A
CASE STUDY OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
DEVELOPING COUNTRIES:
UNDERTAKEN IN
SUCCESSES AND FAILURES
BY
M.A.SW.(SS.)
MARTHA SENZANGANI MBATHA
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA, PRETORIA
(1984)
Submitted to the Department of
Urban Studies and Planning
in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements of the
Degree of
MASTER OF CITY PLANNING
at
MASSACHUSETTS
the
INSTITUTE OF
TECHNOLOGY
June 1986
Copyright
Martha Senzangani Mbatha
Signature of A'uthor
Deyj rtment of Urban Studies
-, 1986
and Planning
J7
Certified by
'Thesis
SupervisJ-
'-n
Accepted
by
II
Chair
'Rotch
MASSACHUSETTS INSTiTUTE
OFTECHNOLOGY
JUL 1 0 1986
LIBRARIES
,.Department
qomm'ittee
ABSTRACT
failure of development
countries.
focus
The
projects undertaken in developing
the
role
culture.
projects undertaken
some
to
in
confirm or
role of such concepts
the
theories about
in
projects.
failure of projects.
success and
role in determining
Community involvement in planning and
is necessary for
both factors play a
indicate that
Findings from cases
significant
of
purposes of determining
for
analyzed so as
are
certain developing countries
disconfirm some
used
Cases
concepts.
of these
development
is
study method
case
two factors viz.
role of
is on the
community participation and indigenous
The
success and
factors determining
thesis discusses
This
project success
implementation of projects
and its
continuity
in future
since members become physically and emotionally involved in
project work.
The
failure of projects.
further
Cases
are compatible with local beliefs
successful
than those that are
indigenous
culture encounter
adapted so as
in determining
to
indicate
that projects
and traditions
not.
Those
are
projects
in
that
more
that overlook
resistance but can be gradually
achieve positive
the results
involvement often results
such
absence of
results.
of projects.
Both factors
interact
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would
like to thank
Professor Ralph Gakenheimer
throughout
friends for
M.C.P.
this thesis.
for
their
support
and
guidance
My deepest gratitude
their unceasing
program.
Professor Judith Tendler
goes
throughout the
to my
TABLE OF
INTRODUCTION
CONTENTS
................
Methodology..................
.6
II
THE
PERFORMANCE
OF DEVELOPMENT
Incorporation of Local
The Harambee
Table
The
PROJECTS..........10
Interests.................10
Projects.............
.
.
.
...11
1..........................................13
Deedar Society..............................15
Failure to
Incorporate Local Interests...........17
Consequences
of Community Involvement............22
Participatory Control Over Funds.................24
The Role of Traditional Norms....................25
Lack of Consideration of Indigenous
Culture......28
III
EVALUATION AND CONCLUSION.......................35
Recommendations..................................44
REFERENCES
1
INTRODUCTION
The
reached
by
purpose
of
different
projects.
participation
of
any
This
countries
shall
the
variables.
in
The
on
order
is
in
data
to
on
successful
two
role
to
find
out
factors
of
if
adopted
in
discover
studies
more
of
about
such a study should
understand what problems
are
implementation of projects
involved
in
in developing
and
viz.
can be
developing
projects.
some
the
as
traditional
there
implementation of
case
significance of
on
be
conclusions
for
the
can
and
makes
and
order
that
examine
focus
communities,
done
to
what
will
planning
available
implemented
*
local
principles
during
use
I
will be
universal
study
authors
unsuccessful
culture.
this
role
I
projects
of
such
enable me
to:
the
countries;
and
*
recommend what could
The
distinguish
failures
between
uncovered
myths
and
by
useful
to
overcome such problems
this
study
theories
should
about
help
me
successes
or
of projects.
I
have
increasingly
enhancement
projects
information
be done
chosen
being
of
used
to
write
for
development.
undertaken
at
local
the
about
projects
alleviation
These
will
level which
be
are
of
because
poverty
they
are
and
the
mainly
small-scale
usually
implemented
2
or
at
least
maintained
communities
often
projects.
Development
improvement
in
the
have
in
continuous
improvements
number
projects
income
creating
in
this
of
over
which
living
Members
expertise
context
"
means
together
and
time."
are
members.
technical
distribution
the
(Kocher
implemented
for
.a
.
of
such
general
with decreasing
capacity
to
in
1975:2).
Dixon,
have
been
sustain
A
explicitly
:
described as aiming at
*
community
little
levels
inequality
of
by
self-reliant
and self-determining
communities;
*
avoiding
of exploitation of
the
poor and
differentiation through promoting
excessive
equitable
distribution of resources;
*
reducing the gulf between urban and
*
encouraging co-operation among members
communities;
*
rural
life;
of
and
increasing openness
to
technical
innovations
(Ellman in Cliffe et al,
1975:316-317)
Therefore
to
referring
I
of
involves
issue of
conform
the
to
level
the
of
each
notion
country
the
of
development.
I
term
"development
in living
conditions
the
the overall improvements
inhabitants
the
use
shall
distribution
the
per
Such
be
shall
of
capita
a
notion
referring
does
as
not
of all
This
to.
I will
resources.
income
when
measure
a
seem
to
not
of
fit
3
into
my
understanding
developing
which
countries.
has
been
having
by
high
deviation
longevity.
Central
($975)
This
while
the
those
for
per
the
lowest
the
in
in
class
the
of
disadvantage
poor
literacy
and
1984
that
were
R330
the
R1,300
($247.50).
successful project
the
promotes
will
its
government's
which benefits
A project
is
by
reported
were
which
things,
economy
the
March
in
Africa
reflected
I shall therefore consider a
other
South
income,
which
class
like
as
capita
Report
development
developed
illustrated
upper
distribution of resources.
the
country
inequities
high
in
the
a
reasonably
Service
amongst
one,
a
better
for
earnings
(Omond, 1985:87).
as
is
constitutes
example
extremely
Statistical
average
what
For
characterized
standard
of
not
equitable
the
elite to
as
considered
be
successful.
main goal for
The
enhance
development
living.
Results of
improved
which
and
development
undertaking
long run.
This
pointed
often
have
more
their inestimable
In
always
been
had
to
a
wide
leads
the
their
advantages
educational
high
Therefore
of
expectation
more
and
every
success
of development
is because proponents
to
of
are usually manifested in
opportunities.
to
is to
standards
improve
longevity,
hence
and
employment
attainments
the
to
designed
is
successful projects
services
health
countries
projects in developing
in
projects
particularly
to
role in overcoming underdevelopment.
reality the outcome
Programs
positive.
spectrum
a dismal failure.
of
results
People
who
of
development
that
have
ranging
have
been
from
had
projects has
implemented
outstanding
to
play
not
have
success
direct
roles
4
in the
implementation of projects
contrary to anticipated
has
to
be
uncovered
project.
As
programs
has
should
of
be
approach
for
have
across
confirms
a
also
a
their
on
and
the
in
successful
outcome
approaches
successful
to
a
the
formulate
refer
roles
the
of
that
implementation
learning
top-down
process
approach
determining
a
of
course
the
(e.g.
nature
of
of
its
are
not
by
Hirschman
problem-ridden
distinction
overcoming
I
is
and
between
their
which
that
when he
consider
contribute
that
it
to
have
since
that
the
be
revised
to
view
is
all
to
only
the
less
projects
valid
successful
in
are not.
necessary
the
to
refers
or
is
administrative
and
that
are more
those
found
Rondinelli's
concluding
thus
those
and
results.
(1967:1-3)
be
may
in
one
(1983:29)
of uncertainty
economic
adequate
project
troubles and
therefore
characteristics
or
example,
Rondinelli
it
This
successful
For
certain degree
technical,
of
by
implementation
valid
optimization
a
have
project.
are more
others.
given
projects
the same vicinity I would
projects
than
as
where
unsuccessful
an
some
project
dimensions
supported
and
that
entails
frequently
situations
Sometimes in
troubles
conceived
as
to
based
I
manifested
successful
initially
assure
doing)
of results.
characteristic
the
such practitioners, more
constitutes
to ensure
play minor
proposition
overcoming
in
what
failures
they want).
had a mixture
it
For
people
avoided
by
often experienced
information
development.
