Making Development Agents: Participation as Boundary Object in International Development

Abstract

Despite high transaction and financial costs participatory approaches to development are now standardised across a range of organisations internationally. Participatory planning in various forms is widely used in donor funded local government projects worldwide. This article critically explores the reasons for the continued popularity of participatory approaches. Using examples of cognate participatory processes in Tanzania I show how the outputs of participatory approaches do not justify their continued popularity for development stakeholders. Analytical frameworks from science studies on the social process of collaboration provide insights into the persistence of participatory forms. Participation operates as a boundary object enabling diverse stakeholders to temporarily align themselves around a common project for the purpose of development implementation.

The significance of student voice: female students’ interpretations of failure in Tanzanian secondary education

“…According to Critchley (2003), for students to actively take part in development and implementation of education policy, their participation has to be formalized at all levels. In contrast, Green (2010) argues that the heavily institutionalized participatory planning mechanisms used in Tanzanian development activities has made participation to work against its intended benefits. Furthermore, social structures and cultural norms may limit students to voice their concerns (Unterhalter 2012), whether formalized or not.…”

Boundary objects in information science

“…The concept of BO has been welcomed in diverse research communities, for instance, in management (Kuhn, 2002), archival science (Yeo, 2008), development studies (Green, 2010), economics (Langenohl, 2008), education (Emad & Roth, 2009), document studies (Lund, 2009), and library and information science (Albrechtsen & Jacob, 1998), while enjoying particular popularity in information systems and computer supported cooperative work research (CSCW) (Lee, 2007;Lutters & Ackerman, 2007), among others. An equally broad variety of research artefacts from physical objects to concepts and activities have been analytically interpreted as boundary objects (for an incomplete overview of artefacts, see Table 1 and Figure 1).…”

Community policing and the politics of local development in Tanzania

“…: 26), and participation 'has often come to mean teaching the community to act in the way that … experts require them to' (Marsland 2006: 68). Ongoing local government reforms in which principles of participation are enshrined have done little to alter the top down nature of development planning, and communities are therefore largely expected to recognise their responsibilities within government determined projects, rather than contribute to the development of new ideas and ways of doing things (Chaliga 2008;Green 2010aGreen , 2010bGreen : 1246Norman & Massoi 2010;Rabé & Kamanzi 2012). As was the case during the socialist period, popular participation is frequently underpinned by the threat of fines or even imprisonment (Green 2010a(Green : 25, 2010b(Green : 1241.…”

“…However, these gatherings typically offer little opportunity to subject leaders to answerability or to have an input into local policy making (Chaliga 2008;Rabé & Kamanzi 2012). Public meetings are forums 'which appear inclusive but within which very few people have authority to speak' (Green 2010b(Green : 1256. Residents may thus often view meetings as an occasion when they are informed of decisions that have already been made by authorities at the mtaa level or above (Rabé & Kamanzi 2012).…”