v 13 7 150 0
IIUInivIersiIty~Fre~e S~tat~e ~~~I~~W~
34300000229603
Universiteit Vrystaat
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN THE UPGRADING OF INFORMAL
SETTLEMENTS: THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL GUIDELINES
by
LUClUS JOHANNES SNYMAN BOTES
Thesis submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree
PHILOSOPHIAE DOCTOR
In the
FACULTY OF THE HUMANITIES
(DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY)
at the
UNIVERSITY OF THE ORANGE FREE STATE
Bloemfontein
May 1999
Promoter: Prof HCJ van Rensburg
(Centre for Health Systems Research and Development, UOFS)
Co-promoter: Prof EP Beukes
(The King's University College, Canada)
Declaration
I declare that this thesis submitted for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor at the University of
the Orange Free State is my own, independent work and has not been submitted by me to
another university/faculty.
I furthermore cede copyright of the thesis in favour of
the University of the Orange Free State.
Lucius Bates
Bloemfontein
May 1999
ii
For Hubré my wife
When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I
ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist.
When I ask why the poor do not participate in producing
their own food, they call me a pathological optimist.
Dom Helder Camara - paraphrased by the author
iv
Acknowledgments
While I should take full responsibility for the views expressed in this study, it should be clear that
my understanding, philosophy and conceptualisation have evolved in close contact with many
persons, groups and organisations specifically in the Free State and Northern Cape provinces
of South Africa but also in the rest of South Africa.
I wish to acknowledge research support from the Nederlands Zuid Afrikaanse Vereniging
(Amsterdam), the Faculty of Social Sciences - University of the Orange Free State
(Bloemfontein), the Department of Sociology - University of the Orange Free State
(Bloemfontein), The Neerlandia Vereniging (Bloemfontein), the Van Ewijk Stichting (Cape Town),
the Centre for Science and Development (Pretoria) and the Institute of Social Studies (The
Hague).
I wish to thank the following people for their comments, assistance and inspiration:
• Dingie van Rensburg for being a compassionate mentor, excellent role model and dear
friend. His unique outlook on matters, meticulous critical eye and tremendous work ethic
were inspirational. His supervision and willingness to share his vast research experience
have enriched this endeavour.
• Elwil Beukes in his capacity as eo-promoter for introducing me to the field of development
studies and for his critical comments which aided me in presenting clear ideas and made me
realise the implications of my thinking.
• Hubré for her love and her constant support of my work. She has taught me to be tolerant
and patient and often brings out the best in me.
• Huibré-Maré and Louise-Maré for waiting for me on several occasions while daddy was
engaged in writing this thesis.
• Marius Pretorius, for language editing this work. It was a pleasure to learn from him.
• Armand Swanepoel for assisting in the final editing and giving the lay-out a professional
appearance.
• Liezl Malan at the Foundation for Contemporary Research in Cape Town, who kindly pro-
vided the pictures for this study.
• Several community leaders and ordinary community people in upgrading projects in the
Northern Cape, the Free State and the North West provinces of South Africa who have
directly or indirectly shaped the outcome of this research. A special word of thanks to the
communities of Boikhutsong, Freedom Square, Huhudi, Nonzwakazi and Tswaragano who
have confirmed my faith in the general goodwill of ordinary people and who let me experi-
ence ubuntu, i.e. a human being can only become a human being through other human
beings.
• Finally, I thank God, whose presence in my life makes everything possible.
v
Abbreviations and acronyms
ANC African National Congress
CBO community based organisation
CBOO community based development organisation
Cf. compare confer (atur)
Eds. editors
et al. and others et alii
FRESBA Freedom Square Builders Association
HOI Human Development Index
lOT Independent Development Trust
NGO Non-governmental organisation
pp. pages
ROP Reconstruction and Development Programme
SANCO South Africa National Civic Organisation
UCT Upgrade Community Trust
UOF United Democratic Front
UNCEO United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
UNCHS United Nations Centre for Human Settlements
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNRISO United Nations Research Institute for Social Development
USAIO United States Agency for International Development
WHO World Health Organisation
vi
Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS vi
CHAPTER 1
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN THE UPGRADING OF INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS:
INTRODUCTION AND METHODOGICAL FRAMEWORK
1. Rationale and background for this study
2. Value of the study 4
3. The "sociology of participatory development" 5
4. Research aims and objectives 7
5. Research design and methods 7
6. Arrangement of material 9
CHAPTER 2
PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT: HISTORICAL ORIGINS AND THEORETICAL ROOTS 10
1. Participatory development: a multitude of historical antecedents 11
1.1 Community participation: the legacy of Western democratic ideas 13
1.2 Community participation in populism and neo-populism 14
1.3 Community participation and African communality 14
1.4 Community participation and the conventional community development movement 15
1.5 Community participation in Western social work and community radicalism 16
1.6 Community participation in Latin American conscientisation 17
1.7 Community participation and the basic needs approach 17
1.8 Community participation as essential for sustainable development 18
1.9 Community participation as important dimension of human/people-
centred development 19
2. Community participation as globally institutionalised development 20
3. Conclusion 21
CHAPTER 3
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN DEVELOPMENT: A CLARIFICATION OF CONCEPTS 24
1.1 Community 25
1.2 Participation 27
1.2.1 Participation as sharing power 30
1.2.2 Participation as authentic and self-reliant action 32
1.2.3 Participation as a means and an end 37
1.2.4 Participation as involvement in different phases 37
1.3 Development 38
2. An operational definition of community participation in development 40
CHAPTER 4
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN DEVELOPMENT: IMPORTANCE, ADVANTAGES,
PRINCIPLES AND STAKEHOLDERS 41
1. The importance and the advantages of community participation 41
2. Principles and preconditions of community participation 44
vii
2.1 Self-reliance or self-sufficiency 45
2.2 Listening to the people 45
2.3 Equal roles, no dominance 46
2.4 Good communication 46
2.5 Increasing legitimacy through inclusiveness 46
2.6 Commitment and patience 47
2.7 Empowerment and capacity-building 47
2.8 Support systems and mechanisms 48
2.9 Decentralised decision-making 48
2.10 Inclusive problem solving 48
2.11 Interactive decision-making 49
2.12 Networks, joint ventures and partnerships 49
3. Stakeholders in community participation: their roles and interests 50
4. Conclusion 51
CHAPTER 5
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN DEVELOPMENT: ORGANISATIONAL AND
INSTITUTIONAL DYNAMICS 52
1. Community organisation(s) and community participation 53
2. Community participation and development aid 55
2.1 Community participation and the state 56
2.2 Community participation and alternatives to state support 60
2.2.1 Community participation and international development agencies 61
2.2.2 Community participation and non-governmental organisations 65
3. Conclusion 66
CHAPTER 6
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN DEVELOPMENT: DIFFICULTIES AND DILEMMAS 68
1. Impediments or obstacles to community participation 68
1.1 The paternalistic role of development professionals 69
1.2 The inhibiting and prescriptive role of the state 71
1.3 The over-reporting of development successes 72
1.4 Selective participation 72
1.5 Hard-issue bias 73
1.6 Conflicting interest groups within end-beneficiary communities 74
1.7 Gate-keeping by local élite 75
1.8 Excessive pressures for immediate results: the accentuation of
product at the expense of process 76
1.9 The lack of public interest in becoming involved 78
2. Conclusion 78
CHAPTER 7
LOW-INCOME HOUSING POLICIES AND COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION: URBAN SOUTH
AFRICA IN RETROSPECT 80
1. The global context and growing challenge of shelter poverty in urban areas 80
2. Low-income housing policies in urban areas 82
2.1 Introduction 82
viii
2.2 Relations between government and community in connection with low-income
housing policies 84
2.3 Trends in public housing provision 85
2.4 Incremental and progressive housing versus conventional housing 87
2.5 Sites-and-services versus in-situ upgrading 88
2.6 Low-income housing provision in urban areas:conclusions 89
3. The South African urban low-income housing scene 90
3.1 Urbanisation and housing poverty in South Africa 90
3.2 Urban control and low-income housing policies: past and present situations 92
3.3 The emergence of participatory urban development in South Africa 97
3.4 The Reconstruction and Development Programme (ROP) and urban
low-income housing delivery 99
3.5 A future scenario for community participation in South Africa low-
income housing delivery 102
4. Conclusion 103
CHAPTER 8
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN THE UPGRADING OF FREEDOM SQUARE:
A CASE STUDY 105
1. The establishment and development of Freedom Square 106
2. The Independent Development Trust (lOT), community participation and
urban upgrading 108
3. Methodological considerations in analysing community participation in
Freedom Square 109
4. Analysing community participation in upgrading Freedom Square 113
4.1 Personal involvement and rapid assessment of existing documentation 114
4.2 Surveys and survey findings 122
5. Community participation in upgrading Freedom Square: discussion and conclusions 128
CHAPTER 9
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN THE UPGRADING
OF INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS: EMERGING GUIDELINES 132
1. A list of "guidelines" for promoting community participation 136
2. Epilogue 138
BOXES, FIGURES, MAPS AND TABLES x
REFERENCES 140
ANNEXURE 154
SUMMARY lOPSOMMING 156
ix
BOXES, FIGURES, MAPS AND TABLES
BOXES
Box 6.1 Tau and Kado as prototypes of development professionals 70
Box 6.2 Conflict in places of peace 74
Box 7.1 Profile of informal settlements in South Africa 91
FIGURES
Figure 2.1 Participatory development: the outcome of a multitude of
global historical antecedents 13
Figure 3.1 A modification of Abbott's model of community participation 28
Figure 3.2 Authentic and pseudo-participation: a reflection on different modes and
intensity levels of participation 35
Figure 4.1 The four Ps in participatory development 43
Figure 5.1 Levels of decision-making and activity for development 55
Figure 5.2 Community participation and the role of the state 58
Figure 6.1 Process versus product in community participation 77
Figure 7.1 Government policies towards informal settlements 84
Figure 8.1 Share in decision-making 123
Figure 8.2 Information shared about the project 123
Figure 8.3 Attendance of meetings where the project was discussed (1993) 124
Figure 8.4 Satisfaction with information shared at meetings (1993) 125
Figure 8.5 Personal involvement in the project 125
Figure 8.6 Assessment of input by various stakeholders 127
Figure 8.7 Perceptions of the work done by the developers in this area (1995) 128
MAPS
Map 8.1 South African upgrading projects where the researcher was involved (1990-1996) 106
Map 8.2 Freedom Square as selected case study area in relation to Greater Bloemfontein 107
Map 8.3 Initial settlement pattern in Freedom Square 117
Map 8.4 Redesigned settlement pattern in Freedom Square 118
TABLES
Table 7.1 Phases in the low-income urban housing policies and practices in South Africa 94
Table 8.1 The way in which community members were informed about the project (1993) 123
Table 8.2 Ability of the community to solve own problems 126
Table 8.3 Community solidarity (ubuntu) 126
x
---1
Community participation in
the upgrading of informal
/ .
/. (' r
settlements: introduction and0~
I ~
methodological framework
A key issue in any development project is the participation of community
members. Academics, policy-makers and developers have intensively
been pondering over community participation for the past two to three
decades. The notion of community participation, popularised by many
development agencies and the United Nations, is increasingly being
applied in urban and rural development fields such as health, education,
housing, service delivery and social work. According to Chaufan
(1983:9) community participation is the "single most-written-about-issue
in the field of rural development" (cf. Alihonou et al.,1993:13; Stiefel &
Wolfe, 1994:40-73). By the 1970s the policy statements of the major
international donors and implementing agencies all emphasised the
importance of community participation. Some even called the 1980s the
decade of participation. The presence of community participation is now,
in the 1990s, effectively obligatory in all policy documents and project
proposals of these organisations.
1. Ratfonale and background for this study
The concept 'community participation' is loaded with ambiguity, despite
the fact that the literature dealing with the subject is extensive. While
contemporary writings on community participation are often coloured
with lofty sentiments, the difficulties of achieving effective and meaning-
ful community participation in practice, are not always recognised. In
many instances, ideas on community participation are indeed a case of
old wine in new bottles. It is therefore important to move beyond the
development rhetoric of community participation and to unravel the deep-
er meaning and impact of a participatory approach in development.
According to Gaigher (1992:11) there have been many calls for more par-
1
Community participation in the upgrading of informal settlements introduction and methodological framework Chapter 1
ticipation in development programmes but relatively little critical analysis of the actual forms such
participation should assume. Moreover, Dudley (1993: 164) warned in this regard that commu-
nity participation could be a false horizon and called upon developmentalists to advance beyond
it in their thinking.
If one analyses the current international discourse on development thinking, there is evident-
ly no longer a search for grand structural transformations but rather for the promotion of democ-
racy and for egalitarian and participatory styles of politics and development. With this as a point
of departure, this study attempts to unravel the notion of community participation in development.
Participatory development is, due to its very origin and nature, not a paradigm that operates at
a macro level but rather deals with micro-level situations and contexts. Promoting community
participation also requires development scholars that are both paradigmatic and pragmatic in
their orientation. Over the past decade community participation has been incorporated as a key
element in a wide variety of development programmes and projects claiming to bring about col-
lective involvement. Though the results have often been disappointing, the reasons for failure
have not always been clear. A comprehensive overview of participation is beyond the scope of
this study. Participation occurs within different contexts which include industrial participation,
worker participation, popular participation and political participation. This study will deal with
community participation in development initiatives, specifically in urban development and in
urban upgrading projects.
All over the world, and in South Africa in particular, enthusiasm and ideological fervour for
community participation in development exist among politicians, funders, academics, developers
and communities themselves. Moreover, in South Africa, the Reconstruction and Development
Programme (ROP) (ANC:1994), adopted by the ANC-led government is called "a people-driven
process" (i.e. "active involvement and growing empowerment") as a guiding principle for rebuild-
ing the country. Yet, politicians, ever adroit at representing popular concepts as straightforward,
often do not acknowledge the difficulty of achieving participation at grassroots level. Therefore
community participation should be high on the development research agenda for South Africa.
In 1996 an estimated 22 million of South Africa's 40 million people or 54% of the population
were urbanised.' By the year 2010 it will probably grow to a projected 75%, making South Africa
the most urbanised Sub-Saharan African country and one of the most urbanised countries in all
of Africa (cf. Van Rensburg,1996:376). Despite the many advantages urbanisation holds for the
South African population, the scope and rate at which urbanisation is currently taking place,
especially among the black population, present several problems and disadvantages, such as
urban poverty, for the socio-economic well-being of the population. Of the black people residing
in urban areas 41% could be regarded as b'eing poor of whom 60% could be regarded as rela-
tively poor, while 30% are absolutely poor (Pillay,1996:39). This justifies attention to the urban
poor, since the migration process (rural to peri-urban to urban) is not yet complete in South
Africa.
Together with rapid urbanisation, the South African housing crisis has intensified, and the
phenomenon of informal settlements" and land invasion has grown. Informal housing is a major
Cf. Statistics South Africa, 1998. Statistics with regard the urbanisation rate in South Africa differ sub-
stantially and also according to the definitions of what is considered as "urban". In the South African
context "urban" is defined as any populated area with some form of local authority.
2 "Informal settlements" refers to urban neighbourhoods consisting of less formal houses. These hou-
ses are usually built with unconventional building material such as corrugated iron, plastic,wood, etc.
2
Community participation in the upgrading of informal settlements: Introduction and methodological framework Chapter 1
element of South Africa's urban landscape that can no longer be ignored or wished away. More
than 8 million South Africans live in informally constructed shelters. To give some perspective:
the total number of urban people for the whole of South Africa living in informal housing current-
ly exceeds the total population of Gauteng (the former Pretoria-Witwatersrand-Vereeniging area
- which is now one of the nine provinces of South Africa). Approximately 29% of the South
African population or 2,5 million households, live as informal settlers, squatters or backyard
dwellers (South Africa Survey, 1997:756). [Official estimates in 1992 were 1,5 million households
or 17% (South Africa Survey, 1993:206,212)]. More than five million of the individuals in informal
urban housing are situated in South Africa's six major metropolitan areas. Strikingly, more than
half of the black metropolitan population is resident in informal housing.
The housing shortage in South Africa has been widely documented (Gelderblom & Kok,1994;
Le Roux, 1996; Pillay, 1996:22). Other important basic needs constitute water and electricity pro-
vision. As in many other developing countries, one pressing development issue in contemporary
South Africa concerns the upgrading of informal settlements. The primacy of the upgrading of
informal settlements as a development priority in South Africa is evident in the active and con-
tinual involvement of a wide range of role-players and stakeholders of statutory and non-statu-
tory status in this problematic sector. The development period after the watershed date of
February 1990 has, in particular, been characterised by extensive programmes for upgrading
informal settlements throughout the country.
Given the highly politicised nature of informal settlements (often accompanied by land inva-
sions), tendencies to boycott perceived "top down" and unpopular initiatives are common within
the South African context. The high incidence of social problems such as unemployment, vio-
lence, low income levels and poverty in such areas, requires that informal settlement upgrading
projects should be facilitated in a more participatory manner. To date, however, little has been
done to identify tested and proven criteria to ensure true and meaningful community involvement
in the upgrading of informal settlements - particularly ones tailored to the South African context.
When analysing documentation and literature on participatory development, one is often left
with the uncomfortable feeling that the challenge to transform participatory development ideals
into reality remains unsolved. Protagonists of community participation in development employ
the commonly uttered rhetoric of "people-centred development", "bottom-up approaches", "grass
roots involvement", etc., but it is not at all clear whether these are anything but platitudes long
since devoid of any agreed upon or precise meaning. The discourses on participatory develop-
ment are usually seen as self-evident and unworthy of attention. This being the case, the
research problem of this study relates not only to the complex and problematic nature of com-
munity participation as a development phenomenon, but it also specifically deals with the actual
difficulty of achieving and promoting community participation. The research problem thus begs
the following questions:
• What is community participation?
• How is one to achieve meaningful and successful community participation?
• How is one to monitor, measure and evaluate the impact and success of community partici-
pation?
• How will one design and implement the upgrading of informal settlements in a true partici-
patory manner?
3
Community participation In the upgrading of informal settlements. introduction and methodological framework Chapter 1
It is significant to note that in this study the problems raised above will be directly applied to
the field of upgrading informal settlements. This makes particular sense, since this development
field is a relatively new one in South Africa. (Before February 1990 the common inclination was
simply to bulldoze such communities.) In a sense, the upgrading of informal settlements as a
field of study is still largely "unspoiled" by misappropriations of the community participation con-
cept. Although some guidelines for the assessment of community participation in general terms
do exist and the critique may be that this study is just another rehash, there are no specific guide-
lines applicable to upgrading projects. Several bibliographic searches indicate that "community
participation in the upgrading of informal settlements" is definitely not a topic that has been
researched exhaustively in the South African context.
The researcher's interest in this research topic arose from his involvement since August 1991
in five site-and-service informal settlement upgrading projects in the Free State, Northern Cape
and North-West provinces of South Africa, financed by the Independent Development Trust (cf.
Map 8.1). These projects provided approximately 6 000 households with serviced sites. The
concept "serviced" includes water supply to each site, waterborne sanitation including a toilet
structure, graded roads with access to each site, paved bus routes and tenure registered in
favour of individual owners. As a consequence, the researcher interacted with various commu-
nity leaders, community-based organisations and development agencies. The researcher was
one of 18 consultants in South Africa whose tasks inter alia were to analyse community dynam-
ics, to ensure inclusive, negotiated and participatory development and to facilitate the emer-
gence of viable social compacts in these communities.
2. Value of the study
As noted earlier, vast quantities of literature on popular participation have been published since
the 1950s and from the 1970s onwards even more followed on community participation in par-
ticular. This study could therefore easily be viewed as studying the "science of the obvious". I
am, however, of the opinion that the way in which this study evolves differs somehow from most
other discourses on community participation. Firstly, it attempts to trace the roots of community
participation back to some of the social and development theories and paradigms from which
community participation originated. Secondly, it attempts to achieve conceptual clarity on com-
munity participation in relation to development projects. Thirdly, it discusses different method-
ological attempts to analyse community participation in urban upgrading projects. Fourthly, it
pays some attention to community participation in low-income urban development and housing
projects. Fifthly, it analyses the community participation dynamics of a selected case study of
informal settlement upgrading. Lastly, it discusses some emergent guidelines for promoting or
facilitating community participation in urban upgrading projects.
This study will attempt to unravel the complexity of community participatlon, and, as a result,
could have significant value at various levels and for different interest groups. The value of this
study could therefore be explained by answering the questions: For whom is this research of
value? (stakeholders and interest groups) and how is this study of value (levels or areas). In
terms of the "whom question", this study could be of value to a wide range of interest groups
such as academics, developers, communities, development workers, policy makers, politicians
and civil servants. This study may also be useful to the state, parastatals, service organisations,
non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and community-based organisations as institutional or
4
Community participation In the upgrading of informal settlements Introduction and methodological framework Chapter 1
organisational interest groups. With regard to the "how and at which level question", the
research has definite potential to contribute to the sociological, practical, theoretical, method-
ological, ideological and policy levels of development. Two of the most important units of socio-
logical inquiry are "the community" and "social action". A study of community participation in
development thus makes this a very valid sociological research topic. This study could con-
tribute to more socially acceptable and effective management of upgrading projects (practical
level). This study will identify and analyse the development theories that contributed towards the
emergence of a participatory development paradigm (theoretical level) and will also attempt to
describe and apply the different assessment methods of community participation (methodologi-
callevel). As this study evolves many of the normative issues associated with the what, the why
and the how of community participation in informal settlement upgrading will also be critically
debated (ideological level). The ultimate aim is to develop some guidelines towards promoting
community participation in the upgrading of informal settlements (policy and practical level).
3. The "sociology of participatory development"
Another question which arises is whether sociologists should be involved in the field of commu-
nity participation. Authors like Cernea (1985), Hulme & Turner (1990), Paul (1987) and Uphoff
(1985) plead that Sociology should take a more applied role in development interventionsê.
Cernea (1985: 10) for instance states:
"Sociologists have to face the nuts and bolts of development activities, to roll
up their sleeves and to deal with mundane, pragmatic questions of translating
plans into realities in a sociologically sound manner. They need to link data
generation, action-orientated research, social analysis, design for social action
and evaluation into a continuum and thus stretch sociology's contributions far
beyond simple pronouncements".
The need for sociological involvement in the development process is also a result of the
recognition that repeated failures have plagued development programmes which were sociolog-
ically ill-informed and ill-conceived, thus failing to address the important socio-cultural variables
of projects. The drive for a multidisciplinary approach in initiating or analysing development
attempts also makes the involvement of sociologists that much more important.
Hulme & Turner (1990:65) comment that despite all the approaches in the Sociology of devel-
opment, there is still some doubt whether sociological theory has made any significant contribu-
tion to the practice of development. Current approaches to development tend to emphasise three
3 Hulme & Turner (1990: 153-182) distinguish between the enlightenment and engineering roles which
sociologists exercise. The enlightenment model implies that the role of sociologists stops at passively
disseminating/analysing research findings. When an enginering role is adopted, sociologists are also
actively involved in the direct application of their research findings. There is also a dual approach
where the involvement of sociologists is both through enlightenment and engineering. The researcher
also supports this dual approach. The fact that the researcher was involved from 1991 to 1995 in facili-
tating the establishment of four community-based development organisations (CBDOs) in informal set-
tlements (Northern Cape and North West, South Africa) and the organisationol development training of
three other CBDOs in the Free State Province in South Africa, serves as testimony to seeing his own
role as that of an involved sociologist (Engineering role). Conversely, the researcher also participat-
ed in the planning, execution and analyses of four base-line data surveys in the one informal settle-
ment (Enlightenment role).
5
Community participation in the upgrading of Informal settlements: introduction and methodological framework Chapter 1
main aspects in the development discourse: a more practical and applied approach; a more peo-
ple-orientated approach and a more problem-orientated approach. In trying to solve social prob-
lems development theory became less paradigmatic and grand theoretical in nature and more
pragmatic.
Many have indicated that people are now the basic priority in development. Slogans like
'putting people first' (Cernea, 1985), 'development is for people' and 'people must at all times be
central in the sociology of developing societies' (Coetzee, 1989), emphasise that a people-orien-
tated approach is acknowledged. However, Van Der Kooy (1989:65-92) points out that this has
not necessarily been integrated into practical approaches and strategies. Hulme and Turner
(1990:65-67) suggest that the work of economists has generally come to dominate development
because of their ability to translate theory into practice. The roles of sociologists and anthropol-
ogists have often been reduced to playing a secondary and supportive role. The contribution of
the non-economic social sciences which study people, cultures, and societies, are, according to
Cernea (1985:3) and Taylor (1994:67-68), of vital necessity. However, due to certain external
and internal factors the sociology of development could not fulfil its anticipated role in the past.
(Hulme & Turner, 1990: 151). External to the discipline of sociology, project personnel tend to be
ignorant of the sociologist's contribution and tend to view sociology as being synonymous with
critical left-wing ideology. Within the discipline of sociology there is a lack of relevant training. In
this regard 'relevant' refers to more applied sociology and less conventional, paradigmatic soci-
ology. One argument used by conventional sociologists is the charge that applied work detracts
from scholarship and is less important than basic, conventional sociology. Because of this con-
ventional view of the role of sociologists, some maintain that sociology is in a state of a crisis and
even refers to the impasse of a sociology of development. For a sociology of development to be
relevant, sociologists need to leave the mainstream of basic research and work more closely with
practitioners with the aim of solving practical problems, which can also have important theoreti-
cal implications (Taylor,1994:69). Related to this problem is whether the findings of sociology
should be applied to society through the enlightenment or engineering model. According to the
enlightenment model, sociology's contribution is sufficient in the dissemination (i.e. description,
analysing and explaining) of social phenomena. In the engineering model the social sciences
are translated into tools of change and are used purposively to organise new social actions and
relationships and to initiate interventions. Hulme and Turner (1990: 153) advocated a combina-
tion of these two models.
An additional value of sociology lies in its methodological ability to evaluate or assess pro-
grammes and projects. In developing countries, the role of the sociologist in the evaluation of
development initiatives is increasingly being acknowledged, and mechanisms, which increas-
ingly call for more practical inputs from the sociologist, are being explored. Sociologists am
beginning to study the nature, processes and methodologies of development (Taylor, 1994:87-
88). Chapters eight and nine of this study will elaborate specifically on the community partici-
patory-related dynamics of a selected case study.
6
Community participation in the upgrading of informal settlements introduction and methodological framework Chapter 1
4. Research aims and objectives
The proposed research has four main aims. The first aim is to clarify community participation"
as a concept and as a phenomenon within the framework of development projects in general,
and on the upgrading of informal settlements in particular. The intention is to move beyond the
common rhetoric surrounding the idea of participatory development and to reflect critically on the
manner in which community participation has been conceptualised and operationalised by dif-
ferent actors in the development field. This aim intends to construct an 'analytical' framework of
community participation in development projects.
The second aim is to analyse the process of achieving community participation in the upgra-
ding of informal settlements. Relevant questions to be answered are: To what extent is the
implementation of community participation in the upgrading of informal settlement problematic?
Why does community participation so often fail? What are the criteria for effective and mean-
ingful participation?
The third aim is to develop the assessment methodology to measure the impact of commu-
nity involvement in the upgrading of informal settlements. Questions to be explored are: How
does one measure the extent of community participation? How does one measure the impact
and success or failures of community participation? This assessment methodology will then be
applied to a selected South African case study.
A fourth aim of the study is to develop theoretical and practical guidelines for the planning and
implementation of community participation, ensuring sustainable development.
From these four more general aims the following seven specific objectives could be cited:
• to identify and describe the historical antecedents of community participation in development
projects;
• to differentiate between the different definitions of community participation by various role-
players;
• to elaborate on the different approaches to community participation and what each mode of
participation entails;
• to identify important constraints on community participation;
• to construct guidelines for implementing upgrading projects in informal settlements in a com-
munity participatory manner;
• to identify the criteria by which success or failure of community participation in upgrading
projects can be assessed and;
• to make recommendations to ensure that community participation is more successful.
5. Research design and methods
An extensive and in-depth literature study on the notion of community participation in develop-
ment clarifing the concept of community participation and different approaches to participatory
development were identified and discussed. In doing this literature study, the researcher first
systematically scrutinised development literature for any ideas on participatory development in
general. After a better understanding of this paradigm was gained, the researcher consulted
4 Both 'community' and 'participation' are very ambiguous concepts and they will therefore be extensively
discussed in Chapter 3, sections 1.1 and 1.2.
7
Community participation In the upgrading of informal settlements introduction and methodological framework Chapter 1
specific sources (books, scientific articles, popular articles and project reports) to describe and
analyse the role of community participation in the upgrading of informal settlements.
Documentation on several upgrading projects was accessed at the international level at the
Institute of Social Studies in The Hague, and at the national level and at the local level. A sig-
nificant quantity of relevant development documentation (et. References) was accessed to
develop conceptual clarity for studying community participation.
A second method which was used, in addition to a documentary study, was a rapid assess-
ment of existing evaluation reports on South African urban upgrading initiatives. Permission to
access documentation of 103 Independent Development Trust (lOT) informal settlement upgra-
ding projects in South Africa was obtained. This exercise often included indirect data sources
such as project reports, plans, analyses, evaluations, papers, policy documents, discussions and
debates of which some circulated among the different development agencies and institutions
that are involved in informal settlement upgrading in South Africa.
In this study base-line survey data, secondary data and minutes of meetings of the develop-
ment trust (social compact) responsible for the upgrading of Freedom Square and Namibia
Square informal settlements (in Bloemfontein)(et. Map 8.2), were used as direct sources of field
data and as a third method of coming to a greater understanding of issues related to communi-
ty participation. The main purpose of using several research methods was to suggest and gen-
erate ways (guidelines) in which meaningful community participation could be increased in the
upgrading of informal settlements so as to improve the results.
Participation and development initiatives should be analysed dialectically, that means in
opposite relationship to one another, as consequences of the interaction among international,
domestic and local groups who act in response to changing economic and political priorities.
This theoretical orientation affects the decisions on how to organise this study. It starts by indi-
cating how and to what extent theoretical paradigms on development contribute towards the
emergence of community participation. It proceeds with both a development and a sociological
analysis of the historical and international contexts of participation and development. Next, the
South African context is introduced to indicate how community participation evolved in the South
African urban development and informal settlement upgrading scene. The study culminates in
mapping out some guiding principles and conclusions on community participation in urban infor-
mal settlement upgrading, focussing on Freedom Square as case study - the biggest informal
settlements in Bloemfontein (South Africa) with approximately 4200 households or 20 000 resi-
dents.
With regard to the Freedom Square case study, a first survey of 164 households was con-
ducted within six months after the first land invasions occurred (October 1990). Students from
the departments of Sociology and Geography at the University of the Free State, were trained
as interviewers. In 1993, a follow-up study with the assistance of one Masters student
(Geography), two Honours students (Sociology) and ten trained interviewers from informal set-
tlement communities, was completed in 1993. This study was conducted by means of in-depth
interviews, historical analysis of relevant documentation (minutes, letters, agreements, etc.) and
a survey of 113 households. The researcher facilitated three further surveys in Freedom,
Bloemfontein: one in 1994 with regard to small loan preferences of residents of the settlement
and in 1995 another survey. The latter was part of a national survey on the upgrading of infor-
mal settlements in South Africa in collaboration with researchers from the Institute of Socio-
8
Community participation in the upgrading of informal settlements introduction and methodological framework Chapter 1
Economic Research of the University of Durban Westville. A final survey was conducted in 1997.
It focussed on the housing-related needs of the Freedom Square community. The methodologi-
cal considerations for selecting Freedom Square as case study, are further discussed in chapter 8.
6. Arrangement of material
This study will analys and evaluate the history, anatomy, physiology, pathology, ethics, psychol-
ogy and sociology of participatory development. In this context, the history refers to the different
paradigms and theories of development that have contributed towards the emergence of the par-
ticipatory development (Chapter 2); the anatomy refers to what community participation in devel-
opment entails and who is responsible for community participation (Chapters 3 & 4); the physi-
ology of community participation deals with the institutional and organisational dynamics of par-
ticipatory processes (Chapter 5); the pathology of participatory development refers to the prob-
lems (difficulties en dilemmas) associated with community participation (Chapter 6); the ethics of
participatory development refers to its normative dimensions about what constitutes ideal and
authentic participation (Chapter 3); the psychology and sociology of community participation are
associated with the values, beliefs, structure and dynamics of community participation in devel-
opment as well as community participation in practice, in particular the upgrading of informal set-
tlements in South Africa (Chapters 7, 8 & 9).
This thesis comprises nine chapters:
• Chapter 1 devotes atttention to the research problem and rationale for this study, what the
research wants to contribute, aims and objectives of the research and the design and
methodology employed in pursuing this study.
• Chapter 2 focusses on the theoretical origin and historical roots of participatory development.
• In chapter 3 a clarification of three very elusive concepts, viz. "community", "participation"
and "development" is done. An operational definition for community participation in a project
context is also provided.
• Chapter 4 deals with important dimensions and aspects of community participation in devel-
opment. Aspects like the importance and advantages of community participation, the princi-
ples and preconditions of community participation and stakeholders in community participa-
tion are among the issues that are dealt with in this chapter.
• Chapter 5 focusses on the organisational and institutional dynamics of community participa-
tion. The participatory development roles of government, international and national devel-
opment agencies, NGOs and CBOs are analysed.
• Chapter 6 indicates that promoting the ideals of community participation is not an easy task.
Participatory development is a complex and difficult endeavor, an assumption that is sub-
stantiated through unravelling the impediments and obstacles related to promoting commu-
nity participation.
• The notion of community participation, specifically in South Africa's urban development con-
text, is attended to in chapter 7.
• Chapter 8 analyses the dynamics of community participation in one selected informal settle-
ment upgrading project as case study (Freedom Square, Bloemfontein).
• Chapter 9 concludes with some guidelines on the promotion of community participation in
urban development and urban upgrading projects.
9
---2
Participatory development:
historical origins and
theoretical roots
I "Beneath every participation programme lurks a particular social theory,paradigm, or at least a set of assumptions ..." (Kasparson as quoted byLund,1987:8)n international development circles the community participation 1
approach is emerging repeatedly, although it is called by various terms
and is woven into development programmes in different ways.
Community participation is not a new idea in development studies, but is
based rather on a rich legacy of ideas and practical agendas which have
helped to facilitate the formulation of present-day proposals for the
involvement of local people in development.
With a view to tracing the theoretical origins of participatory development,
it is useful to distinguish between three broad approaches to develop-
ment. These approaches are modernisation (parsonian theories),
dependency and underdevelopment (Marxist and Neo-Marxist theories)
and people-orientated (alternative development theories) approaches.
The existence of these three broad development approaches can be val-
idated in many introductory texts in the Sociology of development and
development studies [i.e. Barnett,1988; Harrison, 1988; Hulme &
Turner,1990; Martinussen, 1997; Swanepoel & De Beer,1997;
Taylor, 1994; Webster, 1990]. Within the people-orientated approach two
perspectives will be examined, one 'mainstream', the so-called counter-
revolutionaries, and the other, more 'alternative' or people-centred
development.
The counter-revolutionaries are of a group of economists, mainly from
Western governments and multilateral agencies such as the World Bank,
Throughout this study I will use the terms 'community participation' and
'community involvement' interchangeably - well knowing that some people
distinguish between participation and involvement, albeit rather in an artifi-
cial manner by applying semantics and assuming that involvement is a high-
er form of participation. To the researcher both community participation and
community involvement are two sides of the same coin.
10
Participatory development: historical origins and theoretical roots Chapter 2
who emphasise the notion of 'building institutional development'. Issues of underdevelopment
will thus be addressed through an improvement in the ability of institutions to make better use of
available human and financial resources. The counter-revolutionaries take the stance that eco-
nomic growth needs to be promoted and that international aid is still a necessity (although its dis-
tribution and misuse by local élite can be questioned). To them, poverty alleviation lies in eco-
nomic growth with a "human face".
In contrast, the people-centred development vision gives priority to the role of voluntary
organisations, NGOs and social movements as important building blocks of civil society. They
also regard true people's participation as the central dynamo in any development drive. To 'peo-
ple-centred' protagonists growth is subordinate to equity and they view international aid with
much more circumspection, arguing that aid creates dependency, while neglecting a country's
most important resource, its people. The label of 'people-centred development' clearly reflects
the orientation towards the social energy of people and their ability to transform institutions.
People-centred development is seen as encompassing a form of empowerment through orga-
nisation and resource control.
There are, amongst others, especially three reasons why studying development theory is
important in analysing community participation in development. Firstly, it assists us in exploring
the historical roots of participation to obtain a better understanding of the plurality of approach-
es inluencing the context and content of the participatory development paradigm. Secondly, it
discards the idea of a mono-perspective on the complexity and challenging problems facing
community participation in development. Thirdly, it sensitises us to be aware that the develop-
ment approach we use will influence, even determine, the way we see participation being incor-
porated in national development initiatives and local level outcomes.
This chapter has two main aims. Firstly, to provide an overview and synopsis of the histori-
cal-development roots of participatory development by exploring and identifying the development
contexts and approaches that contributed towards the emergence of participatory development.
Secondly, to analyse and systematise the different contributions of various development
approaches towards the emergence of community participation in development.
This chapter will focus primarily on the emergence of the participatory development para-
digm. Alternative development theories, and both micro-development theories and macro-devel-
opment theories are useful to explain the emergence of the participatory development paradigm.
Promoting or enabling community participation in development initiatives demands that policy-
makers and project implementers take note of the historical origin and various constructs that
are used when discussing community participation in development. Of course, it is impossible
to review these antecedents here in any detail, but some of the more important influences on
contemporary community participation theory and practices do require elaboration.
1. Participatory development: a multitude of historical antecedents
Since World War II and during the first two development decades (1950 - 1970), many people
associated development with economic growth, technological advancement and the accumula-
tion of capital. However, since 1970 there has been a growing awareness that development also
implies important non-economic dimensions and that development is more than material
advancement. Discontent increased with the established "modernisation" economic develop-
11
Participalory development: historical origins and theoretical roots Chapter 2
ment strategies and the 1980s saw a growing acknowledgement that development programmes
based on pure economic growth were not only unfeasible, but also destructive to resources and
social institutions in the societies they were meant to develop (Ayres, 1995; Cadribo,1994; Hall,
1986; Lund, 1987:4; Moser, 1983.)
The failure of accelerated growth, rapid industrialisation and modern technology models to
provide adequate redistribution of resources, sufficient employment, alleviation of poverty or ful-
filment of basic needs, has in the past two decades resulted in a search for alternative approach-
es to development. The essence of alternative development approaches is that people become
the main actors of their own development.
Critics of economic development strategies have seriously questioned the "go for growth"
approaches and have indicated that economic growth alone is not "a rising tide that will lift all
boats": the fruits of economic growth would not automatically spread and "trickle down" to the
poorest of the poor (Van Zyl & Beukes,1993:122-123). Societies have to find a strategy of eco-
nomic growth which has poverty alleviation built into it and which embraces concepts pertaining
to quality of life. Due to this economic view of development, many people were classified as
"poor", and therefore as objects of sympathy, paternalistic intervention and assistance. They (the
poor) have also internalised a negative self-image. Perceiving themselves as 'inferior' they have
sought to be developed by their 'superiors', surrendering their values, cultures and their own
accumulated knowledge and wisdom.
Alternative development strategies also emphasise a closing of the 'consciousness gap'
between the leaders of society and the masses. The urge for community involvement in devel-
opment initiatives stems mainly from a humanist view of development. Increasing people's
share in the fruits of development progress is an important notion for approaches such as 'redis-
tribution with growth' and the basic needs approach. It is indicated that past planning was high-
ly centralised and bureaucratised, encouraged by pre-designed blueprints from the West, as well
as by frequently authoritarian or paternalistic attitudes of planners or policy-makers. Hall
(1986:92-93) and Cadribo (1994:23) note that the failure of many schemes was attributed to a
lack of popular participation by beneficiaries in implementation and evaluation, causing severe
management problems.
The argument that will continuously feature in this paper is that, in the first place, many
strands of development thinking, critical of standard growth-oriented approaches, give rise to the
current notion of participatory development. Secondly, the emergence of participatory develop-
ment could be regarded as one of the consequences of the rise in alternative development theo-
ries. This is schematised in Figure 2.1.
12
Participatory development: historical origins and theoretical roots Chapter 2
Unrted Nation's Participation Programmes
WiO & Primary Health Care Movement
W>rld Bank
Basic needs approach
Sustainable development
(Designed by author)
Figure 2.1 Participatory development: the outcome of a multitude of global
historical antecedents
1.1 Community participation: the legacy of Western democratic ideals
The notion of community participation is an ancient one because the relationship between par-
ticipation and social development has existed since the time of the ancient Greeks. In Aristotle's
view, participation in state affairs was essential to the development and fulfilment of the human
personality (Cohen & Uphoff, 1980:214; Taylor, 1994:91).
By arguing that ordinary citizens have a right to share in decision-making, proponents of com-
munity participation reveal the inspiration of Western democratic ideals. On the level of popular
culture, participation is synonymous with democracy (Morgan, 1993:7; Gilbert,1987:66).
However, the link between community participation and democracy is not based on notions of
representative democracy, but rather on a modern variant of liberal democratic theory known as
neighbourhood democracy or participatory democracy. Indeed, many proponents of community
participation are sceptical of representative democracy and its possibility of providing meaning-
ful opportunities for the involvement of the masses. Drawing on the theory of neighbourhood
democracy, they advocate the creation of people's organisations and community-based devel-
opment organisations.
The notion of community participation in development, therefore, emerged from attempts to
democratise development (cf. Clark, 1991). Part and parcel of these attempts is the idea that
those people who are influenced or affected by the outcome of development should be allowed
to take part actively in decisions that affect their lives. Ordinary people should therefore become
co-decision makers in development (Mayo & Craig, 1995: 11). Community participation and links
between democracy and development are of growing importance in the current international
development debate, because in the last instance development is a political process within which
people develop their capacities to exercise economic and political choices. The emergence of
the participatory development paradigm is therefore to a large degree the point of convergence
between development and the ideals of democracy.
13
Participatory development: historical origins and theoretical roots Chapter 2
1.2 Community participation in populism and neo-popullsmê
Views on community participation are also infused with populist notions, which are characterised
by the belief that "virtue resides in the simple people who are in the overwhelming majority".
Well-known sociologist Peter Berger (1974:13) argues that every human being knows his own
world better than any outsider. Those who are the objects of policy should have the opportuni-
ty to participate not only in specific decisions but in the definition of the situation on which these
decisions are based. This may be called cognitive participation. According to this view, a devel-
opment planner should have cognitive respect for those things which are meaningful to people.
This is congruent with the ideas of the well-known Tanzanian populist, Julius Nyerere, when he
argues that ordinary people do know what their basic needs are and can be relied upon to deter-
mine their own priorities of development and then work for them (cf. Kakonge & Imvbore,
1994:9).
Populists have for some time also been placing greater emphasis on uncovering indigenous
and popular knowledge. Some even refer to "sustaining development on the indigenous".
Traditional knowledge, wisdom and cultural values of the local people are considered to be
important (cf. Abed,1992:32; Ake,1990; Chambers,1983:75-101; Dudley,1993:74; Pieterse &
Simone, 1994:43; Rahman,1993:157; and Rahman,1995:24-32).
There are many definitions of populism, but common to all is the idea that the solution to prob-
lems of poverty and underdevelopment is with ordinary people themselves, who would pursue
development in a non-industrialist small-scale manner through their own input and by means of
appropriate technology. These small-scale enterprises are located in small towns and villages
and reflect a world of equality and community. Populist writers call for ecologically-sound and
harmonious development, with the necessity of appropriate solutions being found for the prob-
lems of development among ordinary people. These solutions are seen as applicable both to
countries of the 'rich north' and of the 'poor south', and are usually small-scale and rural-based.
Populism has considerable influence in development studies, particularly in developing coun-
tries where it has been embraced by political leaders, intellectuals and technocrats. Some of the
major exponents of neo-populism have included Julius Nyerere (already referred to above) with his
Ujamaa-$ocialism, the International Labour Organisation concerned with the World Employment
Programme, Schumacher with his "small is beautiful" ideas, the Intermediate Technology
Development Group, and Lipton with his warnings against urban bias. By analysing the linkage
between community participation and populism/neo-populism, it is quite clear that the community
participatory development paradigm was influenced by populistic ideas on development.
1.3 Community participation and African communality
"Umuntu ngumuntu ngabantLi' is the Zulu version of a traditional African aphorism. This can
roughly be translated as "a human being is (only) a human being through other human beings".
The idea of Ubuntu essentially means "I am because we are - I can only be a person through
2 Twentieth-century neo-populism, according to Kitching (1990:21), is theoretically a much more ambi-
tious critique of industrialisation than nineteenth-century populism in that it is not purely oppositional.
It rather attempts to argue that there is an alternative pattern of economic development, which can
be just as effective or even more effective than large-scale industrialisation in eliminating mass
poverty; additionally, it can also be less costly in social or human terms.
14
Participatory development: historical origins and theoretical roots Chapter 2
others". This African form of humanism emphasises the sense of community, which provides an
important base for building development on indigenous community knowledge and organisa-
tions. Many South Africans (particularly blacks) view the community as a collective entity evolv-
ing from generation to generation. In this view individual prosperity is inseparable from the pros-
perity and growth of all. Taylor and Mackenzie (1992:227) refer to the organic African commu-
nity, which operates as a mechanism of survival in Africa, while Ake (1990: 14) views the African
culture as profoundly participatory in character and as linking participation to communality.
Although the above views on Ubuntu could be regarded as true romantisicm and thus
detached from reality, the assumed prevailing culture among ordinary people in Africa makes
participatory development a very applicable strategy. The key values of Ubuntu are group soli-
darity, interdependence, teamwork, conformity, compassion, love, human dignity, mutual respect
and collective unity. Mbigi and Maree (1995:1-5) make use of the idea of Ubuntu in their search
for a solution to the development problems facing South Africa, stating that Africa's achieve-
ments and genius do not lie in technology but in social and spiritual spheres.
In the work of the Arab historian and social thinker of the 14th century, Ibn Khaldun, we also
find this strong feeling of traditional solidarity, in other words where the individual disappears to
the benefit of the social group, which he names "Asibiya" (Tri, 1992:110).
There are, however, examples of development projects all over Africa where local knowledge
and practices are being condemned to obsolescence and the socio-cultural values or the souls
of the people are destroyed in the name of development. In these contexts, the human poten-
tial, basic wisdom and knowledge of Africa's local peoples have been seriously underestimated
and undermined by international and national development agencies (Pieterse & Simone,
1994:43; Taylor & Mackenzie,1992:257).
Indigenous knowledge and African communality should be seen as essential ingredients of
participatory development. People and local communities are both the source and ultimate pur-
pose of development.
1.4 Community participation and the conventional community
development movement
In the 1950s the United Nation Economic and Social Council defined community development
as follows:
"[Community development] is the processes by which the efforts of the people
themselves are united with those of governmental authorities to improve the
economic, social and cultural conditions of communities ... This complex of
processes is then made up of two essential elements: the participation of peo-
ple themselves in efforts to improve their level of living with as much reliance
as possible on their own initiative; and provision of other and technical services
in ways which encourage initiative, self-hel) and mutual help" (United
Nations,1971:2).
In this report popular participation and involvement in the development process are defined
as the primary objectives of community development (United Nations, 1971 :39). Several authors
(Abbott, 1995: 156-168; Moser, 1989:90; Sheng, 1990:57) emphasise the close link between com-
munity development and community participation. The community development movement, with
15
Participatory development historical origins and theoretical roots Chapter 2
its emphasis on change, popular participation, local involvement and leadership training, can
thus be regarded as the precursor of the community participation approach.
Although community development may be regarded as an immediate precursor to the com-
munity participation movement, contemporary community participation advocates have been
vociferous critics of community development. They mainly claimed that the implementation of
community development failed because of its bureaucratic administration; its superimposed
direction and tight control by the state; its indiscriminate application of Western-based moderni-
sation and economist theories; its lack of understanding of local social structures; its overem-
phasis of the physical, technical and concrete objectives and products of a project without stri-
ving for less tangible goals such as an appropriate development process; its lack of self-reliance
and human dignity; its stereotypical view of the community as 'simple, homogeneous, harmo-
nious, sustainable and relatively autonomous' without recognising the diverse composition of
many communities and the presence of both overt and covert conflict (cf. Gaigher,1992:12;
Hulme & Turner, 1990:1990-191; Korten, 1991 a:7; Lund,1987:4-6; Midgley et al.,1986:18;
Marsden & Moser, 1990:6; Morgan, 1993:44).
