Citizens Participation University 2011
June 20-24, Kunbabony, Hungary
CEE CN CITIZEN PARTICIPATION UNIVERSITY 2011
In 2011 CEE CN held its third annual Citizen Participation University. The main topics this
year were:

Examination of five different types of intervention: community development,
community organising, advocacy, service delivery and social movements.

Implementation of the Code of Good Practice for Civil Participation in the DecisionMaking Process in order to promote citizen participation.

Introduction of the Citizen Participation Study with focus on
 How the Code is implemented in the participating countries
 The opportunities for five different interventions in each country in order to
understand them better and to use them more effectively
Participants had the chance to contribute their ideas on these topics throughout the
duration of the University. These were then summarized at the end of the week.
Kunbabony, 21 June 2011
After an informal introductory first evening, the University commenced with a formal welcome
by Máte Varga (HACD) and Chuck Hirt (CEE CN). The main topics to be dealt with this year
(above) were introduced to the participants, then a series of plenary sessions and workshops
followed.
PLENARY SESSION: ADVOCACY
Férenc Peterfi (HACD): Advocacy, protection of interests, control of power.
Férenc Peterfi opened up with an overview of the current state of advocacy and participative
democracy in the region. He then talked about the necessary changes needed for the
successful protection of public interests and control of power, including:
 Need to raise awareness and strengthen community consciousness within the
communities
 Potential to employ experts
 Time needed for consultation and negotiations
 Training, independent resources and the support of institutions
Izabella Marton, Hungarian Anti Poverty Network: Advocacy, the practice of the European
and the Hungarian Anti-Poverty Networks.
Izabella Marton introduced alternative definitions of advocacy with an emphasis on
developing strategies for achieving targets, including:
 Reinforcing the influence on public policies, decisions and resource allocations.
 Aiming strategies at policy makers, political, economic and social systems and
institutions.
 Changing attitudes from reactive to proactive, from confrontational to collaborative.
WORKSHOP: ADVOCACY
This workshop gave participants the opportunity to express their advocacy experiences.
Participants worked in two groups, in pairs within each group. They then shared their
experiences and understanding of the concept of advocacy with the rest of the group:
 In order to teach about advocacy, the community has to be identified as such first.
 Freedom of thought must be emphasized.
 A defined strategy is needed for success.
 Important figures at local level have to be involved.
 Advocacy should be an important part of civic education. Citizens must know and
understand the existing laws and their own rights.
PLENARY SESSION: COMMUNITY ORGANISING
Michael Rothschuh, Germany, member of FOCO
Michael Rothschuh introduced the concepts of „community organising“ and „community“ and
put them in the context of CEE. As an example, he introduced ACORN (Association of
Community Organizations for Reform Now) which has come to be a pressure group, a labour
union, a local political action committee, a housing developer, a school and a leadership
training institute founder.
His talk put an emphasis on the differences between community organising and community
development: community development aims, with the help of professionals, to change
spaces for the people of the community, whereas community organising seeks to empower
the people of the community so that they can directly implement change.
Chuck Hirt, CKO, Slovakia
Chuck Hirt then spoke about the main aims of community organizing: helping citizens build
skills which would then help them be more involved in the public arena.
WORKSHOP: COMMUNITY ORGANISING
Working in two groups, participants discussed the similarities and differences between
community organizing and advocacy. A summary of the results is as follows:
Participants concluded that both areas need change and better strategy development. The
use of the media to create publicity is also a common goal, as well as the need to target
decision-makers directly.
Unlike advocacy, however, CO does not speak for the group. While advocacy aims to
influence rules and laws, CO’s main aim is to build stronger citizen organizations. Similarly,
advocacy needs professionals and experts to implement its aims, whereas CO develops
citizens‘ skills, thus while advocacy works for citizens, CO works with them. The conclusion
was that developing CO is a lengthier process.
Kunbabony, 22 June 2011
The second day began with an activity introduced by the Russian delegation. Participants
were asked to write on a piece of paper and in their own language their wish for the rest of
the group. The wishes were then read out loud in front of the group.
PLENARY SESSION: SERVICES
Gabriela Benedikt, member of HACD
Gabriela Benedikt works in the sphere of service provision for NGOs and development of
leaders. Her talk was focused on ambivalence.
Service provision comes from three different directions: the State, the business sector, and
NGOs. The latter provide services where there is a gap in the system, although at times
NGOs would take on new initiatives. However, a consensus is needed to identify whose
responsibility it is to provide services.
Due to a triangulation between providers (NGOs), funding donors (stakeholders), and targets
(citizens), NGOs have to divide their energy and in many cases the majority of it ends up
concentrated on their work with donors while their relationship with targets weakens. How
could the right balance be achieved?
Zsuzsa Mezarós, Association of Community Workers of Upper Kiskunság, HACD.
Zsuzsa Mezarós introduced the topic in a different context on the basis that the needs of
today’s more complex communities have to be addressed. Consumerism’s new role in
society and the social gaps it has created must also be taken into account because
community services depend on social economy.
WORKSHOP: SERVICES
As part of this workshop, participants shared their ideas regarding bridging the gap between
NGOs, donors, and the people. The following suggestions were analyzed:
 Ownership of services by the people.
 Caution regarding money resources.
 The need to widen the scope of available resources which would include not only
money, but also land etc.
 Improving the balance of power between NGOs, the state, and stakeholders.
 The need for transparency in donor’s agendas and improved communication between
NGOs, donors, and targets.
PLENARY SESSION: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Aiden Lloyd, CEBSD-CWC
Aiden Lloyd introduced the concept of „community“ as one which has many meanings and
definitions. He then proceeded to talk about the background of community development:
cooperative building, decolonisation, building nations, social work as a collective way to meet
individual needs, and the lessons learned from development work. Community development
represents a balance of knowledge, skills, and values which has to be participative and
empowering with a commitment to social justice, equality, and inclusion.
Magdalena Tancau, Pour la Solidarité, Belgium: Community Development between Self Help
Ideology and Radical Practice
Magdalena Tancau talked about community development as a commitment to the role of
community work in achieving transformative change for social and environmental justice. She
described the key purpose of CD to be to collectively bring about social change and social
justice by working with communities to:
 Identify their needs, rights and responsibilities.
 Plan, organize and take action.
 Evaluate the effectiveness and impact of that action.
Community development also involves working with public authorities, services and
agencies, to enable them to better understand, engage with and respond to communities.
WORKSHOP: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
In this workshop, the above speakers divided participants into two groups and set two
different questions for each group. The participants then discussed the questions in their
respective groups and presented their results to the rest. The questions were as follows:
1) Is it possible to be both for and against the state and why?
2) Is the CD sector capable of developing coherence and impart its own agenda? Can it
develop the coalitions/alliances needed in order to influence change?
Kunbabony, 22 June 2011
PLENARY SESSION: SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
Mauricio Deliz, Change the World, Norway
Mauricio Deliz talked about grassroot alternatives to current politics. He introduced three
such alternatives: permaculture – eco-villages – transition towns:
1) Permaculture: means the use of renewable energies, also in urban areas
2) Eco-villages: represents the idea of living and working together
3) Transition towns: is a collective term for the combination of permaculture, eco-village,
theatre, and participatory processes which would change the current economic frame.
Transition means getting people together and talking about decisions in order to
produce more locally, and create a more robust society.
7 principles of the transition model were introduced:
1) Having a positive vision.
2) Giving people access to relevant information and trusting them to make good
decisions.
3) Inclusion and openness.
4) Sharing and networking.
5) Building resilience.
6) Internal and external restructuring.
7) Proximity principle: self-organization and decision-making at the appropriate level.
COFFEE DIALOGUE
In this exercise, four tables were laid out, a question set on each one. A host person received
participants at each table and introduced the question/topic of discussion. Ideas were written
on the paper tablecloths in order to be reviewed at the end among the big group.
Table 1. What would you bring home/to your home organization from CPU 2011?
Table 2. Suggestions for general activities for CEE Citizens Network. Suggestions for
activities for partners/countries.
Table 3. Ideas for Citizen Participation University 2012
Table 4. Ideas for training and learning
Kunbabony, 23 June 2011
PARALLEL WORKSHOPS (I): CPStudy and TRANSITION TOWNS
CPS
CEE CN‘s Citizen Participation Study project was introduced to the participants, and its main
aims and objectives were discussed and analyzed among them. Ideas about how the study
would be carried out and its expected outcomes were also considered. Below are some of
the comments that participants made:
 Neighbouring EU projects should consider to include non-EU countries.
 The problem with projects financed by the Grundtvig grand is that they are far too
short-termed. Participants suggested to plan a long-term project and consult all
partners about how to develop it.

