Block 1

An Introduction to
UNIT 1 AN INTRODUCTION TO Participatory

Management
PARTICIPATORY MANAGEMENT
Structure
1.1 Introduction
Objectives
1.2 Participatory Management and Development
1.3 Philosophy of the Participatory Approach
1.4 Participation as a Process of Consultation
Constraints of Community Participation and Mobilisation
Solutions to Community Participation
1.5 Visual Tools and Materials for Participatory Modes of Interaction
1.6 Approaches to Participatory Management
1.7 Use of Participatory Approach
1.8 Participatory Rural Appraisal
1.9 Participatory Rural Appraisal in the Development
1.10 Constraints for Participatory Management and Development
1.11 Summary
1.12 Terminal Questions
1.1 INTRODUCTION
In this unit, we will discuss important concepts of the participatory management, its
emergence as a new paradigm of management; its philosophy and approaches to
development; participation mechanisms and impact of political system and major
constraints in people’s participation. In the context of the human relationship with the
nature, the focus is on the role of individuals and communities to promote and
integrate their contribution in the conservation efforts and development. The main
contents covered in this unit include, Participatory Management and Development:
Basic Concepts, Philosophy of participatory approach to development, Socio-political
context and constraints of the Participatory Management and development process;
Participation and community mobilisation for the development process; major
constraints in participation; and Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA): as a tool for
Participatory Development.
Objectives
After studying this unit, you should be able to:
• understand and discuss the concepts of participatory management and
development, and the philosophy of participatory approach to development;
• define the concept and process of participation, people’s involvement and
empowerment to promote the development process;
• understand the process of community mobilisation and participation in the
participatory management;
• apply the PRA methods in the development projects; and
• comprehend the socio-political context of the participatory management, and
identify and address some of the major constraints in participatory management.
1.2 PARTICIPATORY MANAGEMENT AND

DEVELOPMENT
In any organisation or development activity not only the designated managers but also
the other support staff exercise their influence over the decisions that affect the
organisation, project or any development activity. In this process, participation of all
7
Genesis and Concepts of the stakeholders is assured, throughout the project cycle, starting from the
Participatory Management visualisation and planning to the implementation and final evaluation and assessment.
Participatory management can improve the effectiveness and capacity of an

organisation involved in the development management thus contributing to good
leadership by the management. It also contributes to an increased transparency in
organisational decision making and implementation of the project activities.
Social organisation is a process of organising the community in-groups to achieve any

collective objective or to fulfill the community needs.
Community mobilisation is a process of mobilising the community for participation in

the social, human and community development process.
Though these terms are always used inter-changeably, they are different from each
other in substance and practice despite having many common features. While social
change is an integral part of development, development facilitates and leads towards
social change.
Development implies improvement, growth and change. It is concerned with the

transition of cultures, societies, and communities from less advanced to more
advanced social stages.
Development involves a broader perspective. It is regarded as a form of social change.

While social change can be considered as a concept that charts the transformation of
societies, states and communities, development is often seen as a planned and directed
social change.
Development, as a form of social change, has two dimensions:
1. It is the vision of those who adhere to the law of non-intervention and argue that
social change will have its own natural evolution where the state will adopt non-
internventionist policies and the market forces will determine the social change.
This perspective has evolved from the natural law and the “invisible-hand”
ideology of the laissez-faire doctrine. It is based partially on economic analysis
and partially on ideological beliefs.
2. The idea of development stems from the vision of society in terms of a planned
intervention, whic h stresses on the utilisation of knowledge and technology to
help solve the problems of individuals and groups. It is based on the philosophical
idea that in applying systematic and appropriate knowledge to the problems
confronting the social system, we can facilitate purposefully directed change for
the betterment of all.
Community Development is the process by which the efforts of the people are united
with those of the governmental authorities to improve the economic, social, and
cultural conditions of communities, to integrate the communities into the life of the
nation, and enable them to contribute to the progress of the nation. This process is,
therefore, made up of two essential elements. Firstly, the participation by the people
themselves is an effort to improve their level of living, with as much reliance as
possible on their own initiatives; and secondly, the provision of technical and other
services is a way that encourages initiative, self-help and mutual help and makes these
more effective. It is expressed in programmes designed to achieve a wide variety of
specific improvement.
8
In brief, the Community Development could be defined as: An Introduction to
Participatory
Management
• A group of people,
• In a community,
• Reaching a decision,
• To initiate a social action process i.e., planned intervention,
• To change,
• Their economic, social, cultural, or environmental situation.
Community Development has evolved from two major forces:
• Economic development; and

• Community organisation.
Participatory Development enables people to address the local issues by forming into
associations. Through this they will be able to plan and act on their own behalf,
encourage trust and self-awareness and enable independence and self -sufficiency.
The main goal of the participatory development is to involve local communities, and
all other stakeholders, by using participatory methods to create voluntary associations
for community development, so that they can identify, plan, control and maintain and
use local resources for greater prosperity. Local associations are part of the civil
society. In this process, besides the community organisations, all other stakeholders
and partners, who may be the potential contributors in the development process, are
also involved at various stages.
Participation is an act of being involved and of involving individuals or groups in
making choices and decisions, in planning, in taking actions, in controlling and
sharing the benefits. Participation reduces dependency by creating confidence, self-
sufficiency and trust.
In community work, participation means that the whole community, including those
who do not usually speak-up, participate in the decisions of the community.
Stakeholders means the people and groups who have interest or “stake” in the success
of the organisation, project or any other developmental activity. This definition of
stakeholders is very broad. Most voluntary and non-profit organisations have a wide
array of stakeholders, who feel that their perspective should be duly represented in the
decision-making, thereby increasing the accountability factor.
Stakeholders’ connection can be:
• legal (in case of the members),

• practical (those who provide funds),
• moral (such as clients, partners, and the public at large).
The importance of stakeholders adds an entirely new dimension to governance and
participatory management and development. Representation and accountability
become core of the governance and management and development process, closely
intertwined with decision making.
Satisfying these stakeholders is nevertheless a complex task: relationships differ, their
weight of influence varies, competing interests must be balanced and conflicting
perspectives reconciled. The result is a complex web of players, as shown in the
Fig. 1.1.
9
Genesis and Concepts of
Participatory Management
Members
Tax-payers Customers
Funders Clients
supporters beneficiaries
Voters Staff
Organisation,
Project,
Development
activity
Partners, like Line

Volunteers agencies
Community at large
The public trust
Fig.1.1: Complex web of stakeholders and players of the participatory development and
management process
SAQ 1
i) Explain in your own words the concept of participatory management and
development.
ii) Explain the following concepts:
a) Development and Social Change.
b) Community Development.
c) Stakeholders.
1.3 PHILOSOPHY OF THE PARTICIPATORY

APPROACH
The effectiveness of the participatory approach to management and development,
depends on the tools we use. Communities cannot be lectured about participation.
They know when they are excluded. So for development workers, for a more
meaningful and sustainable relationship with the poor, listening to what the poor have
to say, allowing to make them sense the reality, enabling them to put it in a shape
what is workable and supporting the actions they decide to take, is part of the
10
development workers’ job today. Since it is different from the development work of An Introduction to
Participatory
the past, it requires other skills and tools. Management
Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) and Participatory Learning and Action
(PLA) are among the basic methods, which are commonly used in the participatory
development and management. These methods make use of specific tools to enable
people to analyse their situation. The tools of PRA and PLA come with a philosophy,
which ensure that knowledge of the people is used to empower them, rather than the
development worker. Both together form part of the participatory process towards
involving people in their own development. PRA has been discussed in detail in the
sections to follow.
1.4 PARTICIPATION AS A PROCESS OF

CONSULTATION
Participation is a process of consultation and willingness to share something and to do
something collectively. Participation is a process, in which, everything, from the
concept through planning, implementat ion, monitoring, evaluation, and maintenance,
should be in the ownership of the people.
In order to elaborate the concept and process of participation, let us review some of
the characteristics of the participation:
• Participation is a way of life.
• Individuals are like the components of machinery.
• Participation demands equality in decision-making.
• Change in the attitude is required for participation.
• Commonality of interest provides basis for participation.
• Combined thinking and struggle promotes participation.
• Participation is need-based.
• Two-way learning process leads towards participation.
• Someone has to initiate the process of participation as an activist.
How to Promote Participation
• Involve people’s time/money to ensure their interest.
• Listen and learn where to support.
• Consult, take collective decisions without hierarchy.
• Follow up.
• Identify common interests.
• Promote solution.
• Reaching the poor.
• Allocate works, promote leadership, and convene meetings.
• Provide appropriate technology to solve and manage collective social and
economic problems.
• By giving equal chance of opinion to all the members of the community or group.
• Call meetings, select activists / people by criteria.
• Take burning issues to mobilise the people.
• Organise people around their rights.
• Form Village Development Organisations (VDOs).
• Mobilise, be punctual, make no promises.
• Set personal examples through actions and deeds.
1.4.1 Constraints of Community Participation and Mobilisation

It is evident that there are a number of constraints which hinder the process of
community participation and mobilisation. At the same time there are strong networks
in the communities in terms of interdependence or cooperation amongst friends, 11
Genesis and Concepts of families, and neighbours. Unfortunately, however, in most of the communities there is
Participatory Management little formal organisation and strategising around community organisations, which
could potentially serve as a means to address their needs.
This sense of immobility and trends to avoid participation in the development process
arises from a number of factors:
i) The misperception among the community members that politicians and
bureaucrats will alleviate their problems, despite the fact that the problems of
corruption and poor administration are evident throughout the world;
ii) Lack of expertise amongst the community to facilitate such organisation;
iii) Lack of will and interest amongst the community members to enhance the
required skills for facilitation of such social organisation;
iv) Illiteracy, social problems, especially lack of access to social and economic
resources/services and poverty among the majority of people living in rural areas
and among the marginalised groups in the urban areas;
v) The unwillingness of the community as a whole to give up individual interests to
form a broader cooper ative;
vi) An extreme shortage of available resources to facilitate the community
mobilisation process;
vii) Politicisation of the development and management procedures and processes;
viii) Traditional cultures, social systems; and
ix) Adherence to authoritarian and non-democratic societies and political systems.
1.4.2 Solutions to Community P articipation

The solutions to resolve such problems are rooted within the resource capacities and
social organisation al structures of the communities. The organising structure
presented here to resolve the problems related to the community mobilisation is based
on the concepts of self-help, encompassing various distinguishing features of
community development theory, practice and ideology. While it is not assumed that
all the problems of the communities can be resolved by community's efforts alone, it
is seen as a means of achieving broad community participation and effort. Through
this means, it is suggested that the living conditions, facilities and services of the
community will improve, along with the empowerment of the community.
SAQ 2
i) Explain the philosophy of the participatory approach.
ii) Write the following in your own words :
a) Process of consultation.
b) Community participation and mobilisation.
c) Solutions to the community participation.
1.5 VISUAL TOOLS AND MATERIALS FOR

PARTICIPATORY MODES OF INTERACTION
Visual tools that reflect local reality help overcome class and literacy barriers and
facilitate the involvement of those usually excluded: women, the poor and the less
powerful. At the agency level, visual materials help participatory modes of interaction,
break hierarchical and disciplinary barriers and forces staff to explore new ways of
12
doing things. It also demystifies planning and researches. Additionally it often marks An Introduction to
Participatory
the beginning of people realising such materials could be used to involve community Management
people in the decision making.
Almost all materials can be used in a participatory way. It is easy to use innovative,
visual materials to extract information from communities for external planning rather
than to empower people to undertake action. Readers are encouraged to relate and
utilise the ideas in the book to meet their own specific needs.
In participatory activities, facilitators keep a low profile after introducing a task or
activity and ultimately they become invisible and withdraw their support at an
appropriate time. The tasks should be simple and the need for instructions should be
minimal. This necessitates much time preparing the materials and thinking through the
process. However during the actual activity, good facilitators ensure that the process
be controlled and taken over by the group to the greatest extent possible. Tasks that
are open-ended allow the emergence of local perspectives, beliefs, values, and reality
rather than eliciting the “one correct answer”.
When the intention is to empower participants, it is helpful to keep the following
questions in mind while designing and conducting activities:
• Is the task open-ended or over -structured?

• How much time and instruction are needed to clarify the task?
• Who is controlling the process?
• Who plays the dominant role in managing the task?
• Who is controlling the outcome?
• Does the task search for the correct answer?
• Who is talking the most? (Facilitator or participants).
• Does the task generate discussion, thinking, energy, excitement and fun?
• Does the activity lead to changing perspective, group spirit or discussion of “what
next?”
1.6 APPROACHES TO PARTICIPATORY

MANAGEMENT
The bases for participatory management and development should be ‘communities
first’ approach and planning/action which leads to the formation of sustainable
Community Organisations (COs).
Field workers using participatory methods achieve community involvement and
empowerment. The methods we use come from a large set of tools developed for
Rapid Appraisal and Participatory Assessment (RA & PA), which have evolved into a
dynamic people-centred Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) approach to
development.
The premise of participatory development is that when community members plan and
act as a group, in local associations, the result is more lasting and sustainable (as
compared to the results using top-down methods of development, defined and dictated
by outsiders).
Full participation of the community members in social organisation and mobilisation
from the beginning will lead to their empowerment and self-sufficiency as members
of the Community Organisations.
The use of participatory tools to empower communities not only helps them to
develop sustainable associations and take action on their own behalf, but also helps
field workers, agency and government workers to understand and appreciate local
communities, local people and local institutions; thus, a participatory approach is
many-sided. The understanding and information gained by the participatory process
are more useful for local development rather than those gained by using other 13
Genesis and Concepts of methods. The active involvement of local people in the process is more productive,
Participatory Management realistic, appropriate, dynamic and empowering than the questionnaire survey
approach to research or the dependency-creating methods of top-down development.
There are many tools for participatory development. The following are especially
good for creating rapport, generating a participatory process, and collecting
information for use in planning and action. Some tools are based simply upon
common sense and are improved by experience. By using combined techniques and
strategies of PLA and rapid appraisal, the field worker -facilitator is armed with a
powerful, flexible and creative tool kit for the field.
Some of the common tools and strategies for participatory social mobilisation are
given below for the guidance of the social organisers:
• conduct semi-structured interviews (SSI) and focus group discussions with
farmers;
• conduct key informant interviews;
• probe for better understanding;
• practice participant-observation;
• use observation skills based on experience to make social viability judgments;
• promote simple community resource sketch mapping by farmers;
• plot water accessibility and distribution patterns and discuss problems with
farmers;
• map water distribution systems with farmers;
• conduct watercourse transect surveys with farmers;
• give farmers a pen and encourage them to do the mapping, plotting and transects;
• conduct a watercourse or community SWOL analysis with farmers, identifying
the local “Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Limitations ” (SWOL),
especially encourage discussion on the ‘opportunities’ and be positive;
• document water utilisation history and practice from oral histories;
• create social profiles and farmer profiles through discussion and social mapping;
and
• conduct simple eye-ball measurements of watercourse systems etc.
These participatory tools and observation-based judgment methods are useful for
gathering information and mobilising farmer associations. But because they are
subjective and qualitative, the data is not very much ‘enumerated’ or ‘counted’.
Similarly, precision and accuracy of information is not essential and fixed blueprints
for mobilisation do not exist. Approximate understanding and flexibility are
undoubtedly, assets.
Certain helper questions are useful to ask at the initial stages of both consultative and
participatory fieldwork (see below); they are open ended and excellent for probing a
topic:
• Use them to avoid simple yes/no answers (yes and no tell you very little).
• Avoid leading questions in which the answers are suggested in the questions (they
are usually misleading or leading).
• Follow up by silently asking yourself; so what? “What am I learning? What am I
hearing about this issue or situation? What is really important there?”
14
• Use probing techniques, then analyse the answer and use your accumulated An Introduction to
Participatory
insight, judgment and good sense based on experience, along with the clues which Management
farmers give you, to raise more questions.
The field worker strives to be a true facilitator and catalyst for development. He
practices a soft, low-key approach that is courteous, informative, supportive, and
helpful. He avoids behaviour that is showy or elitist (For example, he rides a
motorcycle, not in a flashy jeep. He wears village style clothes, not a city suit. He
speaks the local language, not showing off his English). Thus the field worker is a
helper and not boss.
Below are two comparative lists of terms and ideas about the ideal facilitator's role as
compared to the undesirable ruler or boss − like style and attitudes.
Helper or Facilitator Ruler or Boss
An expediter and assistant Bureaucratic, authoritarian
A humble helper and consultant A bossy director, autocratic
Dresses simply like a community

Likes to look superior (wears urban dress,
member and walks or rides local
is driven in a flashy jeep, shows of his
transport or a bicycle or
mobile/cell phone etc.); disregards
motorcycle; walks, talks and community members.
respects farmers
Maintains a low-key, soft approach Likes a flashy approach; drives too boldly
to his work, focusing attention on and noisily drawing attention to him.
the community members and not on
himself
Likes to learn from local Opinionated, has all the answers

experience
Respects local knowledge and Disrespects local knowledge and skills

skills
Encourages participation, self- Does not appreciate or encourage

confidence and independence, participation, perpetuates beneficiary
helps community members do it dependency
themselves
Prefers working with community Does not really like working with
members, enjoys their company community members, not living in villages
Understands civil society and Does not appreciate civil society , nor its
appreciates its importance in local significance for local or national
and national development. development
Is people centred Is technology/bureaucracy-centred.
1.7 USE OF PARTICIPATORY APPROACH

The participatory methods are used in every activity associated with social
mobilisation, group organisation and planning, operation, and management.
You may wish to start with a community mapping exercise to become familiar with
the place, the people and the issues. But give farmers the lead.
15
Genesis and Concepts of Walk, talk and draw a transect map, to focus attention on resource issues and their
Participatory Management management. Let them make the maps and lead the discussion.
Collect information for community profiles. Learn the community.
Put the communities-first. All decisions about forming an association, how to run it,
and how to mange the watercourse resources must be the decisions of the community
members.
Encourage and enable them take action to address local issues, solve their problems
and manage their resources.
Our goal is formation of community based associations that are community-led and
self-sufficient.
As a facilitator, guide and catalyst, you encourage innovation. The more the rural
development is conducted by, with and for communities, the more sustainable it
becomes.
Development by intervention is directed by the outsiders, and for outsiders.
Communities have little say in the matter. This old-style development promotes
dependence on outsiders and outsider solutions. Perpetuating dependent beneficiaries
should not be the goal.
Participation encourages innovation.
Innovation promotes positive development. In innovative development, progressive
ideas and actions are based upon local experience, local leadership and local
management on what works, locally! Innovative development reduces dependency. In
fact, it empowers.
Ultimately, mobilisation will be successful and development sustainable when the
farmers say in a positive voice, with conviction:
“This is our association - we will run it!”
“This is our watercourse - we will manage it!”
“These are our resources - we must look after them!”
SAQ 3
i) What do you understand by visual tools and materials? Explain.
ii) Describe various approaches for Participatory Management.
iii) Write a note on the use of participatory approach.
1.8 PARTICIPATORY RURAL APPRAISAL

Since 1990 various appraisal techniques have gained widespread recognition in
participatory management, development, research and implementation of various
projects. The reason for emphasis on rapidity is that commonly used survey methods
are not only very costly, but also take too long for data collection and analysis. The
participation in data collection is more important because all the key responsibilities
are given to outsiders in the conventional research, rather than community members.
Participatory rural appraisal (PRA) is an intensive but semi-structured learning
experience carried out in a community by a multi-disciplinary team working with the
community. It is an alternative to the traditional research methods, which focuses
upon questionnaire-based surveys and statistical analysis.
Much of what is new in PRA, consists of the approach of the professionals involved.
We should encourage the participation of the community members, believing that the
16
community knows the purpose of the study and will reveal if we are prepared to listen. An Introduction to
Participatory
We respect the community members; show interest in what they say, know, show and Management
do – and do not visit them with the intention of confirming our own biases. We are
patient, we do not rush or interrupt the community members, we listen in order to
learn. We do not lecture, but we provide information that is requested if we have it.
We are humble when with the farmers – respecting their understanding of their own
situation. We facilitate the community members to express, share and analyse their
own knowledge. We are assertive with those who have sent us to learn – making it
clear what we have learnt and facilitating positive and constructive change.
PRA has begun and continues to be acknowledged, as a better way for outsiders to
learn. In answering the question, ‘Whose knowledge counts?’ it seeks to enable
outsiders to learn from rural people and about rural environment and conditions, and
to do this in a cost-effective and timely manner. PRA is an Approach for Shared
searning. It is “An approach (and family of methodologies and techniques) for shared
learning between local people and outsiders, to enable development practitioners,
government officials and local people to plan together, appropriate interventions for
launching and completion of various development projects.”
Participatory Rural Appraisal − A Misnomer:

Participatory more or less.
Rural but also urban uses.
Appraisal but also in identification,
Implementation, evaluation,
And ESW (Economic and Sector Work).
The term − PRA itself is misleading since more and more PRA is being used not only
in rural settings (a recent World Bank study of urban violence in Jamaica used a range
of PRA techniques), and not only for project appraisal, but also throughout the project
cycle, for Economic and Sector Work (ESW).
Indeed, the term PRA, is one of the many labels for similar participatory assessment
approaches, and the methodologies overlap considerably. It is probably more useful to
consider the key principles behind PRA, and its “trademark techniques” rather than
the name, per se, when assessing its appropriateness to particular situation.
The term PRA also refers to some other research methods and techniques, such as:
Ø Participatory Research Approaches (PRA).
Ø Participatory Rapid Appraisal (PRA).
Ø Participatory Reflection Action (PRA).
There are some other research methods, where participatory approaches are
commonly used for conducting social and development research, or to conduct field
work for data collection. For example:
• PLA − Participatory Learning Approaches.