Protagonists of participatory development argue that conventional community development
approaches did not only have a long list of documented failings but also stifled the innate capa-
cities of ordinary people to determine their own destiny and perpetuate the structures of inequa-
lity and oppression (cf. Swanepoel & De Beer, 1983: 101). They maintain that an alternative
grass-roots approach, which liberates the powerless and ensures their involvement in commu-
nity life, is needed to promote genuine participatory development. 3 Midgley et al. (1986: 145)
point out that unlike the old community development approach, the new concept of community
participatory development involves an aggressive criticism of existing power structures and
requires a far more direct role of ordinary people in deciding matters affecting their welfare. The
key premise of this section is that not only did the community development approach contribute
towards the emergence of participatory development but that the disillusionment with the practi-
cal implementation of community development contributed to the emergence of the participato-
ry development paradigm.
1.5 Community participation in Western social work and
community radicalism
Although social work is concerned primarily with the problems of needy individuals and their fa-
milies, it has also, since its inception in the late nineteenth century, focussed on communities
seeking to organise and mobilise people to improve local amenities and social services (Midgley
et al., 1986:19). During the 1960s the American style of community work and organisation trans-
formed conventional methods of community work: instead of seeking to help deprived commu-
nities to improve their social and environmental circumstances, the new community work
activists urged that people take direct political action to demand changes and improvements.
According to Dudley (1993:7) participation used to be the rallying cry of radicals. The initial
assumptions of the social work projects that poverty could be reduced by local improvements,
th~provision of better services and the stimulation of community interest, soon lost appeal and
~
3 The terms "participatory development", "participative development" and "participation in development"
will be used as synonyms.
16
Participatory development: historical origins and theoretical roots Chapter 2
many workers began to see their task as one of raising the political consciousness of the poor.
However, the end of the Cold War, with the collapse of experiments in socialism, has contributed
to the erosion of socialist institutions and structures and left radical thinking in disarray. In this
regard Rahman (1995:29) pleads for keeping alive the radical spirit in grassroots work social
activism through supporting the values of social activism.
Community action ideas have had some popularity in social work circles in developing coun-
tries and many non-governmental organisations also adopted radical community work methods.
Projects associated with radical community action attempt to increase the productive capacity of
the group while strengthening collective interest. Midgley et al. (1986:20-21) note that the con-
temporary participation movement in the Third World has been much influenced by community
work radicalism in the West. This reflects the influence of an increasingly popular structural
approach in community work which focusses on economic, social and political factors rather than
on individual, family or cultural factors in seeking to account for deprivation.
1.6 Community participation in Latin American conscientisation
Another contributing force to community participation was the conscientizacion movement po-
pular in Latin American grassroots rural development schemes. Conscientizacion is a concept
associated with Paulo Freire's book, Pedagogy of the oppressed (1972). Freire suggests that
adult education and literacy techniques could use the life experiences of oppressed peoples to
awaken a "critical consciousness" about the roots of oppression. This happens with a dialogue
where the oppressed are enabled to become active and reflective about their reality (including
actions, values and situations), to struggle in order to transform this reality (the process of con-
scientisation). Through this self-reflected awareness ordinary people will be stimulated to self-
driven collective action to transform their own social reality (Mayo & Craig,1995:6; Mclaren,
1997:147-153; O'Gorman,1995:209; Rahman, 1993:81; 1995:25). This is opposed to the con-
ventional view of development that viewed economic growth as a dominant measure of quality
of life. Sometimes the community knows what it knows, but may be unable to articulate this con-
sciously. Development workers need to be helping a community. However, there are also some
who caution that conscientisation cannot be induced from outside because it is a spontaneous
occurrence.
There are many examples of development workers using Freire's techniques to promote
social awareness, to help the community to systematise their rudimentary knowledge of their
problems, to decipher their needs and abilities, to inspire community mobilisation and to use it in
the resolution of their problems (cf. Alihonou et a/.,1993:52; Checkoway,1995:12-14; Morgan,
1993:65; Salole,1991:12; Stiefel & WOlfe,1994:30). The pocess of awareness creation sets in
motion a process of reflection, mobilisation, organisation, action and further reflection among the
poor - which are all critical elements of participatory development.
1.7 Community participation and the basic needs approach
The basic needs and bottom-up development approaches are often described in tandem. This
views the basic needs approach as a contributing force towards the emergence of the participa-
tory development paradigm. The basic needs approach emerged as a result of attempts to
impose development on communities without seeking the involvement of those communities. A
17
Participatory development historical origins and theoretical roots Chapter 2
basic needs approach, in addition to community organisation and the empowering of the com-
munity are the three key elements necessary for genuine community participation. In fact, many
define development as ''the ability and desire of people to satisfy their own needs". The assump-
tion which predominates in this approach, is that members of the community need to express
their needs and need to know how to meet them (cf. Heald, 1991 :30; Max-Neef, 1991 :39;
Viloria, 1992:31). Development geared to the satisfaction of fundamental human needs cannot,
by definition, be structured from the top downwards. It cannot be imposed either by law or
decree. It can only emanate directly from the actions, expectations and critical awareness of the
poor themselves. Instead of being the traditional objects of development, people have to take a
leading role in development.
The basic needs approach to development, as a humanist development strategy, shifted the
focus of development from economic growth to people and their needs and to poverty alleviation
as a prerequisite of development. Therefore, before development can take place, people's basic
needs should first be satisfied. Since the basic needs approach places great emphasis on "peo-
ples' needs", it is inevitable that the development priorities of ordinary people are the guiding
principle for these development approaches. The issue of "development from below" or "bottom-
up development", which the basic needs approach put on the development agenda in the 1980s,
makes this approach one of the theoretical roots of the participatory development paradigm.
1.8 Community participation as essential for sustainable development
Of central concern in any discussion of sustainable development in wider human terms is the
issue of participation. The term "sustainable" highlights both the environmental and social dimen-
sions of development processes. The ideals of sustainability, which imply a long-term balance
between available resources and intended development, came to the fore during the 1980s and
reached global proportions at the Rio Earth Summit in 1993. The World Commission on
Environment and Development (Brundtland Commission) of 1987 called for 'development that
meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the needs of future genera-
tions' (Serageldin, 1994:2).
From the conclusions of the Brundtland Commission to the agenda of the Earth Summit, one
of the main prerequisites of sustainable development is securing effective citizen's participation.
On the one hand, sustainability cannot be ensured without the participation of ordinary people,
and on the other, participation alone is no guarantee of sustainability because local and nation-
al élite can hijack a participation process and ordinary people are no ecological angels.
However, despite these reservations, the chances are very good that development Initiatives
with insufficient attention to social factors or with little or no community involvement may be
unsustainable. In this regard Kakonge and Imvbore (1994:8) indicate that lack of local partici-
pation has contributed to the failure of many environmental projects in Africa. It is the ordinary
people alone who can make development sustainable, and development has not reallv occurred
until it is sustainable. It is only when development is people-centred and community-driven that
one can refer to sustainable development. Brahman (1996:308) observes that:
"Sustainable development practices must be based on more than just ecolog-
ical soundness. They must put local people's priorities first, by promoting
methods and stress dialogue, participation, and learning by doing, emphasis-
18
Participatory development: hlstoricat origins and theoretical roots Chapter 2
ing the inseparability of social and environmental problems from the perspec-
tive of those experiencing them."
This entails that people who benefit from and bear the brunt of change should define deve-
lopment for themselves and be empowered to be the driving force of their development. Besides
adopting appropriate technologies and encouraging conservationist lifestyles, using of bottom-
up, participatory planning approaches could make development processes more environmental-
ly sustainable. Community participation and involvement in decisions ensure acceptability and
consequently sustainability of development initiatives (cf. Akello, 1994:4; Elliot, 1994; Fitzgerald et
aI., 1997; Kakonge & Imvbore, 1994; Warburton,1998).
1.9 Community participation as an important dimension of humanI
people-centred development
Human scale development (cf. Max-Neef, 1991; Van Zyl & Beukes, 1993) or people-centred
development (Korten, 1991 b) emerged as an alternative development paradigm to the standard
definitions of development (such as economic growth, measurable in GNP, per capita income or
similar quantifiable indicators). This relatively recent development paradigm emphasises the fact
that development is much more than only economic and technological advancement and indus-
trial growth. According to a people-centred view of the development reality, it is possible for a
country to grow economically while the well-being of its people declines. The distinction between
human development and economic growth has been given sufficient empirical substance in the
United Nations Human Development Reports. In human scale development and people-centred
development approaches, development is about people, about a more egalitarian approach to
development through self-reliance and self-help with community participation as one of the most
important mechanisms to ensure the redistribution of resources. According to this paradigm, one
has to take cognisance of values, shared beliefs and social structures. One of the best-known
writers about people-centred development, David Korten, describes it as follows:
"Development is a process by which the members of society increase their
personal and institutional capacities to mobilise and manage resources, to pro-
duce sustainable and justly distributed improvements in their quality of life con-
sistent with their own aspirations." [Cited in the Independent Development
Trust (lOT) Consolidation Manual, 1993: 1]
The human-centred development paradigm refers to the improvement of human conditions
which will eventually lead to political autonomy, economic growth and broad social and institu-
tional reconstruction. In a sense it pleads for the humanisation of development politics where
people themselves should be drawn into theorising and research on development issues. Social
reconstruction makes provision for principles of freedom, equality, fraternity, satisfaction of basic
needs and a process of community growth. The people-centred development vision emphasis-
es the liberation of the human creative potential and mobilisation of human resources to solve
the social, political, economic and material problems. People-centred development implies that
development can only be accelerated if the energies and resources of the people are mobilised.
To attain this, ordinary people have to become the engine of development and take part in deci-
sions that affect their lives (Coetzee & Graaff, 1996: 139-152).
19
Participatory development: historical origins and theoretical roots Chapter 2
In this regard Rahman (1993:4,14-15) traces the creativist view of development to Marx and
the self-mobilised society to Mao Tse-tung. Development and poverty alleviation is to liberate,
reinforce and support the creative energy of human beings and the self-managing skills of ordi-
nary individuals, and development planning is planning how to do this. The 'creativist' view of
development is contrasted with the 'consumerist' view of the liberal trend in development think-
ing which seeks to eradicate poverty in material terms. We have to learn how to plan the mobil-
isation of the human energy of the people, to plan to develop with what we have, not with what
we do not have. People have to become constructively engaged in tasks set by themselves and
then go about them together, pooling resources and energy whereby they can do better than by
walking alone, drawing strength and sustaining-power from a shared life and shared effort.
People should not become preoccupied with the negative thinking and dependence orientation
of what they do not have. "One cannot move forward thinking of what one does not have; one
can only move forward thinking of what one can accomplish with what one has"
(Rahman,1993:179-180,185,190). Rahman regards mobilisation as an essential development
strategy and a collective attempt to alleviate human misery. Mobilisation is therefore also an
important precursor of self-reliant development (cf. also Development Bank of Southern Africa,
1991 :7; Mugisha 1994:4).
Human-scale or people-centred development emphasises the importance of the social ener-
gy of people and their ability to transform institutions. Human development takes place where
people have improved opportunities of choice, more life-chances, greater access to resources
and greater participation in decisions impacting on their lives. If one analyses the key concepts
in the human development paradigm, such as self-reliance, empowerment, the liberation of the
human creative potential, people's self-development, capacity building, mobilisation, etc., it sets
the scene for the emergence of community participation and community involvement as impor-
tant non-economic dimensions of development. People-centred development seeks to place
economics at the service of people. Priority is also given to local resource control and owner-
ship. Well-being and not "well-having" is the starting-point for participatory development.
2. Community participation as globally institutionalised development
Although the historical antecedents as identified and explored in the first part of the chapter pro-
vide an overview of the sources and evolutionary inspiration for current community participation
theory, the emergence of participatory development as coherent approach to social development
can be seen as a direct consequence of the global institutionalisation of participatory develop-
ment among the key world organisations such as the United Nations, World Health Organisation
(WHO), United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the World Bank, to name a few. The
emphasis on popular participation in United Nation thinking was formalised with the publication
of two major documents in the 1970s, i.e. Popular participation in development (1971) and
Popular participation in decision-making for development (1975). The former reviewed the
emergence of community participation and community development in the Third World, while the
latter offered a formal definition of community development in respect of its implementation. The
publication of these documents was followed by a major research programme into popular par-
ticipation by the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. Participation was to
become one of the major themes around which this research institute's activities were to evolve.
Reinforcement for the idea of popular participation also emerged from other international agen-
20
Participatory development: historical origins and theoretical roots Chapter 2
cies such as the WHO, UNICEF, United States Agency for International Development (USAID),
the World Bank and international women's organisations, to name but a few.
However, an even more significant contribution came from agencies such as UNICEF and the
WHO, and especially in the adoption of the UNICEFIWHO Declaration on Primary Health Care
at the Alma Ata Conference in 1978. In this document the idea of community participation fea-
tured prominently and it called for the mobilisation of local communities to take responsibility for
their own health. The report encouraged active participation rather than passive acceptance of
community development programmes. UNICEF and WHO were optimistic that "health by the
people" was feasible. Indeed, several collections of country case studies gave grounds for opti-
mism, demonstrating that community-based primary health care programmes were already func-
tioning in a number of countries.
The experience in both developing and developed countries has been that the community
participation approach has been employed mainly in deprived and depressed neighbourhoods.
It is noteworthy that participatory approaches to development are born out of the experience with
co-operatives in Romania and Poland, the kibbutz and moshav in Isreal, and farmers' associa-
tions in China. In the 1970s a growing interest emerged in applying these participatory process-
es to housing and urban problems (United Nations, 1971 :4-5). Authors such as Koenigsberger,
Abrams and Turner popularised the idea of self-help housing (Midgley et a/.,1986:22). The ini-
tiative was taken by the World Bank, which modified its housing sector lending policies to pro-
mote self-help housing in the Third World. Already in 1975 the World Bank stated in its publica-
tion Housing: Sector Po/icy Paper that informal settlement upgrading and sites-and-service
schemes could be primary lending instruments for more equitable urban development.
Through the influence of the international agencies, the governments of many developing
countries have acknowledged the need for greater emphasis on community-based development
strategies and some have taken steps to strengthen participatory elements in their social devel-
opment programmes. Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have also been major promot-
ers of community participation ideals. International voluntary agencies ranging from OXFAM to
the World Council of Churches have been particularly enthusiastic about community participa-
tion ideas, and many academics, especially in the field of development studies, regard commu-
nity participation as a new and viable approach to social development. Many voluntary organi-
sations in the Third World, including charity organisations, indigenous populist movements and
community-based organisations have popularised the ideals of community participation (Midgley
et a/., 1986:22-23), and the inclusion of community participation is now in effect obligatory in all
policy documents and proposals in these organisations.
3. Conclusion
The elaboration of development policies in favour of the poor, the disadvantaged, the deprived
and the dispossessed, based on notions of equality and social justice, was the hallmark of much
development planning and thinking in the 1980s. This chapter has provided a brief overview of
historical and current thinking associated with the participatory development paradigm. One may
ask why the influence of applied development research methods i.e. Participatory Rural
Appraisal (PRA) and Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) is not included in this overview. The
answer is: because the emphasis was more on theoretical origins of participatory development
than on methodological contributions.
21
Participatory development: historical origins and theoretical roots Chapter 2
Community participation is now a paramount and popular issue in development studies, to
such an extent that many writers have already referred to the rise of the participatory develop-
ment paradigm. The emergence of participation as an alternative paradigm of development has
been phenomenal. The acceptance of participatory approaches to development is not simply the
result of Western influence and occurrences in other continents of the world, but it also reflects
an awareness of the inadequacy of previous development efforts which failed to communicate
effectively with local persons and consider their felt needs and potential contributions. Rahman
(1995:26) begs for participatory development as the best poverty alleviation strategy, because
mainstream development efforts remain very much non-participatory and poverty-augmenting
rather than poverty-alleviating.
The background to the concern with community participation is the perceived failure of strate-
gies for development which have stressed economic growth, and have involved the excessive
build-up of a centralised bureaucracy that has stifled individual initiative and collective develop-
ment. Scholars like Gustavo Esteva (in Watts, 1995:45) maintains that "development stinks" irre-
spective of alternative development strategies that attempt to give development a more human
face, while other scholars in development studies refer to the "crisis of developmentalism" (prac-
tice) and an "impasse in development thinking" (theory).
Participatory development was developed primarily in a Third World context and grew out of
a wide range of divergent ideas, theories and paradigms (cf. Figure 2.1), from all over the globe,
which were broadly related to the emerging number of 'alternative development' strategies. The
rise of the participatory development paradigm could therefore truly be regarded as the result of
a global process.
More often than not, development projects in the past decades have been planned and exe-
cuted "for" but not "with" and "by" the people concerned. Consequently these projects become
failures, due also to inadequate attention to local culture and conditions. Development projects
can succeed only if the people in the target area participate in the planning, decision-making,
management, implementation, and if they share equally in the outcomes and appraisal of these
projects. It is therefore crucial to gain the active co-operation of the local people in all these
aspects. Participatory development stresses certain important values over others, such as co-
operation (over competition), harmony with nature (over exploitation), and social needs (over
unlimited personal desire).
"'Putting people first' in development projects means giving people more opportunities to par-
ticipate effectively in development activities. It means empowering people to mobilise their
capacities, to be social actors rather than passive subjects, to manage the resources, to make
decisions, and to control the activities that affect their lives (Cernea, 1985: 10).
It is clear that the notion of community participation is profoundly normative in that it reflects
beliefs derived from social and political theories about how societies should be organised. The
idea of community participation is sustained by the belief that the power of the state or interna-
tional and national development agencies has extended too far, diminishing the freedoms of ordi-
nary people and their rights to control their affairs, defend their interests and fight against exclu-
sion.
It is evident from the socio-historical overview of the evolution of participatory development in
this chapter and the presentation in Figure 2.1, that the participatory development paradigm
22
Participatory development historical origins and theoretical roots Chapter 2
emerged from a multitude and rich legacy of development forces and approaches that influenced
and co-shaped it. These theoretical roots of participatory development can basically be traced
to the populist, basic needs, reformist, sustainable and alternative approaches to development.
However, approaches such as human development, basic needs and sustainable development
could also be regarded to some extent as emerging from the participatory development para-
digm. There are also some strong African, Latin American, South-East Asian and Western influ-
ences which makes the urge for greater community participation a truly global phenomenon. The
importance of international agencies, NGOs and CBOs in contributing towards the global intsti-
tutionalisation of participatory development, is also highlighted in this chapter.
The next chapter (Chapter 3) will attempt to clarify some key concepts related to the partici-
patory development paradigm and also work towards a tentative operational definition of com-
munity participation.
23
----3
Community participation in
development: a clarification
of concepts
Tterms "community","participation"and "development"meandifferent
things to different people. They are regarded as three of the commoner,
most ambiguous, most elusive, and most deceptive words in the socio-
logical lexicon, which are difficult to circumscribe, and which, so far, have
not been ascribed universally accepted definitions (cf. Abercrombie et a/.,
1994:75; Groenewald, 1989:258; Maya & Craig, 1995:1). In a sense, com-
munity participation in development is rather like "democracy" or "jus-
tice". People are generally in favour of it, while retaining their individual
definitions of what it actually means, and conceding that they might be
hard-pressed to agree with others on how we might achieve it.
Medard (in Alihonou et a/., 1993:13), for example, records ninety-four
definitions of "community" while Cowen & Shenton (1995:28) indicate
that there are more than 700 definitions of development in different text-
books. Grouping together these three concepts in multiple combinations
such as "community participation in development" or "participatory deve-
lopment" confuse as much as they define. Perhaps these three words
occupy the centre of an incredibly powerful semantic constellation; at the
same time, very few words are as feeble, as fragile and as incapable of
giving substance and meaning to thought and behaviour. These con-
cepts are inherently vague and require some clarification. There is no
consensus on what should be understood by community participation in
development. Neither is there agreement on how community participa-
tion in development can be best brought about, nor why it has proved so
difficult to initiate development initiatives in a true community participato-
ry way. Therefore, although particular attention is devoted to describing
different conceptions of community participation in development, a seri-
24
Community participation in development: a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
aus attempt will be made in this chapter to acquire conceptual clarity of what is meant by the now
familiar phrase of "community participation in development".
1.1 Community
Although it may appear to be self-evident that the proponents of community participation are
referring to communities when discussing who participates, the concept of community even
though it is central to the issue, is very often poorly defined in the literature. Most people do not
seek to define the term community formally, and instead, use it loosely to denote a social-spa-
tial and geographic entity. However the notion of locality can be ambiguous: it can refer simul-
taneously to neighbourhoods, villages, townships, towns, sectors of a city, cities and even dis-
tricts or regions. A second definition simply connotes a community as 'a group of people with
face to face contact, a sense of belonging together and sharing the same common interests and
values' (cf. Cobbett,1987:327; Sheng,1990:56). This view conceives of community as the low-
est level of aggregation at which people organise for common effort.
Linking on to the structural-functionalist analysis of community by Talcott Parsons,
Groenewald (1989:259) indicates that community refers to the place where the individual expe-
riences, and has to deal with, the constraints of society and physical environment. According to
this view the interacting, structural components of "community" are residence, jurisdiction, com-
munication and occupation. Thornton & Ramphele (in Boonzaaier & Sharp, 1988:29-39) indicate
the main characteristics of a community as:
• the presence of a group of people
• a willingness to co-operate
• a coherent social organisation
• a sense of belonging
The main shortcomings in the views of Thornton & Ramphele is that you may find a deeply
divided community in terms of geographic borders, where power struggles prevail and where
there is a lack of willingness to co-operate and yet, the mere fact that there is a lack of co-ope-
ration does not make it a non-community.
There are, however, some problematic aspects with regard to community as a concept. In
some cases one can even refer to permutations or deviations from the "standard" concept of
community. One cannot assume that there is always a pre-existing community - only in a num-
ber of situations, for instance with green-fields development (a specific newly developed area to
which people from different communities migrate) or in cases where people have just invaded
land, one cannot yet refer to a community in the true sense of the word. Yet, people believe in
communities, desire community, and act as if they exist - even when they do not. Communities
are dynamic, and are always in a constant state of flux, even when they are ostensibly most sta-
ble. Communities ar s the unpredictable product of history, and the product of people.
Although definitions of community vary, in development circles most authors relate the idea
of community to notions of deprivation and disadvantage. For others (i.e. Gopal & Marc,1994:12)
the term community refers not only to the absolute poor, but also to a broad range of local-level
groups, including grassroots organisations (i.e. community-based organisations and small
localised NGOs), individual beneficiaries or groups of beneficiaries, informal groups of artisans,
business people or entrepreneurs, all of which are disadvantaged, either because of lack of ade-
25
Community participation in development a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
quate financial assets or because of institutional capacity. Reid (1989) goes even further and
suggests that a community should include not only the groups of people immediately affected by
development projects, but also private voluntary organisations, co-operatives, schools, universi-
ties and private entrepreneurs, all of which constitute unique sources of information useful to
planning and implementation. When referring to community in development terms many scho-
lars are clearly not concerned with wealthy suburbanites, affluent landowners, rich farmers or
other élite groups. Perhaps this is one reason why many people view the community in South
Africa as everybody who is non-white. Although many have pointed out that the concept refers
to impoverished villages or low income urban neighbourhoods, they fail to recognise that
deprived communities are not homogeneous and that inequalities of one kind or another cha-
racterise most forms of social organisation. In this regard many researchers indicate that the
very notion of a single, homogeneous "community", represented by a single organisation, is high-
ly questionable (cf. Dudley, 1993: 11; Friedman,1992:8-9; Galjart, 1995: 19; Chapter 6 of this the-
sis). Such simplistic definitions of community do not only deny the possibility of different values
and perspectives within a particular area, but they also assume a homogeneity of community
interests, which rarely exists.
In all communities there is considerable differentiation in terms of gender, age, knowledge,
kinship, wealth and social status which may influence people's willingness to share burdens and
benefits and rights and duties equally. In defining community, it is important to note the 'the com-
munity' constitutes a wide range of interest groups, such as individuals, households, organised
groups and leaders, all claiming to represent communal interests. The community can therefore
not be viewed in monolithic, homogeneous terms. Gaigher (1992:8) also refers to the stereo-
typical view that many developers have of the community as being "simple, homogeneous, har-
monious, durable and relatively autonomous". In reality each of these images is unfounded
when the evidence, assembled by sociologists and anthropologists, is considered. In many
ways, people who live in the same area may not be a community at all, because of their diffe-
rence in interests. It is often impossible that a whole community can participate as an organic
entity. In many social compacts the more powerful interest groups have a tendency to dominate
the weaker and less literate ones. This often leads to a situation where the most needy com-
munity people are not properly penetrated by development initiatives due to this domination.
Not even informal settlement communities are cohesive, integrated and homogeneous enti-
ties. In deprived communities, as in affluent communities, we find social, economic and political
stratification and therefore differentiation in terms of status, income and power. Marginalised
sections in a community also suffer from conflicts, rivalries and factional ism.
In summary, the few essential elements that a community comprises of are: a group of peo-
ple, interaction among people, common values and norms, a designated geographical area and
a "target population" of intended beneficiaries. For the purpose of this study a community will be
defined as (a) group(s) of people with shared interests and a shared sense of belonging which
generally operate in the same physical environment. The emphasis on shared social-spatial
experiences is the common denominator in constituting a community. On the one hand, "com-
munity" can best be understood as "an image of coherence", a cultural notion which people use
to give to reality and form their social actions and thoughts. On the other hand, the sociological
existence of communities is founded on intense social interaction among their members, which
inevitably produces social boundaries defining communities and giving members identity. The
26
Community participation In development: a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
concept community will always imply a social and a physical dimension. In terms of this defini-
tion an informal settlement community may be defined as a group of people where the majority
of households (groups of people) live in informal dwellings (shared experiences), usually demar-
cated in geographic terms by a name attached to it like Tambo Square or Freedom Square
(same physical environment). "Groups of people" and a "shared interest" deal with the social
dimension while the "same physical environment" refers to the physical dimension. In develop-
ment thought "community" seems to be the critical qualifier of participation. In the following sec-
tion it will become clearer how the concepts community and participation relate with each other.
1.2 Participation
According to Morgan (1993:4) the concept of participation is a socially constructed amalgam of
ideas, defined and refined through time. Participation is such an amorphous term which is uni-
tary neither in concept nor in practice. Furthermore it is a matter on which there is considerable
disagreement among development scholars and practitioners. Korten (1991 a:3) refers to par-
ticipation as "a word with many meanings" while Cohen & Uphoff (1977:1) describe the com-
plexity of participation as a concept with much disagreement on the scope and substance of the
term. To others such as Roodt (1996), participation is a jargon word which has been manipu-
lated by vastly different groups of people to mean entirely different things.
The word "participation" refers to the involvement of an individual or community in various
stages of activity. Implied in the concept are: interaction of two parties or more, equalisation of
power, decision-making, and a learning process (Koesoebjono-Sarwono,1993:35-36). Some
use the term to mean active participation in political decision-making, while to activist groups,
participation has no meaning unless the people involved have significant control over decisions
concerning the organisation to which they belong. Others associate participation with the equi-
table sharing of project benefits, yet others view participation as an instrument to enhance the
efficiency of projects (Paul,1987:2). Bhatnagar and Williams (1992:2) define participation as:
"... A process by which people - especially disadvantaged people - can exer-
cise influence over policy formulation, design alternatives, investment choices,
management, and monitoring of development interventions in their communi-
ties".
If one analyses the range of definitions on community participation, it is clear that the effec-
tive devolution of power to local communities to choose matters that concern their own welfare
and prosperity is at the centre of the philosophy of community participation.
This definition, while suitable as a working definition, raises many further questions and lacks
specificity about the nature of the programmes required for promoting participation. Although this
definition of community participation is widely accepted, it needs to be made more operational
so that technical, social, economic and politicat interventions can be designed for participation.
There have been many calls for more participation in development programmes over the last two
to three development decades, yet there has been relatively little critical analysis of what forms
such participation should take (Gaigher,1992:11; Hulme & Turner,1990:191-192). In some situa-
tions the calls appeared to be largely rhetorical, especially when made by centralised, authori-
tarian regimes. In others, they appeared to be based on the naive assumption that the poor had
27
Community participation in development: a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
limitless time and energy to devote to participatory activities and that participation could be
achieved without conflict of interests. Clearly, much more information is needed if we are to
know who participates, what precisely participation entails and how it can be promoted. The re-
lativity of the notions community and participation should by now be obvious.
To Roodt (1996:312) participation implies people involving them, to a greater or lesser
degree, in organisations directly or indirectly concerned with the decision-making about, and
implementation of development. Korten (1991a:3-6) indicates that the way participation is used
in a development context may depend on one's view of poverty and preferences regarding the
choice of development strategy to alleviate poverty. In this regard Abbott (1995:159) also refers
to "the relationship between a paradigm of development [and] thinking on community participa-
tion". It is clear from Figure 3.1 that just as the dependency paradigm superseded the moderni-
sation paradigm, so too community participation/empowerment superseded community deve-
lopment as an approach.
ORIGINAL Superseded NEW Superseded LATER
LINKAGE by LINKAGE by LINKAGES
PARADIGM: MODERNISATION DEPENDENCY
I I
APPROACH: COMMUNITY EMPOv.ERMENT
DEVELOPMENT
Figure 3.1 A modification of Abbott's model of community participation 1
Figure 3.1 is an attempt to include the role of development paradigms - other than only mo-
dernisation and dependency - in the rise of a participatory development approach. Abbott's
model illustrates only how the dependency paradigm and empowerment as approach (new link-
age) replaced the modernisation paradigm and the related community development approach
(original linkage). This, in my view, is a useful but as yet limited explanation for the de-linking of
community development and community participation approaches. One should definitely
acknowledge that later (more recent) linkages superseded both the old and new linkages in the
listed alternative development paradigms (i.e. populism and neo-populism, basic needs, sus-
tainable development and people-centred development). Abbott identifies only an original and
new linkage without exploring the possibility of later linkages. In his approach to community par-
ticipation he does not mention that other so-called "alternative development approaches" also
contributed to the emergence of empowerment and community participation in what can be
This study will make a distinction between the concept popular/citizen participation and community par-
ticipation/involvement. While the former is concerned with broad issues of social development and the
creation of opportunities for the involvement of people in the political, economic and social life of a
nation, the latter connotes the direct involvement of ordinary people in local affairs such as project-
related or programme-related involvement of end-beneficiaries. Although popular participation and
community participation may be distinguished from each other, they are obviously inter-linked.
28
Community participation In development a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
labelled the "participatory development paradigm" (cf. Chapter 2 of this thesis for an overview of
the emergence of the participatory development paradigm). An interesting paradox is the argu-
ment that these alternative development paradigms have also superseded the dependency par-
adigm, and yet, approaches such as empowerment, self-reliance, interactive planning, etc. are
still important and have not been replaced. The approach of empowerment is just as important,
if not more important, in the assumptions of (for instance) people-centred development than in
the conceptual and operational framework of the dependency approach. Perhaps Abbott uses
'empowerment' to be an inclusive term for what I see as the outcomes of later linkages.
The definition and function of community participation will rest upon, firstly, the way develop-
ment planners define development and, secondly, how planners think the community should
respond to this definition. For supporters of the economic growth policies (modernisation theory)
people are expected to participate as labourers, consumers and entrepreneurs. It is to be hoped
that their input will also change their values and attitudes that may currently oppose participatory
development. For protagonists of the basic needs theory the focus is on the participation of the
poor as eo-producers to increase the equitable distribution of the benefits of growth, while for peo-
ple-centred scholars, development is measured in terms of the empowerment of poor people and
the amount of control that they exercise in development decisions which have an impact on their
lives. There is a critical difference between the first approach and the second and the third. The
first approach focuses on economic growth as the most important factor in promoting quality of
life and alleviating poverty. The second and the third approaches, the basic needs and people-
centred approaches, believe that people's perceptions of development and underdevelopment
are the critical factors; they stress the importance of community people defining and prioritising
their needs and learning how to participate in decisions on how change can best be achieved.
Dudley (1993:159) emphasises the point that it is time to stop simply reiterating the cry for
community participation. That was yesterday's battle. The challenge now is more to get beyond
the general principles and determine the practicalities of how to promote participation in deve-
lopment initiatives. Although there are different views about what participation entails, many def-
initions draw on resolutions of the UN that were adopted in the early 1970s. One definition of
this kind was formulated by a group of experts appointed to discuss community level action in
popular participation. It defined participation as:
"The creation of opportunities to enable all members of a community and the
larger society to actively contribute to and influence the development process
and to share equitably in the fruits of developmenf (Midgley et al., 1986:24).
This definition suggests that the members of community participate in development if the
poorest groups in the community have an effective role in choosing both the development pro-
duct and the appropriate process, if they contribute to the implementation of decisions and if they
derive equitable benefits from these programmes.
The sections that follow deal with the different perspectives on participation. While the link-
ages of participation with power and self-reliance are highlighted, the different modes of partici-
pation are also unravelled.
29
Community participation in development: a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
1.2.1 Participation as sharing power
A central issue of participation is the distribution of power. Morgan (1993:5-6) highlights the poli-
tical and power dimensions attached to community participation in describing the concept as fo-
llows:
"Participation is merely another way of looking at power. Participation is first
and foremost a political symbol, by nature amorphous, flexible and adaptable.
Unravelling what participation symbolises to different people and groups at
various historical periods offers insights into the relations of domination and
subordination operating within and between societies."
Although a significant strand of the development literature sees community participation as
apolitical, it is by definition political, because participation is about mobilisation, power and the
control and distribution of resources. Bang (1986: 1394), Bhatnagar & Wiliams (1992:7), Cernea
(1983:93), Convers & Hawker (1989:469), Dudley (1993:7), Lund (1987:1), Mackenzie (1992:1),
Sheng (1990:58), Stiefel & Wolfe (1994:4) and Zakus (1998:481) all emphasise the political
nature of participation and the linkage of participation to a wider context of political, social and
economic change.
Functionalist sociologists such as Parsons conceptualise power in society as a variable sum.
According to this perspective, the amount of power in society is not fixed but variable; power lies
with members of society as a whole, and power can increase in society as a whole, as that soci-
ety pursues collective goals. The logic of such a position is that the empowerment of the po-
werless can be achieved within the existing order without any significant negative effects upon
the power of the powerful. The increase in the power of one interest group does not necessar-
ily diminish that of another. The powerless can be empowered, and they can then share in fruits
of development, alongside those who have already achieved power. Power is not a scarce com-
modity, but one that can be enjoyed and shared (Checkoway,1995:4; Mayo & Craig,1995:5;
Young, 1993:163). In this regard, power is viewed in distributive and generative terms: power is
a potential resource in every person or community; the key is just to recognise this power, let this
power be unleashed or act upon the power; this is the power some people have of stimulating
activity in others and of raising their morale; or this power lies in the actions that enable a com-
munity to increase its ability to change its future as an act of choice (Hulme & Turner,1990:214;
Rowlands, 1995: 102).
Alternatively Weber's definition of power is conceptualised in zero-sum/ terms. This defini-
tion of power is more problematic, because there is a fixed amount of power in society (Mayo &
2 Etzioni (in Uphoff, 1993:611) identified three ideal types of organisations based on alternative means of
gaining compliance: coercive, remunerative (or utilitarian), and normative. Respective exernples would
be a prison, a business and a service organisation. Galbraith subsequently wrote about tnree types of
power - condign, compensatory, and conditioned. The first of these three types of compliance is ne-
gative-sum, the second zero-sum, and the third positive-sum. Another way of contrasting them is to
compare the relationships they postulate among people's utility functions. In the first kind of exchange
there is negative interdependence, i.e. one person's loss is considered as another person's gain, while
in the second category, there is positive interdependence of utility functions. In the third situation, there
is positive interdependence, with people regarding others' gains as also their own. In terms of Uphoff's
classification of principles of organised behaviour: CBOs are more normative with elements of remu-
neration, while the market sector is exclusively remunerative, and the state sector predominantly coer-
cive, with some elements of normative and remunerative principles of organised behaviour.
30
Community participation In development a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
Craig,1995:5). According to Checkoway (1995:4) it is common to view empowerment as a
process in which a person or community gives power or gets it from another. The notion is that
power originates outside the person or community, who gives it to or gets it from another.
Increasing the power of one group then implies decreasing the power of other groups. The more
power one group has, the less the other has. According to such a perspective, the empower-
ment of the powerless would involve gains that would, of necessity, have to be achieved from
the powerful. This view of power is in terms of dominance, ability to force your will on others and
obedience, and it results in the notion of 'power over', since some people are seen to have con-
trol or influence over others. Those who assume that power is having a fixed volume (zero-sum
terms) see little possibility for co-operative action, and anticipate that existing power holders will
resist or eo-opt any opposing initiative (Hulme & Turner,1990:214; Rowlands,1995:101-102). A
key question in this regard is who controls the development project? The poor or weak will ty-
pically participate actively in a project in direct proportion to their ability to assume control of the
project. According to Cobbett (1987:329), this usually occurs at the expense of the powerful.
The Marxist perspective on power raises yet wider issues. According to this perspective, poli-
tical power cannot ultimately be separated from economic power. Thus, the empowerment of
the relatively powerless has inherently limited possibilities under capitalism. Although the poor
and the powerless may effectively participate in particular development projects and pro-
grammes, gains in these projects are all confined by the constraints of the wider requirements
of profitability within the global market. Marxists have also been concerned with the power of
ideas: in particular with the setting of ideological agendas and the concept of hegemony.
Economic and political power is to be seen as both legitimate and effectively non-contestable
within capitalist society. Understanding and challenging this hegemony, then, become central to
the development of alternative struggles for economic, political and social transformation (Mayo
& Craig,1995:6). As one neo-Marxist, Lacoste, indicates: destroying the power concentration of
the indigenous élite is an important prerequisite for development. Development initiatives should
not be the sole domain of the development élite. Ordinary people should have the opportunity
of participating and of sharing in the material benefits.
There are many protestations against a predominantly negative interpretation of power. In
line with Foucoult and Galbraith, Giddens indicates that power relations can also be emancipa-
tory besides exploitative and dominative. Giddens distinguishes between the 'liberating and pro-
ductive' and the 'repressive and destructive' aspects of power (cf. Robinson,1996:13). True par-
ticipatory development should strive to promote the liberating and productive aspects of power
while trying to challenge the repressive and destructive aspects of power.
Many refer to the equalisation or decentralisation of decision-making power. This implies the
sharing of power with the weaker, excluded and more marginal groups in society as one of the
key premises of participatory development (cf. Kagonge & Imvbore,1994:9; Kok &
Gelderblom, 1994:58; Midgley et al., 1986; Morgan, 1993; Stiefel & Wolfe, 1994). True participa-
tion thus presupposes changes in relations of power and prioritisation of interests. Meaningful
participation should therefore help to address powerlessness. Underprivileged people need to
escape the overwhelming sense of entrapment and feelings of incapability to do something to
improve their situation.
Many perspectives on participation and reasons for supporting community participation tend
to fall into two different ideological camps: on the one hand, the left-radical camp suggesting that
31
Community participation in development a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
real participation cannot be achieved without revolutionary socio-structural changes; and on the
other, the technocratic camp suggesting that participation is nothing more than a component of
the project design. Those on the left trust that community participation will lead to a transforma-
tion of society, while those on the right emphasise the utilitarian results and short-term benefits
of participation (cf. Convers & Hawker,1989; Gilbert & Ward,1984). Along the same lines
Swanepoel & De Beer (1997: 128-130) argue that there are two ways of lookinq at participation:
either a system-maintaining or a system-transforming process. The former is a weak interpreta-
tion of participation and the latter a strong definition of participation. When participation is not ta-
king place as it ought to, where communities are eo-opted to participate or at best mobilised to
get involved, the weak interpretation of participation is applicable. For the strong interpretation
of participation as empowerement, the question "who controls development" is of crucial impor-
tance. Those affected by development projects should not be passive recipients of development
products but they ought to be the main role players and decision-makers.
In order to bridge the gap between these two camps it is necessary to recognise the social,
political and organisational dimensions of participation, while also taking note of people's self-
development as a practical expression of the creativist view of development. This view rejects
the notion of macro-structural change as the sole prerequisite of people's self-development. If
the creative potential of human beings is unleashed, it will inevitably challenge existing institu-
tional arrangements, which will satisfy the 'left-radical camp' and contribute to innovative and
people-friendly project designs for the enjoyment of the 'technocratic camp'. The underlying
assumption in this regard is that the best promise for development, and particularly for partici-
patory development, lies with the initiatives of ordinary people.
In a more positive and functional way, the most obvious use of participation as a political tool
is to bring people together to lobby the state to provide services, or as Paulo Freire puts it, 'unity
among the oppressed' is considered as a necessary prerequisite for liberation
(Mclaren,1997:149). Governments and international agencies generally describe community
participation less controversially as a method to accomplish physical tasks more cost-effective-
ly and with a greater likelihood of sustainability (a weak interpretation of participation), while com-
munity-based organisations define participation more in terms of how it can empower a commu-
nity and of how ordinary people can influence decisions affecting them (a strong interpretation of
participation).
1.2.2 Participation as authentic and self-reliant action
Figure 3.2 is a summary of several inputs that distinguish between authentic participation, which
involves all three criteria mentioned previously (design, decision-making and implementation),
and pseudo-participation, which limits participation to the mere implementation or the ratification
of decisions already taken by external bodies. There is an interesting debate with regard to the
distinction between true or false participation. On the one hand, there are those who strongly
advocate that outside development agencies and/or development professionals should not initi-
ate participation processes at all, but should rather respond to needs identified by local commu-
nities and link into existing grass-root initiatives. This is based on the human-centred vision of
development, viz. that fundamental human needs and their appropriate satisfiers can be articu-
lated only from within a particular community. The role of government and development agen-
cies then becomes a facilitating and enabling one, to be guided by the proposals put forward by
32
Community participation In development a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
local-level communities (cf. Rowlands, 1995:1 05). On the other hand, there are those who indi-
cate that pre-determined development initiatives and sources from outside the community could
play an important role on unleashing community energies and talents, and are in many instances
inevitable (cf. Fussell,1996:46; Galjart,1981:147).
There are multiple modes or intensity levels of participation as depicted in Figure 3.2. At one
end, participation can be initiated, planned and controlled at the grassroots level without profes-
sional sponsorship (spontaneous participation); at the other, it is imposed from above, with the
organisational components defined by professionals and external agencies such as state autho-
rities (induced or compulsory participation). In the complete bottom-up and trickle-up mode, peo-
ple have attained full participation in controlling activities of the official decision-making body by
having majority representation. In this case the locus of power is jointly shared between the peo-
ple and the planner-administrators, with the former in greater control. At the other end of the con-
tinuum local élite are appointed by outside authorities that have the locus of power. In this case,
the role of community organisations is, essentially, to legitimise outside conceived programmes
and assist in their implementation. This lead to little people's power in decision-making.
Although there are many possible kinds of participation, who participates and how, may be
more crucial to project success than any definition or quantitative expression of participation. It
is useful to distinguish five degrees or levels of community participation: imposition, consultation,
information sharing, decision-making, implementation (cf. Figure 3.2) However, these levels or
mutations of community participation may co-exist in the same project. (Some also refer to the
intensity of community participation, thereby depicting the extent to which project participants
actually practise community participation). According to Paul (1987:5) the nature of the project
and the characteristics of the beneficiaries determine the extent to which community participa-
tion can actively be practised by beneficiaries.
In deciding which participation approach to follow, the following factors should be taken into
consideration (cf. also Sowman & Gawith,1994:564-565):
• the scale of the project
• the location of the project
• the number of people likely to be involved
• the resources available for community participation (time, funds, personnel)
• the level of training of personnel undertaking the participation programme
• the presence of community development workers in the community
• the level of education of the parties to be consulted
• the socio-economic status of communities likely to be involved
• the level of organisation within the community
• the representativeness of community leaders
• the role of NGOs and CBOs in the community
• the degree of homogeneity of the people involved
• the role of women in the community
• any history of previous conflict or lack of consultation
33
Community participation In development: a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
The community can see the processes of participation as operating on a continuum, ranging
from no participation whatsoever, to full ownership. The levels of intensity depicted in Figure 3.2
below should not be seen as watertight compartments, but it may be possible (in a theoretical
sense) to move in the course of a project from an initial phase which is at a level of consultation,
to community ownership at the end of the project. Planning for participation should allow flexi-
bility in order for this sort of progression to take place. The ideal intensity of community partici-
pation is for an end-beneficiary community to shift from an advisory role to a desicion-making,
and eventually to an ownership role. Being involved in the decision-making process gives the
community members the feeling that that they are taking part in the project, and as a result, their
sense of ownership in that particular project grows. To some authors, this sense of ownership
is even stronger when the activities are initiated by the community members themselves, while
Salale (1991 :8,14) and the Independent Development Trust (1993:5) stress that ownership of
development projects is possible even if it is initiated outside the community: ownership is not
determined by where the project originates.
A situation of shared ownership is also possible between the development agency and the
community. In fact, Abbott (1995: 164-166) indicates that ownership and thus ultimate control is
not the final stage on the participation continuum. In authoritarian and closed contexts commu-
nities often confront and challenge the development agency or government, and empowerment
struggles occur outside "the system". In contexts where governments create a more open envi-
ronment, community control is negotiated and the form of control is more stable. As the deci-
sion-making process becomes more complex in terms of the nature of a project, communities do
not have the sophisticated support systems necessary to manage complex projects. The result
is increased consensus-seeking, and the building of partnerships between the community and
other stakeholders. This situation of shared-development and partnership-building could be
regarded as an even higher or more intense mode of participation than just unilateral ownership
and control on the side of the community.
The characteristics of the decision-making environment will determine which level(s) of com-
munity particïpation is(are) the most suitable entry point at the initial stages of a project (cf.
Abbott,1995:164). However, to be faithful to the principles of authentic and spontaneous partic-
ipation, the challenge to both community members and development professionals will always
be to aspire to the highest level of community participation.
Does it really mean that people have participated if they have merely been informed about a
development programme? What if they feel moral, peer, and other less benign pressure to
donate labour (Sal ale, 1991 :6)? With the imposition, information-sharing and consultative styles
of community participation, the initiative still predominantly originates from above. This is why
these levels of participation are labelled pseudo-participation. The people are predominantly told
what to do and are not involved in decision-making as to how to set about it. It therefore still very
much implies a "top-down" mode of thinking and operation.
34
Community participation in development: a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
Pseudo-participation Authentic Participation
Imposition IConsultation Community control IOwnership
Co-option Community control
Information sharing Decision-making Initiating/control
Implementing pre- Project designers and The control of the Decisions are made Beneficiaries exclu-
designed develop- managers share project remains exclusively by benefi- sively make deci-
ment projects without infomnation with be- vested in the hands ciaries or jointly sions.
any interaction with neficiaries. Low inten- of the implementing between the commu- Beneficiaries take
the target community, sity but can have agent. nity and the imple- the initiative to act
Community is viewed positive impact. A Community is con- menting agent pro-actively and
as merely a recipient two-way flow of infor- suited on key (Shared decision- demonstrate the
of material develop- mation between the issues. making). Developers confidence to contin-
ment products. An implementing agent Development agen- and end-beneficiaries ue on their own. The
outside stake holder and the community. cies sometimes form have an equal voice community both initi-
usually externally dri- Control of the project advisory bodies with in sharing policy and ates and assumes
ves the development is finnnly in the hands whom they interact select the desired control for all or
project. Community of the agency that on a regular basis. development strate- some phases of the
members are called looks for inputs from gy. Equal representa- project. Achieving
together and lec- the community for tion of laypersons this highest level of
tured, then they may infomnation and and professionals on participation .
be offered a resource advice, which may decision-making assumes that the
in exchange for their enhance project structures. Decisions community are in
labour. Often the design. are arrived at by con- control of their
community members sensus. Informal set- development and
are passive and tlers may, for exam- take responsibility
unenthusiastic about ple, decide jointly for the planning,
the project. with project staff on implementation,
Community members the design of their management and
are reluctant to housing. maintenance of the
attend meetings with This is a higher level project - with outside
the outside stake- of intensity. Control assistance where
holder who is frustrat- over of the project is required. This level
ed by having to urge shared and allows for of participation shifts
them to continue. more influence on the bulk of decision-
projects by beneficia- making responsibility
ries than under con- to the community.
sultation or informa-
tion sharing.
Induced/coerced/compulsory participation Spontaneous participation
Non-autonomous participation Autonomous participation
Fonnnalandtop4iJwn Voluntary and bottom-up
Restricted participation Wide or full participation
Sponsored or officially endorsed Without external support
Task-centered participation Power-centered participation
(Designed by the author)
Figure 3.2 Authentic and pseudo-participation: a reflection on different modes and intensity levels of
participation
35
Community participation in devetopment: a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
Midgley et al. (1986:27) distinguishes between spontaneous, induced and coerced participation.
