Non-Governmental Organisations: Practical Experiences
Ba sed on analysis of 1 50 organisations from across the developing World, Uphoff ( 1 99 1 :496) summaried the characteristics of local organisations tha t enable them to function beneficially. Informal modes of operation were genera lly more successful tha n more formal ones, because local people were unfa miliar with such formal proceedings; the performa nce was better when decision-making was shared between the executive committees (or many committees) and general assembly of a ll members; horizontal links with simila r organisations and vertical links with organisations above and below created better performance and more stability ; and the size of the organisation was not a significant factor in determining the level of success. Brohman ( 1 996:265-66) asserts that people only find themselves in a truly participatory organisation when they share common concerns and volunteer to act collectively.
A study of perceptions on participation, which involved 230 governmental a nd non governmenta l organisations in Africa, found that people usually participate in planning and implementation, while monitoring and evaluation is conducted by outsiders (Guijt, 1 99 1 ).
The Wasteland Development Progra mme in India, through Social Action for Rural and Tribal Inhabitants, supported a group formation for women a s a mechanism to strengthen the political voice of women within local organisations. These groups succeeded in obta ining tenuria l rights to common land for women' s groups. It also provided a base for women to challenge the gender division of labour at home and in society. Studies showed that, as a result of these groups' efforts, men started to help in household chores while women were working on the wastelands (Weekes-Vagliani, 1 995 :67).
Fernando ( 1 995 : 1 77) in his ca se study about one of the Sri Lanka n NGO experiences in the field of participatory development at gra ssroots level, differentiates between two types of persons who could be identified a s leaders: firstly, the village leader who leads the
community on an ideologica l basis and receives respect in return. A person like this mobilises resources, including human resources for community purposes. Secondly, village brokers who negotiate resource flows from outside the village and have knowledge about how this system operates.
Oxfa m implemented Kebkabiya Food Security Project in North Darfur in Sudan in 1 987 which was focused on building seed banks (Cornwall, 2003). It has been noticed that men made all community decisions while women' s contribution was initially limited to helping to build seed banks. Oxfam decided to address gender issues by hiring two female coordinators, whose task was to represent women' s concerns to the management committee and encourage women' s participation in the project. Loca l women had been encouraged to form their own committees. Oxfa m' s strategy was based on working separa tely with the women, and then to try to persuade the men of the value of involving women in their committees, with the a im that women ca n develop confidence and after being involved in ma le-run committees can speak out and a ddress their concerns. After that women started to ask for practica l help and support for some generating activities such as poultry raising and handicra fts. Oxfa m refused to respond to women's requests, because they worried that these forms of activities would support the tra ditional gender roles and hence reinforce gender inequa lity rather than empowering them (Cornwa ll, 2003). According to Cornwa ll, Kabkabiya women's needs a nd interests were not taken into account because the NGO policy contradicted with participa nts' interests. Cornwall (2003) explained that Oxfa m, despite their commitment to participation, is guided by their own objectives, which they believed to be in the women' s interest. On the other hand, ba sed on long working experience a s development worker in Sudan, Osma n (2002:24) asserts that development organisations should not be surprised if they face resistance to such interventions, especia lly in communities with strict gendered codes of behavior. Reflecting on Oxfa m's experiences in Sudan, Osman (2002:23) a sserts that the main challenge facing development organisations is that gender-sensitive poverty eradication policies and strategies are context-specific.