• PLA − Participatory Learning and Action.
• RRA − Rapid Rural Assessment.
PRA: Key Principles

Participation : Local people are partners in data collection and analysis
Flexibility : Not a standardised methodology but depends on time, purpose,
resources, and skills
Teamwork : Outsiders and insiders, men and women, mix of disciplines
Optimal Ignorance : Cost and time efficient, ample time for analysis and planning
Systematic : For validity and reliability, partly stratified sampling,
triangulation 17
Participatory Management 1.9 PARTICIPATORY RURAL APPRAISAL IN THE
DEVELOPMENT
Note for Counsellors
This section of the unit is based on the application of the PRA tools and techniques
for conducting fieldwork and implementation of the development projects. Teaching
and learning of the tools/techniques should be done through simulations; practical
demonstrations and the field training to apply the PRA TECHNIQUES in the natural
and real life situation. To facilitate the students some of the commonly used
techniques are discussed here while minor and less used tools should be verbally
described and discussed by the counsellors during tutorial sessions or practically
demonstrated during the fieldwork.
Grouping of the Key Techniques of the PRA
a) Interviews/
Discussions : Individuals
Households,
Focus groups,
Community meetings
b) Mapping : Community maps
Personal maps
Institutional maps
c) Ranking : Problem ranking

Preference ranking
Wealth ranking
d) Trend Analysis : Historical diagramming

Seasonal calendars
“Basket of Techniques”
PRA offers a “basket of techniques”, from which the most appropriate for the
project/ESW context can be selected. The central part of any PRA is semi-structured
interviewing-that is, interviewing based not on a questionnaire, but on a checklist of
issues, which the PRA team adapts according to the interview situation. The
interviewers guide these interviews informally like conversations. While sensitive
topics are better addressed in interviews with individuals, other topics of more general
concern are amenable to focus on group discussions and community meetings.
During these interviews and discussions, several diagrammatic techniques are often
used to stimulate debate and record the results. Many of these visuals are drawn, not
on paper, but on the ground with sticks, stones, seeds and other local materials, and
then later on transferred to paper for a permanent record.
Mapping techniques, very useful at the start of a PRA activity, involve community
members depicting the physical and /or social characteristics of their community and
the areas of most importance to them, or key informants mapping the extent to which
local organisations interact with each other. Ranking exercises, done either by
individuals or groups, reveal the priority problems and preferences of the population,
or, in wealth ranking, the local definition and indicators of poverty and the
stratification of the community by relative wealth.
Some of the commonly used PRA tools for analyses are being elaborated in the
following pages.
18
Participant observation means, observation coupled with questions of what, why, An Introduction to
Participatory
where, when, who and which type, about the things, activities, persons, relationships, Management
and problems around you. Since this is the first phase for establishing an open and
sincere relationship with the local people to gain acceptance, one has to sincerely
become a learner, keen and curious to know about local people, their ways, their joys
and sorrows. We must become a keen observer of local people.
Observe everything and anything about the life of the people and about their
environment and use this data to confirm hypotheses you have about the community.
Ask informal, open-ended questions, so that data are generated and more questions
arise out of it. An important aspect to keep in mind is how to select people to
approach.
DO’s
Ask after health
Introduction
Purpose of visit
Check time suitability
Speak with respect
Cultural feeling
Speak in local language
Stay sensitive to people’s environment
Don’t interrupt
Use social maps
Find out about: Division of resources; participation; health facilities ; local
population; information of local NGOs; general information; ranking of problems;
find out who can act, local potential; political situation and any other information
related to the project activities.
i) Mapping
Maps can be drawn using open spaces anywhere in the village with the help of
stones, twinges, etc. Historical landmarking is one way of gaining information.
ii) Transect Walk
As we walk through the village, we mark down anything we see on the way, and
ask questions about what we see, who did we meet, what kind of houses did we
see, and water routes, etc. This is later on plotted on a paper and thus becomes a
transect map.
iii) Venn (Chapati) Diagram/ Institutional Diagram
Village agencies like village council, schools, government offices, etc., serve the
people. Draw circles for those that are important, i.e. the size corresponding to the
importance of the agency. The central circle represents the village; the length of
lines leading from this centre point indicate the effectiveness of service delivery,
that is accessibility of the villagers to those resources offered by the agencies. The
circles of different sizes indicate the importance of these organisations and
agencies to the village.
iv) Pie Diagram or Pie Chart
This is basically a circle with sections, that indicate the proportion, for example,
household expenses; how much is spent on medicines, food, etc., to determine
where savings can be made. This can also be used to determine household
income. It may, however, be wiser to start with expenditures, first. People then are
less hesitant to talk about their incomes. Although the information may not be
statistically correct, it does give the field worker and the community member an
idea of income and expenditure. 19
Genesis and Concepts of v) Problem-Solutions Matrix
Several columns representing problems and solutions can be done with
individuals and groups giving a cross-analysis of varying perspectives of existing
groups in the community. Since this chart also indicates the efforts people have
already made to improve their situation or solve their problems, it is a good tool
for planning new action. The suggestions of the community are also represented
on the matrix and so act as a guide to the local planning committee. This tool is
useful for cross-checking information gathered through other techniques.
vi) Ranking and Scoring
Ranking is the prioritisation of the issues or classification, in a community
according to importance, e.g. water, electricity. It can also be done between two
or more issues. The community mem bers prioritis e the issues by discussing
among themselves the importance of each in relation to the next. The problems-
solutions matrix can follow this exercise.
vii) Seasonal Calendar
It can be used to determine how time is used, what crops are grown, rainfall,
income levels, occupations of women, etc., from season to season. For example,
in a seasonal calendar, the daily routine of an old woman and young girl were
compared in terms of activities and time spent in carrying out each task in the
course of one day.
viii)Mobility Chart or Mobility Mapping
Mobility patterns of a person, for marriage attendance, school, job, travel gives us
an idea of movements of people- e.g., frequent visits to a doctor outside the
village could indicate the lack of medical fac ilities within the village. Several
movement lines in certain areas could indicate the importance of the person or
place to the community.
ix) Some More Techniques
PRA makes use of a wide range of techniques. Besides the above-mentioned
tools, in order to familiarise the participants with some other techniques, a list is
given below:
• Secondary data review
• Direct observation
• Observation indicator checklists
• Focus group discussions
• Preference ranking a scoring
• Pair wise ranking
• Direct matrix ranking
• Ranking by voting
• Wealth ranking
• Analysis group discussion
• Innovation assessment
• Construction of diagrams
• Modelling
• Participatory mapping
• Historical and future (visioning) mapping
• Social mapping
• Historical seasonal calendar
• Time trends
• Historical profile
20 • Livelihood analysis
• Flow/casual diagram An Introduction to
Participatory
• Systems diagram Management
• Histogram
• Participatory observation – learning by doing
• Oral histories
• Participatory geneology
• Workshops
• Group walks
• Stories
• Case studies and portraits
• Proverbs
• Indigenous categories and terms, taxonomies
• Rap id market surveys
CAUTION
No PRA will use all of these techniques; the most appropriate and useful set of
techniques should be selected. Each time a PRA is done, it should experiment with,
invert, and adapt methods as necessary.
1.10 CONSTRAINTS FOR PARTICIPATORY

MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
The participatory development workers and management experts have normally
experienced the following constraints and barriers in the process of participatory
management and development work:
• Constraints related to the go al and the objectives of the organisation or project;
• Process versus product;
• Community related constraints or citizen involvement;
• Language, semantics, titles all represent constraints;
• Holistic versus traditional approach;
• Allocation of resources;
• Resources and Processes;
• Constraints related to the project scope; and
• Profit motives.
Other barriers, which slow down or prohibit the participatory management and
development, include:
• Psychological barriers;
• Sociological barriers;
• Economic or financial barriers; and
• Technical barriers.
SAQ 4
i) Explain the following in your own words :
a) Participatory Rural Appraisal.
b) Approach for shared learning.
c) Participatory Rural Appraisal in the Development.
d) Constraints for Participatory Management and Development.
Let us summarise what we have studied so far.
21
Participatory Management 1.11 SUMMARY
Recent developments in the development economics have focussed on the enhanced
role of good governance and in this respect participatory management has acquired a
central position in the development of the rural sector in the developing countries. The
participation of the local population in the management of the local problems of
developments, particularly their participation in decision making process, has become
an effective instrument in the community development leading to complete social
transformation. Their participation in solving the local problems through various
initiatives is a concerted effort to reduce poverty and improve their standards of
living. Participation in the dec ision making process is an important constituent of the
participatory management. This involves the participation of all the stakeholders
throughout the project cycle starting from visualisation and planning to the
implementation, final evaluation and assessment. However, there are constraints of the
community participation and the mobilisation process. The participatory tools to
empower communities not only help them to develop sustainable association but also
help the field workers to understand and better appreciate local communities, local
people and local institutions. Of the various approaches to participatory management
Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) is quite important; these can be used both in the
rural and urban areas not only for appraisal but also for identification, implementation
and evaluation of the projects. Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) is one of the
important tools and method used by the field worker for appraisal and participatory
assessment. PRA and its tools are extremely usef ul to the field worker using
participatory management method to achieve community involvement and
empowerment.
The PRA also includes research methods and techniques such as Participatory
Research, Approach, Participatory Rapid Appraisal, and Participatory Reflection
Action. Other research methods where participatory approach can be used, are for
conducting social and development research such as Participatory Learning Approach,
Participatory Learning and Action and Rapid Rural Assessment.
1.12 TERMINAL QUESTIONS

1. Discuss the philosophy of the participatory approach.
2. Do you agree with the concept that participation is a process of consultation?
3. How can participation be promoted and community involved in the participatory
management and development?
4. Describe the barriers and constraints hampering community participation and
mobilisation process. What are the ways to overcome such barriers?
5. How do the visual tools and materials help participatory modes of interaction and
empowerment?
6. Describe the approaches and methods for participatory management and
development. When do you use the participatory approach?
7. Discuss the PRA as a basic tool for participatory management and development.
8. Describe the commonly used PRA tools. How are these tools applied in the
participatory development projects?
9. Identify the constraints and barriers of participatory management and
development. Can you suggest some measures to remove such barriers?
22
An Introduction to
BIBLIOGRAPHY Participatory
Management
1. Chambers, R., (1997) Whose Reality Count Putting the First Last , Intermediate
Technology Publications.
2. HRDI Module: Concept of Participatory Development and Principles of
Community Mobilisation, Human Resource Development Institute.
3. Pearce, A., and Stiefel, M., (1979) Inquiry into Participation, UNRISD/79/C.14,
United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, Geneva.
4. Shepherd A., (1998) Sustainable Rural Development, St. Martin Press: New York.
5. Uphoff, N., (1992) Possibilities for Participatory Development and Post-
Newtonian Social Science, Cornell University Press: Ithaca.
23
Participatory Management UNIT 2 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES
Structure
2.1 Introduction
Objectives
2.2 Historical Perspective of the Participatory Management and Development
Evolution of PRA
2.3 History of Participatory Management and Development Approach in South
Asia
Introduction of Self- Government System
Rural Development Initiatives
2.4 Summary
2.1 INTRODUCTION
In the first unit you have studied the genesis and concept of participatory
management. You have also studied the participatory rural appraisal (P RA) as a tool
and method used by field worker for appraisal and participatory management.
In this unit the main focus will be on the explanation of the historical perspectives of
the participatory management of development, including its background and evolution
of this approach in South Asia. The main contents discussed in this unit are: historical
perspective of the participatory management of development, background and
evolution of participatory development and history of participatory approach in South
Asia.
Objectives
• understand and discuss the historical perspective of the participatory management
of development;
• describe the background and evolution of participatory development; and
• recall the history of participatory approach in South Asia.
2.2 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF THE

PARTICIPATORY MANAGEMENT AND
DEVELOPMENT
Robert Chambers, one of the pioneers of the participatory approaches of management
and development, says, in his book:
“Participatory approaches and practices enable workers to express and
analyze their multiple realities. Many poor people’s realities are local,
complex, diverse, dynamic and unpredictable. For farming, forest-based
and pastoral livelihoods they often seek security by complic ating and
diversifying activities, and multiplying linkages and supports to exploit
varied and varying local resources and opportunities.
The values and preferences of poor local people typically contrast with
those of the better off, outsiders and profess ionals. They need and want to
be able to take a long view. They can, locally, manage greater complexity.
Their values, preferences and criteria are typically numerous, diverse and
dynamic, and often differ from those supposed for them by professionals.
24
Local people are themselves diverse, with sharp contrasts of preferences Historical Perspectives
and priorities, by age, gender, social and ethnic group, and wealth.
Reversals of normal dominance to enhance the diversity and complexity, to
empower local people, the poor and other w orkers, and to privilege their
realities, expresses a new paradigm (as discussed in Chapter 9 of his book)
and requires changes in the behavior and attitudes of uppers” (Chapter 10,
p. 162).
The above analysis of the human society and the socio-economic development
perspective based on the previously practiced development models, mainly structured
upon the “top-down” approaches, outlines the reasons and factors leading towards the
introduction and evolution of the participatory approaches in the management and
development.
Referring to the impact and failure of the traditional models of management and
development, Daphne Thuvesson (1995), writes, “As the existing system crumbles
around us, new and exciting alternatives are sprouting up in the rubble”. Thomas
Kohn, wrote in 1962, “Probably the single most prevalent claim advanced by the
proponents of a new paradigm (participatory approaches) is that they can solve the
problems that have led the old one to crises”.
How far these ‘claims’ have proved successful is under debate for quite some time,
but the results of the application of the participatory approaches in management and
development and existing realities show that the proponents of the ‘new paradigm’
were not totally wrong in their assumptions.
The 1980s and 1990s have seen a gradually growing criticism on the development
models and strategies, which were followed for the past three decades with only minor
adjustments. The conventional models and strategies have seen development primarily
as a series of technical transfers aimed at boosting production and generating wealth.
In practice, conventional development projects usually target medium to large-scale
progressive producers, supporting them with technology, credit and extension advice
in the hope that improvements will gradually extend to more “backward” strata of
rural society. In many cases, however, the channeling of development assistance to the
better off has led to the concentration of land and capital, marginalisation of small
farmers and alarming growth in the number of land-less labourers, which is simply
widening the gap between the rich and the poor.
Over the past ten years, rapid appraisal techniques have gained widespread
recognition in development research and in planning and implementation of the
development projects. The reason for emphasis on rapidity is that commonly used
survey methods and other data collection and implementation techniques applied in
the development sector are not only very costly but also take too long for data
collection and analysis. Moreover, the participation in data collection and
development process is more important because all the key responsibilities are given
to outsiders in the conventional research and development project implementation
processes, rather than community members and other relevant stakeholders.
The basic fault in the conventional approaches of development is that the rural poor
and other marginalised groups of society are rarely consulted and involved in the
development planning and usua lly have no active role in the implementation and
monitoring and evaluation of the development activities. A vast majority of the poor
have no organisational structure to represent their interests and to protect their rights.
Isolated, illiterate or under-educated and often dependent on rural elite, they lack the
means to win greater access to resources and markets, and to prevent the imposition of
unworkable programmes or technologies.
In most of the countries of South Asia, particularly in the Government sector, the rules
of business of development do not focus on the poorest, for conducting various rural
development and extension programmes. 25
Genesis and Concepts of Considering the background and evolution of the participatory research, management
Participatory Management and development approaches in the academic perspective, the following significant
phases can be identified in the formulation and development of these approaches:
• Contribution of the scholars and researchers who were involved in ethnographic

research;
• Development and application of rapid assessment procedures;
• Adoption of participatory rapid/rural appraisal techniques;
• Introduction and use of rapid rural appraisal tools and methods;
• A vigorous development and application of the farming system research; and
• Finally, on the basis of the conducted research, recognition of limitations of
“green revolution” and transfer of technology
2.2.1 Evolution of PRA

Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) evolved from a series of qualitative,
multidisciplinary approaches to learning about local-level conditions, environment
and local peoples’ perspectives, including Rapid Rural Appraisal, and Agro-eco-
system Analysis. The pioneers of PRA development have been NGOs, and
agricultural research organisations, and in recent years the World Bank and other
donors have begun to adopt PRA methods in their work.
The phases of the evolution of the PRA have been reflected in the following Fig. 2.1
Recognition of limitations of “Green Revolution”

and transfer of technology
Farming system research/ Agro-Eco-System analysis
Rapid rural appraisal
Participatory rapid/rural appraisal
Rapid assessment procedures
Ethnographic research
Fig.2.1: Background and evolution of the participatory research, management and development
approach es
Indeed, the term PRA, is one of the many labels for similar participatory assessment
approaches, the methodologies of which overlap considerably. It is probably more
useful to consider the key principles behind PRA, and its “trademark techniques”
rather than the name, per se, when assessing its appropriateness to particular situation.
For detailed discussion of PRA and its various dimensions please see the section on
PRA in Unit 1 of this Block. This is being done to avoid unnecessary repetition.
SAQ 1
i) Explain the historical perspective of the Participatory Management of
Development.
ii) Write a note on the evolution of participatory development.
26
Historical Perspectives
2.3 HISTORY OF PARTICIPATORY MANAGEMENT
AND DEVELOPMENT APPROACH IN SOUTH ASIA
Rural development has been used mainly as a catchphrase and regarded erroneously
as a panacea for rural poverty in Pakistan and many other countries of South Asia and
other Third World regions. Many public sector programmes have claimed to
specifically address the problems of rural people and their socio – economic
development. The experiences and results of the most of these programmes indicate
that the benefits have been distributed disproportionately between various rural groups
even when the programmes have worked well. Also, these programmes have been
‘prescriptive’ and not ‘participatory’. Most of these programmes were implemented
through public sector departments and organisations adopting top-down approaches of
management and development.
The prospective beneficiaries, particularly the rural poor, including small farmers and
the land less have rarely participated in the planning, management and
implementation of various development projects and programmes, mainly run by the
respective Governments in Pakistan and other South Asian states. One of the major
reasons for adopting the perspective and top-down approaches resides in the structure
of social and economic relations in rural areas, where a minority of landlords exercise
most of the power at the local level and influenc e the machinery of the state. The
highly differentiated agrarian structure in many areas in which the patron-client
relations are visibly asymmetrical-acts as a barrier to the direct participation of a vast
majority of the intended beneficiaries in the dec ision-making processes affecting their
welfare and socio-economic development.
One aspect of rural development is political development and the stability of
institutions of participatory democracy. Sometimes, it is sought as an end and
sometimes as a means to economic growth and social change. In Pakistan in most of
the cases, democratic institutions do not exist nor do they emerge spontaneously from
traditional political cultures. They need to be deliberately created through conscious
and planned interventions. A significant part of this process is the socialisation of
rural communities in democratic political behaviour. In this sense, political
development requires a full-time and devoted patronage of sympathetic institution
builders.
2.3.1 Introduction of Self-Government System