While coerced participation is condemned outright, and induced participation regarded as se-
cond best, spontaneous participation comes close to an ideal mode of participation, as it reflects
a voluntary and autonomous action from the people to organise and deal with their problems,
unaided by government or other external agents (cf. Figure 3.2).3
For true community participation to take place there should be at least some degree of shar-
ing of decisions. Any development agency intending to plan and implement a development ini-
tiative in a participatory manner needs to take cognisance of the underlying value assumptions
and the practical consequences of authentic participation (cf. Figure 3.2). The process of par-
ticipation takes place at two levels. The first is at the interface between the promoting agency
and project group, where the promoter transfers tasks and responsibilities to the group (external
participation). The second level is within the group, which delegates functions, tasks and
responsibilities to different sub-committees (internal participation). In the beginning, external
participation occurs mainly where important decisions are made between the promoting agency
and the project group. As the process continues, the experience of participation leads to a
growth in self-reliance of the group members enabling them to take initiatives and build up a "par-
ticipatory consciousness" (Koesoebjono-Sarwono,1993:40).
Authentic participation in development can be defined as designing development in such a
way that intended beneficiaries are encouraged to "take matters into their own hands", to parti-
cipate in their own development through mobilising their own resources, through defining their
own needs, and through making their own decisions on how to meet them.
The public therefore have the right to decide what they want from a development venture -
establish the objectives and policies, delegate to the professionals the responsibility for imple-
menting these policies, and reserve for themselves the role of auditor, i.e. evaluate the results.
As early as 1975, Fantini (1975:15) pleaded that there should be a quantum leap in changing
developers' perceptions towards community participation in development projects. He indicated
that the participation of ordinary people on the street was a right and not a privilege, and he
entertained the idea that common people had the right to participate in ways that ensured the
development venture was indeed serving the best interests of everyone in the community."
Development planners therefore, had a moral obligation to "listen to the people". Fantini even
suggested that the right to participate in development projects by beneficiary communities
should be legally entrenched.
3 In Bangladesh there is the Rangpur self-reliance movement where the villagers of sixty villages took
an oath to reject any form of grant or relief from outside; they mobilised themselves to launch collec-
tive seonornic and social programmes. This position is quite clear from the revealing words of these
villauers in a conversation with a development worker: "We want persons like you to visit us, to give us
your advice, your blessings, and the dust of your feet. But we do not want money from anybody"
(Rahman, 1993:3). This happened during 1974 when these villages were the hardest hit by devastating
floods and famine. A similar movement is the Bhoomi Sena movement in India with the philosophy 'that
no outsider will tell us what we should do" (Rahman, 1993:3,4). Collective self-reflection on the experi-
ence of their struggle and the root causes of their poverty are typical of these movements.
4 See also Akello (1994:16), Rodriquez (1988:70) and Sheng (1990:58), all of whom indicate that peo-
ple have the right and duty to participate. Such involvement provides a basis for increasing self-confi-
dence and self-realisation, which are sorely lacking among the poor and the under-privileged.
36
Community participation in development: a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
Typical authentic participation is thus where 'top-down blueprint approaches' are firmly
eschewed in favour of dialogue, mutual consultation at all stages, self-reliance, collective action
to solve group problems, democratic decision-making and local control over project activities.
1.2.3 Participation as a means and an end
There is a fundamental split between those who view participation as a means to an end and
those who advocate it as an end in itself. Participation can function either as a goal or as a tool.
As a goal (end) in itself, community participation appears to be necessary to stimulate individual
and social well-being. As an end in itself, participation is part of the process of empowerment,
which builds self-reliance, skills and the capacity of the community to act effectively (cf. Bhatnagar
& Williams,1992:iii; Dudley,1993:7; Midgley et al., 1986:15; Schumacher, 1973: 235-285).
As a tool for carrying out a task (means to an end), whether political or physical, community
participation is not an end in itself; it is essentially a means for mobilising local resources to
achieve development. Community participation may be advocated for pragmatic and utilitarian
reasons, as it is a means towards producing better project results. Development initiatives tend
to be more sustainable and yield higher returns when they involve those they are intended to
help (cf. Bhatnagar & Williams,1992; Nientied et al., 1990:42; Stein,1990:26). The ideal situa-
tion is where community participation as a means has the capacity to develop into participation
as an end (Moser,1989:84). Correspondingly, if participation is viewed only as a means, then it
is usually included only in the later phases of implementation and maintenance. Participation as
a means is seen as a way of using the economic and social resources of people to achieve pre-
determined targets. This passive form of participation is limited to comments and advice, and
does not lead to any direct control. If community participation is defined as an end, then com-
munity participation is at the outset a pre-condition in decision-making. Participation as an end
is a process in which confidence and solidarity is built amongst the people because it is an active
form of participation responding to both !ocal needs and to changing local circumstances
(Rogerson, 1992: 118). In practice, good community participation achieves both: it empowers and
builds community capacity (end in itself), but it also is a means of ensuring that the project runs
efficiently and effectively (means to an end)."
1.2.4 Participation as involvement in different phases
Participation involves different phases. These phases can be more easily observed when the
project or proqrarnme is initiated from outside. As explained in section 1.2.2 of this chapter, true
community participation requires that community members should be involved in all the following
phases of the development process (cf. Abeyrama & Saeed,1984:22; Koesoebjono-
Sarwono, 1993:40-41):
• Preparation - problems are identified, objectives formulated and plans made. The identifi-
cation and priontisation of needs also take place.
• Initiation - the phase in which a person or group proposes a project or programme.
5 Often the interest of an interest group in community participation will depend on the interest group's
point of view and power to influence how and when the community participates in a project. For exam-
ple, a funder may be more interested in encouraging community participation so that a project is cost
effective, while a community group may be more interested in building up its own skills and capacities.
37
Community participation in development: a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
• Legitimisation - the process to make proposed plans and proposals acceptable to the com-
munity.
• Action and execution - covers all the actions concerning the realisation or implementation of
a project.
• Sharing - fair and just access to the project benefits.
• Autonomisation - in this phase the change agents are withdrawn, leaving the community to
continue on its own. This phase proves whether the project or programme is sustainable.
The pre-investment phases (preparation, initiation, legitimisation) of any development initia-
tive are crucial to the success of the project. Community participation is often lacking during
these initial planning and proposal phases of a project. Implementation should commence only
when sufficient participatory consensus has been reached. The sooner the community become
involved, the more intensive the participation will be.
1.3 Development
In recent years development has become one of the most topical issues in the South African con-
text. Development issues are also receiving global attention from across the spectrum: political
parties, the mass media, donor and aid organisations, government departments, the business
sector, service organisations, non-governmental organisations and deprived communities.
In a study on participatory development it is important to reiterate the age-old question: What
is development? Admittedly development means different things to different people and is high-
ly normative." It is the intention of this study neither to deal with development theory in general
nor to map out the different approaches. What is important is to understand that the way in which
development is defined to a large extent determines the prioritisation of development needs, and
therefore influences actual choices, approaches, strategies, programmes, and projects aimed at
alleviating poverty and the problems of under-development.
Besides the first descriptions of development in terms of growth, technological advancement,
progress and becoming modern, development is construed as 'a rapid improvement in people's
standard of living'; 'a process of enlarging people's choices'; 'equalising people's opportunities';
'enhancing participatory democracy processes'; and the 'ability of people of having a say in deci-
sions that shape their lives'; of 'providing human beings with the opportunity to develop their full
potential, achieve greater self-expression and self-realisation'; of 'enabling the poor to organise
6 According to Stone (1989:209), in his study of five villages in Nepal, there was a pronounced gap
between how villagers and project staff perceived concepts like "development" and "community partic-
ipation". It was specifically the villagers who defined development as coming from outside; for them it
did not arise from resources anc initiative mobilised within the community. These attitudes and expec-
tations about "development" arnonq the villagers were based on their experience with an earlier style
of development. This particular study also asked villagers what they understood by the term "commu-
nity participation" in development. To the villagers it meant mainly obeying a village council to con-
tribute land, money, labour or some other resource to a specific development project. At one village,
the council ordered the people to contribute labour for a road construction project, while at another vil-
lage each household was ordered to make a financial contribution to the school. Similarly, Gaigher
(1992:8) indicates that the reason for failure of many community development initiatives, particularly in
Africa with socialist governments, is due to the fact that participation usually means forced labour on
projects identified at top-level, without participation of villagers in the design, implementation and con-
trol of development programmes.
38
Community participation in development a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
for themselves and work together'; an 'increase in the ability of the individual and the communi-
ty to expand its control over factors which affect it' and of 'liberating people's creative energy'.
Even today development is often regarded as a technical engineering exercise, and little
attention is paid to historical, cultural, social and political realities. More recent definitions of
development mentioned above, which are couched in social rather than in techno-economic
terms, provide the philosophical impetus for participatory development. Participatory develop-
ment can neither be given, nor received; it should be generated from within. The assumptions
of participatory development will form the philosophical framework of this study, and, as such, is
part of the broader human development paradigm.
In analysing the historical shift in definitions of 'development' over the past four decades [from
techno-economic progress (modernisation) to a concern for the alleviation of human suffering
(human development)], it becomes evident that the normative dimensions of development theo-
ry, which have people and their human well-being as a main concern, have come to the fore.
The following is a summary of the generally acclaimed content of development as concept:
• Genuine development is much more than economics and economic growth. Development is
not just about having more, but also about being more. The Human Development Index
(HOI) of the United Nations Development Programme serves as an example that develop-
ment is more than economics; development is about the quality of human life, as well as the
quantity of economic growth.
• Development is a process of enlarging people's choices. The three essential choices are for
people to lead a long and healthy life, to acquire knowledge and to have access to those
resources required for a decent standard of living.
• Development is a universal issue and not just an issue for the developing world. Rich and
poor countries constitute a single world system, and the over-development of the first is
closely linked with the underdevelopment and mal-development of the second.
• Development is about relationships. The struggle for equitable and just interaction between
different interest groups is at the heart of the struggle for development. Participation is a crit-
ical aspect of equity. If development is really to belong to all people, they should share it.
• Development does not simply mean delivering products, but addressing the process through
which they are delivered. It is now a well-known maxim that only people can achieve true
development and that development cannot be done to people. Representation and involve-
ment in decision-making, action, and outcomes are therefore regarded as essential. At the
heart of the participatory development process is the creative capacity? of human beings.
• Development is essentially about positive change or improvement - a change for the better
and an improvement in human well-being. Development should therefore be appropriate -
culturally, socially, economically, technologically and environmentally. The challenge is to
resist the displacement of non-economic values by economic values to avoid the problems
of social disintegration and ecological exploitation.
• The three principles of authentic development are: justice (assuring a decent human exis-
tence for all people), sustainability (earth's resources must be used in ways that assure the
well-being of future generations) and inclusiveness (every person must have the opportuni-
ty to be a recognised and respected contributor to family, community and society).
7 Once a community realise the inherent potential within themselves, they can to a large extent prove
their own living conditions through "Zilweleni", a Zulu.expression that means, "fight for yourself."
39
Community participation in development: a clarification of concepts Chapter 3
2. An operational definition of community participation in development
Definitions are like markings in unknown waters. They need to be distinctive and unambiguous.
From the analysis above, clearly, the meanings of community participation can and do change
over time and also from one context to another. It is not a static concept but a dynamic phe-
nomenon that can change according to place and due to socio-historical contexts. However, for
purposes of this study the following, rather "narrow", operational definition of community partici-
pation in development will be used:
Community participation is a collective process that has its focus on the active collabo-
rative involvement of key-stakeholders (i.e. community leaders, CBOs and end-beneficiaries) in
joint decision-making that will influence the outcome of development decisions and actions
impacting on the broader development context of an end-beneficiary community.
This definition identifies the following dimensions of community participation:
Community: As indicated earlier, community will be defined as (a) group(s) of people with
shared interests and a shared sense of belonging who usually operate in the same physical
environment.
Collective: The community as a collective of individuals remains the crucial qualifier of partici-
pation.
Process: Community participation is a process, and cannot be viewed as occurring at one sin-
gle moment in time.
Context: For purposes of this study community participation can be distinguished from the
broader idea of participation (popular participation) in that it occurs within the context of a
development initiative (programme and project). The focus of community participation will
therefore be more on local than regional or national issues.
Focus: The focus of community participation is directed towards people, and these people are
primarily the intended beneficiaries of a development initiative.
Collaborative: Community participation is a collective effort, not an individual one. Therefore
organisational relationships should be considered in the process of community participation.
Development specialists and agencies should avoid making decisions unilaterally and
imposing development agendas; they should rather act as catalysts. Development decisions
are thus the outcomes of negotiated settlements.
Joint decision-making: Community participation requires that beneficiaries take part in and
have control over decisions that affect their lives. Community participation is inherently
power-related. If a community improves its ability to acquire knowledge, life choices are
expanded and the potential for advances in the quality-of-lite is enhanced.
This chapter has attempted to clarify the multiple conceptual meanings and uses of "com-
munity participation in development". It has also explored the myriad of contexts in which the
terms "community"; "participation" and "development" are used so as to provide a better under-
standing and conceptual clarity of these concepts.
The next chapter (Chapter 4) will share the reasons why community participation is important
in development, while focussing on the advantages, principles and stakeholders associated with
community participation.
40
---4-
Community participation in
development: importance,
advantages, principles
and stakeholders
T.chapter shares the reasons why community participation is so impor-
tant in the design and implementation of development-related initiatives.
This is done by means of sharing some of the advantages and principles
associated with community participation. The importance of different
stakeholders in facilitating community participation is also discussed.
1. The importance and the advantages of
community participation
Understanding, communication, participation - these basic words of
human intercourse are vital to any successful development activity. All
have been shown to be a function of the relationship between project
professionals and the people or beneficiaries. However, this relationship
is generally weak, largely due to the differences in perspective of these
two groups. People and planners need to work closely as partners.
Managers should learn to reach out more effectively into the communi-
ties where they want their projects to work. At the. same time, they should
help to re-build the community so that it can make itself heard more
effectively.
Many development planners have discovered, sometimes at great
social and financial costs, that community participation is the lifeblood of
any development venture. In fact, some scholars even regard participa-
tion in decision-making processes as an important social indicator in
defining and measuring quality of life. In the area of primary health care,
community participation had been advocated even before the historic
Alma Ata declaration of 1978 (Hardiman, 1986:45). Health planners and
health workers dealing with health problems at grass-roots level in deve-
loping countries have been particularly vociferous on the benefits to be
41
Community participation In development: Importance. advantages. principles and stakeholders Chapter 4
gained from involving the community. Local participation also yields high economic and envi-
ronmental returns in implementing programmes of afforestation, 1 soil management, park protec-
tion, urban delivery services (i.e. housing, water management, sanitation, drainage and flood
control) (UNOP, 1992:15). Bhatnagar (1992:3) has indicated that there is some quantitative
empirical evidence of the link between participation and development effectiveness that exists in
the agricultural and rural development, sanitation, irrigation and water sectors.
Community participation may therefore increase the access of disadvantaged communities to
project benefits; enhance motivation of communities; increase ownership and community
responsibility of projects; encourage self-reliance by transfer of skills; build local institutional
capacities; ensure that greater proportions of project benefits flow directly to targeted, deserving
beneficiaries; and enhance the sustainability of development interventions (Bamberger,1986:vii;
Gopal & Marc, 1994:1). Besides the above rationale for participation, Kok and Gelderblom
(1994:61-62) also mention increased efficiency and effectiveness, increased community enthu-
siasm and understanding, the involvement of women, improved conditions for cost recovery and
cost sharing, and increased community empowerment as potential benefits of participation.
In 1986 Bamberger (1986:viii) indicated that considerable experience had been gained in the
rural development sector on the role of community participation, while less experience had been
gained in other sectors such as urban development, health services and promotion of smalI-
scale enterprises. If, however, one analyses the published literature and project reports of the
past five years this is no longer the case. Although the rural development sector still receives
plenty of attention, participatory issues in urban development and health matters are just as high
on the aqenda.f
The intention of a participatory development approach should be to bridge the gaps between
product and process, and project and people, and should aim at achieving a high degree of fit
between these different elements (cf. Figure 4.1). One of the ways in which these "four Ps" in
participatory development (product, process, project/programme and people) could converge
into a close-knit relationship is through mechanisms and attempts to foster community partici-
pation.
Haiti's top-down reforestation programme was unsuccessful until small farmers and community groups
were allowed to choose the kinds of trees to be planted, and where. Then, instead of the target of 3
million trees on 6 000 family farms, 20 million trees were planted on 75 000 farms (UNOP, 1992: 15).
However, disappointment has also been experienced with some United States Agency for International
Aid (USAID) community woodlot projects, as reported in the USAID files on the projects.
2 This observation is supported by published articles or project reports of the USAID and the SOCIOFILE
data bases.
42
Community participation In development Importance, advantages, principles and stakeholders Chapter 4
The means of Process
pursuing [
development People
The end-result of [
development
Product
(Designed by the author)
Figure 4.1 The Four Ps in participatory development
Well-known sociologist Robert Merton's classical definition of anomie as a state in which peo-
ple are prevented from attaining socially desirable ends by socially acceptable means is also
applicable to the development context. Often, because of a lack of involvement and participation,
communities become the passive recipients or the mere targets of "development" and might
experience development anomie. Max-Neef (1991) in his deliberations on human scale deve-
lopment also refers to the need for participation as one of the fundamental needs which, if not
properly satisfied, leads to human poverty. Frequently community involvement initiatives are
accompanied by assertions that the community's problems do not only entail a lack of material
resources, but these extend to include alienation from the decision-making institutions affecting
their lives. Development without participation easily leads to the alienation of communities.
Based on this, maximum feasible participation of poor communities is promoted.
Community participation often fosters social integration within and between communities. In
this regard Midgley et al. (1986:26) indicate that community participation strengthens interper-
sonal relationships, fosters self-confidence, improves material conditions and reduces feelings
of powerlessness and alienation. Communities that participate in their own development also
tend to take ownership of and responsibility for the maintenance of services that derive from the
project (Kaya, 1989:50). Local involvement in development-related projects is crucial, because
the local people are the population at the greatest immediate risk from development failures, and
local participation ensures that the projects address people's needs and that successful projects
become institutionalised.
Another important advantage of participatory development is that it facilitates the learning
approach to community development. This approach entails that through every step people take
to reach an objective, they learn to do the next step better and to improve on the next project.
By gaining in ability to reach a certain Objective, people also gain in self-sufficiency. Their
reliance on external resources diminishes and they gain in human dignity. But community deve-
lopment can only be a learning process if people really participate, i.e. participate not just in a
material way, but by thinking, seeking, discussing and making decisions about their needs and
resources.
Although community participation in development is not a panacea, a cure for all community
ills, or a short cut to utopia, there are numerous advantages in planning from below as against
planning from above. The benefits of community participation in development projects could,
and probably would, differ from one stakeholder to another. Community participation is there-
fore region- people- and project-specific. The advantages of community participation for a com-
munity-based organisation may not necessarily be experienced as advantageous by state
43
Community participation In development importance advantages. principles and stakenolders Chapter 4
organisations. What a development professional regards as positive aspects of community
involvement may be regarded by the community leaders as detrimental to the community they
represent. Recognising that the quality and impact of community participation may be experi-
enced in diverse ways, the following is a cautious attempt to highlight some advantages of com-
munity participation in general:
• True community participation counteracts different forms of paternalism and renders com-
munities less dependent, more responsible and more self-reliant on their own knowledge to
operationalise their own development future.
• People understand development plans and take ownership in development outcomes if they
participate. Public trust and commitment are also promoted.
• Participatory development encourages self-actualisation, creativity and perseverance and
strengthens the self-confidence of vulnerable groups.
• People who are involved in a project are more likely to support the project and derive bene-
fit from it; a phenomenon also referred to by many as "commitment through involvement".
• Participatory approaches to development provide a practical method for grass-roots plan-
ning, which ensures that programmes are in keeping with the values and norms of the
indigenous society. The local inhabitants are the only people who can provide information
regarding the community's cultural codes.
• Projects with community input also give a better reflection of the interests and needs of that
community, which in the end help to avoid costly errors because development plans are ren-
dered more responsive to the interests and needs of the poor.
• Increased local participation reduces the overall cost of development projects in that it
ensures that scarce resources are decentralised.
• Participation contributes to the development of organisation, planning and problem-solving
skills (institutional capacity) of local communities.
• Community participation makes development more sustainable since it guarantees the future
involvement of the people.
The preceding paragraphs have indicated that community participation in planning and imple-
mentation is becoming increasingly important: participation is an unavoidable consequence of
democracy; is a way of increasing legitimation; is a means of de-monopolising power; and is a
means of facilitating social integration. There are, however, also more skeptical views on the
value and advantages of community participation which can briefly be summarised as follows:
participation can use (waste) enormous amounts of time, increasingly delay and circularise deci-
sion-making and can have the disadvantage of constantly having to deal with a changing cadre
of decision-makers. The difficulties and dilemmas associated with community participation in
development will be extensively analysed in Chapter 6 of this study.
2. Principles and preconditions of community participation
To avoid or at least decrease the impediments on participatory development, it is important to
identify major principles and preconditions of participation that can serve as a framework of what
constitutes effective community participation, and of how to ensure that such participation can
be integrated into the project development cycle. If one browses through the literature on com-
munity participation, there are a number of underlying principles and preconditions which need
to be highlighted.
44
Community participation In development. Importance. advantages. prtnciples and stakeholders Chapter 4
2.1 Self-reliance or self-sufficiency
One underlying principle of self-reliance is that even poor people have agency, that is, are know-
ledgeable about their situation, can think for themselves, and can influence their situation
(Galjart,1995:18). Self-reliance is defined as a state of mind that views the mental and material
resources of the members of a community as the primary stock to draw on in the pursuit of their
own objectives. Like trees, communities cannot be made to grow by being pulled upward from
the outside; they must grow from within, from their own roots. This does not reject the use of
external resources, but they are considered secondary. It does however, reject the use of exter-
nal resources at the cost of a community's self-respect, a community's right to self-determina-
tion, or a community's autonomy of choice and action (Rahman,1993:19-20,69). Self-reliance
also enables a community to become more economically, socially, culturally and psychological-
ly independent.
The principle of people's self-reliance is professed by most community development actions,
but in reality there is room for much improvement in this regard3. Deprived communities should
not wait for state action or other outside help. Through a process of self-development they
should assume responsibility for their own development and confront and collectively analyse
their problems and mobilise the internal resources and endogenous knowledge within their com-
munities to achieve liberation from all forms of dependence. The essence of self-reliance is self-
development by relying on local resources.
2.2 Listening to the people
Community participation has much to do with taking those who are intended in the development
into account in the design of projects and programmes, and then relying on them in the imple-
mentation process. There is much to be said for the participation of development workers in the
daily life of the community they intend to work with. The perspective of end-beneficiaries is a
critical input for successful development planning. End-beneficiaries often have information
about their social and economic environment, which if ignored by planners, may cause difficul-
ties, serious drawbacks and/or failures in project implementation. Typically, a considerable
amount of time is spent in talking or lecturing to beneficiaries about a project. Much less time is
spent in listening to beneficiaries articulate their needs or in watching attentively (cf.
Cernea,1983:vii; Salole, 1991 :8-9). As Salmen (1989:2-3) puts it in his very striking book "Listen
to the people":
"How can persons of one world effectively plan and manage activities for peo-
ple of the other without understanding them on their terms? Development pro-
jects would be more effective if they better incorporated the point of view of the
people who are the intended beneficiaries. Can't professionals go to the peo-
ple where they live and work and learn to perceive their needs and their own
ideas about how they would improve their lives? Wouldn't development pro-
fessionals themselves benefit from such listening? And might not this listening
stance lead to more open, integrated societies where people and profession-
als are less remote from one another?"
3 There are some cases in history where self-reliance was pursued in a coercive manner. One of the best
examples is Ujaama-Socialism in Tanzania during the 1960s and 1970s when millions of Tanzanians
were forced by government to reside in agricultural villages in order to achieve self-reliance.
45
Community participation In development importance. advantages. principles and stakeholders Chapter 4
When project designers listen to the people, projects can be made to appeal to what people
value, to reinforce people's own identity, and to enhance self-respect. When this happens, when
the project touches the inner core of beneficiaries, it becomes a catalyst for self-improvement
and the development it achieves becomes self-generating.
2.3 Equal roles, no dominance
According to Heunis and Van Rensburg (1995:4) equality of interest should prevail in all actions
and structures aimed at facilitating community involvement. In other words, the power matrix in
these actions and structures should be balanced. No interest group should dominate the
process of deliberation between the development agency, as facilitator of community involve-
ment, and the community. Development professionals, fieldworkers and researchers should also
see themselves as enablers and facilitators to an indigenous process. In this regard Dudley
(1993: 14) indicates that the best an intervener can do is to assist and broaden the choice-
process of the intended beneficiaries, while the proponents of 'consciousness raising' techniques
as developed by Paulo Freire, argue that the intervener can do nothing more than help the ben-
eficiaries to recognise the true nature of their circumstances.
2.4 Good communication
In many cases inadequate communication by the implementing unit of a development agency
can lead to the misunderstanding and, ultimately, rejection of the project by the community.
According to Salmen (1989:49) the potential for poor communication between project imple-
mentation personnel and community residents is great:
"One is middle class, the one is generally poor; one is professional, the other
most often untrained beyond primary school; one is an outsider, the other lives
in the area being affected by the project."
For good communication to take place, the community should be sufficiently organised and
confident to speak for themselves. Mutual understanding between the community people and
development workers is the basis for the kind of communication that fosters a successful project.
In this respect it is imperative that one looks at the role of opinion-leaders in a community
because effective communication is very difficult to deliver en-masse. You need spokes-persons
and this aspect can on its own determine the success or failure of a project and will be elabor-
ated in section 2.10.
There are some important questions regarding communication and information-sharing:
• Does the information reach the entire community in the correct form?
• Does the community understand the information?
• Can a community take a decision on the basis of this information?
• Does the decision reflect the opinion of at least the majority of the population?
2.5 Increasing legitimacy through inclusiveness
Community participation in development should always strive to increase the legitimacy of both
the development process and its outcome. If processes initiated by developers cannot truly iden-
tify community priorities, local community structures and forums (consisting of various interest
46
Community participation in devetopment: importance, advantages, principles and stakenolders Chapter 4
groups and community structures) offer an opportunity to negotiate and agree on the options that
are to be put to beneficiaries. Inclusiveness is about identifying and involving as many interest
groups relevant to the intended development initiative as possible, Once options reach the end-
beneficiaries, they will then enjoy greater legitimacy since they will clearly be seen to be the
product of agreement by a range of groups; developers will then not be acting as sole designers
of development and identifiers of priorities. The development of inclusive approaches specifi-
cally refers to special attempts to include the poor and the marginalised in conceptualising, plan-
ning, implementing and evaluating development efforts (Friedman, 1993:50-51; Lipton & Van der
Gaag,1993:36).
2.6 Commitment and patience
The establishment of community relations is a difficult, slow and gradual process. Development
professionals should win the trust of the communities they serve, and identify and work closely
with existing community-based structures to facilitate community participation. If necessary, they
should also endeavour to establish new structures for facilitating community involvement, and
maintain good communication links with and feedback to these structures. The attitudes of both
policy makers and target groups are crucial to the success or failure of a participatory develop-
ment strategy (Heunis & Van Rensburg, 1995:4-6; Keeton, 1987:149; Van Rensburg,1997:35).
2.7 Empowerment and capacity-building
In his study of fifty World Bank projects, Paul (1987:v,13) criticised the World Bank for not
focussing enough on empowerment and capacity building. Attempts to achieve community
involvement should strive to empower the marginalised and the deprived by strengthening their
leverage over implementing agencies, to bargain better, to know their rights and obligations, and
to increase the control over the resources and decisions affecting their lives and their participa-
tion in the benefits produced by the society in which they live (Cernea,1983:43; Kok &
Gelderblom, 1994:58). Community empowerment strategies will pull community members
together to face an environment that is unsympathetic to the poor. Empowerment is much more
than merely transmitting information to participants; it is a process whereby people, organisa-
tions and communities gain mastery over their affairs and find their own solutions without being
patronised. This should be done through ongoing training and capacity building in administra-
tive, leadership and decision-making competencies. The well-known proverb once again
appears to be useful in understanding empowerment: 'Give people fish and they eat today, teach
them how to fish and they can eat every day'. However, Thomas, as quoted by Taylor
(1994: 119), makes the distinction that it is important to look at 'who owns the fish'. It is clear from
the development literature that empowerment epitomises the interface between participation and
power.
Capacity building generally means the strengthening or transfer of skills and knowledge
rather than resources, which in the end will enable organisations to broaden both their organised
support base and their ability to represent the concerns of their members. Capacity building
refers inter alia to the development of competence, management skills, leadership, teamwork,
decision-making, groupwork, bookkeeping skills, etc. When people's capacities to conceive
development ideas, plan, implement and manage development actions have improved, then
their capacity has been built.
47
Community participatron In development Importance. advantages principles and stakeholders Chapter 4
2.8 Support systems and mechanisms
Because community involvement requires systems of support at the national, the provincial, the
local and the community level, community participation initiatives without these support mecha-
nisms are doomed. Factors of critical importance in the support of community involvement
include commitment to community involvement; and a re-orientation of the bureaucracy in favour
of both community involvement and the development of capacity for self-development (Heunis &
Van Rensburg, 1995: 4-6).
2.9 Decentralised decision-making
Both Cobbett (1987:327,333) and Gaigher et al. (1995:230-231) emphasise that the central
thrust of participatory development revolves around the decentralisation of power and the deci-
sion-making responsibilities to the target communities. In terms of this principle, ordinary peo-
ple should have as much control as possible over the design, implementation and evaluation of
development - but one should also guard against 'off-loading' of government responsibilities.
Decentralisation does not always equal democratisation.
2.10 Inclusive problem-solving
Any claim that development is being negotiated with the community cannot be taken at face
value. It could mean that it is being negotiated only with a section, or that it is being discussed
with individuals or organisations that purport to speak for communities but in reality are manda-
ted by a small minority within them. Two issues are therefore paramount: inclusiveness and re-
presentativeness. The first refers to the extent to which all interests are included, while the se-
cond refers to the extent to which beneficiaries of development are represented or merely spo-
ken for (though not on behalf of) (Friedman,1993:2).
Both the principles of inclusivity and representativeness relate to the issue of who is partici-
pating in negotiated development. This has important implications for the nature of development
itself. It is reasonable to assume that the identity of the parties will exert an important influence
on development policies and approaches, both generally and within specific projects.
Development inevitably requires choices about whose needs are to enjoy priority; often, some
interests can be entertained only at the expense of others.
According to Friedman (1993:2) it is trite to point out that those who participate in negotiation
or decision-making are likely to want first place in the queue for the interests of those on whose
behalf they speak. True participation cannot merely be equated to "leadership participation".
Althouqh some leaders and those claiming to represent the community inevitably have to parti-
cipate, a big effort has to be made to ensure and secure that the principles and interests of ordi-
nary beneficiaries guide or strongly influence the development outcome.
The existence of a community-based organisation does not guarantee that it represents the
entire community. One must be careful in assuming that a single organisation or group of peo-
ple can indeed represent the full spectrum of community concerns and interests
(Sheng, 1990:61). To avoid the dangers of selective participation it is important to facilitate multi-
faceted representativeness through as many relevant interest groups as possible, as well as re-
presentatives of the end-beneficiary community. Negotiated development should also be the
48
Community participation In development: importance, advantages, principles and stakeholders Chapter 4
broader context for participation to take place, This assumes that development be negotiated
with the "community" and with its "real/legitimate leaders", rather than with those leaders the
members of the "establishment" have chosen. Mechanisms must also be put in place to ensure
that the benefits of development are shared equally and as widely as possible.
2.11 Interactive decision-making
Although the ideal of authentic participation is probably not possible under the direction of the
state or another formal development agency, there are nevertheless ways in which the degree
of popular involvement during all the phases of project planning and implementation can be
increased. One suggestion concerns the adoption of a 'process' approach to planning, in con-
trast to a 'blueprint/readymade' style which predominated led until the late 1980s (cf. Bhatnagar,
1992:7 and Rahman, 1993:4). Korten (1991 a:7) highlights the limitations of a blueprint approach
to decision-making, stating that:
"In blueprint project designs the key decisions regarding services, facilities,
inputs, schedules and outcomes were all centrally determined by planning
experts. The planners lacked the inclination, time, and means to obtain mean-
ingful inputs from unorganised, poorly educated and widely dispersed benefi-
ciaries in the design of multi-million dollar projects. So they not only planned
the project, they planned how the poor should participate in its implementation
as well".
The process approach rejects the assumption that projects are simply vehicles for the appli-
cation of preconceived plans by outsiders (i.e. the state or other development agencies). It
demands a redefinition of the task, planner, bureaucrat and technician from that of making deci-
sions for people, to assisting people in making better decisions for themselves
(Korten, 1991 a: 13). Heald (1991 :30) and Max-Neef et al. (1991) call this process approach 'inter-
active planning' where all the relevant stakeholders jointly define their development problems
and seek solutions in an interactive way with a multi-directional flow of ideas and communica-
tion. This usually results in a broadening of vision through the interaction of creative processes.
Creating spaces for development thinking and participation is one of the cornerstones of parti-
cipatory development.
2.12 Networks, joint ventures and partnerships
An international trend towards collaboration in development has evolved. It is quite evident that
community participation in development projects needs to be viewed as an integral part of a col-
laborative process comprising various actors and organisations (Taylor, 1994: 196-197). Owing
to the numerous possibilities for competition, duplications, tensions, and conflicts it is proposed
that networking, JOLlt ventures and partnerships be used as ways of solving these problems.
Through networking between community-based initiatives and other stakeholders in develop-
ment, so it is believed, many of the problems of unco-ordinated action will be prevented. The
establishment of coalitions or partnerships among community-based organisations may also
result in a pooling of fields of experience and an enhanced learning experience.
People will participate only when they see the benefits of doing so. According to Gilbert
(1987:56) the failure of community participation programmes is related to people's distrust of the
49
Community participation in development: importance. advantages. principles and stakenolders Chapter 4
organiser or development worker. Deprived communities are very sensitive to new people enter-
ing the community. It is vitally important to attempt development initiatives - as partners in a
combined way - that can create trust between an end-beneficiary community and the personnel
of a development agency or government department. A key issue remains how developers can
form partnerships with community organisations without submerging these organisations' own
identities. Dialogue needs to be at the heart of each development relationship to encourage
exchange, agreement and partnership (Slim,1995:146). Genuine partnerships imply that com-
munity-based structures and professionals are accountable both to their donors and to the com-
munity at large.
3. Stakeholders in community participation: their roles and interests
In any study of community participation in development it is important to identify and understand
clearly the roles of the different stakeholders. This is to ensure transparency and accountability to
the community through jointly-developed, known, and respected mechanisms. The term "stake-
holder" refers to any group, organisation or individual that may have an interest or claim in a devel-
opment initiative. Stakeholders include members of the benefiting community, as well as
• the private commercial sector
• private donor and aid agencies
• government and/or local authorities
• NGOs and service organisations
• civic and resident organisations
• community-based organisations
• church groups
" labour organisations
• community groups
• women's groups
• neighbouring towns or communities
• individual households
• planners, professionals and consultants
Development projects usually require the involvement of a variety of stakeholders, because
the involvement of different stakeholders remains one of the best ways of responding to the li-
mitations of knowledge in decision-rnakinq." The roles of these stakeholders are usually close-
ly interwoven. The stakeholders or partners that are vital to programme or project management
are the community, the leadership and the funding agency. Each stakeholder has its own under-
standing of what community participation entails and has its own reason for being involved in the
project.
4 Lund (1987) also raises critical questions regarding participation in the town-planning process. Among
these are, who is likely to participate? How much participation is possible and desirable, according to
whose definition of participation? Who becomes elected into decision-making processes, and who not?
What weight should be given to the views of organised interest groups as opposed to the less articu-
late, unorganised majority? The Kasa mother-child health-nutrition project in Maharashtra, India, and
the Serabu Hospital village health project, Sierra Leone, illustrate the importance of distinguishing
between involving only the leaders and the participation of the wider community. Since these projects
were built on a hierarchical structure, the approval and co-operation of the leaders were first sought and
thereafter wider community participation was sought, involving community members from the design to
the implementation of the project (Hardiman, 1986:58-65).
50
Community participation in development: importance, advantages, principles and stakenolders Chapter 4
Reasons for involvement could include: improving the quality of life in a community; promo-
ting a particular political agenda; making requests for community agreement to the use of a par-
ticular technology; transferring skills to the community; earning money from a project and shar-
ing project costs (Independent Development Trust, 1993:18-19). Stakeholder roles in an initiative
could include the following: initiating an idea for the project; providing funding; providing techni-
cal assistance; providing physical labour; taking key policy decisions; designing action plans and
time-frames; ensuring that the implementation occurs according to policy directives; mobilising
and co-ordinating the community's commitment.
Individual role-players such as professionals, managers, development workers, etc., should
possess the following characteristics or people-centred skills: cultural sensitivity, negotiating
skills, vision, perseverance, conviction, and practical work experience in development
(Bhatnagar,1992:20). However, it is neither the skill nor knowledge, but the attitudes and com-
mitments of people that are really important. Development workers should believe in participa-
tion, have faith in the capacity of people and believe in democratic methods.
In any development process, all stakeholders have their own interests and agendas. As far
as possible, these agendas should be open. Successful development depends on the degree
to which all of these agendas can be merged. Merging may be tough but is an essential require-
ment which creates its own problems and trade-offs. In cases where the agenda of only one
party is met, the project is likely to fail. Some stakeholder agendas can either threaten or
enhance community ownership of a project. It is important for community-based organisations
to be aware of the different roles other parties can play so that these organisations can try to
drive the projects themselves.
Ideally, community-based organisations should try to identify the desired relationship with
each stakeholder and shape that relationship so that it will benefit the community. Where a num-
ber of stakeholders are involved in a project, time has to be allowed to create trust between the
partners (Independent Development Trust,1993:19-20). In many instances the state-communi-
ty or development agency-community interaction should be seen as 'an instance of antagonistic
co-operation' (Taylor,1994:189). The need for collaborative development, therefore, remains
very important and demands almost supernatural efforts of those who facilitate participation.
4. Conclusion
This overview of principles and preconditions of community participation presupposes that who-
ever is involved in development initiatives should have a vision for creating a better society
through participatory development. Many of these principles derive from democratic principles
and policies such as inclusiveness, representativeness, transparency and accountability. The
underlying development ethic is one of co-operation rather than of prescription. This in turn
implies that an appropriate process has to accompany every development product and attempt.
The next chapter (Chapter 5) will focus on the organisational and institutional dynamics of
community participation. The participatory development roles of government, international and
national development agencies, NGOs and CBOs will be analysed.
I I
51
---5-
Community participation
in development:
organisational and
institutional
dynamics
T chapter is an artempt to give an overview of the organisational
dynamics related to participatory development. It will become clearer as
the chapter unfolds that the nature of community participation depends
largely on the way in which development is institutionalised on the
ground. The importance of appropriate organisational structures for com-
munity participation in projects needs to be stressed. As Carroll puts it:
"Joint or collaborative involvement is a hallmark of
popular participation. Participation tends to be inef-
fective outside of an organisational context. Partici-
pation needs group structures" (Carroll, 1992:1 09).
A major element in most discussions on the promotion of community
participation is the notion of institution-building, also referred to as the
establishment of efficient social compacts, which can function as local
level organisations of involvement or community-based decision-making
bodies. Institution-building usually refers to the establishment of deci-
sion-making bodies that are fully representative, democratically elected,
accountable and effective in their lonq-terrn functioning.
Effective community participation is impossible without a kind of
organisation or social compact (steerlnq committee, executive or board)
empowered to take decisions on their own. Because one could regard
organisations as sense-making contexts, it is generally accepted that the
question of community participation in development is largely an organi-
sational one. Some even refer to participation as being the most vital
organisational problem of our time (Constantino-David, 1982: 190;
Taylor,1994:149). Several authors (Cernea,1988; Hulme & Turner,
1990:215) indicate the importance of organisations, particularly non-
governmental organisations (NGOs) and community-based organisa-
52
Comrnunity participation in development: organisational and Institutional dynamics Chapter 5
tions (CBOs) in facilitating community participation. Any overview of community participation
should take cognisance of the organisational dynamics of such participation.
1. Community organisation(s) and community participation
Many thinkers such as Gandhi and Nyerere saw the creation of community organisations as ends
in themselves, because the successful establishment of an organisation was seen as empower-
ing those who had previously been unable to exert influence on society. The prospects of com-
munity participation are related directly to the presence of community-based organisations: The
presence of organised groups makes it easier, at least in principle, to achieve people's participa-
tion. Some observers view community-based organisations 1 as instruments of participation or
vehicles for involvement, while others claim that even an initially antagonistic leadership is a po-
sitive sign. In general, it is easier to begin working with existing community-based organisations
than to organise the community from scratch (Yeh, 1987: 16-17). Effective community-based
organisations are a vital factor in contributing to participatory development and enhancing the
problem-solving capacity and the design structures of decision-making. To effectuate their func-
tioning, community-based organisations should look very stringently at their own mechanisms of
participation, democratic decision-making, accountability, means of interacting with the poorest
sections in the community, ways of acquiring financial resources, access to information, networ-
king and linking up with wider social movements. Factors such as mobilisation, training, motiva-
tion, organisation and leadership are pivotal to enhancing these dimensions of participation.
Effective planning cannot be done to or for an organisation: it should be done by it.
Properly functioning community structures also ensure responsiveness to local needs, give
participants ownership of the project and serve as a vehicle for skills training. Community-based
development organisations should process and evaluate citizens' opinions and ensure a full
understanding of the issues - as well as choose appropriate techniques to facilitate participation
(Pieterse & Simone, 1994:46). Esman & Uphoff (as cited in Hulme & Turner, 1990:195) studied
the relationships among the performance of 150 rural community-based organisations and their
environments and structures. Surprisingly, social heterogeneity and social stratification are
found to correlate positively, and at a statistically significant level, with enhanced local organisa-
tional performance. This is an important finding as it challenges the commonly-held notion that
such organisations operate best in socially homogeneous societies with limited differentiation.
Less surprising is the conclusion that local organisations produce better results in communities
that already have relatively participatory norms for decision-making. The study also found that
the degree of participatory orientation (i.e. the extent to which orqanisations actively promote
membership involvement and equity) correlates with good performance and in particular, corre-
lates significantly with an increased ability to raise the incomes of poorer members and to
increase the access of the poor to services (Hulme & Turner, 1990: 195).
However, community-based structures can also create a few problems: organisations can
become self-serving to members, rather than community-orientated and can even cause com-
munity divisions. Therefore, community-based organisations should be as representative as
possible. Representation can be structurally implemented in different ways. It can, for instance,
The Development Resource Centre estimate that South Africa has some 54 000 NGOs. Of these a total
of 20 000 are developmental in nature, and approximately 12 000 to 15 000 are community-based
organisations (Bernstein,1993:58).
53
Community participation in development: organisational and institutional dynamics Chapter 5
range from individual-personal membership to institutional membership. Both have advantages
and disadvantages that will not be elaborated upon here. Rahman (1993:41) cautions us not to
create community-based organisations mechanically before there has been a process through
which pre-organisational or informal people's institutions may develop which, in turn, may later
crystallise into more formal organisational structures.
Regarding community participation, community groups and organisations operate on a con-
tinuum. The first is one of harmonious co-operation, following traditional community develop-
ment lines, with an emphasis on request to authorities for provision of services. The other is one
of conflict-confrontation-negotiation where issues are raised more in terms of demands than as
requests. In the confrontational approach, the result does not always lead to peaceful solutions
and violence does sometimes result. In both styles the principle of self-help is involved, but there
is a different degree of self-help. The harmonious co-operation style can be found in both top-
down and bottom-up modes, but the confrontational is more characteristic of the bottom-up
approach (Yeh, 1987: 16).
According to Uphoff (1993:608), grass-root organisations or local organisations mainly ope-
rate at the local level of decision-making. Ten such levels of decision-making were identified
ranging from international to the individual level. These are shown in Figure 5.1, with the three
commonly regarded as "local" grouped together in a box. The basic characteristic of what is
"local" or "community-based" from a socio-economic perspective is that most people in a locali-
ty, community or group have regular tace-to-tace relationships and are likely to have multi-
stranded relationships - as members of a residents organisation, members of a church, buyers
at the same shops, etc. While households and individuals are found at local levels, they do not
present the same problematic issues of "collective" action found in groups, communities and
localities. However, some scholars also view households and individuals as the smallest units
of development and participation, because the community, as the fundamental unit for develop-
ment, is made up of households comprised of individuals with an array of roles and responsibi-
lities, which have evolved in a way that allows the community to function (Fussell,1996:47;
Hart,1993:3). It goes without saying that those development initiatives that do not have as
premise the community as a collective entity, are doomed to failure. Community development
efforts will thus not only have to include the broader community as represented by its leaders
and structures, but will also have to ensure that the household and individual end-beneficiaries,
as the smallest units of the end-beneficiary community, are included (cf. Figure 5.1)
54
Community participation in development organisational and Institutional dynamics Chapter 5
International level
I
National level
. I
Regional level
i
District level
I
Subdistrict level
I
Locality level
A set of communities having social and
economic relations, usually with interactions
centred around a market town
Community level
An established sosio-economic residential unit,
often referred to as a settlement
Group level
A self-identified set of persons with some
common interest. sud'l as age, gender, etnie or
other groupmg; may be persons in a small
residential area like a neighbourhood
Househ61d level
. . I
Individual level
Figure 5.1 Levels of decision-making and activity for development (Uphoff, 1988:11)
In analysing the concept of community participation it is important to consider global relations,
the role of international development agencies, the role of the state and also local community
dynamics. Researchers have too often neglected the dynamic interplay among these different
levels of community participation. International development literature-' contains numerous eva-
luations of community participation programmes, many of which centre on the administrative or
cultural impediments to effective participation. Many researchers have assumed that the main
hurdles to participation can be found at the community level, e.g. example in the psychological
characteristics or charismatic appeals of individuals, the organisational leadership structures,
and styles of specific communities, etc. (Marsden & Maser, 1990:7; Morgan, 1993; Pan American
Health Organisation, 1984). In this study some case studies will be used, well knowing that such
"micro" community-focussed examples can easily miss the larger context of what guides deve-
lopment policy decisions. However, community participation will be analysed by taking into
account the relations among international, domestic and local groups.
2. Community participation and development aid
A major problem facing the nature of community participation is finance. When governments or
donor agencies work with local organisations, their manner of giving or withholding funds is like-
ly to create a psychology of dependency, which is the antithesis of development and a barrier to
participatory development. True decentralisation of decision-making and participation occurs
only when local community-based structures have control over financial resources. Since they
are usually unable to raise sufficient revenues to meet their own needs, they are dependent on
externa!' funds from the government or donor agencies and thus subject to external control.
Morgan (1993:160) notes:
2 USAID database.
55
Community participation in development. organisational and institutional dynamics Chapter 5
"The strings attached to aid moneys limit the ability of recipients to devise their
own development agendas and priorities, or to build local capacity for identify-
ing and solving local problems. Ultimately, foreign moneys often finance "tech-
nical" (rather than socio-political) solutions to development problems, thereby
avoiding (and even obfuscating) the underlying structural causes of poverty
and social inequality."
Often donors are not prepared to grant funds for unquantifiable social objectives such as
community participation in development. Another complaint sometimes heard from them is that
"participation does not move money" therefore the reluctance to invest resources in the complex
of participation activities at the design and implementation phases of projects (Swanepoel & De
Seer, 1983: 103; Uphoff,1985:380). Most development agencies tend to limit the participation of
the members of the target groups they are supposed to sponsor. They are reluctant to design
and implement a development initiative in a truely community-driven way unless they are com-
pelled by external and internal pressures to do so. This is based on the assumption that they
know the needs and problems of the people better than the people themselves. Participation
frequently becomes contingent on the availability of external resources and hence dependent on
such deliveries from outside. Due to this situation of dependency, communities are also deprived
of the prerogative to define what constitutes participation. A very important aspect in terms of
financing (i.e. donor) is that it to a large extent inhibits rather than encourage marketing or entre-
preneurial skills of local communities - something that is imperative for a step-by-step improving
of skills. The provision of development aid is often a means by which the donors extend their
ideological power base at the expense of the beneficiaries, concealing their real motives by
claiming to be the only bearers of liberation, salvation and relief. In such cases donor aid is noth-
ing more than a form of power over communities, which strongly influences the nature and direc-
tion of development initiatives. This may easily lead to the loss of control by local communities
- especially loss of control over certain aspects of their livelihoods. These are some of the rea-
sons why some view donor funding, grants and relief money as the main threats to participatory
development. To many international donor and development institutions, local participation is fine
as long as it comes up with agendas and programmes that work according to Western standards
of efficacy? (Pieterse & Simone, 1994:43).
