PGIS & P- Mapping in PSP

1. PGIS & P- Mapping in PSP Participatory Spatial Planning and Good Governance Rationale, Principles, Characteristics, Operationalisation Participation means different things to different people

3. ‘Good Governance’ • Accountability - transparency & visibility of government decisions and policies, • accountability mechanisms, • responsiveness to lower levels • community involvement a means to generate accountability. • Accountability not the end in itself, a means of supporting higher-level social-political goals of: • Legitimacy, Participation • Respect for Rights, Empowerment • Equity (not simply, equality), and • Competence (including efficiency).

4. UNDP - Good Governance • UNDP (1997) core characteristics of GG: • Participation; Rule of law; Transparency; Responsiveness; Consensus-orientation; Equity; Effectiveness and efficiency; Accountability; Legitimacy; Strategic Vision; Resource Prudence; Ecological Soundness; Empowering and Enabling; Spatially grounded in communities.

5. Historical Phases of “Participation” • "Self-help" schemes 1960s-1970s • Labour inputs of local people in land clearing, tree planting, ditch digging, etc., "blood & sweat". • Needs Assessment late 1970s-1980s • Problem identification & prioritising by local people. • Identification of potential Solutions 1990s • Identification of solutions by local people, • Incl. use indigenous / local knowledge

6. “Decentralisation”– towards Participation • De-concentration of administrative authority. • Delegation of decision-making authority. • Devolution of decision-making powers. and: • De-institutionalise: transfer public functions outside of govt. authority to non-governmental or private sector bodies, i.e. • privatise; or • disengage to NGOs; or, • devolve to local authority bodies.

8. Why ‘Participation.? • What are the strengths / positive points about Participatory (Neighbourhood or Community) Planning ?

9. Rationale for Participatory Planning • Democratic decision-making + equity component. • Local accountability. • Economic & Technical efficiency of activities . • mobilise under-utilised local physical, human, institutional, and knowledge resources. • Policy impact (effectiveness) improved better feedback – implementation & policy more adaptive & responsive to internal conditions. • Strengthen understanding of local variability in natural & social ecology. • Long/term view & stability of policy programmes, and commitments to sustainable management.

10. Intensity of Participation - “Ladder” • Information Sharing, • communication between outsiders and local people, primarily technical information, e.g. needs assessment. • Consultation • Outsiders refer certain issues to local stakeholders, for further details, or refinement, or e.g. for prioritising. • Involvement in Decision-making by all actors, • Involve local people in decision-making, policy-setting. • Initiating Actions • Initiatives of local people who are empowerede.g. self-mobilisation to perform activities

11. Community Participation Purposes Continuum Facilitate Collaborate Empower (Mediate) LESS------------------------------------------------MORE Emphasis on self-reliance Emphasis on action and collective action Emphasis on internal process Explicit recognition of specific socio-economic groups / actors Requirement for political commitment from outside parties Emphasis on bottom-up inputs to decision-making "Participation as a process having its own inherent value – as an end in itself" LESS------------------------------------------------MORE

12. What is wrong with Participation? • What are the deficiencies / weaknesses / problems with Participatory local planning ?

13. Obstacles toParticipation in Spatial Planning. • External political resistance to 'real' local empowerment. • internal local holders of power will not give it up. • breadth of needs, priorities, opinions, etc. between actors in the local community is too wide.women especially are frequently excluded from early stages of decision-making, etc. • minorities - e.g. ethnic groups, castes, - are frequently excluded. • there is an absolute scarcity of resources to be shared - and, overall there is poverty. • unequal distribution of access to power - ultra-poor, elderly, children, handicapped, refugees, inarticulate. • serious time constraints involved in processes of participation. • participation may be costly.

14. Problems of Local Institutions • Local-level planning organs are not in policy-setting position; therefore difficult to advise policy-makers. • Influenced by local elites and politicians • Limited Capacity of local staff – w.r.t. calibre, commitment, (corruption), and continuity. • Skills of govt. staff and NGO cadre less developed at local level • Local govt. officers normally subordinate to their central offices. • Ethnic, religious, caste, language conflicts often found within the local level. • National requirements to support national goals & policies, even not in interests of local population, therefore locally unpopular.