The British ruled the sub-continent for about two hundred years as their colony. This
era can be divided into two periods:
• East India Company rule (1757-1857); and
• British Crown rule (1857-1947).
The East India Company ruled the British India exclusively for their military and
commercial gains. It was a period of ruthless exploitation and oppression. Two main
features of this period are given bellow:
• No rural development efforts were made in this period;

• The Permanent Settlement (Zamindary System) was introduced in 1793 for
facilitating the collection of land revenue. But it depressed the peasants and
created a class of landlords. It also affected agricultural production.
A few steps were taken during the later phase of the British rule, from 1880 to 1940,
to alleviate some problems of the rural people. But the aim of the British rule was:
• Collection of revenues; and

• Maintenance of law and order.
27
Genesis and Concepts of Four main features of the British colonial administration and their results were:
Features Results
i) Elitism : Disparity, privileged few and vast non-privileged.

ii) Paternalism : Childish dependency; Cult of prayerful petitions.
iii) Neglect : Meagre allocations for development of rural areas.
iv) Centralism : Non-participation and Apathy.
The status of the peasants, workers and artisans was weakened due to the oppression
and exploitation of the Zamindars (landlords), merchants and moneylenders. Besides,
famines prevailed in the land, whereas there was surplus food before the British rule.
The British Government, during its rule in the sub-continent, introduced many
political and administrative reforms, including the establishment of Agriculture
Department (in 1880); a system for rural self-government (in 1885); and Cooperative
Societies for credit (in 1904); and setting-up of Rural Reconstruction Department (in
1938-1944). But these organisations remained largely ineffective and proved to be
inadequate for various factors, mainly lack of funds, limited jurisdiction and short
term goals, etc.
Lord Ripon introduced a modern framework for rural self-government, with the stated
objective of political education only, without focussing on administrative efficiency.
However, the implementation of the reforms was entrusted to the provincial
governments, which were composed almost exclusively of civil servants.
The circumscribed model of rural self-government was operating throughout the

Indian sub-continent. Looking at the areas included in present-day Pakistan,
practically in all the Districts of Punjab it had the strongest legal framework (starting
from 1883). Some headway had been made in the NWFP and Bahawalpur by 1950.
Significant exceptions were the province of Balochistan, all princely states, and the
tribal areas. Punjab possessed by far the strongest traditions of rural local government.
Not only was this province the first to follow the lead of Lord Ripon’s resolution in
establishing rural self-governing institutions at the District level, but was also the only
province that had established that grassroots village government units known as
Panchayats, a form of village government that the British had resurrected from India’s
distant past. However, even in Punjab, over three-quarters of the villages legally
eligible for the panchayat system was without that system.
2.3.2 Rural Development Initiatives

We will take the example of Pakistan (1947-1971). Like many other countries of
South Asia, the role of the socio-economic development professionals, has fallen on
the bureaucrats and public servants, who are, neither sympathetic nor capable, any
more to act as institution builders. The Pakistani experiment with this model of
political development has revealed inherent contradictions and has shown how the
rational tendencies of bureaucracy operate to frustrate a major purpose it is supposed
to serve, i.e. the development of participatory democracy. Looking at the situation in
other countries of South Asian region, almost similar conditions and scenarios emerge
during the last few decades, especially in the 1970s and 1980s.
After the creation of Pakistan, universal adult franchise was introduced in place of the
extremely restricted colonial franchise. The law of panchayats was extended to the
whole of Pakistan in 1956. Plans were prepared to make local government laws
uniform throughout Pakistan, and an election commission was appointed in order to
prepare the ground for holding elections to local bodies. However, subsequent
government action was in opposite direction; 24 out of 34 district Councils stood
superseded by 1957.
28
A further complication for the development of rural self -government was the Historical Perspectives
experiment of rural ‘community development’ called the Village Agricultural and
Industrial Development (Village – AID) Programme. The government created a
network of new institutions for rural development under Village-AID in 1953; at the
same time it withdrew many of the functions that the local government was
performing. The ad hoc councils created under Village-AID, however, failed to
mobilise villagers because they lacked roots in the people, and the programme was
discarded in 1961.
Village-Aid was the first programme of the comprehensive village development
launched in Pakistan and Bangladesh. This was also the first programme, which laid
considerable emphasis on people’s participation. But the expected participation could
not be achieved due to the lack of proper mechanism. This programme had a short
life. It also heavily suffered from departmental rivalries and lack of departmental
coordination. However, it left rich experiences for the formulation of future plans and
programme.
In 1959, soon after the imposition of Martial Law in Pakistan, the military government
introduced the experiment of ‘Basic Democracies’ as a basis on which local
government was to build a positive role in national development. It was also a system
of indirect rule.
The experiment of Basic Democracies repeated the folly of placing local governments
under the tight control of bureaucrats. Following in the footsteps of their imperial
predecessors, the Pakistani bureaucrats again restricted the independence of local
councils by remaining as presiding officers, chief executives and the controlling
authorities. The experiment of ‘guided’ democracy, or indirect rule, which ended in
1970, left the local self -government system greatly weakened because it was used to
maintain centralised authority and to distribute largesse according to the contributions
made to the election of representatives for the Provincial and National Assemblies.
During this period, the respective governments of the South Asian region, including
India, Pakistan and Bangladesh introduced a number of rural development initiatives.
These efforts created a new environment for rural upliftment through creation of
institutional infrastructure and by launching various projects for multi-sectoral
development in the region. During this phase the public sector projects also tried to
involve the people in the development activities, but the results were not satisfactory
to a large extent.
In Pakistan, after V-AID programme and introduction of the system of the Basic
Democracies, Rural Works Programme (1963-72), was launched. This programme
had origins in a pilot project for community development undertaken by Dr. Akhtar
Hameed Khan as Director of the Pakistan Academy for Rural Development in
Comilla, presently located in Bangladesh.
The basic purpose of the pilot project in Comilla was to assess the capability of the
village people and local government officials to undertake sizable development
programmes in their respective areas and to evolve a sustainable working procedure
for the implementation and maintenance of the projects.
Some of the other significant steps taken during this period in Pakistan, include the
following:
• Union Multipurpose Cooperatives were introduced in 1950 in place of village-
based credit cooperatives;
• Zamindari system was abolished through the enactment of the Estate Acquisition
Act 1951;
• V-AID programme, which was introduced in 1953, was discarded in 1961, before
it could be introduced all over the country;
29
Genesis and Concepts of • Nation-building departments were strengthened and field workers were posted at
Participatory Management the Block and Union Council level; and
• Several autonomous bodies were set-up with the aim of supplying agricultural
inputs, irrigation and flood control, etc.
The Comilla experiment created a new era in the history of Bangladesh and Pakistan,
as Akhtar Hameed Khan, in Karachi also replicated this model in the later period, as
Orangi Pilot Project (OPP). Besides that:
• A number of other rural development projects were also launched on the basis of
this model throughout the country, at various times;
• The concept of Integrated Rural Development came into being through the
Comilla Experiment;
• Institutionalisation of the whole process of rural development was the key word of
the Comilla Approach; and
• The Comilla Experiment has produced a set of principles and procedures on the
basis of which new programmes have been and can be developed for rural
development.
India: 1947-1971
In India, the Community Development (CD) Programme was launched in 1952. It was
introduced, first as an experimental project, and was made a national programme in
1955 and extended to cover all parts of rural India in a phased manner.
It was basically “government programme with people’s participation”. Community
Development (CD) was the first and the biggest programme of comprehensive village
development in India, which aimed at multi-sectoral development, through a single
agency. By the end of 1966, the entire rural India, (comprising 5.5 lakh villages), was
brought under this programme.
This Programme made a deep impact on the rural development in India. Under this
programme:
• ‘Panchayat Raj’ was introduced. Elected panchayat bodies were set up at the
Block (thana) and Lower (village) levels, which have widened the scope of
people’s participation in village development;
• Democratic decentralisation has been effected to a certain extent following the
introduction of the CD programme;
• Intensive area development programmes were introduced, which have helped in
increasing food production; and
• Several anti-poverty programmes have been launched in different parts of India
for socio-economic development of the rural poor.
Pakistan: 1971-Todate
In Pakistan, some of the major programmes introduced during this period include the
following:
• The Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP), 1972-78, which was
based on the comprehensive and systematic (holistic) view of rural development.
Two of its programmes were targeted at broadening its popular support in the
rural areas: land reform, and a rural development programme, including the IRDP,
People’s Works Programme (PWP), and Agro-villas;
• Rural Development Programmes introduced during 1978-88, included: land
reforms; reinforcement of five-year development plans. Rehabilitation of local
30
self-governments in 1979; introduction of Zakat and Usher – religious levies on Historical Perspectives
personal wealth of Muslims; and
• Social Action Programmes (SAP I & II), which were channelled through District
Development Committees.
In Pakistan, during the 1970s, the entire local self-government system remained
suspended since no elections were held. Local self -government was revived during the
1980’s mainly to give legitimacy to an unallocated (m ilitary – controlled) government
at the Federal and Provincial levels. There have been no elections since 1991, and
public officials have replaced almost all of the elected local governments. It is
interesting that while there have been four general elections for the National and
Provincial Assemblies since 1988, the local self-government system has been allowed
to languish without elections. Public servants are running the show in both rural and
urban areas, unhindered by elected local representatives.
This brief historical account of local government in Pakistan shows that successive
governments have felt obliged to establish some kind of local government institutions
to mobilise rural communities. All have sought to achieve this goal under the
leadership of professional public servants, but, significantly, none of these attempts
have succeeded in producing viable local governments. Above all, rural communities,
particularly the vast majority of marginalised and poor people, have not been
empowered to take basic decisions at the local (village level) without dictation (or
prescription) from their traditional leaders and government officials.
The checkered record of rural self -government in Pakistan has highlighted several
inadequacies with regard to direct participation by rural people at the village level in
the planning and implementation of rural development programmes and projects:
• The village (mohallah) is not the basic unit for the Union Council. The
constituency of a Union Councillor does not correspond to the village boundaries:
one ward may contain four villages or one village may have four members.
• Since an electoral unit comprises a face-to-face group, local elections have led to
strong enmities and division of villages into contending groups. It is almost
impossible to have any sort of development cooperation among the village people.
• A local councillor, because of several contestants for the office, usually represents
less than half of his/her ward and cannot effectively mobilise the constituency for
development purposes.
• A grassroots (village level) organisation, which identifies the real needs and
problems of the rural population and which can activate the people to participate
directly in development activities, has not been encouraged or supported to
develop because of the village rivalries and excessive interference by public
officials.
During the same period the phenomenon of participatory development through NGOs
and donor driven programmes started and spread rapidly throughout Pakistan. The
first two major programmes of this nature were Agha Khan Rural Support Programme
(AKRSP), which was started by Shoaib Sultan Khan, in the Northern Areas of
Pakistan, and Orangi Pilot Project (OPP), which was launched by Akhtar Hameed
Khan, in Orangi Town, Karachi. Both these programmes were launched in the early
1980s. Both the programmes were taken as trendsetters for participatory development,
due to the remarkable results and impact.
Later on, especially in 1990s, in Pakistan, a series of rural support programmes were
started, following the AKRSP model, at national, provincial and local levels. All of
these programmes were of the participatory nature and based on the community
organisation and mobilisation models.
Besides these rural supports programmes, in Pakistan, many other projects of the
social sectors, also adopted participatory development and management approaches 31
Genesis and Concepts of and involved the communities at various levels, for implementing development
Participatory Management projects. These projects, leaving aside a few, have proved more effective, productive
and result oriented, as compared to the rural development projects of the past, which
were implemented through top-down approaches.
Bangladesh
In Bangladesh, during the post 1971 period, the following significant developments
were recorded in the community based rural development projects and participatory
management and development sectors:
• All the national programmes of rural development introduced in the 1960s were
continued;
• Elected bodies of Union Parishad were suspended for over three years, which
affected the local councils and their role in rural development;
• The First Five year Plan (1973-78), Two year Plan (1978-80) and Second Five
year Plan (1980-85) were developed and the practice continued in the following
years. But the allocations for the rural areas were meagre;
• Some scattered efforts to develop the marginalised groups were also done;
• Much emphasis was laid on “self-help”, “self-reliance”, and “People’s
Participation”;
• A number of programmes, like Swanirvor (self-reliance); Canal Digging through
Voluntry Mass Participation; Youth Complex; Mass Literacy; Jatiya Mahila
Sangstha and Gram Sarkar were introduced during these years and were discarded
after some period.
• Grameen Banks were also introduced for the alleviation of rural poverty;
• A large number of NGOs started working in the field of rural development during
this period;
• The scheme of Administrative Re-organisation was introduced in 1982 with a
view to developing the Block as the seat of decentralised and coordin ated rural
administration. Upzilla Parishad was entrusted with planning and implementation
of local level plans for village development;
• Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee (BRAC) was established for the
grass-root participatory development; and
• A vigorous family planning programme was launched to control the population
growth and to enhance the community development process.
All these initiatives, especially the Grameen Bank micro- credit programmes and
effective intervention made by the BRAC, produced positive and fruitful results.
These programmes promoted the participatory development and management process
and helped to reduce the rural poverty through community mobilisation, social
organisation, micro credit, skill enhancement and enterprise development programmes
in the rural and semi – urban areas of the country.
India: 1971-Todate
In India the Community Development Programme continued to function throughout
the country in the post 1971 period, with the same objectives, spreading its scope and
area, for helping rural poor and reducing their poverty through multi-sectoral,
participatory and community based development initiatives.
During this period, simultaneously, in India, a large number of NGOs have started
their activities, to promote the partic ipatory development process and for addressing
the poverty issues, especially in the rural and semi- urban areas of the country. The
32 interventions, made by these NGOs, are not only supplementing the government
intervention in the socio-economic sectors, but also contributing remarkably in the Historical Perspectives
poverty reduction and enhancement of the living standards of the poor and
marginalised groups and communities.
Looking at the trends of and the interventions in the rural and participatory
management and development, in the South Asian countries, and analysing,
especially, the socio-economic development initiatives taken during the 1980s and
1990s, it may be realised that this trend would be further multiplied and replicated in
all socio-economic projects and sectoral development initiatives during the 21 st
century. It is hoped that the replication and multiplication of these experiences will
not only facilitate the planning and implementation of the development projects at the
grass root level, but also help in promotion of the quality of life through poverty
reduction, skills and enterprise development, enhancing the income and access to the
social services for the poor.
SAQ 2
a) Explain the following in your own words :
i) Development perspective in South Asia .
ii) Self-Government System.
iii) Rural Development Issues .
2.4 SUMMARY
This unit has highlighted the participatory management in its historical perspective in
relation to the problems of rural people and their socio-economic development. The
focus is on the South Asian countries with an intensive and extensive details about
Pakistan. Prior to 1947, the British colonial rulers in India hardly paid any attention to
the rural development. Their primary aim was to exploit and oppress people, and
collect revenue. Hardly any money was earmarked for rural development. Whatever
institutional structures were created for rural areas remained non-functional because
of the inadequacy of funds alongwith other constraints. India and Pakistan had their
respective experiences with the rural participation and local self -government in the
post 1947 period. Pakistan started with self-government with the law creating
Panchayats way back in 1956 followed by village Agricultural and Industrial
Development; Basic democracies; and guided democracy; Integrated Rural
Development; Land Reforms; People's Works Programme; Social Action Programme;
and District Development Committees. However, most of the rural development
initiatives did not amelior ate the conditions of the poor because of the negative role of
the bureaucracy. The experience with local self -government system has remained in
practice dysfunctional and most of the time remained suspended or inoperative and
was allowed to languish while public servants administered both the rural and urban
areas.
India has had a mixed track record of rural development. It started with the launching
of Community Development in 1952. Some of the important initiatives have been:
Panchayati Raj; Several Anti-poverty programmes; Indira Yojana, Integrated Rural
Development; and Food for work programmes etc. Community Development
programmes have been functioning throughout the country. Development of rural
poor, poverty reduction programmes and mutli-sectoral participatory and community
based development initiatives have been actively initiated. In this whole process of
rural development programmes , NGOs have played a very important role.
However, the rural poverty eradication programmes have had marginal effect in the
poverty removal. Bureaucratic bottlenecks, corruption etc. have belied the goals set
forth in most of these programmes aimed to bring social and economic justice to
people. Zamindar i system, though has been abolished in law, in practice, its 33
Genesis and Concepts of implementation has been circumvented by various ways. Rural debt, rural poverty,
Participatory Management farmer deaths, landless labourers are some of the glaring problems. With
Globalisation and India’s commitments under WTO to liberalise the agriculture
sector, it would have serious implication for the rural poor, food security and
agriculture sector in general.
Bangladesh had its own experience after its emergence as an independent state in
1971. There have been significant developments in rural developments projects and
participatory management and development with a focus on self-rule, self-reliance and
people’s participation. Its important programmes have been: Canal digging through
Voluntary Mass Participation, Youth Complex; Gram Sarkar; Jatiya Mahila
Sangathan, Grameen Bank, Bang ladesh Rural Advancement Committee (BRAC) etc.
Programmes for rural upliftment have continued through successive plans. However,
Bangladesh is one of the least developed countries and is faced with serious problem
of poverty, particularly rural poverty.

1. Describe the concept of the ‘New Paradigm’ in the light of the philosophy of
Robert Chambers.
2. Discuss the phenomenon of transition from the conventional to participatory
approaches.
3. Elaborate the background and evolution of participatory development.
4. Trace the evolution of the PRA.
5. Comment on the usage of PRA and its “trademark techniques”.
6. Do you agree with the notion that Participatory Rural Appraisal is a misnomer?
7. Describe the process of inculcation of Participatory Techniques in the
Development Projects.
8. Write a comprehensive note on Rural and Participatory Development Perspectives
in South Asian countries like India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
9. Comment on the introduction of the Self-Government System and other measures
for Rural Development during the British Period.
10. Highlight the Rural Development initiatives taken in South Asian countries during
1947-1971.
11. Discuss the Participatory Development initiatives taken since 1971 in South Asian
countries.
12. Comment on the future of the participatory approaches of management and
development in South Asia.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Chambers, R., (1997) Whose Reality Count Putting the First Last , Intermediate
34
State Policies and
Programmes:
Environmental
UNIT 3 STATE POLICIES AND Conservation and
Sustainable Development
PROGRAMMES: in Pakistan
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSERVATION AND
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN
PAKISTAN
Structure
3.1 Introduction
Objectives
3.2 Policies and Programmes of Pakistan
3.3 National Conservation Strategy
Implementation Arrangements and Strategy
Operating Principles
3.4 Community Organisations and NGOs
3.5 Institutional Arrangements
3.6 Summary
3.1 INTRODUCTION
In the previous unit we have discussed the role of participatory management in its
historical perspective in relation to the problem of rural people and their socio-
economic development. In the present unit we will deal with state policies and
programmes relating to environmental conservation in terms of sustainable
development.
The most striking feature of the environment from the institutional point of view is
that it is a common property. Community institutions are institutions that manage
common property. Yet most conventional thinking about resource management takes
place at two levels – the individual household and the higher, usually at the
governmental level. Correspondingly, current policies and projects focus on the
individual and public sector management of environment, admitting private and state
property but ignoring common property. One result of such an approach has been
known for several decades as ‘the tragedy of the commons’ – the unsustainable use of
common resources. The second result is that the strategy is inequitable, since the
poorer segments of society depend on common property for substantial parts of their
livelihood. In this unit we will examine. The present policies and programmes of
Pakistan, Pakistan’s National Conservation Strategy, Elements of National
Conservation Strategy (objectives, operating principles and instruments),
implementation arrangements, action agenda and implementation strategy, co-
operation of community organisations and NGOs, structure of community
organisations and support systems.
Objectives
• understand the approaches to development and natural resource management in
Pakistan;
• understand the managerial and representative vs. participatory community
management;
• describe the role of federal government, provincial governments, local bodies and
NGOs; and
• discuss institutional arrangements and financial arrangements regarding
community organisations.
35
3.2 POLICIES AND PROGRAMMES OF PAKISTAN