2.1 Community participation and the state
According to Midgley et al. (1986:145-146), few systematic attempts have been made during the
last twenty years to examine the relationship between state and community initiatives in social
development. This is partly because many community participation theorists have rejected state
involvement out of hand and refused to consider the issues. In their opinion state involvement
will simply perpetuate the old 'top-down' approach to social development, which imposes pro-
grammes and services on a passive population, stifles community participation initiatives, weak-
ens local self-reliance, leads to a decrease in local ability to perform locally determined projects
and undermines community solidarity. People's self-mobilisation for participatory development
does not take place if the state assumes the primary responsibility for initiating and implemen-
ting development, for then two negative things happen. Firstly, the people wait for state agencies
3 In this regard Boomi Sena, a community-based movement in India, is highly selective and only accepts
unconditional contributions from external sources of funding.
56
Community participation In development: organisational and institutional dynamics Chapter 5
to deliver development, they waste resources, time and energy in lobbying and waiting for such
deliveries instead of mobilising their own resources and taking initiatives of their own. Secondly,
the state usually fails to deliver, because the state neither has sufficient resources to deliver on a
national scale, nor the capacity to manage the increasing number of development projects and
programmes effectively (Asthana, 1994:59-60, Gopal & Marc,1994:20; Rahman, 1993: 118-119)
While these views are popular, they ignore the fact that the role of the state in modern soci-
ety has expanded enormously during the past century. Today, the state is a major provider of
social development services and, as a prime policy-maker, it largely determines how social
development programmes will evolve. The state also has the power to shape and determine the
nature of community participation activities in many Third World countries. To ignore the role of
the state in any discussion on community participation would, therefore, be a serious omission.
Whatever the disappointments with the role of the state in the past, there are many arguments
for the importance of greater dialogue between the public and voluntary/NGO sectors, between
state and civil society, and for the identification of linkages between local organisations and go-
vernment agencies.
There is a delicate relationship between state and community organisations. On the one
hand, the state is anxious to reduce its costs by promoting participatory development and self-
help schemes, which often results in increased advocacy by community groups. On the other
hand, government structures are generally unwilling to allow this advocacy to reach a point
where it challenges their decision-making power. Thus, participation is often defined in govern-
ment terms rather than community terms. (This issue will be explained in greater detail in
Chapter 6.)
The view that government support for community participation in development results not in
an increase, but in a diminution of community involvement, is a paradox that is not often recog-
nised. In this regard Morgan (1993:6) indicates that state-sponsored community participation is
an oxymoron, because state sponsorship implies an inevitable degree of control and manipula-
tion, and Korten (1991 a:8) notes that participation and bureaucracy are fundamentally opposing
forces; seeking participation through bureaucratic'' structures is a contradiction. On the other
hand, some proponents of community participation argue that state involvement is not only ne-
cessary, but also desirable and that community development programmes are often ineffective
without government support. Governmental organisations are much larger than NGOs and have
access to a wide range of technical, managerial and planning skills and to funding. They are
good at large-scale infrastructural projects like roads, electricity networks, school-building and
water reticulation, which require less sensitive people-management (Graaff & Louw, 1992: 13).5
A compromise position is that state support is helpful, but that local people should be assisted
and taught how to resist the efforts of bureaucrats and politicians to subvert their authority.
4 Max Weber is widely recognised as the father of the modern idea of bureaucracy for his role in defining
bureaucracy as an ideal organisational type and in articulating a theory of bureaucratic organisation. To
Weber the most perfectly developed bureaucracy would eliminate all personal, irrational and emotional
elements. He explicitly rejects any form of fellowship and people's participation in decision-making. The
critical point here is that the suppression of participation within a bureaucratic organisation is not a mal-
function. It is rather the organisational designer's intention (Korten, 1991 b:8-9).
5 However, if one reads reports of large scale community-intensive infrastructural projects like the Orangi
Pilot Project in Karachi, Pakistan, even large-scale infrastructural projects require many people-sensi-
tive skills.
57
Community participation in development: organisational and institutional dynamics Chapter 5
According to Gaigher (1992:49), the problem is that governments are, more often than not,
only interested in concrete objectives, which fit in with their national planning and have very lit-
tle concern for abstract human needs like organisational development, institutional capacity-
building, i.e. the improvement of leadership and decision-making skills.
CLOSED
GOVERNMENTS OPENGOVERNMENTS
Government's
response to
community
participation: Anti-participatory Manipulative Incremental Participatory
Government's
response to
community
participation:
Community's I
response to
govemment's action: Ignorance Confrontation Control Ownership Consensus-
Decision-making
Increasing openness of govemment to th9 involvement of communities
(Designed by author)
Figure 5.2 Community participation and the role of the state
The state can react on community involvement in social development projects in a variety of
ways (cf. Figure 5.2). States can support, manipulate, reject or neglect the demands of the poor.
Therefore, the attitude of the state is essential in determining the potential results of community
participation. The following four ideal-typical modes serve as an example of state responses to
community participation:
(1) The anti-participatory mode
The first mode is congruent with Marxist and élite theories, which hold that the state is not inter-
ested in the poor and that it supports neither community participation nor social development.
Instead, the state acts on behalf of the ruling class. Efforts to mobilise the masses for partici-
pation will be viewed as a threat and will be suppressed. The state will oppose de facto any form
of popular participation in its attempt to monopolise all forms of collective action. This leaves lit-
tle space for autonomous, creative and participatory expression of popular aspirations. This
mode can occur in any non-free or authoritarian society, both capitalist and socialist (Midgley et
al.,1986:39).
(2) The manipulative mode
The state supports community participation, but does so for ulterior motives. Among these are
a desire to use community participation for purposes of political and social control, the recogni-
tion that community participation can reduce the costs of social development programmes and
also to facilitate implementation. Selective participation will also take place where the state
chooses to support only those participatory ventures which it regards as legitimate, satisfactory
and of advantageous to the ruling party. If one analyses the Ethiopian peasant association
movement, the Chinese rural communes, participation in the Primary Health Care drive in Costa
Rica and the Tanzanian Ujamaa village policy, they are all examples of the manipulative partici-
patory mode where participation is not valued as an end in itself. Participation is only useful as
58
Community participation in development: organisational and institutional dynamics Chapter 5
long as it serves to help achieve national economic and political objectives. In other words, par-
ticipation seems to mean getting people to do what outsiders think is good for them
(Hall, 1986:99; Wanyande,1987:95).
Another form of manipulative participation occurs when the state sponsors community par-
ticipation for instrumental reasons. Many governments employ the rhetoric of participation to
recruit labour for development projects, without involving the people in decision-making. In this
mode of participation, development is still overwhelmingly characterised by a 'blue-print
approach', which does not allow for effective popular participation. The responsibility for taking
the initiative in determining what form of development should take rests firmly in the hands of
central planners. Local people are consulted only in so far as such contacts allow the precon-
ceived strategy to be finely tuned and made more efficient on the ground, along the instrumen-
talist and utilitarian lines already discussed. The local community is the subordinate partner in
this regard, is occasionally allowed to voice an opinion, but should not protest too vehemently
(Hall, 1986:99-100). Participation here is to be defined, labelled and managed by the state -
sometimes according to guidelines set by international agencies. This circumscribed vision of
participation rules out a range of autonomous or informal community actions not condoned by
government, including everything from indigenous development to confrontations and protests
against state policies (Morgan, 1993:13). In this regard Stiefel & Wolfe (1994) note that govern-
ments often refrain from considering participation in terms of class and power. The proponents
of community participation condemn the practice of "manipulation" not only because it is unde-
mocratic and suppresses local initiative, but also because it often leads to abuse.
(3) The incremental mode
The incremental mode of participation is characterised by official support for community partici-
pation ideas, but also by an ambivalent approach to implementation that fails to support local
activities properly or to ensure that participatory institutions function effectively. While these go-
vernments do not oppose community participation, they fail to provide the necessary backing to
ensure the implementation of community participation. A far more common cause of incremen-
tal community participation is policy and administrative ineffectiveness and bureaucratic ineffi-
ciency, inflexibility and remoteness (Midgley et al., 1986:42-43).
(4) The participatory mode
In the participatory mode the state fully approves of community participation and responds by
creating mechanisms for the effective involvement of local communities in all aspects of deve-
lopment. Inspired by various social and political theories including (but not exclusively) pop-
ulism, anarchism and pluralism, the participatory mode involves a real devolution and decen-
tralisation of power. Besides creating genuine community-level development and political insti-
tutions, the state sponsors participatory activities through tra:ining and deployment of communi-
ty workers. An effort is made to enfranchise the poorest sections of the community and recog-
nition and support are provided for all kinds of voluntary organisations. Local decision-making
bodies are given specific rights and functions, and real control over budgets. Steps are taken to
ensure that civil servants are sensitised to the needs of ordinary people and that participation
becomes institutionalised in the administrative procedures of the government (Midgley et
al.,1986:43-44).
59
Community participation In development: organisational and institutional dynamics Chapter 5
It should be borne in mind that even if these four ideal-typical modes of participation may not
fit the situation in all countries, combinations or variations of these responses may occur. Hulme
& Turner (1990) criticises Midgley's typology adding that it is:
"[O]f limited utility when applied to empirical materials. Only a small number
of instances of the anti-participatory mode can be identified. The participatory
mode is found to be a pure ideal with no evidence that it reflects a real-world
experience. In consequence, almost all cases fall into the second and third
categories, but, as it is virtually impossible to define a boundary between the
manipulative and incremental modes, and as the information on which to allo-
cate specific country experiences is often largely subjective, the typology is of
little use for analysing empirical evidence. As an analytical framework
Midgley's approach can also be criticised for treating the state as a monolithic
entity rather than an arena for continuos conflict in which different major actors
and agencies may be operating in different modes at any specific time."
Groenewald (1989:256-271) is a little more optimistic about the utility value of Midgley's clas-
sification when it is used with the criteria for true community participation and the willingness to
devolve power.
It is, of course, the hope of proponents of community participation that their efforts will result
in Third World governments adopting the participatory stance. From the above-mentioned it is
evident how the state and the government of the day play a pivotal role in enabling a conducive
environment for true community participation to emerge or to be maintained. Governments who
promote participation, assume the obligation to listen and respond to the citizenry, to accept cri-
ticism, to communicate and negotiate, to share decision-making power with ordinary people, and
to work toward substantive socio-political change (Morgan, 1993: 159). Put differently: govern-
ments who promote community participation should be responsive to the needs and wishes of
the people. The transition from bureaucracy to participation implies a genuine cultural revolution
in development thinking and doing, something which necessitates a re-orientation and re-training
of community leaders and bureaucrats towards joint or participatory planning and action.
2.2 Community participation and alternatives to state support
If one examines the literature, there is little evidence to demonstrate that state support and com-
munity initiatives have been effectively combined to promote genuine participation. Protagonists
of the oarticipatory paradigm point out that state sponsorship of community participation has
been largely of the incremental and manipulative variety which exploits particular programmes
for ulterior ends, stifles authentic community responses, defeats the ideals of genuine people's
participation in social development, and fosters paternalism whereby complacent citizens rely on
the state, instead of on their own initiative, to acquire goods and services. With few exceptions,
there is general acceptance that African governments, for instance, have been unable to meet
their development goals (Midgley et al., 1986:150-151).
If state sponsorship of community participation in social development neutralises authentic
participation, what then are the alternatives? One option is to abandon the concept of authentic
participation and to accept a more limited definition, which recognises the realities of statism in
modern society and also the difficulties involved in achieving both absolute popular control and
the total involvement of all members of the community.
60
Community participation in development organisational and institutional dynamics Chapter 5
A second option is to do away with state involvement entirely, instead of sacrificing the ideals
of community participation. However, given the current role of the state, this is totally unrealistic.
A third option is to support spontaneous 'bottom-up' participation, where local people orga-
nise themselves for social development. There are, however, also several conceptual and prac-
tical difficulties with the notion of spontaneous participation. On the conceptual side, if sponta-
neous participation is so highly prized, why do proponents of community participation continue
to advocate its promotion by interventionist strategies? Another problem with the notion of spon-
taneous participation is the way certain forms of community organisation are classified as
authentic, while others are not (Midgley et a/.,1986:151-152). On the practical side there are a
number of problems with the notion of spontaneous development (cf. also Chapter 6). It ignores
the need for external resources, and it is doubtful whether spontaneous forms of community par-
ticipation are as independent of external aid as is often pretended. The Boomi Sena movement
in India (which is often cited as an ideal example of spontaneous participation) and community
development projects in Sierra Leone made as much use as possible of external resources, such
as public and NGO forms of assistance, as long as they did not enforce conditions on the recei-
ving communities (Midgley et a/., 1986: 153).
A last option is to place faith in the role of NGOs in promoting participatory activities. The
assumption is made that these organisations are more likely to promote authentic forms of par-
ticipation (cf. Mayo & Craig, 1995:2). Traditionally, NGOs are less bound by "red-tape" and bureau-
cratic procedure. Unlike the state, these organisations are claimed to be dynamic, flexible, social-
ly concerned, innovative, adaptable, politically progressive, and these organisations are more like-
ly to identify with the oppressed, they enjoy a greater deal of community support, and they readily
test new ideas and reformulate existing approaches. NGOs are also able to mobilise resources
for social development projects, and more financial aid than is often appreciated has been chan-
nelled through non-governmental channels. Although NGOs cannot fill all the 'development space'
that is left by the state, they can often supply development support in a much more promising way
than the state. However, NGOs as engines for participatory development are not without pro-
blems, something which will be discussed in section 2.2.2 of this chapter.
2.2.1 Community participation and international development agencies
There exists quite a range of opinions within the international development establishment con-
cerning the meaning and function of community participation in development. According to
Morgan (1993:71), one common feature characterises these diverse definitions: in the process
of hammering out what constitutes community participation, the international establishment has
left little room for active citizen involvement. The agencies redefine participation as a specific,
bounded feature of state-citizen interaction, rather than as the continuation of an indefinite
process which haf always been practised by self-reliant communities and community-based
organisations. This has set the scene for international agencies, governments and foreign advi-
sers to decide what does constitute community participation and what does not. Citizens are to
participate only by obeying the directives prescribed by authorities and by participating in initia-
tives initiated by officials. Too much dependence on outside donors, orientates the accountabil-
ity of community leaders towards the donors, rather than towards the people. There are also
many examples of development agencies which are very bureaucratic and inflexible in their pro-
cedures and thus unresponsive to community requirements. This creates weak leadership and
61
Community participation In development: organisational and institutional dynamics Chapter 5
eventually contributes to denying deprived communities the right and privilege of self-determi-
nation (Rahman, 1993: 129, 130, 159). On the other hand, various international agencies (i.e.
WHO,UNICEF) do play a role in promoting community participation in a way which transcends
narrow national concerns and which appeals internationally.
Commissioned studies by some international development agencies during the 1980s on the
correlation between project success, sustainability, local institution-building and beneficiary par-
ticipation, delivered increasing empirical evidence that past failures of development projects
were linked to the absence of participation (Stiefel & Wolfe, 1994:221).
What follows next is an attempt to systematise the role of some specific international deve-
lopment agencies and their views on the suitability/unsuitability of state-driven participatory
development.
Community participation according to the Alma Ata Declaration
At the now well-known Alma Ata conference participation was viewed as part of the primary
health care drive. Morgan (1993:68) shares the essence of the Alma Ata declaration in respect
of participation:
"The community must first be involved in the assessment of the situation, the
definition of problems and the setting of priorities. Then it helps to plan primary
health care activities and subsequently it co-operates fully when these activi-
ties are carried out."
This emphasis on community participation shifts the focus away from existing methods of
health care delivery in which medical professionals defined and dominated the health care sys-
tem. Primary health care means that ordinary community people will become involved in both
decisions about health and health services, and in health service delivery. This shift places
greater responsibility on individuals and communities to cater for their own health - also referred
to as self-care. The utilitarian aspects of participation in this declaration are inescapable which
imply that community participation is thus defined as a tool of government: communities are to
cooperate with government initiatives, and will be urged to practise health, thereby minimising
the need for governmental health interventions (Morgan 1993:68 - 69). (Cf. Chapter 2, section
3, on the role of the WHO in the emergence of the participatory development paradigm).
Community participation according to the Pan American Health Organisation (PAHO)
PAHO defined genuine participation as much more than a contribution of labour and material
resources:
"Participation is perfected as it is practised. In the course of its development,
participation becomes active, when the people take part in the various stages;
conscious, when they fully understand the problems, translate them into felt
needs, and work to solve them; responsible when they commit themselves and
decide to move ahead in full awareness of the consequences and their obli-
gations; deliberate, when they express their voluntary resolution; organised,
when they perceive the need to pool their efforts to attain the common objec-
tive; and sustained, when they band together permanently to solve the various
problems of the community" (Morgan, 1993:68) (emphasis added).
62
Community participation in development: organisational and institutional dynamics Chapter 5
This definition relegates government to a subsidiary role, allowing greater autonomy and self-
determination to the Latin American communities themselves. According to Morgan (1993:68) it
is a much more empowering, progressive definition than that which emerges in the Alma Ata de-
claration, where government is given a pivotal role in channelling community participation in
health.
Community participation according to the World Bank
In the World Bank's documentation during the 1970s and the early 1980s the definition of com-
munity participation is notable for its utilitarian, unidirectional bias: communities are subordinate
to governments and should cooperate by relieving governments of financial burdens. There is
no mention of community involvement in planning or decision-making (Morgan, 1993:69-71).
One of the World Bank's later dissertations on community participation continues to view
community participation as a means for ensuring that Third World development projects reach
the poorest in the most efficient and cost-effective way, sharing costs as well as benefits, through
the promotion of self-help (this is sometimes referred to as the utilitarian view of community par-
ticipation).
Paul, in a discussion paper on the role of community participation in World Bank projects in
the 1970s and 1980s, basis his evaluation on 50 projects in the fields of urban housing, health
and irrigation (cf. Paul 1987). Paul details five potential objectives of participatory initiatives:
empowerment, building beneficiary capacity, increasing project effectiveness, improving project
efficiency and project cost sharing. The main findings Paul's study criticise the World Bank for
not focussing enough on empowerment and capacity building; participation has been seen mere-
ly as a means of increasing project efficiency, effectiveness and sharing costs, rather than as a
means of building beneficiary capacity or empowerment; the degree of participation has been
relatively low, often confined to information sharing or consultation (Paul, 1987:v, 13). The ques-
tion posed in Isham et al., (1995) is whether participation does improve performance. After an
analysis of 121 diverse rural water projects, the statistical findings suggest that increasing be-
neficiary participation directly fosters better project outcomes.
Morgan (1993:70) criticises the dissertation of Paul and the World Bank stating that it is full
of development jargon, complete with a "nearly useless chart detailing the 'mix of instruments'
and 'mix of intensity' that might, theoretically, characterise different types of community partici-
pation". The major failing in Paul's arguments "is his Bank-centredness, as though the decisions
over whether, when, and how to promote participation can, should and will be made unilaterally
by Bank employees rather than by beneficiaries."
Convers & Hawker (1989:468-469) also elaborate on the main weaknesses in Paul's study
stating that
"[i]t does not confront the issues underlying the relatively low level of impor-
tance attached to community participation by the Bank. It fails to recognise
that ... Bank projects ... require[s] a totally different approach to participation.
It requires a 'bottom-up' approach in which participation is seen from the be-
neficiaries point of view and the beneficiaries play the lead role in the initiation
and design of a project, rather than a 'top down' approach demonstrated in the
paper [of Paul] ... it requires an approach which sees participation as part of a
process of social, political and organisational change and recognises the com-
63
Community participation in development organisational and institutional dynamics Chapter 5
plexities and constraints which this entails, rather than a technocratic
approach, in which participation is something that can be 'bolted on' to a pro-
ject irrespective of the social, political and organisational context."
In yet other documents of the World Bank, participation has clearly become big business for
lining the consultants' pockets. Rahman (1995:32) also criticises the Bank's Structural
Adjustment Programmes, indicating that they are non-participatory and non-poverty-augmenting
in character.
One of the latest publications (1992) of the World Bank calls "Participatory Development and
the World Bank: Potential Directions for Change" reflects the outcome of an international work-
shop in February 1992 (cf. Bhatnagar & Williams,1992). This publication is a great improvement
on the earlier ones elaborating, as it does, on the dynamics and difficulty of promoting participa-
tion.
From the above it is clear that there is a long tradition of community participation within the
World Bank, and that participation itself was a learning process within the Bank. Yet, many still
believe that the lessons are not taken seriously enough. Community participation remains an
optional extra.
Community participation according to the regional development banks
Some of the regional development banks, such as the Inter-American Development Bank, stress
that an investment in participatory development practices is an investment in "human capital for-
mation". Human capital formation is a phrase used by economists who propose that investment
in people's health, nutritional status, educational status, living conditions, etc. can be justified by
an expected increase in their participation and productivity. This sounds like blunt materialism
where human beings are regarded as commodities, valued mainly for their contribution
(Morgan, 1993:46-51; Paul, 1987:v, 13).
Community participation according to agencies of the United Nations
In the 1980s United Nations agencies advocated participation in development projects for three
reasons (Rogerson, 1992:117-118):
• Participation is an end in itself as people have a right to participate in the planning, imple-
mentation and management of projects which profoundly affect their lives.
• Participation is a means of improving efficiency and of enhancing the results of development
work.
• Participation is a means towards 'capacity building' in the sense that it is a learning process
in building-up a self-reliant and co-operative spirit in communities.
The Popular Participation Programme of The United Nations Research Institute for Social
Development (UNRISD) is regarded as a success story for participation. It did not only initiate
a creative discourse among hundreds of development thinkers and activists through its newslet-
ter, Dialogue about Participation, but also in the 1990s sponsored dozens of studies to relate the
theory and practice of participation to global and national contexts. However, these studies
focussed on popular participation rather than on project-related or end-beneficiary participation.
64
Community participation in development. organisatiOnal and institutional dynamics Chapter 5
Among regional forums of the United Nations, the 1990 Arusha Conference on popular par-
ticipation in the Recovery and Development Process in Africa issued the African Charter on
Popular Participation, a strong call for participatory development.
The Human Development Report of the United Nations (1993) has people's participation as
its special focus. The Human Development Report defines participation in terms of people ha-
ving constant "access to decision-making and power" (UNDP, 1993:21). According to the report
(UNDP,1993:1,99), people's participation is no longer a vague ideology based on the wishful
thinking of a few idealists, but it has become a development paradigm in its own right. This
report goes on to state that the challenge for any development venture is to be more people-
friendly. People-friendly programmes or projects allow people to participate fully in their opera-
tion and share equitably in their benefits.
2.2.2 Community participation and non-governmental organisations
Given the limitations of achieving any degree of true participation under state tutelage, another
important channel for pursuing this objective lies outside direct government influence and
through non-governmental organisations. According to Hall (1986: 102), where development is
facilitated by NGOs, the likelihood of authentic participation is far more than with state-guided
initiatives. Perhaps the main reason for this is that official policies tend to be built on the assump-
tion that deprived communities are incapable of defining their own development path. NGOs, on
the other hand, start rather from the opposite premise, namely that only the beneficiaries them-
selves know what the most appropriate course of action is.
Community participation initiatives should certainly not exclude local community-based
organisations (CBOs) and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) They are more often staffed
by the type of people likely to support community involvement. They also tend to work on a
smaller scale and to be more closely involved at the localities where local participation is pro-
moted. Voluntary and civic organisations and other NGOs are the non-official expression of civil
society and are to be used fully in establishing community involvement in development initiatives.
It has been NGOs, to a much larger extent than government agencies, which have looked at
poor people and assisted grass-roots organisations in the process of empowerment towards
acquiring access to public services (cf. Constantino-David,1995:154; Edwards & Hulme, 1995;
Galjart, 1995: 14; Heunis & Van Rensburg,1995:6; Mayo & Craig,1995:2; Rahman,1995:25;
Sheng, 1990:61).
Because of the above-mentioned and other reasons, NGOs have become popular with offi-
cial donors such as the World Bank. The reasons are, firstly, that state-planned and state-led
development activities have been disappointing; and secondly, that NGOs appear to have
become less radical or revolutionary (Galjart, 1995:16) or have been eo-opted by 'development'
agencies (Rahman,1995:26).
In the past, most of the successful participatory development programmes were run by
NGOs. Governments may pay lip service to the principle, but in practice its implementation by
government tends to be weak. There are many reasons for this, quite apart from the usual
charges against the bureaucratic machinery. The projects of NGOs are on a smaller scale and
therefore community participation is easier to achieve, and it is also easier for NGOs to test small
pilot projects in a participatory manner. Since NGOs are more involved at a local level, they ful-
65
Community participation In development organisational and institutional dynarmes Chapter 5
fil a useful role as a "broker" or "third party" in the process. Evidence from development projects
indicates that NGOs, being third parties, are better positioned than state or market organisations
to carry out the following key tasks:
• assisting local groups and communities to organise and develop their own projects and pro-
grammes;
• advising governments on the formulation and implementation of community support policies;
• mediating between the community and the state and other corporate powers;
• raising public consciousness about the under-utilised capacity of CBOs and NGOs;
• From the above it is clear that CBOs and NGOs are seen increasingly as channels for pro-
moting economic and social development, also contributing to the democratisation of the
economy, society and polity (Elliott,1994:59,62; Uphoff,1993:618).
In their analysis of development initiatives in Africa, Taylor & Mackenzie (1992:253) indicate
that the role and significance of NGOs has increased. The fact that the 1980s is regarded by
some as the development decade of non-governmental organisations, and by others as the
development decade of participation, sets the scene for NGOs as important vehicles of commu-
nity participation. While it is undoubtedly true that NGOs have played a major role in the pro-
motion of community participation, it cannot be claimed that their involvement has been faultless.
Many of these larger organisations also function bureaucratically and also use formal proce-
dures, and are not at all flexible and innovative. Some NGOs, according to Taylor & Mackenzie
(1992:255), may even have hidden agendas of their own, which may in turn subvert or dominate
the initiatives of local communities. Charismatic leadership, which is unresponsive to new ideas
and views innovation as a threat to its authority dominates many voluntary organisations. The
assumption that the leaders of voluntary organisations are usually politically progressive also
needs to be questioned. Middle-class individuals whose views are paternalistic, rather than rad-
ically egalitarian run many NGOs. Sometimes NGOs compete with each other and very often
they suffer from a lack of continuity, with the result that communities are left with unfinished pro-
jects and unfulfilled promises.
However, even relatively unsuccessful collective grassroots development efforts create a sort
of social energy in the participants that may re-emerge in a later initiative. In general, available
empirical evidence demonstrates that NGOs have been increasingly supportive of local initia-
tives. As long as development cannot be planned, and as long as research has not shown that
governments do much better at promoting development than NGOs, there is room for the latter.
But, like all other actors on the scene, NGOs should remain modest in their aims.
Although donors continuously demand that all expenses be accounted for, the literature con-
tains few evaluations of project costs and benefits. Especially NGOs were insufficiently cost-
conscious. Lately, NGOs are increasingly being required to fit into non-participatory systems of
development administration. To ensure that their priorities and endeavours conform to national
development priorities, they are increasingly obliged to have their activities approved through the
bureaucratic procedures used by government itself.
66
Community participation in development organisational and institutional dynamics Chapter 5
3. Conclusion
These historical antecedents to contemporary community participation programmes demon-
strated the following:
• the initiative for development programmes often came from outside the community, with the
justification that the programme was for the community's own benefit;
• governments and international agencies allocated themselves the prerogative to define what
constituted "participation" without input from communities themselves;
• communities often had little choice in whether to participate in government-inspired pro-
grammes or not;
• compliance with the government programme was defined as "participation", while refusing to
cooperate was a crime.
Participatory programmes, whether sponsored by the state or the voluntary sector, have
brought tangible benefits to local people in many parts of the world. But these activities have not
generally conformed to the ideals of authentic participation. Participation programmes have not
been free of state manipulation or of the imposition of external values and directions by NGOs.
The role of the state, and for that matter of any other development agency, should be to faci-
litate, co-ordinate, advise and enable, rather than to control, prescribe and restrict. The World
Summit for Social Development in Copenhagen, March 1995, also emphasised the joint role that
governments, civil society and NGOs have to play in creating a conducive environment for par-
ticipatory development, stating that signatory governments should
"... commit themselves to reinforce as appropriate the means and capacities
for people to participate in the formulation and implementation of social and
economic policies and programmes through decentralisation, open manage-
ment of public institutions, and strengthening of the abilities and opportunities
of civil society and local communities to develop their own organisations,
resources and activities".
"... strengthen the ability of local communities and groups with common con-
cerns to develop their own organisations and resources and to propose poli-
cies relating to social development, including through the activities of non-go-
vernmental organisations."
The next chapter (chapter 6) will attempt to expose the difficulties and dilemmas associated
with community participation in development with specific reference to urban upgrading projects.
67
----6-
Community participation in
development: difficulties and
dilemmas'
Cmmunity participationin developmentis advocatedfor variousnoble
reasons and is often rhetorical and permeated with lofty sentiments. To
criticise these advantages of community participation would therefore
appear to be ungenerous. The flexibility of the phrase "community par-
ticipation in development" and the rampant enthusiasm with which it is
used, makes it resistant to analysis. As a concept, "community participa-
tion" is one of the most overused, yet least understood concepts in deve-
loping countries, without a serious attempt to analyse critically the diffe-
rent forms that participation could take (cf. Gaigher.1992:11; Nientied et
a/.,1990:53; Oakley, 1991 :269). But, as development scientists, it is our
obligation to apply our analytical skills in the examining of any set of
beliefs. This obligation applies equally to participatory development as a
paradigm. This, in itself, is a difficult endeavour, because it calls for not
only a criticism of romantic ideals that have intrinsic appeal, but also for
disentangling ethical issues from theoretical and practical considerations
(cf. Midgley et a/.,1986:34). There are many examples of people advo-
cating or applying community participation as uncritical trumpet-blowing
exercises. This chapter is therefore an attempt to expose the important
impediments or obstacles to community participation with some refe-
rence to its application in urban upgrading projects.
1. Impediments or obstacles to community participation
There is a wide range of factors that could hinder and indeed constrain
the promotion of participatory development, and these often lead to the
emergence of non-participatory approaches. Such obstacles prohibiting
An earlier version of this chapter is approved for publication in the inter-
national Community Development Journal of 2000.
68
Community participation difficulties and dilemmas Chapter 6
participation abound, ranging from institutional to socio-cultural, to technical, to logistical, and are
spread over a seemingly endless spectrum. Obstacles are moreover external, internal and even
a combination of both. "External obstacles" refer to those factors outside the end-beneficiary
community that inhibit or prevent true community participation from taking place. External obsta-
cles suggest the role of development professionals, the broader government orientation towards
promoting participation, the tendency among development agencies to apply selective participa-
tion, and their techno-financial bias. Internal obstacles refer to conflicting interest groups, gate-
keeping by local élite, and alleged lack of public interest in becoming involved. Some of the
obstacles, such as excessive pressures for immediate results and techno-financial bias, include
both internal and external characteristics.
1.1 The paternalistic role of development professionals
The majority of development projects are initiated by outsiders. They are rarely founded spon-
taneously by the community itself. The paternalistic roles of many 'development experts' during
the past four development decades impacted significantly on participatory development
approaches. In this regard Cadribo (1994:22) even referred to Africa as a graveyard of deve-
lopment projects due to their failures resulting from externally induced development and from
externally managed processes. The following remarks of community members illustrate their dis-
content with the paternalistic approaches of development professionals:
"They (the developers) arrived already knowing everything. They come here
and look around, but they see only what is not here" (Indian Villager.)
"Developers just came overnight, they just arrived. They did not tell the peo-
ple. They made us think that they were coming to save us" (Informal settler
Vryburg, North West Province, South Africa.)
Often professional experts dominate decision-making and manipulate, instead of facilitate,
development processes.ê The trademark of 'development experts' is often that they always
know best and therefore their prime function is to transfer knowledge to communities who by de-
finition "know less". The reason for this is that professionals are predominantly trained in ways
that disempower and who tell other people what they should think and do. This has contributed
to professionals (unconsciously or consciously) regarding themselves as the sole owners of
development wisdom and as having the monopoly of solutions which consistently underrate and
undervalue the capacities of local people to make their own decisions as well as to determine
their own priorities. Development professionals do not question the limits of their own know-
ledge, it is therefore difficult for development planners to view community needs and opportuni-
ties through "the eyes of end-beneficiaries" (Dudley, 1993: 150; Heymans,1994:34;
Howlands, 1995: 105). As so few professionals and politicians yet realise, the real experts on
people's own situations, resources and priorities, are community members themselves, the
2 Constantino-David (1982: 194) notes that elements of facilitation and manipulation are inevitable in com-
munity organisation and mobilisation for development. She uses the term facipulation which includes
elements of both facilitation and manipulation.
69
Community participation difficulties and dilemmas Chapter 6
inperts, on whose unique local knowledge the external experts depend for constructive contri-
butions - if the latter but new it! (Turner,1996:343).
Box 6.1 Tau and Kad03 as prototypes of development professionals
Although there are many different types of development professionals óperating in and with
deprived communities, one can perhaps distinguish between two prototypes of professionals.
Let us first ascribe names to these two typical professionals, just for the purpose of the exam-
ple, and ca,.I1them 'Tau" and "Kado". Tau views community participation as a tool to deliver
development products, as soon and as effectively as possible, to the beneficiary community.
At the end of a multi-million informal settlement upgrading project, Tau's approach paid off
· resulting in 4 000 sites that were serviced, with electricity installed in each site (an amenity
which had not initially been budgeted for) and savings for the community-based organisation
(of which the community leaders were part) of nearly Rt million in the bank. Basically Tau
employs a utilitarian idea of participation in development ~hich emphasises the delivery of the
development product, come hell o(high water! He predominantly applies community parfici,
pationas a tool for carrying ~ut a task or as a means to an end. Several times during the'pro-
ject the community leaders expressed their dissatisfaction attne lack of consultation and com-
munication of issues important to them. They also complained about not being paid for the
time that they had put into organising community meetings and assisting with a range of tasks
that contributed to the successful implementation of thffJproject Tau emphasised tha(they
had been elected as volunteers and therefore had to serve the community. Some of the lea-
·ders in the beneficiary community b~came so frustrated withTau's approach in this projeqt,
·that they decided to end theirthree year long working relationship with Tau on: the eve of
another R20 million housing project. They objected (rightly o/wrongly) to having been mis-
used by Tau for the benefit of Tau and the development agency he represents.
Kado, on the other hand, regards community particip~tion as an end in itself. For hi~ con-
tinUOUScommunication and dialOgue are the key to creating an environment conducive to
wot1<ingaspartnersip with the tommunity and its leaders. 'liéargues that set obÏectives a//d ."
tangiPle products are notJess important but that the pfocess ot achieving them is of equal .
.'.•importance. After ending their relatïonship with Tau, the CQmmi.Ir1ityleaders opted to work with
Kado. Kado fadfitated the restructuring of the community based ~,ganisation (CBO) in~uch a
w"aythat the community leaders could receive remuneratioh;for whatis termed community
consultancy work. Kado is also }1 firm believer and practitior1er of interactive decision-making
processes.
:} .:,:.".-': " -.:-=-::-::;: ' .: -:=- ,::
Drie wonders what the reasoning of the community leaders is when they have opted to
work with Kado, instead of Tau? P~fhaps Kado understands the spirit of the community and
its leaders better. But before I fall into the trap of judging these two professionals' approaches
toparticipatory development I will try to give history the opportunity of judging the newly found
relationship between Kado and the community leaders. Three years from now, at the com-
pletion of the second project, it will be interesting to assess how the community leaders
responded to Kado's way of managing participation in development, and what the overall
results are.
3 The example in Box 6.1 presented itself in one of the infonnal settlement communities in South Africa in which the
author was involved during the past five years. For ethical reasons the fictitious names "Tau" and "Kado" were used.
70
Community participation difficulties and dilemmas Chapter 6
In some instances, community participation is not a genuine attempt to empower communi-
ties to choose development options freely, but rather an attempt to sell preconceived proposals.
Participation processes often begin only after projects have already been designed. The
process is not an attempt to ascertain the outcomes and priorities, but rather to gain acceptance
for an already assembled package. Consultation with the community may simply be to legitimise
existing decisions i.e. to tell people what is going to happen by asking them what they think about
it. Community participation is in these cases nothing more than attempts to convince beneficia-
ries what is best for them.
If a development professional is the pivot around which development initiatives are built, any
community can easily become dependent on the presence and ideas of such a development
champion, who in turn, may hinder participatory development by undervaluing the input and
experiences of non-professionals. The consultant should be involved with a community only for
as long as it takes to identify real needs and to transfer necessary skills and ideas to ensure that
the community people can run programmes themselves. In communities where people are not
yet aware of their own potential, or have not been allowed to express and develop it, a depen-
dent relationship could often emerge which could impede the release of a community's own ini-
tiatives and collective capabilities.
1.2 The inhibiting and prescriptive role of the state
Although Gilbert (1987:56-80) generally agrees with the benefits of popular participation, he
believes that its achievements in practice have often been vastly exaggerated and its outcomes
have often damaged the interests of the weaker groups in society, mainly because its advocates
have often play down the political dimension of community participation. In Latin American soci-
eties there are many examples where governments, to maintain existing power relations in soci-
ety, have used community participation." He also points out that the benefits to be derived from
participation depend primarily on the political interests involved and he concludes that participa-
tion can be very dangerous when placed in wrong hands.
To the state it appears that the main aim of community participation programmes is less about
improving conditions for the poor or of modifying forms of decision-making, than about main-
taining existing power relations in society and ensuring the silence of the poor. Community par-
ticipation is often used by governments as a means of legitimising the political system and as a
form of social control. The level of commitment by many governments to community participa-
tion has often been dubious or extremely limited. Formal channels of community participation
have not always generated major benefits for local communities (Constantino-David, 1982:191;
Gilbert & Ward, 1984:770-780; Morgan, 1993:6; Rahman,1993:226).
Participation is often constrained at the state level by partisanship, funding limitations, rigidi-
ty, the resistance of local and national bureaucrats, and the state's inability to respond effective-
ly to the felt needs of the populace, Government bureaucrats as the instruments of nation states
are very much in a hierarchical mode of thinking which inhibits participatory development and
4 The ostensibly non-political, non-partisan character of participation obscures its use as a weapon in the
struggle for power. Morgan (1993:7) describes, almost in a cynically ironical way, how participation was
used as a resource and object of political struggle by politicians, health professionals and officials in the
"noble" field of primary health care in Costa Rica.
71
Community participation: difficulties and dilemmas Chapter 6
undermines the people's own governing abilities. There is a delicate relationship between state
and community organisations. On the one hand, the state is anxious to reduce its costs by pro-
moting participatory development and self-help schemes, which often results in increased advo-
cacy by community groups. On the other hand, government-structures are generally unwilling
to allow this advocacy to reach a point where it challenges their decision-making power. Thus,
participation is often defined in government terms rather than in community terms.
1.3 The over-reporting of development successes
Another problem is that successes related to development initiatives are quantified, document-
ed and communicated to a greater extent than are failures. There is, therefore, a lack of under-
standing of lessons learned, and of their communication. In theoretical discussion, development
experts will readily agree that failures are an important part of the learning process. Yet, when
considering their own projects, development experts at all levels in the process have an interest
in presenting a picture of success. Success is rewarded while failure, however potentially infor-
mative, is not. The result of this is that knowledge of the nature of the failure, the very informa-
tion which could allow intervention policy to be improve, is lost (Dudley, 1993: 11-12; Friedman,
1993:35; Rahman, 1993: 153). We need more studies of what went wrong in development initia-
tives, the reasons why they went wrong and some suggestions as to how the same mistakes
may be avoided.
1.4 Selective participation
Very often it is the most visible and vocal, wealthier, more articulated and educated groups that
are allowed to be partners in development, without serious and ongoing attempts to identify less
obvious partners. Friedman (1993:11-17) and Young (1993:148) have warned against the prac-
tice of many development agencies to engage exclusively with particular groups as community
representatives, while, Gaigher et al. (1995:239) also mention that poor community penetration
by NGOs and CBOs is one of the main impediments to community participation. Since many
community organisations are not democratically elected, the involvement of local leaders often
represents the voice of a group of self-appointed people, and may not accurately reflect the
views and perspectives of the broader community. This easily runs the risk of the project being
eo-opted by certain groups or interests, leaving development workers with a feeling that the be-
neficiaries consulted were the wrong ones.
This may create problems because the needs and issues at stake are determined by people
who do not experience poverty in society. saroie (1991:10) even refers to these groups as mar-
ginal participants. It is a well-known social anthropological principle that often the most outgo-
ing or most easily approachable members Of the community tend to be those that are marginal
to their own society. It remains one of the mest serious challenges to ensure that the people who
have neither the capacity, nor the desire to participate, are involved in the development process.
72
Community participation difficulties and dilemmas Chapter 6
One of the worst manifestations of selective participation occurs when the development
agency "buys" the goodwill and support of key interest groups in the community, which is also
referred to as 'community-renting'. 5 This is often the result where community involvement exer-
cises are susceptible to manipulation and misappropriation. The point has been made in Latin
American contexts that communities may deliberately buy into eo-option to gain access to
resources. Other practices that can easily lead to exclusionary or selective development can
occur when the developer or donor agency, rather than the community themselves, identifies the
community partners,. This selective identification usually happens when development workers
ask the "best known" members of the community to serve on a committee (cf. Morgan, 1993: 144-
147). Since to the developer participation is largely a matter of convenience, the objective is to
find a partner in order to allow the project to continue, and, the screening of the representative-
ness of the partner is, at most, secondary.
1.5 Hard-issue bias
In many development projects the so-called "hard" issues (technological, financial, physical and
material) are perceived as being more important for the successful implementation of these pro-
jects than the "soft" issues (such as community involvement, decision making procedures, the
establishment of efficient social compacts, organisational development capacity building and
empowerment) (cf. Moser, 1989; Sowman & Gawith, 1994:567-568). This may be the result of the
assumption that social and cultural features (the so called "soft issues") are ephemeral, intangi-
ble and unnecessarily time-consuming in comparison with the more easily managed "hard
issues". This inevitably results in a technical bias, which neglects the fact that inappropriate
social processes can destroy the most noble development endeavour. Cernea thus describes
the soft - hard issue dichotomy:
"While many technologies are available for the "hardware" components of
development projects, this is not the case for the institutional components and
socio-cultural parts of these projects ("software"), which in no way are less
important for the projects' ultimate success. Thus, creating and strengthening
adequate social organisation - the social capital that sustains, uses and main-
tains the technology, and involving the users of the technology, is no less
important than the technology itself' (Cernea, 1983: 13; Cernea,1994:8).
The majority of professional organisations for development (i.e. engineering firms, town and
regional planners, quantity surveyors, contractors) involved in urban development are also more
oriented towards "product-related hard issues" rather than "process-related soft issues"."
Participation is not a value or a norm for these professions, but it is a matter of convenience.
5 "Community-renting" refers to examples where the goodwill and support of communities are "bought" in
exchange for some promised spin-offs. Since the establishmerit of Provincial Housing Boards in South
Africa in 1994, various reports have been received of developers (i.e. town & regional planners, con-
sulting engineers and building contractors) engaging in community-renting practices for the primary rea-
son of obtaining contracts.
6 People with a financial, technical, and/or professional background tend to overemphasise the develop-
ment product, while for people with a social and community based background, development is more a
matter of the right approach or process. Cf. Box 6.1: Tau has a technical science background whereas
Kado has a social science background.
73
Community participation: diHiculties and dilemmas Chapter 6
Most of them also lack the attitudes and skills required to elicit community participation, because
the 'community' is only a means towards achieving their own development goals.
In this regard Asthana (1994:57) refers to the tensions that exist between hard and soft issues
in slum improvement projects in India. In many instances the social dimensions of a project
remain largely undefined. It seems to be assumed either that the soft issues of a project are less
important, or that everyone knows how to do thern.?
1.6 Conflicting interest groups within end-beneficiary communities
In the majority of cases development introduces marginalised communities to scarce resources
and opportunities. This very often increases the likelihood of development as a divisive force.
Development always is the result of decisions which require choices about whose needs are to
enjoy priority; often some interests can be accommodated only at the expense of others. A lo-
gical consequence of this is the likelihood that conflict can develop among different interest
groups or segments of the community. Conflict also arises in situations where some groups may
feel neglected in decisions affecting their lives. This in turn may enhance the possibility of dif-
ferent interest groups within a single community opposing each other.
Competition among community based organisations and other popular movements for
access to scarce development resources and power is a major constraint preventing proper par-
ticipation. Most civic and political movements are well aware that development, for which they
can claim responsibility, will boost their support base; they, therefore, have an incentive to dis-
courage processes for which they cannot claim sole credit. In the South African urban develop-
ment scene there are various examples of how development initiatives are being sabotaged,
undermined or hi-jacked, because a specific interest group believes that it was allocated an
insufficient role. (cf. Box 6.2)
Box 6.2 .Conflict in places of peace
In T~'w~ragano, which literallyme~nS "Let us get together and do something", a small informal
.settlëmen(óf 270 households in Kimberley (Northern Cape Province - South Africa), rivalry
between ~o community organisations and their leadership w~s so severe that a housing pro,,:·
posa! was delayed for approximately 18months. Only after/our mediation attempts, 10 mee-
. tings and many harsh words dici the two organisations agr~ê tb ~upport a housing proposal
jointly. ;~ another community Cal/ed Boikhutsong "Place of peace" comprising 780 hou~e-
holds. (also in Kimberley) tension between two community groups was so severe that the
community centre (in which a community-based organisation also occupied an office) was
believed to have been deliberately set on fire and two community members killed. Four
attempts to arrange an Annual General Meeting failed due to disruptions by members of the
opposing community group.
7 Due to limited time, two housing proposals in South Africa [one in Tswaragano-Kimberley (Northern
Cape Province), the other in Freedom Square-Bloemfontein (Free State Province) - 1995) only clarified
the hard-technical issues and did not devote enough time to creating a suitable social compact as engine
for effective community participation. Both projects were delayed for several months due to this techno-
economical bias and underplay of community-related issues.
74
Community participation difficulties and dilemmas Chapter 6
Another reason why different stakeholders in a development initiative may find themselves at
loggerheads, is because they can be in the same development drive for various reasons: In this
regard Stiefel & Wolfe (1994:17) refer to as a "difference in rationalities". Because interest groups
engage in encounters and development projects for different reasons, they very often do not share
either a common vision nor objectives regarding the future development of their community, which
is almost a guaranteed recipe for conflict. In reflecting about the pros and cons of participatory
development what is perceived as negative by one interest group can very often have a positive
connotation for another.
From the above it is clear that each community consists of a variety of social groups with dif-
fering interests and different perceptions of their actual and desired roles in society. A critical fac-
tor influencing the motivation to participate is often the composition of a community. In informal set-
tlements, for instance, besides political and cultural differentiation, there are also: the new arrivals
versus the old-timers, the tenants versus the owners, the old versus the young, male versus
female, unemployed versus employed, formally employed versus informally employed, etc ..
1.7 Gate-keeping by local élite
It is a well-known fact that in cases where the community leadership favours a project the
chances of success are far greater than where leaders are opposed to it. However, often a par-
ticular organisation, the dominant one in a target area, may interpose itself between the devel-
opment agency and the beneficiaries, resisting all attempts to engage with the latter. Thus local
élite may be able to effectively thwart attempts to engage directly with beneficiaries, because this
threatens their control. 8
There is always the danger that decision-making at community-level may fall into the hands
of a small and self-perpetuating clique, which may act in its own interests with a total disregard
for the community at large. This is even more problematic in cases where there are different
organisations claiming to represent "the community" and the matter even becomes more dubi-
ous where a specific interest group or community is seen to be gaining at the expense of other
8 For example, Cemea (1983:95) indicates how village élite tend to control the contacts between the poor-
est village groups and planners from the Integrated Programme for Rural Development (PID'::R) in Mexico.
Kaseje (1992:1-9) also shares his experiences of how the roles of local élite lead to mismanagement and
almost destruction of a rural health programme in Kenya. There are reports of serious problems in the
Eastem Cape, South Africa, that arise in cases where one strong interest group like the South African
National Civic Organisation (SANCO) attempt to act as development agency (a role in which they seldom
have any capacity or competence); and in the process interfere with the activities of established commu-
nity-based development organisations (CBDOs). This problem is compounded when Civics attempt to
extend their "watchdog of the people" role to one which assumes a gate-keeping function with respect to
funding for development projects formulated by the people in consultation with competent CBDOs. At the
local level, this has led to conflict and interference with project implementation, often to the extent that ini-
tiatives are abandoned or tum out to be only partially successfull.
75
Community participation. difficulties and dilemmas Chapter 6
parties. In this regard Friedman (1993:29) has used the term "positioning for patronaqe"? In
developing countries, South Africa included, the peculiar dynamics of informal settlements often
lend themselves to an autocratic style of leadership based on patronage, which reinforces the
prevailing inequality of the existing social structure (cf. Nientied et al. 1990:45).
