zenaida L. Micayabas Faculty of the Community Development Department College of Public Affairs Mindanao State University Marawi City In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Course CD 100 – Cc (Introduction to Community Development) First Semester, AY 2014-2015 by DIANNE G. POGOSA September 29, 2014  Title: EMPOWERMENT AND PARTICIPATION IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Thesis Statement: Participation and empowerment are key factors in sustainable development; local ‘ownership’ is essential to sustain capacity but depends on wide-spread participation, which in turn requires empowerment. Outline: Empowerment Root Word of Empowerment Power Definition of Power Sources of Power Multiple Forms of Power Other Kinds of Power Definition of Empowerment Processes for People Empowerment Participation Definition of Participation Ten Key Ideas about Participation Aspects of Participation “Nine Plagues” of Community Participation “Twelve Commandments” of Community Participation Importance of Empowerment and Participation in Community Development CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION There is widespread agreement that empowerment, as understood and promoted in the context of development and poverty reduction, is a multidimensional and interdependent process involving social, political, economic and legal changes that will enable people living in poverty and marginalisation to participate meaningfully in shaping their own futures (Alsop, Bertelsen et al. 2006; Eyben, Cornwall et al. 2008). Without genuine empowerment, participation can quickly become a token exercise or even a means of maintaining power relations; and without meaningful participation, empowerment can remain an empty, unfulfilled promise (Cornwall and Brock 2005). Empowerment and participation are deeply complementary and can be considered means and ends, processes and outcomes. The main objective of this paper is to give sufficient information about the background and principles behind empowerment and participation. This study also tries to find out on how these ideas are being used in community development. This paper focuses and limits on the basic ideas of empowerment and participation, the current problems being faced by the communities in terms of these concepts, and the possible methods to be used in solving these problems. The researcher gathered the information through the use of library sources such as books and which served as the primary sources of the paper and the internet as the secondary sources. Also, the conclusions made by the researcher will be based from the summary of references used and from the collected readings gathered.  CHAPTER II Currently “empowerment” is the term favored to convey the idea of people becoming the agents [of] their own development. Whatever it is called, this is a complex and rather difficult concept. The source of difficulty is that it has a normative dimension as well as an empirical dimension. Normatively, saying that people have been “empowered” means that they have become better able to shape their own lives, which is a goal that everyone has reason to value. From a more empirical perspective, “empowerment” means gaining a number of factors that make this goal achievable. So it counts as “empowering” when individuals acquire key abilities (literacy) or psychological traits (self-confidence), or when, together, they acquire organizational capacity to acquire needed resources or improve local conditions. It also counts as “empowering” when their social institutions become less domineering of them and more inclusive, or, indeed, when democratic rights are introduced or become better respected and supported. In other words, “empowerment” can refer to two sorts of change, either making gains in the extent to which they can and do shape their lives for the better, or making gains in possessing the means to do so (Drydyk, 2007). However, empowerment does not stand alone without power. Power serves as a very important tool in empowering people. Power involves ability to affect external events/ forces/ decisions. It is best understood as aspect of relationships or interrelationships (can be resisted as well as acquiesced to). It is also contextual: may have power in some situations/ roles & not others. Power deals with relationships (Citizen Participation and Empowerment, 2006). According to Lukes (1974) power may occur in several levels and this clarifies the understanding of the term and also its relationship to community organization. At the level of individual, power refers to the ability to make decisions, at the organization level power involves the shared leadership and common decision making. The possibility of empowerment depends on two things – empowerment requires that power can change and expand (Czuba, 1999). Empowerment is a process that fosters power (that is, the capacity to implement) in people, for use in their own lives, their communities, and in their society, by acting on issues that they define as important (Czuba, 1999). Power is often related to our ability to make others do what we want, regardless of their own wishes or interests (Weber, 1946). Traditional social science emphasizes power as influence and control, often treating it as a commodity or structure divorced from human action (Lips, 1991). Nelmida-Miclat (1993) enumerated the different sources of power: (1) Freedom is present when a free man has the power to carve his own destiny as he is not inhibited or prevented to think and plot the ways and means for him to achieve his goal in life and be able to realize his God-given potentials; (2) Knowledge and Wisdom is a source of power, because persons with vast knowledge and wisdom can wield power since people look up to them in awe and faith, as well as respect these individuals; (3) Mental and Moral Efficacy can wield power through the sheer brilliance of the people who have these because they can influence the thinking of other people and their behavior to the desired positive end; (4) Capability for Leadership