1. INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR GEO-INFORMATION SCIENCE AND EARTH OBSERVATION 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 oDemocratic decision-making + equity component. oLocal accountability. oEconomic & Technical efficiency of activities. omobilise under-utilised local physical, human, institutional, and knowledge resources. oPolicy impact (effectiveness) improved better feedback – implementation & policy more adaptive & responsive to internal conditions. oStrengthen understanding of local variability in natural & social ecology. oLong/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 empowered e.g. self-mobilisation to perform activities

11. Community Participation Purposes Continuum FacilitateCollaborateEmpower (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 to Participation 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 solutions or, 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?