Many residents in informal settlements are engaged in a struggle for survival in a context of
absolute or relative poverty which result in competition for scarce resources. This is obviously
not favourable for community organisation. Leaders in informal settlements appear to adapt well
in these circumstances, and they frequently monopolise the information channels between the
slum residents and the agencies. In this way, and in spite of their sometimes useful role as medi-
ators for the urban poor, they limit the direct and active participation of low income people in ge-
neral. This behaviour by the more dominant groups has often deprived the weaker and more
vulnerable social segments of participation in community affairs. This may also lead to self-cen-
tredness and selfish development decisions. Experience has shown that it is often very difficult
to reach the poorest and that initiatives and leadership will often come from people with higher
social status. In the case of shelter provision projects, women are often under-represented and
as a result women's concerns receive low priority. In the South African context Roodt (1996:312)
expresses his concern for the way in which certain groups and individuals monopolise power and
development resources at the local level, and in the process exclude, or prevent, or limit other
groups and individuals from participation.
1.8 Excessive pressures for immediate results: the accentuation of
product at the expense of process
There is always a tension between the imperatives of delivery (product) and community partici-
pation (process), between the cost of time and the value of debate and agreement. Excessive
pressures for immediate results, accruing from the products and services delivered, often under-
mine attention to institution-building and make it difficult not to address poverty and poverty
reduction from a relief and welfare approach. Any pressure on development workers to show
results may force them to take matters out of the hands of community people and complete these
themselves. For example, the distribution of food is much more quickly achieved than teaching
people how to grow it themselves (Gaigher, 1992:49; Galjart, 1981 :148). Anticipated results in an
often too short term, have also been the cause of many of the world's most inappropriate devel-
opment initiatives. In many instances an overemphasis on the development product is often
unacceptable to community people as illustrated in the words of a community leader in an infor-
mal settlement in HuhudiNryburg - North-West Province, South Africa:
"What we resent is the high-handed way the planners go about ramming pro-
posals down our throats. This is our community and we want to be part of
decisions affecting us."
9 Asthana (1994:64) discusses the role of political patronage in his analysis of slum improvement in
Visakhapatnam, India. He indicates how slum leaders actively sought vertical links with local politicians,
who promised their dwellers' votes in return for resource provision. According to a 1988 survey of slum
leaders in Visakhapatnam, 27% believed that political affiliation was a prerequisite to receiving a hous-
ing scheme. De Vries (1995) indicates how bureaucrats in Mexico often tried to transform gatekeepers
into ideal beneficiaries resulting in an unholy alliance between local power élite and informal settlers.
76
Community participation: difficutties and dilemmas Chapter 6
Friedman (1993:11) has indicated that development progress is often measured, not only by
developers themselves but also by public opinion-makers and politicians, by the speed with
which tangible results are delivered. However, pressure to deliver is not simply a result of impa-
tience from hasty technocrats: potential beneficiaries are often also impatient at endless discus-
sions without any sign of delivery. Lengthy periods spent on process iss~es are regarded with
impatience because action is required rather than social niceties. For many, participatory deve-
lopment is too time-consuming and not cost-effective, because participation in practice is always
a slow and uncertain process and is likely to involve more paperwork and soul-searching (cf.
Alihonou etal.,1993:13; Kaya,1989:42; Paul,1987:10-11).
However, the assumption that participatory planning is necessarily a costly, time-consuming
or drawn-out process, is not always valid. In the first place, evidence suggests that some kinds
of projects can be formulated with participatory inputs within a reasonably short period of time.
When the complaint is made that participation does not work, most often participation has not
seriously been tried, or else has been wrongly facilitated. Most failures are unfairly blamed on
the beneficiaries, when in fact officials are more responsible for shortcomings in design and
implementation. Secondly, although true participation involves greater costs in the identification,
design and planning phases, it may actually be able to save more time and money during the
implementation and evaluation phases, because it ensures that people take ownership of a pro-
ject (Bamberger, 1986: 10; Bhatnagar, 1992: 13; Kok & Gelderblom, 1994:54-55; Kottak,1985:325-
351; Uphoff,1992:144).
Process versus Decision-making Underlying assump- Emphasis
product dynamics tions
Process less important Developer-centred Rely on formal know- Time and product
than approach: charac- how and expertise to
terised by top-down resolve development
. decisions taken by problems in the short-
development élite est possible time
Process more impor- People-centred The immediate resolu- Time and process
tant than product approach: charac- tion of a development
terised by bottom-up problem is less impor-
decisions taken by tant than the way in
community members which the process of
or their legitimate problem-solving is tak-
leaders ing place - even if it
requires a longer time.
Build on the saying "it
is the approach rather
than the outcome of
the message that
spells success"
Figure 6.1 Process versus product in community participation
Two main lines of thinking are mapped out in Figure 6.1 with regard to the process/product
debate. Some people and organisations tend to emphasise process and fail to deliver product,
77
Community participation difficulties and dilemmas Chapter 6
whilst other are so product-driven that they neglect community processes. Both are dangerous:
process without product leaves communities feeling that nothing is really happening other than
a lot of talking, and that time, money and social energy are lost. Product without process runs
the risk of doing something communities do not want or need, or cannot sustain.
1.9 The lack of public interest in becoming involved
One of the major impediments to community participation is the allegation that members of the
public are not really interested in becoming involved. According to Kok & Gelderblom (1994:50-
51) there is evidence supporting the universality of the problem when they state that:
"The question whether people really know what they want and what is likely to
be in their best interest is another area of concern that is frequently cited. It is
often said that people need to be protected against themselves. This notion
implies that people are ignorant and need to be steered in the right direction
by those who 'know better', presumably the professional experts."
A lack of willingness to participate may also result from past experiences of involvement
where expectations were not fulfilled. Because of years of neglect by governments and profes-
sionals for instance, communities may have become lethargic in their attitude to projects and it
may be problematic to muster enthusiasm for these initiatives. They may also distrust initiatives
by governments due to past experiences. Paul (1987) says that the World Bank has learned the
difficulties for beneficiaries to be active in community participation when the country does not
have a social tradition supportive of participation; when inadequate technology inhibits proper
service delivery; when the government is perceived by beneficiaries to be a satisfactory medi-
um; and when governments are reluctant to build participation into their project designs.
2. Conclusion
Community participation in development projects often assumes the notion of "common purpose
and common good". This perspective romanticises the people or the community, a position that
is analysed and refuted in this chapter. The obstacles to participatory development highlight the
social and power relations between the stakeholders in a development planning process: pro-
fessional planners and technicians, the beneficiary population, and the concerned agencies and
institutions. A re-negotiation of the relationship between those who control resources and the
recipients of those resources is needed. Involving people can be expensive in various ways and,
in some instances, can paralyse decision-making, holding development investments hostage to
unproductive activism and reinforcing local power structures and power struggles. Community
participation can use enormous amounts of time, endlessly delay and circularise decision-ma-
king, may have to deal with a constantly changing cadre of decision-makers and can every now
and then evoke the new charge of lack of mandate. The challenge for those involved in partici-
pation is to recognise these obstacles related to development, and also how these obstacles
might impede community participation.
This chapter has exposed some of the obstacles and impediments facing attempts to initiate
participatory development. Some of the obstacles have an external influence on the end-benefi-
ciary community (from outside), while others are endemic or internal to the community. How
these internal and external obstacles inter-relate or interact with one another, is of vital impor-
78
Cornmumty participation: diHiculties and dilemmas Chapter 6
tance in obtainning a clear picture on all the different factors and processes impacting upon pro-
moting and facilitating community participation.
Community dynamics in the developing world occur in heterogeneous, divided and complex
societies. All attempts to initiate grassroots development should deal with far more than visible
conflicts between competing values and interests. Sometimes even authentic community par-
ticipation is not a guarantee that a development intervention will be without serious conflict or will
be successful. In some instances ali the relevant stakeholders may agree upon the contents,
form, process and product of development, and yet conflict may arise during the implementation
phase of a development project.
Perhaps Gilbert (1987:75) summarises the essence of problems and controversies in com-
munity participation best by stating that:
"The only valid conclusion that can be drawn is one of tempered enthusiasm
for the idea of community participation, and then always subject to local cir-
cumstances. Community participation is worthwhile and can help improve the
living conditions of low-income communities. But, since it can also be used to
their disadvantage the poor are often well-advised to limit their involvement."
However, in spite of the numerous and well-documented cases illustrating the problematic
nature of participatory development in the developing world and particularly in Africa, there is stili
general optimism and support for community participation in development. This optimism is also
very much apparent in South Africa today. Development in the full sense of the word is impossi-
ble without appropriate community participation.
The next chapter (Chapter 7) will pay attention to the different dimensions of community par-
ticipation in low-income housing and to urban upgrading as important means of addressing
urban shelter poverty.
79
7-
Low-income housing policies
and community participation:
urban South Africa
in retrospect
A s this study deals with "community participation in the upgrading of infor-
mal settlements" it is appropriate and necessary in this chapter to pay
some attention to the different dimensions and aspects of urban shelter
poverty in relation to community participation. In the next chapter
(Chapter 8) a selected upgrading project (Freedom & Namibia,
Bloemfontein, South Africa) will be presented as case study in order to
explore these aspects of community participation in practise.
In the past 20 years the theme of urban policies to ameliorate shelter
poverty has generated a considerable body of scholarly writing. This chap-
ter first discusses the global nature of shelter poverty specifically in urban
environments. It then elaborates on the extent of shelter poverty with a
focus on low-income urban areas in South Africa. Low-income housing
policies are analysed and themes such as progressive housing, conven-
tional housing, public housing provision, sites-and-services initiatives, in-
situ upgrading initiatives and self-help housing deserve attention. An his-
torical overview of South African low-income housing policies is also pro-
vided, with some attention to urban control measures, the emergence of
participatory urban development and the role of the Reconstruction and
Development Programme in low-income housing delivery.
1. The global context and growing challenge of
shelter poverty in urban areas
During the past decade (1987-1997), globalisation and the complex inter-
dependence it represents, have become established as the context for the
understanding of housing, and urban and socio-economic development. In
the past 40 years the pace of urbanisation in less-developed countries has
been truly dramatic. In 1950 less than 300 million people in developing
80
Low-income housing policies and community participation urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
countries lived in urban areas. Between 1950 and 1988 the proportion of the Third World's popula-
tion living in cities more than doubled from 17% to 43%. In the Third World in 1990, some 1.3 billion
people lived in urban centres and within the next 20 years this figure is expected to reach more than
2 billion (Choguill,1995:403; De Volkskrant,1996:5; UNCED,1993:181).
The population of urban areas in developing countries currently grows at the rate of at least 3.6
per cent annually, about four times faster than in rural areas. In low income countries the urba-
nisation rate may attain even 8,8% per annum (Davey, 1996: 1). This is mainly the result of migra-
tio to urban areas and not in fertility rates. Each year the urban population of the developing coun-
tries is increasing by 50 million. The rapid growth in cities has been accompanied by a rapid
growth in the number of people living in sub-standard, overcrowded and desperate conditions.
More than one-third of the population in cities of developing countries live in slums, informal set-
tlements or sub-standard housing, while 600 million people in cities or towns throughout the world
are homeless or live in life and health threatening situations (Naiker,1993; UNCHS,1996:xxi).
There is a global crisis of shelter poverty' in the Third World. Provision of housing to the urban
poor remains one of the main problems facing both planners and politicians in cities of develop-
ing countries (Gelderblom & Kok, 1994; Narine,1986). It is currently estimated that an average of
50% of the world's urban population live at a level of extreme poverty, with the figure rising as high
as 79% in some cities (Asthana, 1994:58). The major characteristics of urban and housing pover-
ty are an absence or inadequacy of municipal infrastructure and basic services such as water sup-
ply, roads and street lighting, garbage collection and disposal, drainage and flood protection, and
social services such as primary health care and primary education. Pezzoli (1995:160) has indi-
cated that, over the next few years, the developing world must increase its capacity by 65% to
produce and manage its urban infrastructure, services and shelter merely to maintain today's
often inadequate conditions.
In Asian and African cities inadequate housing is characteristic of 25% to 90% of the population
(Aid rich & Sandhu, 1995:18). In the low-income countries an average of only 5,6% of central
government expenditure in 1991 was allocated for housing, amenities, social security and wel-
fare.2 Conversely, in high income industrialised countries, during the same year, the percentage
of central government expenditure on housing, amenities, social security and welfare was an
average of 39% (UNCED,1993:182).
Despite the scale of urban poverty, much of the literature on participation and development has
focussed on rural problems, as was also the case with the first World Housing Conference,
Habitat I, in Vancouver in 1976. Few were thinking about urban housing. It is only in the past
sever years that aid and development analysts have really woken up to the time bomb that is
called urban poverty and that the majority of NGOs have shifted their attention and activities to
urban poverty, Urban poverty figured prominently on the agenda of the Rio Earth Summit (1992)
and it was the agenda for the Second World Housing Conference, Habitat II, in Istanbul in May
1996. This is an indication of the globalisation of the issue - a global community of organisa-
tions, institutions and individuals concerned with the issue of housing poverty but also global in
The concepts "housing poverty" and "shelter poverty" are used interchangeably. These terms refer to
people that live in sub-standard houses or forms of shelter that are threatening to their quality of life
and well-being in general.
2 Expenditure by international support and financial organisations is equally low. For example, only 1%
of the United Nation's total grant-financed expenditures in 1988 went to human settlements, while in
1991, loans from the World Bank for urban development, water supply and sewerage amounted to
5,5% of their total lending (UNCED,1993:181).
81
Low-income housing policies and community participation urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
terms of the sheer international extent of shelter poverty.
2. Low-income housing policies in urban areas
2.1 Introduction
At the core of the debate on informal settlements is the issue as to whether people in these set-
tlements are part of the problem or part of the solution. Inadequate sanitation, overcrowding and
poor health facilities provide ample arguments to those who see slum settlements as comprising
the 'dregs of humanity' and a threat to public health conditions. Informal settlements often carry
the stigma of being centres of crime, hooliganism, unemployment, vandalism, etc. Almost all
countries initially introduced slum clearance programmes during the 1960s. The initial strategy
of governments was to relocate or control the urban population rather than to improve their living
conditions. The main aims behind this strategy were political, health and social. Views of 'over-
urbanisation' (where there were more urban workers than formal urban jobs) supported regimes
in their efforts to limit the migration/influx to cities (Aid rich & Sandhu, 1995:20).
Until recently, conventional wisdom with Lipton as the main protagonist, held that there was
an "urban bias", with the cities of the Third World benefiting from a disproportionate share of their
nation's resources to the detriment of the rural poor. The main reason for this is that the state is
urban-based, and central governments usually rely for their political support primarily on urban
areas. This resulted in development agencies explicitly directing their efforts at rural populations.
By contrast, the plight of the urban poor received relatively little attention from these same agen-
cies (Asthana, 1994:58; Lipton & Van der Gaag,1993).
In the past decade the relevance of the urban bias concept has been called into question.
Biases in the allocation of resources, it is argued, work not so much against rural areas as
against the poor. Thus, although urban dwellers appear to enjoy higher living standards than
their rural counterparts, official statistics mask enormous intra-urban inequalities in socio-eco-
nomic status, environmental conditions and health." It is now widely accepted that the vast
majority of urban inhabitants hardly benefit from government investment in industrial develop-
ment and public services (Asthana, 1994:58). The quality of life of the urban poor is threatened
by factors such as overcrowding, poor housing, crime, pollution and inadequate water and sa-
nitation. The majority of urban people in developing countries could therefore be regarded as
suffering from shelter poverty. Unable to afford 'legal' housing, many urban inhabitants have no
option but to squat illegally on land or invade crowded and deteriorating tenements in city-cen-
tre slums. As urban bias has neither lessened poverty nor increased basic service provision in
low-income areas, poor city dwellers do not enjoy better living standards than their rural coun-
terparts. Indeed, in several countries, higher rates of malnutrition and infectious disease have
been recorded in L rban slums and squatter settlements than in rural villages. At least rural poor
have cleaner air and in addition have some natural resources (clay, grass, trees) to build their
own houses and thus an improved shelter-related fall back position. In many developing coun-
tries, the urban poor now outnumber those in rural areas where such conditions are traditional-
ly higher (cf. Mugisha, 1994: 18). Urban poverty is often the consequence of higher living costs
3 A household survey in the Free State Province of South Africa indicated that the housing, electricity and
sewerage needs were for the same proportion of the urban community considered to be important as
for the rural farmworker communities (Van Rensburg et al.,1996:6-7). This emphasises the fact that
housing-related needs in South Africa are probably, equally important to rural and urban communities.
82
Low-income housing policies and community participation urban South Africa In retrospect Chapter 7
in the city, restricted employment opportunities, no fallback position to subsistence agriculture
and lack of support of the extended family as in rural areas.
Another attempt to distinguish between urban and rural development projects is the assump-
tion that these projects are different in nature. Urban projects, including health, housing, streets,
sewerage, electricity and water, are more infrastructure and consumption-orientated and can be
undertaken without the participation of consumers, while rural projects (i.e. agriculture, credit,
inputs and planting practices) are production-orientated and cannot be undertaken without the
participation of consumers. Moser (1989:93-94) correctly criticises this stereotypical division
between production and consumption and between rural and urban as having no empirical basis.
There are, for instance, many examples across the globe where urban housing projects have
been one of the most important points of entry into production and where they have been used
as a leading economic growth sector. Housing now has to be studied for production and
income/resource generation as well as for consumption and reproduction concerns (Ferguson-
Brown, 1995:202; Pezzolli, 1995: 160). A greater understanding of the linkages between urban
and rural, and between production and consumption is required in order to reveal the significant
potential for participatory development.
There are many different typologies of informal settlements including "slums of hope" versus
"slums of despair", "open-end" versus "dead-end" slums, "the very low-income bridgeheads", the
"low-income consolidators" and the "middle-income status seekers", and "spontaneous" versus
"planned informal settlements" (Yeh,1987). However, typologies are usually simplistic in that
they are based on a very small number of variables and thus cannot be expected to thoroughly
describe and analyse slums, squatter areas or other low-income informal settlements. Yeh
(1987: 19) indicates that there is no linear relationship between typologies of urban informal set-
tlements and improvement strategies. He states that it is an illusion to believe that there is a
solution to housing problems which are conceived and treated independently of other social.
economic and political problems. Therefore, strategies to improve low-income informal settle-
ments will be inadequate unless there are concomitant social and economic policy changes at
both the national and the provincial level. Poverty therefore constitutes the context of housing
problems. In a critical comment on Yeh's typologies, Conner (1987:24-26) pleads, besides a
typology of informal settlements, that government attitudes towards low-income housing should
also be analysed. On a continuum this could probably range from intolerance, through benign
neglect, to support (cf. Figure 7.1).
Prior to the 1960s a fairly low priority was given to housing issues in national development
strategies, because it was considered an unproductive sector. Other sectors, such as industry,
energy generation and transport, were considered better sectors for urban cost recovery. Turner
and Mangin were some of the pioneers who promoted the productive potential of housing initia-
tives. Turner (1976) argued strongly that if the poor could be given security of tenure and a plot of
land in a favourable location, progressive improvement would transform the squatter shack into a
respectable house.' Informal settlements are the evidence of people taking responsibility for their
4 However, Turner's ideas have been fiercely criticised by Burgess. Turner's starting point was the use
value of a house, while Burgess emphasised the exchange value. Houses, however built, could and
would be sold, and so be incorporated into the housing markets. This would expose the poor to com-
modification processes to which they were previously inured which would lead to heavy burdens for the
poor as far as repayments were concerned and to possible displacement when they sold out to better-
off groups. Turner was also accused of de-politicising the housing problem.
83
tow-income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
own future. The view that households could be valuable resource systems for improving housing
poverty, represented an important shift in international housing policies. It also resulted in a
changed perception of viewing informal houses as an asset instead of treating these as a waste
and a burden. The challenge, to authorities, NGOs and private developers was to tap into the infor-
mal housing drive in innovative ways that would ensure the creation of sustainable settlements.
2.2 Relations between government and community in connection with
low-income housing policies
National governmental policies towards urban development and informal settlements evolved through
several phases." The first phase (1950-1970) could be described as one of severe tension
between state and society relations (cf. Figure 7.1). During this phase governments demonstrat-
ed very hostile attitudes towards informal settlements. Reactive urban policies such as evictions,
forced removals and controlled urbanisation were commonplace in dealing with the problems of over-
urbanisation. These government actions were also typical of societies with closed governments.
The second phase (1970-1980) was characterised by changing state-society relations. As illus-
trated in Figure 7.1, governments now had greater tolerance towards informal settlements due
to the growing recognition of the futility of demolishing informal housing without viable alternatives.
Governments now also became involved in a limited way, by addressing the shelter needs of the
urban poor. These governments were also more open to community participation. Although the
emphasis was on costly and unsustainable conventional housing drives, international organisations
and governments realised that they had failed to reach the poorest of the urban population.
The third phase (1980-1990) was the era when informal settlers were regarded as part of
the urban solution. Governments began to engage in addressing urban housing poverty with
progressive housing approaches such as sites-and-services programmes and upgrading initia-
tives. Housing delivery projects in a participatory manner also became more important
From the three phases depicted above it is evident that in time the state's role moved con-
sistently from active control, to passive support, to active enablement of low-income housing ini-
tiatives. This is illustrated in Figure 7.1.
Levels of state intolerance/tolerance
High towards urban informal civil society
rlJ'\
LOW~
1950 ------------ 1990
State - society relations: State - society relations:
tention & intolerance accommodation & partnerships
• Clearance. Demolition. • Negotiation
Bulldozing • Upgrading
• Controlled urbanisation • Consolidation
• Conventional housing • Participatory development
• Progressive housing
(Designed by the author)
Figure 7.1 Government policies towards informal settlements
5 As with all historical events, these phases are not watertight compartments.
84
tow-income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa In retrospect Chapter?
The circle in Figure 7.1 represents the contradictions between the decreasing trend of into-
lerance and coercive measures by the state and the development of urban informal civil society.
Government attitudes towards low-income housing policy have changed markedly during the
past two to three decades: from bulldozing and relocating to negotiating, upgrading and conso-
lidating. In many developing countries, city planners are moving away from models of control and
prohibition and towards models of facilitation and working with local communities. Although there
is an inclination towards greater tolerance and pro-active management of the affairs of the urban
poor, there are still sporadic manifestations of the state's intolerance towards less formal urban
neighbourhoods. Although informal settlements are not completely blameless for this intole-
rance, these levels of tolerance by national governments depend largely on global, national and
local political and developmental forces. Often after the election of a new government,6 or at the
hosting of a major international event," or during a visit of a diqnitary" (especially from the First
World), acts of government intolerance of the urban poor re-emerge in the form of forced
removals and relocations.
2.3 Trends in public housing provision
In countries with high levels of human development such as South Korea, Costa Rica and
Mexico the attempts of governments to address housing poverty were, historically more suc-
cessful than in countries with medium levels of human development (Anglophone Caribbean,
Brazil, Cuba, Colombia, China) and countries with low levels of human development (Egypt,
Zambia, Tanzania, Ghana, Pakistan, India) (cf. Aldrich & Sandhu, 1995). The reasons for this will
be discussed in the following paragraphs.
Over the past 30 years, shelter has frequently been viewed as the primary weapon in the
Third World's fight to improve overall living conditions. As a result, a wide range of housing poli-
cies have been initiated as means of improving the size of housing stock, almost all with disap-
pointing results. Many of these initiatives failed due to budgetary constraints aggravated by
structural adjustment and a bias towards conventional housing approaches which generally tend
to favour upper-income groups over the poorest of the poor. Recent urban development efforts
therefore emphasise the provision of low cost infrastructural schemes. Choguill (1995:410-411)
refers to the emerging importance of infrastructure in reducing morbidity, improving health, pro-
viding a basis for environmental improvement, and reducing the drudgery of living in low-income
communities.
The two international conferences on human settlements at Vancouver (Habitat I) and
Istanbul (Habitat II), did much to emphasise the vision Of "housing for ail by 2000". However,
international and national policies and initiatives to ameliorate housing poverty were largely
unsuccessful. State urban development and public housing delivery generally had a bad track
record during the first three development decades. Some of the reasons are the following:
6 Colombia and Zambia were examples where the approach of governments was one of clearance, then
acceptance and then again clearance, due to a change in political élite.
7 In the run-up to the Istanbul Habitat II Conference the city was "cleaned up" (sic) for the conference.
This involved the poisoning of street cats and dogs, removing most of the street children from the cen-
tre of the city, and arresting members of a transvestite community who lived near the conference val-
ley. Street children were also removed prior to the Rio Earth Summit
8 During Queen Elizabeth's visit to Zimbabwe in the early eighties, informal dwellings were removed by
the Mugabe government from the main road next to the Harare airport.
85
tow-income housing policies and communily participation: urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
Firstly, vast sums of money were spent on preparing master plans which were hoped to pro-
duce a well-structured pattern of urban growth. Foreign consultancy firms were widely used to
prepare these plans and to assist in their implementation. But, in spite of the enormous effort,
urban planning has not lived up to the expectations of politicians, bureaucrats, professionals and
communities at large. Rapid urban growth rendered plans obsolete even before they were com-
pleted. and confounded those who believed that urban planning would transform developing
cities into well-designed and orderly places (Marsden & Moser, 1990:5; Narine, 1986: 111).
Secondly, a record of bad governance of shelter programmes prevails, which includes a lack
of management capacity and lack of proper planning. Urban planning has been insensitive to
social conditions (such as the poverty problem) in Third World cities, because bureaucracies
often continue to adopt an unresponsive position. An architectural and engineering bias in the
planning process has emphasised infrastructure at the expense of human needs and has been
naively unaware of the nature and extent of urban poverty. This often reduces participation in
planning to a paper exercise. Shelter is nowadays recognised as much more than just the pro-
vision of physical infrastructure. Shelter policies involve the entire environment or surroundings
in which projects are undertaken, requiring not only an integrated approach in the designing
stage, but also an increasing focus on implementation and post-project evaluation.
Thirdly, state urban housing policies have sometimes been brutal in their effects. There are
vivid examples in the housing literature where the state employs a policy of clearance, demoli-
tion and bulldozing to erase urban eye-sores or so-called slums in Africa, Asia and Latin America,
as a solution to the housing problem. Sophiatown, District Six and Crossroads are but a few
examples of the mass demolition of poor housing neighbourhoods in South Africa. It is now
widely recognised that shelter policies which advocate the destruction of urban slums and the
resettlement of local populations are no longer appropriate or acceptable (Marsden &
Moser, 1990:5). The brutality of state housing policies can also be found in urban control poli-
cies. In some Asian and African societies the movement from countryside to cities was strictly
controlled. But as these countries shifted to freer markets and more open systems, the social
engineering of communities decreased, and consequently the numbers moving to cities
increased equally rapidly (Narine,1986:112-113).
Fourthly, housing schemes do not always address local needs and are usually priced out of
reach for the poorest of the poor? due to the application of sophisticated and costly technology,
thus discouraging the development of community participation skills among urban planners and
professionals.
Fifthly, other reasons for the bad track record of public housing provision are a lack of politi-
cal will, lengthy negotiation processes, inadequate cost recovery, unsuitability of site location
with respect to job opportunities and social services, and finally, incorrect implementation.
In cities as diverse as Lima, Bangkok, Lagos and Ankara the tailure of public housing pro-
grammes has resulted in low-income people taking responsibility for t:1eir own shelter provision,
acting both individually and in highly organised groups through land invasions and squatting. It
is because of the above-mentioned failures of public housing policies that greater emphasis is
today being placed on the upgrading of slums or informal settlements in a people-centred and
9 In 1986 1.8 million (17%) of Egypt's housing stock was vacant. The rent was so high that the majori-
ty of poor house-seekers could not afford it (De Volkskrant,1996:5).
86
Low-income housing policies and community participation urban South Africa In retrospect Chapter 7
participatory way where the active role of the citizen in self-provisioning is essential. This means
that informal settlers construct their own housing with their own resources and at their own pace.
The role and responsibility of governments in the housing arena has therefore shifted from pro-
vision to enablement.
The initial response was to label invaded land as illegal squatter settlements and to bulldoze
such settlements in the mistaken belief that, if they were physically eradicated, the problem
would disappear, yet by the 1970s many Third World governments, together with international
donor agencies, slowly began to recognise the potential of utilising squatter settlements and the
resources of the poor more efficiently. Therefore, the radical changes in shelter policy, resulting
in both sites-and-services and upgrading as the two dominant forms of progressive housing in
urban areas, were built on the principles of do-it-yourself and of community participation.
However, both sites-and-services and upgrading projects could still be contractor-driven, there-
fore people's housing or self-help housing is a more recent form of progressive housing deliv-
ery, with even higher levels of community participation. According to Betancur (1995:225) infor-
mal settlements today stand as a testimony to the ability of the poor to find their own solutions -
no matter how incipient - for their problems, and the inability of both governments and the pri-
vate sector to contribute meaningfully to these monumental efforts. In the next two sections (2.4,
2.5) four distinct approaches to low-income housing delivery and their relation to participatory
development will be discussed briefly.
2.4 Incremental and progressive houslnq"? versus conventional housing
Major areas of contention in the debate on appropriate low-income housing policies remain the
nature of the product to be supplied and the process to be followed. On the one hand there are
those who advocate supplying a smaller number of complete houses - the conventional
approach. On the other there are those who argue for mass provision of basic starter homes
which owners can expand over time - the progressive approach. Given the magnitude of hous-
ing problems in many countries, the progressive approach (squatter upgrading and sites-and-
services schemes) is as a more suitable strategy than conventional housing provision to facili-
tate community participation in housing delivery.
The bulk of international literature illustrates how incremental or progressive housing con-
tributes towards urban upgrading in a more participatory manner. Conversely, conventional
housing strategies have a bad reputation for neglecting the power of people's self-development.
For the following reasons progressive housing policies are more able to facilitate authentic com-
munity participation than conventional housing attempts:
10 Low-income housing initiatives are a process rather than a snap-shot, instant develop nent product.
This is necessarily so, because poor households cannot be expected to invest large sums in their
dwelling structures or environment all at once. Therefore, one principle is to leave room for future
development (Yeh,1987:14). Many households also revert to self-help housing construction which
means that houses have been planned and built by the occupants. or informal paid labour from the
community is employed to assist in house-building. Incremental housing starts with access to a well-
located site with secure tenure and basic services, followed by rudimentary shelter which can be
improved over time. For the purposes of this study the concepts "incremental housing" and "progres-
sive housing" are used interchangeably.
87
Lew-income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa In retrospect Chapter 7
• In reality there are more opportunities for active community participation in progressive or
incremental housing than in conventional housing. In conventional housing delivery the state
and para-statal development agencies become the sole or dominant partners in housing pro-
vision. The target community's function is often largely reduced to that of a passive recipi-
ent of instant houses.
• The nature of self-built housing or starter homes (which could be regarded as part of incre-
mental housing) enhances the involvement of local (small scale) contractors and builders
from the community. Conventional housing projects, on the other hand, tend to be more
developer-driven.
• Many homeowners become involved in the seif-improvement of their own dwellings in incre-
mental housing drives.
• The underlying principle of progressive housing is the gradual improvement of people's own
shelter environment through their own efforts and those of the immediate community, but at
their own pace.
There are, however, examples where conventional housing provision initiatives also effec-
tively involve the poor. Perhaps it is no longer a question of incremental/progressive housing
versus conventional housing, but seeking local conditions and levels of financial assistance that
will prevail for the specific housing strategy, or a combination of both. Often the call for pro-
gressive housing meets fierce resistance from groups with vested interests, such as politicians
or developers. In the South African housing sector politicians and bureaucrats frequently favour
conventional housing. 11
2.5 Sites-and-serviceslê versus in-situ upgrading13
Government-initiated housing drives are characterised by building houses for the poor. The
houses produced are often inappropriate to the needs of the target population and do little to pro-
mote the active involvement of the poor in improving their own living conditions. Since the early
1970s there has, due to lower costs, been a gradual withdrawal of government involvement in
housing provision in favour of self-help principles.
When reviewing the existing literature on strategies to alleviate housing poverty, in-situ
upgrading 0.1 informal settlements demonstrates greater potential compared to green-field14 and
sites-and-services development, because urban upgrading basically preserves more than what
11 There is a difference of support among the nine provincial Ministers of Housing in South Africa with
regard to their support for the specific housing policy in each province. Half of the ministers are against
progressive housing policies while it was a well-known fact that the late Joe Slovo, South Africa's first
national Minister of Housing, favoured progressive or incremental housing.
'12 The provision of plots of land provided with basic supporting services. Basic services refer to piped
water, sanitation, refuse removal, legalisation of tenure, roads and sometimes electricity. Normally the
land is still vacant where people relocate.
13 Upgrading is sometimes confused with sites-and-services schemes. However, upgrading usually
refers to the upgrading of an existing informal settlement and may include making fully-serviced land
and core housing available to poor households. Upgrading is a housing process where the main
emphasis is on the improvement of the housing stock through house construction, technical assis-
tance, secure tenure, the reduction of densities, bringing in better sanitation, better infrastructure and
social facilities without relocating the community at stake.
14 Green-field development refers to a situation where land is earmarked for residential development and
potential residents are identified. Only after the installation of basic services are residents assisted to
move to the developed land.
88
tow-income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa In retrospect Chapter 7
it destroys or disrupts. Ironically, upgrading has received little attention in academic literature on
housing and planning (Choguill,1995:409). Further reasons why upgrading is preferred to site-
and-service include:
• The World Bank's15 experience is that upgrading schemes were more successful in reaching
the poor, mainly because they were directed at areas where the poor already lived whereas
sites-and-services plots were allocated to selected households which could repay the costs
(Pugh,1995:63).
• In many instances settlements identified for upgrading have the highest concentrations of
income poverty and housing poverty.
• Upgrading preserves existing economic opportunities for the urban poor.
• Upgrading preserves the low cost housing stock already in existence at its present location
and it avoids the waste of hard-earned personal assets.
• Upgrading preserves the community structure.
• Resettlement to less favourable locations is often socially disruptive, involves high commu-
nity costs, and reduces access to informal employment (ChoguilI, 1995:409).
• Sites-and-services schemes often struggle to recover the cost of the investment over a li-
mited period of time.
Sites-and-services schemes often fail to encourage self-help and community participation,
and some stakeholders, especially community activists and political leaders, complain that these
schemes are inferior and unacceptable."
Although some of these reasons have not been empirically tested, they emphasise the idea
that when policy makers have to choose between funding a green-field sites-and-services pro-
ject or an upgrading project it is probably better to consider funding the latter.
2.6 Low-income housing provision in urban areas: conclusions
The following conclusions may be drawn when analysing the nature of international low-income
housing policies (cf. Aldrich & Sandhu, 1995; Sapire & Beall,1995; Uduku,1994.):
• The formation of informal settlements is intentionally or unintentionally shaped by state poli-
cy and the strategies selected to ameliorate the related problems. Policy has consequently
been dominated by efforts to prevent, manipulate and, most recently, legalise informal set-
tlements.
• The World Bank and several national governments are shifting their involvement in addres-
sing housing poverty from conventional housing provision to sites-and-services and upgra-
ding initiatives with an emphasis on the role of urban infrastructure in urban development.
15 The World Bank become deeply involved in supporting sites-and-service schemes and by 1983 had
funded more than 70 such projects in the developing world.
16 In South Africa there were also hostile attitudes towards sites-and-services schemes which culminated
in these projects being labelled "toilets in the veld". At a Free State Housing Summit (South Africa) in
August 1995 many negative attitudes about incremental housing and self-help housing schemes were
expressed. It was stated that those in middle or high-income neighbourhoods did receive significant
state support and that promoting the ideals of self-help housing could therefore divert potential go-
vernment assistance away from the poorest of the poor. Many of the reasons behind this sentiment
were politically motivated, assuming that any housing delivery process other than conventional deliv-
ery is inferior as it promotes inequality and white domination.
89
Lew-meome housing policies and community participation urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
The intention is to make housing more affordable to low-income households without the pay-
ment of subsidies or rents.
• Governments have not been particularly successful in meeting the shelter requirements of
the urban populations of developing countries. It is clear that governments everywhere are
suffering from a crisis of confidence, because they are no longer able to meet the rising
expectations. In some instances the involvement of governments impedes rather than pro-
motes shelter programmes.
• Housing is increasingly being recognised as only one part of urban development. A com-
prehensive process of consolidation and human-scale development linked with income gen-
eration and job creation for the poor is needed.
• Urban planners and professionals need to possess more than technical knowledge and
knowledge of the general planning principles of their country. These would involve the skills
to promote and co-ordinate community development and community participation in planning
efforts. Successful planners need the skills of a diplomat, a development economist and a
sociologist.
• Understanding the relationships of households and housing to society at large is therefore of
vital importance. Self-help housing and the use of own labour in housing construction are
strongly being considered.
• The majority of governments in developing countries initiate different levels of infrastructure
and service provision simultaneously, which means that sites-and-services, upgrading and
conventional housing provision are promoted together.
• More governments act as enablers instead of providers. Because funds are limited in deve-
loping countries, governments provide the essentials required by the urban poor rather than
things the latter can provide for themselves.
• In periods of economical difficulty governments usually cut their budgets for social expendi-
ture. Structural adjustment programmes originating with the World Bank and the IMF which
result in the escalation of "new urban poverty" exacerbate this trend. Housing as a high vo-
lume, long-term investment tends to be affected sooner than other sectors of the economy
by such measures.
The essence of these trends, in terms of low-income housing policies, is a greater emphasis on
the social (non-material) dimensions of housing, the role of people in their own housing delivery
(people's housing processes) and a re-definition of the limited role of the state as the enabler.
3. The South African urban low-income housing scene
3.1 Urbanisation and housing poverty in South Africa
In 1990 an estimated 22 million of South Africa's 37 million people or 59% of the population were
urbanised."? South African cities are growing at an enormous rate (in the order of 3 to 5 percent
per year). By the year 2000 it will probably grow to a projected 75%, making South Africa the
most urbanised Sub-Saharan African country and one of the most urbanised countries in all of
Africa (Sapire & Beall,1995:3; Van Rensburg,1996:376). Forty nine per cent of the population
17 Statistics with regard to the urbanisation rate in South Africa differ substantially and also according to
the definitions of what is considered as "urban". In the South African context "urban" is defined as any
populated area with some form of local authority.
90
Low-income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
are living in settlements with more than 100 000 residents. In comparison, the rate for Africa as
a whole is 31,4% (UNCHS,1996:85). South Africa's cities are growing at an estimated 300 000
households a year, with an average of five people per household. Despite the many advantages
urbanisation holds for the South African population, the scope and rate at which urbanisation is
at present taking place, especially among the black population, present several problems and
disadvantages for the health and social security of the population (Van Rensburg 1996:376).
Although 75% of the rural population are poor, 41% of the urban and 20% of the metropolitan
population could be considered to be poor (Pillay, 1996:39). Of these 41% black urban poor, 60%
could be regarded as relatively poor while 30% are absolutely poor. This statistics justify atten-
tion to the urban poor, since the migration process (rural to peri-urban to urban) is not yet com-
plete in South Africa.
As the South African housing crisis has intensified, so too the phenomenon of informal set-
tlernents" and land invasion has grown. Informal housing is a major element of South Africa's
urban landscape that can no longer be ignored or wished away. More than 8 million South
Africans are currently living in informally constructed shelters. To give some perspective, the
total number of urban people for the whole of South Africa in informal housing currently exceeds
the total population of Gauteng (the former Pretoria-Witwatersrand-Vereeniging area - one of the
nine provinces of South Africa). Approximately 29% of the South African population or 2,5 mil-
lion households, live as informal settlers, squatters or backyard dwellers (South Africa Survey,
1997:756). [Official estimates in 1992 were 1,5 million households or 17% (South Africa
Survey,1993:206,212)]. More than five million of individuals in informal urban housing are situ-
ated in South Africa's six major metropolitan areas. Strikingly, more than half of the black met-
ropolitan population are resident in informal housing.
During 1995 a national survey was conducted in eight informal settlements - comprising 200
000 South African inhabitants. The most important characteristics of these settlements are
depicted in Box 7.1, which gives a picture of the socio-economic profile of South African informal
settlements.
South African informal settlements symbolise many things simultaneously. Firstly, they are
symbolic of misplaced urbanisation as a result of apartheid planning and regulation. When coer-
cive measures of urban control were recalled, this resulted in noticeable land invasions on a
18 Informal settlements refer to urban neighbourhoods consisting of less formal houses. These houses
are usually built with unconventional building material such as corrugated iron, plastic, wood, etc.
91
tew-income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
national scale. Secondly, they are a reminder of the previous government's failure to provide
successfully in the shelter-related needs of low-income communities. Thirdly, they provide a
daunting challenge for the new government to facilitate an acceptable participatory housing
delivery process. However, any attempt by any post-apartheid government to provide formal
houses for everyone could crush that government and bankrupt the country. These different con-
texts of interpretation will be clarified in the course of the argumentation.
Inadequate housing is still a major social deficit in South Africa today and the housing short-
age in South Africa has been widely documented (Gelderblom & Kok,1994; Le Roux,1996;
Pillay,1996:22). In comparison with other provinces, the Free State has the highest percentage
(23%) of households living in shacks, followed by Gauteng (19%) and the Western Cape (12%).
The South African Living Standards Survey (1994) also indicated that more than one third of all
households, and more than half of the urban and metropolitan households deemed the provision
of housing to be one of the three most important tasks a government could fulfil. Other impor-
tant basic needs constitute water and electricity provision (Le Roux,1996:57). The current hous-
ing backlog could grow if a minimum of 200 000 units are not built every year. In 1994 and 1995
the central government's budget allocation for housing in South Africa was less than 2% com-
pared with the international average of 3,5%. Due to budgetary constraints the lack of funding
for housing delivery aggravated. In the 1996/97 national budget the allocation for housing was
a mere 0,9% while the general view is that an effective housing programme requires between
4% and 5% of the national budget (Davidson,1994; South Africa Survey, 1997:691). The hou-
sing budget did however increase to 2,2% for 1997/1998 budget, but can still be regarded as well
below an acceptable percentage needed to alleviate shelter poverty in South Africa.
3.2 Urban control and low-income housing policies in South Africa:
past and present situations
Any discussion of South African urban policy will inevitably tend to centre on the element of con-
trol. That is not surprising, because numerous measures and mechanisms have been devised
and implemented to control the black, dominated classes in South African urban areas
(Mayiam, 1995:31-32). Many South African scholars, especially geographers, highlight the pre-
sent implications of the spatiality of apartheid. Vestiges of apartheid persist in confounding post-
apartheid urban managers in their attempts to repair the damages of the past One can refer to
the spatial technology of power which simply means that 'space is fundamental in any exercise
of power'. This post-modern view of space and power is used to describe how the need to
achieve urban control in South Africa, through different laws and influx controls, have impacted
upon the urban landscape (Robinson,1996:5-29). Urban racial segregation has created starkly
divided landscapes with sprawling, infrastructurally poor black townships. This resulted in the
creation of settlements of surveillance to ensure that residents conform to the requirements of
the apartheid regime. The resurgence of a nation-wide political movement [first the United
Democratic Front (UDF) which was followed by the South African National Civic Organisation
(SAN CO)] contesting the legitimacy of the apartheid state in the 1980s, was grounded in numer-
ous urban communities and their struggles over the living conditions which apartheid planning
and the government had imposed on them. Most of the struggles against apartheid policies and
urban control were fought in urban settlements. The crisis of urban governance was compoun-
92
Low·income housing policies and community participation urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
ded by the evident failure of state machinery to control the movement of African people to the
cities (Robinson,1996:205).
The dawn of the new political dispensation in South Africa, and the political promises made
in the run-up to the election of April 27 1994, have unleashed a number of new demands which
are beginning to impact - positively and negatively - on the process of housing delivery. Many
of the expectations are not new and some of them can be traced to the Freedom Charter, but
they have never previously been verbalised or transformed into electioneering promises (and
subsequently into demands by the electorate) like ''four-room houses" and "reclaiming the land".
These expectations (and demands) are undoubtedly affecting and will continue to affect housing,
one of the most politicised aspects of the South African society. To cope with the housing short-
age of 1,2 million structures, whilst dealing with the annual demand for extra units, the African
National Congress indicated in its Reconstruction and Development Programme (ROP) that it
was aiming at securing the delivery of 1 million units within 5 years (ANC,1994:22). This promise
should be seen against the fact that the delivery sector could, at best, deliver only 50 000 units
per annum over the past decade. Although there are indications that this hollow promise has
been practically dropped from the political rhetoric of the day, some key policy-makers and opin-
ion leaders in the housing sector are still striving to achieve the target by the next elections in
1999. This clearly sets the scene for conflict in housing development.
Add to this the legacy which apartheid has left on housing: group areas and forced removals;
influx control until the mid 1980s; limited ownership for Africans outside the homelands until 1977
and inequitable per capita state expenditure based on racial categories. These are major hur-
dles which housing development in South Africa have to overcome. The mentioned historical
obstacles in housing delivery have been exacerbated by the fact that the anti-apartheid forces
chose the issue of housing as a prime target zone in their fight against the system. The coun-
try-wide boycott of service charges (water, electricity and sanitation) until 1994 resulted in shor-
tages in the income budgets of local authorities and massive amounts of the housing budget
have had to be channelled into meeting these deficits. Add to this the concerted campaign of
bond boycotts which scared financial institutions and the magnitude of the problem becomes
clearer (Botes et al., 1996). The land question is a pivotal and emotive issue when urban devel-
opment and low-income housing development are discussed. However, for the purposes of this
chapter, land issues and how these influenced the South African landscape will not be discussed
in detail. In some places land issues, only insofar as they relate to low-income urban housing,
will receive attention.
Table 7.1 presents an overview of the evolution of low-income housing policy and legislation
in South Africa. When one analyses the table, the dominance of state-driven conventional hous-
ing schemes in low-income housing provision is evident. Several phases can be identified in the
evolution of South African state interventions in the urban arena.
The first phase [(1900-1920) (cf. Table 7.1)] is associated with public health and disease
control. Legislation in favour of slum control was an outgrowth of rising concern amongst pub-
lic health officials and urban managers that unsegregated, overcrowded and unsanitary African
neighbourhoods posed a threat to white health and satety.'? According to the aims of this
19 There were many cases in Cape Town, Port Elizabeth, Durban and Johannesburg where the outbreak
of epidemics in slum neighbourhoods was used as motivation for racial removals and resettlement.
The term 'sanitation syndrome' is even used for the association made by whites between 'the black
urban presence' and 'squalor, disease and crime' (Mayiam,1995:24-25).
93
Low-income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
approach housing could be declared 'unfit for human habitation', the occupants removed and the
buildings demolished.
Table 7_1 Phases in the low income urban housing policies and practices in South Africa
(Designed by the author)
Phase: Legislativeand Housing delivery: Housing delivery: practice
institutional framework policy and approach and actions
1900-1920 Legislation in favour of Slum-clearance Bulldozing and forced
slum control motivated by programmes removals
health and disease control
1920-19$0 First legislation of urban Limited state provided o Bulldozing and forced
African control and urban conventional housing removals
segregation motivated by schemes o Resettling and segregating
racism the urban poor in racially-
mixed inner-city suburbs
• Accommodating African
migrant workers on the
mines in single sex hostels
1950-1986 Apartheid planning with a Major conventional • Bulldozing and forced
multitude of urban policy housing schemes removals
controls • Institutionalisation of racially
segregated cities and neigh-
bourhoods
1986-1990 "Order1y urbanisation" and Combination of conven- • Abolition of influx control
Neo-apartheid tional and progressive • Acceptance of presence of
housing schemes "urban blacks"
• Major efforts to develop
"black South Africa"
• Establishment of National
Housing Forum
Informal processes to cre- Emphasis on progres- • lOT capital Subsidy Scheme
ate legitimate institutional sive housing schemes of servicing 100000 sites
frameworks for housing o National Building
delivery Commission - sites-and-ser-
vice funding
• Establishment of National
Housing Forum
Institutionalisation of Conventional housing • Establishment of National
housing development and schemes as well as pro- Ministry of Housing and nine
delivery on a non-racial gressive housing deliv- provincial Ministries
basis ery • Establishment of National
Recognition of people's Housing Board and nine
housing provincial Housing Boards
• Approval and implementa-
tion of Housing Subsidy
Scheme
• Establishment of National
Housing Finance
Corporation
Launching of a People's
Housing Process
94
Low-income housing policies and community participation urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
The second phase of legislation (1920-1950) was more directly concerned with achieving
urban control. Africans had to live in declared 'locations'. This was difficult to achieve and
enforce due to lack of available alternative accommodation for those they wished to remove.
Besides racist motivations, policies of urban segregation and forced removals also served capi-
talist interests with the intention of creating space for business development. Urban control mea-
sures were thus borne into the class struggle.