Roles is a source of power, since some individuals have the charisma and leadership capabilities that enable them to make people act and follow them; (5) Ability to Act or Produce an Effect as a source of power is present to those achievers who can act and deliver the goods because as role models, they have the power to influence and modify behavior patterns for productive pursuits; (6) Prestige and Wealth are obtained with people who are in the center of power. They can make or unmake a person because of their powerful connections; (7) Possession of Authority and Control over Others are being hold by the government officials through the virtue of authority attached to their positions since their policies and decisions have great effect on people’s lives; and (8) Physical Might as Controlling a Group of Armed Persons is shown from those people whose power emanates from the barrel of a gun. Because of these definitions and sources, power has multiple forms. The first form is based on its types, which are the following: (1) Power Over, or the capacity to dominate others; (2) Power To, or ability for self-direction to pursue goals; and (3) Power From, or the ability to resist power exerted by others. In addition, Integrative Power is the capacity to build groups, bind people together and inspire loyalty or “people power” (Citizen Participation and Empowerment, 2006). One of the most notable studies on power was conducted by social psychologists John French and Bertram Raven in 1959. They identified five bases of power: (1) Reward Power is controlling valued rewards that can be used to shape others’ behavior; (2) Coercive Power is capacity to punish; (3) Legitimate Power is based on role/position of one over another; (4) Expert Power is based on knowledge/skill; and (5) Referent Power is based on interpersonal connection or a shared social identity (Citizen Participation and Empowerment, 2006). Just like any other term, empowerment has a lot of definitions. According to Agrimelda Nelmida-Miclat (1993), it is the process of releasing the potentials of people through appropriate programs, services and strategies; removing blocks that deter their growth and development and accessing them for the enhancement of their highest capabilities that they would be freed from the fetters of poverty, ignorance, depression, social injustice and fear to stand up for their rights and pursuits happiness as a member of a free and just society. It entails the transfer of power to the people for decision-making and policy formulation, focuses on the development of marginalized individuals in the community to participate in all spheres of decision-making, and occurs when people realise that they can make a contribution or solve problems, and they have a right and responsibility to do so. Community empowerment, therefore, is more than the involvement, participation or engagement of communities. It implies community ownership and action that explicitly aims at social and political change. Community empowerment is a process of re-negotiating power in order to gain more control. It recognizes that if some people are going to be empowered, then others will be sharing their existing power and giving some of it up (Baum, 2008). Power is a central concept in community empowerment and health promotion invariably operates within the arena of a power struggle (A Fairer World, 2007). People should be given opportunities to acquire the other positive sources of power as freedom, knowledge and wisdom, mental and moral efficacy, capabilities for leadership roles and abilities to achieve their goals and dreams. They should be assisted to realize their highest potentials as active and contributing members of society. These are the suggested processes for people empowerment: (1) Identify the blocks that hinder people’s growth and development; (2) Removal of the blocks to growth and development; (3) Releasing the potentials of people; and (4) Accessing the people for the enhancement of their potentials to its higher and productive level. Such learning and productive opportunities are the following: (a) A wide latitude to make decisions on matters that would affect their interests and welfare; (b) Access to attain capability building; (c) Access to greater economic resources as bigger loans that would not require stringent requirements to provide people capital investments through the cooperative concept; (d) Access to technological knowledge and modern equipments to boost production; (e) Access to higher institutions of learning with quality education and value inculcation; and (f) Spiritual enhancement seminars (Nelmida-Miclat, 1993). On the contrary, participation is one of the most important things that a community must have in order to achieve development. Communities are playing an active part and have a significant degree of power and influence (Burns, D., F. Heywood, et al., 2004). Participation also refers to the real sharing of each person in being a relevant actor in the society and the involvement in shaping, implementing and evaluating programs and sharing the benefits (Rifkin, S., M. Kangere, 2002). Participation is an active process where intended beneficiaries influence program[me] outcomes and gain personal growth (Oakley, 1989). Community participation means some form of involvement of people, with similar needs and goals, in decisions affecting their lives. Charles Abrams defines community participation as, “[t]he theory that the local community should be given an active role in programs and improvements directly affecting it”. It is only rational to give control of affairs and decisions to people most affected by them. Besides, since no government or authority has the means to solve all the public problems adequately, it is necessary to involve people in matters that affect them (Abrams, 1971). Wilcox (2002) provided the Ten Key Ideas about Participation. The first one is the level of participation. In 1969, Sherry Arnstein proposed an eight-step Ladder of Participation which relates to the stance an organisation