Exploitation of the earth's resources has increased at an unprecedented rate for the
last two centuries. In the recent decades its rate of exploitation has reached unparallel
level. Human activities are now affecting some of the most basic climatic and
biological cycles of the planet. Pakistan, with a per capita gross national product just
one-ninth the world average, is neither a major global polluter nor a large consumer
of resources.
It is commonly noted in Pakistan that traditional institutions, for the management of
community resources and common problems, have disintegrated or become weak.
There is a direct relationship between these two trends – that resources and
infrastructure are being destroyed because the social organisation to manage them no
longer exists. While traditional institutions for resource management have become
weak, new ones have not been effective. Many specialised agencies have been
created by the Government and the local government have been strengthened in the
1980s but little intervention has occurred that could qualify as institutional
development at the village or neighbourhood levels. The contribution of the private
sector to environmental management in Pakistan is regrettably little: a few consulting
firms are active, mainly in the fields of engineering and town planning but the local
expertise is limited to pollution control.
The government institutions for natural resource management are sectorally
organised, in line with the general arrangements for administration and development
between the Federation, provinces and local bodies. Co-ordination mechanisms for
economic planning and project approval are well established, especially for large
infrastructure projects. But generally speaking, the ministries and attached
departments have limited capacities for analysis of environmental impacts, many of
which are cross sectoral and agencies are not oriented towards joint facilitation of
local development. Much more collaboration and coordinated extension is needed to
promote the long-term rational use of resources.
Pakistan has no overarching policy that has been primarily and specifically conceived
in the interests of conserving and developing its natural resources sustainably. The
Perspective Plan (1988-2003) and Five-Year Plans make scant explicit references to
the environment and natural resources. Yet there are complex and forceful linkages
between economic policies, instruments and allocations and the conservation or
degradation of the environment. In the absence of an explicit policy framework,
economic and sectoral policies have worked at cross-purposes with respect to
environmentally sustainable development and management.
Although specific environmental enactments are few and insufficient, Pakistan is
fairly well endowed with ‘incidental’ environmental legislation – on land use, grazing
control, forest conservation, parks and wildlife, fisheries, mineral development, water
and air quality, noise, toxic substances, solid wastes, preservation of antiquities and
special premises and public health and safety. As they were not enacted with a view
towards environmental protection and resource conservation, these laws lack a proper
definition of the environment, quantifiable standards and implementation tools,
leading to sporadic and arbitrary enforcement.
In many cases, operational regulations under the laws have not been prescribed,
penalties are punitive in character and inflation-depreciated fines are not regularly
revised, all of which encourage corruption. Administrative agencies and the judiciary
lack awareness of environmental hazards and risks. Above all, there is a lack of
respect for the law and a lack of political commitment to enact and enforce it.
3.3 NATIONAL CONSERVATION STRATEGY
36
State Policies and
Programmes:
Environmental
The Pakistan National Conservation Strategy (NCS) is a broad-based policy Conservation and
statement aimed at achieving environmentally sustainable economic and social Sustainable Development
development in Pakistan. The NCS was developed over a nine-year period (1983- in Pakistan
1992) through the collaborative efforts of the IUCN and the Government of Pakistan.
The NCS development process included extensive consultations with thousands of
experts, interested individuals, communities, NGOs, and government agencies. The
final product, according to several observers, is outstanding, in terms of both
comprehensiveness and quality.
The NCS specifies the basic guidelines for an integrated effort aimed at protecting the
environment and natural resources of the country. This broad framework provides a
comprehensive point of reference for all agencies, departments, private sector
companies, financial institutions and donor agencies for undertaking systematic
efforts to bring about an effective change for sustainable development.
To be successful, large and complex endeavours require explicit objectives. The
National Conservation Strategy (NCS) has three objectives:
i) conservation of natural resources,
ii) sustainable development, and
iii) improved efficiency in the use and management of resources.
Although these objectives are comprehensive, their full implications are not
necessarily evident at the outset. Operating principles identify the methods and
approaches that will enable these objectives to be reached. The three main operating
principles of the NCS are to:
• achieve greater public partnership in development and management,

• merge environment and economics in decision making, and
• focus on durable improvements in the quality of life.
Moral persuasion and leadership, social sanction and economic, legal and regulatory
instruments of change – all with their various strengths and limitations – will have to
be applied to bring about a hierarchy of value, knowledge, institutional change and
technical innovations. Two key value changes needed are restoration of the
conservation ethic and a revival of the community spirit.
3.3.1 Implementation Arrangements and Strategy

The National Conservation Strategy is a call for action addressed to senior and local
governments, businesses, NGOs, local communities and individuals. But the
sustainable development of Pakistan is a huge multi-generational endeavour. Where
should we begin? And how should we proceed? It is necessary to set priorities and to
begin implementation from undisputed resource management and conservation
domains. Yet the priority actions must be those with significant wider economic and
social ramifications that would not happen by themselves owing to market or
institutional failure. Strategy implies a combination of hitherto desperate elements to
achieve synergy and understanding.
The NCS seeks to transform attitudes and practices and to influence national
consumption patterns, but it can only be one contributor to inculcating sustainable
and socially productive behaviour. Development will profoundly change the nature of
Pakistan in the coming decades. The NCS focuses on the influencing investment
choices, which are more flexible than the consumption patterns. More particularly, it
is designed to take leadership in investments relating to the maintenance of natural
resources and to increase the efficiency with which critical non-renewable resources
are used. This is literally an investment in having a future, as opposed to investments
for a future return, yet it can pay well in economic terms.
3.3.2 Operating Principles

The three objectives of NCS are comprehensive. Their full implications may not
necessarily be evident at the outset. Operating principles identify the methods and
37
approaches that will enable these objectives to be reached. These principles should be
compatible with the objectives and they should illustrate, in their application, the
approach of the NCS.
The three main operational principles of the NCS as mentioned earlier are discussed
in detail as below:
Greater public partnership in development and environmental management
This operating principle has four components, which may also be seen as four
sequential measures, ranging from a general base of more awareness to linking
channels created and institutionalising participative community management.
• Develop greater public awareness and appreciation of the need for conservation
of natural resources and the quality of the environment, using mass media as well
as the formal education system;
• Promote environmental NGOs and participative community organisations that
can implement environmental conservation programmes and consciousness
raising events to achieve greater public awareness and understanding of the
importance of environmental conservation and sustainable development;
• Provide for a two-way flow of communication between government, community
organisations, and NGOs on matters relating to the conservation of nature and
natural resources; and
• Identify and develop an institutional framework that will enable people in urban
neighbourhoods and in villages to identify, design in detail, and implement
projects and programmes that they desire and they will maintain or improve the
quality of their community and its environment. The structure and relationship of
this community-oriented framework to other public and private institutions
should be designed to maximise co-ordination and co-operation and minimise
conflict, since all institutional components have important roles to play and are
essential to effective sustainable development. This is the essence of the full
partnership between government and NGOs that the NCS seeks to foster.
A merger of environment and economics in decision-making
As economic development and ecological effects are bound together in the workings
of the real world, their consideration needs to be similarly integrated in the decision-
making. This will require changes in the attitudes, objectives and institutional
arrangements at every level:
• Make the central economic planning and sectoral development agencies at the
federal and provincial levels directly responsible for the maintenance of
ecological systems and processes and for the sustainable use of natural resources.
Specialised environmental agencies have a supporting role to play in the
provision of technical expertise. But the mainstream departments and agencies
alone should be held responsible for the impact of economic development on the
environment.
• Set up a programme to identify the minimum requirements in establishing an
environmental quality baseline and begin continuous monitoring of the
parameters selected.
Durable improvements in the quality of life
To provide a focus that ensures improvement as durable and continues in perpetuity,
it is important to match improvements in the quality of amenities and infrastructure
with increase in the efficiency of natural resource use and the quality of human
capital.
A major threat to the ability of the natural resource base to sustain Pakistan’s
population and an improved quality of life is the rate of population growth. Thus an
important operational principle of the NCS is to reduce the rate of population growth
38
State Policies and
Programmes:
Environmental
as quickly as possible. These initiatives entail a significant shift in government Conservation and
development allocations. Sustainable Development
in Pakistan
Improvements in the quality of life in human settlements must involve the efficient
use of raw materials and energy. Their uses should be based on technologies with the
greatest practicable recovery and recycling of materials and on the adoption of
natural processes (e.g., biomass, direct solar, wind and wave power) as a
replacement, complement, or supplement to the use of fossil fuels.
Expenditures required for restoring ecosystems devastated by pollution typically
exceed by at least a thousand fold the costs of pollution abatement measures. Durable
improvement in the quality of life requires control and prevention of pollution.
Preference should be given to the developments that rely on biological and natural
processes rather than engineering or structural works, which are intrinsically capital –
or-energy intensive. Biological solutions are frequently slow to establish and
therefore need to be planned. Once established, however, they have the ability to
operate on low-cost or free inputs, to be self-maintaining and self-replicating and to
have increased rather than depreciated value and productivity over time.
SAQ 1
i) Explain various approaches to development and natural resource management in
Pakistan.
ii) Write a note on the following in your own words:
a) National Conservation Strategy.
b) Implementation Arrangements and Strategy
c) Operating Principles.
3.4 COMMUNITY ORGANISATIONS AND NGOs

Three broad approaches to development in Pakistan exist:
1. The departmental approach;
2. The representative approach; and
3. The participatory approach.
1. The departmental approach
The departmental approach is often used for building infrastructure, such as
schools, hospitals, roads, or a dispensary. It continues to be pursued by various
government developmental agencies. It is important to note that these activities
are usually carried out without the involvement of the people for whom the
services are provided. This unfortunately leads people to think that the facility is
a gift of government; they are not concerned with the cost of providing the
infrastructure or with its operation and maintenance, and end up feeling
dependent on the government. Another serious problem with the departmental
approach is that it does not allow communities to incorporate changes according
to their needs in the blueprints developed by the line agencies technical experts.
There is no mechanism, for example, to either construct or maintain irrigation
water channels outside the administrative control of the irrigation department.
2. The representative approach
Political representation is essential for many purposes, but it is not a substitute
for participation by ordinary citizens in the process of development.
Representatives cannot plan and implement the day-to-day economic activities of
communities. They cannot substitute, for example, for farmers in the organisation
of production, marketing, input supply, credit, and community resources and
infrastructure. At the same time, representative approaches are more often than
39
not divisive and political rather than consensual, whereas consensus is a
prerequisite of development at the community level.
The departmental and representative approaches are not successful in reaching
people and solving their problems. This is not due to their inefficient working but
to their implementation structure and mandates. The Federal and provincial
governments have established specialised agencies for training, credit, input
supply to create broad institutional base at the grassroots level. At the same time,
development agencies are organised on a sectoral or functional basis instead of
following an integrated multifunctional approach.
3. The participatory approach
To make optimal use of grassroots opportunities, it is important that the villagers
and city dwellers be provided with an environment in which they can establish
their own organisations, identify their priorities, organise their resources, manage
their development agenda, and forge necessary links for the on-going technical
and financial assistance by outside agencies. The systems of local government,
development administration, and resource mobilisation are all incomplete without
participatory community organisations.
The most important element in energising this local development is a change in
the role of governmental departments; the government needs to recognise the
potential role of local communities in mobilising capital resources and
undertaking managerial tasks for resource management in keeping with the goals
of the NCS. It needs to pay considerable attention to people’s participation in
their work, and to appreciate that community organisations and people’s
initiatives can complement the governmental initiatives in difficult areas. The
government needs to accept and engage the community as partners in
development, not competitors, for government alone can never succeed in
ensuring the sustainable development.
The government does, however, have an important role in facilitating and
encouraging the development of community initiatives and community
organisations. It can create an environment in which people are encouraged to
find solutions to their problems. It can remove obstacles but at the same time
requires mechanisms for engaging the resources, ingenuity, and sense of
ownership of communities, and a much greater understanding of people’s
priorities.
Overall, the provision of intercommunity infrastructure will remain the
responsibility of the Federal, provincial, and local bodies. In the first phase,
community organisations should emphasise development programmes within
their own communities. In the long run, after gaining experience with small
schemes, these groups can also play a role in the construction and management of
intercommunity infrastructure.
The managerial approach is followed by most of the line agencies and
development projects in Pakistan. The participatory approach is being followed
by the Pak-German Integrated Rural Development Project in the NWFP and
Balochistan, the Agha Khan Rural Support Programme (AKRSP) in Chitral and
the Northern Areas and the Orangi Pilot Project in Karachi (See Box 1).
Participatory models are also being tested by the Pak-Holland PATA Irrigation
Project and the Pak-Swiss Kalam Integrated Development Project in the NWFP
and the by the Hyderabad Development Authority’s Khuda Ki Basti, a low-
income housing project. It is clear that these initiatives are recent and few.
Beyond these formally recognised ones, however, the participatory mode is
common in many villages, where farmers may get together to scrape and
maintain access to a pucca road or to run a custom-based water turn system.
The representative approach is followed in all programmes that depend on the
public representatives (including Members of National and Provincial
Assemblies, District and Union Councillors and political party office holders)
40
State Policies and
Programmes:
Environmental
and in all models of organisations (including official co-operatives and Water Conservation and
User Associations) in which decision-making powers are vested not in the Sustainable Development
general body but in the executive committees, management boards etc. in Pakistan
All the three approaches – managerial, participatory, and representative – should

be part of environmental management as none is a perfect substitute for the other.
However, their domains have to be understood on the basis of their efficacy and
their impact at various scales and levels.
Activity 3.1
What are the state policies and programmes of your country regarding participatory
management of conservation and development (community mobilisation,
participation and organisation)?
Box 1
An example of successful participatory management

The Agha Khan Rural Support Programme (AKRSP) in the three northern districts
of Gilgit, Diamir and Chitral is a prime exponent of the participatory approach.
Some 1100 village organisations (VOs) now participate in AKRSP. The standard
operating procedure for the establishment of VOs is to have the village to identify
a productive infrastructure project. The nature of the project is less important than
having it as the catalyst around which the participatory organisation can form. It
shows villagers as to what they can do when they organise themselves and make
use of their talents. The programme includes sending villagers away on courses
that teach them special skills – veterinary or irrigation techniques, tree planting,
basic management principles or accountancy, or any skill that they lack and are
willing to learn on a short course at a training centre.
One important feature of the AKRSP approach is the insistence that the village
organisation collect money from each member, no matter how impoverished, to
help build a source of credit that the VO can use for whatever purposes it wants
without having to satisfy the criteria and hurdles imposed by banks or
governments. It also gives the members a feeling of participation in the VO and,
since it is their money, they will be inclined to spend it wisely.
AKRSP understands well the limits of community-based management systems
(CBMS). The system works best among small farmers and in small groups.
According to AKRSP: “maximum workable group size is 100; beyond that it is
difficult for groups to manage their activities and decisions, unless VOs or CBMS
come together along traditional organisational structures. The implication is that
for activities such as range management or forest management, involving activities
beyond the scope of individual CBMS, some form of representational system is
inevitable.”
SAQ 2
i) Explain the following in your own words:
a) The departmental approach.
b) The representation approach.
c) The participatory approach.
3.5 INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

A satisfactory framework for collaboration between government and community
organisations involves agreements on the priorities for sustainable development; on
the allocation of resources between government and community organisations on the
41
agreed-upon priorities; on the implementation roles for the government, and on the
approach to be followed in promoting community organisations.
The NCS envisages two sets of priorities, with an implementation mechanism
corresponding to each:
• Creation of institutions for common resources: This priority will be addressed by

NGOs through the support and collaboration of Federal and provincial
governments, local bodies, and other NGOs. These NGOs will be registered
under the laws of Pakistan and should complement and supplement the policies,
programmes, and new initiatives of the government.
• Other programmes for natural resources and urban waste management: These
priorities will be addressed by the Federal Agencies, provincial line agencies and
local bodies, working with the new institutions for common resources.
These implementation mechanisms differ in their relationship to the government
machinery, but they are expected to follow a common arrangement for the allocation
of funds and evaluation of performance, and a common approach to community
organisation – the participatory approach to development.
The most important function attached to community organisations is to fill the gap
that exists between communities and government in formulation, planning and
implementation of projects related to common resources. As these organisations have
to function and collaborate on two fronts, they should be created by arrangements
through which both communities and the government can own them. Community
response towards these initiatives depends greatly on the organisation’s success at
improving the conditions. The government has to take the first step towards the
creation of these organisations with the help of NGOs, and should continuously
facilitate their success by providing financial support and policy guidelines.
Role of Federal Government
Three main functions should be handled by the Federal government:
formulation of policy guidelines,
financial allocations, and
provision of an enabling framework.
The Federal Agencies that can perform these functions, in co-ordination with the
concerned ministries are the Economic Affairs Division (EAD), Environment and
Urban Affairs Division (EUAD), and the Planning Commission, especially its
proposed Environmental Cell, the ministries, will send proposals of project in which
community participation seems necessary to EAD, EUAD, and Planning Commission
to formulate the Policy guidelines, enabling framework, and financial allocation for
the community organisation.
Role of Provincial Governments
All the provincial departments should collaborate and co-ordinate with the
community organisations on the activities and projects related to natural resources
conservation and environment as a whole. Many departments have extension teams to
disseminate their specific messages to the communities. These departments can pool
their human resources and share their experiences with community organisations.
Proper co-ordination between these extension teams and community organisations
will be needed to develop an integrated approach for the organisation and
development of communities. Provincial governments will also make some financial
allocations to community organisations.
The other important function of the provincial governments is to establish provincial
environmental councils (PECs). Sitting on these councils will be senior officers of the
provincial governments, heads of line departments, local bodies, and NGOs. Their
main function will be to monitor and evaluate the performance of community
42
State Policies and
Programmes:
Environmental
organisations, line departments, and NGOs. Evaluation reports will be submitted to Conservation and
the provincial governments and published for the general public. Sustainable Development
in Pakistan
Role of Local Bodies
The most important NCS function for local bodies is to develop a working
relationship with the community organisations. While, preparing district development
plans, community organisations should be consulted about the incorporation of
environmental concerns. Local bodies will also allocate some financial resources to
community organisations from their annual development funds.
Role of NGOs
A wide range of NGOs work in different parts of Pakistan on different subjects, and
they have an extremely important role to play in creating community organisations.
The groups can share their experiences and design joint ventures for broadening their
scope of activities. This support is essential as the Federal provincial governments
work to foster community organisations as part of the NCS.
SAQ 3
a) Role of federal governments.
b) Role of provincial governments.
c) Role of local Bodies.
d) Role of NGOs.
Structure of Community Organisations and Support Systems

Community organisations seek to help people in rural villages and urban
neighbourhoods to undertake development on the basis of participation. Villages and
Lane Organisations (VOs and LOs) are coalitions of residents whose common
interests are best served by organising as an interest group. The VO/LO will identify
the project that would benefit most of the residents and could be implemented by the
residents themselves. In return for initial project funds, the VO/LO members commit
themselves to the discipline of organisation, collective savings, training in use of new
technologies, and implementation and maintenance of the project. All members of the
organisation are required to attend weekly or monthly meetings where work done on
a project is reviewed, plans are made for the future, and savings are deposited by all
members; in short, the VO/LO would be the executing agency for all the village and
lane-level projects.
VOs and LOs can be created by directly investing in the Productive Physical
Infrastructure, as was done for the creation of Water Users’ Associations. A support
structure is crucial for these new organisations, lest they collapse after the
consumption of seed capital. Two tiers of support structure are proposed –
district/city programme offices (DPO/CPO) and technical support units (TSU). They
need to organise communities so that they can generate their own revenue through
savings to solve their common problems.
Five to fifteen technical support units per district and 5 to 25 per city should be
established. Their most important function is to induce the formation of VOs and LOs
as the primary vehicle for all development activities. Their responsibilities will
include conducting physical infrastructure surveys, collecting information on the
status and use of natural resources, performing land use surveys and budget
estimates, and planning. One TSU will cover about 100 VOs/LOs.
One DPO per district and one CPO per city should be established. These will perform
all programme planning and management functions, and will provide initial funds to
a VO/LO as a grant. The main responsibilities will be project formulation; monitoring
and evaluation of research, training, and development; co-ordination with Federal
Agencies, provincial line departments, local bodies, and NGOs; and supervision and
coordination of project implementation in the field.
43
Financial Arrangements
Rural development in Pakistan is highly subsidised, yet the credibility of existing
community organisations has been questioned. In this environment, community
organisations have to establish their credibility rapidly; they have to recognise that
they will be operating in a buyer’s market. They will need the resources with which
to see/approach people through new staff, and institutional partners. The
demonstration of new approaches will need to be subsidised which should be
considered as an investment in institutional development at all levels. With these
subsidies, community organisation should aim at bringing about behavioural change.
But subsidies will need to be phased out over time as the organisation’s approach
becomes acceptable, and as they enter the seller’s market. The NCS financial
arrangements for community organisations are designed with these guiding principles
in mind. Continued funding will be contingent on the performance of the community
organisation.
The best available example of a technical proposal for the creation of a community
organisation is that of the Sarhad Rural Support Corporation, NWFP. Its feasibility
study was prepared by a forum of NGOs, senior Ministers, civil servants, donors, and
prominent individuals in both Federal and Provincial government. The Aga Khan
Rural Support programme served as the focal point for the documentation and
preparation of the proposal. The NCS proposes that the Federal government should
identify such potential NGOs in different parts of the country that can serve as local
points for the preparation of such proposals. Finances for such exercise could be
provided by the Trust for Voluntary Organisations (TVO) under the EAD.
Finances required for the creation of community organisations will be the
responsibility of the Federal and Provincial governments. Once the organisations are
created, they can raise their funds independently from EAD, Provincial Planning and
Development departments (P&D), local bodies, and local and international donor
agencies.
At the Federal level, these finances can be arranged from:
• the EAD resource pool for NGOs (project-specific bilateral funds for NGOs), and
• the Trust for Voluntary Organisations (funds received from donors without any
project title but earmarked for NGO development).
Annual revision to determine the future allocation of Federal funds can be conducted
by EUAD and the Planning Division, with the help of local government rural
development, provincial P&D, and social welfare departments, and of the provincial
environmental councils; the TVO may also want to use these review reports while
considering future financial allocations.
At the provincial level, community organisations can raise funds from the provincial
P&D and social welfare departments and of the Provincial Environmental Councils
(PEC). The result of annual PEC evaluation reports should determine the future
allocation of funds by provincial governments and P&D.
Local Bodies should also allocate some funds for community organisations according
to the requirements of their development projects. At this level, allocation of funds
will be monitored by the district councils.
An independent source of funds for community organisations is domestic and
international donor agencies. The only condition should be that the organisations
show these grants in their total receipts, so that the public sector evaluation bodies
can do comprehensive evaluations.
SAQ 4
a) Explain the structure of community organisation.
44
State Policies and
Programmes:
Environmental
b) Financial arrangements. Conservation and
Let us summarise what we have studied so far. in Pakistan
3.6 SUMMARY
Natural resource and environmental management issues are complex. The forms of
organisations most appropriate to sustainable development are intensely debated and
controversial. However, a broad map of the applicability of various institutional
forms and instruments at the farm-household, community, departmental, provincial
and national levels show that managerial, representative and participatory approaches
are required. Insofar as there is a vacuum at the grassroots level in terms of viable
community-based management systems, a priority for the National Conservation
Strategy should be given to promote such participatory community management.