The third phase (1950 to 1986) can generally be described as the apartheid phase, which
was in many respects a consolidation and streamlining of previous urban policies. Until the abo-
lition of influx control and spatial apartheid laws such as the Group Areas Act, the South African
urban landscape was enormously transformed on the basis of racially segregated cities and the
application of a multitude of urban policy controls." These forms of urban policy controls were
aimed at preventing the settling of black people in white urban South Africa or at de-blackening
some of the existing white urban areas by forcing Africans to relocate in so-called homelands.
Although the different phases are useful for understanding the historical evolution of urban poli-
cies in South Africa one can also distinguish between two further phases to frame the more con-
temporary urban development history.
The period 1986 to 1990 can be regarded as the neo-apartheid phase. During this and the
post-1990 phase housing was central to the problems of social and political order. The Urban
Foundation (an NGO formed by big business) lobbied extensively for influx control to be lifted.
This centrepiece of apartheid was abandoned in 1986. However, there were still several
attempts to legislate for what they called 'orderly urbanisation' which made urban residence
dependent upon housing availability. According to Robinson (1996:208) this was not effectively
implemented but remind us that the problems of urban governance have been associated with
housing provision. The Urban Foundation once again played a pioneering role in trying to
resolve the housing crisis. The minimal provision of shelter was considered sufficient for the
urban poor. This resulted in sites-and-services schemes and informal settlement upgrading.
During this period, attention was given to tenure and access to housing for low-income house-
holds while the futility of eradicating informal settlements was also acknowrecoeo." It was
acknowledged, at least in some government circles, that households and owners will feel secure
in making housing investments only when they are safe from eviction and various forms of
harassment. Various researchers-" have indicated that ownership plays the most important role
in giving people the confidence to upgrade their houses.
20 South Africa is one country where control measures have been clear and specific. With Ihe so-called
influx control legislation, black people were not allowed (for almost 40 years) to migrate lo settlements
of their choice unless they had permanent jobs. The motive behind this was apartheid planning to keep
cities "white" and de-blacken the so-called "black spots" in 'White South Africa'. Needless to say, these
measures of urban control carried high financial and social costs, embittering relations between sec-
tions of the community.
21 A squatter leader spelled out the failure of mass removals of informal settlers: "The Government was
like a man who has a cornfield which is invaded by birds. He chases the birds from one part of the
field and they alight in another part ... we squatters are the birds ... we will see whether it is the farmer
or the birds who get tired first" (Harrison,1992:15).
22 In two separate surveys (1990 and 1993) in Freedom Square (one of the largest informal settlements
in South Africa), the most positive aspect as perceived by end-beneficiaries in the upgrading of
Freedom Square was ownership of the site they resided on. This supports the assumption that
legalised tenure enhances both social security and the social value of the individual household (cf.
Botes et al., 1991; Labuschagne, 1993; Marais,1993:9).
95
Low-income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
Until the mid 1980s the international experience of housing had little influence on housing
policies in South Africa because the state focused on planning for apartheid. The South African
government's approaches towards informal housing shifted from coercive measures and anti-
urbanisation policies to allowing informal urbanisation to take place. After 1990 the government
also adopted a supportive role in which the upgrading of informal settlements through conven-
tional and progressive housing were and still are promoted.
The post-1990 phase can also be divided into two different phases. 1990-1994: the gradual
dismantling of apartheid urban policies and the creation of new more legitimate ways and
processes to negotiate urban policies. Organisations like the newly created National Housing
Forum,23 Planact24 and the Independent Development Trust'" played an important role in this
regard.
The post-apartheid phase (from 1994 onwards) is characterised by the institutionalisation
of a non-racial legitimate institutional framework to design and implement new housing policies.
This was demonstrated by the creation of a formal structure called the National Housing Board,
and the creation of a Ministry of Housing (with the late Joe Slovo as first Housing minister) at the
central government level, nine Provincial Housing Boards and nine Provincial Housing
Ministries. Of all the basic needs in South Africa, housing is probably the most controversial. In
the ROP base-document the principle is emphasised that "all South Africans have the right26 to
a secure place in which to live in peace and dignity" (ANC, 1994: 23). Though it is argued that
housing should be attordable-" to even the "poorest of South Africans", this approach will still
have to take account of funding and resource constraints. Fiscal discipline necessitates cost
recovery, leading to the risk that subsidies in this area will again benefit the relatively better off,
and not the poorest of the poor. If poverty alleviation should in fact be the first priority, housing
23 Among the nineteen members were the African National Congress, South African National Civic
Organisation, Inkhata, Association of Mortgage Lenders, Material Manufacture and Supply Sector,
Construction Consortium, The Congress of SA Trade Unions, Urban Foundation, SA Housing Trust and
the non-profit Housing Delivery Sector.
24 This development NGO was launched in Johannesburg in 1985, by a group of development profes-
sionals working in the University of Witwatersrand and in private practice. The main aim was to pro-
vide expertise in planning, engineering and architecture which would enable communities to set the
development agenda for their own areas and demand a say in planning decisions (Abbott,1996:200-
201).
25 A South African Trust was established independent of government but funded by government, com-
prising prominent business and academic people, to oversee a budget of R750 million for urban infra-
structure provision in a scheme whereby the sum of R7 500 would be allocated as a capital subsidy for
a serviced site for 100 000 households. This resulted in the improvement of the living conditions of
about half a million people. To ensure the money was made available to low income families, an
income ceiling of R1 000 per month was placed on the main breadwinner.
26 The issue of housing as a human right was the most debated issue at the Habitat II Conference in
Istanbul. .Due to the influence of the American bloc a compromise was reached that housing is a pro-
gressive right and not a fundamental right. In South Africa, housing is considered as a second-gene-
ration human right. According to Geiderbium & Kok (1994:99) the constitutions of over 30 countries
also recognise the right to housing.
27 The issue of affordability of housing or the ability of households to repay loans used for the construc-
tion and purchase of houses is very important in the South African housing scene. Gelderblom & Kok
(1994:107) indicate that nearly 45% of African households are not financially able to make any contri-
bution to their housing. Some people suggest that there is in fact no housing problem - only an income
and employment problem in South Africa. This has resulted in criticism of the ANC government's social
development drive of embarking on a national housing delivery process. According to this critique the
government should rather focus on job creation and economic development in order to enable the poor
to provide for their own social development needs, including housing.
96
Low-Income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa In retrospect Chapter 7
provision should therefore, at this stage, not be such a high priority. In terms of costs, the poor
could gain more and have benefits more broadly spread - from water and electricity provision
and the extension of primary health care - than they could from housing alone (Le
Roux,1996:58). In April 1996 the National Housing Finance Corporation, which focussed on the
mobilisation of alternative forms of finance for low-income earners, was established. May 1996
saw the launching of the People's Housing Process which focussed on supporting self-help
housing through the establishment of housing support centres throughout South Africa. The
main objectives of this government-driven programme are to give the poor access to subsidies,
serviced land, skills training, advice, building materials and technical assistance (South Africa
SIJrvey,1997:738-739). Other low-income housing policy matters during 1996 which merit atten-
tion include:
• Utilisation of the R525 million RDP Fund to promote public-private partnerships in housing
delivery;
• Since local level delivery capacity is regarded as critical to the success of a low-income
housing programme, delivery responsibility was devolved to the local municipal level. This
meant that local authorities could also act as private developers. This move, however, was
severely criticised by organisations in the private sector who argued that these actions jeo-
pardised private sector interests and undermined private sector participation in the low-
income housing market.
• The application of institutional subsidies to support a rental housing approach (South Africa
Survey,1997:740-744).
3.3 The emergence of participatory urban development in South Africa
South Africa's rapid urbanisation and the associated problems of housing and infrastructure pro-
vision have been well documented. What have been less well covered are the role of commu-
nity participation and civil society in urban development and the factors influencing the effec-
tiveness of community participation in urban renewal. Over the past couple of years develop-
ment in South Africa has undergone a virtual paradigm shift: a shift from imposed, prescribed or
selective development-'' to what Friedman (1993) and Abbott (1996) call "negotiated develop-
ment". From the mid-1970s, urban conflict awoke white élite to the need to redress the materi-
al circumstances of black city-dwellers: development was either imposed in a top-down manner
by the white "establishment" (also referred to by some as the "betterment approach") or it was
negotiated with selected leaders from homeland or black local authorities. Social movements
such as the United Democratic Front (UDF - early 1980s) and the South African National Civic
Organisation (SANCO late 1980s and early 1990s) whi::h operated outside official structures,
were rarely consulted on housing projects. Less were they invited to become full partners in the
planning and execution of development projects. However, these urban movements did become
a major force influencing urban policy, albeit by and lar£ e at local levels.
28 The majority of development projects in South Africa prior to 1990 were generally ideology-driven. In
these cases the government, para-statals and even private developers undertook development ven-
tures primarily for the promotion of their own image and power base. These development projects were
largely extensions/confirmations of existing separate development policies and could at best be
labelled examples of "betterment approaches".
97
tow-income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
According to Abbott (1996:201) the lack of community participation was one of the main his-
torical weaknesses in the low-income housing policy and urban management field in South
Africa. According to Friedman (1993: 1) there is now general agreement that the approach of
imposed development has failed: in its place is a virtual consensus, at least in theory, that deve-
lopment must be negotiated with the "community" and with its "real/legitimate leaders", rather
than with those leaders the "establishment" has chosen.
The idea of negotiated development is, therefore, new to South Africa since it emerged only
during the late 1980s and early 1990s. Perhaps one can also regard the emergence of negoti-
ated development as part of a broader sensitivity to democracy and the demand for a growing
process of democratisation.
Prior to the 1970s, apartheid itself was of course referred to as "separate development".
During the 1970s and early 1980s development was not an agreed upon goal for black urbanites;
neither was it part of the political vocabulary as it still carried apartheid connotations. The gov-
ernment had initially insisted that development was something which happened separately in the
homelands only - it was not needed in the cities since black residents were regarded only as tem-
porary inhabitants of white urban South Africa. Even after th.is ideology began to erode, there
was no official commitment to urban development: township residents were expected to rely on
the efforts of self-financing separate local authorities whose resources did not stretch far enough
to finance basic services, let alone to initiate "development" (Friedman,1993:4). In some cases
government and semi-government organisations defined community development as a process
whereby communities are motivated to participate in and to cooperate with the activities of deve-
lopment agents. This inevitably leads to only lip-service being paid to concepts like participation,
self-reliance, empowerment, bottom-up decision-making, etc. resulting in the use and abuse of
terms such as participation and development as essential components of apartheid politics in
South Africa.
This separate development approach changed only in the mid-1980s. In reaction to urban
conflict the establishment of the Regional Services Councils in 1985 for the first time committed
a statutory institution to allocating resources to infrastructural development in the townships.
During the late 1980s the motives for and mode of development changed dramatically - the
National Security Management System used development in a manipulative manner to win the
hearts and minds of township people in order to neutralise the militancy in townships and to
regain control (Friedman,1993:4). This was a final retreat from the principle that development
should be focussed on homeland development only. The Development Bank of South Africa
(DBSA), which until then had concerned itself with homeland development only, funded its first
urban programme in Alexandra township in 1987. Although this chanqe in approach sanctioned
urban development, it insisted that it be either imposed from the top, or negotiated with selective
partners such as Black Local Authorities. This strategy was a response to resistance politics
from the township civic associations, most of them initially affiliated to the UDF and later to
SANCO.
A detailed analysis of SANCO or related organisations is, however, beyond the the scope of
this study, but for the purposes of this chapter two points are relevant. Firstly, civic organisations
were de facto local arms of the liberation movement in South Africa and their main goal was to
challenge the imposition of urban neo-apartheid and, in particular, the Black Local Authority sys-
tem. Secondly, local "bread and butter" grievances (i.e. lack of services, payment of services,
98
tow-income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
need for serviced land, etc.) were potent mobilising issues. The first point implied that civics,
unlike interest-based local pressure groups, claimed to represent the community (usually black
and deprived) as a whole. On the one hand, their undoubted success in mobilising resistance
lent credibility to the claim; while, on the other hand, there was marked absence of agreed tests
of representativeness. The latter also had important effects, since the role and function of the
civics had changed from protest or activist organisations to community facilitators in develop-
ment initiatives. Friedman (1993:4-5) points out that this background has set the context for
negotiated development in South Africa in the 1990s.
Along with national-level negotiations, which gave rise to the transfer of power from white
minority government to a Government of National Unity in May 1994, negotiations for a new form
of local government were held during the course of 1993-1994. These took the form of the Local
Government Negotiating Forum (LGNF). The delegates to the LGNF agreed to divide into statu-
tory and non-statutory delegations. The non-statutory alliance consisted of SANCO (who initia-
ted the national rent boycott which had brought the authorities to the negotiating table), the ANC
and the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU). The statutory forces included rep-
resentatives from different levels of government, officials, professional institutes, councillors and
practitioners (Robinson, 1996:209-21 0). These local government negotiations are yet another
example of the politicisation of urban services and government in South Africa during the 1980s
and 1990s operating in an environment of consensus-seeking and negotiated development.
Abbott (1996:51-63) identifies four components of the South African local authority manage-
ment system as being central to the successful provision and maintenance of physical infra-
structure, namely: legitimacy, affordabillity, institutional capacity and user-convenience. Due to
the lack of meaningful and effective community participation, all four areas were simultaneously
placed under severe stress. Understanding political transition in South Africa is very important
to understanding the relationship between community participation and urban upgrading.
From this concise overview it becomes clear that the urge for participatory development in
the South African urban scene is very much the result of a paradigm shift in development think-
ing, a shift in favour of negotiated development. Negotiated development presupposes that
development agencies form partnerships with the urban poor to collaborate with them on the
solution of their problems, rather than trying to force them into generic schemes they cannot
afford.
3.4 The Reconstruction and Development Programme (ROP) and urban
low-income housing delivery
The South African Government of National Unity, which was established after the April 1994 elec-
tions was strongly committed to addressing the problems of poverty and inequality. Its frame-
work for the alleviation and reduction of poverty revolves around the ROP which was formulated
by the ANC and its associates before the election and which was adopted as the policy frame-
work of the then Government of National Unity (Tj0nneland,1996:5). The ROP was regarded by
many as a panacea for South Africa's wide range of development problems. The ROP had two
major and related objectives; to combat poverty and to reconstruct the economy. Five broad pro-
grammes were defined to promote this: meeting basic needs; upgrading human rights; streng-
thening the economy; democratising the state and society; and making the state and public sec-
tor more efficient (ANC,1994).
99
Low-income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
The RDP holds a strong people-centred view of development which recognises the fact that
the poor should be given control over their own lives, and that their ability to mobilise sufficient
resources should be increased. The RDP reflects a commitment to grass-roots, bottom-up
development which is owned and driven by communities and their own representative organisa-
tions. Its central aim is to improve the quality of life of all South Africans and particularly of the
neglected sectors of society. The RDP pertinently embraces the principles of participatory deve-
lopment, holding that development is not about the delivery of goods to a passive citizenry, but
rather about active involvement and growing empowerment. The RDP endeavours to integrate
growth, development, reconstruction and redistribution into a unified programme (ANC,1994:
6,15).
There are however some criticisms against the RDP which also impact on the debates con-
cerning urban development and community participation. Van Zyl (1995: 14-16) asks a critical
question about the scope of the people-centred vision of the RDP. Needs mentioned in the RDP
are defined in conventional and materialistic terms as a desire for economic goods and services.
Such a narrow interpretation of needs renders it difficult to address both material and non-mate-
rial needs in a systematic and integrated manner. This leaves the government wide open to pop-
ular demands to simply hand out goods and services to the poor. Concerning endogenous
development, the RDP can be said to have originated inside South Africa, and not for example
from outside institutions such as the World Bank or the United Nations. Irrespective of the
diverse and multi-cultural nature of South Africa, one could safely conclude that the majority of
the principles and ideals reflected in the RDP have the support of the vast majority of South
Africans.
The RDP's strong emphasis on democratisation, people-driven processes, active involve-
ment and the growing empowerment of communities clearly demonstrates that it regards the pro-
motion of greater self-reliance of communities as an important component of its development
vision. Since fundamental needs and their appropriate satisfiers can only be articulated from
within a community, there is the danger that the delivery of economic goods and services can,
and often are planned and controlled by government officials under pressure to deliver on polit-
ical promises. If so, development degenerates into the quick-fix of delivering very visible mate-
rial commodities from the top down, rather than focussing on bottom-up delivery which enables
people to develop themselves.
Although some achievements in the areas of primary health care, nutrition, water supply and
electricity provision were reached during the govemment's first 500 days, in terms of housing
delivery the RDP fell short of what both the ANC and most South Africans had hoped for. For
example, the building of low-cost houses hardly got off the ground with only 11 000 houses built
during the first 500 days instead of the national aim to build 200 000 units per annum. Until the
end of June 1996, the RDP delivered less than 15 000 houses - a far cry from the two-year
benchmark of 400 000. Notwithstanding considerable concern regarding the slow pace of deli-
very, 1996 saw the rate of delivery increase substantially. Between March 1994, (when the hou-
sing subsidy scheme was implemented), and August 1995, the average monthly delivery was
536 subsidies. However, between September 1995 and September 1996 delivery averaged 6
952 per month. After the first 1 000 days housing delivery improved to 135 087 houses built
(South Africa Survey, 1997:747-748) and by January 1999 approximately 700 000 houses had
been built (Marais,1999; Moses.1999). Many accuse the RDP of creating bureaucratic bottle-
100
Low·income housing policies and community participation urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
necks which not only slow the pace of government delivery even further, but threatens the sur-
vival of NGOs already engaged in development work. The RDP Ministry has not even been able
to allocate all the funds at its disposal (only 55 % of the 1994-95 RDP Fund had been allocated,
and only a small fraction of this amount was actually spent). In May 1996 the RDP Fund had an
embarrassing surplus of approximately R2 billion of unused RDP funds (Caliguire,1996:5-6,20;
Tjonneland,1996:5-6).
Several conclusions can be drawn from this lack of development performance. It could well
be a lack of appropriate institutional capacity to deliver. With hindsight, one could conclude that
the RDP was a programme without a plan, a development credo without the capacity to deliver,
a popular manifesto without the potential to mobilise. According to Tjonneland (1996:6) the suc-
cessful RDP projects are mainly in the areas where the existing capacity to deliver has long
existed, such as the Department of Water Affairs and in ESCOM, a main electricity supplier.
Some may argue that the problem hinges with the current Provincial Housing Board policies and
practices-? which are conventional rather than incremental or progressively orientated. Another
argument is that successful housing delivery depends on the consent and participation of com-
munities, on an efficient public service and - in many instances - on partnerships with the private
sector and NGOs. These take time to develop (often more than a couple of hundred days) and
require skilful negotiations.
Some have criticised the RDP for not being an integrated plan of action, but rather a pre-elec-
tion shopping list of goals the ANC had hoped to attain once it took over government, and, in the
event, containing too many promises and too few priorities. Although the RDP had originally
been the icon of the New South Africa, it soon turned into a scapegoat (cf. Blumenfeld,1996).
However, its symbolic importance cannot be underestimated. The RDP was at least a starting
point for putting forward the development problems of South Africa and the issue of inequality as
the priority items on the agenda, and for providing a set of values, goals and strategies to re-
medy these.
After 730 days the ANC-led government dismantled the RDP Office due to lack of delivery.
The RDP was replaced by the Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) initiative. Was
this a signal that the ANC was abandoning its pre-election vision of reconstruction and develop-
ment initiatives? This raises serious questions about the government's future commitment to
development (Caliguire,1996:5-6,20). The failure of the new Government to deliver on develop-
ment promises could lead to a resurgence of the South African NGO and CBO sector. These
segments of civil society will resurrect and transform themselves and may in future have agen-
das and priorities which conflict with those of the government. The closing down of the RDP
Office could also be viewed in terms of the larger ideological debate of "economic growth versus
redistribution", which is stirring within government. Control over the programmatic and strategic
aspects of the ROP has been given to the Office of the Deputy State President. For some, the
dismantling of the RDP Office symbolises that economic growth, rather than redistribution, has
won the day as the primary tool for change. Nowadays, fostering the aims of human develop-
ment seem more unlikely.
29 The Free State Housing Board did not approve a single housing subsidy for the 1997 financial year due
to management and administrative problems as well as a lack of capacity of both the National and
Provincial Housing Departments. At least two housing boards of other provinces (Mpumalanga and
Northern Cape) almost stopped functioning during 1997.
101
Low-income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
3.5 A future scenario for community participation in South African
low-income housing delivery
The priorities for low-income housing in South Africa will, for years to come, emphasise the fol-
lowing:
• The shelter related needs of the poor
• Communities should be meaningfully involved in housing development that affects them
• All stakeholders in low-income housing delivery should be meaningfully involved
• The potential of people to fulfil their own housing needs should be encouraged and supported.
In the new South Africa one has to be cautious of professionals, officials, politicians, even
those that present themselves as so-called community leaders, who use participatory develop-
ment for their own personal gain or to serve political ends and to maximise power. Even the ROP,
which was designed with good intentions, is not above the dirty business of politics. What better
combination of symbols than a government that has committed itself to participatory develop-
ment through the ROP? Yet, politicians may at the same time use their concern for development
to political advantage. Although this may sound like overemphasising the cons pirational aspects
of social development initiatives in South Africa, one cannot deny the political-ideological agen-
da implicit in the development establishment's promotion of participatory development.
Perhaps we have reached the climax of community participation in South Africa. During the
years of oppression and lack of legitimised and democratised institutions there was the biggest
urge for large-scale popular participation in the struggles for freedom. During the transitional
years from a Neo-apartheid to a Post-apartheid era (1986 - 1994), especially, the shift towards
participatory development approaches was significant in South Africa. Now that democratically
elected government structures and their development programmes have gained more legitima-
cy, practising community participation may decrease. The State's involvement to provide in the
socio-economic needs of the majority in South Africa through the ROP may also lead to the
demise of community participation in development projects. In this regard Morgan (1993:74-77)
indicates that:
"Effective bottom-up community participation seems to decrease in proportion
to mcreasinq state involvement in developrnentt.ê?
Applying this idea, people are more likely to want to participate where the established order
offers them fewer opportunities to participate; in other words participation and the demand for
participation will be greater where and when there is a more urgent and immediate need for
social change. Conversely, participation is less apparent in contexts where the government pro-
vides more basic services. Greater participation is quite simply unecessary where the relations
between the state and citizenry are more co-operative and mutually respectful.
Theoretically, the outcry for participation will decline if the current government can deliver.
However, if the ANC-led government cannot sufficiently and speedily provide in the expectations
of those who voted them into power, only then will civil society again embark on true sponta-
neous participatory development initiatives. Community participation will also be influenced
every five years when it is General Election time. Usually, for a short period after such elections
the state will emphasise the process-related nature of housing delivery. However, come the next
30 Morgan illustrates this argument with case studies from Cuba and Tanzania.
102
Low-income housing policies and community participation. urban South Africa In retrospect Chapter 7
election, tangible delivery will dominate at the expense of people participating in housing delivery
initiatives to live up to the election promises. One should not argue that participation is by de-
finition only viable if it is driven by political objectives. The fact that we have a democratically
elected government in South Africa is no guarantee that they are sensitive enough to communi-
ty needs. When many of the hastily created housing projects (rows upon rows of pink and blue
houses) are considered it really does not seem to be the case. The more government tries to
speak for people (even in delivery) the more it will be questioned.
4. Conclusion
This chapter has highlighted the emergence and evolution of participatory housing processes in
urban low-income communities both internationally and in South Africa. It analysed the different
manifestations of reactionary government policies aimed at managing cities. Acts of intolerance
towards over-urbanisation, such as forced removals and controlled urbanisation, were dis-
cussed. The forced removals of squatters is not a solution of the housing problems. Formal con-
ventional housing programmes have failed to deliver housing at the rate and scale required, and
they have frequently proved to be unaffordable to the poor. Factors that may lead to a major
shift in policies to address housing poverty also received attention. These include not only finan-
cial realities and public budgetary constraints but also acknowledgements of the human and eco-
nomic value of informal housing stock and processes of self-help housing drives. Community
participation in urban projects should be a two-way process and state programmes need to be
linked to the efforts of local people to improve their urban environment. Many case studies in
urban upgrading also show that it is both possible and desirable to involve ordinary people in
addressing housing poverty.
Much of the dynamics of the recent transformation of South African society have been acted
out in the urban arena. The urban crisis and subsequently the housing challenge has been at
the centre of the crisis of apartheid. The effective management of cities and initiatives to improve
the shelter environment of many people will be essential to the success of the new government.
Informal housing processes and formal processes will have to be harnessed together by means
of mixed and pragmatic low-income housing policies. The chances of success of a state-cen-
tred, public, conventional housing approach in relation to the scale of need in low-income com-
munities is small compared to the prospects offered by an incremental housing approach.
According to McCarthy et al. (1995) if we fail to satisfy the needs of the urban poor, the conse-
quences for our cities will be continuing land invasions, a proliferation of unserviced informal
housing, increasingly impossible urban management, and a general decline in local and inter-
national investor confidence.
What is needed, while approaching the year 2000, is a shift from urban crisis management
and reactive planning to pro-active urban development and a fervour to assist the urban poor in
creating their own sustainable human settlements. In South Africa, as is already the case in
other developing countries, we should not only aim at increasing our housing stock, but also at
improving it. In many countries where the aim was predominantly to increase the size of the
housing stock, delivery could not be sustained due to budgetary constraints, and this resulted in
103
Low-income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa in retrospect Chapter 7
a bias towards the upper-lower income groups, while negating the poorest segments of society.
Perhaps Joubert as quoted by Harrison (1992:20) best summarises the challenge of communi-
ty participation in low-income housing policies:
"How we respond to the needs of low-income urban communities is one of the
major challenges facing South Africa. We could bulldoze the shacks in the
hopes that their occupants will disappear, but they will simply spring up some-
where else - more dilapidated, more desperate, more hostile. We could ignore
them, and they will slowly become a health threat and an economic burden on
our formal cities. Or we could use our resources and expertise to turn this
massive wave of human energy into a positive component of urban develop-
ment".
The next chapter (Chapter 8) will discuss community participation in the upgrading of
Freedom Square as a case study. The purpose is to highlight various aspects of community par-
ticipation and to test the "theory" of participatory development in practice.
104
--8-
Community participation in
the upgrading of Freedom
Square: a case study
In this chapter community participation in development is cast into an
applied geographical and local context. For this purpose Freedom
Square (an informal settlement on the outskirts of Bloemfontein, the cap-
ital of the Free State Province in South Africa) (cf. Map 8.2) has been
selected as a case study community in order to explore and illuminate
different aspects and various dimensions of community participation in
practice. There are three reasons for the decision to focus on this selec-
ted case study. A first reason is to unravel the processes and dynamics
of community participation in a specific informal settlement-upgrading
context. Such an in-depth analysis of the participatory-related values,
beliefs and attitudes of the end-beneficiaries and other role players from
the case study community will deliver a more contextualised and there-
fore a deeper understanding of community participation. This will also
add a practical and applied dimension to this study.
A second reason for selecting Freedom Square is due to the
researcher's involvement in this community from August 1990 (six
months after the land invasions and the release of President Mandela)
until 1998. The researcher has had the advantage of having nine years
of direct exposure to the group dynamics in this community (cf. Map 8.1).
A third reason is linked to one of the important contributions that the
dependency theory made towards the study of underdeveloped commu-
nities, namely that poverty can only be truly discovered through a
detailed socio-historic analysis. By looking at the past, one gains per-
spective on the future. This serves as an important reason why the
researcher decided to analyse the participatory aspects of the socio-his-
105
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: J case study Chapter 8
torical transition in the upgrading of Freedom Square. The history of Freedom Square epitomis-
es the history of South African in-situ upgrading.
A toutin reason - once again to challenge and test the "theory" of community participation as
accumulated in numerous experiences all over the globe, and in this sense to contribute to the
richness of knowledge and experience.
This chapter is an attempt to do three things: Firstly to maintain that the nature, quality and
intensity of community participation in a development project are due to their complexity, difficult
to measure. Secondly that the researcher opted for a combination of detailed descriptions and
analyses of participatory dynamics among key stakeholders and selections of measurements via
surveys in the selected community. And thirdly to draw conclusions about community participa-
tion in a selected case study of informal settlement upgrading.
Freedom and Namibia Square
ec 0 100 200_
• BoikhutsonQ. TsworoQono
• Nonzwakazi
... Huhudi
Map 8.1 South African upgrading projects where the researcher was involved (1990-1996)
1. The establishment and development of Freedom Square
Owing to aparth€·id, land for African housing in South Africa was for many years a scarce
resource. In all towns and cities restrictions existed to prevent the expansion of African town-
ships. This resulled in illegal backyard squatting, as well as in a high incidence of lodger fami-
lies. The abolition of influx control in 1986, without a pre-emptive development thrust to make
serviced stands available, resulted in even worse overcrowding and squatting. This started to
spill over into illegal land invasions [encouraged by the South African National Civic Organisation
(SANCO)] mainly of unused land within townships or of vacant land adjacent to townships
(Bates et al., 1991 :9-1 0).
Shortly after the historic speech delivered by the then State President, FW de Klerk, on 2
February 1990 when he announced the unbanning of the ANC, political and social tension began
to increase countrywide. This provided the spark that initiated various land-invasion processes.
106
Community participation in the upgrading ot Freedom Square a case study Chapter 8
In the case of Bloemfontein, the Mangaung Civic Association proposed that the land around
Mangaung be occupied informally. As a result of over-population, especially in Mangaung, and
the accompanying encouragement of the civic association, eight informal settlements had
already mushroomed around Bloemfontein by the end of 1990. Eventually, the occupied land at
Rodenbeck, situated outside Mangaung was renamed Freedom Square and Namibia Square (cf.
Map 8.2). The authorities could deduce from this move that very strong political connotations of
liberation were attached to these names, and that the Mangaung Civic Association was issuing
a strong challenge to the predominantly white authorities. In other words Freedom Square was
founded, on the one hand for political reasons, and on the other hand, as a result of the short-
comings in the provision of housing for Africans in Bloemfontein, the latter reason also reflecting
political motivation (cf. Van Rensburg et a/., 1997).
Map 8.2 Freedom Square 1 as selected case study area in relation to Greater Bloemfontein
In March 1991 the Independent Development Trust (IDT)2 announced a R750 million Capital
Subsidy Scheme to provide approximately 110 000 subsidies of R7 500 each. This enabled
households earning less than R1 000 per month to enter the housing market through acquiring
registered ownership of a serviced site. At the completion of this scheme in 1996, 113 344 sub-
1. Namibia Square is adjacent to Freedom Square and was simultaneously invaded. Namibia consisted
of 1 500 informal dwellings at the time when the upgrading project commenced in 1991. It is, however,
important that the whole of Freedom Square was serviced (3 200 sites) while only 800 of the 1 500
sites in Namibia were targeted for services, due to only 4 000 Subsidies (because of budgetary alloca-
tions for the Free State Province) having been approved by the Independent Development Trust. This
explains why many refer only to the Freedom Square Upgrading Project instead of the Freedom
Square and Namibia Square Upgrading Project.
2. The lOT was established in 1990 to manage and disburse a fund of R2 000 million. The lOT operated
during the democratic transition of South Africa (1991 to 1994) as the biggest national development
agency. Although the lOT received its main financial support from the South African Government it
could be regarded as an NGO sufficiently removed from Government to allow for broader community-
based inputs.
107
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
sidies had been provided to 103 different projects located throughout South Africa. With the
announcement of the IDT's Capital Subsidy Scheme, the Urban Foundation (an urban develop-
ment NGO) and the Mangaung Civic Association were some of the first organisations to apply
for funds for the upgrading of stands. The upgrading project of Freedom Square was one of the
largest in South Africa, involving 4 132 stands and funds to the amount of R31 million.
Immediately after it became known that the IDT would indeed have funds available, a commu-
nity trust (the Upgrade Community Trust) was established to act as developer, while the Urban
Foundation and later the New Housing Company (NewHCo) were assigned the roles of project
managers. After two years' work, the project was officially launched in June 1992, and this
implied that the city gates for housing to poor blacks were thrown wide open for the first time (cf.
Marais, 1994:146, 156). The site-and-service component of the project was completed in 1995,
and in October of the same year, the Free State Housing Board approved a housing proposal to
the amount of R29 million. The construction of formal state-subsidised houses started on 3 June
1996 and was completed in November 1998.
This case study of Freedom therefore covers three time periods, namely that of large scale
occupation of land in 1990 and 1991, the implementation of a site-and-service scheme in 1992
to 1995, and finally, the implementation of a low-income housing project from 1996 to 1998. The
current population of Freedom Square is 17 200 people which results in an average household
size of 4.2 people.
2. The Independent Development Trust (lOT), community participation
and urban upgrading
Compared with other similar low-income housing or service-delivery projects within South Africa,
the IDT has achieved a much higher degree of participation (cf. Robinson et al., 1994). Far more
consultation and community participation took place around the Capital Subsidy Scheme than
had ever occurred before in South African low-income housing initiatives. From the findings of a
national assessment of the Scheme it appears that the consultation and participation objectives
were only partially successful. Most notable was the effective and transparent way in which com-
munity structures took responsibility for site allocation. On the whole, beneficiaries and their
leaders were unaware of the projects until the implementation of the projects; they were hardly
involved in decisions concerning standards and cost; they were not generally trained in techni-
cal choice nor were they involved from the very beginning in planning for service maintenance
(cf. Robinson etal.,1994:vii-viii).
In a national postal survey launched in February 1993, 709 questionnaires were sent to all
role-players involved in the 103 IDT Capital Subsidy projects. Although a response rate of only
21% materialised, it is significant that the single most-mentioned aspect of the project identified
as having worked well was that "commurity participation facilitated the implementation of the
project" (Robinson et al., 1994:190). However, there were also two community participation-
related aspects which were highlighted by respondents as the main problems encountered in the
informal settlement upgrading initiatives: too many role players involved which made decision-
making difficult and a lack of development knowledge by the community.
Thus, despite the large-scale efforts and undeniable achievements of the IDT's Subsidy
Scheme in general, focussing on one particular case study and analysing the community partic-
108
Community participation In the upgrading of Freedom Square a case study Chapter 8
ipation aspects of the Freedom upgrading could generate some important experiences and
reveal some sobering lessons.
3. Methodological considerations in analysing community participation
in Freedom Square
It is sometimes said that the way to truth is as important as the truth itself. Paraphrasing this old
adage, we may say that the process through which one arrives at a methodology for participa-
tion is no less important than the methodology itself. A key question in studying participatory
development is how to capture and measure community participation in development pro-
grammes or projects. Attempts to measure community participation are still relatively new and
meaningful data is not always available. Moreover, benefits like the development of community
based organisations, the transference of skills to local levels and consequent benefits to the
community, etc. are difficult to assess. The challenge to the researcher in participatory develop-
ment is to 'listen to the people' (cf. Dudley, 1993:57; Salmen, 1989). This practice can be hard to
implement, particularly to the outsider. Even when one's professional bias is not acting as a fil-
ter to what is heard, there are many other obstacles to successful listening, i.e. language, sus-
picion, the community's pride, the unspoken assumptions of the end-beneficiary and the
researcher, the beneficiary's desire to please, the beneficiary's expectations, the perceived role
of one's companions, limited time and the dominance of the articulate over the inarticulate.
To assess the effectiveness or success of community participation in any development
attempt is perhaps the most problematic of all aspects. How people and interest groups respond
to a particular form of participation will depend largely on their viewpoint. Effectiveness for what
and for whom is largely a political question that can hardly be answered objectively. It is no easy
task to evaluate the impact and outcome of community participation in relation to set objectives.
First of all, it is easier to measure the achievement of some objectives than of others. For exam-
ple, the outcome in respect of cost sharing can be quantified, whereas contribution to project
effectiveness or capacity building is more difficult to determine and may have to be viewed from
a longer-term perspective. Second, interpreting the outcome of community participation is not
easy, as it depends also on the role played by other complementary elements in the project. The
problem is that some objectives of community participation cannot be disentangled from those
of the project itself.
Conventionally the social sciences and development studies have had an overwhelming bias
towards quantitative indicators for assessing development progress and initiatives. This has
been unfortunate and has generally given a distorted approach to development policy and
actions. In an attempt to overcome problems of this nature, qualitative techniques have been
devised which are now frequently grouped under rapid appraisal methods also labelled partici-
patory (action) research. Rapid appraisal techniques emerged in the late 1970s and were first
used in the field of rural development. This research method seeks to stimulate and assist dis-
advantaged people to undertake their own collective investigations into their living conditions and
environment. From this they can develop their own systematic thinking - their own 'science'.
Uneducated or semi-educated people thus have the ability to develop "systematically scientific
collective knowledge" through their own research efforts and own praxis (Rahman,1993:5;
1995:24; Varkevisser et a/., 1993: 13). This participatory research methodology has the same
conceptual basis as Paulo Freire's conscientisation of self-reflected learning. In this regard
109
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
Varkevisser et al. (1993: 13) pleads for a learning process approach where development workers
and ordinary community people would share their knowledge and resources, creating pro-
grammes in which the needs and capacities of beneficiaries would be linked to those of out-
siders.
Workshops, semi-structured individual and group interviews and unstructured interviews are
but some of a few data-gathering techniques that the researcher can apply to listen to the peo-
ple and to evaluate the frequency and quality of community involvement in projects. As
Chambers (1983) puts it, "it is by talking, travelling, asking, listening, observing and doing things
together that development workers can most effectively learn". Dudley (1993:69) says that a
researcher, in analysing community participation in development, should pursue the principle of
maximum serendipity. In this the researcher should establish opportunities for mutual discove-
ries, for both beneficiaries and interveners, by doing things together, to understand the context
of development, participation and each other's knowledge better. The main aim of participatory
research is not to promote a research partnership between experts and ordinary people, but
rather to promote people's own research on the basis of self-created knowledge.
It is very important to place any assessment of community participation in the broader socio-
political and economic historical context of a country, region and community. One could, for
example, ask whether the nature of community participation will now differ from what was prac-
tised seven to eight years ago in South Africa, now that a different realpolitik prevails where poli-
tical citizen participation took place at the national, the regionai and the local levels. Some may
argue that the frequency and intensity of community participation may have diminished because
the society has been democratised and the outcry for legitimisation and direct democracy has
decreased. This relation between citizen participation and project specific participation will
remain an interesting research topic to pursue. With regard to the question as to whether there
is a relationship between the form of government and the form of participation, Morgan (1993:6)
asserts that spontaneous participation is more acceptable to democratic states than to repres-
sive regimes. Other examples, like for instance the Costa Rican case, dispel the notion that there
is a direct, linear relationship between the form of government and the form of participation.
Elaborating a social methodology to analyse community participation requires the multi-disci-
plinary skills of social researchers, development planners and members of the end-beneficiary
community. It furthermore requires a dialogic method of inquiry wherever the perceptions and
understandings of the people whose participation is in question are 'considered to be crucially
important in understanding the problematic nature of participation. Some researchers have fre-
quently tried dialogic methods of inquiry such as participatory action research but have often fa-
llen back upon more conventional methods of inquiry, collecting quantitative and human per-
ceptional data by means of surveys, questionnaires and interviews rather than by in-depth dia-
logues with the people. The problem with conventional research methods is that they often pur-
sue research upon the people while participatory research is doing re,earch with the people. The
reason for this is the basic premise of a conventional research paradigm where some
researchers are superior and therefore qualified to guide, control and determine the others'
research. The generation of knowledge in this paradigm is by prescribed methods which require
observation from a distance as opposed to getting involved (Rahman, 1993: 142, 217).
International development agencies have spent millions of dollars in hiring consultants to
devise standardised measures of participation, identify their correlates and determine how to
110
Community participation In the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
make them more "successful". These development experts, in their attempts to evaluate com-
munity participation, tend to focus on whether or not communities are "co-operating" with go-
vernment-sponsored initiatives. Yet, according to Morgan (1993:5) and Rahman (1993:205), it is
pointless to attempt to identify the extent of participation without first spelling out the political
motivations and ideologies of those who design the programmes and conduct the evaluations.
Who will assess participatory programmes? By whose criteria will "success" be judged? Can
there be an objective measure of participation when the concept is so amorphous? Who decides
the criteria to be used in determining success or failure? A more useful approach is not only to
judge whether or under what conditions participation succeeds or fails, but also to analyse the
negotiations and debates among groups competing for ideological, political and economic con-
trol. This is the methodological framework against which the selected case study in Freedom
Square will be studied.
Since the 1980s, an important body of literature emerged3 regarding research with qualita-
tive processes such as 'participation'. This study will however, not further analyse and discuss
the methodological issues pertaining to researching participatory development in a qualitative
manner. Albeit considered as important, such an endeavour will fall outside the scope and focus
of this study.
In the last part of this section I will attempt to answer two questions:
• Firstly, which research methods were applied in analysing community participation in the
upgrading of Freedom Square?
• Secondly, could the research of community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square
be regarded as scientific?
In order to describe and analyse the different dimensions with regard to community partici-
pation in Freedom Square, the researcher drew on a broad spectrum of methodologies and a
combination of four surveys. These were:
• A household survey in October 1990 just after the first land invasion occurred (cf. Botes et
al., 1991) to draft a demographic and economic profile, to describe the migration patterns
and to determine the living conditions and housing expectations of the residents.
• A household survey in September 1993 to assess end-beneficiaries's satisfaction with the
Capital Subsidy Scheme Upgrading Project. (cf. Labuschagne, 1993; Marais,1994).
.. A household survey in February 1995 to assess the attitudes of end-beneficiaries with regard
to the completed upgrading project and other consolidation efforts (cf. Mcarthy et al., 1995)
3 The Evaluation of Social Development continues to be a critical issue of development practice. With
the growing importance of concepts such as 'participation', 'capacity building' and 'empowerment',
there is an increasing need to know how to monitor and assess the effect and impact of these qualita-
tive processes. Since 1989, the International NGO Training and Research Centre (INTRAC) has organ-
ised three International Workshops on the Evaluation of SocialDevelopment. The first, held in 1989 at
COS, University of Swansea, focused on exploring the conceptual basis of the evaluation of social
development, and the critical issues relating to the qualitative evaluation of social change. INTRAC
convened the second workshop, which was held in the Netherlands, in 1992. This focused on the
methodological basis of the qualitative evaluation of social development, and was built around the pre-
sentation of a number of substantial case studies. In 1996, INTRAC convened the third workshop,
which was also held in the Netherlands and took as its theme the 'outcomes' and 'impact' of social
development programmes and projects. The discussions and contributions to each of the above work-
shops were published as books.
111
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
• A household survey in September 1997 to explore the social impact of upgrading and low-
income housing initiatives in Freedom Square (cf. Van Rensburg,1997)
• Participatory observations of the researcher from 1992 to 1995 and 1997 to 1998 while act-
ing as a consultant for the lOT and adviser for community-based groups in the upgrading pro-
ject.
• A rapid assessment of "community documentation" such as minutes, letters, agreements,
upgrading proposals, etc.
• A rapid assessment of existing documentation on other informal settlement upgrading pro-
jects in South Africa.
The above-mentioned methodologies were combined in a triangulative manner in order to
analyse this case study. Obviously the four surveys provided information of a more quantitative
character while the personal involvement and observations of the researcher and rapid assess-
ments were more qualitative in nature. In other words, these qualitative and quantitative method-
ologies were not applied as opposing methodologies but as complementary to each other. This
combination of methods was used to crosscheck and increase the validity of the findinqs."
There were several factors that could have made this research less objective (for that matter
less "scientific") such as the socio-cultural differences between the researcher and those being
researched; the researcher's involvement in a community with a lower status and a different cul-
ture - affirming the status of the researcher as a middle class white outsider unable to speak
Sesotho or isiXhosa (the dominant first languages in Freedom Square) and the fact that the
researcher acted as a consultant for the Independent Development Trust.
One could ask the question whether this research endeavour, due to the factors mentioned
in the previous paragraph, does compromise the objectivity and reliability of the findings.
However, this research attempt could well be regarded as objective (for that matter "scientific"),
i.e. in the sense of methodology and product having passed a process of systematic social/col-
lective verification, which was pursued in the following way:5
• Agreements were reached between the researcher and the Freedom Square community as
to valid methods of investigation, reasoning and regulation of observations. For example,
three of the four surveys in the selected case study were constructed in close collaboration
with those being researched through meetings with them and approval from their legitimate
community leaders. During these contacts community representatives had several opportu-
nities to co-determine the research design and research objectives and to assist in the oper-
ationalisation of some research questions. In all four surveys community people were not just
objects of research. Through their active involvement in researching their own living con-
texts, they co-determined the research agenda and the methodology of data-collection and
generation of knowledge. Community leaders largely generated and approved the question-
naire items which were included in the surveys.
• The method of sampling in all four surveys was probability sampling and specifically sys-
tematic random sampling. The sample sizes of all four survey's were 100 or more respon-
4 Besides the researcher's involvement in Freedom Square, he also acted as development adviser in
four other informal settlement upgrading projects (cf. Map 8.1 of the researchers's involvement). This
had the advantage that the researcher could merge the historical and empirical facts with his own
observations and interpretations of community participation in the upgrading of this settlement.
5 Cf. also annexure 1 where products stemming from this study are listed.
112
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
dents. The longitudinal dimension (four surveys over a time span of eight years) improved
the reliability and generalisability of the research findings.
• In three of the four surveys ordinary community members from similar informal settlements
with at least a grade 12 qualification were recruited and trained as fieldworkers in the data-
collection phases of the respective surveys. The advantage of this was that they could rea-
dily establish rapport with respondents and were knowledgeable about the local dialect and
geographical outlay of the survey area. Other advantages of employing local people as field-
workers is that you build their capacity and also that respondents feel more at ease when
they answer the questions because they are interacting with persons that live in, or are at
least familiar with similar circumstances.
• Research findings were properly discussed with several community organisations and their
representatives at workshops thereby creating an opportunity for modification and validation.
These community workshops and public meetings to discuss the research findings were usu-
ally well-attended.
• Minutes of all meetings that related to the selected case study and other relevant social arti-
facts (i.e. letters and reports) were analysed. The researcher gained access to the minutes
of Upgrade Community Trust meetings and community meetings. This documents served as
units of observation and units of analysis because they could be regarded as reproductions
or accounts of interactions, discourses and debates which occurred among some of the key
stakeholders who were closely involved with the upgrading of Freedom Square from 1990 to
1998. These minutes could, from a methodological point of view, be regarded as the point of
convergence of the dialogue between professionals, community leaders and ordinary com-
munity members. From these texts it was possible to analyse the specific manner in which
the various interest groups conceptualised and operationalised community participation in
the Freedom Square Upgrading Project.
From the above it is clear that the verification process in this research was a dialogical
process of collective reflection, thus enhancing the objectivity and scientific integrity of this
endeavour.
4. Analysing community participation in the upgrading of
Freedom Squares
Like all the other lOT capital subsidy projects, the upgrading of Freedom-Namibia had a built-in
requirement that community consultation should take place at a number of stages: as part of the
initial application, around services and standards, in the allocation of sites and in consolidation?
(i.e. other development efforts in the informal settlement).
The mere fact that poor people decided to mobilise themselves in land invasions and the sub-
sequent occupation of land can be regarded as a very visible and forceful manifestation of com-
munity participation. One should therefore guard against the approach of limiting issues with
6 An earlier version of part of this chapter appeared in Development Southern Africa 13(3):453-467,
1996. The inputs of co-authors Thomas Stewart and Johannes Wessels are gratefully acknowledged.
My apologies for possible unacknowledged traces of their thinking in what I have written.
7 Consolidation refers to the process of upgrading of communities living in informal circumstances lea-
ding to the upgrading of shelter and services, provision of community facilities, and the establishment
of enterprises for economic opportunities.
113
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
regard to community participation only to the upgrade project phase (1992 - onwards) in
Freedom and Namibia Squares. Some of the best-known dimensions of community participa-
tion such as conscientisation, mobilisation, community control and the urge for community ow-
nership were already occurring two years prior to the formal upgrading initiative funded by the
Independent Development Trust. As early as the land invasion ordinary community members,
under the auspices of their leadership, decided to claim their piece of land. Land invasions could
therefore be regarded as a collective manifestation of community participation in the rapid
improvement of their immediate shelter needs. However, some community leaders from
Freedom Square did indicate that they did not participate sufficiently during the planning phase
of the upgrading project.
4.1 Personal experience and rapid assessment of existing
documentation
This section is the result of nine years of exposure and experience in the low-income housing
delivery environment. Nine "contexts" of conflict in the upgrading of this large informal settlement
(Freedom Square) are discussed. In sharing these experiences, it is the aim to promote a bet-
ter understanding of the community participation dynamics of development in general and in
informal settlement upgrading in particular. Understanding these dynamics is pivotal to, inter
alia, ongoing urban development and sustainable housing delivery.
Context 1 - land ownership
The Freedom Square land invasion was organised by the Mangaung Civic Association in 1990.
The land that was occupied had been targeted for extending the coloured township of Heidedal.