promoting participation may take. The ladder has three (3) main typologies. The first typology is Non-Participation, which refers to the absence of negligible amount of power exercised by the “have not” citizens in the process of their involvement. This typology is located at the lowest part of the ladder. This includes manipulation and therapy. The second typology is the Tokenism or Token Participation. This is located at the middle of the ladder. The symbolic participation includes information, consultation and placation. The third and the highest level of participation is Real Participation or Citizen Power. It is the genuine participation where the “have nots” exercise great amount of power or is already fully autonomous. This includes partnership, delegation and citizen control. Practitioners consulted during development of the guide felt strongly that information-giving and consultation are often wrongly presented as participation. This can lead to disillusionment among community interests, or pressure for more involvement with the potential for conflict and delay. The second key idea is initiation and process. It deals with situations where someone, or some organisation, seeks to involve others at some level: that is, participation doesn’t just happen, it is initiated. The practitioner then manages a process over time, and allows others involved more or less control over what happens. In the guide the process is described during four phases: Initiation - Preparation - Participation - Continuation. The third key idea is control. The initiator is in a strong position to decide how much or how little control to allow to others - for example, just information, or a major say in what is to happen. This decision is equivalent to taking a stand on the ladder – or adopting a stance about the level of participation. The next is power and purpose. Understanding participation involves understanding power: the ability of the different interests to achieve what they want. Power will depend on who has information and money. It will also depend on people’s confidence and skills. Many organisations are unwilling to allow people to participate because they fear loss of control: they believe there is only so much power to go around, and giving some to others means losing their own. However, there are many situations when working together allows everyone to achieve more than they could on their own. These represent the benefits of participation. The fifth idea is the role of the practitioner. Because the practitioners control much of what happens it is important they constantly think about the part they are playing. It may be difficult for a practitioner both to control access to funds and other resources and to play a neutral role in facilitating a participation process. The sixth key idea is the stakeholders and community. The term community often masks a complex range of interests, many of whom will have different priorities. Some may wish to be closely involved in an initiative, others less so. The guide suggests it is more useful to think of stakeholders - that is, anyone who has a stake in what happens. It does not follow that everyone affected has an equal say; the idea of the ladder is to prompt thinking about who has most influence. The seventh key idea is partnership. It is useful when a number of different interests willingly come together formally or informally to achieve some common purpose. The partners don’t have to be equal in skills, funds or even confidence, but they do have to trust each other and share some commitment. This takes time. The eighth key idea is commitment. It is the other side of apathy: people are committed when they want to achieve something, apathetic when they don’t. People care about what they are interested in, and become committed when they feel they can achieve something. If people are apathetic about proposals, it may simply be that they don't share the interests or concerns of those putting forward the plans. The ninth idea is ownership of ideas. People are most likely to be committed to carry something through if they have a stake in the idea. One of the biggest barriers to action is ‘not invented here’. The antidote is to allow people to say ‘we thought of that’. In practice that means running brainstorming workshops, helping people think through the practicality of ideas, and negotiating with others a result which is acceptable to as many people as possible. The last key idea is confidence and capacity. Ideas and wish lists are little use if they cannot be put into practice. The ability to do that depends as much on people's confidence and skills as it does on money. Many participation processes involve breaking new ground - tackling difficult projects and setting up new forms of organisations. It is unrealistic to expect individuals or small groups suddenly to develop the capability to make complex decisions and become involved in major projects. They need training - or better still the opportunity to learn formally and informally, to develop confidence and trust in each other. The different aspects of participation are as follows: concerns for the social, economic, political and cultural issues; implies a process of raising critical consciousness of people about their problems at national and international levels; and requires communications and access to information. Broad-based participation at the local level is the key to articulating the aspirations of the poor and of mobilizing their energies. Participation is both a means and an end. As an end, the participation of people in the broad spectrum of affairs which concern them is an expression of their worth and rightful place in the society. As a means, it serves as a mechanism for mobilizing resources, labor, ideas, and motivation for promoting community welfare and development. People can participate as recipients in a welfare program, as implementers of programs and as participants in project monitoring and evaluation. There are instances that community workers encounter various problems in