1. Explain the policies and programmes of Pakistan with regard to environmental
conservation.
2. Explain the objectives and principles of National Conservation Strategy.
3. Explain the role of federal government.
4. Discuss institutional financial arrangements regarding community organisation.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. GoP-IUCN., (1992) The Pakistan National Conservation Strategy.
2. Dr. Qadar, S, and Dogar, A.R., (2003) Pakistan’s Environmental Laws and their
compliance, Lahore Law Times Publications.
3. Pakistan: Support to the Implementation of the National Conservation Strategy,
April 20, (1993), Stage 1, Final Report, Sweco.
45
UNIT 4 MODELS
. OF PARTICIPATORY
MANAGEMENT IN SOUTH ASIA
Structure
4.1 Introduction
Objectives
4.2 Why Models? Are Models Helpful or Not?
A Model of Governance and Participatory Development
4.3 Role of Participatory Management
What is Good Governance?
4.4 Models of Participatory Management with Particular Reference to South Asia
IndividualistlNeo Liberal Model
CollectivistlSocialist Model
Organisational Model
45 Summary
• 4.6 Terminal Questions
-4.1 INTRODUCTION
In the last unit of this block, you have dealt with the policies and programmes relating
to environmental conservation and sustainable development as a case study of
Pakistan. -
The main focus of the present unit is on the evolution and impact of various models of
the participatory management of development in South Asia.
In this unit you will understand the concept and significance and role of Models,
Participatory Management and .Good Governance, and Models of Participatory
Management in South Asia, including the Individualist Model, the Collectivist Model,
the Organisational Model, the Debate Model, and the application and usage of these
models in South Asia. -'
-Objectives
• defme and discuss the concept, significance and role of models;

• understand and discuss various models of participatory development, including
the Individualist Model; the Collectivist Model; the Organisational Model and the
Debate Model;
• describe the basic features of these models, with a special focus on the
Organisational Model; and
• assess the application and usage of these models in South Asia.
4.2 WHY MODELS? ARE MODELS HELPFUL OR-NOT?

If you seek advise on improving governance in any organisation, or about
management of the development activities, the primary concern is "What about
- adopting a model?" or, more pointedly, "have you considered Organisation Model?"
The development management and governance of the organisations generate much of

the debate regarding what is a model? Are models useful? Should a management
board adopt a model?
A model may be defined in a number of ways, on the basis of its nature and
characteristics or the usage, etc.
46
A modelis: Models of Participatory
Management in South
Asia
• A simplified description of a complex entity or process: "the computer
programme was based on a model of the circulatory and respiratory systems."
• Something to be 'imitated: "an exemplary success"; "a model of clarity".
• A representation of a system or process ..
• A representation of a set of components of a process, system, or subject area,
generally developed for understanding, analysis, improvement, andlor
replacement of the process.
• A representation of information, activities, relationships, and constraints.
• A way to represent a system for the purpose of reproducing, simplifying,
analysing, or understanding it. .
,
• A system that describes or predicts an associated process based on the defmition
of variables, rules and equations. A properly defined model enables the analysis of
the possible effects of changes in the underlying process based on the changes in
the model. .
4.2.1 A Model of Governance and Participatory Development

Governance models vary according to how a board is structured, how responsibilities
are distributed between various stakeholders, like board management, and staff, and
the process used for board development, management and decision making.
The strongest model proponents are those who adhere to a view of voluntary .sector
. governance conceived by JOPJ} Carver. Carver, a consultant and author on governance
issues, made a very important contribution to thinking about governance by
developing what he called the "policy governance" model. But the policy governance"
model, like all other management models, is not without problems. Critics of this
model object to the notion of a universally applicable approach to governance and
development management. According to them, a model does not take into account the
realities of human nature and the inherent problems of managing a voluntary
organisation. Also, some feel that the model makes the organisation staff and board
members too remote from the activities of their organisation, and that it discourages
teamwork between board members and staff.
Given the controversy over this model, what should an executive director or board
member or any development worker do - adopt a model, or forget about it altogether?
The research on the models was inspired by the belief that one model of governance
and management/development could not possibly accommodate the great diversity of
organisations within: the corporate or non-profit sectors and could not address the
developmental needs ofthe society. '
At the start of the 20th'century, early proponents of management saw their work as a
quest to identify the "one best way" of doing something; later they came to be known
as the scientific school of management.
However, as thinking about management became more sophisticated, the idea that
'there must be universally valid best practices was abandoned in favour of a situational
approach. That is, the right way to manage a development organisation depended
:greatly on its situation: its business or mission, its market, its stakeholders or clients,
"its history and traditions, and so forth.
The researchers' view on the models' debate is that the discussion about governance
~d management started about seventy-five years ago. The notion that there is one
Universal set of principles valid for all invites development organisations to adopt
governance policies or practices that are ill suited to their
, . circumstances.
,47
r Genesis and Concepts of One of the researches, that examined the governance practices of over 20 different
Participatory Management organisations in the non-profit development sector, highlighted not one, but several
different approaches to governance in the development sector, which could be seen as
. models in a descriptive sense.
SAQl
i) Explain the concept and significance of role models.
ii) Write a note in your own words onamodel of governance and participatory
development.
4.3. ROLE OF PARTICIPATORY MANAGEMENT

Application of various participatory management models of development intends to
promote the condition of the humanity at-large, with a special focus on the conditions
ofthe poor and marginalised groups of the society, through establishing ajust,
equitable, and secure social system. The matter of the fact is that such social system
may not be established without good governance. So, before discussing and analysing
various models.of the participatory management and their application in the South •
. Asian countries, it deems fit to have a look on the concept of good governance and its
basic principles. This discussion would also provide a framework to understand and
analyse the application and functionin&. of various models in the South Asian
countries .
.4.3.1 What is Good Governance?

One goal of good governance is to enable any organisation or institution to do its work
and fulfill its mission. Good governance results in organisational or institutional
effectiveness.
Good governance is about more than getting the job done, especially in the voluntary
and development sectors, where values play an important role in determining both
organisational purposes and style of operation; moreover, process is as important as
- product. Good governance, more than only a means to organisational effectiveness,
sometimes, becomes an end in itself
Since the cultural norms and values of the organisation largely shape the "right way",
there can be no universal template for good governance. Each organisation or
institution must tailor their own definition of good governance to suit.their needs and
values.
. . .
There is plenty of room for different traditions and values to be accommodated in the
definition of good governance. At the same time, all is not relative. There are some .'
universal norms and values that apply across cultural boundaries. The United Nations
published a list of characteristics of good governance. They include:
• Participation: providing all men and women with a voice in decision making:
• Transparency: built on the free flow of information.
.• Responsiveness: of institutions and processes to stakeholders.
• Consensus orientation: differing interests are mediated to reach a broad

consensus on what is in the general interest.
• -, Equity: all men and women have opportunitiesto become involved.
• Effectiveness and efficiency: processes and institutions produce results that meet
.needs while making the best use of resources.
• Accountability: of decision-makers to stakeholders.
48
"I
I
Models of Participatory A
• Strategic vision: leaders and the public have a broad and long term perspective
Management in South
on good governance and human development, along with a sense of what is Asia
needed for such development. There is also an understanding of the historical,
cultural and social complexities in which the perspective is grounded,
As we have seen above, good governance is laden with values but it has a practical
side as well. In practice, Organisational structure, traditions, and most importantly
people and the relationships between them shape quality of governance to a great
extent. A sample of good governance in practice could be defined by: .
• A high degree of key stakeholders agreement on mission and values;

• Appropriate representation of different stakeholders; .
• Role clarity and clear lines of accountability;
• Positive working relationships between board, management and staff;
• A process for monitoring achievement of objectives; ,
• A balance between stability and flexible response to environmental changes; and
• Respect for organisational norms.
4.4 MODELS OF PARTICIPATORY MANAGEMENT

WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO SOUTH ASIA
In the South Asian region, majority of the rural population, like most of the rural
people in the underdeveloped countries, is poor, no matter how poverty is defined.
The rural poor are not a homogeneous group, nor is the incidence of poverty equally
distributed among them. They do, however, share the underlying causes of their
poverty. Landlessness or scarcity of productive land and poor prospects of
employment or low wages are among the major factors. .
In some regions, such as northern Pakistan; the physical and natural environments
exacerbate the co~ditions of poverty, even if the poor have reasonable entitlement to
land. The prospects of improved living conditions for the rural poor depend on many
factors. The major ones seem to be population growth, technical progress, markets,
and public policy. The contribution of each of these factors is not easy to identify,
. because they act on the human condition in an interdependent and complex way. In
. - mariy underdeveloped countries, the forces of market and government policies work
against the rural poor.
The rural poor (smalllandholders and the land-less), like their counterparts in urban
areas, are a marginalised and peripheral people. The rich are at the centre in both the
. places. There is, however, one big difference between the rural and urban poor: the
latter group can share with 'the rich some of the services and facilities Which the rural
poor have no way of accessing. This is partly due to the indivisibility of these services
and partly because of the capacity of the urban poor to organise and agitate. The rural
poor do not have the rich living in their midst; nor do they have the capacity to
.. organise because of their isolation, division, and sometimes indifference, etc. Added
to this is the fact that industrial growth is mainly concentrated in urban areas, fed by
the agricultural surplus producedlargely by the rural poor.
~ How can the rural poor acquire greater control over their physical andsocial
·,'environments to improve their living standards? The answer to this question lies in
their access to opportunities to exploit the potential they have rather than their
-exploitation and dispossession in the process of development.
,
, , , The difference of approaches to the development of ruralpeople is based primarily on
'. the division between theoretical perspectives on the causes ofmass poverty and the .
\ . sources of its alleviation. Three conceptual models have beenused in analysing the
, \, issues related to rural development. They. are the individualist (capitalist) model; the
collectivist (communist) model, and the organisational (cooperative) model. The
-difference between the first two is embedded in the mutually exclusive ideologies of
~ . 49
•
Genesis and Concepts of development. A brief conceptual and theoretical overview of these models and their
Participatory Management application and impact in the South Asian region has been given in the following
discussion.
4.4.1 IndividualistlNeo Liberal Model

The individualist model has its roots in the classical and neoclassical theories of
private.or "free" markets as the only rational vehicle to improve the material welfare
of the rich and poor alike. The individual'sright to private property in the means of
production is the fountainhead of enterprise, and competition among these individuals
is the assured way of efficiency. More importantly, it is also regarded as the basis of a
just order, because free markets reward the participants according to their contribution
in.the process of production. The uneven distribution of assets and resources cannot
be blamed on the operation of the capitalist model. Uneven development and
inequitable distribution are not accepted as the inevitable products of a capitalist
economy. The development of a Capitalist agriculture, based on the forces of private
(and free) markets, is seen as a fortuitous circumstance for alleviating poverty among
• the majority of rural and urban people. t
In many underdeveloped countries, the same "bimodal" strategy of rural development •

has been promoted. One of its major consequences has been the proletarianisation of
peasantry (smallholders and tenants alike) and dependence on wage labour at one end
and accumulation ofland and capital at the other. Several Latin American countries,
and some in Asia and Africa, have followed this route with disastrous effects on the
society: displacement of small land holders and their flight to urban areas in search of
jobs and incomes for survival are among the most visible signs of the process of
change.
Specialised production based on capital- intensive methods and market oriented

values have also deeply affected the availability of products that the peasants used to
produce for the household. The increasing involvement of smalllandholders in the
cash nexus and contraction ofland as an asset threatens their.survival. The transition '
from subsistence to a cash economy then victimises the vulnerable groups in the
. market place. Slums of the poor and enclaves of the rich in urban areas are only two
of the major manifestations of the development process. Should the rural poor wait for
the promised "trickle - down" effect of the invisible hand of market? There is much
evidence,now and in the past that the answer to this question cannot be in affirmative.
4.4.2 Collectivist/Socialist Model

The collectivist model is premised on Marx's critique of classical theory and favours
abolition of private property in the means of production (land and capital). Private
property and markets are seen as the basic causes of division of society into
antagonistic classes and observed inequalities of in come and wealth. Abolition of
private property and classes and its replacement by collective ownership and
management are regarded as the only assured foundation for harmonious social and
economic development. There is, however, no general agreement aboutthe nature 0t
collective control, particularly of land and labour. .
The Russian collectivist model, (as developed.in the former Soviet Union), practiced
in several countries until recently; was plugged with the problems of inefficiency
because of excessive state control without autonomy for the peasants. The Chinese
communist system, as a variant of the Russian model, was faced with similar
problems of rigid and hierarchical structure of production and distribution with little
incentive forthe individual's effort. Recent changes in the collective and commune
systems ~particularly long-term leasing ofland by the state to the individual and.
cooperative peasant households-reflect clearly the weakness of a centralised regime to
rapidly improve the living standards-of peasants. This change in several communist.
countries is part of the larger and even revplutionary attempt to free the economy from
50 state control. It must, however, be note<1that some Eastern European countries and.
..•
r.· -
China produce serious contradictions between the ideology and practice of Models of Participatory
. Management in South
communism. Some communist countries have started to disown even the trapping of Asia
Marxian ideology.
4.4.3 Organisational Model
The organisational model is skeptical about the ideological claims of the other two
models, i.e. the individualist and collectivist. It favours neither pure individualism nor
pure collectivism. In the organisational model, the institution of private property in
'land is not abolished. Its claim is that the pooling of individual endowments or
resources within a cooperative framework avoids the costs inherent in other models of
rural development. A participatory mode of organisation would reduce the
vulnerability and isolation of the individual households and foster the development of
an equitable and self-sustaining socio-economic system.
At the conceptual level, the organisational model involves three basic components:
• a programme,
• participants or prospective beneficiaries, and
• a support organisation.
The success of the organisational model depends on a high degree of "fit" i.e. relation
between the programme design, beneficiary needs, and the capacities of the assisting
organisation. In other words, the model is responsive to the expressed needs of
beneficiaries through a strong organisation capable of making the programme work.
The concept of "fit" in the context of rural development is central to the understanding
of why some programmes succeed and many do not. Underlying this is the
assumption that it is best achieved through learning and not by following ablue print
or plan. It uses the "learning by doing" method.
The fit between the participants and the programme involves their needs and the
specific resources and services supplied as programme outputs. Of course, the
beneficiary needs will depend on the social and political context of the village. The
supporting organisation's fit with the beneficiaries is determined by the means used to
express the needs and the ways in which the organisation responds. This will include
the capacity to organise and to make decisions in response to the expressed needs that
galvanise the beneficiary organisation. Finally, the fit between the organisation and
. the programme involves activity requirements of the programme and competence of
the support organisation to deliver inputs for programme outputs. The technical and .
social capabilities of support organisation are the critical factors, which help it to play
its role effectively. Let us examine the three fits (relationships) in the context of a
strategy for rural development based on the organisational mode:
i) The prospective beneficiaries-smalllandholders-must participate fully in each

stage of the development of a specific programme, starting from the articulation
of their needs and assessment of their resources. The programme has to address
those needs of the beneficiaries that increase their capacity for sustainable
development. It must offer the various participants outputs who use their
resources and assist in making their organisation viable. Organisation is the
vehicle through which the programme provides inputs and the participants realise.
services and outputs on a sustainable basis. The programme and beneficiary needs
have to be welded together through a participatory organisation.
ii) The partnership of the support organisations with the participants must be based
on reciprocal obligations. The entry point has to be selected with great care to
glue the participants to a common and productive activity, which will act as
individual and collective resources to generate a process of equitable and
sustainable development. The success of this relationship would depend mainly
on the managerial skills' and credibility of the support organisation in organising
51
r
Genesis and Concepts of the beneficiaries and in providing the inputs that strengthen the capacity of
Participatory Management participants both as individuals and groups to become self-reliant.
iii) The technical and social capabilities of the support organisation are the crucial
factors in making the programme efficient and effective. They will include
assessment of needs, identification of the entry poipt for social organisation and
activists, speed and flexibility in management, cost effectiveness of programme
packages and development and delivery inputs and services directly related to the
outputs the participants expect and need. The key to these capabilities is the
learning -by-doing approach, in which innovations are induced in response to and
by the experiences and resources of participants. The programme and the support
. organisation have to be guided by the principle of participation in' developing the
social organisation capacity to improve their economic and social environment.
.. -; "··",·h'" ~
The concept of fit and the learning approach are the basic ingredients in a 'sucCessful
.programme of rural development. The learning approach greatly helps in achieving
the desired fits because there is always some specificity or uniqueness in the
circumstance~ and timing of a programme. While the general principles stay intact,
adjustments may have to be made in the programme packages for specific target
groups or regions. The practice has to be flexible and evolutionary: developing
through learning.
For example, what may work for a rather homogeneous community of the poor, living
in an isolated and harsh physical environment, would not be workable in a community
that is highly differentiated on the basis of endowment of assets such as productive
land and capital.
. In the first case, there is probably a long tradition of reciprocal obligations of member
household to survive in a hostile physical, 'and natural environment.
In the second community, theinterests may be fragmented depending on one's

position in the rural hierarchy based on the ownership ofland and related assets.
I
An effective fit is seldom achieved in those ruraldevelopment programmes that have