This land was registered in the name of the House of Representatives, who had earmarked it for
transfer to the Bloemfontein City Council for housing development. The Council and the
Provincial Administration (Orange Free State) were prepared to remove the people, but before
that, the Urban Foundation was asked by the civics and by some enlightened officials of the
provincial administration to attempt to resolve the conflict. As a result, a comprehensive land
exchange arrangement was reached between the House of Representatives and the city coun-
cils of both Bloemfontein and Mangaung, thereby securing the land for housing development for
the people who had settled there (Wessels,1993:2-3).
Hart (1992:33) maintains that conflict with authorities is a central problem in informal settle-
ments, owing mainly to attempts, over decades, to demolish these settlements and backyard
shacks and label them as "squatter" areas or slums (cf. Chapter 7 section 2.2 and Figure 7.1).
This point was certainly borne out in Freedom Square. Conflict between the Mangaung Civic
Association and the Mangaung City Council was a major stumbling block. Shuttle diplomacy and
numerous separate meetings with both parties, were required to get the Council to agree to a
land exchange arrangement, whereby land which they had bought to the east of the invaded
area (with financial assistance from the provincial administration) was exchanged for the inva-
ded land. A second co-operation and development agreement with the Council was required to
allow development in that area.
The Freedom Square community at large seemed unanimous in rejecting the Mangaung City
Council. Several councilors had their homes attacked by supporters of the civics, who threatened
114
Community participation in thp.upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
to necklace (i.e. kill them by burning tyres) them if they did not resign. For its part, the Council
was reluctant to enter into agreements that would result in a development which would channel
resources towards supporters of the civics, whilst the backlogs in the formal part of Mangaung
remained unaddressed. The leadership of a single councilor carried the day. He stated that it
was not a choice between development for supporters or antagonists, but a choice between
stagnation and progress. The secretary-general of the civics also took a pragmatic approach,
arguing that formal agreements were necessary because they would eventually be taken over
by legitimate local authorities. The pragmatism of these two men ensured that development
could proceed.
Land invasions and illegal occupation of land, which started out as strategies to oppose
apartheid structures, have since degenerated into a culture of entitlement and queue-jumping to
gain access to development funding. This was acknowledged by the late Joe Slovo, the then
Minister of Housing (The Sunday Times, 14 August 1994:2). Unless existing property rights are
acknowledged and sensitively managed at all levels of government, land invasions that violate
existing land rights may become one of the greatest sources of conflict and thus a serious obsta-
cle to development.
Context 2 - responsibility and accountability
Notions such as empowerment, transparency, community participation and capacity building are
common in the field of development and often determine the manner in which projects are organ-
ised and run. How were these notions embodied in the Freedom Square upgrading project?
The development was funded by the Independent Development Trust, who required a com-
munity-based organisation or partner in the project. The Mangaung Civic Association wanted
civic leaders from the Freedom Square area to be significantly involved. This led to the forma-
tion of the Upgrade Bloemfontein East Community Trust which was constituted as follows: one
member each from the Bloemfontein City Council, the Mangaung City Council, the Mangaung
Civic Association; two members each from the Regional Board of the Urban Foundation and the
Freedom Square Building Centre ("Clinic"); four resident representatives from the Freedom and
Namibia Square areas. It was agreed to that neither the city councils nor the Civic Association
would be represented by elected people, but rather by officials.
The fund er's involvement was subject to an agreement between the Community Trust and a
development agency appointed to manage the project. The Urban Foundation was formally con-
tracted as the project management and also provided a secretarial service to the Upgrade
Community Trust, which had no direct employees. This project management function was later
transferred to the New Housing Company (NewHCo), when that body merged with the Urban
Foundation's Informal Settlement Unit. Project management was responsible for co-ordinating
the activities of the various consultants - civil engineers and contractors, the Freedom Square
Builders Association (a local subcontractor), surveyors, town planners, etc. - and for providing
financial management services. Although the consultants were commissioned by the Upgrade
Community Trust to perform their particular professional tasks, they reported to project ma-
nagement.
Monthly meetings were held at which thorough project management reports were presented
to the trustees for scrutiny, discussion and approval. All decisions were based on motivated re-
115
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
commendations. Nevertheless, the resident trustees - those drawn directly from the communi-
ty - were reluctant to take certain crucial decisions on the sale of business sites, electrification
and approval of the budget. This was probably because of capacity deficiencies: people may
have felt unable to defend decisions, or may have failed to understand the technical and finan-
cial complexities and their implications. There were delays, which led to cash-flow problems,
additional expenses and a loss of income to the Upgrade Community Trust. Subsequently, a
Problem Solving Committee was established to deal with problems related to the project experi-
enced at grassroots level. This committee consisted of one resident trustee, one representative
each from Freedom Square and Namibia Square Civic Associations, and one representative
from project management.
Absentee shack-owners soon became a problem that the Problem Solving Committee had to
deal with. A number of shacks, apparently deserted or at least temporarily abandoned, posed a
financial threat to the development because the capital subsidy guaranteed by the lOT would
only be paid once ownership of the land had been transferred. Consequently, the Upgrade
Community Trust decided on a strategy of letters, visits, and notices to these shacks, cautioning
the owners that their stands might be reallocated if they did not come forward to sign their do-
cuments within a reasonable time. Although the Problem Solving Committee supported this
strategy, community leaders apparently did not execute the task, and instead asked project ma-
nagement to handle it. A small number of disputes arose when some of the absentees eventu-
ally returned to their shacks. Project management was blamed for reallocating the sites and had
to resolve the disputes.
In this community, the same people who were trustees were also civic leaders, leaders of va-
rious sub-committees, and members of the Problem Solving Committee. They were therefore
somewhat overburdened with responsibility. Their standing in the community apparently also
varied directly according to the progress of the project. When the initial delivery process came
to a halt, the community leaders at once began to have difficulties in arranging mass meetings,
and at next annual election new civic leaders were elected.
The community leaders seldom dealt with the problems effectively, but referred them instead
to someone who could take the blame if the solutions proved unpopular. People were eager to
be associated with pleasant prospects, such as announcing the level of services to be installed,
or the date when construction would commence; but they were reluctant to perform painful tasks,
such as informing people to pay for sites and services. One can perhaps conclude that having
responsibility does not necessarily bring about capacity and accountability, and that having sta-
tus does 110tnecessarily bring about responsibility.
Context :3 - site size and shape
The size and shape of residential sites is a common cause of friction in low-cost housing. Those
who initially invaded the land at Freedom Square demarcated their own sites, but shortly after-
wards the Mangaung Civic Association established teams to perform this task. Sites varied from
180 to 2 000 square metres and were arranged in irregular patterns, with several single-row sites
and even some that did not front onto a street or public space at all (cf. Map 8.3). This inefficient
settlement pattern was characterised by an excess of roads and inappropriately wide road
reserves and site dimensions that would make it extremely costly to install infrastructure and
maintain services.
116
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
Map 8.3 Initial settlement pattern in Freedom Square
The civics asked the Urban Foundation to obtained initial estimates on the cost of installing infra-
structure. From these estimates, it was evident that the physical layout would have to be adjus-
ted to make upgrading affordable. Project management and the civics began discussing a more
cost-effective layout. At first there was vehement opposition to the idea of smaller sites.
However, the civics accepted the planning principle of back-to-back rather than single row sites
and eventually decided that residential sites would vary from 240 to 400 square metres. They
were of the opinion that any person having a site larger than this should make an individual con-
tribution to the development.
The civics had now accepted a design which would make the installation and maintenance of
water-borne sewerage more feasible. But the wider community remained unconvinced.
Arguments pointing out that water was a scarce resource had no effect. Eventually, one planning
principle at least was established: water-borne sewerage with mid-block sewer lines required
regular mld-block lines and so the staggered mid-block lines would have to be straightened.
Several workshops and meetings were held with the civics to determine the level of services.
The size of sites caused lengthy discussions which were complicated by the fact that most res-
idents (and committee members) did not understand the use of the square metre in measuring
sites. The notion that the settlement has to be dense because of the cost of infrastructure, rather
than the cost of land, was also difficult to convey to people who had no concept of water reticu-
lation or water-borne sanltatlon.
Several practical information sessions were organised, during which the project management
team illustrated how a six-roomed house of 76 square metres could be positioned on a site of
240 square metres. But that was not the only hurdle. Many people who accepted the idea of
smaller sites, still insisted on a street frontage of 20 metres. Time and again it had to be
explained that cost-effective planning required a frontage of no more than 12 metres per site (cf.
Map 8.4).
117
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square a case study Chapter 8
Map 8.4 Redesigned settlement pattern in Freedom Square
After three months and 17 meetings and workshops, sufficient consensus was reached to
commission the land surveyor. An area of 217 ha (compared to the 250 ha at the preliminary
design phase) was identified as the project area. It then transpired that some residents had not
been informed of agreements reached by their civics and the land surveying was delayed for
eight weeks. Other individuals were opposed to the carving up of their large sites into smaller
residential sites. A survey in 1993 also indicated that 64% of the residents were dissatisfied with
the size of their sites (Labuschagne,1993). The land surveying was nevertheless successfully
completed and all of the general plans were approved. In the end, the total length of sewer lines
could be limited to 38 040 metres compared to 42 965 metres in the preliminary design. The
lengths of roads and waterlines were also at least 15% shorter than in the preliminary design
(Wessels,1993:5).
The size and shape of sites is an extremely critical issue. In Freedom Square, the people
settled for smaller sites in order to gain a higher level of infrastructure. But in some later land
invasions in Bloemfontein such compromises were not possible; people believed that the new
Government would even provide them with houses and felt no need to compromise on the size
of their sites. It is of critical importance that a strategy be devised to break the community per-
ception that a large stand with a house in the middle of it is the solution. However, innovative
layout schemes to optimise the size of sites by using courtyards, etc. (as at Gracelands on the
East Rand) have not met with success. The limitations of development resources and how these
impact on stand sizes should be soelt out clearly, or this issue will remain a bone of contention
and contribute to urban sprawl.
Context 4 - voluntary participation versus remunerated participation
When the Upgrade Community Trust had been functioning for 18 months, the resident trustees
(all but one of whom were unemployed) made a formal request for substantial remuneration from
the Upgrade Community Trust. Project management, who was jointly responsible for managing
118
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
the Upgrade Community Trust's financial affairs, spelt out the consequences of meeting their
request. Apart from the precedent that would be set, remuneration would contravene the Deed
of Trust, and the community might accuse the trustees of misusing resources. None of these
arguments were accepted. The resident trustees countered that project management was being
paid, while they were unemployed.
An opinion was sought from the funder's legal consultants. They indicated that it was an
unprecedented request and preferred not to give an opinion, recommending that the matter be
resolved locally. A local legal opinion was therefore obtained. This indicated that, in terms of the
Deed of Trust, trusteeship was a voluntary service and trustees could only be compensated for
direct expenditure and tasks assigned to them directly by the Upgrade Community Trust. This
last point then became the questionable basis for trustees' claims. When the Upgrade
Community Trust decided to remunerate the trustees, the relationship between project manage-
ment and the Upgrade Community Trust, which had been extremely tense, was immediately
restored.
After this incident, project management submitted a claim for work that it had performed over
and above its usual tasks, as defined in the project management agreement. This claim was
rejected by the resident trustees and referred to the funders, the Independent Development
Trust, for comment. Again the funders recommended that the matter be resolved locally, and
legal opinion was sought. Meanwhile, a representative of the funders visited the project to discuss
the relationships among the bodies involved in the development with the trustees and others,
including the project manager. This helped to bring about a better general understanding, and
the two parties settled on an amount between the original claim and the amount recommended
by legal opinion.
It is clear from both these incidents that the roles and responsibilities of the various parties in
the project were not properly understood. These should be clarified constantly.
Context 5 - contractors versus local labour
Whereas conventional contractors have mechanised their construction methods for economic
reasons and have usually built up their own construction teams over time, communities, and
especially those in which there is a high rate of unemployment, favour or even insist on local
labour being used in construction projects. This demand can be dealt with through subcontracts
to small community-based contractors, through joint ventures or through labour-based construc-
tion, all involving local labour.
Both the main contractor and the community generally lack experience in dealing with one
another. In informal settlements, there tends to be less expertise, a higher rate of unemployment
and a stronger sense of community cohesion (cf Table 8.3) than in formal neighbourhoods. This
seems to result in a greater insistence on takin; control of a project (cf. Table 8.2) and in parti-
cular those parts of it which are perceived as being easily understood, such as the building of
structures above ground level, the digging of trenches or the laying of pipes.
In Freedom Square, the main contractor employed a local sub-contractor, Freedom Square
Builders Association (Fresba), to build the toilets and do the plumbing. It took about three months
for Fresba to learn to do the construction according to specifications. During this period the main
119
Community participation In the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
contractor had to employ additional staff to complete the work, and the resulting claims for extra
expenses caused tension between the main contractor and the developer.
Fresba's attendance of site meetings was generally poor, despite a formal sub-contracting
agreement that spelt out roles and responsibilities. The main contractor also had to help with
much of Fresba's administration, concerning material supplies, expenditures and wages,
although this was not his responsibility. Even though most of Fresba's members had completed
a building management course at the University of the Orange Free State, in which they were
taught how to administer a contract, their management and administrative skills were inade-
quate.
It could be argued that the insistence on using local labour might result in a reduction in the
capacity (so vitally important to the construction industry at large) of the formal contractors.
Labour-based construction need not cost much more than conventional construction, but the
cost of the training and the potential for conflict, especially in the area of quality control, should
not be underestimated. It is also easy for main contractors to use sub-contractors as scapegoats
for poor quality work or for slow progress. However, it should be noted that the trade skills were
acquired a lot quicker than were management and administrative skills. The failure of Fresba's
members to perform in the latter area raises important questions: Was the training appropriate
in content and methodology and the support adequate? Did both parties properly manage the
interface between the main contractor and Fresba? Did the leadership of Fresba have the entre-
preneurial and managerial capacity to create a viable concern? Did Fresba have the long-term
interests of their organisation at heart or did they view the project as a one-off opportunity?
Context 6 - 'outsiders'
Defining a project area for development creates opportunities for people and brings about com-
munity cohesion. This cohesion can have a negative, exclusive side to it. In Freedom Square,
Fresba refused to admit other sub-contractors to the area, claiming that they themselves were
poor and unemployed and should be given preference when it came to employment opportuni-
ties. There was therefore no competition, with the result that both productivity and quality of work
were very uneven. Fresba also acquired a stranglehold on the project by threatening to disrupt
construction whenever their demands were not met. When other construction opportunities
arose in Mangaung, residents of those areas retaliated by excluding Fresba.
There were similar problems with business sites in Freedom Square. Under the co-operation
and services agreement with the Mangaung City Council, the business sites in Freedom Square
were to be disposed of by means of public tender. But the resident trustees demanded prefe-
rential treatment for tenders from Freedom Square. In an Upgrade Community Trust meeting on
the tenders received, they insisted that business sites be given to the residents of Freedom
Square free of charge and that "outside" people be kept out. However, they could not decide
what should be done if demand for business sites exceeded supply. The trustees then under-
took to dispose of the sites themselves. Two years passed without any progress being made,
while the community was deprived of development and employment opportunities, and the
Upgrade Community Trust lost potential income. Eventually, under pressure from businessmen
wanting sites, the tendering process had to be repeated all over again.
120
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
Context 7 - professionals
The designs for all the services in Freedom Square were completed by professional consulting
engineers, then checked by an external consultant, and finally approved by the local authority's
city engineer. But, this did not prevent the community from believing that they were being pro-
vided with poorly designed services. The sewer blockages that occurred were blamed mainly on
inferior designs, despite the number of foreign objects discovered in the system, ranging from
teaspoons to axes, tin cans to shirts and bricks to bottles.
Community participation, crucial as it is, does not mean that ordinary people have the exper-
tise to evaluate professional work. It may be that the poor municipal services people have had
to put up in the past, have made them suspicious and apt to question highly technical matters.
Professionals, on the other hand, are neither accustomed to having their integrity questioned nor
equipped to convey specialist knowledge to laymen in terms they understand.
Context 8 - the problem of free delivery
When people believe they are entitled to certain things, it is almost impossible to recover costs
on any kind of development or to get people to contribute towards it themselves. In Freedom
Square serviced sites and ownership were provided to individuals free of charge, through the
Independent Development Trust's Capital Subsidy scheme. To receive the subsidy, the stand
had to be registered in the name of the beneficiary and provided with services. Proper sales
administration, including the signing of a deed of sale for registration purposes, was therefore
essential. But the mere signing of the deed proved to be problematic, as some residents had to
be individually transported to the attorneys for this purpose.
Because delivery was free, some registered owners later simply abandoned their stands and
vanished without trace. These stands could only be transferred to new owners with the consent
of the registered owners or after expropriation. This caused a great deal of tension between the
developer, community leaders and people in need of housing wanting to occupy these vacant
stands. In state-funded or subsidised housing it should perhaps be possible for the authorities
to expropriate automatically and reallocate housing stock that has been underutilised for an
extended period.
The local authority required a water connection deposit of R50 per stand. Despite promises
to the contrary, very few people paid their deposits and in the end the Upgrade Community Trust
had to do so. Water was supposed to be paid for according to usage, but getting people to meet
their commitments became a major problem. Countless arguments were advanced to justify non-
payment, including the fact that the locations for payment were inaccessible, that people
received accounts only after an initial three months of usage, that neighbours without water were
also using the water points, and that people in neighbouring Mangaung paid a 'flat rate' for ser-
vices.
Getting people to contribute something themselves generally makes for healthy development.
But it is almost impossible to do this once people have already occupied their stands, as the most
effective way of securing contributions is through the allocation of land. If people had paid even
a nominal amount for their stands, they would have made more of an effort to sell them when
they moved away. Re-establishing a 'culture of payment' will probably require a great deal of
sensitivity of approach, on the one hand, and firm discipline and law enforcement on the other.
121
Community participation in the upgrading at Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
Context 9· inclusion and exclusion
Developers, financiers and politicians often have to confront the harsh reality that the demand
for scarce resources exceeds the supply. In 1991, the Urban Foundation helped the Community
Trust representing Freedom Square and Namibia Square to apply to the Independent
Development Trust for funds under their Capital Subsidy Scheme. An application was submitted
for 4 800 sites, covering the entire Freedom and Namibia Squares, which at that stage consist-
ed of only 3 200 households (the larger number of sites was to allow for densification). Only 4
000 subsidies were approved, and so a sparsely populated section of Namibia Square was
excluded. This decision eventually led to conflict. The community and its representatives were
divided to the extent that very little meaningful co-operation and interaction were possible. The
desirability of the project was drawn into question, with the result that the entire development
often teetered on the brink of crisis. Tensions led to faction fighting and two people were killed.
When some additional subsidies were obtained, but did not cover the whole of the excluded
area, these were rejected outright by community leaders.
In a country like South Africa where large numbers of people are in need, development can
be a divisive force, especially as resources will probably not be sufficient to meet the existing
backlogs nor the needs of a rapidly growing population. Ways need to be found to determine in
advance who will benefit from a particular project and who not. Perhaps only those who are will-
ing to forfeit their newly-acquired property rights in favour of the local authority the moment their
accounts for water, sanitation, and property tax fall into arrears, should qualify to benefit from a
project. Such a step which could also help to restore the culture of payment.
4.2 Surveys and survey findings
As indicated in section 3.1 of this chapter, the main purpose of the four surveys was not to mea-
sure the perceptions of the residents of Freedom Square towards aspects of community partici-
pation in the upgrading of their community. Yet, certain questions provided some insight on how
ordinary community members perceived the processes and outcomes of community participa-
tion in this upgrading project. The selected questions will therefore aim at answering one main
research question, namely: To what extent has true community participation been realised in the
upgrading of Freedom Square? However, in answering this question one has to take into account
the nature and initial purpose of the four mentioned surveys. This section will therefore be more
explorative and descriptive and less evaluative. It is however important to note that this section
focus predominantly on the 1993 survey and to a lesser extent on the 1995 survey. With regard
to the 1990 surveys and the 1997 surveys community participation per se was not included in
the questionnaires.
The following figures and tables could be regarded as operationalising different aspects of
community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square:
122
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
60 58.3
50
40
30
20
10
:0
Agree Uncertain Disagree
Figure 8.1 Share in decision-making
In terms of practicality as to whether respondents did participate in locating their sites, the
majority (58,3%) indicated that they had a say, while almost a third (37,8%) did not participate in
the location of their sites (cf. Figure 8.1). Almost even proportions of respondents indicated that
they did or that they did not as an individual, have a say in the project.
55.3 I-Agree :
!.Uncertain.
! .~.Disagree
Figure 8.2 Information shared about the project
Although the vast majority of respondents indicated that they had attended meetings where
the project was discussed (cf. Table 8.1) it is quite interesting to note that still 55,3% of the
Freedom Square population did not know exactly how the upgrading was going to be done (cf.
Figure 8.2). It would make more sense to compare the findings of Figure 8.2 with Figure 8.1 than
with Table 8.1 and Figure 8.3, since these responses may reflect the opinions of people who feel
they were adequately informed about the project.
Table 8.1 The way in which community members were informed about the project (1993)
. ::..... .................
%
.: .)< N
.....
Massmeetings 55 53,4
Local leaders 10 9,7
Block meetings 3 2,9
Neighbours/Friends 1 1,0
Fresba members 5 4,9
Was not informed 1 1
Other 20 28,1
Total 95 100
123
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
Sowman & Gawith (1994:563-564) also emphasise general or public meetings, small group
discussions and house meetings as methods of communication and participation. Small discus-
sion groups are perhaps the most appropriate and effective form of promoting community par-
ticipation, because there is probably a relationship between the size and cohesiveness of a com-
munity and the kind of participation that can be mobilised and sustained." Such methods are par-
ticularly useful in exploring ideas and assessing people's perceptions and level of understanding
of the issues. It is reasonable to suggest that small, close-knit units of association have a better
chance of achieving and maintaining high levels of internal participation. For example, house-
holds manage their destinies to a great extent, whilst whole societies are much more removed
from the decisions that influence them.
11.7
• Yes, did attend
88.3
Figure 8.3 Attendance of meetings where the project was discussed (1993)
Given the fact that there are approximately 4 100 households in Freedom Square, it is quite
remarkable that 88,3% of the respondents indicated that they attended community meetings
where the upgrading project was discussed (cf. Figure 8.3). Mass meetings or public meetings
are an essential element in the promotion of community participation. These meetings permit
the discussion of local issues and help to foster group solidarity. However, experience in the
South African context reveals that the attendance of these meetings is sometimes problematic.
Attendance not only fluctuates a lot but community leaders often find it difficult to have quorums.
Sometimes community members did not get proper advance notice of the meetings; the major-
ity of meetings were held in the evening when many women were busy preparing food and per-
forming other household tasks; others worked night shifts or others were tired, having just
returned from work. Such conditions obstruct effective decision-making and make it very diffi-
cult to judge whether the actual number of community members present are representative
enough of an entire community.
8 Experience in the informal communities of Hout Bay indicated that smaller meetings consisting of 8 to
20 people were more successful in terms of the dissemination and gathering of information than the
general meetings, where people did not have adequate opportunity to express their views and where
stronger community members dominated the events (Sowman & Gawith,1994:563-564).
124
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
5.4
• Yes. satisfied
Ill: No, dissatisfied
94.6
Figure 8.4 Satisfaction with information shared at meetings (1993)
At mass meetings considerable communication and presentation skills are required from
facilitators, especially to get essential ideas and often highly technical issues across to the com-
munity so as to enable them to comment effectively, understand the issues and available
options, and take informed decisions (cf. Figure 8.4). Disputes over the legitimacy of meetings
often occur with groups who claim to have been left out of the process. Another difficulty is that
decisions taken at mass meetings are not always sufficiently sensitive to micro-situations within
the community at the household level. A separation of functions is required where principle and
broad policy issues can be clarified at public meetings, while it is more appropriate to deliberate
decisions with greater technical detail at small-group or household level.
~·Yes • No
Figure 8.5 Personal involvement in the project
Even in a project with ostensibly high community participation the majority of the ordinary com-
munity members indicated that they had not been involved in the improvement of their neigh-
bourhood (Figure 8.5). It is interesting to note that despite the high attendance of community
meetings (cf. Figure 8.3), almost 80% of the respondents still feel that they were not personally
involved in the upgrading project (cf. Figure 8.5). This may be either because residents do not
generally define the mere attendance of meetings as personal involvement or it may be that re-
sidents do not regard these community meetings as effective structures for personal involvement.
However, since 94,6% of those in the project that attended meetings were satisfied with the way
in which information was shared at these meetings (cf. Figure 8.4), it would appear that the majo-
rity of community members regard community meetings as effective mechanisms for information
sharing. Of those respondents that indicated their involvement in the project, 90% were involved
in decision-making and 10% were workers on the project. 9 Moreover, beneficiaries of a develop-
ment project may perceive development and development-related processes and outcomes quite
9 Twenty-one respondents indicated that they had been involved in improvements
125
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
differently than developers and outside researchers. This may result in a situation where what
seems contradictory in a specific context, makes perfect sense in another.
Table 8.2 Ability of the community to solve own problems
Agree Uncertain Disagrée Total
N % N % N % N %
The people of Freedom Square
can solve most of their
problems through their own
efforts (1993) 50 48,5 12 11,7 38 36,9 101 100
Quite a number of the residents of Freedom Square were of the opinion that they were able
to solve their own problems through their own efforts, something which is the essence of self-
reliance and community participation (cf. Table 8.2). Such a finding is a contradiction in terms if
it is to be analysed against some of the broader context zones of leaders that did not want to
take responsibility for decisions, the non-payment of service by the majority of households and
the refusal of access to outsiders to take-up business opportunities, to name but a few (cf.
Section 4.1 of this chapter). Some interesting trends were discovered regarding a relationship
between income, year of settlement and whether the Freedom Square community were able to
solve their own problems. Larger proportions in the low income group (less than R400 per
month) were positive about the Freedom Square community's ability to solve their own problems
than in the higher income group (More than R400 per month), who were generally more pes-
simistic about the problem-solving ability of ordinary community members. With regard to year
of settlement, those people that migrated to the area in 1990 (the pioneers) were more optimistic
about their ability to solve their own problems than the people that migrated to the area later
(post-1990).
Table 8.3 Community solidarity (ubuntu)
Agree Uncertain Disagree Total
N % N % N % N %
There is a lot of goodwill
among the people of
Freedom Square (1993) 67 65,1 14 13,6 22 21,4 103 100
As early as the 1990 survey, many respondents already mentioned good community spirit as
one of the most positive aspects of living in Freedom Square. It would appear that sharing a com-
mon fate and struggling together does indeed create collective bondage among the members of
a community. Given the fact that the residents migrated from different places to settle in Freedom
Square and that the community also consisted of various language groups there is a remarkable
us-feeling. This sense of ubuntu and community solidarity was confirmed in the 1993 survey
when 65% of the residents did indeed indicate that there was a lot of goodwill in the community.
126
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
Assessment of input by various roleplayers
1993 1997
The Trustees
Freedom Square
(Civic Committee)
Block Committees
Focon Civil
(Engineering firm)
Fresba
(Freedom Square Builders
Association) 73.8
100 80 60 40 20 0 0 20 60 80 100
• Very dissatisfied/Dissatisfied ~ Uncertain 0 Very satisfied/Satisfied
• Empty eens mdlcated that the speofc role pfayer was not ~Iuated In the t 997 suoev
Figure 8.6 Assessment of input by various stakeholders
The greatest satisfaction with stake-holders in the upgrading project were with those interest
groups from the community which were also closest to the people. One of the main reasons why
Freedom Square Civics were evaluated so favourably is because the civics were to a large
extent responsible for the land invasion. The majority of respondents were also very satisfied
with Fresba, the reason for this being that Fresba consisted of builders only from the communi-
ty9. The community was least satisfied with the outside contractor. Bi-variate analysis of the
1993 survey revealed that community members with a lower income level (less than R400) were
significantly more satisfied with Fresba than people with a higher income level (R401 and more).
One possible explanation for this may be that Fresba's membership consisted largely of
unskilled and semi-skilled workers, people with whom the lower income groups could more read-
ily associate themselves than could the higher income groups. In general, people with a lower
level of income were much more satisfied with different aspects of the project than people with
higher levels of income. This could emphasise the fact that the impact of site-and-service pro-
jects is greater for the poor of the poor than for the cream of the poor.
9 According to Stewart (1993:9) employing members of the community as unskilled labour and semi-
skilled labour, and using Fresba as sub-contractor, has given the community a direct involvement in the
project, earned them some income and established a joint responsibility with the contractor. The own-
ership established in this manner has largely prevented vandalism and crime on the project and has in
fact established some kind of community cohesion and pride.
127
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
4.8
tIVery good/Good
.OK
Figure 8.7 Perceptions of the work done by the developers in this area (1995)
The concept "The developers" refers to the Upgrade Community Trust, Fresba and Focon
Civil. It is interesting to note that, almost at completion of the site and service phase of the pro-
ject (1995), proportionally more community members (80,9%) were satisfied with the developers
than two years earlier when the project was still in its initial phases, and, only 64% to 76% of the
residents expressed their satisfaction with the developers. However, the 1997 survey revealed
that community members, due to dissatisfaction with the quality of houses that they received,
also started to evaluate the role of the different role players more negatively. This finding empha-
sises the fact that the assessment of a low-income housing initiative by an end-beneficiary com-
munity can be extremely time, context and product bound and specific. In fact, the project ma-
nager during the housing delivery phase indicated how, on an almost weekly basis, the percep-
tion of leaders from Freedom Square concerning his performance and contribution fluctuated
between regarding him as the development hero to regarding him as the villain of the project.
5. Community participation in upgrading Freedom Square:
discussion and conclusions
From analysing the surveys, other relevant documentation (i.e. minutes, letters, agreements,
etc.) and the researcher's own involvement, it is clear that community participation constituted
an integral part of the Freedom Square Upgrading project. The mere fact that the community
invaded the land and then, through their elected leadership, initiated the project together with
several NGOs and developers, is proof of the participatory way in which this low-income housing
project evolved. All the important stakeholders in this project committed themselves to the ideals
and practice of community participation. Community participation occurred at all levels and phas-
es of the project. This is confirmed in the surveys of 1993, 1995 and 1997 where the residents
of Freeoom Square expressed their general satisfaction on both the process and the outcomes
of this upoJrading project. During the land invasion phase of the project, informal and unstructured
forms of community participation dominated the scene (i.e. mass meetings, zonal meetings, etc.)
while during the site-and-service and low-income housing phases more formalised forms of par-
ticipation featured (i.e. Boards, Upgrade Community Trust meetings, Committees, etc.)
Community participation played an important role in the facilitation of sensitive issues such
as: resettlement, site sizes, sewer blockages and many other housing and infrastructure-related
128
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
matters. However, community participation was no guarantee against the occurrence of conflict
between different role players in the project. Moreover, the fact that community members and
community groups were encouraged to participate even initiated and/or aggravated conflict.
The lessons learnt concerning community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square
are numerous and varied, even if they are not universally valid. Among the many lessons, the
following can be highlighted:
• In the past people living in informal settlements were excluded from formal political structures
and institutions at the local and the national levels. Although many communities have sought
to fill this vacuum with structures of their own, their activities have often been constrained by
the poverty of their constituents, the insecurity of their circumstances and their isolation from
the mainstream of local administration.
• Political organisation around spontaneous informal housing is strongly influenced by the vul-
nerability and insecurity of residents, and by their need to gain access to land, tenure, shel-
ter and services. In these circumstances, local organisation is sometimes issue-based and
transitory, focussed on averting the threat of removal, for example, or on obtaining access to
water. Furthermore, the powerlessness of informal settlers renders them open to dependent
and exploitative relationships with patrons seeking a power base.
• By virtue of their marginalised and deprived nature, informal settlements are prone to con-
flict. This may be the result of internal competition over resources or influence, or it may
reflect tension between informal settlers and surrounding communities.
• An arbitration or mediation mechanism should be put in place right from the start, and one
enjoying credibility from all parties.
• Community leaders in an upgrading project should not be perceived as working too closely
with the developer, because this may threaten the legitimacy and social acceptance of the
leadership and erode their power base.
• Conflict around land remains highly emotive, whether it be between the residents of an infor-
mal settlement and the responsible local authority, the residents and the landowner, the res-
idents and the developer, or among the residents themselves. Although land invasions and
sizes of sites reflect a need for land, they sometimes also reflect a greed for land.
• Apparently the sizes and especially the shapes of sites are not regarded as a cost factor
when communities embark on their own planning efforts. Where there is no proactive and
professional planning body, resource-poor communities will address their own situation with
the means at their disposal.
• Community representation should not be taken for granted. Regular democratic elections to
elect representatives should be built into the management process.
• It is often difficult for community leaders to distinguish between an activist agenda and a
development agenda.
• When an informal settlement is formalised, it is inevitable that some newly erected shelters
be moved and stand boundaries altered. These changes are not popular, but they will be
accepted if time is taken to educate people about as to why they are necessary.
• The technical level of an upgrading project also pre-determines the level of expected input
from a community. Some decisions demand such a high level of technical knowledge that
only a qualified engineer is really equipped to take an informed decision. There should there-
fore be differentiation of decision-making, just as there are different levels of community
129
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square: a case study Chapter 8
input. Determining these levels and who should take the final decision and responsibility
could be major issues of contention.
• The sharing of information/communication in an upgrading project is vital to the success or
failure of a project. If this is left only in the hands of community leaders, it may distort the
message. However, the communication of key issues offers a unique opportunity for com-
munity members to share information in their own way and this contributes towards deve-
loping their leadership potential.
• The roles and responsibilities of the different parties involved in development should be care-
fully defined and spelt out, and the development project itself carefully managed.
Communities generally underestimate the cost of professional services and risks that deve-
lopers run. Perhaps the greatest risk to developers is that informal contractors do not appre-
ciate the time demands of a construction programme.
• Poverty does not only fosters egoism, it also breeds hostility towards those who are better
off (Kruijer, 1987:15). Excluding certain people from business and employment opportunities
in a settlement may benefit the community in the short term, but undoubtedly harms deve-
lopment in the long term.
• In defining a project or project area, technical and financial criteria should not be the only
concern. Great care should be taken that the boundaries and structures established by the
community itself are taken into account.
• There will probably always be tension between the actual development project and the ideal
version of it, especially because resources are always limited. The tension between 'delivery'
and 'democracy' is central in development work. Although it is generally accepted as neces-
sary, community participation, which exposes laymen to technical information may give them
the confidence to question or discredit professionals and to politicise their work. This results
in conflict and distrust, delays and escalating costs.
• Professionals and development agencies are not accustomed to having their integrity ques-
tioned nor are they equipped to convey specialist knowledge to laymen. Professionals can
be as much an obstacle to community participation as the ignorant community member.
• People should be enabled to have a say in the development product they will receive. In this
regard it is vital that the professional or developing agency communicate the consequences
and impact of the community's choices in the medium and the long term.
• Good community facilitation requires substantial financial support. Community leaders may,
after an initial voluntary involvement in the development initiative, demand remuneration to
compensate for their time, transport and input.
Successful development does not simply mean an absence of conflict; conflict can either help
or hinder the development process. If it is well managed, conflict can be a dynamic force that
generates new ideas and more appropriate solutions. In the transitional phase in South Africa,
conflict will remain an 'essential evil'. If there is proper collaboration with communities, conflict
can be managed in such a way that it helps to make people comfortable with the product and
the process. Although section 4.1 of this chapter has focussed on conflict in the upgrading of
Freedom Square, this particular development project is nevertheless regarded by many as one
of the success stories of incremental housing in South Africa. In fact, the survey results sup-
ported the idea that the ordinary members of the Freedom Square community evaluated the
community participation aspects of the Freedom Square project quite favourably. The tale of
Freedom Square upgrading is one that reflects victory for ordinary community members. It also
130
Community participation in the upgrading of Freedom Square a case study Chapter 8
demonstrates that informal settlers do have the inherent ability to participate meaningfully in their
own development.
Building on the previous chapters, and this one, the next and final chapter (Chapter 9) will
propose some emerging guidelines for community participation which organisations and individ-
uals may consider applying in development initiatives.
131
--9-
Community participation in
the upgrading of informal
settlements: emerging
guidelines
T.call for effective community participation in upgrading projects is evi-
dent, but how community participation in urban development is opera-
tionalised, is often extremely vague. This chapter should be regarded as
the point of convergence and concluding remark of what has been por-
trayed and debated in chapters one to eight to gain greater insight into
and clarity on the dynamics of participatory development. Many of the
ideas on community participation in the upgrading of informal settlements
will be systematised and linked together in order to assist grassroots
activists, state bureaucrats, development professionals and academics
in deepening their understanding and practice of participatory develop-
ment. This chapter suggests that there are several guidelines emerging
in this field that organisations and individuals involved in the upgrading of
informal settlements may consider applying.
Whenever development projects, especially low-income housing pro-
jects, fail to produce the desired results, the failure is often attributed to
the lack of community participation. In planning and implementing devel-
opment initiatives, the question has therefore frequently been asked, why
there is ostensibly a lack of participation by community members. Usually
the very reason why people choose; or do not choose to. participate, is
sought within the community itself. In doing so the broader structural rea-
sons for participation or non-participation are neglected. This study
attempts to uncover some important issues that impact on the participa-
tion of different groups in the shelter-related affairs of deprived commu-
nities. This study has indicated how both macro-societal and micro-com-
munal issues at the historical, political, economic, social and cultural le-
vels have influenced donor agencies, authorities, development profes-
sionals, community workers, community leaders and ordinary members
132
Community participation in the upgrading of informal settlements: emerging guidelines Chapter 9
of the community and their respective roles in the failure or success of participation in develop-
ment programmes and projects in general, and in the upgrading of informal settlements in par-
ticular. This study has also indicated in several ways why and how those whose lives are to be
improved should define what participation in development means to them, rather than technical
experts and politicians.
It was demonstrated in chapters 6, 7 and 8 that real community participation is not easy to
achieve. In an analogy with the words of the ancient philosopher on leadership, Machiavelli, one
could say that there is nothing more difficult to arrange, more doubtful of success, and more dan-
gerous to carry through than pursuing development initiatives in a participatory manner. It is dif-
ficult to organise and facilitate community participation in decision-making; there is resistance as
well as ignorance among the more powerful actors of a development project and there is lack of
participation by the community in the community organisation. There are also those who want to
monopolise participation for their own selfish or humanitarian ends, and many other difficulties
and dilemmas associated with community participation in development. Still, community partici-
pation is an indispensable component of informal settlement upgrading and low-income housing.
Upgrading and low-income housing projects are, due to their nature, closer to the communi-
ty than other types of projects, making them ideal opportunities for realising community partici-
pation provided they are initiated, planned and implemented in a proper and appropriate way.
While everyone agrees on the need for participation in development, translating the term from
a concept into everyday reality remains an arduous task. Methods of community participation
should be appropriate and acceptable to both the affected community, the nature of the devel-
opment initiative, and the stage in the project cycle, and cannot unilaterally be designed by
development planners. Ideally the affected community should assist in deciding the method. If
this is not possible, the development professional should present the proposed approach to the
community for comment. It is useful to obtain suggestions from the community regarding me-
thods of communication and participation which are currently effective in their community. No
participatory approach can evolve simply in a sanitised executive office, removed from those
communities for which it is destined.
No design of participation procedure can be perfect and workable from the first attempt.
Participatory procedures need to be put through a process of designing-testing-Iearning-
revising in a real field situation. Translating the goals of participation into practice is therefore
a laborious process. For example, a development team starts with a trip through the neigh-
bourhood to acquaint themselves with the social groups and the phys'cal environment. The
objectives of the study are also discussed with the residents. A survey is then conducted orally,
using selected informants from different interest groups in the community. After the data collec-
tion phase this kind of inquiry is systematised. The next step is to hold meetings with the com-
munity and there are generally two ways of holding them: firstly, selected issues are discussed
with certain groups separately; secondly, the meeting is held in a large, ir tegrated group in which
all the information of interest to the community is discussed.
A successful community participation strategy should conform with community expecta-
tions and priorities. Evaluation of previous projects in similar cultural and socio-economic set-
tings to determine strengths and weaknesses of prior approaches; assessment of community
capacity to sustain a development initiative, and community leadership, are important prerequi-
sites in developing an appropriate participatory strategy.
133
Community participation in the upgrading of informal settlements: emerging guidelines Chapter 9
Leadership sometimes poses both a problem and a challenge for community workers.
Community organisations need leaders, but in most urban low-income communities the only per-
sons who can afford to be active in a community organisation are the richer among the poor:
businesspeople, shopkeepers, landlords who do not have to worry all day about earning an
income. Consequently, community leaders are often not representative of the population, but
represent particular interest groups. The question of how to improve leadership of local organi-
sations remains an issue on which little headway has been made. Community-based organisa-
tions have been an important breeding ground for developing community leaders. These orga-
nisations may be able to integrate both traditional and emergent leaders in the new decision-
making bodies, and in this way, build a coalition of interests that unites different factions.
Community participation can be effectively initiated through the creation of specific projects.
However, several writers have warned against project-initiated participation - a project can ea-
sily become an end in itself and participation may decline once it is completed.
Training for participation is essential. Community leaders should be sent on training
courses to improve their organisational, administrative and leadership abilities and to learn all
facets of project management. Other skills that often need improvement are technical and finan-
cial management skills as well as conflict resolution skills. These skills will build the capacity of
local leadership and end-beneficiaries thereby ensuring that their involvement is more meaning-
ful and that their contributions have greater impact on the outcomes of development. This is also
referred to as the development of capacity for self-management. On the other hand, it is equal-
ly important to train officials and development workers to be sensitive to the principles of parti-
cipatory approaches and how to promote participation. Some even plead for a fundamental re-
examination and re-direction of professional training, using relevant processes to create com-
munity awareness, understanding and motivation for community involvement. Others, again, ask
for the de-bureaucratisation of agencies, and, since virtually all development professionals are
products of the positivistic traditions of Western education, this largely precludes participation.
Getting bureaucrats and NGO staff to work together takes considerable re-orientation and re-
training on both sides. Sometimes developers and professional people who are involved in
urban development are either scared or neither well equipped nor prepared to efficiently man-
age the "hard" and "soft" issues of a project in a participatory manner. They need to interact on
a frequent basis with the end-beneficiary community, CBOs and community leadership to keep
them well informed and to build partnerships.
What then can be done to promote participation in development? Development strategies
need to be re-examined in respect of people's indigenous needs. Firstly, there are no universal
answers and development is not a subject for experts only. Secondly, defining a develop-
ment process should be subjected to the democratic development process, by which experts
work closely with people and their institutions at all levels. Although wider political issues can-
not be ignored, community participation hinges on mobilisation, training, motivation, orqanisation
and leadership. Thirdly, in order for an intervention to be successful, it is useful for the interven-
er to do three things:
• Identify the existing networks of social institutions in a community relevant to a planned
intervention.
• Relate one's intervention to individuals, organisations and situations whose purpose,
skills and responsibilities are clearly understood by the end-beneficiaries.
134
Community participation in the upgrading of informal settlements: emerging guidelines Chapter 9
• If it is absolutely necessary to introduce a new actor or situation in a community, ensure that
its purpose is made as unambiguous as possible.
Simply listening to a few community leaders cannot constitute a community diagnosis. To
include inputs from all the social strata and community subgroups is very important.
Opinions of less vocal, and often more vulnerable groups (i.e. women, tenants, unemployed peo-
ple, the elderly, etc.) should also be sought. Regional integration implies that participatory pro-
gramming should reconcile local priorities with the overall strategy for entire communities.
Iterative planning about what to do, where to do it, and who the beneficiaries are, should be
geared towards increasing the production capability, the employment opportunities and
the incomes of the most deprived groups. There are no clearly defined community participa-
tion procedures which will guarantee a successful project in every situation. Because of varia-
tions in community characteristics, project size and degree of significance of the project
need, there can be no uniform procedure for ensuring effective community participation.
Strategies adopted from elsewhere will rarely yield tangible benefits. It is necessary to
design the community participation approach to suit local conditions, a process that demands
a prior knowledge of community behavioural patterns, priorities and expectations.
Factors such as culture, history, government policy and social, political and economic struc-
tures and circumstances influence community participation. Individual and group motivations
appear to be context-specific and locality-bound rather than universally definable. As communi-
ty participation grows out of a specific situation, its applicability to and replication in another
region is problematic, as it encounters various and complex problems. In this regard one could
refer to the disillusionment resulting from the realisation that replication of successful participa-
tory projects is an unsolved problem.
The post-modern age we live in is a very complex and problematic time in history. Nothing
is certain and simple anymore. Perhaps the only certainty is that nothing is certain. The 1990s
is the turning point in world history when many of the structural givens of social development
themselves turn out to be problematic. In dealing with a topic on participatory development in
the upgrading of informal settlements, a mere attempt to formulate some guidelines could easi-
ly ignore the complex nature of our social reality. Guidelines for promoting participatory
development are not cast in stone and should therefore be seen neither as blueprints, nor
as recipes, but rather as a frameworks of values, principles and approaches to promote
the ideals of participatory development.
According to Kuhn (1970) a scientific paradigm should, besides a theory, also include exem-
plars, instruments and techniques. Deliberations on problems, obstacles, constraints and issues
related to community participation would therefore be incomplete without an attempt at drafting
some tentative or emergent guidelines ("instruments and techniques") for promoting or facilitat-
ing participatory development. I use the term 'guidelines' in preference to 'techniques' to avoid
the perception that guidelines are mere recipes or blueprints for guaranteeing the promotion of
true community participation. Experience has shown that there are no "quick fix" approaches in
pursuing development in a participatory manner. Due to the complexity of community dynamics
as a human process there are neither blueprints, nor ready-made recipes of participatory
processes which can be applied to promote participatory development.
After wrestling with more than 300 articles, books, project reports and other documentation
on community participation, I am almost convinced that community participation is such a con-
135
Community participation in the upgrading of informal settlements emerging guidelines Chapter 9
text-bounded and time-specific phenomenon that there is the danger that the mere mapping out
of specific guidelines may impede the true understanding of community participation. As this
study develops it becomes increasingly clear to me that concrete modes of participation need
to be developed within the context of a particular project as it is impossible simply to
transfer forms of participation from one project to another. Community participation can be
read and understood differently from one country to another country, from one community to
another, from one case study to another, depending on the meaning assigned to it and the social
implications derived from it. There are no recipes, formulae or blueprints to promote com-
munity participation. Therefore, there are only broad principles to take note of. What fol-
lows is a list of rather generic guidelines that are also applicable to community participation in
the upgrading of informal settlements.
1. A list of "guidelines" for promoting community participation
Whoever wants to become involved in participatory development should:
1. Demonstrate an awareness of their status as outsiders to the beneficiary community and
also the potential impact of their involvement. Development professionals should facilitate
their involvement in a transitional way, in other words, build into their involvement a process
of progressive redundancy or self-liquidation in order to encourage people's self-develop-
ment and to avoid dependency.
2. Respect the community's indigenous contribution as manifested in their knowledge,
skills and potential. The creativity and self-initiatives of the poor people should form the
starting-point of participatory development. People can no longer be viewed as mere
objects or targets of development - they are the subjects. Guard against a delivery approach
to development - that is, an attempt to bring development to the poor through deliveries of
knowledge and resources from outside. Poor people should be encouraged to undertake
self-driven initiatives for change.
3. Become good facilitators and catalysts of development that assist, facilitate and sti-
mulate community-based initiatives and challenge practices which hinder people in
realising their own initiatives and in realising their own ideals. Good catalysts identify with
the interests of the deprived and have faith in ordinary people.
4. Promote co-decision-making and co-ownership in defining needs, goal setting, and for-
mulating policies and plans in the implementation of these decisions. Selective participatory
practices can be avoided when development workers seek out various sets of interests,
rather than listening only to a few community leaders and prominent figures.
5. Adopt a process-approach to planning in contrast to a blueprint/ready-made style and
structure. In such a process approach outsiders (planners/professionals/experts) learn as
much from insiders (community leadership/community members) as what insiders learn from
outsiders. This process-approach is also called interactive planning where all the relevant
stakeholders jointly define their development problems and collectively seek solutions in an
interactive way with multi-directional flow of ideas and communication.
6. Clarify the different roles and responsibilities with regard to promoting participatory
development practices since there are many different and sometimes unfocussed stake-
holders involved. This will avoid any misunderstanding of the role professionals, community
leaders and community members need to play.
136
Community participation in the upgrading of informal settlements: emerging guidelines Chapter 9
7. Communicate both programme/project successes and failures - sometimes failures are
more informative and directive than the successes.
8. Promote the spirit of "ubuntu" - a South African concept encompassing key values such
as solidarity, conformity, compassion, respect, human dignity and collective unity.
9. Listen to community members, especially the more vulnerable, less vocal and margi-
nalised groups.
10. Guard against the domination of some interest groups or a small unrepresentative lea-
dership clique that often threatens the co-operative spirit in a community.
11. Involve a cross-section of interest groups to collaborate as partners in jointly defining
development needs and goals, and designing appropriate processes to reach these goals.