All CEE CN and CEBSD members should be included in the project in order to profile
the network.
TRANSITION TOWNS
Mauricio Deliz, Change the World, Norway
PARALLEL WORKSHOPS (II): ENGAGING THE YOUTH, COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS,
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION WEEK
ENGAGING THE YOUTH
This workshop gave participants the opportunity to discuss the ways in which they can
engage the young members of society to be more active in their local communities and
beyond. Participants agreed that it is important to get our young involved by engaging them
in concrete activities, yet without directing them what to do. CEE CN agreed that it will,
through its members, strongly support activities aimed at youth participation. One of these
could, for example, be to invite the leaders of youth organizations to the next CPU.
COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS
Thomas Dahlberg, CESAM, Sweden
Thomas Dahlberg opened up by explaining how local development partnerships are needed
in order to promote sustainability and community development. He talked about developing
skills within the community that would attract people’s involvement as well as make citizens
more employable and active. Thus, partnerships need to be developed between Economy,
Environment, Culture and Society.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION WEEK
Máte Varga, HACD, Hungary
Citizen Participation Week is CEE CN’s biggest event and participation from all members is
strongly encouraged. Participants contributed ideas on the kinds of simultaneous action
which could be implemented throughout CEE CN’s member states. Merging CPW with the
European Local Democracy week was also discussed.
2013 EUROPEAN YEAR OF ACTIVE CITIZEN
Máte Varga, HACD
2013 has been designated as EUROPEAN YEAR OF THE ACTIVE CITIZEN and ideas on
how the network and member organizations will get involved were discussed at the end of
Citizen Participation University. 2013 also celebrates the 100th anniversary of Robert Jung, a
journalist concerned with how to bring democracy back to the people. It was suggested that
the anniversary is used to emphasize the importance of democracy throughout the year.