Age Structure of project committee
CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSION
"Politics, conflicts of interest, struggles over resources and drawn out processes of consultation, consensus, and even new consensus post- conflict is part of the landscape of community based development. If community empowerment remains an objective, then all role-players must take the realization of this objective seriously through allocating the necessary training, time andpatience to see the process through. "(Adato, M. In SALDRU Report, 1998)
The aim of this researchwas to conducta critical analysis of the process of community participationin publicworks programmes in South Africaand to highlight important issues that should be included in the design, implementation and monitoring of
participatorydevelopment processes. The first phase (1994 to 1997) ofthe Community Based Public Works Programme (CBPWP) was used as a case studyto do this.
This dissertation contains the information from this research. The methodology used in this research andinthe collection of the base data used in it was written upinChapter2.
A literature review was conducted on both PublicWorksProgrammes and on Participation. Chapter3 of this report containsa summary of current thinking on participation, and Chapter4 provides the reader with background information on public works projects. Chapter5 described the case study for this research, the CBPWP: its nature, scale, aims and objectives and its contextin post-apartheid South Africa. Italso summarized the projectsthat were conducted for CASFJlLO and SALDRU and which providedbaseline data for this research. Chapter6 presentedthe research results in the formatofprofilesofcommunity levelstakeholders and a step-by-step outline of the stages of a CBPWPand how these stakeholders interactedwith it.
Chapter7 is an analysis of the lessons containedinChapter 6, relatedto the theoretical background ofparticipation and publicworks in Chapters 3 and 4 and the list of key and corollary research questionsinSection 1.5.
With regard to whether this project reached its objectivesplease refer to the evaluation overleafwhich outlines its successes and constraints as well alternative approaches that could have been used and recommendations for further research.
Important points from this research include the following:
• Public works programmes are multi-purpose and range from strategic.Iong-term economic interventions to emergencyrelief programmes. They are instruments through which public spending can be directed towards the poor and range from community-based, labour-intensive infrastructure building programmes to
programmes to address natural resource management goals. In post-apartheid context of South Africa in the 1990s they are intrinsically tied to transformation and
reconstruction and incorporateobjectives of the empowerment of communities in the developmentprocess and the transformation of development institutionsand top- down developmentprocesses. Many ofthese programmesin South Africa, including the CBPWP, recognise community participation in particular as an essential
component of meeting their objectives.
• Successful community participationdepends on the adequate provision of information,accesstoresources and understanding oflocallevel dynamics.
Participation canbea both a means (to improve project performance)and anend(to empower communitiesto participate in their own development);Itis not without costs; and the nature and type ofcommunityparticipation varies from purely information sharing, through consultation, decision-making and the initiation of action.
Key findings ofthis research include:
• That significant areas ofconcern about the community participation process in the CBPWP included: external determination ofparticipatoryprocesses and the stages of projects where communities are given the opportunityto participate; uncertaintyof roles and responsibilities, lack of dedicated resources, capacity and information constraints; unclear definition ofrights and processes to address concerns raised in
the participation process; conflict; powerrelationships and lack of ongoing monitoring and evaluation.
• That community participation has significant costs and that there needs to be some assessment of these costs,and maximisation of "benefits based on agreement byall stakeholderson the mostimportant elements, awareness of budgetaryconstraints at all levels and a focus on objectives of community participation.
• That development processes have statedgoals of empowerment, capacitybuilding and participation, and yet (i) they do not dedicate resources (sufficient information, time and money) to the participatory process; (ii) ensurethat community committees have the capacity to carryout responsibilitiesinthis regard and (iii) measure the attainment ofthese goals(at leastnot in a participatory fashion, but onlyby once-off externalevaluations like this one).
• That a participatory process should includethe informed selectionof stakeholders (with regard to community dynamics, different levels of power; alignment with
organizations, different education levels, traditionalpracticesrelatingto gender,weak bargaining powerof certaingroups,etc) and especially to recognize their rights and risks of these stakeholders in this process. For participationto be meaningful it has to be accompanied by rights and the recognition ofthese. If community stakeholders raise issues in participation processes, this is meaningless unlessthere is a defined process to acknowledge and dealwith these concerns.
For more key findings of this research, please refer to the sections7.2; 7.4; 7.5 and 7.7.
For recommendations on improving the cost effectiveness ofparticipation processes please see section7.5. For recommendations on what shouldbe includedin the design, implementation and monitoring of participation, please refer to table 15.
For possible waysto implement these researchfindings pleaserefer to the Tableon page 133.
EVALUATION:
This section provides a visual representation (in theformof a table) of positive and negative aspects of this dissertation;possible alternative ways approaches that,in
hindsight, might have been more effective;and recommendation for further research into community participationindevelopment programmes.
•
•
•
•
With the approach used, it was possible to considera broad range of data across a wide spectrumof CBPWP projects and thus develop a genericview ofthe concernsand problems of community
participation. Thisdata has a very broad and general application.
The combiningofbaseline data collectedfrom two different projects(one more quantitativeand the other qualitative) enabled a broader,more objective view of the subject
Itmight have been more revealingto look at data from only one or two local projects and examine the specificrelationships,activities and results of community participation instead ofincorporating data across a spectrumofover 100 projects.The applicationforthis,however,would be narroweras it would reflectvery local results.
It might have been usefulto examine only one group at community level, e.g.womenor"the project
committee"and their participation(it would not have been possible to use the questionnaire data in this approach)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The fact that there was so much baselinedata availablein raw fonn made its interrogation very difficult. It required a strict focussingon research questions and it was easy to get sidetracked The assumptionismade (see 1.5) that community participationin public works projects actuallyleads to both empowerment and equitable and sustainable development. The dissertationrecommends that,in a monitoringand evaluation,exerciseitisimportantto link the measurement of participationwith the achievingof its goals.It,in a sense,does not do this itself,but focusses on the process without
understanding the outcomes and objectivesof participation sufficiently.
The researchdoes not contain very detailed information relatingto women and youth and their
artici ation in the CBPWP
Research on the extent to whichcommunity
participationcontributesto empowerment, and what are the other elementsthat contributeto this.
Researchon women'sparticipationin public works progrannnes,to considertheir role and potential in the developmentprocess and limitations on their
participation
Researchinto local levelpolitics and howthiseffects the community participationprocess.
Research into sources ofconflictin labour intensive communitybased progrannnesand how these can be managed
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
This section provides suggestions for possible ways of implementing this research. The actions are listed, the target group and the objective of this action.
To write a paper summarising this research and have it published in a publication such as the
"Land and Rural Digesf'
To compile a pamphlet or short manual on issues to be considered when designing, implementing and monitoring community participation in environment and development projects
To publish this paper on the International Association for Public Participation Website (http://www.pin.org)
Target group: The "Land andRuraldigest", for example,has a circulation ofover5000 subscribers from government, private sector, academia and the NGO sector.
Aim: to influence thinking amongst policy makers.
Target group: People working with communites e.g.community facilitators,and project committee members in ongoing public works projects.
NGOs and Government Departments, (National, Provincial and Local) who are implementing public works programmes - specifically:
Dept. Water Affairs and Forestry (and the Working for Water Program);
The Dept.ofAgriculture (and the Land Care Program)
The Dept. of Public Works (CBPWP, Clean and Green program, Community Employment Program)
Aim: To raise awareness about the potential problems in community participation exercises.
Target group: People interested in community participation internationally.
Aim: To share information, particularly from a Third World Perspective