terms of the participation of the residents in the community. As cited in UniteForSight.com, there are “Nine Plagues” of Community Participation which are considered to be the common hindrances in community participation. These are the following: (1) the paternalistic role of development professionals, wherein it creates a dangerous power dynamic in which foreign “experts” claim entitlement to the final say during project design and implementation. They monopolize decision-making, manipulate the needs of the community to match their preconceived notions of the community’s deficiencies, and trivialize community members’ perspectives; (2) the inhibiting and prescriptive role of the state, in which Botes and van Rensburg assert that, for the state, community participation programs are often more about “maintaining existing power relations in society and ensuring the silence of the poor,” as well as “legitimizing the political system … as a form of social control.” Participatory programs should work to improve the well-being of the destitute and produce alternative, more democratic, more empowering decision-making models; (3) the over-reporting of development successes. This plague is pretty easy to fix, yet is committed often. Those involved in development prefer to accentuate their successes while glazing over their faults. This is for the simple reason that “[s]uccess is rewarded, whereas failure, however potentially informative, is not.” Such a frame of mind is injurious in that it undermines valuable information that could be used to improve an intervention’s efforts in the future; (4) selective participation occurs when “the most visible and vocal, wealthier, more articulated and educated groups … are allowed to be partners in development without serious and ongoing attempts to identify less obvious partners.” Exclusion of more marginalized members of the community—often the members who understand best the intricacies of poverty and injustice—leaves decision-making leverage in the possession of self-appointed individuals who may be far removed from the real issues of the broader community; (5) hard-issue bias favors tangible deliverables, which are more conducive to objective evaluation, to the less visible, more abstract achievements of community development programs; (6) conflicting interest groups within end-beneficiary communities concerns the conflict that can arise between disparate interest groups when development projects introduce scarce resources and rare opportunities for growth and change. Dissonance amongst community constituents, competition, and lack of shared vision causes difficulties in the identification of project goals and objectives; (7) gate-keeping by local elites. If a local leader or group leadership authority in a particular community interposes itself between the development agency and the project beneficiaries to maintain power, the outside organization may have difficulty ensuring that the best interests of the community members are being pursued; (8) excessive pressures for immediate results: the accentuation of product at the expense of process. As Botes and van Rensburg acknowledge, “[t]here is always a tension between the imperatives of delivery (product) and community participation (process), between the cost of time and the value of debate and agreement.” This overwhelming pressure for immediate outcomes hampers emphasis on institution-building and pushes poverty reduction programs into the realm of welfare and relief. Such an exigent stress on rapid results sometimes goads developers to finish the projects quickly at the expense of forgoing community involvement; and (9) the lack of public interest in becoming involved. This plague has two dimensions. Sometimes, community members do not want to become involved simply because the project does not interest them. This could suggest an underlying deficiency in project design—developers may be introducing a service not needed or wanted by the community. Other times, community members, disillusioned by failed expectations in past projects, may have little faith in the promises of agencies (“Nine Plagues” of Community Participation, 2013). While what works in one community could catastrophically fail in another community, there are several “guidelines” that Botes and van Rensburg propose as steps in the right direction toward achieving community participation. The steps are considered to be the “Twelve Commandments” of Community Participation. Developers should … (1) "Demonstrate an awareness of their status as outsiders to the beneficiary community and the potential impact of their involvement." (2) "Respect the community’s indigenous contribution as manifested in their knowledge, skills, and potential." (3) "Become good facilitators and catalysts of development who assist and stimulate community-based initiatives and challenge practices that hinder people from releasing their own initiatives and realizing their own ideals." (4) "Promote co-decision-making in defining needs, goal-setting, and formulating policies and plans in the implementation of these decisions. Selective participatory practices can be avoided when development workers seek out various sets of interest, rather than listening only to a few community leaders and prominent figures." (5) "Communicate both program/project successes and failures—sometimes failures are more informative." (6) "Believe in … key values such as solidarity, conformity, compassion, respect, human dignity, and collective unity." (7) "Listen to community members, especially the more vulnerable, less vocal, and marginalized groups." (8) "Guard against the domination of some interest groups or a small unrepresentative leadership clique." (9) "Involve a cross-section of interest groups to collaborate as partners in jointly defining development needs and goals, and designing appropriate processes to reach these goals." (19) "Acknowledge that process-related soft issues are as important as product-related hard issues." (11) "Aim at releasing the energy within a community