Ha iley (200 1 ) explores the development approaches, which were adopted by South Asia n NGOs through ca se studies that included nine organisations i n three countries, Bangladesh, India and Pakistan. The study revealed that the organisations invest their time in building personal relationships with the communities and networks of trusting relationships between
staff and local people. One of the key elements in the success of these NGOs is their leaders' commitment to social justice and helping the rura l poor and by having a clear vision of how they can contribute to local development. Hailey concludes that the South Asian NGOs successfully adopted informal approaches to participatory processes, which was dependent on personal interaction. This was based on personal criteria, such as trust, respect a nd friendship. Hailey (2001 :89) finds that the participation of the local community in the NGOs' programmes ca me easily and naturally as a result of highly personalised interaction between the NGOs' staff and the communities. These NGOs' staff had engaged with, and listened to the community in an unstructured and informa l ma nner. The NGOs presented three justifications for not using the formulaic participatory techniques and tools such a s, PRA : 1 )
such approaches a re operationally inappropriate and ha ve practical limitations; 2) the cultural context and local circumstances are more conductive to informa l and personalised methods tha n to the functional and formulaic approach; 3) formal approaches are seen a s a lien techniques that are imposed by outsiders to promote certain va lues or political agenda s.
Mosse (200 1 ) examined the experience of the Kribhco Indo-British Farming Project (KRIBP) in India , which was ma naged by an NGO and government. KRIBP has focused on improving the livelihoods of poor farming families through a PRA-based process. Mosse showed that loca l knowledge made no contribution to pla nning processes. Instead what was presented a s local needs was actually shaped by local perceptions of what development orga nisations were expected to deliver. Mosse (200 1 : 1 9) finds that PRA events in KRIBP produced knowledge that is strongly shaped by loca l relations of power, authority a nd gender. In other words it was shaped by locally dominant groups a nd by project interests (Mosse, 200 1 : 23). Mosse (2001 : 1 9) attributed this to the nature of PRA and its open-endedness. This suggests that loca l knowledge might not modify project models.
Recent studies on participatory development have started to focus on cultural and social a spects. Kassa m (2002) presents the experiences of an NGO of the indigenous Oromo people (Hundee) of Centra l Ethiopia . Hundee decided to protect its distinct entity and to pursue development based on translating their traditiona l views into modern-day development practices. It adopted strategies aimed at enabling communities to understa nd the cause of their problems and how to solve them. Hundee focused on informing people of their rights and duties within the fra mework of the Ethiopian constitution and a s a consequence
considerable achievements were made and changes occurred in Oromo life. The study of Ethiopian Hundee is an important work for understanding the influence of local values in mobilising communities.
The formation and performance of local organisations or grassroots organisations might be confronted by considerable challenges and constraints. Fernando ( 1 995) explains that familiarity with an external system, how it functions, and how it could be addressed, may also stand as a challenge for all grassroots organisations. Thomas ( 1 994) asserts that even if the establishment of voluntary organisations were based on communication and full participation, people who have a strong character will find a way to dominate. In general, a decision-making process within a community may be affected by age, gender, class, and caste or on other ground (ODA, 1 995). Cleaver (200 1 ) supports this view. The author argues that formation of local organisations and setting criteria for their members does not mean that exclusion, vulnerability, and subordination are overcome, because conditions and relations are shaped by some structural factors that are left untouched.
The practices of participatory development have faced various constraints, which definitely influence the outcomes of its interventions. The following section briefly outlines these constraints.
Factors which influenced People's Participation
Theoretically the concept of participation is linked to alternative development programmes, but in practice it is tightly control led, either by the state or the urban and rural elite groups (Rahnema, 1 992). McGee (2002) argues that in practice there is a kind of invisible
----
disagreement among the decision makers on which stage within the project cycle participation should occur and the extent to which participation should determine project inputs and activities.
Development projects are assumed to contribute to social changes in societies. However, they may not benefit all people equally, some people will gain more and some may lose from the process (ODA, 1 995). Black ( 1 99 1 : 1 52) argues that primary beneficiaries of rural development programmes are the cities as development funds mainly settle where offices are built and maintained, supplies are purchased, and salaries are earned and spent. Brohman
( 1 996) asserts that if care is not taken, bottom-up development initiatives may result in more inequa lity in terms of resource distribution a nd decision-making a mong local groups.