(learning
I
that
the
some
or
communities
projects
come
result
adopted
successes.
regarding
induced
projects
where
a
have
to
success
discuss
or
some
failure
of
5
projects.
I
will
participation
receive
and
focus
mainly
indigenous
By
situations
where
community
process
of
the
of
projects.
to determine
term
and
choosing
also use
the
term"
way of
life of
in
strategies
a
wide
in
to
Mbithi
planning
of
of
from
refrain
and
development
cognitive and
the
definition
officials
in
are
of
to
to
in
the
planning
is
the
and
right
of
context I will
be
to
a
process
identifying
their
them.
shall
dealing with
(1974:124)
denote
I
traditional
the
arousing
has
to
to
with
accept
they
may
or
proceed
be
in
reality has
avoid
local
such
to
a
way
as
constraints
officials
so
with
people
to
an
and
as
from
to
their
remarks
that
a
sharp
avoid
the present,
the
past and
have a consistent
and
coherent
the people's
popular
working
(1974:175)
operational break between
to
is
it maximizes
Project
it.
uprooting
Mbithi
example
to
any
local
consideration the cultural beliefs
suspicions
relation
projects
projects because
deal
or
participation
implementation of
persons
communities
Social
future.
plan
into
take
For
traditions.
the
majority
may also have to
practices
of
refer
engaged
referring
efforts
for
often
the people.
possibility
since
In this
when
important constituent of successful
the
the
indigenous culture"
Acc-ording
involvement
during
Self-determination
engage
factors
shall
are
"self-determination"
problems
I
members
their destiny.
community members
through
two
namely:
consider what constitutes
participation
self-determination
implementation
people
local
variables,
These
serious attention when analysts
projects.
using
two
culture.
successful
all
on
frustration,
own experience
apathy
if
and
project
outright
6
defiance.
METHODOLOGY
A
relevance
case
of
in
describe
case
or
one
one
single
for
*
on
developing
study
as
I
evaluating
unsuccessful
and
Biklen
examination
single
have
and
for
Bogdan
detailed
one
used
of
depository
selected
to
of
use
the
projects
(1982:58)
one
setting,
documents,
the
case
or
study
following reasons:
It
will
give
investigation of
are
designed
will
on
be
successful
"a
event."
the
will
countries.
subject, or
particular
method
method
literature
undertaken
a
study
enable
what
to
an
the
procedures
and
me
to
Using
identify
for
the
designing
The
indepth
when
projects
study
written
and
study method
two
an
case
relevant
following
and
for
followed
successful
the case
analyse
project
opportunity
implemented.
accounts
projects.
able
me
material
unsuccessful
I shall
also be
factors
main
implementation
method
in
in
developing
countries:
*
-
participation
-
the
Through
role
the
countries
of
case
and
study method
of
local
traditional
I will
particular
especially
and
culture
study method
identify
is
communities
useful
on
focus
cases.
when
The
used
to
specific
case
study
7
patterns and
processes
of an
concentrate on the projects
have
earmarked will have
Most of
particularly
Lusaka
undertaken
by
I
tempts
I
am
projects
regarding
evaluate
put
and
the
considering
the
by
use.
and
private
a
case
behavior
or
undue
projects
in
Projects;
Pollnac
(1981)
the
failure of projects.
involvement
of
people
at
a
the
of
sometimes
context
the
one
role
root
which
will
will
be
project
case
study
are:
Mbithi
be
made
without
-
(1980)
in
level,
the
-
African
Thailand.
in
the
the more
the
higher
the
participation
that
to
(1974)
Southern
Fisheries
of
method
Korten
(1985)
Scale
in
patterns
They point out
grass
incidence of success of projects.
voluntary
each case.
countries
Small
mainly
the
Projects
to
method
generalization
Seidman
-
welfare
Development;
Projects;
analyse
authors
Rural
and
Program).
general
used
developing
Special
(BRAC)
also
Kenya
more
of contrasting situations.
misbehavior
have
in
study
considering
no
-
considered.
Although
compared,
Bangladesh
development
co-operatives
Pilot
the special circumstances of
and
I
implemented.
Harambee
African
using
this
to
who
success or
Indian
to compare a number
Scholars
Harambee
These
that
against
were
extrapolated
Society,
governments
aware
guard
the organizations
designed and
the
respectively will be
researchers
will
mainly
(Southern
both
organizations
be
Deedar
Workshops
I will
taken from Asia, Africa and Latin America.
will
the
that
these will be small-scale rural
projects
These
organization.
8
My
out
by
will
these
is
the
spells
part
members
doom
allowed
from
since,
played
in
by
can also
of such members.
projects
the
different
for
and
to
indigenous
modify
of
from
result
When
culture
within
success
and
for
the
conclusions
on
is
responsible
for
around
way I think the
in
participation,
culture.
factors
to
reached
and
involved
people
projects
I have
the involvement
designing
and
the
in
is
then
enhanced.
different
unsuccessful
enumerated
the
sacredly
from without
are
by
of
involve villagers
are
the
I
Indigenous
the consideration
invaded
successful
carried
authors
projects
above.
In this
picture of
implementing
My
projects
the
in
countries.
Important
projects
to
study will provide a more complete
involved
developing
two
of
not
examimining
center
in
villagers
of
dynamics
addition
indigenous
purpose
will
investigations
Lack of enthusiasm
projects.
the
prospects
what
the
intertwined with participation because
community
culture
is
researchers
examine
culture
of
study
will
ideas
be
about
clarified
successful
through
and
asking
unsuccessful
the
following
questions:
*
what are
*
what
is
culture
*
is
there
obstacles in
the role of
local
in facilitating
the role of
in development
of goal
achievement?
participation and indigenous
goal achievement?
any generalization
concerning
factors
the process
that can be made
the above-mentioned
projects?
two
9
In
development
the
following
section
projects undertaken in
I
shall
discuss
the outcome
developing countries.
of
10
II
THE PERFORMANCE OF
As
factors
has
are
projects.
been
being
pointed
in
out
project
project.
as
was
Many
undertaken
experts,
local
overemphasis
on
and
the
however,
section
for
interests
traditional
failure
norms
Results
projects
countries
help
that
of
undertaken
from
in
confirming
are
development
in
thus
it
approaches,
characteristic
is
of
such
that
different
important
countries
a
positive
authors
Although
is
in
may
that
they are
and
causal
number
as
of
inhibiting
projects
to
were
different
have
development
the
that
to
developing
a
such
reactions
note
to
each
participation
having
some
of
like failure
disconfirming
countries
causing
issues
implemented
projects.
different
characteristics
as
by
considered
to
local
and
of
issues like
main characteristics
and
failure.
several
the circumstances in which
point
relationship with project
success
previous
responsible
biases of each author,
incorporate
reasons
the
PROJECTS
Such factors may be different depending on
the choices and
the
mentioned
DEVELOPMENT
all
unifying
developing
countries.
INCORPORATION OF LOCAL
According
proven
to
be
an
to
INTERESTS AND LOCAL PARTICIPATION
Rondinelli
essential
source
(1977:102)
of
rural
information
people
for
have
project
11
ideas.
Logically
position
of
their
therefore,
identifying
problems.
local
their
needs
Consequently
together
with
expression
of
people's needs
local
and
it
officials
local
people
in
suggesting
is
necessary
leaders
and
are
should
the
solutions
that
to
immediately
priority of
the villagers
In
during
consideration
the
project
be
to
a
of
success
projects.
This
undertaken
in
in Kenya
and
to review these
at that
local
facilitate
objectives.
been
stage
is
No
in
the
countries
e.g.
agency
or
own,
be
not
or
the
time.
the
been
taken
problem
into
getting
of
This
is
participation
is
vital
to
implementation
of
the
Deedar co-operative
the
eliminated.
by
confirmed
may
have
usually
peoples'
project e.g.
has
particular
planning
where
which
needs
interests
implemented
some
the
the
case
the
particularly
the
where
cases
satisfy
to
project
authority should supplant people's aspirations with their
attempt
best
cases
several
Harambee
in India.
self-help
projects
of
groups
self-help
We
are
now going
cases.
