Community Participation in Local Governance – An Empirical Analysis of Urbanized Local Governments in the Philippines and Uganda

Ishii, Risako

doi:10.1080/01900692.2016.1242610

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More importantly, studies on decentralization and participation over the years have largely overlooked one crucial issue regarding participation. That is, many of the assessments on decentralization and participation (such as Caparas and Agrawal 2016;Waheduzzaman and As-Saber 2015;Ishii 2017;Ryan 2012) have always framed local people as a homogenous group; hence, such assessments have often failed to ascertain whether decentralization has truly provided spaces for the poor to effectively participate. This presents a critical gap in the assessment of decentralized participation because involvement of citizens is often not differentiated among the various strata of citizens to consider the participation of the poor.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decentralization and Pro-poor Participation in Ghana: Unmasking the Barriers to Inclusive Grassroots Development

Be-ere

2022

St Comp Int Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Donors have strongly advocated decentralization on the grounds that it broadens the participation of citizens in development processes, thereby increasing government responsiveness to their needs. Although there have been studies seeking to establish the veracity of this claim, they remain weak on two fronts. One, while wealth differentials affect citizen participation, these studies approach citizens as a homogenous group. Two, participation is mostly viewed narrowly—participation in elections. Drawing on empirical data from Ghana’s decentralization reform, this paper addresses these gaps by questioning how pro-poor citizen participation in decentralized development planning has been. I argue that although Ghana’s decentralization was propagated on championing pro-poor grassroots participation in governance and development, in reality, participation is elitist and has failed to reflect the voices of the poor. My findings demonstrate that the participation structures and processes used in local development planning are unfavourable to the poor in many respects. Elite and representative participation is promoted to the detriment of broad citizen participation. This exclusion is resulting in surging apathy of citizens towards the district assemblies—institutions hitherto trusted as their development champions. This paper concludes that the poor will remain voiceless despite decentralization unless the structural barriers to their participation are tackled in decentralization design and praxis.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decentralization and Pro-poor Participation in Ghana: Unmasking the Barriers to Inclusive Grassroots Development

Be-ere

2022

St Comp Int Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Various local government reforms have therefore been manipulated by distrust of and interference from the central authorities (Clausen 2020;Crook and Manor 1998;Gaynor 2014). As a result, public participation in local government is a controversial issue in many countries (Ishii 2017). Little research has been carried out to determine the nature of these patterns which are sometimes caused by the central authorities not empowering the common citizens (Mohmand and Cheema 2007;Wahid et al 2017;Rid and Murtaza 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fragile states, decentralisation and the nature of barriers to citizen participation in local government: a view from Pakistan

Ali

2022

SN Soc Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of decentralisation reforms is to narrow the gap between the public and government and increase public participation in decision-making. However, empirical evidence from developing countries suggests otherwise. A case in point is Pakistan, even though it has a well-structured local government system consisting of three levels of government, district, tehsil and union councils. Nevertheless, Pakistan’s nascent but fragile democracy and the non-democratic nature of decision-making at the state level prevent public participation and as a result do not remove but rather create obstacles to citizens’ involvement in service delivery. This paper therefore argues that citizen participation in Pakistan’s local government system faces more barriers which are imposed by the centralised state rather than removing hurdles to community participation. I demonstrate that having well-structured local governments is not enough for community engagement instead of a nation-state’s strong commitment to pro-community participation. The aim of this study is to identify and examine the barriers to public participation and how they prevent participation in the local government service delivery process, especially when non-democratic countries such as Pakistan introduce local government reforms. A qualitative study was carried out with a questionnaire containing seven open-ended qualitative questions. The thematically analysed results show that the military establishment introduced local government systems which have used local governments to suppress community autonomy and prevent community participation. As there is a patron/client relationship between the central government of Pakistan and the feudal lords and local elites, local elites have indulged in corruption and favouritism which hinder public participation at the grassroots level in the local governments in the province of Sindh, in Pakistan.

show abstract

“…Encouraging citizens to participate in the decision-making of local governments has become a key policy goal in countries across the world (Caparas & Agrawal, 2016;Michels, 2012;Ishii, 2017;Smith, 2009). Citizen participation has instrumental value in that it promises improvements in allocative efficiencywhere local public services increasingly match the needs of citizens (Kernaghan, 2009) but it also promises to perform a development function as well.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Local Government Size and Political Efficacy: Do Citizen Panels Make a Difference?

Andrews

Entwistle

Guarneros‐Meza

2018

International Journal of Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Democratic theorists suggest that the size of local government is an important influence on citizens' political efficacy. Typically, it is argued that small is beautiful for efficacy, because residents in areas served by smaller local governments are more likely to feel empowered to engage with decision-making. Nonetheless, it is conceivable that large governments can impart a higher degree of political efficacy by introducing structures that involve citizens more closely in decision-making. This paper examines these arguments by analysing whether jurisdiction size influences political efficacy in Welsh local government, and whether the presence of a citizen panel makes a difference to the size-efficacy relationship. Multi-level analyses suggest that size is negatively associated with internal and external political efficacy, but that larger local governments can overcome the burden of bigness for external efficacy through the use of citizen panels. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

show abstract

Community Participation in Local Governance – An Empirical Analysis of Urbanized Local Governments in the Philippines and Uganda

Cited by 6 publications

References 24 publications

Decentralization and Pro-poor Participation in Ghana: Unmasking the Barriers to Inclusive Grassroots Development

Decentralization and Pro-poor Participation in Ghana: Unmasking the Barriers to Inclusive Grassroots Development

Fragile states, decentralisation and the nature of barriers to citizen participation in local government: a view from Pakistan

Local Government Size and Political Efficacy: Do Citizen Panels Make a Difference?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About