THEMATIC ANALYSIS: GETTING TO GRIPS WITH CITY-TO-CITY LEARNING
5.4. Making sense of city-to-city learning
5.4.3. Who learns and who benefits?
154
155
The case study therefore appears to validate the usefulness of transformational learning theory highlighted in the literature review earlier, which emphasizes personally relevant experiences emerging through “social interactions, peer dialogues and self-reflection” (Preston et al., 2014:
55). As the notion of self-reflection is a common feature in the learning literature, as noted by writers from the global North such as Devers-Kanoglu (2009) and Higgins (2011), the southern African experience also suggests a confirmation that this internal reflection process helps contribute to practitioner learning.
Interesting too, was the fact that despite the unevenness of understanding of the concept of city- to-city learning, all focus group participants agreed that both sides involved in the relationship did enjoy some mutual benefits. In probing how to ensure there was a best match of the two cities in order to maximize the benefits to both sides involved in the city-to-city learning and whether indeed having a perfect match was a defining characteristic, it was interesting to note that in the eThekwini Municipality there was total group consensus that the perfect match was not critical:
You can never find a city that totally matches another city… there are always differences. One needs to look beyond the differences. You have to recognize when difference makes a difference and when they don’t. Actually it’s just a feel that you get, and you have to work through it.
Head of Planning, eThekwini Municipality
The focus group participants also accepted that challenges are obviously experienced due to the different legal, political and institutional contexts, but that this was easily overcome through understanding and through making these differences explicit. This point was reiterated by a member of the Cities Alliance Secretariat who argues the case for mutual learning. For her:
City-to-city learning is a very powerful form of learning where there already exists a measure of implicit understanding of the context within which practitioners need to perform and learn from each other.
Member of the Cities Alliance Secretariat
156
Similarly too, the stage of development in the planning cycle too was not regarded as a constraint, and the observation that learning can occur from a city that is not performing particularly well in certain aspects was also made. This point was also made by the UCLG interviewees too. For them, far more critical was the issue of local technicians wanting to learn; investing their time, their energy, their commitment to make it work. It was clear that if the city felt that this was an imposed program, then it will not yield the results intended. This point was also accepted by the Namibians, who added that despite differing contexts, peers are able to recognize leanings and apply them immediately. This is an aspect that will be revisited when a framework for city-to-city learning will be developed.
In analyzing who benefits from the learning process, the former eThekwini Municipality City Manager was able to offer the most insightful and critical comments around the uneven spread of benefits:
The benefits are not spread widely. There is not really broader participation in the learning. It moves the teams directly involved into new plains of thinking; but frankly not everyone is carried through. Once this imbalance is created, it is ‘like moss rolling down a hill which just grows and grows’. To solve this we need to invest in the partnerships and do serious thinking about what is learned. Once this investment is made the returns are easier.
Former City Manager, eThekwini Municipality
One of the biggest challenges with city-to-city learning raised by the former City Manager of the eThekwini Municipality was that the learning curve for the participating officials in international learning projects was sometimes extremely steep. Their experience in the mentorship exposed them to new ideas and ways of doing things that were sometimes not accepted by those who had not been part of the learning exchanges. Whilst not making reference to the UCLG program, it was admitted that by empowering some officials or political leadership only, and not others, can lead to serious challenges later, as not all are on the same level of understanding.
157
From the former City Manager’s experience, this seemingly insignificant point about the extent to which the base needs to be broadened to include all key stakeholders in city-to-city learning had important governance consequences in the eThekwini Municipality case. Flyvberg’s (2002: 2) insistence on “grounding our theorizing in the actual politics of city-building” is relevant here for this research project. The case study shows that careful attention needs to be paid to who is learning and highlights the need for the entire collective leadership team to learn together.
For the researcher, what stood out from the afore-going analysis is a simple, yet fundamentally important point. This is that ultimately, it is not so much that cities learn, but that individuals do.
City-to-city learning programs might create the platform and help structure meaningful engagement, but it is individuals that ultimately learn from the experience. Whilst this point is taken for granted, it cannot be emphasized enough. From the former eThekwini Municipality City Manager’s reflection, the single greatest shortcoming in his own international city-to-city learning experience was that despite his personal or individual learning curve being extremely steep, the conditions were not created for him to share this with his entire political leadership team.
In noting that the delegations from both Malawi and Namibia who visited Durban to participate in the training and learn first-hand from the experiences of eThekwini municipal practitioners comprised of only a selected few municipal practitioners begins to sound alarm bells. Whilst it is accepted that the budgets for travel were limited, perhaps more sustainable long-term learning outcomes may have been cemented if spaces had been created for other key stakeholders from the respective cities to be involved.
From the international literature on learning, where the city of Turin for example is considered a case of good practice, the point is made that what enabled city learning processes was the “network mechanisms of public, private and civic leaders” (Campbell, 2012a: 102). Moreover, in that critical examination of the city learning processes in the cities of Portland, Charlotte and Turin, the broad based nature of learning and engagement with key stakeholders stands out. Providing a good indicator of exactly who was engaged in the process, Campbell (2012a: 122) identifies the key actors as consisting of “an amalgam of elected officials, corporations, and commercial
158
establishments, developers and home-builders, neighborhood associations, NGOs and large civic institutions like universities and hospitals”.
Noteworthy too is the observation in the case study that individuals with steep learning curves would also more likely challenge prevailing organizational culture which sometimes could work to alienate those who are not ready for such changes. Hence the issue of ensuring that learning delegations are broadened to include at least the most important stakeholders is a key consideration discussed in the next chapter.