The Harambee Projects
the Kiswahili
"Harambee" is
pull together.
Kenyatta,
has
unity and
in undertaking
state and
urges
become
1982:79).
the Kenyan president, Jomo
effort
task facing the
economic communities.
synonymous with
of
that would be required
the development
its diverse
people to
Cohen,
as a slogan underscoring the kind
commitment to
all
(Reynolds in Weber and
proposed by
It was first
term that
self-help.
The
of
new
term
In general
these
12
projects have become renown for
achieving
fully
their objectives.
11.4 percent
of
the
their success in
It
One
characteristics
had a peculiar
that members
rejection of government
for the Five Year
schools
development
from the Harambee
even if
them teachers
relevant
effort
the Harambee
regard for
to meet
to
During
the
ovations only when their
immediate needs and
needs.
The
school,
construction of
join
activities of
amongst others,
construction of Harambee high
maternity home and the
refused to
the government
people's
Harambee groups included,
disregard
They would build
and nurses.
these
was
projects
even
and
their
programs e.g.
meetings, speakers received
words were
of
Development Plan.
clinics
and
guarantee
in an
that
1963 and 1973.
the
of
been estimated
overall national
expenditure in Kenya was derived
between
has
the
the
the
building of a
dams and local
roads.
The
relationship
table
following
between
above-mentioned
local
projects.
is
a
initiative
good
and
summary
success
of
the
of
the
13
TABLE
AN EVALUATIVE APPROACH TO COMMUNITY
IN EASTERN KENYA
: Group Origin of
: Decision and
: Plan Implementa-:
: tion
Decision
area
1.
Construction:
of Harambee
:
High School
:
:
Clan leaders in
consultation
with community
development
1
PROJECTS IN FOUR COMMUNITIES
Participants
Remarks
:
:
:
:
Clans, family
heads,
individuals,
and women
: Successful
: in all four
: communities
Clans, family
heads,
individuals,
mainly women
: Successful
2.
Building
maternity
home
: Women leaders,
: clan leaders,
: officials
:
:
:
:
3.
Compostmaking
: Extension
: officers
: Communities,
: farmers
: Failed
4.
Destocking
: Government
: officials
: Communities,
: homestead
: heads
: Failed
5.
Resistance
to
destocking
and
terracing
: Communities,
: Local cattle
: owners and home-: family heads
:
: stead leaders
: Government
: Communities,
cotton
:
: farmers,
communal
plantations
:
: their house: holds
6. Adoption
of
and
: Successful
: in all four
communities
: Failing
14
: Group Origin of : Participants
Remarks
: Decision and
: Plan Implementa-:
: tion
-----------------------------------------------------------------7. Maintaining : Government
: Communities,
: Failed
irrigation
: individual plot:
channels
:
: owners and
their
households
Decision
area
8.
Adoption of
early
maturing
maize
:
:
:
:
9. Maintaining
irrigation
channels
10.
and
: Village
: Committee
Land
: Village
Allocation : Committee
to migrants: Successful
Adapted
The
of
Government
researchers
extension
officers
the
ten
had
not
For
example
from:
Mbithi
interesting
projects
: Communities,
: Slow but
: individual
: successful
: farm households:
: Community
: households
: Slow but
: successful
: Community
: "village
: committee"
: Successful
(1974:172-173)
point
about
undertaken
the
involved community members
decided
Officials
in
that
of
farmers
took
They applied
one
such
a
the
four
reduce
decision
projects
that
during
instances
should
the same method
these
stock
consulting
the
-the
and
maintenance of
officials
(destocking).
with
farmers.
following projects:
-adoption of communal cotton plantations,
-compost-making
out
unsuccessful
government
their
in cases of
that
the planning stage.
the
without
were
is
irrigation channels.
15
members
Community
of
implementation
reported
were
committees
failed
dismally.
members
during
taken
and
their
knew
thus
successful
decision-making
the
In
process.
of
building
cases
of
refused
projects
maintained
by
projects
failed,
that
to
were expected
they
to destock and
were
in
the
those
that
members
e.g.
were
community
the maternity home.
and
school
high
The
that
members
community
by
communities
the
projects
six
village
interests.
and
Successful
the Harambee
those
resisted when
even
and
implemented
with
touch
all
among
taken by
those
needs
communities's
participation
is
in
latter were
characteristic
unifying
were
the
that
is
committees
and
to
had
decisions
the
between
difference
government officials
the
by
The
that
community
members
Community
process.
those
represented
committees
planning
the
from village
to
compared
as
tottering
Village
committees.
such
choose
as
government
those projects whose
plan implementation was
of decision and
group origin
of
process
by
(made
However,
village committees).
officials and
the
during
decisions
external
such
in
came
only
community members
simply
projects e.g.
implement
they
cotton communal plantations.
to engage in
The Deedar Society
The
Deedar
was
themselves
organized
was
society
formed
a
society
rickshawpullers
of
into a cooperative.
in
in Bangladesh
1960
and it
serving Balarampur and Kashinathpur.
set
of
rules
borrowed
concerning
from the
the amount
society
and
of
who
The society
is currently
Members
money
formed a
that
can be
the purposes for which
16
such loans
rules
can be used,
e.g.
automatically made
to the
elite,
i.e.
society offers
brickfield
the
renovating
the
society
small amounts
employment
to
and some members
its
houses.
to
be
unattractive
of loans.
members in
have
Such
set up
The
the
shops
in the
society's market.
Members
regularly elect
the Managing Committee from
amongst
themselves.
decision by
No
is valid without
committee
members who meet regularly
Meetings.
the managing
endorsement of
the
other
during the Weekly General
the Weekly General Meetings members
During
exercize discipline on
can even decide to
the Managing
Committee.
an organization of
supplied
leadership
confirms
the rural
this
idea
by
an
when he
poor may
asserts
He,
planning cannot be overlooked.
the
argues
that
single
principle
assumption
society,
Deedar
the
Pakistan Academy
an
providing
important
members
poultry-raising,
the
that
human
leadership has
for Rural
role
with
improved
in
paddy
(1974:188)
Mbithi
the
need
results
reality.
In
of
central
for
goes beyond that
been working
success
literacy,
collaborate with
action
Development.
the
to
however,
social
oversimplifies
the
played
that
have
agency.
external
within
leadership
that
remarks
(1983:5)
Ray
Such an
nutrition,
cultivation
and
one
from
the
case
closely
of
with
academy has
society
this
and
through
bee-keeping,
accountancy
17
skills.
Members
themselves
acquired
who
of
go
the Deedar
for
training
to all members
Failure To
of
were
writing
author
on
the
The
without
from
or
communities
which
problems.
their
if
are
fail
they
These
hidden
some
of
people.
In
to
just
not
government
the
skills
basic
plans
designed
are
and
they
all
the
The
same
programs
are
systems
socio-technical
years,
many
survival
out
worked
needs.
many
In
in their situation and
only
fail,
officials
government
negatively disposed
In
not
perceived
that may
however,
if
the Deedar society could
consider
motives
reality,
life.
of
but
life.
themselves
identify
as
possess
villagers'
so
officials.
often
they
consultation may not
experts
external
having
the
over
that members of
fact
communities
plans
the
centrally
have,
meet
to
as
established
well
proceed
planners
and
their already difficult
exarcebate
experts
teach
among
the numerous weaknesses
of
the villagers have become masters
guidance
few members
thereafter
that
slate
such
poor
intervention
that
is
improving
that
methods
appropriate
any
to
into
which
respects
clean
relevant
interventions
that one
programs
a
remarks
within
a
Incorporate Local Interests
designed
knowledge
and
elect
the Deedar society.