without exploiting or exhausting them." (12) "Empower communities to share equitably in the fruits of development through active processes whereby beneficiaries influence the direction of development initiatives rather than merely receive a share of benefits in a passive manner." Botes and van Rensburg offer these “twelve commandments” not as fixed rules, formulae, inflexible blueprints, or surefire recipes for success. Rather, these guidelines encompass lessons learned by seasoned development professionals. “Although successful participation is very elusive, these guidelines serve as a developmental ethical code of conduct of bringing disparate groups together for the real intention and praxis of participatory development … A reorientation of the thinking of development professionals is therefore necessary.” Such a reorientation manifests when developers see themselves as facilitators instead of agents, planning with and not for the people. Arriving at the development site with preconceived, cookie-cutter solutions detracts from the realization of such a paradigm shift (“Twelve Commandments” of Community Participation, 2013). Because of these concepts, empowerment is important in community development. The process of people empowerment is long and tedious [e]specially for people living in third world countries who have been enured in a life of oppression and resignation. These make them vulnerable to injustice and exploitation. But once empowered they would be a potent force for the country’s development and progress as they achieve for themselves a better life and higher socio-economic goals (Nelmida-Miclat, 1993). The following are some of the key reasons why community participation is essential: (1) Active participation of local residents is essential to improved democratic and service accountability; (2) It enhances social cohesion because communities recognise the value of working in partnership with each other and with statutory agencies; (3) It enhances effectiveness as communities bring understanding, knowledge and experience essential to the regeneration process. Community definitions of need, problems and solutions are different from those put forward by service planners and providers; (4) It enables policy to be relevant to local communities; (5) It adds economic value both through the mobilisation of voluntary contributions to deliver regeneration and through skill development, which enhances the opportunities for employment and an increase in community wealth.; (6) It gives residents the opportunity to develop the skills and networks that are needed to address social exclusion; and (7) It promotes sustainability because community members have ownership of their communities and can develop the confidence and skills to sustain developments once the ‘extra’ resources have gone (Burns, D., F. Heywood, et al. 2004).  CHAPTER III CONCLUSION Empowerment and participation are two of the most valuable tools being used by community development and social work practitioners in achieving development. Just like any other words, empowerment and participation have many definitions, depending upon the perspective being used by experts. Both of these tools are complementary; there would be no participation without empowerment and vice versa. Power is considered to be the force that is behind empowerment. Without the concept of power, empowerment would not emerge. Power has its own set of definitions, sources, forms and kinds which can be used for the welfare of the people in the society. Although there are hindrances in giving power to the powerless, the experts in the various fields that affect communities provided methods and procedures in preventing and destroying the barriers of community empowerment and participation. However, the results of these methods would take longer time to be seen. As instruments of development, people must be motivated and empowered in order to be participative in reaching the community’s goals for the future.  BIBLIOGRAPHY Abram, C. (1971). The Language of Cities: A Glossary of Terms Alsop, R., M. F. Bertelsen, et al. (2006). Empowerment in Practice: from analysis to implementation. Washington DC, The World Bank. Baum, F. (2008). Foreword to Health promotion in action: from local to global empowerment Burns, D., F. Heywood, et al. (2004). Making community participation meaningful: A handbook for development and assessment. The Policy Press, UK Citizen Participation and Empowerment. 2006. PowerPoint Presentation Czuba, C. E. (1999). Empowerment: What Is It? Journal of Extension, 37(5). Drydyk, J. (2007). Participation, Empowerment, and Democracy: More Or Less, Carleton University Eyben, R., A. Cornwall, et al. (2008). Conceptualising empowerment and the implications for pro poor growth: A paper for the DAC Poverty Network. Brighton, Institute of Development Studies. Lips, H. (1991). Women, men and power. Mountain View, CA: Mayfeld. Lukes, S. (1994). Power: A radical view. London: Macmillan Press Ltd. Nelmida-Miclat, A. (1993). The Fundamentals of Community Organization and People Empowerment. Mary Jo Educational Supply, 1993 “Nine Plagues” of Community Participation. Retrieved from UniteForSight.com. http://www.uniteforsight.org/community-development/course4/module2 Oakley, P. (1989), Community Involvement in Health Development. Geneva: WHO Participation and Empowerment. Retrieved from A Fairer World (2007). http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml Pettit, J. (2012). Empowerment and Participation: bridging the gap between understanding and practice, Institute of Development Studies, Sussex, UK Rifkin, S., M. Kangere (2002). CBR: A Participatory Strategy In Africa. Twelve Commandments” of Community Participation. Retrieved from UniteForSight.com http://www.uniteforsight.org/community-development/course4/module3. Weber, M. (1946). Class, Status and Party. In (eds.) M. Weber. Essays in Sociology. Cambridge: Oxford University Press. Wilcox, D. 2002. Community Participation and Empowerment: Putting Theory into Practice. PLA Notes CD-ROM 1988–2001