15. Indicators for Assessing Participation • Target Groups' Role in Problem Identification, Design, Planning • Part. in preparing proposal; & in project planning • Indigenous knowledge in problem identification & prioritisation. • Distribution of Part. between groups • Target Groups' Role during Implementation • Financial contributions; Labour contributions • ITK in identifying possible solutionsor, Dependency on outside expertise • Distribution of Part. between target groups • Beneficiaries' Role in Continuation  • Continued use of ITK / or, dependency • Degree of local ownership and control • Flow of income from project • Local initiatives for new projects

16. Village sketch mapping exercise with villagers

17. How to be Participatory? • What approaches and methods to encourage / promote a participatory planning approach ?

18. Instruments for Participation • "Top-Down" - Information Sharing • untargeted, one-way dissemination: • Mass media, information dissemination • Public meetings, public exhibitions • "Top-Down" - Consultation + Information Sharing • more targeted, partially two-way information: • Public hearings • Local Community meetings and workshops • RRA methods • "Two-way' - Consultation + Information Sharing • Public Fora; PRA methods; Focus groups, Interest groups

19. Instruments for Participation • "Bottom-up" - Decision-Making + Consultation + Information • Sharing Initiating Actions • Advocacy planning • Petitions; Elections • Civil Action; Demonstrations • PRA • "Stand Alone" - Initiating Actions instruments for Empowerment • implementing participation within a community: • Social Mobilisation; animateurs, etc.

21. Local K is a key to PSP Local Knowledge, IK, ITK, ISK • Local Knowledge is a resource that disadvantaged & marginalised groups control - whilst land, property, resources, labour are appropriated; • resource needing little investment for realisation; • reflects capability, competence of local community • places community on equivalence with outsiders • local knowledge is operational.

22. Identification / Selection of ‘Stakeholders’ • Select by a consistent variable? – e.g. number of people involved, or economic power and/or economic vulnerability, or level of knowledge, or political influence? • Do parties identify and select themselves? – or are they “obvious” ? • How do categories of parties change with geographical scale? • Arguments for proactive, positive discrimination to support weaker, less articulate actors.

23. Gendered Space • Ignorance – (huh?) • IK of resources & resource management • Invisibility – • Spatial scale of women´s activities • Exclusion • Women´s spaces , restricted spaces

25. Gendered ISK & Genderising GIS • GIS as ‘masculinist’, materialist positivist technology • handles only discrete, bounded, pre-defined units of analysis, and • unable to cope with ambiguity, fuzziness, abstract concepts or synthesis, and • straight-jacketing emotions and spiritual values. • GIS is missing reflexivity, & ignoring qualitative info • “feminisation of GIS”. Hall 1996, Kwan 2002, …

26. Promoting 'Participation‘ in Geo-Information terms • Facilitation • elicit local knowledge of ITK and NRM, • school children assist with GPS, participatory mapping, for baselines & on-going monitoring. • Collaboration [activities under ‘facilitation’], • + e.g. participatory assessment of needs, collaborative spatial problem analysis, joint prioritising of interventions, joint map legend • Empowerment [activities under collaboration], • + importantly: “taking over” sustainably • self-determination & local initiative in all stages.

27. Which is P-GIS? • P-GIS as form of ‘participatory spatial planning’ (PSP) which makes use of maps and GI output, especially GIS. • Core is ‘degree of participation’ in planning, • essential issues are: processes, activities, instruments, and procedures that involve participation? • P-GIS is ‘doing (technical) GIS with some degree of people’s participation – • Participation could be simply data collection, or , choice of data inputs, data layers, analysis, data queries. • Core activity is the GI outputs (maps, etc.),

28. Which is P-GIS? P-GIS as form of ‘participatory planning’, specifically, ‘participatory spatial planning’ (PSP), makes use of maps, GI output, and especially GIS’.

29. Which is P-GIS? • Spatial planning can hardly not include maps, etc., though can be PP without maps, e.g. the PP of a school curriculum or a cultural policy. • Core element is the ‘participatory’ in PSP, • what are the functions, processes, activities, measures, instruments, procedures of spatial planning which involve participation?, and • what criteria and indicators to measure the presence & degree of participation?

30. Good Practice Sequence in PGIS Pre Conditions • Purpose purpose purpose • Partnership • Positively discriminate • Power • Products • Participation is learning • Participation is slow • PRA principles – flexibility, innovative, involved, triangulation

31. Reiteration Check the Purpose – for whom? Check Impacts and Effects For whose benefits? At whose costs? Where does Power shift to / from?