followed a blueprint approach, guided mainly by fixed ideas and run by centralised
bureaucracies without the participation of prospective beneficiaries. The examples are
too numerous to mention.
In countries where a collectivist or communist model has not been accepted, there is a
considerable debate about the impact of the individualist (capitalist) and
organisational (cooperative) approaches. The individualist approach can exist in both
thefeudal (landlord-tenant) and peasant (owner-operator) agrarian system. In the
feudal system, the landlord lives mainly on the rental income appropriated from the.
output ofland, produce by the sharecropper or tenant.
The existing distribution ofland-ownership excludes the tenant from access to land
without the landlord. In the peasant system, small parcels ofland with family labour
are the basis of production for the household and market. Given these agrarian
structures, the introduction of capital and technology by both the forces of market and
government policies creates new pressure on the landless tenants and small
landowning peasants. Their displacement from the land becomes a necessity for
development. They must look for work as wage labourers, mainly outside the
agriculture. Their entitlement to land as a source of income is lost. Steady
employment and a reasonable. wage can now be the only source of sustenance. hi the
capitalist development of agriculture, the process of adjustment is often costly both for
the dispossessed peasants and the society.
Rural development in the individualist approach isa catch phrase, usually devoid of
content. If.its objective is to provide opportunities for the rural poor to improve their
living standards, it must depend on the organised and collective efforts of this group.
i52 But a collective and cooperative. effort requires certain conditions that usually run
..
-.---~.---
counter to the interest of rural elite. How can the small farmers, tenants, and land-less Models of Partlclpatory
. Management in South
workers organise to articulate their needs and mobilise their resources for higher Asia
standards of living if the elite see little gain or much loss in rural development?
Alleviation of rural poverty in an agrarian system based on the highly unequal
endowments ofland and capital poses a formidable challenge to the practitioners.
Should we insist that rural development under these conditions is highly unlikely,
because the rural elite either resists or subverts the programme by which they either
gain little or lose much?
In communities where most rural people are land-poor and live in a harsh or isolated
environment, there is usually a long and well-established tradition of cooperative or
collective behaviour for survival. They know that the management of their own
meagre resources and of commo/n,property in the village must depend on reciprocal
obligations. They are well aware of the benefits from economies of scale and the price
of waste. Outside interventions' with emphasis on articulated needs and cooperative
management of resources can bring about new choices for these rural people. These
choices are not imposed on them, but are made available' in response to their collective
demands and capacities. Their organisation can unleash a self-sustaining and equitable
process of rural development, because outsiders would be involved on a self-
liquidating basis.
A "diagnosis prescription" approach to alleviate rural poverty, on the other hand, is

often based on outsiders' arrogance about their knowledge of the rural poor. Rural
development, as a strategy to improve the well being of this group, is premised on
outsiders' views and perceptions. The poor themselves are rarely a part of the strategy.
They do participate in providing information, in making decisions, and in managing
the rural development projects and programmes. In fact, some development
programmes increase their powerlessness and vulnerability to both physical and the
economic environment.
. SAQ2
'a) Discuss various models of participatory development.
b) Write cl note on the following in your own words:
i) What is good governance? ••

ii) Individualist/Neo-Liberal Model.
.iii) Collectivist/Socialist Model.
iv) Organisational Model.
4.5 SUMMARY
Whether a model would help in achieving "the goals of development management or
improve the governing of an organisation is debatable. A model may be defined as a
representation of a set of components of a process, system or subj ect area, generally'
developed for understanding, analysis, improvement or replacement of process: or it
may be conceived as a systematic way of representing the purpose of reproducing,
simplifying, analysing or understanding it.
A model of governance of an organisation vary according to how a board is

structured, how responsibilities are distributed between various stakeholders, like
board management and staff and in the process used for board- development,
management and decision making. A model of governance and management could
possibly accommodate great diversity of organisation within the corporate or non-
profile sectors. .
53
Genesis and Concepts of The primary purpose of participatory management model of development is to
Participatory Management promote the conditions of the humanity at large with a focus.on the poor and
marginalised people and groups of society through a just, equitable and secure social
system.
The UN has listed the following components, cutting across cultural boundaries,
norms and values of governance for an organisation or an institution: participation,
transparency, responsiveness, consensus orientation, equity, effectiveness and
efficiency, accountability and strategic vision. In practical terms an organisation to be
governed by the principles of good governance could include: agreement between
stakeholder on mission and values, appropriate representation, accountability,
congenial work relationship between board, members and staff, effective monitoring
of achievement of objectives, balance between flexibility and stability, flexible
. response to environmental changes and respect for organisational reforms.
Rampantpoverty is the hallmark of the South Asian Countries. There is a growing

- number of poor, along with widening gap betw~en rich and poor. Removal of poverty,
particularly in rural areas is the main task before the South Asians states. The issues
related to rural development and alleviation of the lot of the rural poor and eradication
of poverty through participatory models of development are primary challenges ..
After the collapse of Soviet Union, and the Chinese acceptance of market economy
norms, the socialist model of development seems to have lost its credibility. The Neo- .
liberal, or new classical model of free market economy seems to have emerged as the
sole model of economic development. They argue that it is a universal model of
development and that there is no alternative to this (TINA - There Is No Alternative).
In most of the under developed countries the neo-liberal strategy of rural and urban
development has been promoted and it is with the help of this model global poverty is
sought to be reduced by 50% in the coming decades. But it has its own consequences
and one wonders how this objective will be achieved. With the liberalisation of
agriculture trade regime, the plight of the poor farmers is likely to become all the mere.
miserable along with creation of agricultural unemployment.
The Organisational model seeks to pool individual endowments or resources within a

cooperative framework, and it seeks to avoid the costs inherent in other models of
rural development. A participatory model of organisation would reduce the
vulnerability and isolation of individual household and foster development of an
equitable and self-sustaining socio-economic system. This model is suggested for the
developing countries. But how successful it can be in the overall operation of neo-
liberal model of development, is yet to be seen.

1. Define a model. Why are models needed? Are models helpful or not? .
2. What is the role of Participatory Management models in good governance?
3. What is Good Governance? Describe its characteristics.
4. Discuss the background and situation of the South Asian Region with reference to
rural poverty. /I
5. Describe the issues and approaches to the access and control of the resources and
physical environment. /
6. Analyse the following models with reference to the South Asian region:
i) The Individualist model

ii) The Collectivist model.
iii) The Organisational model.
;54
r
Models of Participatory
7. Describe in detail the basic features of an Organisational model.
Management in South
Asia
8. Which model of development is suitable for the South Asian countries?Analyse
critically.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Pearce, A, and Stiefel, M., (1979) Inquiry into Participation, UNRISD179/C.14,
United Nations Research Institute for Social Development,Geneva.
2. Uphoff, N., (1992) Learning from Gal Oya: Possibilities for Participatory
Development and Post-Newtonian Social Science, Cornel University Press:
Ithaca. '
. /
55
Participatory Approaches
UNIT 5 PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES to Environment and
Development
TO ENVIRONMENT AND
DEVELOPMENT
Structure
5.1 Introduction
Objectives
5.2 Participatory Approaches
5.3 Participatory Development
Principles of Participation
Constraints to Participation
5.4 Community Organisation
Advantages of Organisation
Disadvantages of Not Getting Organise d
Functions of Organisation
Salient Features of Community Organisation
Threats to Community Organisation
Community Organisation and W omen
5.5 Significance of Participatory Approaches in Empowering People for
5.6 Participatory Methodologies in the Empowering Process
5.7 Summary
5.1 INTRODUCTION
In the first block, we have discussed the concept of participatory management and its
genesis. In the first unit of Block 2, we will examine the participatory approaches,
participatory development, principles of participation, community organisation,
participatory learning, significance of participatory approaches in empowering and
people for sustainable development.
Over the last few years, words such as ‘participation’, ‘empowerment’, ‘bottom up
planning’, and ‘indigenous knowledge’ have become increasingly common in the
world of rural development. Such is their popularity that it is now difficult to find a
rural based development project which does not, in one way or other, claim to adopt a
participatory approach involving bottom up planning, acknowledging the importance
of indigenous knowledge and claiming to empower local people. It is increasingly
possible to talk, at least provisionally, of an emerging common orthodoxy in rural
development, which is shared by a range of practitioners working in the bilateral,
multilateral and non-governmental sectors of the development industry.
Objectives
• appreciate the most developed approaches and techniques in Participatory Rural

Appraisal (PRA);
• explain five streams standing out as sources of PRA and between which insights,
approaches and methods are continuously flowing;
• explain as to why a participatory approach is needed in development;
• explain the role of participation in development; and
• discuss the use of participatory methodologies in the empowering process.
5
Approaches and Practices
5.2 PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES
For more than two decades, development theorists and practitioners have talked about
the need for participation of ordinary people in development. In much of rural
development, however, thinking about participation has remained at a very idealistic
and ideological level. It lacks analytical tools, practical methods and an adequate
theoretical framework. So it has degenerated into a kind of propaganda – words to
convince audience, NGOs. Governments have recognised the necessity of involving
people in development activities. Som etimes it is the participation of particular
categories of people which has to be demonstrated – women, the poorest of the poor,
and minority groups. But participation is usually asserted, not demonstrated. Few in
the audience have time to examine the indicators, which are in any case poorly
developed. Indicators of how participation happens and its effects on participants need
to be developed and applied.
Several dimensions of empowerment have been identified, which could help in the
development of indicators about participation: a good starting point for developing
indicators about participation. Some of them could be: organisation of under
privileged; knowledged about their social environment; development of their self -
reliant attitude; institutional deve lopment like mass participation in decision making;
ability to handle conflicts and tension and a consensus that all can advance together;
evolution of gender equality; awareness that changes were occurring at the grass root
level; development of human dignity, popular democracy and cultural diversity.
The most developed approach is Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA). ‘PRA is a
growing family of approaches and methods to enable local people to share with each
other and with outsiders, enhance and analyse their knowledge of life and conditions,
to plan and to act. It is difficult to define as to what a PRA is. Is it a set of techniques
(RRA), or a set of techniques wrapped up in a participatory approach (PRA), or a
philosophy and approach to life for a professional’s development? Its core lies in the
development, adaptation and application of simple, structured interactive techniques
based on game theory and social science research methods which produce accurate
information through group work and dialogue.
Five streams which stand out as sources of PRA and between which insights,
approaches and methods are continuously flowing, are listed as below:
• action-reflection research;
• agro-ecosystem analysis;
• applied anthropology;
• field research on farming systems; and
• rapid rural appraisal (RRA)
Participatory Action -reflection Research
The term ‘Participatory action-reflection research’ is used to encompass approaches
and methods, which have, in various ways combined action, reflection, participation
and research. Thes e range from action and reflection, an action in which professionals
act and reflect on what they do and how they learn, to approaches which use dialogue
and participatory research to enhance local people’s awareness and confidence and to
empower their action.
Agro-ecosystem Analysis
Drawing on systems and ecological thinking, it combines analysis of systems and
system priorities (productivity, stability, sustainability and equitability) with pattern
analysis of space (maps and transects), time (seasonal calendars and long-term trends),
flows and relationships (flow, casual, venn and other diagrams), relative values (bar
6
diagrams of relative sources of income etc.), and decisions (decision trees and other Participatory Approaches
to Environment and
decision diagrams). Development
Applied Anthropology
Social anthropology, in its classical form, has been concerned more with
understanding than with changing. Social anthropologists helped other development
professionals to appreciate better the richness and validity of rural people’s
knowledge.
Field Research on Farming Systems
Farming systems research systematised methods for investigating, understanding and
prescribing for farming-system complexity.
Field research on farming systems contributed especially to the appreciation and
understanding of:
• the complexity, diversity and risk-proneness of many farming systems;

• the knowledge, professionalism and rationality of small and poor farmers;
• their experimental mindset and behaviour; and
• their ability to conduct their own analyses.
Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA)
RRA began and continues as a better way for outsiders to learn about rural issues. It
helps outsiders to gain information and insight from rural people and about rural
conditions, which enables them to do in a more cost-effective and timely manner.
SAQ 1
i) Identify various methods and techniques of participatory rural appraisal.
ii) Write a note on the following in your own words.
a) Agro-ecosystem.
b) Farming systems.
5.3 PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT

The concept of growth with equity and participation is becoming popular in recent
years. Many donor agencies and aid organisations now recommend that governments
in the developing countries should adopt popular participation as a basic policy
measure in national development strategies and encourage the social mobilisation for
community organisations, trade unions, youth, women and other associations in the
development process particularly in setting goals, formulating policies and
implementing the development plans.
Participation is a process of development, whereby people are given the opportunity to
express their voice and choice in decisions, which affect their future. This
participation needs to be more action oriented than a token one for the justification of
other motives. A study by the International Labour Organisation of “Poverty-oriented”
project worldwide showed that the poorest were excluded from activities and benefits.
All this shows that there is a need for beneficiaries’ participation in a development
programme at all levels.
Recent years have seen a growing criticism of development strategies followed for the
past three decades with only minor adjustments. These conventional strategies have
seen development primarily as a series of technical transfers aimed at boosting
production and generating wealth. In practice, conventional projects usually target
medium to large-scale progressive producers, supporting the technology, credit and
7
Approaches and Practices extension, and advice in the hope that improvements will gradually extend to more
“backward” strata of rural society. In many cases, however, the channelling of
development assistance to the better off has led to the concentration of land and
capital, marginalisation of small farmers and alarming growth in the number of
landless labourers, which is simply widening the gap between the rich and the poor.
The basic fault in the conventional approach is that the rural poor are rarely consulted
in development planning and usually have no active role in development activities.
This is because the vast majority of the poor have no organisational structure to
represent their interests. Isolated, under-educated and often dependent on rural elite,
they lack the means to win greater access to resources and markets, and to prevent the
imposition of unworkable programmes or technologies.
Unless the rural poor are given the means to participate fully in development, they
will continue to be excluded from its benefits. This realisation has provoked new
interest in an alternative rural development strategy of people’s participation through
community organisations controlled and financed by the poor.
Discussion about participation is never easy, mainly because there are so many
contradictory and ambivalent notions of the concept and the practices involved. In a
very general way, participation may be define d here as:
A complex social, technical and institutional process through which
communities may become more fully involved in their own
development, more particularly taking an active part in the design,
implementation and evaluation of specific development initiatives.
Participation by rural people in the community organisations and other institutions
that govern their lives is a basic human right. If rural development was to realise its
potential, advantaged rural people had to be organised and actively involved in
designing the policies and programmes and in controlling social and economic
institutions. There is a close link between participation and voluntary, autonomous
and democratic organisations representing the poor. The donor agencies are showing
great interest in close co-operation with organisations of intended beneficiaries, and it
is being proposed that the assistance be channelled through small farmer and peasant
groups.
With their economic survival at stake, many developing countries have been forced to
cut back on rural development, giving priority to growth ahead of the alarming
concern for participation and equity. Great progress, however, has been made by
many development programmes through participatory principles and methodologies.
5.3.1 Principles of P articipation

The experience of programmes working on the principles of participatory
development has demonstrated that true participation is possible only when the rural
poor are able to pool their efforts and resources in pursuit of objectiv es they set for
themselves. The most efficient means for achieving this objective are small,
democratic and informal common interest groups composed of 20-30 like minded
community members. For governments and development agencies, people
participation through small groups offers distinct advantages ranging from economies
of scale and efficiency to equity and sustainability. People’ s participation is likely to
lead to the following advantages:
• Reduced costs and increased efficiency: The poor’s contribution to programme

and project planning and implementation represent savings that reduce projects
costs. The poor also contribute their knowledge of local conditions, facilitating the
diagnosis of environmental, social and institutional constraints, as well as the
search for solutions.
8
• Economies of Scale: The high cost of providing development services to Participatory Approaches
to Environment and
scattered, small-scale producers is a major constraint on poverty and other Development
development oriented programmes. Participatory groups constitute a grassroots
“receiving system” that allow development agencies to reduce the unit delivery or
transaction costs of their services, thus broadening their impact on the one hand
and give an opportunity of pooling their resources for many collective actions to
the community members on the other.
• Higher productivity: Given access to resources and a guarantee that they will
share fully the benefits of their efforts, the poor become more receptive to new
technologies and services, and achieve higher levels of production and income.
This helps in building net cash surpluses that strengthen the groups’ economic
base and contribute to rural capital formation that in most cases has been used for
internal lending and carrying on other joint development schemes.
• Building of community organisation: The limited size and informality of small

groups is suited to the poor’s scarce organisational experience and low literacy
levels. Moreover, the small group environment is ideal for the diffusion of
collective decision-making and leadership skills, which can be used in the
subsequent development of inter group federations that are known as apex
organisations.
• Sustainability: Participatory development leads to increased self -reliance among

the poor and the establishment of a network of self-sustaining community
organisations. This carries important benefits: the greater efficiency of
development services stimulates economic growth in rural areas and broadens
domestic markets, thus favouring balanced national development. Participatory
approaches provide opportunities for the poor to contribute constructively to
development.
Through active participation, every one in the group is benefitted to some extent.
Decisions are made in the group on the basis of equity and saving is the equity capital
of the community.
5.3.2 Constraints to Participation

In their attempts to achieve participatory approach, many developmental project
personnel realised the far-reaching consequences of this choice and the necessary
adjustments needed to fit it into the existing social, cultural and institutional
conditions of different areas.
Several constraints emerge while implementing the programme. Such problems arise,
on the one hand, from the opinions of the planners and development agents, and, on
the other hand, those stemming from the cultural values and social patterns of the
populations of the programme areas.
In some cases, the planners, decision-makers and social organisers who, while
advocating some forms of people’s involvement in the development process, continue
to think and act according to a perspective that posits people as ‘passive targets’ and
not as ‘active participants’ – as objects, and not as subjects of development. This
mentality is firmly based on a number of attitudes and certainties. The following
beliefs can be encountered as the programme unfolds.
• Programme and target people share common interests so that people’s

participation is simply a matter of collaboration by the community with
programme officials for implementing an activity;
• Social issues are either irrelevant or can be dealt with on the basis of a good dose
of ‘common sense’;
9
Approaches and Practices • Involvement of people is important only at the implementation stage, after the
major technical parameters of the programme have been decided by the experts;
• A ‘participatory approach’ simply means that people have to be mobilised quickly

and easily in order to meet predefined goals, targets and objectives, with no
latitude for them to decide on other goals or objectives;
• Rural communities are backward, primitive, and hostile to change, while their
production methods are irrational and detrimental to the environment. Thus,
people are viewed, on the one hand, as the problem in development efforts and, on
the other hand, in need of technical direction since they do not know what is good
for them; and
• Women are not important actors in productive activities, perceived as a

predominantly male sphere, and thus may be conveniently ignored as participants
in or beneficiaries of technical projects in this domain.
Participation becomes a process through which programme officials have to convince
people to adopt what, from a technical point of view, has been identified as good for
them, as well as implement what is considered to correspond to the political and
economic objectives of the country or province as a whole.
Many problems arise in the process of socialisation, because of specific social and
cultural values of the people in the programme areas; hold of feudal lords on local
poor, the political autonomy of individual households, male honour, and women’s
seclusion. All of them influence the participatory approach.
• Most of the developing societies have kinship-based groups, which entail co-
operation, solidarity, alliances and obligations, membership based on birth and
alliance;
• Local social economy is broken down into independent household with local and
familial control of production, devoid of wider organisation or centralisation in
the set-up of the productive process;
• Most of the rural communities are heterogeneous; and
• Are elderly dominated societies with an off-farm source of income.