12. Anticipate the conflict potential in participatory development and design mechanisms
to deal with it. Strive for continuous deliberation and consensus-seeking efforts whenever
there is a clash of opinions on process or product related issues. In development initiatives
there is often a need for somebody skilled in conflict resolution and mediation to perform
community facilitation work.
13. Acknowledge that process-related soft issues are as important as product-related
hard issues. Any investment in shelter for the poor should involve an appropriate mix of
technological and social factors, where both hardware and software are developed together.
In this regard recognise the importance of a multi-disciplinary approach to project
planning and development.
14. Aim at releasing the energy within a community without exploiting or exhausting
these community members.
15. Empower communities to share equitably in the fruits of development through active
processes whereby beneficiaries influence the direction of development initiatives rather
than merely receive a share of benefits in a passive manner.
16. Realise that, like in any other development effort, leaders play a crucial role in determin-
ing the success of community participation in the upgrading of informal settlements. It is
through building the capacity of the community, its organisations and its leaders that the
foundations for community participation are erected or strengthened.
The above paragraph lists sixteen emergent guidelines for participatory development, and
there are certainly more. These draft guidelines should not be considered as fixed rules, for-
mulae or prescriptions; but they should rather reflect the lessons that have been learned by hard-
earned experiences. The majority of these suggested guidelines "emerged", were "tried and test-
ed", or "ignored" during the authors involvement in five informal settlement upgrading projects in
South Africa. Although successful participation is very elusive, these guidelines could serve as
a developmental strategy of conduct for bringing disparate groups together for the real intention
and praxis of participatory development. At the same time these guidelines could also be used
as a development ethical code. If one looks closely at these guidelines they appeal to different
levels of human co-existence and serve almost as the norms of facilitating development in a par-
ticipatory manner. Participatory development, and for that matter human development, is about
processes whereby people empower themselves to participate continuously in improving their
own destiny.
A reorientation of the thinking of development professionals is therefore necessary in which
they should rather adopt the molto of planning with and not forthe people. In this re-orientation
137
Community participation In the upgrading of informal settlements: emerging gUidelines Chapter 9
they should change from being implementers to being facilitators who foster the principle of min-
imum intervention and respect the indigenous knowledge of ordinary community members.
Where developers have adopted a facilitating role they need to understand that they are out-
siders who cannot develop deprived people by themselves. Being a facilitator who promotes
participatory development and foremost, implies understanding a community's problems/issues,
assisting them to articulate these better, and then helping the community to search for solutions.
Facilitators should never come with ready-made solutions or tell the people what to do; they
should rather encourage and assist people to think about their problems in their own way.
Besides giving advice and guidance, facilitators can do this by stimulating self-investigation and
reflection among the poor; and by stimulating them to take their own decisions and action, and
also to review and evaluate themselves.
The challenge is to make community participation more than an empty catchword.
Community participation in development projects cannot function on rhetoric. Practice is far
more important than definition. Although the majority of people engaged in development seem
to understand the issues related to community involvement, they nevertheless appear to know
little about how to handle these for purposes of policy design and project management.
Community participation in development projects cannot be seen as an isolated phenomenon; it
should rather be seen as part of a network in tandem with other development activities. Those
potentially affected by development projects need to be more involved at every stage of the
development endeavour. Local knowledge needs to be better utilised in the design and imple-
mentation of development programmes and projects.
2. Epilogue
The participatory development paradigm is here to stay. Although there are major issues and
problems associated with community participation in development, I am, however, convinced
that the benefits of participation by far outweigh these problems. Despite its ambiguities and lim-
itations, the participatory approach enables people to assume responsibilities for policies and
actions which concern them.
In this study, rather than rely only on secondary resources, I have, with a few notable excep-
tions, chosen to use examples from my own involvement in informal settlement upgrading pro-
jects in three provinces of South Africa. However, the reader has to look beyond the case stud-
ies to see the principles which are being illustrated. How to promote community participation in
the best manner will remain an ongoing dialogue, a work in progress and an elusive ideal. I see
this as healthy, because we ali learn by doing and we learn even more through our mistakes.
I hope that the principles and guidelines introduced here may be useful in discussing, design-
ing and evaluating the process of community participation in urban upgrading, whatever its con-
tent and wherever its location. I trust that this study will encourage self-reliant participatory devel-
opment processes where local communities have a significant voice in initiating, planning, imple-
menting, monitoring, evaluating and controlling their own development future. I believe that this
study could contribute to the process of sharing and learning from each other in reaffirming the
values of true participation and the empowerment of the powerless and the vulnerable in such a
way that it transcends barriers of race, class, gender and education.
138
Community participation in the upgrading of informal settlements: emerging quidelines Chapter 9
"Participation is a good thing if we know how to foster it: Help people reflect on
their own condition; Speak their language; Live with (or at least spend time
with) them; Take their values and interests into account; Respect them as indi-
viduals; Find ways to get them to have a stake; Train them; Create appropri-
ate reward structures; Pay attention to detail; Take adequate time; Do your
homework" Dichter (1992:89).
139
Abed FH. 1992. Bangladesh rural advancement committee: promoting popular participation. In
Bhatnagar B. & Williams A.C. 1992. Pat1icipatory development and the World Bank: potential
directions for change. Washington: The World Bank, pp.31-35.
Abercrombie N., Hill S. & Turner B. 1994. Dictionary of Sociology. London: Penguin.
Abeyrama T. & Saeed K. 1984. The Gramodaya Mandalaya scheme in Sri Lanka: participatory
development or power play? Community Development Journal 19(1 ):20-31.
Abbott J. 1989. Community participation in water supply planning: The Ramogodi experience.
Municipal Engineer 20(6):19-33.
Abbott J. 1995. Community participation and its relationship to community development.
Community Development Journal 30(2): 158-168.
Abbott J. 1996. Sharing the city: community pat1icipation in urban management. London:
Earthscan.
Adejunmobi A. 1990. Self-help community development in selected Nigerian rural communities:
problems and prospects. Community Development Journal 25(3):225-235.
African National Congress (ANC). 1994. The reconstruction and development programme - a pol-
icy framework. Cape Town: Umanyano.
Ahiburg DA., Kelly AC. & Oppenheim MK. 1996. The impact of population growth on well-being in
developing countries. Berlin: Springer.
Ake C. 1990. Sustaining Development on the Indigenous. The long term perspective: study of
Sub-Saharan Africa, (VoI3. Institutional and socio-political issues.) Washington: World Bank.
Akello M. 1994. Community and womens pat1icipation in rural water and sanitation east Uganda
programme. Unpublished MA dissertation, The Hague: Institute of Social Studies.
Alamgir M. 1988. Poverty alleviation through participatory development. Journal of the Society for
International Development 2(3):97-102.
Aldrich BC. & Sandhu RS. 1995. Housing the Urban Poor. London: Zed.
Alihonou E., Inoussa S., Res L., Sagbohan M. & Varkevisser CM. 1993. Community perticipetion
in primary health care: The case of Gakpe, Benin. Amsterdam: Royal Tropical Institute.
Asthana S. 1994. Integrated slum improvement in Visakhapatnam, India: problems and
prospects. Habitat International 18(1 ):57-70.
Ayres R. 1995. Development studies: an introduction through selected readings. Oartford:
Greenwich University.
Bamberger M. 1986. The role of community pat1icipation in development planning and project
management. Washington: World Bank.
140
Bamberger M. 1988. Methodological issues in the evaluation of community participation.
Washington: World Bank.
Bang A. 1986. Community participation in FP programmes. Economic and Political Weekly. 9
August: 1395-1396.
Barnett T. 1988. Sociology and development. London: Hutchinson.
Bates AP. 1967. The sociological enterprise. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Bedford L. 1995. The Free State land reform research programme: synthesis report.
Johannesburg: Land and Agricultural Policy Centre.
Beresford P. & Croft S. 1993. Citizen involvement: a practical guide for change. London:
Macmillan.
Berger PL. 1974. Pyramids of sacrifice: political ethics and social change. Middlesex: Penguin.
Bernstein A. 1993. NGOs and a democratic South Africa. Development and Democracy 5(3):50-
58. Johannesburg: The Urban Foundation.
Betancur JJ. 1995. Spontaneous settlements in Columbia: from opposition to reluctant accep-
tance to ... again opposition. In Aldrich BC. & Sandhu RS. (eds.) 1995. Housing the urban
poor. London: Zed, pp.224-244.
Bhatnagar B. 1992. Participatory development and the World Bank: opportunities and concerns.
In Bhatnagar B. & Williams AC. (eds.) 1992. Participatory development and the World Bank:
potential directions for change. Washington: The World Bank, pp.1-13.
Bhatnagar B. & Williams AC. (eds.) 1992. Participatory development and the World Bank: poten-
tial directions for change. Washington: The World Bank.
Blumenfeld J. 1996. From icon to scapegoat: the experience of South Africa's reconstruction and
development programme, The Development Studies Association Conference, 18-20
September 1996, London: Reading University.
Boersema N., Barendse E., Huggins G. & Van der Merwe E.C. 1991. Community-based deve-
lopment: alternative approaches. Pretoria: Human Science Research Council.
Boonzaaier E. & Sharp J. (eds.) 1988. South African keywords: The uses and abuses of political
concepts. Cape Town: David Philip.
Botes LJS. 1996. Promoting community participation in development initiatives: some South
African examples illustrating the complexities and difficulties. The Development Studies
Association Confmence, 18-20 September 1996. London: Reading.
Botes LJS., Krige S. ,~ Wessels J. 1991. Informal settlements in Bloemfontein. A study of migra-
tion patterns, sccio-economlc profile, living conditions and future housing expectations.
Bloemfontein: Ur.ian Foundation.
Botes LJS., Stewart T. & Wessels J. 1996. Conflict in development: an experience in housing
delivery. Development Southern Africa 13(3):453-467.
Botha WJ. 1993. Housing in the changing South Africa with special reference to informal settle-
ments. Bloemfontein: University of the Orange Free State.
141
Bradford H. 1988. Formulating resettlement: a review of the surplus people. Social Dynamics
14(1 ):67-74.
Bradley RM. & Karunadasa HI. 1989. Community Participation in the water supply sector in Sri
Lanka. Royal Society of Health Journa/1 09(4):131-136.
Brohman J. 1996. Popular development: rethinking the theory and practice of development.
Oxford: Blackweil.
Burkey S. 1996. People first: a guide to self-reliant, participatory rural development. London: Zed.
Burns B. 1993. Promoting participation in irrigation: reflections on experience in Southeast Asia.
World Development 21 (11):1837-1849.
Cadribo R. 1994. Development theory, humans, culture and the environment: a re-appraisal.
Lesotho Social Sciences Review 1(1): 18-25.
Caliguire D. 1996. Death of a dream. Democracy in Action 10(3):5-6,20.
Carroll TF. 1992. Capacity building for participatory organisations. In Bhatnagar B. & Williams AC.
1992. Participatory development and the World Bank: potential directions for change.
Washington: The World Bank, pp.109-121.
Cernea MM. 1983. A social methodology for community participation in local investments: the
experience of Mexico's PIDER program. World Bank staff working paper, No.598.
Washington: The World Bank.
Cernea MM. (ed.) 1985. Putting people first: Sociological variables in rural development. New
York: Oxford.
Cernea MM. 1988. Non-governmental organisations and local development. Washington: The
World Bank.
Cernea MM. 1992. The building blocks of participation: testing a social methodology. In
Bhatnagar B. & Williams A.C. 1992. Participatory development and the World Bank: potential
directions for change. Washington: The World Bank, pp.92 -108.
Cernea MM. 1994. The Sociologist approach to sustainable development. In Serageldin I. (ed.)
1994. Making development sustainable: from concepts to action. Washington: The World
Bank, pp 7-9.
Chambers R. 1983. Rural development: putting the last first. London: Longman.
Chaufan SK. 1983. Who puts the water in the taps? London: Earthscan.
Checkoway .B. 1995. Six strategies of community change. Community Development Journal
30(1 ):2-20.
Choguill CL. 1995. The future of .'Jlanned urban development in the Third World: new directions.
In Aldrich BC. & Sandhu RS. (eds.) 1995. Housing the urban poor. London: Zed, pp. 403-414.
Choguill MBG. 1996. A Ladder of community participation for underdeveloped countries. Habitat
Internationa/20(3):431-444.
Clapham C. 1995. How permanent are Africa's new democracies. African Institute Bulletin
35(2):1.
142
Clark G. Bekker S. & Cross C. 1994. Civic capacity building. Indicator SA 11(4)83-88.
Clarke J. 1991. Democratising development: the role of voluntary organisations. London:
Earthscan.
Cobbett M. 1987. Community projects: the possibilities in South Africa. Development Southern
Africa 4(2) :324-333.
Coetzee JK. (ed.) 1989. Development is for people. Johannesburg: Southern.
Coetzee JK. & Graaff (eds.) J. 1996. Reconstruction, development and people. Johannesburg:
Thomson.
Cohen JM. & Uphoff NT. 1977. Rural development participation: concepts and measures for pro-
ject design, implementation and evaluation. Corneii: Corneli University.
Cohen JM. & Uphoff NT. 1980. Participation's place in rural development: seeking clarity through
specificity. World Development 8:213-235.
Constantino-David K. 1982. Issues in community organisation. Community Development Journal
17(3): 190-201.
Constantino-David K. 1995. Community-organising in the Philippines: the experience of develop-
ment NGOs. In Mayo M. & Craig G. (eds.) Community empowerment: a reader in participa-
tion and development. 1995. London: Zed Books, pp.154-167.
Convers D. & Hawker C. 1989. Community participation in development projects: the World Bank
experience. Public Administration and Development 9(4):468-469.
Conner JR. 1987. Comment on Yeh SHK. Urban low-income settlements in developing countries:
characteristics and improvement strategies. Regional Development Dialogue 8(4):24-26.
Cotton A. & Reinhard S. 1990. Barriers to resident participation in slum improvement: the main-
tenance question. Community Development Journal 25(1 ):37-41.
Cotton A. & Skinner R. 1990. Barriers to resident participation in slum improvement: the mainte-
nance question. Community Development Journal 25(1 ):37-41.
Cowen M & Shenton R. 1995. The intention of development in Crush, J. 1995. Power of deve-
lopment, New York: Routledge, pp.27-43.
Craig G., Mayo M. & Taylor M. 1990. Empowerment: a continuing role for community develop-
ment. Community Development Journal 25(4):286-290.
Crush J. 1995. Power of Development. New York: Routledge.
Cunningham P. 1996. Questioning development in the context of South Africa. The Development
Studies Association Conference, 18-20 September 1996, London: University of Reading.
Davey K. 1996. Urban management: the challvnge of growth. Aldershot-Hants: Avebury.
Davidson B. 1994. Shelter from the storm: an introduction to housing in the period of political tran-
sition. New Ground Summer 1994/1995: 7-9. -
De Kadt E. 1982. Community participation for Health: the case of Latin America. Word
Development 10(7):573-584.
Oe Volkskrant, 1 June 1996, p.5.
143
De Vries P. 1995. Squatters becoming beneficiaries: The trajectory of an integrated rural deve-
lopment programme. European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 58:45-70.
Deng LA. & Tjenneland EN. 1996. South Africa: wealth, poverty and reconstruction. Cape Town:
University of the Western Cape (Chr. Michelsen Institute/Centre for Southern African Studies).
Development Bank of Southern Africa. 1991. Annual Report 1990/1991. Halfway House:
Development Bank of Southern Africa.
Dichter T. 1992. Demystifying popular participation: institutional mechanisms for popular partici-
pation. In Bhatnagar B. & Williams A.C. 1992. Participatory development and the World Bank:
potential directions for change. Washington: The World Bank, pp.89-96.
Dudley E. 1993 The critical villager: beyond community participation. London: Routledge.
Eberhard A. 1992. Community empowerment or exhaustion? Testing the realities behind the
rhetoric. New Ground Spring 1992.
Edwards M. & Hulme D. 1995. Non-governmental organisations. Performance and accountabili-
ty: beyond the magic bul/et. London: Earth Scan.
Elliot J. 1994. An Introduction to sustainable development. The developing world. London:
Routledge.
Fantini M. 1975. The people and their schools: community participation. Bloomington: Phi Delta
Kappa Education Foundation.
Ferguson-Brown H. 1995. Social work and social development: lessons from Botswana. Africa
Insight (25)3:201-204.
Fitzgerald P., Mclennan A. & Munslow B. (eds.) 1997. Managing sustainable development in
South Africa. Cape Town: Oxford.
Freire P. 1972. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Penguin.
Friedman J. 1992. Empowerment: the politics of alternative development. Cambridge,
Masachusetts: Blackwell.
Friedman S. 1993. The elusive "community": the dynamics of negotiated development. Cape
Town: Centre for Policy Studies. Social Contract Series, No. 28.
Fussell W. 1996. The value of local knowledge and the importance of shifting beliefs in the
process of social change. Community Development Journal31 (1):44-53.
Gaigher MJ. 1992. Care Groups in Venda: Primary Health Care knowledge as a strategy for
community development. Unpublished DPhil thesis, Bloemfontein: University of the Orange
Free State.
Gaigher MJ., Van Rensburg HCJ. & Bester ANJ. 1995. Health and Development: The Venda care
group organisation. Development Southern Africa 12(2):225-235.
Galjart B. 1981. Participatory development projects: some conclusions from research.
Sociologica Ruralis 21(2):142-159.
144
Galjart B. 1995. Counter development: possibilities and constraints in Mayo M. & Craig G.
Community empowerment: a reader in participation and development. 1995. (eds.). London:
Zed, pp.12-23.
Gelderblom D. & Kok. 1994. Urbanisation: South Africa's challenge, Volume I. Pretoria: Human
Science Research Council.
Gilbert, A. 1987. Forms and effectiveness of community participation in squatter settlements.
Regional Development Dialogue 8(4):56-80.
Gilbert A. & Ward P. 1984. Community action by the urban poor: democratic involvement, com-
munity self-help or a means of social control? World Development 12(8):769-782.
Gopal G. & Marc A. 1994. World Bank - financed projects with community participation.
Washington: World Bank.
Graaff J. & Louw W. 1992. Civil society in the platteland: the case of rural NGOs. Development
Society of Southern Africa Biennial Conference, 9-11 September 1992, Grahamstown:
Rhodes University.
Groenewald CJ. 1989. Community development. In Coetzee JK. (ed.) 1989. Development is for
people. Johannesburg: Southern, pp. 256-271.
Hall A. 1986. Community participation and rural development in Midgley J. (et aI.). 1986.
Community participation, social development and the state. London: Methuen, pp. 87-104.
Hardiman M. 1986. People's involvement in health and medical care. In Midgley J. (et al.) 1986.
Community participation, social development and the state. London: Methuen, pp. 45-69.
Harrison D. 1988. The sociology of modernization and development. London: Unwin Hyman.
Harrison LE. 1993. Underdevelopment is a state of mind in Seligson A. & Passé-Smith JT.
Development and underdevelopment: the political development of underdevelopment. 1993.
London: Lynne Rienner, pp. 173-181.
Harrison P. 1992. The policies and politics of informal settlements in South Africa: a historical per-
spective. Africa Insight 22(1):14-22.
Hart T. 1993. Community participation: a preliminary project proposal. Johannesburg: The Urban
Foundation.
Heald G. 1991. Negotiated, development planning and the resolution of deep-rooted conflict: a
modus operandi in South Africa. South African Journal for Entrepreneurship and Small
Business 3(2):24-39.
Heunis JC. & Van Rensburg HCJ. 1995. Community involvement in primary health care: guide-
lines for facilitation and evaluation. Bloemfontein: University of the Orange Free State -
(Centre for Health Systems Research & Development.)
Heymans C. 1994. Setting agendas where the issues are. The developmental limits and possi-
bilities of local-and urban planning and management process. Development Southern Africa
11 (1):33-48.
Hulme D. & Turner M. 1990. Sociology and development: theories, policies and practices.
London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
145
Independent Development Trust (lOT). 1993. Consolidation manual. Cape Town: Independent
Development Trust.
Isham J., Narayan K. & Pritchett L. 1995. Does participation improve performance? Establishing
causality with subjective data. World Bank Economic Review 9(2): 175-200.
Jacobs I. 1992. Community participation in project implementation. Development Society of
Southern Africa Biennial Conference, 9-11 September 1992, Grahamstown: Rhodes
University.
Jaravaza ZXT. 1985. The applicability of community participation in sites-and-services housing
development: a case study of Mupandawana low-income housing pilot project. Harare:
Department of Social Studies - University of Zimbabwe.
Kakonge JO. & Imvbore AM. 1994. Achieving Sustainable development in Africa. Lesotho Social
Sciences Review. 1 (1): 1-13.
Kaseje D. 1992. Leadership for health for all - the painful learning experience of the Saradidi rural
health programme (Kenya). Contact, World Council of Churches (Christian Medical
Commission) 127:1-9.
Kaya HO. 1989. People's participation programmes and the dilemma of rural leadership in
Tanzania. Berlin: Schreiber.
Keeton GR. 1986. The basic needs approach to economic development. In Coetzee JK. (ed.)
1986. Development is for people. Johannesburg: Southern, pp.139-156.
Kitching G. 1990. Development and underdevelopment in historical perspective. London:
Routledge.
Koesoebjono-Sarwona S. 1993. Participation in primary health care. Leiden: Rijksuniversiteit
Leiden.
Kok P.& Gelderblom D. 1994. Urbanisation South Africa's challenge, Volume" Planning. Pretoria:
Human Science Research Council.
Korten DC. 1991a. People centered development: towards a framework. West Hartford:
Kumarian.
Korten DC. 1991b. People centered development: alternative for a world in crisis. Manila: People
Centered Development Forum.
Kottak CP. 1985. When people don't come first: some sociological lessons from completed pro-
jects in Cernea MM. (ed.) 1985. Putting people first: sociological variables in rural develop-
ment. New York: Oxford, pp.325-355.
Kruijer GJ. 1987. Development through liberation: Third World problems and solutions. London:
Macmillan.
Kuhn TS. 1970. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Labuschagne M. 1993. Rolspelers en inwoners se belewing van die opgraderingsproses in
Freedom Square informele nedersetting, met spesifieke verwysing na gemeenskapsdeel-
name. Unpublished BA Honnours dissertation, Bloemfontein: University of the Orange Free
State.
146
Lai O. 1995. The logic of urban development and slum settlements: the People's Republic of
China. In Aldrich BC. & Sandhu RS. (eds.) 1995. Housing the urban poor. London: Zed,
pp.277 -292.
Le Roux P. 1996. Poverty, social policies and the reconstruction and development programme in
Deng LA. & Tjenneland EL. 1996. South Africa: wealth, poverty and reconstruction. Cape
Town: University of the Western Cape (Chr. Michelsen Institute & Centre for Southern African
Studies), pp.47-75.
Lipton M. & Van Der Gaag J. 1993. Including the poor. Washington: World Bank.
Lund FJ. 1987. The community based approach to development. A description and analysis of
three rural community health projects. Durban: University of Natal - . Centre for Social and
Development studies.
Mackenzie F. 1992. Development from within? The struggle to survive in Taylor DRF. & Mackenzie
F. (eds.) 1992. Development from within: survival in rural Africa. New York: Routledge, pp.t-
32.
Marais JGL. 1993. Site and service schemes and upgrading programmes: 121essons from inter-
national experience. Bloemfontein: Vista University.
Marais JGL. 1994. Erf- en diensskema as 'n wyse tot behuisingsvoorsiening: Freedom Square
en Namibia Square (Bloemfontein) as 'n tydruimtelike gevallestudie. Unpublished MA
dissertation, Bloemfontein: University of the Orange Free State.
Marais JGL. 1999. Who received what,where in the Free State Province, 1994-1998: an assess-
ment of post-apartheid housing delivery policy. Development Society of Southern Africa
Biennial Conference, 7-8 April 1999, Johannesburg: Rand Afrikaans University.
Marsden D. 1987. Community participation, social development and the state. Community
Development Journal 22(4):351-353.
Marsden D.& Moser C. 1990. Editorial introduction: participation and housing the poor.
Community Development Journal 25(1 ):3-8.
Martinussen J. 1997. Society, state and market: a guide to competing theories of development.
London: Zed Books.
Max-Neef M. 1991. Human scale development, conception, application and further reflections.
New York: Apex.
Maylam P. 1995. Explaining the apartheid city: 20 years of South African urban historiography.
Journal of Southern African Studies 21 (1):19-38.
Mayo M. & Craig G. (eds.) 1995. Community empowerment: a reader in participation and devel-
opment. London: Zed.
Mbigi L. & Maree J. 1995. Ubuntu: the spirit of African transformation management. Pretoria:
Knowledge Resources.
Mbigi L. & Westbrook W. 1998. In search of the African business renaissance. People Dynamics
16(2):23-33.
147
McCarthy J., Hindson D. & Oelofse M. 1995. Evaluation of informal settlement upgrading and con-
solidation projects. Johannesburg: National Business Initiative.
Mclaren P. 1997. Paulo Freire's legacy of hope and struggle, Theory, Culture and Society
(14)4:147-153.
Midgley J., Hall A., Hardiman M. & Narine D. 1986. Community participation, social development
and the State. London: Methuen.
Morgan LM. 1993. Community participation in health: the politics of primary care in Costa Rica.
New York: Cambridge.
Moser, CN. (ed.) 1983. Evaluting community participation in urban development Projects.
Proceedings of a workshop held at the Development Planning Unit 14th January 1983.
London: University College of London: Development Planning Unit.
Maser CN. 1989. Community participation in urban projects in the Third World. progress in plan-
ning 32(2):73-133.
Moses IJ. 1999. National and provincial budgets in perspective. Paper presented at the Housing
Policy Development Programme, Bloemfontein: University of the Orange Free State, 1-5
March 1999.
Mosha AC. 1995. Squatter and slum settlements in Tanzania. In Aldrich BC. & Sandhu RS. (eds.)
1995. Housing the urban poor. London: Zed, pp. 277-292.
Mugisha JF. 1994. Decentralized provision of primary health care in Uganda: an evaluation of two
programmes based on community participation. The Hague: Institute of Social Studies.
Munslow B. & Ekolo FE. 1995. Is democracy necessary for sustainable development?
Democratization 2(2): 158-178.
Naiker U. 1993. Global strategy for shelter to the year 2000. World Housing Congress, 10-14 May
1993, Cape Town.
Narine D. 1986. Community participation, social development and the state, urban development,
housing and community involvement in Midgley J (et al). London: Methuen, pp.105-125.
Nientied P., Ben Mhenni S. & De Wit J. 1990. Community participation in low-income housing poli-
cies:potential and paradox. Community Development Journal 25(1 ):42-55.
Oakley P. 1989. Community involvement in health development. Geneva: World Health
Organization.
Oakley P. 1991. Projects with people: the practice of participation in rural development. Geneva:
International Labour Office.
O'Gorman F. 1995. Brazilian community development: changes and challenges. In Mayo M. &
Craig G. (eds.) 1995. Community empowerment: a reader in participation and development.
London: Zed, pp.206-217.
Pan American Health Organization. 1984. Community participation in health and development in
the Americas: an analysis of selected case studies. Washington DC: World Health
Organization.
148
Paul S. 1987. Community participation in development projects: The World Bank experience.
World Bank discussion papers, NO.6. Washington: The World Bank.
Peterson JD. 1991. Squatters in the United States and Latin America: the discouree of communi-
ty development. Community Development Journal 26(1 ):28-34.
Pezzolli K. 1995. Mexico's urban housing environments: economic and eéoligical challenges of
the 1990s. In Aldrich BC. & Sandhu RS. (eds.) 1995. Housing the urban poor. London: Zed,
pp.140-166.
Pieterse EA. & Simone AM. 1994. Governance & development: a critical analysis of community
based organisations in the Western Cape. University of the Western Cape: Foundation For
Contemporary Research.
Pillay P. 1996. Poverty in South Africa. In Deng LA. & Tjenneland EL. 1996. South Africa: wealth,
poverty and reconstruction. University of the Western Cape: Chr. Michelsen Institute & Centre
for Southern African Studies, pp.14-45.
Prodder Newsletter. March 1994, 6(1 )1-2.
Pugh C. 1995. The role of the World Bank in housing. In Aldrich BC. & Sandhu RS. (eds.) 1995.
Housing the urban poor. London: Zed, pp.34-92.
Racelis M. 1992. The United Nations Children's Fund: Experience with Popular Participation. In
Bhatnagar B. & Williams A.C. 1992. Participatory development and the World Bank: potential
directions for change. Washington: The World Bank, pp.59-70.
Rahman MA. 1993. People's self development. London: Zed.
Rahman MA. 1995. Participatory development: toward liberation or eo-option? In Mayo M. &
Craig G. (eds.) 1995. Community empowerment: a reader in participation and development.
London: Zed, pp.24-32.
Reid WVC. 1989. Sustainable development: lessons from success. Environment 3(4):7-35.
Rifkin SB. 1986. Lessons from community participation in health programmes. Health Policy and
Planning 1(3):240-249.
Rifkin SB. 1988. Primary health care on measuring participation. Social Science and Medicine
26(9):931-940.
Robinson P., Sullivan T. & Lund S. 1994. Assessment of lOT's Capital Subsidy Scheme. Durban:
University of Natal.
Robinson J. 1996. The power of apartheid: state power and space in South African Cities. Oxford:
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Rogerson CM. (ed.) 1992. Managing urban growth: the international experience. Johannesburg:
The Urban Foundation (Development Strategy and Policy Unit).
Rodriquez MM. 1988. Participation and community development, achievements and constraints
in the case of women in Columbia. A research paper for obtaining the MA degree in develop-
ment studies. The Hague: Institute of Social Studies.
Roodt MJ. 1996. "Participatory development": a jargon concept In Coetzee JK. & Graaff (eds.) J.
1996. Reconstruction, development and people. Johannesburg: Thomson, pp.312-323.
149
Rowlands J. 1995. Empowerment examined. Development in Practice 5(2):101-107.
Salmen LF. 1989. Listen to the people: participant - observer evaluation of development projects.
Washington: Oxford University.
Salole G. 1991. Participatory development: the taxation of the beneficiary. Journal of Social
Development in Africa 6(2):5-18.
Samuel P. The World Bank experience. Community participation in development projects. World
Bank Discussion Papers .
...
Sapire H & Beal! J. 1995. Introduction: urban change and urban studies in South Africa. Journal
of Southern African Studies 21 (1):3-17.
Schlyter A. 1995. Squatter and Slum Settlements in Zambia. In Aldrich BC. & Sandhu RS. (eds.)
1995. Housing the urban poor. London: Zed, pp.317-338.
Schumacher EF. 1973. Small is Beautiful. London: Blond & Briggs.
Seligson A. & Passé-Smith 1993. Development & underdevelopment: the political economy of
inequality. London: Lynne Rienner.
Serageldin I. (ed.) 1994. Making development sustainable: from concepts to action. Washington:
The World Bank.
Sheng YK. 1990. Community participation in low-income housing projects: problems and
prospects. Community Development Journal 25(1):56-65.
Slim H. 1995. What is development? Development in Practice 5(2):143-148.
Soliman AH. 1995. A Tale of Informal Housing in Egypt. In Aldrich BC. & Sandhu RS. (eds.) 1995.
Housing the urban poor. London: Zed, pp.297-318.
South Africa Survey 1992/1993. 1993. Johannesburg: South African Institute of Race Relations.
South Africa Survey 1996/1997. 1997. Johannesburg: South African Institute of Race Relations.
Sowman M. & Gawith M. 1994. Participation of disadvantaged communities in project-planning
and decision-making: A case study of Hout Bay. Development Southem Africa 11(4):557-571.
Sridharan N. 1995. Indian slums: problems, policies and issues. In Aldrich BC. & Sandhu RS.
(eds.) 1995. Housing the urban poor. London: Zed, pp.385-400.
Statistics South Africa. 1998. Census in Brief. Pretoria: Statistics South Africa.
Stein A. 1990. Critical issues in community participation in self-help housing programmes: The
experience of Fundasal. Community Development Journal 25(1 ):21-30.
Stewart T. 1993. The site-and-service concept as applied by means of capital subsidy scheme in
Freedom and Namibia squares. Bloemfontein: Urban Foundation.
Stiefel M. & Wolfe M. 1994. A voice for the excluded; popular participation in development: utopia
or neccessity. London: Zed.
Stone L. 1989. Cultural crossroads of community participation in development: a case study from
Nepal. Human Organization 43(3):206-213.
Sunday Times. 1994. 14 August, 1994.
150
Swanepoel H. & De Beer FC. 1983. Community participation in Swaziland's rural development.
Africa Insight 18(2):100-103.
Swanepoel H. & De Beer F. 1997. Introduction to development studies. Johannesburg: Thomson.
Swilling M. 1994. South African urban problems: towards a research agenda. Johannesburg:
University of the Witwatersrand (Graduate School of Public and Develópment Management)
Taylor GJ. 1994. Community participation in development projects: a Sociological study.
Unpublished MA dissertation, Port Elizabeth: University of Port Elizabeth.
Taylor DRF. & Mackenzie F. (eds.) 1992. Development from within: survival in rural Africa. New
York: Routledge.
Tjenneland EN. 1996. The politics of poverty reduction and development in the Rainbow Nation -
an overview. In Deng LA. & Tienneland EL. 1996. South Africa: wealth, poverty and recon-
struction. Cape Town: University of the Western Cape (Chr. Michelsen Institute & Centre for
Southern African Studies), pp.1-12.
Tri HC. (ed.) 1992. Participative administration and endogenous development. UNESCO.
Turner J. 1976. Housing by people: towards autonomy in building. London: Marion Boyars.
Turner J. 1996. Tools for building community: An examination of 13 hypotheses. Habitat
International. 20(3):339-347.
Uduku NO. 1994. Promoting community based approaches to social infrastructure provision in
urban areas in Nigeria. Environment and Urbanization (6)2:57-78.
United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (UNCHS). 1996. An urbanizing world: global report
on human settlements. Oxford: Oxford University.
The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). 1993. London:
Graham & TrothamIMartinus Nijhof.
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 1971. Popular participation in deve-
lopment: Emerging trends in community development. New York: United Nations.
United Nations Development Programme (UNOP). 1992. Human development report: develop-
ment and the environment. New York: Oxford.
United Nations Development Programme (UNOP). 1993. Human development report: develop-
ment and participation. New York: Oxford.
Uphoff N. 1985. Fitting projects to people. In Cernea MM (ed.). 1985. Putting people first. New
York: Oxford, pp.359-395.
Uphoff N. 1988. Assisted seif-reliance: working with, rather than for, the poor. Washington:
Overseas Development Council.
Uphoff N. 1992. Monitoring and evaluating popular participation in World Bank-Assisted projects.
In Bhatnagar B. & Williams A.C. 1992. Participatory development and the World Bank: poten-
tial directions for change. Washington: The World Bank, pp.135-156.
Uphoff N. 1993. Grassroots organisations and NGO's in rural development: Opportunities with
diminishing states and expanding markets. World Development 21 (4):607-622.
151
Van Der Kooy R. 1989. Development; mirage or miracle? The unlikelihood of real development
with present approaches. Development Society of Southern Africa Biennial Conference, 6-8
July 1989, Durban: University of Natal.
Van Rensburg HCJ. 1996. Demographic transition, social security and health care: the South
African case. In Yang WS. and Lee ML. (eds.) 1996. Demographic transition, health care and
social security. Taipei: Academia Sinica, Book series 37, pp.373-403.
Van Rensburg HCJ. 1997. The health in Gariep: a guide for managers and gaverners.
Bloemfontein: Health Systems Trust and the Centre for Health Systems Research.
Van Rensburg NEJ. 1997. Die sosio-ekonomiese impak van lae-inkomste behuisingsinisiatiewe
in Freedom Square: 'n longitudinale oorsig. Unpublished BA Honnours dissertation,
Bloemfontein: University of the Orange Free State.
Van Rensburg D. (ed.), Heunis C., Pelser A. & Machedi S. 1996. A community perspective of
involvement in primary health care: case studies from Mangaung and the Sasolburg Sub-
region. Bloemfontein: University of the Orange Free State (Centre for Health Systems
Research and Development).
Van Zyl J & Beukes E. 1993. Human-centred development: the key to social stability in South
Africa. Africa Insight 23(3): 122-123.
Van Zyl J. 1995. Needs-based development strategy and the ROP: same braad issues. Halfway-
House: Development Bank of Southern Africa.
Varkevisser CM., Alihonou E. & Inoussa S. 1993. Rapid appraisal of health and nutrition in a PHC
project in Pahou, Benin. Amsterdam: Royal Tropical Institute.
Viloria L. 1992. Community participation in marginal settlements in the Philippines: the case of
Metro Manilla. Regional Development Dialogue 13(4):22-33.
Wanyande P. 1987. Women's groups in participatory development: Kenya's development experi-
ence through the use of Harambee. Journal of the Society for International Development
2(3):94-102.
Warburton D. (ed.) 1998. Community and sustainable development: participation in the future.
London: Earthscan.
Watts M. 1995. The crisis of development in Crush, J. (ed.) 1995. Power of Development. New
York: Routledge.
Webstm A. 1990. Introduction to the Sociology of Development. London:Macmillan.
Wessels J. 1993. Community involvement for cost effective planning. World Housing Congress,
10-14 May 1993, Cape Town.
Whyte AV. 1995. Building a new South Africa: environment, reconstruction and development.
Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.
Yeh SHK. 1987. Urban low-income settlements in developing countries: characteristics and
improvement strategies. Regional Development Dialogue 8(4):1-23.
Young K. 1993. Planning development with women, making a world of difference: Planning from
the gender perspective. London: Macmillan.
152
Zakus JDL. 1998. Resource dependency and community participation in primary health care.
Social Science and Medicine 64(4,5):475-494.
153
ANNEXURE
Papers and publications that emanated from this study
The following refereed articles, papers and reports were delivered as products stem-
ming from this study:
Accredited articles in refereed journals
• Botes LJS., Stewart T. & Wessels J.
1996. Conflict in development: Lessons from the housing initiatives in Freedom Square and
Namibia Square. Development Southern Africa 13(3):453-467.
• Botes LJS. & Van Rensburg D.
1999. Community participation in development: nine plagues and twelve commandments.
Approved for publication in the Community Development Journal (first edition 2000).
Papers at international conferences and seminars
• Botes LJS.
1996. Promoting community participation in development initiatives: some South African
examples illustrating the complexities and difficulties. The Development Studies Association
Conference, 18 - 20 September 1996. London: Reading.
• Botes LJS.
1996. Stedelijke ontwikkeling en huisvestingsbeleid in Zuid-Afrika. 25 October 1996
Antwerpen: Department Sociologie en Sociaalbeleid: University of Antwerpen (UFSIA).
• Botes LJS.
1996. Low-income housing policies and community participation: urban South Africa in a
global context. State and Society relations research seminar, 29 October 1996. The Hague:
Institutes of Social Studies.
• Botes LJS.
1997. Low-income housing policies and community participation: Urban South Africa in ret-
rospect. Planning in the Americas. Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning. Ft.
Lauderdale Florida. 6 - 9 November 1997.
• Botes LJS.
1997. The participatory development paradigm: historical origins and theoretical roots.
Oregon State University, Corvallis. 10 November 1997 & Utah State University, Logan 13
November 1997.
Papers at national conferences and workshops
• Botes LJS.
1994. An overview of principles and problems in participatory development. Centre for
Health Systems Research, University of the Free State (Workshop on community involve-
ment in Primary Health Care), Bloemfontein, 18 July 1994.
• Botes LJS. & Stewart T.
1994. Conflict in development: an experience in housing delivery. Conference of the South
African Association for Conflict Intervention, Bloemfontein, 28 September 1994.
• Botes LJS. .
1995. Progressive versus conventional housing. Free State Housing Summit. Bloemfontein.
12 August 1995.
• Botes LJS.
1999. It takes many to tango: the organisational and institutional dynamics of community
participation in development. Development Society of Southern Africa Biennial Conference,
7-8 April 1999, Johannesburg: Rand Afrikaans University.
154
Research Reports
• Bates LJS.
1994. Pilot search and identification of possible housing and urban infrastructure projects.
(For the National Youth Development Forum). Cape Town: Independent Development Trust.
Bates LJS. & Van Loggerenberg JF.
1994. Report on regional and local forums in the Orange Free State and the Northern Cape.
Bloemfontein: University of the Orange Free State & the Institute for a Democratic Alternative
of South Africa.
• Bates LJS, Matsepe M. & Tshabalala S.
1995. Report on urban development and housing initiatives for the Free State Region. Cape
Town: Independent Development Trust.
155
Summary
Key terms
community; participation; development; community participation in development; parti-
cipatory development; empowerment; informal settlement; urban upgrading; low-income
housing; poverty.
The emergence of participation as an alternative paradigm of development has been phe-
nomenal. All over the world, and in South Africa in particular, enthusiasm for community partici-
pation in development exists. Moreover, many development initiatives in South Africa aspire to
be participatory and people-driven processes. However, the difficulties of achieving participation
at grassroots level is not always fully recognised or analysed. Therefore, participatory develop-
ment, specifically in urban upgrading in South Africa, was the focus of this research. This study
attempted to move beyond both the development rhetoric and the lofty sentiments associated
with participatory development, and to search for a deeper understanding of community partici-
pation in development.
In this search for a more in-depth understanding of the dynamics of participatory develop-
ment, the study firstly traced the roots of community participation back to some of the social and
development theories and paradigms from which community participation originated. The accep-
tance of participatory approaches to development reflects an awareness of the inadequacy of
previous development efforts that failed to communicate effectively with local persons and con-
siders their felt needs and potential contributions. Participatory development was developed pri-
marily in a Third World context, albeit with Western influences, and it grew out of a wide range
of alternative and divergent ideas, theories and paradigms, from all over, and from a multitude
and rich legacy of development forces and approaches that influenced and co-shaped it.
Secondly, this thesis attempted to achieve conceptual clarity on community participation in
relation to development projects. Community participation is for the purposes of this study,
defined as a collective process that has its focus on the active collaborative involvement of key-
stakeholders in joint decision-making that will influence the outcome of development decisions
and of actions impacting on the broader development context of an end-beneficiary community.
Thirdly, this research paid some attention to community participation in low-income urban
housing projects. Important impediments or obstacles to community participation were exposed,
with some reference to their application in urban upqradinq contexts. This study highlighted the
emergence and evolution of participatory housing processes in urban low-income communities,
both internationally and in South Africa. The global nature of shelter poverty, specifically in urban
environments, was explored and the extent of shelter poverty in South Africa's urban areas and
related low-income housing initiatives was discussed. r,e emergence of participatory urban
development in South Africa was also analysed.
Fourthly, the research described and analysed the community participation dynamics of a
selected case study of informal settlement upgrading. For this purpose Freedom Square (an
informal settlement on the outskirts of Bloemfontein, the capital of the Free State Province in
South Africa) was selected as a case study. The findings demonstrated that informal settlers do
have the inherent ability to participate meaningfully in their own development, albeit not without
conflict among the different stakeholders involved.
156
Lastly, the study proposed some emergent guidelines for promoting or facilitating community
participation in urban upgrading projects. These guidelines could serve as a developmental stra-
tegy of conduct for the practice of participatory development and also as a development ethical
code. Participatory development, and for that matter human development, is about processes
whereby people empower themselves to participate continuously in improving their own destiny.
A constant reorientation of the thinking of development professionals is therefore necessary, du-
ring which process they should rather adopt the motto of planning with and not for the people. In
this reorientation they should change from being implementers to being facilitators and enablers
who foster the principle of minimum intervention and who respect the indigenous knowledge of
ordinary community members.
The participatory development paradigm is here to stay, but the challenge remains to make
community participation more than an empty catchword. Although there are major issues and
problems associated with community participation in development, the benefits of participation
by far outweigh these problems. Despite its ambiguities and limitations, the participatory
approach enables ordinary people to assume responsibility for policies and decisions, and also
for actions which concern them.
157
Opsomming
Die opkoms van deelnemende ontwikkeling as alternatiewe paradigma is merkwaardig. Oral in
die wêreld, ook in Suid-Afrika, is daar groot entoesiasme vir gemeenskapsdeelname in ontwik-
keling. Boonop streef baie ontwikkelingsinisiatiewe daarna om deelnemende en mensgedrewe
prosesse te wees. Desnieteenstaande word die probleme verbonde aan gemeenskapsdeel-
name op voetsool-vlak nie altyd genoegsaam erken of ontleed nie. Deelnemende ontwikkeling,
en spesifiek soos dit in die Suid-Afrikaanse stedelike opgraderingstoneel vergestalt, is die fokus
van hierdie navorsing. In hierdie studie is gepoog om verder as die blote ontwikkelingsretoriek
en lofwaardige sentimente gekoppel aan deelnemende ontwikkeling te beweeg deur dit op die
keper te beskou en tot 'n dieper verstaan van gemeenskapsdeelname in ontwikkeling te kom.
In die poging om tot 'n dieper verstaan van die dinamika van deelnemende ontwikkeling te
kom, het die studie eerstens gesoek na die teoretiese en paradigmatiese wortels waaruit
gemeenskapsdeelname ontwikkel het. Die aanvaarding van deelnemende benaderings tot
ontwikkeling reflekteer 'n bewuswording van die ontoereikendheid van vorige ontwikkelings-
pogings om effektief met plaaslike mense rakende hul behoeftes en moontlike bydraes te kom-
munikeer. Deelnemende ontwikkeling het hoofsaaklik in 'n Derde Wêreld-konteks ontstaan -
alhowel met Westerse invloede - en gegroei uit 'n wye verskeidenheid van alternatiewe idees,
teoriëe en paradigmas en vanuit 'n ryke nalatenskap van ontwikkelingskragte en -benaderings
wat daarop ingespeel en daaraan gestalte gegee het.
Tweedens het hierdie tesis gepoog om konseptueie helderheid ten opsigte van gemeen-
skapsdeelname in relasie tot ontwikkelingsprojekte te verkry. Vir die doel is gemeenskapsdeel-
name gedefinieer as 'n kollektiewe proses met die fokus van aktiewe samewerkende betrokken-
heid van sleutelbelangegroepe in gesamentlike besluitneming wat 'n impak het op die breër
ontwikkelingskonteks en die ontvanger-gemeenskap.
Derdens het hierdie navorsing ook gefokus op lae-inkomste stedelike behuisingprojekte.
Belangrike struikelblokke of probleme wat met gemeenskapsdeelname verband hou, is ook uit-
gelig, asook die relevansie hiervan vir stedelike opgraderingskontekste. Die studie het ook die
ontstaan en ewolusie van deelnemende behuisingsprosesse in internasionale en Suid-
Afrikaanse lae-inkomste stedelike gemeenskapppe beklemtoon. Die internasionale aard van
"skuilplek-armoede" in spesifiek stedelike omgewings is verken en die omvang van skuilplek-
armoede in Suid Afrika se stedelike gebiede en verwante lae-inkomste behuisingsprojekte is ook
bespreek. Die ontstaan van deelnemende stedelike ontwikkeling in Suid-Afrika is ook ontleed.
In die vierde plek het die navorsing die dinamika van gemeenskapsdeelname aan die hand
van 'n geselekteerde informele nedersetting opgraderingsprojek beskryf en ontleed. Hiervoor is
Freedom Square en informele woonbuurt aan die buitewyke van Bloemfontein, die hoofstad van
die Vrystaat provinsie) as gevallestudie geselekteer. Die bevindinge het duidelik aanqetoon dat
informele nedersetters die inherente vermoë het om betekenisvol aan hulle eie ontw kkeling deel
te neem, alhoewel nie sonder konflik tussen die belangegroepe nie.
Laastens het die studie riglyne vir die aanmoediging of fasilitering van gemeenskapsdeel-
name in stedelike opgraderingsprojekte voorgestel. Hierdie riglyne kan as 'n strategie vir optrede
en as 'n etiese ontwikkelingskode dien. Deelnemende ontwikkeling en ook mensgesentreerde
ontwikkeling omsluit prosesse waar mense hulself bemagtig tot voortdurende deelname om
hulle eie toekoms te verbeter. 'n Voortdurende heroriëntering van die denke van ontwikkel-
158
ingskundiges is nodig sodat hulle die gedagte om met mense en nie vir mense te beplan nie, ten
volle aanvaar en uitleef. In hierdie heroriëntering moet ontwikkelingskundiges verander van
implementeerders na fasiliteerders wat respek toon vir die inheemse kennis van die mense wat
hulle poog om te ontwikkel en 'n aanvaarding van die beginsel van minimum intervensie.
Die deelnemende ontwikkelingsbenadering het gekom om te bly, maar die uitdaging is steeds
om dit prakties tot uitvoer te bring. Alhoewel gemeenskapsdeelname in ontwikkeling nie sonder
dubbelsinnighede en probleme is nie, stel dit gewone mense by uitnemendheid in staat om
beleid en besluit, en daarom ook handelinge wat hulle raak, te beïnvloed.
159