Cernea ( 1 99 1 ) points to the risk of development projects being controlled by externa l influences, such as donors and/or implementing agencies. Bagadion a nd Korton ( 1 99 1 :73) argue that development agencies usually have norms, procedures, policies and a ttitudes, which offer little support to build people' s capabilities. Development agencies a re seen to be responsible for the persistent problem of limited participation, which is due to the way they operate and to staffing that make genuine participatory approaches difficult or even impossible to apply (Schneider and Libercier, 1 995b: 48). Therefore they may fail to achieve their declared aim of empowering communities (Neefjes, 2000).
At present, internationa l organisations, donors and government are sharing a growing interest in participatory approaches. Blackbum and Holland ( 1 998: 1 ) assert that a s these approaches become institutionalised, new challenges have emerged and need to be a ddressed. These challenges include the organisational reforms and cha nging of professionals, a nd bureaucrats' behaviour. Hildyard and others (200 1 :70) expla in that if national and international development agencies are truly serious about the issues of susta inability, equity, and poverty reduction, they should give priority to the needs a nd political development of ma rginalised and oppressed groups. Hildyard and others propose that development agencies need to exa mine their internal hierarchies, training techniques, and office culture, which are essentia l to support receptivity, flexibility, pa tience, open-mindedness, non-defensiveness, curiosity, and respect for 'others' opinions (Hildyard et aI., 200 1 ). Freire ( 1 970: 1 35) contends tha t if the conditions, which dominate a project, are authoritarian, rigid, a nd dominant this will ma intain an exclusive environment. In fact, the success in participatory development projects depends on donors' and implementing agencies' rea diness to a dopt a process approach and delegate clearly defined responsibilities and decision ma king power to loca l stakeholders (Eylers and Foster, 1 998), a s well as involving different related institutions as partner organisations.
Ladbury and Eyben ( 1 995) identified four reasons for beneficiaries' lack of participation in development decisions that affect them: economic, politic, professiona lism, and the na ture of the products. Regarding economic issues, Ladbury and Eyben ( 1 995: 1 94) argue that there is a strong individually ba sed economic rationale for collective action. On the other hand,
politically, participation would be limited if the beneficiaries lack the power to organise and get themselves fa irly represented. Professionalism is also seen a s a barrier for participa tion as the culture of some sector specialists, such a s hea lth does not encourage participation (ODA,
1 995:97).
Narayan ( 1 995) studied the communities' involvement in 1 2 1 rura l water supply projects in 49 countries implemented by the World Bank. The study demonstrated that participation contributed to project effectiveness and encouraged a sense of empowerment ( 1 995 : 1 ). It showed that a development agency' s responsiveness to communities was influencing stakeholders' participation. The study suggested that people' s involvement in stages prior to implementation would influence their commitment to a project (Narayan, 1 995 :2). The study ( 1 995 :53) revealed that the degree of a community 's organisation has an influence on the level and quality of people's participation.
,. Some development agencies analysed their participatory development experiences and tried to identify obstacles that affected their efforts. The World Bank (200 1 a:3) identified the following constraints to participation in its projects during the period 1 994- 1 998: government' s skepticism about participatory approaches; government agencies lack of capacity to engage in participation; and communities' lack of tra ining and technica l knowledge .
.. Participation also depends on availability and distribution of resources, and access to a ssets and rights. If the communities are well organised and motivated their capability may be reduced by several limita tions such as inadequacy of resources and the structural fra me of loca l institutions (Cleaver, 200 1 ). Fernando ( 1 995 : 1 83) suggests that promoters of participatory development should keep their projects limited to ensure tha t the resources that reach groups can make significant changes in their lives.
n Participation theorists caution that 'participation' might lead to more exclusion of powerless
groups and individuals. Development interventions have been accused of being controlled by specific powerful groups or individuals and primary development stakeholders are treated as passive beneficiaries. Moreover, in some societies powerless people have been dominated for a long time by powerful elite groups, and have been overtaken by the mentality of independence, which reduced their capability to act and make their own decisions, while
those who enjoyed the power and status are opposed the change (Freire, 1 970; Mathur, 1 995). Participatory development authors (Uphoff, 1 99 1 :492; Mathur, 1 995 : 1 60; Brohma n, 1 996; Rudqvist and Woodford-Berger, 1 996; Simon and Narman, 1 999) argue that through the bottom-up development efforts there is a possibility that elite groups might monopolise project benefits or that field-officers and project leaders might align themselves with some community groups aga inst the interests of the poor, leading to limited or negative outcomes of development interventions. Well-informed and powerful individuals may influence the process of allocation and distribution of aid (Fernando, 1 995).