Though these factors need not necessarily create obstacles to participatory form of
development, they may significantly slow down the process of involving all the
community members and categories of people in the development efforts, especially
at the initial stages.
Following are the main elements of a pragmatic, step-by-step participatory approach
for tackling the above-mentioned constraints to participation.
• Setting up favourable structures allowing the populations to express their views
and opinions;
• Allowing different social categories of a community to meet and discuss
problems;
• Establishing a dialogue between programme staff and the community as equal

partners;
• Bring changes in the attitudes of development agents, through publications and

organisation of workshops and training courses;
• Assessing the constraints realistically and steering clear an alternative approach
wherever necessary; and
10
• Demonstrate participation of the people on pragmatic and sociological situation of Participatory Approaches
to Environment and
the community by producing replicable models and use them as learning Development
examples.
SAQ 2
i) What do you understand by participation? Explain.
ii) Examine various principles of participation.
iii) Analyse various constraints of participat ion.
5.4 COMMUNITY ORGANISATION

In order to translate the principles of community development effectively into practice
for the attainment of socio-economic and environmentally sound development, the
formation of Local Community Organisation is vital for the whole process to follow.
Such organisations are local institutions to decide, plan, implement and manage
activities in the light of the principles formulated for the comprehensive community
development. These institutions may be a mass coalition of village, or an interest
group, or a group of like-minded people for the promotion of the groups’ interest in
the principles of co-operation and democracy.
Such organisations can be created around a single activity of common interest of the
community and it can be nurtured over the time by development activities. It is easy to
organise but to keep them organised is not an easy task for the social organisers and
the community members themselves. They would cooperate when it is profitable.
Moreover, they will rem ain organised if it continues to benefit its members.
The necessary conditions for initiating and sustaining the participatory institutional
development process at grassroots level are:
• Steps should be taken to ensure that these measures complement or build upon
locally existing institutions and organisations rather than replace them, as there
are problems in accepting completely new forms of organisations. Simple
transformation or modernisation of “traditional organisations” can also be
problematic.
• Group Promoters (GPs) should assist as catalysts in group development and in

linking groups to government/NGO services. Community leader's or social
organisers role is that of an advisor strengthening the groups leadership,
organisation and planning capacity, a participatory trainer teaching basic problem
solving and technical skills, and a link person facilitating communication between
the groups and government/NGO’s development services. Once the groups reach
maturity, community leader or social organisers withdraw from the groups.
• Financial support (government or external project) is necessary for financing

training of support staff and providing seed money, and or financial topping-ups
to self-mobilised savings, and or loans.
Participatory learning method is an interactive learning process engaging the co-
operation and problem solving capacities of the poor. It addresses participants at all
levels from the local to national. Participatory learning methods are based on
participatory rural appraisal (PRA) as well as small-group learning techniques. Ideally
a participatory learning exercise for institution building is a phased approach. It aims
first at team building and group formation processes with a focus on demand-driven
skill development in fields, such as organisational management and leadership. This
phase of learning is directed towards and brings together representatives from all
institutional layers involved in the programme implementation. The second phase
focuses on technical skill development addressing mainly the small self-help groups
on topics of direct relevance to the rural poor such as group savings and credit and 11
Approaches and Practices small business management and accounting. When learning groups are small,
members come from the same socio-economic level and have similar concerns
learning of technical skill is easier. Beneficiaries set the demands, not outsiders. The
use of group-based, participatory learning methods for strengthening the collective
learning, problem-solving and enterprise management skills of the poor have proved
to be quite successful and a number of tools for doing this are already available.
5.4.1 Advantages of Organisation

Advantages of organisation can be summarised as follows:
• Solves those problems collectively which are not possible to tackle individually;
• Develop, protect and improve land collectively;

• Investment increases due to pooling of meagre resources through collective
action;
• Raises equity capital and controls capital collectively;
• Easy availability and utilisation of services and facilities;
• Co-operative management of capital and credit;
• Collective arrangement for the sale of agricultural produce, thereby minimising
expenses and maximising returns;
• Up-gradation of skills, know -how etc;
• Self-arrangement by the community members themselves towards settlement of
disputes; and
• Develop a local management system.
5.4.2 Disadvantages of Not Getting Organised

In a nutshell, the disadvantages for the community not getting organised are as
follows:
• All the above mentioned advantages will not accrue leading to great losses;
• The condition of land and the economic plight of the communities will further
deteriorate;
• The village communities will remain deprived and neglected;
• Exploitation by the middlemen and commission agents will continue;
• People will lag behind in development and progress; and
• The village communities will never stand on their own feet.
5.4.3 Functions of Organisation

Functions and responsibilities of the local organisations are to:
• Promote local economic activity, which would lead to higher income;
• Take-up social projects in order to create harmony and mutual understanding
among the people;
• Mobilise savings to provide credit to the community members;
• Arrange reclamation and development of land and irrigation facilities and other
12 productive physical infrastructures and their regular maintenance;
• Identify productive projects and prioritise them according to the need; Participatory Approaches
to Environment and
Development
• Supply agriculture inputs and other requisites of the community;
• Arrange the marketing of agricultural produce and handicraft products;
• Arrange veterinary and plant protection services and facilities in the village;
• Arrange and participate in the up-grading of human skill training programme;
• Participate in the management of local affairs, settlement of dispute and petty
affairs in the village;
• Establish projects like poultry, livestock, dairy, agro-processing industries etc, and
encourage similar projects among members;
• Sponsor and supervise schemes of primary health with special emphasis on
sanitation, conservation, and cleanliness of environment and potable drinking
water.
• Encourage primary education and adult literacy;
• Co-ordinate and co-operate with other departments and organisations for their
activities;
• Fix credit limit for members in accordance with equity and social justice;
• Examine the accounts, sanction loans to members, supervise their end-use and
effect recoveries;
• Sanction contingent expenditures;
• Decide the terms and conditions on which deposits are to be received and arrange
for the payment for return of deposits;
• Acquire and construct buildings or carry out works necessary or conducive to the
proper functioning of the council; and
• Any other function likely to promote the welfare and economic betterment of the
village community.
5.4.4 Salient Features of Community Organisation

• The members of local organisation should have a clear -cut understanding about
the concept of self-help and self-reliance through community development and its
own duties and responsibilities within a community organisation.
• The members of a community organisation should have collective and
participatory approach towards the solution of their common, social problems.
• They must believe that “all are for one and one is for all” and should have a sense
of “we” feeling and collective belonging.
• The community organisation should try to promote the common interest of its
members and facilitate them in the attachment of their needs. Minority benefits
should be considered minor and secondary factors by community organisations.
• Fortnightly/monthly meetings and savings should be a regular business of the
community organisation in order to promote the habit of thrift and savings among
the members and to generate capital for seller financing.
• Community organisation should have the spirit of self-management, self-help and
self-reliance.
13
Approaches and Practices • The community organisation should try to obtain maximum benefits from the
package offered by development agencies.
• The community organisation should try to obtain benefits from the packages
offered by development agencies and NGOs.
• The community organisations should be free of all political and sectarian issues
and its sole objective should be the promotion of socio-economic interest of its
members. They, however, should make the community members aware of their
right to vote and their understanding as to how they can effectively exercise this
right.
• The office bearers should be devoted, sincere and dedicated leaders and willing to
develop their communities.
• The community organisation should initiate some socio-economic activities from
time to time from their own resources.
• It should establish links with other institutions and agencies for the
comprehensive village development.
5.4.5 Threats to Community Organisation

Community organisations can encounter active and passive resistance from many
sources like local elite, political leaders, religious leaders and in some cases area
administrators. To avoid such resistance, the programme should have an equitable and
supportive role for all walks of life and for all governmental and non-governmental
organisations in the area. The community workers would have to use all
organisational tactics to deal with such people during their interaction and
motivational visits.
Subordination
Sometimes the community organisation is dominated by the prosperous farmers,
merchants and other businessmen and the organisation is converted to the services of
vested interest people and not the whole community. Moreover, in some cases the
main cause of the damage or effectiveness of a community organisation may be
leadership; and today’s leadership might become tomorrow’s oligarch to use the local
organisation for his own vested interest.
The factor, which leads to domination, is the lack of managerial skills between the
leaders and the followers. The major measures for controlling dominance are the
training of members of the local organisation in participation, decision-making and
other organised activities. Regular follow -up, general conferences of the
representatives, papers on dif ferent activities and on performance of the local
organisation and its wider distribution or reading in the general meetings can improve
such situations.
Ineffectiveness
Community organisation might become ineffective to its members in due course of
time. This is mainly due to lack of skills in organisation development, accounts and
planning.
The other reasons include no risk taking nature of the rural people and uncertainties
surrounding the rural life. The community worker will have to train the office bearers
in particular and general members in book-keeping, organisational work and resource
mobilisation from the community itself through their leaders. Fund raising through
donations and savings will considerably improve the effectiveness of a local
organisation. Similarly, follow -ups by the social organisers are also helpful in keeping
the community organisation effective.
14
Malpractices Participatory Approaches
to Environment and
Dishonesty and lack of dedication are the common problems that threaten the survival Development
of a community organisation. Sometimes individuals use community organisation for
their own interest or for the interest of their friends and family, at the cost of collective
interests of the members. Sometimes the funds are misappropriated. Smaller groups,
regular meetings and simplification of the procedures can help in overcoming the
malpractices. In smaller groups invariably there is more interaction which reduces the
possibilities of malpractices and increases the prospects of handling the funds in a
more honest manner.
Similarly holding the general body meeting regularly makes the representation more
effective and prevents misappropriation. Simple bookkeeping procedures can enable
the community members to understand the financial position of the community
organisation and their own liabilities. The important point of the sustainability of an
organisation is to encourage and reinforce members’ commitment to their organisation
and to their sense of responsibility towards the organisation.
5.4.6 Community Organisation and Women

Participation of both male and female partners in development activities is an inherent
part of the participatory development and the social organisation process facilitates it.
Women's participation in the development of natural resources and other development
activities is not possible without an explicit gender awareness, and without building
the techniques for understanding and systematically addressing the issue on a wider
scale. The programme staff as well as the community has to be sensitised on gender
issues and the concept of gender parity needs to be clarified. All programmes should
have a clear strategy for organising women in their respective programme areas.
Participation of women in development activities is certainly wider than the
promotion of women only. The programmes should focus on the relationship between
men and women, their roles, access to and control over resources, division of labour
and needs through the community organisations. A clear understanding on these
issues leads to household security, well-being of the family, use of natural resources
and production and many other aspects of rural life. Failure to take into account
women and their role often results in unsuccessful project activities.
Therefore, understanding the gender relationships and adjusting methods and
messages for them is critical for full participation by all sectors of the community.
Separate strategy for women’s participation should be devised to ensure a balanced
involvement of men and women in the project activities; however, as far as social
organisation of women is concerned, it is important to follow all the following steps
for establishing women community organisations.
• Understanding and documenting the differences in gender roles, activities, needs
and opportunities in the context of each community development programme;
• Data should be collected and organised to highlight women's key problems,
underlying causes of problems for men and women, and the relationship between
problems and causes;
• A thorough analysis of the data should be conducted to highlight the learned
behaviours of men and women;
• Women participation analysis framework should cover various categories of
information such as need assessment, activity profile, resources, access, and
control profile, benefits and incentive analysis and institutional constraints and
opportunities;
15
Approaches and Practices • Specific-training packages should be developed to sensitise the programme staff
and the community on gender issues in the context of social and cultural
environment;
• Objectives of women participation should be clearly stated in the context of

overall objectives of the project. This will help the staff to understand how to get
out of conventional approach of thinking only in terms of providing different
facilities for women; and
• Special monitoring and evaluation system should be in place to enable the
adjustment of women participation, to establish accountability of commitment,
and to achieve gender-specific priorities.
The social organisation objectives of increasing women’s managerial and
organisational capacities, enhancing their self -confidence, and allowing them to
control income in their hands, are best met where there is a separate women’s
organisation. When activities are implemented through the male dominated
organisations, the physical and economic objectives of increasing productivity and
income or reducing labour time may be met, but the conscienc itisation effect on
women is definitely less or even nil sometimes. By forming an organisation with
separate membership and savings accounts, women can initiate a process that enables
them to share experience, workload, problems and decision making.
SAQ 3
i) What is community organisation? Explain necessary conditions initiated for the
development process.
ii) Explain the various functions and responsibilities of the local organisation.
iii) Write a note on the following in your own words.
a) Features of community organisation.
b) Community organisation and women.
5.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF PARTICIPATORY

APPROACHES IN EMPOWERING PEOPLE FOR
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
The family of approaches and methods known as Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA),
Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA), Participatory Interaction in Development (PID),
and Participatory Planning and Action (PLA), has gained increasing acceptance
during the past decade within development projects. It applies to theory as well as
development practice, bringing about a reversal from top-down to bottom-up, from
centralised standardisation to local diversity, and from blueprint to learning process.
This section focuses attention on what, why and how of such participatory
approaches, and their impact on sustainable development. It also makes the case for
using such an approach as the intervention strategy for development, be it rural or
urban.
Participation basically means taking part or sharing. In the development context it
goes further, with implications as to who shares, with whom, and in what context.
Participation in development has a long history. Various government and non-
governmental organisations, both national and international, have focused attention on
participation in a conspicuous manner over the past two decades. The terms ‘popular
participation’ and ‘people’s participation’ have now become a part of the development
language in both the sectors.
The term participation, as well as the rationale for these approaches, have been
16 interpreted in a variety of ways. Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) argues for
participation in the following manner: Participation by the people in the institutions Participatory Approaches
to Environment and
and systems which govern their lives is a basic human right and also essential for Development
realignment of political power in favour of the disadvantaged groups and for social
and economic development. Rural development strategies can realise their full
potential only through motivation, active involvement and organisation at the
grassroots level of rural people, with special emphasis on the least advantaged, in
conceptualising and designing policies and programmes and in creating
administrative, socia l and economic institutions, including co-operative and other
voluntary forms of organisation of implementing and evaluating them.
Similar views are reflected by the United Nations Research Institute for Social
Development (UNRISD), that the value of participation arises from the inherent
strength of participation as a means of articulating genuine needs and satisfying them
through self reliance and mass mobilisation. UNRISD used the following definition of
participation in one of its publications: Participation involves organised efforts to
increase control over resources and regulative institutions in given social situations,
on the part of groups and movements of those hitherto excluded from such control.
There are however, significant variations in the usage of the term. According to
Chambers, “Participation” is a word, which is experiencing a renaissance in the 1990s.
So widespread is its use that some talk of a paradigm shift to participatory
development. But he argues that ‘There are three main ways in which participation is
used. First it is used, as a cosmetic label to make whatever is proposed appears good.
Secondly it describes a co-opting practice to mobilise local labour and reduce cost.
Often this means that they (local people) participate in “our” project. Third, it is used
to describe an empowering process, which enables the local people to do their own
analysis, to take command, to gain confidence, and to make their own decisions. In
theory, this means, that “we “participate in “their” project not “they” in “ours”. In this
perspective reversing power relations is the key and weak link in achieving
participation. He also notes that the gap between concept and actual practice is
overshadowed by the use of the term participation in development jargon today, so
much so that the meaning of the term needs clarification.
Field experience clearly shows that participation means different things to different
people. For some it means people attending meetings, or labour contribution in
development work like shramadana (free labour). In irrigation rehabilitation, for
example, participation in some cases appears to have meant holding meetings to get
people’s endorsement to what has already been planned by the technical experts. Such
meetings, presided over by the decision makers, came to be known as ratification
meetings, where the dominant views of those who knew, prevailed over the others. In
other instances, participation means group formation for co-operative/collective action
for input supply and marketing.
The highest form of participation appears to be self-organisation and self-
responsibility and self-actualisation, which results in the empowerment of the people
concerned. Participation is considered by some as an essential part of human growth,
that is, the development that guides sustainability.
The meaning of participation used in this unit has empowerment and self-
responsibility for collective decision making as its final goal. The achievement of such
participation needs to be a process in which the rural poor themselves become more
aware of their own situation, of the socio-economic reality around them and of the
problems. Having understood such problems they take decisions on the steps to be
taken in initiating a change in their situation. Development strategies in such a context
should be supportive, and accompany this process.
In such a perspective, participation becomes interrelated with a process, which opens
a wide spectrum of free and open interactions. In this process, there can be progress as
well as failures, but both must be viewed as opportunities to learn for taking better
decisions in the future. Participation becomes a learning process for both the villagers
17
Approaches and Practices and the development workers. Such a process cannot be determined from outside.
Continuing interaction and reflection generates it.
Experiential learning makes the process the people’s own, as opposed to the people
being mobilised, led or directed by outside forces. Through collective self reflection
on their experiences and problems, people become aware of different dimensions of
the reality, and of what can be done by themselves to transform it. With this
awareness, they decide upon what collective action to take and analyse its results to
promote their awareness further. Thus they move on with progressive and advancing
knowledge of their evolving reality.
During the early 1970s the development interventions that were carried out with either
local or external funding emphasised two types of actors. On one side were those who
engaged in the task of identifying development needs, planning development
activities, mobilising resources for development, implementation, monitoring the
implementation process to ensure that designs, plans and disbursement of resource
were taking place as planned. They also evaluated the success or failure after the
event, using monetary disbursements, physical achievements or assessing the impact
these activities had on the target groups as yardsticks.
On the other side were the beneficiaries for whom and for whose development all
these tasks were undertaken. They were only to operate and maintain structures such
as minor irrigation reservoirs, wells and rural roads, and to share the cost of the
development activities.
The two categories of actors therefore were those who do things and those for whom
things are being done; those who do are the empowered, they have knowledge,
authority, access to resources and decision making power. Those who are the
beneficiaries, lacked authority, were poor and were basic ally voiceless in the decision
making process. The gap that exists between these two groups resulted in mutual
mistrust, often leading to antagonism, and had serious implications on the
development process.
Therefore bridging this gap between these two parties, namely the doers – the
politicians, the bureaucrats, NGO activists, and those for whom things are being
done – the peasants, the poor, and the citizenry at large, is identified as a prime need
for successful achievement of development activities/projects. Numerous failures have
been recorded in a wide spectrum of development activities, owing to the existence of
this gap.
The gap can be illustrated by looking at the process through which development
activities are usually undertaken. Development work is usually undertaken through
projects, with set objectives, a predetermined time schedule, a plan of action, and a
budget. Responsibility for implementation is assigned, and the beneficiary clientele
comes into the picture only as a peripheral element.
Most of these projects are conceptualised and formulated around the availability of
funds. There are many instances where the need for a project to achieve some
objective is conceived in the mind of some authority that either has access to funds or
enough power to start. After the project is conceived, a pre–feasibility study may be
carried out, with data being gathered through traditional methods and a justification
for the project worked out. If the initiator of the project is very keen on the project and
has enough power, then the projects, which are not really feasible, are manipulated to
appear feasible.
Once the pre-feasibility stage is over, a feasibility study is undertaken. The same
manipulatory process is carried out in a deeper and more intensive form. If the
feasibility study meets requirements, then the project gets off the ground and
thereafter the project is implemented. Invariably the project is to benefit a specific
clientele but where does the clientele come into the picture in the project planning
18
process? Often clients are considered a nuisance, because they express justifiable fears Participatory Approaches
to Environment and
about the changes that may result from the project. Development
Are development projects planned to satisfy someone’s ego, to utilise some available
funding, or to solve genuine problems? If the objective is to solve problems, all parties
affected by the problem should have a say in the solution that is identified. The
affected parties should be brought into the project identification and formulation
process. But if the involvement of the clientele is desired, how should it be done and
what are the methodologies, and processes? It is here that participatory methodologies
and implementation become relevant.
The participation of the beneficiaries is needed to achieve success of the projects at a
very practical level. A study on rural participation cites an evaluation of over 50 rural
development projects, which reveal that participation, and decision-making during
implementation is even more critical to project success than participation at the initial
stages. Due to lack of participation, a large number of development projects have
resulted only in a short-lived progress.
An example can be cited with regard to some minor irrigation projects implemented in
the latter half of the 1980s in the districts of Kurunegala and Moneragala in Sri Lanka.
In the early 1990s, two to three years after projects completion, the Self Help Support
Programme of the Swiss Interco operation undertook an evaluation of some of the
completed irrigation projects. The results revealed that about 70% of the minor
irrigation tanks rehabilitated were found to be poorly maintained by the farmers, as
they were envisaging further external support for maintenance.
When some of the farmers were asked why they allowed the tank bund to get eroded
to half its size in certain places, let plants grow uncontrolled, and neglected, the ant
hills destroying the bunds, the answer was: we have informed the Field Officers in
writing several times but none of them came this way after the construction work was
over. This is a clear indication of the lack of involvement in the decision-making and
implementation.
Field interaction showed that they lacked a sense of ownership or responsibility for
maintaining such structures. There was no organised effort to find alternative means
of addressing such issues. The Farmer Organisations appear to have been formed by
the intervening organisations to renovate the first set of tanks. When the construction
work was over, the need to take collective action for maintenance was not realised.
With this experience, a participatory approach was encouraged with the next set of
tanks to be rehabilitated, implemented by two partner organisations in Mahawa and
Kurunegala. It took a much longer time to complete the structures, as compared to the
earlier experience. The Farmer Organisations were involved from the planning stage,
through implementation and monitoring and evaluation, using a participatory
approach, PRA. This meant building up the capacity of the Farmer Organisations, and
even more so of the field officers who were used to planning and implementing
projects on their own for the benefit of the people. The role reversal of these officers
did not come about automatically by using the methods alone, but resulted from the
follow-up after training in participatory methodology.
This slow process of reflection and action finally allowed information generation,
analysis, planning and action by the farmers based on their own decisions. The results
can be seen today. Urapolayagama, Heeralugam, villages in the Kurunegala District
facilitated by the National Development Foundation, Kandubodagamawewa in
Mahawa facilitated by the Sri Lanka Freedom from Hunger Campaign Board, Savings
and Credit Groups at Mahiyangana facilitated by Future in our Hands, are examples of
successful efforts of this approach. In these instances farmers organised themselves to
maintain the rehabilitated schemes backed by groups funds and collective action. The
difference in the results and impact of the implementation strategy has been evident.
19
Approaches and Practices These experiences also show the importance of the participation of the people
concerned in the decision making process throughout the development cycle. A sense
of ownership of assets ar ises when there is participation in planning, designing,
implementation, monitoring and evaluation.
5.6 PARTICIPATORY METHODOLOGIES IN THE