Korten also maintains
centrally
society
there
actual
by
be
further
is
a
foreign
endanger
common
of
designed
addressing
community
shows
members
externally
with
to
fact
to
accept
their
members
as
the welfare
tendency
among
18
project
engage
in
manifested
responsibility
for
in
that
destocking,
involved
would
outsider
it
projects
would
involved in the
be
project
long
for
involvement
may
to
that
any
To
channels.
the
However,
projects
local
if
an
such
of
facts
have
they
in
communal
implementation
the
are
failed
of
an
have
plans
these
adoption
to
for
such
planners
which
projects
due
of
communities
describes
irrigation
such
adapted
be
suitable
community members would
for
stock,
remaining
the
efficient
channels
such
lack
officials
of
to
would
of
a
as
be
of
better
been
had
achieve
consulting
compost-making
of
would
farmers.
to
involvement
immediate
results
community
maintaining
and
effort
beneficial
with
availability
cotton communal plantations
joint
community
the
in
result
would
destocking
land
process
a
best
that
compost-making,
that
take
irrelevance
Harambee
of
is
planning process.
more
irrigation
reason
and
cattle manure, adoption of
supplement
would
four
that those
instance
grazing
knows
community members.
suitably
and
understood
faith
error
obvious
seem
benefit
are
situation
blind
the.maintenance
and
plantations,
the
example
For
of
the
are
187)
when everyone
tendency
a
This
(1974:
the
by
to
disadvantaged
designed
programs
the
without
such
inability
officials
designed.
helping
of
margins
wide
situation.
more
are
programs
programmes
to
subject
For
programs
characterized
as
their
the
designing
the
Such
such
where
such
with
processes.
community needs. Mbithi
attitude
Kenya
poverty
situations
intentions
belief
the
meeting
in
of
whom
good
their
equating
decision-making
in
people
of
officials
is
the
as
Another
desire
against
members.
This
by
the
is
19
particularly
the
case
where
there
local
leaders
project
officials
purposes
of utilizing grants
or
Unfortunately the
and
little
the
villagers
lack
emotional
characterized
by
dependency.
a
the
need
of
that
need
of
above,
and
the
in
need
Then
a
time
the
in
of
to
of
us
this
loans
need
talked
It
did
they
for
would
into
there
While
as
hierarchy
with
the
may
be
the project
be
not
might
is
an
it may be
type
of
important
true
service,
that a
it
does
itself as
considering
in
satisfy
even
intending
outside
agency.
People
are
I have
pointed
out
or
time
may
they
the
have
example,
for
need
their
foliage
they
their
to
resilient
become
considered
satisfied
reducing
as
case,
perceive
purchasing
be
outside
This
ownership.
environments
of
projects
situation
and vertical
that
an
by
their
what
failure.
service,
course
Instead
some
successfully
the
identification
a particular
conceived
communities
land.
once
sense
tells
of
type
adjusting
Kenyan
grazing
outs
community may be
deprivations.
prolonged
no
needs
such a
same
at
capable
drop
its eventual
community
follow that
not
describes
between needs and wants.
distinction
particular
responsibility of
sole
community
situation
of
Such
example, in the lack of maintenance of
people and
Such
implementation
are
a
for
passivity
projects.
no
is
is
ready-made
rate of
is
there
reflected, for
by local
the
a high
done
on
time constraints.
in
as
pressure
something
involvement
(1983:175)
There
since
project
that have
get
such endeavors
they
Gran
to
of
since
organizers.
administrative
result
perceive
continuity
is
for
for
that
more
themselves
their
might
stock
to
as
stock.
have
been
through
20
concentrating
chose
to
on meat or milk cows.
rear
meat
cattle
decision mainly and
would
those
to
concentrate
therefore.
be
a
of
gradual
stock
for
modifications with
be
their
have
therefore
socio-economic
do
deprivation
of
local
with
be.
may
and
that
an
The
lack
fact
This
at
ahead
community
the
with
not
may
time
of
planning
less
are
public
houses
likely
and
be
planning
and
As
to
evident
their
mentioned
the
is
amidst
project
poverty.
and
from
only
not
may
of
earlier
services
if
lack
or
costly
and
of
In
communities.
planners
it
of
the community.
governments
channels
state
imposed
by
to
implementation
irrigation
whatever
accrue
costly
because
maintain
They
arouses suspicions
that
to
further
goals.
and
persist
ideas
local
and
to be respected
some
poverty
involvement
to
also
but
involvement.
people
obviously
and
Having
values,
externally
mistakes
community
of
communities
officials
are
and
type
own.
the need
often
would
be possible.
achieving
Even
that
stockowners
self-determination
external plans
involvement
agencies.
go
to
preferences
cooperation.
community
actual
of
of
gladly
would
people have
to
There
selection
interests
guarantee
and
imposition of
lack
mainly.
relationship
capable
right
not
type
effective
stick
that
rear milk cows would be
full support would
statuses
values
People's
to
a
to
families
to
enthusiastically welcomed and supported
will be
The
as
recognized
that
their
This indicates that
and
encouraged
villagers
a working
concern
proved
on
but
that
such
established
be
that elected
persuaded
quality
In other words
to
funding
or
government
be
time-saving
projects without
in
this
thesis,
facilities
like
not
been
they
had
21
involved
from
the
start
so
structures are weak and why
all.
On
the
other
utilization
is
of
hand
local
therefore
to
between
officials
failure
and
argues,
external
more
local
instance
own
people
development
part
of
time
ensuring
colonial powers.
on
dependent
thwart
against
their
in
not
conclusion
the local
enhancing
It
in
the
those
times,
the
allow
from
that
everything
to
and
people
For
choose
had
on
the
desire
while
at
the
same
subservient
local people
This
to
remained
possible was
development.
of
admistrators
the
remained
Korten
lives.
opportunity
a
project
leadership
not
the
is
training
their
development
that
towards
of
did
Therefore
arose
the colonial
nature
local
an
projects
there
affecting
communities
leadership
efforts
Harambee
to
times
given
To make certain
the achievement of
disregard
succeed
own
colonial
enhance
local
external
The
that
to
given
training
Conflict
administrators
that
was
projects.
interests.
conflicting
economical.
that
During
on issues
were
ensures
excluded
the
indicates
against
of
leaders
more
being
which
be maintained at
local people during
projects.
Administrators
thus
(1974:145)
attention
as
example,
local
authoritarian
their own decisions
to make
their
the
is
of
resent
This
of
for
processes.
Mbithi
leadership
members.
people
period.
relationship
(1980)
and
they were imposed on
administrative
know
involvement
and planning
According
failed when
the
why
they
such services should
resources
clear
decision making
that
done
to
militated
successful projects.
we
reach
is
that
capabilities and
development.
This
development
projects
efforts are unlikely to
is
particularly the case
22
where
communities
implementation of
attributed
to
expected
such projects.
a
participation
are
situation
due
to
interests,
eventual
project
Such
lead
the
absence
latter
of
projects
guarantee
may
not
is
little
by
Lack
of
encourage
for
elite.
The
former
community
and
the
involvement
in
learning process.
dependency
on future continuity of a
therefore
from differing
the
retards the
the
incentive
the
arising
question
implementation
even
projects is
dictation
to
during
of
and members
learning.
planning and
there
and
differences between organizers
participate
Failure
where
control
to
and
there
is
no
project.
Consequences of Community Involvement
The
needs
importance
cannot
be
participation
confront
feelings
worked
as
it
planning
and
positive
impact
development
member
the
in
details of
(Ray,1983)
was
locally
so
that
it
of
managed
no
conducive
to
successful
cases
opportunity
society's
projects
In
of projects.
there
address
was
a
Members
their
to
of the Deedar
A case
involvement
the
and
are
There
an
can
community
the project.
could
with
projects.
outcome
identification with
project
members
member
members
is
environment
that
indicates
the
since
above-mentioned
those
is
views.
its
identify
there
power
their
the
the
implementation
on
of
express
since
community
Where
sense
community
provided
to
a
and
inferiority
get orientated
society
is
there
Participation
learning.
the
helping
underestimated.
authority
of
of
that
strong
in
had
a
case
sense
of
could manipulate
top
priorities
as
23
evident
that
in
in
experts
their
this
in
weekly meetings.
case
the
members
process
needed in order
to
officials
not
guidance
Such
were
and
imposing
of
for
could
school
and
fit
involvement
affecting
by
note
external
which
members
local government
but
could
provide
community
members.
as
interfering
or
and
voice
fears
their
and
process
as
distinct
with an
opportunity
approach,
poverty when
communities
This
in
is due
to
the
as
for
how
contrast,
the
to
can
do
be
things
needs,
projects
process
will
control
of
entail.
decisions
people's levels
future
top-down approach,
an
psychological
project
empowerment improves
them
Such
the
had
felt
whole
in
during
the Harambee
members
met.
could
they
prepares
learn
action.
provides
on
their
considered
predicament of
as
The
members
own.
