• No results found

Manila 26/03/2014 Session 10: Uses of CBMS in Region 10.

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Manila 26/03/2014 Session 10: Uses of CBMS in Region 10."

Copied!
19
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Session 10:

“Uses of CBMS in Region 10”.

Independent Authority for Participation – Tuscany Region, Italy

Manila

(2)

I HAVE BEEN LEARNING A LOT IN THESE DAYS

- Admiring the astonishing results on policies of the CBMS fast expansion, and the energetic power of this meeting, that is able to strengthen political will of continuing expansion….

- the capacity of a penetrating and capillary capacity building to contribute to change the “technical culture” 8and partially the political culture) of your

country.

- About the need to have a system which could integrate and even

substitute the slow and incomplete national statistic system, especially in the catastrophes’ prevention and in the immediate aftermath of a natural disaster.

- that could be reliable and participatory in drawing a territorial diagnostic of problems

- that could be pedagogic, “training citizens” while gathering data

- that could constantly reduce time-consuming using the most advanced technologies

(3)

I ALSO HAVE BEEN LEARNING A LOT ON LIMITS THAT YOUR ANNUAL CBMS MEETINGS ’PROCEEDINGS REPEATEDLY UNDERLINE…

- That citizens have still mainly a role of privileged informants, so they are still not involved creatively in forging and evaluating the policies put in practice on the base of CBMS data collection (although there are experiences where after data collection workshop for discovering dreams and effective actions are

implemented)

- That the devil hides in the details (typology of numerators, languages used…) and there is always the risk of creating excess of expectations where

announcing a census.

- That some policies (as relocation of slums in dangerous areas) are difficult to implement without a participatory approach, carrying a strong psycho-social burden.

- That as far as the method of CBMS is getting more a more sophisticated, there are problems in updating data, and they get very old soon in some areas….

- That publishing the maps you realize can clash with privacy, so that many details have to be kept “hidden” in the public domain….

(4)

YOUR METHOD SEEMS TO ME “MATURE” TO DARE A JUMP

AHEAD and A SCALING UP IN TERMS OF QUALITY and QUANTITY

THAT’S WHY, TAKING ADVANTAGE FROM MY DISTANCE IN

RELATION TO THE PHILIPPINES’ CONTEXT, I WOULD LIKE TO

RETAKE THE LINE OF THINKING OF PROFESSOR ROMULO NERI

(where to go next?), DECLINING IT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF

PARTICIPATORY METHODOLOGIES.

-

trying to imagine if your huge “critical mass” could be ready for

obtaining a new recognition from the State and the Regions,

differentiating their role as promoters, instead of repeating CBMS as a

“fractal” similar at every different institutional level (from barangays to

the central State?)

I would like to decline the idea of “Teaching to Fish” of professor Neri in

international terms,

beyond the world CBMS network

, which mainly

gathers together contexts with affinities and a common strong need to

use Community Based Monitoring especially in its CBMS perspective

(

creating awareness on problems through renovating visions starting

from data collection and 2photographs” of existing reality

)

(5)

I start with a study done by UCLG (the world association of Mayor, seeded in

Barcelona) that maybe some of you belongs too

http://www.uclg.org

It was done in cooperation with

www.oidp.net

(the International Observatory

of Participatory Democracy - OIDP) and it will be presented next week in

Medellin (Colombia) at the UN-Habitat Urban Forum

IT is not a scientific report, but is filtered by the sensitivity of UCLG

(6)

OBVIOUSLY THESE

METHODOLOGIES

ARE

PATH-DEPENDENT, i.e.

DEPEND FROM

LOCAL URGENCIES

AND PRIORITIES.

THE GOAL IS: REFLECTING ON THE CONCEPT OF

“COMMUNTY THAT MONITORS POLICIES”

(WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF SOCIAL

ACCOUNTABILITY), and ITS MULTIPLE POSSIBLE

METHODOLOGIES IN THE DIFFERENT PHASES OF THE POLICIES….

(7)
(8)

Very diverse countries to photograph different phases

of policies in which the community can be a

(9)

It is a self-reflection of local governments on the “fears”

they have in opening a larger space of protagonism to

inhabitants (which means more than just formal

“citizens”)

(10)

CASES WHICH ARE EFFECTIVE EXAMPLES OF COMMUNITY

MONITORING OF PUBLIC POLICIES EVEN IF THEY DO NOT USE

THAT NAME (The Forum of Services in Canoas, Brazil; Citizens’

juries in Poitou Charentes Region, France)

(11)

CONCLUSION are

optimistic on the quality

that CBMs (intended as a

principle, not just a

method) can reach, when

merged with other

participatory devices

(participatory planning and

budgeting, town meetings,

citizens juries with random

selection….) and when

using the positive

potentials of “multiscalar”

networking,

with every

entity having a different

(12)

A last reflection on how scaling-up helps

dissemination

(13)

The « PB office » in Malaga

Province (2007-2011)

(14)

The Tuscanian Region Law nº 69/2007 ->

and Law 46/2013: the engine of a

multiplication (with quality elements

(15)

Until 29011, 7 out of 52 projects of participatory

processes co-funded by the Region were PBs

(13%), growing in the last years…

Emulada em UMBRIA e EMILIA ROMAGNA

1)

Growing deliberative quality

2)

High variety of models (youth/thematic/rotation)

3)

Different typologies of institutions

4)

Different resources put into discussion

5)

Hybridization with other participatory models

6)

“emulative power” which disseminated them

beyond the funded cases…

(16)

UMA NOVA FRONTEIRA: a

promoção supra-municipal

The Lazio Region

(2005-2010)

invested 16 millions per year supporting

municipalities and districts for PB

(17)

Centre for Social Studies

Uma mudança de Lei e um Departmento Participação e Formação ajudaram…

COMPLEMENTARY TOOLS WERE USED, AS

RANDONM SELECTIONS and

COMPUTER-VOTING WITH HEALTH-CARDS…

The municipalities

were

incentived to join

together for asking

meetings in their area

and cooperate. A

“resistant network”

(18)

The national case of Solecki Funds in Poland (since

2009): more than 1112 y Budgeting Processes in 3

years.

(19)

Maraming

Salamat Po!

Shukran!

Thanks a lot….

Daghang

Salamat

(questions are

welcome!)

References

Related documents