Session 10:
“Uses of CBMS in Region 10”.
Independent Authority for Participation – Tuscany Region, Italy
Manila
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
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….
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
)
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
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….
Very diverse countries to photograph different phases
of policies in which the community can be a
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”)
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)
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
A last reflection on how scaling-up helps
dissemination
The « PB office » in Malaga
Province (2007-2011)
The Tuscanian Region Law nº 69/2007 ->
and Law 46/2013: the engine of a
multiplication (with quality elements
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 quality2)
High variety of models (youth/thematic/rotation)3)
Different typologies of institutions4)
Different resources put into discussion5)
Hybridization with other participatory models6)
“emulative power” which disseminated thembeyond the funded cases…
UMA NOVA FRONTEIRA: a
promoção supra-municipal
The Lazio Region
(2005-2010)
invested 16 millions per year supportingmunicipalities and districts for PB
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”
The national case of Solecki Funds in Poland (since
2009): more than 1112 y Budgeting Processes in 3
years.
Maraming
Salamat Po!
Shukran!
Thanks a lot….
Daghang
Salamat
(questions are