The
preserving
poverty-stricken
their powerlesness.
(1983:174)
structure
results
their
example
their
The
what
since
we consider that
Gran
power
for
from the
to
about
schedules.
empowered
further
community
would be
decision-making
For
the building of
home
how such needs
lives.
phase.
themselves
preparation
were
confidence
local
question
maternity
their
the
physical
top-down
perceived
could
convincing
into
in
Communities
of
of
the
priorities and
to
and
be
chosen
to
used
skills
decision-makers
of decision-making about
opportunity
had
society
some
project during the planning
process
their
important
their views on such communities.
about each
high
be
Experts and
projects
not
may
Deedar
acquiring
the key
Participants
the
the
be self-reliant.
support
officers
of
It
to
refers
a
more
to
participation
egalitarian
one
as
shifting
through
making
24
the
poor
greater
get
a
access
new
to
decision-making
implement
the
vision
power
of
and
process
decision
society
leads
and
to
and
decision-making
the
success
of
process
a
is
they
can
command
involvement
greater
better
stake in the
in
evaluation.
the
The
therefore
they have been involved
implementation
which
resources.
Therefore members have a personal
because
in
in
the
motivation
to
implementation.
successful outcome
the conceptualization,
Participation
therefore
an
of
action,
communities
in
important element
in
projects.
Participatory Control Over Funds
Dixon
involvement
resources
(1978)
in
for
cooperatives
receive
were
and
free
acquisition
project
support,
in
projects
selling
competitive in
The
operate
under
communities
machines
most
the
groups
to
sale
cloth.
were
of
the
of
community
and
case
were
These
and
role
financial
that
materials
free
material
of
women's
involved
dairy
products
used
cooperatives
the
When
unable
prevented
in
free
to
survive.
them
from
and
to
supplies
Their
becoming
the open market.
above
involvement at
of
handicrafts.
sewing
on
like
the
refers
Bangladesh
discontinued,
dependence
discussing
the
income-generating
making
when
case
confirms
the planning
their
need,
the
own
the
stage.
importance
In situations
assumptions
outcome
may
be
material aid which may have a disastrous
of
of
community
where outsiders
they
what
premature
think
financial
impact on the
or
community.
25
Community
members
opportunity
aid.
of
receiving
learning
They also get an
in
future
and
self-sustaining
where
selection.
fail
of the
of
this
which
instance.
their
own
such
loans
finance
affluent
and
were
For
small
so
from
composed
Members
loans
obtained.
was
was
The
successful
projects
experience
financial resources
THE ROLE
where
are
secured
aid
be
financial
be available
establishing
comes
in
a
of
as
the
that,
is
a
which
in
along
with
also
to
Deedar
of
example
in
organizing
over
whether
they had
granted
mentioned
to
members
discourage
earlier
been
in
the
this
society
shows
that
other
things,
have
amongst
through member
project
The Deedar
good
control
loans
and
in
in cases
position
succeeded
for
the
implemented.
be
strict
purpose
society
those
to
society
defaults
of
of
participation.
OF TRADITIONAL NORMS
Most
projects
the
will
towards
members
amount
prevent
joining
thesis.
the
seeking
outside assistance.
exercized
the
of
participated
may
poor
this
for
example,
to
of
of
even
used
as
have
case
undertaking projects even without
deprived
situation may be worse
types of projects
Recipients
society
move
not
the
are
that more aid
to
might
usually
aid
procedure
Such a
members
is
the
impression
projects.
This
prescriptions
about
thus
community
such
experienced
realize
that
workers
involved
with
socio-cultural variables
are
development
among
the
26
important
determinants
(Zaltman,
been
as
more
norms
cited
like
due
to
because
Such
the
cultural
of
In
role
President
it
in African
was
projects
together
of
argued,
since
in
the
by
example
community
of
likely
of
to
that
succeed
communalism.
success
find
would
their
than
some authors
facilitate
members
performance
Some
predicted
are
has
traditional
to development
culture
would
there
projects.
Tanzania,
communities
projects,
past
played
For
traditional
of
the
development
practices.
communities'
culture,
join
failure
1977:21).
positive
success
the
such
development
to
their
efforts
of
the
and
considered as more conducive
Nyerere,
development
success
Pollnack
on
promoting
communities were
others
by
emphasis
in
of
it
and
tasks
of
easy
also
in
sharing of benefits.
Some
cultural
authors
practices
(1975:366)
warns
emphasizes
generosity
that
communal
sharing
of
ensuring
that
the
distribution
of
resources
makes
not
actually
Tanzania,
the practice
accompanied
contribution
a
in
because
that
Cliffe
Ujamaa
resources
This is
is
arguing
development.
traditional
of
laziness.
everyone
assumptions,
retard
although
encourage
of
these
sometimes
communal
may
criticize
by
a desire
the
during
work
process.
traditional
Furthermore,
members
flexibility
reduce
of
implementation
of
taboos
types
in
of
e.g.
food
those
and
particular,
as
about
Matthews
process
stereotypes
Such
preventing
beliefs
the
during
projects.
held
stereotypes
people
the
roles
suggests,
from
of
may
tend
community
planning
take
the
and
form
particular
eating
of women.
may
by
Poor
to
be
people
more
27
traditional
cannot
and
afford
less
willing
the risk of
(editors),
1982:139).
where
people
expected
methods
in
favor
consequences will
methods.
is
The
to
case
the
extend
very
of
well
organize
smaller
music
of
they
(Jones and
for
example
technological
of
the
new methods
unknown
e.g.farming
different
views
and
beliefs
e.g.
they
were
as a
since
since
in
the
beliefs
in a
Thereafter
they
would
situations
In
with
culture,
adjustments
the
as
just
Harambee
while their wives
were
the
modern
their
about
fitted
women
activities
could
without
roles
traditional patterns
and
discuss
as
of
setting.
Members
gradually
absorbed
traditional
play traditional
gradually
used
to
pertaining
to
parties
issues
activities
(presidents)
attempt
projects
Kenyan
they would
presidents'
suit
and
(1982:23)
conscious
the
pro-modern
where
planning
to
project
During their meetings
dance,
quite
case
this
illustrate
Reynolds
patterns
together
worked
in
example
In
engage
in Kenya
norms
as mothers. They also used
and
of
Programmes
For
tradition
projects.
left alone
case
Fear
reject
Harambee
their
preparation
to
traditional
normally
clans.
assemble.
tend
traditional
local
although
drums
the
indigenous
to resist
projects.
their
clan
be
they have
technology.
nation-building.
housewives and
one
of
themselves
interaction
may
stop using
the Harambee
adapt
in
disrupting
of
of
promotion of
and
imperative
people
little
because
basically selective.
implementation
points
to
induce people
advantages
the
the
This
modern
In general
perception
to
of
try innovations
losing
Rolls
are
to
were
made
spouses
who
interfering
the
e.g.
had
to
be
were away on activities
28
of
the
Harambee.
presidents'
The
process
of
each
is
elected by members.
of
has
the Harambee
to
spend most
woman has
to
blankets
of
warm' while
*serve
the wife
is
Rural
the
in
differences
Special Rural
her husband has
even some gifts
of
on
presidential
trips.
In
possible conflict
research
and
development
projects
of
prior to
the
illustrate
traditional
the
norms
are
negative
the Special
in Kenya.
Programme sought
through activities
testing,
prototype
and
Culture
Development
achieve development
thrust
Whenever a
form of singing
to avoid
that
cases
Development Programmes
The
family
the president and her husband.