EMPOWERING PROCESS
The recognition of the importance of participation in the development process has led
to the development of a variety of methodologies in order to achieve its objectives in
development projects. Current practices in implementing the participatory approaches
in development are drawn from a variety of traditions such as Activist Participatory
Research, Applied anthropology, Field Research on Farming Systems, Traditions and
Methods of Participatory Research, Agro-Eco Systems Analysis and Rapid Rural
Appraisal. According to Chambers, it represents a growing family of approaches and
methods, which will enable local people to share, analyse and act to enhance their
living conditions.
In the Sri Lankan Context, the national network promoting participatory approaches
uses the term Participatory Interaction in Development (PID) in order to identify the
methodology used in this country. This connotes participatory interaction among all
actors in development, while recognising the key role of the people themselves and its
relevance at various stages of the development cycle. In promoting the use of this
approach in Sri Lanka, the experiences of social mobilisation, such as in the Change
Agent Programme that has evolved during the past decade in Sri Lanka has been kept
in mind.
PID draws heavily on PRA in the use of visualisation of tools and techniques and
changes in the behavioural patterns and attitudes, while focussing on the interaction
and process. It is envisaged that such a conceptual outlook promotes sustained
participatory development, which will contribute to the empowerment of the people.
This approach needs to be treated as an adapted version of participatory development,
which is supported by creative ingenuity. Similarly, like the participatory approach,
these methodologies are bound to change with experience.
Field experience over many years has show n that PID/PRA tools and techniques have
a strong potential for achieving the participation of all actors concerned, particularly
the villagers whether literate or illiterate. The key to this is the element of
visualisation associated with such tools. The shifts from verbal to visual help even the
non-articulate members, such as the under-privileged, women, and children, to
participate. It creates a free and open environment for interaction.
The methods and tools often used are participatory mapping and modelling, direct
observation and transect walks, seasonal calendars, time lines and trend line’s matrix
scoring and ranking, wealth and well-being ranking and grouping, institutional
diagramming (Venn diagrams), and other forms of analytical diagramming suc h as
different types of graphs. Information generated through these techniques is often
supplemented by secondary data, which can be used for crosschecking. Focus group
interviews, semi-structured interviews, and key informants are also used in
combination with the other methods.
The opportunities for triangulation of information generated are another aspect, which
come out very significantly in the use of participatory tools and techniques, and are
built on the principle of visualisation. This means that the reliability and the validity
of the information generated can be established through crosschecking. Visualised
information also allows for the perceptions of different sectors of the populations –
men and women, young and old, privileged and disadvantaged to come together on a
common basis.
20
Interaction within the groups, between groups, and sharing with those from different Participatory Approaches
to Environment and
locations, is made more feasible by the use of visual techniques. When farmers from Development
Dambana in Mahiyangana presented their experience in Colombo to some well-
educated development workers, they could articulate their views effectively with the
use of visuals they prepared themselves. The same was true of the farmers from
Urapolyagama in Kurunegala, where they presented their case to the members of the
national Network for PID/PRA. Exchange visits between farmer organisations and
exchanges between farmers within the group, have become more realistic and
understandable with the use of these techniques. Handled carefully and skillfully by a
facilitator, they become an instrument for bringing about the envisaged change in
behaviour and attitudes, and for breaking barriers between different sections of the
population.
Field experience shows that information needed for a situation analysis, or baseline
data for establishing indicators for monitoring and evaluation in a participatory
manner can be elicited, understood and agreed upon in such a process. Therefore the
same tools could be used for interactive monitoring of progress of impact evaluations.
One such example is the experience of the National Development Foundation. In this
organisation information generated through a participatory process has been helpful
for group interaction during monthly meetings, to compare progress among
themselves, with the tools providing the base for information generation analysis and
discussion. Such information has proven to be equally effective for joint reviews and
evaluations with the intermediary organisations and funding partners. This, however,
should not be interpreted to mean that participatory evaluation and monitoring rules
out hard data. Hard data can be aggregated or drawn from such basic information by
the parties concerned. But the fact remains that the local organisation should do it for
the purpose of monitoring.
Wealth ranking exercises are very useful for learning about the social structure and
identifying a target group. They must be carefully handled, as they can become
sensitive issues. The Farmer organisation of Kanudubodagamawewa in Maho is an
example where such analysis promoted the community to organise itself to help the
poorer sector for example, the landless poor were allowed to use small plots of paddy
land allocated to them by the community for cultivating vegetables during the Yhala
season. The analysis of power relations in the local set-up, which is crucial for the
empowerment process, is often being done with the use of the flow charts and impact
diagramming.
The use of the tools and techniques is limited by the skill of facilitation. Assessing the
limits of local knowledge and awareness, and when to bring in technical and scientific
know -how available with experts, can be addressed with the analysis of information
generated through the use of participatory tools and techniques. The experience of
building on what people already know, particularly with regard to farming systems,
has shown the possibility of harmonising different types of knowledge at the local
level.
None of the above should be taken to mean that the use of suc h methods automatically
ensures participation in the manner expected that leads to empowerment, enabling
villagers to conduct their own analysis, and to own the information generated. Many
who pay lip service to PRA have a tendency to look at the technique as an end in
itself, and not a means for attaining development goals.
The critique that tools and techniques of PID/PRA are only cosmetics to social
mobilisation can be challenged in that sense. Why do people use cosmetics? They
realise the existence of a shortcoming that can be covered by such an action, or at least
to improve on what exists. Such visualised tools and techniques could be considered
as a strong medium or a means for social mobilisation to be effective. This is
particularly so if the agent wishes to change the role from an activator to a facilitator,
who allows the key actors or the community to articulate views, generate information,
21
Approaches and Practices analyse, draw conclusion, assess options, take decisions, implement, and monitor by
themselves. Therefore, as a concept, it goes much deeper, and becomes
complementary to the agent. All such approaches stress the importance of
commitment to the process as a means for empowering the people. The
complementarity of the approaches needs to be recognised in such a context that they
should not be seen as additions for subtraction. Complementarity makes the final
product of the empowerment richer, stronger, and mutually reinforcing.
A farmer, in a recent video, is shown taking pride in the fact that they could produce a
result, which they never imagined they could. Therefore, it is not merely playing with
stones, and sticks, or belittling the literate and the intelligentsia. While it looks like
Montessori work, as some say, the basic principle behind the Montessori Method is
learning by doing. A participatory approach, with a reversal of roles, is also attributed
to experimental learning, in which actors in development are in partnership with those
to be empowered. In other words, it helps the potential and enthusiasm inherent in
human beings to grow and blossom.
Attitudes and Behaviour
Attitudes and behaviour are an integral part in PID/PRA. As observed earlier, in the
project mode of development intervention, over the past half a century, the emphasis
was on planned projects being implemented with the involvement of the beneficiaries.
This has meant that the implementer has a dominant role, and the beneficiary a
passive role. In the use of participatory approaches, these roles are reversed, and the
beneficiaries become key actors in development.
An analyst further elaborates this point as follows: the major shift, however, during
the era of participatory approaches, in the past two decades is one that recognises
people from a professional paradigm centering on things. This emphasis was
dominant in projects implemented during the 1950s and 1960s with large
infrastructure irrigation works and industrialisation being the major sectors. Another
expert refers to it as handing over the stick to the poor from the bureaucracy, implying
a reversal of roles.
This means PID, as an approach, emphasises a change in behaviour and attitudes, as
well as in concepts, values and methods. This challenges the accepted norms, which is
dominant in bureaucracies, professions, careers, and the idea of transfer of knowledge
from the expert to the ignorant. It also means loss of central control of power and
recognising local diversity and empowerment. Such a role reversal applies to all the
steps of the development cycle.
Experience shows that the methods and tools previously described, and the process
adopted contribute to reinforcing the behavioural changes among the main actors in
development. This aspect of participatory approach is the most difficult to achieve.
Sometimes, depending on the behaviour of the so-called facilitator, even a
participatory tool or technique may lead to top-down implementation. After many
years of conventional bureaucratic behaviour, it is certainly a challenge to bring about
these different behavioural patterns.
Frus tration, due to non-fulfillment of promises and specific biases of projects to which
the community has been exposed for generations, makes this paradigm shift a difficult
process for the village. In the eyes of the villager, the outsider is the officer, and the
past experience with outsiders often inhibits free and open expression.
However, there are instances where participatory methods have helped people to
articulate their views to the politicians and decision makers effectively. Even in the
contexts such as the plantation sector, where there is a dominant management set-up,
workers have used the results of participatory analysis to open a dialogue with the
superintendent.
22
The culture of collaboration between development partners, based on openness and Participatory Approaches
to Environment and
democratic decision-making is essential for sustained development. This can only be Development
realised through a participatory relationship with the communities. The more
experience we gather in the use of such an approach, the more we shall understand its
implications. It is important to emphasise the spirit in which these methods are used. It
is not the tool or the approach, which is often at fault, but the way it is used.
Therefore, improving effective facilitation skills on the part of the development
workers bec omes critically important. The way in which the approach is implemented
can help to prevent biases on the basis of community leadership, gender and the
disadvantaged.
Process and Sharing
The third significant element in PID/PRA is the process or the sharing of experience.
Participatory approaches, particularly PID/PRA, emphasise the need to think beyond
projects. In other words, there is a commitment to a process, and is not limited to a
project which is time bound. Such a process will create an environment where people
actively pursue development activities, on their own initiative. In other words,
experience in field situations reveals that self-organised collective action can evolve
as a result of a positive environment, which we, as development workers, may have
helped to generate through facilitating a process.
Due to the emphasis given to the process in participatory approaches, there is no direct
guideline, which can be applied or replicated. The process of learning takes place both
vertically and horizontally. Farmers learn from each other through interaction. Farmer
groups share experience through interaction between groups, which leads to local
people becoming good facilitators for each other’s analysis. Local people, such as
farmers and villagers, become confident of their own expertise and acquire skills
through the process.
This has made it possible for them to share their experience with other local, national
and international organisations. In 1991, villagers from Mahiyangana presented their
analysis, how they did it, and the purpose for which it was done, to a large gathering
of managerial personnel and decision makers from the governmental and non-
governmental organisations at the Bandaranaike Memorial International Conference
Hall in Colombo. A similar experience took place in the network for PID/PRA
gathering in Colombo, where farmers from Kurunegala presented their case in 1994.
Inspite of the change in environment from a simple village life to metropolitan
Colombo, the farmers remained unruffled by the questions raised by the audience.
This shows a clear indication of a high esteem arising from self-actualisation and
confidence. They could explain to anybody with confidence what they had analysed,
planned, implemented and monitored. Recent training conducted for field officers
through farmer resource persons, by Action Aid India, is another example of this form
of sharing.
It is pointed out that various technologies, approaches and methods are spread
laterally by peers rather than vertically through transfer of technology. Farmer to
farmer extension is becoming more prevalent, both within and between countries and
ecological zones. In PID/PRA, the best trainers and facilitators for adjoining villagers
are those who have already gained experience in the application of the approach.
A villager who has gone through a participatory process of development in his village
was asked as to what he would suggest to do differently, if the PDA/PRA process was
to be replicated in another village. He promptly replied: ‘this is how we did it, and it
makes sense to us; others may do it differently. Please ask them to evolve their own
system’. This simple statement from a farmer in a remote village in Kurunegala has an
in-depth philosophy behind it. It shows trust in the potential, and belief in the evolving
nature of the participatory process. However, when reference was made about
improved farming practices, he said: ‘those could be shared with our colleagues in the
next village. Friends from other villages have visited us to learn about intensive rice
23
Approaches and Practices cultivation practices from our demonstration plots’. Thus experience spreads from
farmer to farmer, and village to village. It is also spreading from non-governmental to
governmental organisations and vice versa through national networking. Regional
exchanges provide a forum for sharing of these techniques between nations.
Process and Time
A participatory approach is a catch word in the development jargon today. However ,
when it comes to the progress and monitoring of the projects and programmes, the
tendency is to look for easily accomplished and tangible targets. Naturally the
development worker gets sandwiched between the community based participatory
approach emphasising people and their reality, and the demand for physical and
financial targets. This dilemma still prevails, even though participation has entered as
a buzzword in the development literature.
An expert’s comments on this conflict are as follows: “development workers do not
seem to have very much time or patience. Perhaps it is all a result of the invention of
the jet engine- if we can get there in only ten hours why do we need ten years to
develop the place? On a more serious level, we do seem to want results amazingly
quickly. It is however doubtful that the development process can be compressed to
meet our ambitions. We used to talk about three year projects; perhaps we should be
talking about twenty year programmes. How many rural areas have developed in one
generation? We are working with people, people with their own urgencies, priorities
and time scales. It is their development that is the measure of success.”
This highlights the fact that if people matter in development, there is no short cut. We
have to facilitate a process whereby people become sensitive to their problems and
express readiness to change their situation by taking responsibility for their own
organisations and acting correctively, taking decisions for the desired changes. We, as
development workers, need to facilitate such a process and support strengthening of
such organisations. This is a long-term process demanding the necessary commitment.
‘A great deal of heartbreak which in the past has too often turned over optimistic
idealists into later cynics, would be avoided if those who wish to help in development
could learn to be content to do good slowly.’ As Burkey rightly says, poor people who
never had the opportunity of participating in a democratic process require time to
learn to formulate and express their ideas, participate in open debate, take collective
decisions and follow up with cooperative action. Mistakes can be made into lessons
leading to better decisions in the future. Development workers need to remember that
behavioural patterns cannot be changed at once. Change must be a gradual process, a
process in which the ideas and behaviour of all actors in the development process will
most probably change over time.
SAQ 3
i) Explain the significance of participatory approaches in empowering people for
sustainable development.
ii) Write a note on the following in your own words:
a) Methods and Tools.
b) Process and Sharing.
Let us now summarise what we have studied so far.
5.7 SUMMARY
In the case of specific grassroots level organisations, the potential of participatory
methodology has been proven in many instances. Participatory methods using visual
and verbal modes of communication have been effectively used for appraisal,
24
planning, monitoring and evaluation of the development programmes. But the use of Participatory Approaches
to Environment and
methods alone is not enough to sustain the participation of the community in the Development
development process. Other significant aspects which need to be strengthened include
the institutionalisation of the processes, delegation of responsibility, and
decentralisation of decision-making and resource allocation.
The anticipated role reversals are extremely significant for the key actors, namely the
villagers, to perform effectively.
Participation, in the context of participatory approaches, specifically PID, can be used
in a much wider perspective than it is currently used. All actors in the development
scene have a role to play - the farmers and villagers who are the prime actors, the
facilitators or change agents from government or non-governmental sectors, the
decision makers in managerial positions, and policy makers and politicians. The roles
of different actors can be geared towards the realisation of the common objective of
sustainable development through empowerment of the people. There is a need to
create an environment where people themselves are the key actors, and all the other
actors play a facilitative and supportive role.
This should rule out the misunderstanding that a bottom up process is one where
people do everything by themselves, know everything that needs to be know n and
consider that modern technology/research has no role to play.
In a participatory approach, there is certainly room for scientific research and
technology. The only difference is that we build on what is already known by the
farmers as indigenous technology, and there is an opportunity to harmonise or adapt
research findings in an acceptable and sustained manner. This means a re–orientation
of the conventional extension systems, the field workers’ role, and that of the
institutions they represent, in order to evolve a system which emphasises support and
facilitation for local farming initiatives, which are essential for sustainable
development.

1. Explain various approaches and methods of participatory approach.
2. Discuss participatory approach and the principles of participatory development.
3. Write a note on the constraints of participation.
4. Explain various principles of community development.
5. Write a note on the salient features and functions of community organisation.
6. What is Community organisation? Briefly examine the role of women in these
organisations.
7. Examine the role of participatory approach in empowering people for sustainable
development.
8. Explain the participatory methodologies in the empowering process.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Burkey, S., (1993) People First, A guide to self-reliant participatory rural
development, Zed Books, London & New York.
2. Cohen, J.M, and Uphoff, N.J., (1977) Rural development participation: concepts
measures for project design, implementation and evaluation, Monograph Series
No. 2, Rural Development Committee, Cornell University, Ithaca.
25
Approaches and Practices 3. Chambers, R., (1997) Whose Reality Counts? Putting the First Last. Intermediate
4. Food and Agriculture Organisation (1981) The Peasants Charter: The
declaration of principles and programme of action of World Conference on
Agrarian Reform and Rural Development, FAO, Rome.
5. Ghai, D.P., Khan, A.R., Lee, E.L.H, and Alfthan, T., (1977) The Basic Needs
Approach to Development: some issues regarding concepts and method ology,
International Labour Office, Geneva.
6. Pearce, A, and Stiefel, M., (1979) Inquiry into Participation, UNRISD/79/C.14,
United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, Geneva.
7. Shaha, P., (1993) Participatory Watershed Management Programme in India:
R eversing our roles and reversing our theories, Rural People’s Knowledge,
Agricultural Research and Extension Practice, IIED Research Series Vol. 1.
International Institute for Environment and Development, IIED, London.
8. Shepherd, A., (1998) Sustainable Rural Development. St. Martin’s Press, New
York.
9. Uphoff, N., (1992) Learning from Gal Oya: Possibilities for Participatory
Development and Post -Newtonian Social Science, Cornel University Press, Ithaca.
26

Block 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Block 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Block 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Introduction to

UNIT 1 AN INTRODUCTION TO Participatory

1.2 PARTICIPATORY MANAGEMENT AND

Participatory management can improve the effectiveness and capacity of an

Social organisation is a process of organising the community in-groups to achieve any

Community mobilisation is a process of mobilising the community for participation in

Development implies improvement, growth and change. It is concerned with the

Development involves a broader perspective. It is regarded as a form of social change.

Development, as a form of social change, has two dimensions:

• Economic development; and

• legal (in case of the members),

Partners, like Line

1.3 PHILOSOPHY OF THE PARTICIPATORY

1.4 PARTICIPATION AS A PROCESS OF

1.4.1 Constraints of Community Participation and Mobilisation

1.4.2 Solutions to Community P articipation

1.5 VISUAL TOOLS AND MATERIALS FOR

• Is the task open-ended or over -structured?

1.6 APPROACHES TO PARTICIPATORY

Helper or Facilitator Ruler or Boss

An expediter and assistant Bureaucratic, authoritarian

A humble helper and consultant A bossy director, autocratic

Dresses simply like a community

Likes to learn from local Opinionated, has all the answers

Respects local knowledge and Disrespects local knowledge and skills

Encourages participation, self- Does not appreciate or encourage

Is people centred Is technology/bureaucracy-centred.

1.7 USE OF PARTICIPATORY APPROACH

1.8 PARTICIPATORY RURAL APPRAISAL

Participatory Rural Appraisal − A Misnomer:

• PLA − Participatory Learning Approaches.

PRA: Key Principles

c) Ranking : Problem ranking

d) Trend Analysis : Historical diagramming

1.10 CONSTRAINTS FOR PARTICIPATORY

Let us summarise what we have studied so far.

1.12 TERMINAL QUESTIONS

2.2 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF THE

• Contribution of the scholars and researchers who were involved in ethnographic

2.2.1 Evolution of PRA

Recognition of limitations of “Green Revolution”

Farming system research/ Agro-Eco-System analysis

Rapid rural appraisal

Participatory rapid/rural appraisal

Rapid assessment procedures

2.3.1 Introduction of Self-Government System

• No rural development efforts were made in this period;

• Collection of revenues; and

i) Elitism : Disparity, privileged few and vast non-privileged.

The circumscribed model of rural self-government was operating throughout the

2.3.2 Rural Development Initiatives

Let us summarise what we have studied so far.

2.5 TERMINAL QUESTIONS

3.2 POLICIES AND PROGRAMMES OF PAKISTAN

3.3 NATIONAL CONSERVATION STRATEGY

• achieve greater public partnership in development and management,

3.3.1 Implementation Arrangements and Strategy

3.3.2 Operating Principles

3.4 COMMUNITY ORGANISATIONS AND NGOs