The burea ucratic rigidity and conventiona l system applied by development agencies also hindered people's participation (Mathur, 1 995). According to Schneider and Libercier ( 1 995b), experiences showed that application of participatory approaches by development orga nisations was constra ined by ma ny factors. For example, beha vior of development staff was guided by incentive and ma ny of them did not understand the rationale for participatory strategies in projects. Other examples were time and disbursement pressure and a dopting a blue print approach rather than a process approach.
Claims of full participation and empowerment through participatory development could be driven by particular gender interests, leaving the powerless without a chance to exercise their voices or much choice (Cornwa ll, 2003 :25). Morrisson and Jutting (2005 : 1 065) found that social institutions, which refer to laws, norms, traditions, and codes of conduct that have existed in societies for centuries, a re the most important single factor determining women's participation in economic activities outside the household. They (2005 : 1 080) also found that gender inequalities in participation in economic activities are generally higher in Muslim a nd Hindu dominated countries compared with Christian and Buddhist countries. However, there are important exceptions. This suggests that within the dominant religions, various interpretations and applications regarding the economic role of women a re possible. Morrisson' s and Jutting' s (2005) findings suggest that even in settings that are influenced by culture, religion, or economic roles, changes in favour of women a re possible.
Having outlined the main factors that influenced the outcomes of people' s participation in development the following section summa ries and concludes the chapter.
Summary and Conclusion
Many analysts a rgue that the concept of participation in development planning, policy making and decision sharing has been prominent in documents but has not percolated into practice. Repeatedly, participatory development has been criticised for not dealing with issues of power a nd politics while focusing only on technica l matters, a iming to 'achieve more' rather than empowering people. It has been argued that if alternative development strategies are to achieve their objectives and the loca l poor be genuinely empowered. Funda menta l cha nges to the status quo a nd the distribution of power a mong local people are required not just some scattered reforms (Brohman, 1 996). The main issue here is how and in wha t form people will participate (Gerrit, 1 997:2). Moreover, there is concern about the behaviours of the professionals and the development providers' policies. It is believed that to empower people, donors and development agencies need to have a clear vision, comprehensive experiences, and a strong belief in participatory concepts.
Non-governmenta l organisations, international or national, a re viewed a s the key actors in participatory development. Various practica l experiences have been presented which highlight that loca l NGOs have adopted various approaches and dealt with development issues from their own perspectives.
Previous participatory development experiences suggest that people's participation could be affected by externa l influences, and internal solida rity and conflict within communities. Moreover, the a lternative development approach has focused on local knowledge as a source of information and participation as a way for people to speak out. In practice the roles, strengths, and essence of indigenous participative organisations and practices are rarely explored and utilised in current development interventions.
People's contributions to development, and their locally participative ways and practices, have been ignored under the dominance of state-led and market-driven approaches. Participatory development studies and practices focused on economic factors and were rarely concerned about combining the cultura l and politica l a spects. Empirical studies that draw findings from studying local settings and local people's perceptions are very limited. Moreover, Participation literature focused on participatory approaches that were invented or
adopted by NGOs and development agencies. At the same time they neglected the indigenous participative organisations, approaches, and practices that play an important role in achieving economic, social and huma n development for Third World people in their local settings. There were participative values, organisations and practices that were supported by social norms but were neither explored or reflected in the literature, nor ana lysed and utilised by external development providers.
Despite the long time-fra me since the emergence of participation as a prominent feature in alternative development, it appears that studies on the nature and impact of participatory