Amongst
of
that
keep the husband's bed
away
Consideration of Indigenous
consequences
who
prepared for his
place and
to
that way the group manages
between
the
intensive
from her
the group.
takes
at her husband's
the Harambee
a president
so
of her time away
This
that will
is
Her duties are
be gradually convinced and
ceremonies
Lack of
there
been chosen as a president,
wife's new role.
of
following way:
groups
organizing the activities
got
preparation
spouses took place in the
In
she
the
to
of applied
which
is
systematic
of
programs
their wider application.
The main
small
scale
program was
to
testing
develop
innovations
in
and
the
29
administration
development
The
types
included
farming,
(1974)
foreign
consultants.
etc.,
status,
people
both
were
the
projects,
not
The
culture
the
when
African
promoting
work
cases
about
evidence
organizing
of
practice
project
shows
process.
Instead
pumps,
projects
failed
not
of
us
in
example,
the
and
local
that
For
Harambee
Kenyan
the
a result
is
change
socio-economic
understand
it
that
the
clients'
as
and
communities
they could
project.
the destocking
not
necessary
to
that will be played by indigenous
for
may
not
can
be
so
result
example
effective
participates
in
problems
in
by
accompanied
not
is
everyone
that
For
development.
it
when
it
them.
water
nature
Programme
communalism
ensuring
local
his
stock and
projects
success
of
program
of
"advice."
could
positive role
the
this
these
the
from
his
their
types
implementing
affiliation,
Development
officials
disciplinary measures
the
between
possible failure of
above
overemphasize
some of
different
to
the
(S.R.D.P. Report).
ethnic
open
Rural
project
foresee the
of
in
construction
that
such
her
really
sentiments
people's
In
so
were
Special
roads
argues
hisor
not
methods
the
differences
cultural
is
and
local
of
that
and
programs,
of projects undertaken under
because
agent,
area-based
projects
schools and
Mbithi
of
during
of
free
riders.
solely
There
may
depend
on
also
be
problems
pre-existing
officials may be having
their own
if
a
project
cultural
is
beliefs.
cultural beliefs
expected
to
Project
different
from
30
those
of
prevent
community
the
development
understanding.
difficult
to
A
in the
in places
for
of
during
performance
of
as suitable
considered
that
in
some
that
exclude
men
belief
traditional
employment
obviously
that
can
projects
receive
outside
a
set
be
can
be
be
and
find
traditional
Lesotho
positively
may
be
that
it
people
could
It
be
women
like
process,
do
that
women
of
types
for
women.
the
their
regard is
should
a
the
not
secure
belief
would
hand
other
projects
women's
setting
within household
organized
to
projects
with
income-generating
On
of
surprising
in
clash
Such
setting.
on the
lack
traditionally
example in this
Indians
from
inability
better
not
by
and unavailability
those
do
them
to
opportunities.
therefore not
is
projects
prevent
forms
than
disposed
constrained
and
contracts
other
household
the
limit
will
some enthusiasm.
Gittinger
some
among
organized
that
credit
such
example,
and
decision-making
Another good
cultural stereotypes.
Kenya
several
countries
since
for
projects
for women.
developing
relationship
by
obstacles
tasks
may
numbers of people from work.
Women
take
like
beliefs
retarding productivity at work.
development
the
may,
always
structural
in some contracts
the
not
example,
for
participation
engage
and
advantages
may,
effective
like
certain projects.
cultural
This
may
cultural
performed
project officials as
development of
taking
an
rituals
Communities
major
of
absence of large
rituals
perceived by
Dissimilar
foreign official
tolerate
which result
Initiation
members.
changes
can be
in
Bhooshan
(1979:7)
introduced by
skillful
remarks
that
planning
although
and national
31
effort,
case
such changes
where
cultural
to
values,
change
their
more
cultural
obstacles
if
or
can
This
values
deeply
embedded.
less
For
even
calories
slowly.
the
them.
diets
will occur
it
appropriately
cultural
factors
be
that
necessary,
community
leaders
In
the
existing
where
of
some
necessary
socio-cultural
described
so
be
than
through
to
it
be
may
into
acceptance
to
be
traditional methods
nutritio-nal
practices.
in
the
in
work
in
Such
a
to
those
project.
with
a
help
promote
few modifications
importance
projects
is
so much of ignorance
beliefs
and
concepts.
piece
in something
Some of
their
harmless,
and
of
that
It
paper,
which is
is
take much longer.
be changed.
or
of
like writing
making
changes
already there.
some beneficial,
changed relatively
not
but
customs will be
harmful ones need
of
better
any knowledge, as a different set
blank
few
planning
lack of
a
It
the following words:
Their situation is not
on
have
adjusting
family
The
development
in Jones et al
of
easier
with
change
consideration
like
much
to
have.
and
the
efforts
they would
foods
first
ideas
to
reluctant
that
the
deeper
respond
other
take
introducing
The
formulating
instance,
considerations
by Matthews
may
to
demonstrated
retard
cases
e.g.
people
as
may
when
they are
nutrition
for
projects.
use
can
overcome
programs
may
likely
example
better
be
are
is particularly
harmful,
some
and only the
Some can be
quickly, and others will
32
et
(Jones
al,
1982:140)
It
through
is important
beginning
pilot
projects
role
played
to help
they
where
undertaken
by
culture
by
people develop at
case
study
are.
A
OXFAM
America
and
their own
of
shows
in
traditions
of
one
the
pace
the
important
success
project
(Seidman, 1985:1-13).
The
Lusaka Workshops,
the
broader Southern
one
of
African
Tanzania, Zambia and
concern was
to help
representatives,
projects
to
which
the
produce
furniture;
hoes,
and
repair
small
of
example
industries
to
be one of the
one donor
generating projects.
the problem of
selection of
adequate
culture, traditions
and
threatening problems.
required by the project.
He did
of
For
small scale
organization provided a
industry with a cooperant whose level
those
designed
and make
farm equipment
by donor organizations without an
understanding of people's
problems
promote
and undertook
scale
three women's income
The evaluators discovered
projects
that
basic
aid through
impact of
They held workshops
included
The
respectively.
providing communities with skills
self-reliance.
in
from the Universities of
Zimbabwe
improve
under
held
program, was
Pilot
Zambia in 1984 with project holder
researchers and consultants
falling
the projects
skills
not
speak
exceeded
the
33
local
language and
workers
result
was
that it
by-passing
that
local
traditions,
and
confronted
failure
by
personnel
the
be
community
the
some
The
discover
how
funds, while
less
than three
is
that
are
more
project
rural
problem
consultants
on outside
available
familiar
holders.
particular
in
this
areas
was
thereby
locally.
with
In
She
cultures,
this
or
needs
to
case
lack
difficulties
as
identified
causing
of projects.
conducive
to
advantageous
at
of
of
poor
Although
always
rely
personnel
analysis
careful
attributes
to
problems
to
the
student observer
(1985:1)
qualified
year
of
the same issue.
tendencies
organizations'
over a
the majority
English.
committee was misusing
to discover
Seidman
of
took him
took a participant
weeks
argues
communicated with
through one manager who spoke
the managerial
it
he
the
to
existing
as
the
of
arising
resistance
the case of
refers
to
faced
with
fertility
methods
of
birth
even
from
The
control which
with
the
Muslim
population
were
used
modern
in
as
and
more
even
some
however,
encounters
Paul
of
(1982:152)
program which was
and
Islam beliefs
indigenous
was
using
the
country and
methods.
not
have achieved
they might
after
may
out
structures
beliefs.
indigenous
arising
control.
unfamiliar
stands
the Indonesian population
resistance
against
therefore
from
what
base
intervention. There are,
successes
project
still
existing
in
manifested
stage of the organizer's
records
it
development
recognize
efforts
institutional
In
order
to
were
get
34
the
communities
to
adjust
disseminated
information
groups,
they
This
and
case
implementation
overcome
some
traditional
successful
and
those
can
and
in
obstacles
were
were
use
against
the
from
beliefs.
those
that
We
the
can
matched
thereby
a
community
environment.
program
of
organisers
village
local
in
adaptation
project
of
the
flexibility
flexible
beliefs of communities.
methods,
the
arising
religious
projects
that
ideas
that
help
modern
through
tested
indicates
to
design
program so
conclude
traditional
adapting
as
differences
now
to
and
to
in
that
beliefs
traditional
35
III
AND
EVALUATION
It
is
now
clear
embarking
on
development
poverty.
As
stated
purpose of projects
the
reduce
from
poverty
thirteen
to
of
development
projects
and
that
results
in
unsuccessful.
from those
of
have
be
totally
basis
can
any
and
implementation of
fact
a
section
the
one
year
of
step
which
us
project
to
that
can
the
thesis
role
played
development
I
be
part II,
by
shall
projects.
of
The
planning
overlooked.
through
such
about
considered
outcomes
as
accrue
failed.
evaluate,
the value
indigenous
of
argument
that we consider as having
of
value
poverty.
be
the
positive
some
because of
developing
being made
back
results
of
been achieved
definitely
to
(1985:2)
the
cannot
is
indicators
phenomenon
are
main
the
to alleviate
and
takes
the
Project
each
are
alleviate
devastation
underestimate
to
information uncovered in
participation
in
still
Obviously
projects
this
a
is
fact,
there
In
people die
is
to
thesis
this
Hunger
in their attempts
whether
even
the
to
wrong
projects
This,
attempts.
be
of
effort
of human
lot
attempts have been
some
positive
poverty
would
implementing
Some
A
an
countries
in developing countries
illnesses which are
it
in
beginning
according
countries,
fact
the
poverty.
Though
developing
projects
eighteen million
poverty.
many
for development
e.g.
related
hunger
of
level
at
that
CONCLUSION
on
the
of community
culture,
in
the
36
The
paragraph
two
interact
development
the
in
and
grow
categorized
process
The
involvement
the
support
on
basis
the
in
of
their
they
which
the
foregoing
success
of
of
members
in
community
automatically results
of
the
types
in
determining
modification
may
that
of
projects
example choose the
the way
suggest
have
the
or
practices
Members may for
to
I
implementation of
incorporation
beliefs
like
in
projects.
planning and
the
factors
some
traditional
project
in
question.
of vegetables
can
They
preferences.
can gradually
they would
even
the modern
adjust
to
can
even
technological methods.
Participation
form
of
fund-raising.
those who
by
not outside
would
to
decide
building
brick,
on
a
wood
their
$
for
can
also
it
and
the
is
decision-making
on whether or
or
for
appealing
the
dam,
some
People
$ match
may
aid.
Where
horseback,
who might
then
so
do
or
a
is
for
member
there
is
to
bring
some
donkeys, or
even
the
back
of
basis
of
to
the
not
efforts.
This
likely
to
take
50
a
on
percent
community.
the
projects as against
is
contribute
therefore
can
in most development
of
promised
by the members
even
instance
volunteer
the
the
of
may
members
may
have
on
participation
planning
where
Community
members
the case in small
centralized
project
in kind.
water, on
insignificance
a
appealing,
personally
Community
where
contributions
prospective
heads.
particularly
financial
mean
the
to
contribute
already contributed in kind
to
the
take
Some donors
contribute
of
It
members
financial resources are actually needed.
body
executive
community
afford
can
rather
beneficiary
by
be relegated
seems
large
place.
to
be
projects
Even
in
37
large
projects
participation
especially where
*
learning
in
process
the case
sacrifice
This is
of
of the
in order
for
results
are
entirely
participants
Deedar
need
future dependency,
society
members
to be
to
successful.
realization of
to
thrifty and
sacrifice and
to
the
fact
that
automatically achieved,
donate their
be
gained
and
outcome of hard work and sacrifices.
learn
out
with a
to contribute
projects
not
ruled
involved.
reducing
the
learnt through
positive
are an
provides
experience thus
an understanding
be
be
foreign consultants are
The whole
e.g.
cannot
They
time and
available for
but
energy,
educational
sessions.
*
The
of
community takes
responsibilty
the project whether
There can be no
case the
project
it be positive
projection of blame
fails.
participation, project
for negative
difficult
Where
to convince
the
support future attempts
Development
Like
Programme
of
in
This
consequence
or negative.
to designers
is
in
lack of
responsible
they may find it
community of
the
need
to
project planning and
the case of
in Kenya,
involvement in planning raised
unrealistically.
there
any
organizers are held
consequences and
implementation.
for
the
lack of
Special Rural
community
people's expectations
is because officials who
38
planned
future
the project
benefits
to endorse.
informed
fell into
from what
Mbithi
through
(1974:140) says
to
such as infrastructure
In
and employment.
to
neglected
program.
plans
the
outcomes of the project
possible negative
are therefore trying
to a point
the
In
publicity.
the
this
positive
of disregarding
are convinced about
the community and
the
to
ready-made
the conditions
to do with
of
raised
the community
to get
incomes,
Such circumstances
needs of
cooperate through accepting
Often this has
program,
nature
were
the expected
consequences.
of the
the
such organizers
experimental
exist where planning officials
their perception
in each
for increasing
through misguided
case officials emphasized
community
people were
come through the
As a result expectations
unrealistically
that
Project area of
the process
explain
the
speeches
long impressive
which was
exaggerating
they expected
Special Rural Development
development
a trap of
project.
imposed by
donors.
For example at my workplace we would receive
implementing development
organizations and
receiving
would
be
individuals.
such funds
coming
projects
in
determine whether we
they would
order
still
to
funds
for
from several donor
Immediately after
inform us
see
needed
our
projects
some
that
they
so
additional
as
to
39
Such visits would often
funds.
months
the receipt
of
of
their
be within one to
funds.
circumstances a person organizing a
tempted
to
process
so as to
save
confirms
remarks
this idea when he
that
the Special Rural Development Program
requiring plans
short
*
directives
thwarted through
was
period of
Project
from the center
sustainance
continuity and
to depend on
commitment and
the project.
I wish to
increased
illustrate
of a project by
lack of continuity
a particular
is
ensured since
its own
members.
The dam
the danger of a
relating a story
local
involvement
became very
useful
to
as it was a source of water supply, but
came when members
to
initiative
local maintenance of
community where a
built a water dam without the
dam.
an unrealistic
the Harambee in Kenya where participation
involves
about
case of
time.
the community learns
e.g.
in the
participation
be formulated within
to
the
again
(1974:142)
Mbithi
implementation stage.
the planning
proceed to
time and
such
Under
project may be
the community from
exclude
three
Members
found a dog's
stopped using
even remove the carcass.
following
magistrate
message
that
to
there
the
is
government
of community
the community
the problem
carcass inside
the dam but
did
the
not care
Instead they conveyed the
local magistrate:
a dog's carcass
"Tell
that
in his dam,
40
come and remove
he must
it"
found the dam to be useful,
Although that community
the
they could not take
If
property.
to
proud of
identify
the Harambee
of
community
above
are
lack
towards
accept
that
development in communities
self-reliance.
their
the maternity home,
People
in
in
the
success
is
of member
new may be resisted.
to
note that
process.
in such a
for
projects
of
T h e
is usually accompanied
unwillingness
developing
insurmountable.
that
impression
important
to
take
countries
state of deprivation as a given.
their problems are
something
it
inherent
motivation manifested
of
ensures
countries,
some disadvantages
low level of
gives
exposition
always
participation
development in developing
there
the
in decision-making.
participation
the
the maintenance
in
the building and
school and
The
out.
laid
of the advantage
a good illustration
While
e.g.
projects
future
been
participation
maintenance of the high
is
for
dam would have
of community
the
Furthermore, during
some conditions
the
maintenance of
be
and would
with it
such an achievement.
planning process
example
themselves
the
in
involved
they would have
of such a dam
planning and building
learnt
been
community had
that
foreign
remained a
it
its
for
responsibility
a result
maintenance, as
(Dubazana,1980).
They tend
Any attempt
This can result
in
to
by
risks
sometimes
to
think
introduce
project delay.
41
Some members of
in
a
project
trying
to get
*
the community have
which
is
being
introduced
the co-operation of
by
a
Members
of
their needs
by
caused
previous
to
be unable
who
is
community
have
personal
differentiate
their wants.
and
participate
The reluctance to
from
community may
the
differences or they may
between
foreigner
the community.
The project may meet with opposition
members.
*
time participating
a difficult
in the project may be
involvement
of members
in projects
that failed.
*
participation by
Since
necessitate
that
that
they be
they can acquire
engage in an intended
subjected
some skills
project
some training
to
even before they
activity e.g.
provided with
training for empowerment and
provision of information necessary for
their
capacities
finance.
costly.
money
to become
lengthens the
process
limits
the case
Southern African Pilot Project where members
of the
were
local communities may
The whole process
Funding
Such a
and requires
may be too
extra
slow and
time
agencies might have
set
some
and there may
not
be enough
for the project
to invest
strengthening
self-reliant.
project
for
in the
training
process.
so
42
case
The
culture
While
no
is
there
culture
considered as
traits
may
particular
*
the
beliefs
the
among
the Special Rural
Chetric
(in Dixon's
Indian Women) that
employment outside households
resistance
population
to
because
of
clashes
cultural
implemented
could not
of
communalism would
development
projects.
incentive among all
people
provide
theoretical
fertile
a
accompanied
of
the African
that
ground
failed
Such projects
communalism was not
because
results
the
confirm the
postulations by president Nyerere,
culture
between organizers
and
of Ujamaa where
the Tanzanian cases
programs
in Kenya that
Development Projects
and community members,
for
to
program
control
*
predisposed
negatively
Brahmin and
up
the Indonesian case of
failed
can be wholly
certain cultural
Instead
rural co-operation among
women should not take
*
or
that
as
For example;
projects.
of
types
positively
be
either
projects.
condemned
totally
culture
also no
conducive to development.
case of
*
be
can
that
retarding development there is
development
inhibit
and
facilitate
both
can
indigenous
that
indicate
reviewed
studies
by
to join during
the
the work
process.
While
be
an obstacle
these
to
findings
development
indicate
the
that
cultural
following cases
beliefs may
as discussed
in
43
the
previous
development
chapter,
highlight
cultural
to
projects:
*
the Harambee projects
traditional patterns
e.g.
that adapted
to
suit
toward
role (cf.
the case of
president's
the
after
is
important
are
resistance,
some
to
a
through
obtains
from
indigenous
beliefs
overemphasize
these
skillful
the
both
the
to
preparation of
program which
encounters
note
as
This,
of
the
finally made a
resistance,
involvement
even
positive
in
have
such
of
and
The
on
there
negative
of
eventually managed
perspectives
that
cases
traditional
(1981:9)
efforts.
is
the
encountered
Pollnac
planning
development
the
that
having
theoretical
in
husbands to women's changed
projects might
breakthrough.
achieved
and
in community education.
considered
of
traditional homes
only enhanced after the
community members
achieve
the
Indonesian population
success was
that
projects
husband).
breakthrough
It
extended
the modern
building modern
the adjustment of members'
*
and
traditional women moving away from traditional
midwives
projects
receptivity
argues,
impression
the
is a
one
role
of
tendency
aspects
of
is
to
culture
in development projects.
May
development
represent
a
be
the
projects
particular
most
are
important
not
culture.
fact
culturally
Gran
to
free
(1983:177)
note
but
is
they
talking
that
also
about
44
international
experts
makes
international actor at
cultural norms,
and
that
tendency
associating
even
of
if
of
or
resistancies
because
of
the
of
is
by
aggravated
such
lack
of
in
a
in
the
self-determination as discussed earlier
some
cultural
is
This
is
which
high
a
of
rate
Such a problem
local
of
this
accepted
efforts.
Western world.
involvement
to
superiority
manifested
is
culture,
be
always
cultural
the
there
contrary
will
and
for each."
particular
"development"
of
development
advancements
technological
there
notion
common
uneven
views
devised
Since
with
"...no
self-interests
must be
culture.
adopting
to
observation:
devoid of
"development"
"development",
clashes
result
comes
the Western
means
that
definitions
present
important
general strategies
is
Oftentimes
an
in
communities
on in this
thesis.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The
conclusion we reach
are
tradition
In
therefore recommended
developing
to
enhance success
*
the
that
the organizers
adopt
in development
since
planning
and
it
expositions
is
strategies
in
order
projects:
efforts
at
their tendencies
motivation manifested in
risks
and
of development projects
following
the
participation,
project
above
face
focus development
esteem
of
the
countries
in
in
considerations
important
implementation.
local
is that
revitalizing people's
are
those of
lack of
their unwillingness to
toward self-reliance,
this
can
take
the
take
form of
45
community education
in
engage community members
*
(community members) can
evaluation whereby they
identify
failures
causes of
*
avoid
an
*
determine,
any recruitment
degree and nature of
should
be realistic,
of
projects
local government
leaders,
and weaknesses
with
together
will obtain
benefits members
of
covering both strengths
new venture
their
such errors in
exaggeration
from the project;
previous
of their
this may -help in devising new
development efforts,
ways of overcoming
project
of
the process
the
participation required in
specific cases
*
allocate
some
funds for educating
time and
for effective
program planning and
avoid coercing people against
*
religious beliefs,
as
but
projects to those
beneficial and
meeting
gain more
these
traditional and
their
time to
convince themselves
adopting alien methods
local customs
that
also avoid the uprooting
from their traditions
By
implementation
change gradually so
to give people enough
adapt
necessary
introduce
against possible risks of
*
skills
and other
communities on leadership
as much as
recommendations,
effectiveness in enhancing
I
are
of people
possible.
believe
that
their goal
projects
will
of development.
REFERENCES
The Development Experience of Nepal.
B.S.
Concept Public Company, 1979.
Bhooshan,
Qualitative Research
Bogdan R.C. and S.K. Biklen,
Boston: Allyn and Bacon Inc., 1982.
New Delhi:
for Education.
S. Migot-Adholla and
Cliffe, L., P. Lawrence, W. Luttrell,
Dar es Salaam:
Tanzania.
in
Cooperation
Rural
S. Saul,
1975.
House,
Tanzania Publishing
Dixon, R.B.
Rural Women At Work.
University, 1978.
Baltimore:
John Hopkins
Unpublished Story Used at the University of
Dubazana, H.J.B.
Zululand as an Illustration of Need to Involve Local
1980.
People in Projects.
Hirschman, A.O.
D.C.:
Development by People.
1983.
Gran, G.
Hunger Project.
York:
G.E.
Jones,
Washington
Development Projects Observed.
The Brookings Institution, 1967.
New York:
Scientific,
Praeger
Ending Hunger: An Idea Whose Time
Praeger Publishers, 1975.
Progress
and M.J. Rolls, (editors).
Extension and Community Development.
Wiley & Sons, 1982.
New
Has Come.
in Rural
New York:
John
A
Korten, D.C. "Community Organization and Rural Development:
Administration
Public
Learning Process Approach."
September/October 1980.
Review.
Mbithi,
P.
Nash, J.,
Omond, J.
Paul,
S.
Nairobi:
Rural Sociology and Rural Development.
African Literature Bureau, 1974.
East
Popular Participation and
J. Dandler and N. Hopkins,
Paris: Mouton Publishers, 1976.
Social Change.
The Apartheid Handbook.
1985.
New York:
Penguin Books,
Managing Development Programs: The Lessons
Boulder: Westview Press, 1982.
of Success.
Sociocultural Aspects of Developing Small-Scale
Pollnac. R.B.
World
Fisheries: Delivering Services to the Poor.
1981.
October
no.490,
Paper
Bank Staff Working
Ray,
J.K. Organizing Villagers
for Self
Reliance.
Bangladesh:
Bangladesh
Academy for Rural Development,
Development
Rondinelli, D.A.
Methuen
New York:
1983.
Projects and Policy Experiments.
& Company LTD., 1983.
Rondinelli,
Pennsylvania:
Planning Development Projects.
D.A.
Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross Incorporation, 1977.
Seidman, A.
Southern African Pilot 'Learning Process' Project.
Paper Prepared for OXFAM America.
January 15, 1985.
Special Rural Development Programme: Occasional Paper no.8.
Nairobi: Institute for Development Studies, University
of Nairobi, 1973.
Weber,
G.H. and L.M. Cohen, Beliefs and
Human Sciences Press, 1982.
Self-Help.
New york: