Addis Ababa University
College of Business and Economics
Department of Public Administration and Development Management
Public Participation in Local Development: Context, process, and effect;
the case of Bishoftu City Administration, Oromia
By: Bahiru Detti Heyi
June, 2018
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Addis Ababa University
College of Business and Economics
Department of Public Administration and Development Management
Public Participation in Local Development: Context, process, and effect;
the case of Bishoftu City Administration, Oromia
By: Bahiru Detti Heyi
Supervisor: Degefa Tolossa (PhD)
(Assoc. Professor)
A dissertation submitted to the Department of Public Administration and
Development Management of Addis Ababa University in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
in Public Management and Policy
June, 2018
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Addis Ababa University
College of Business and Economics
Department of Public Administration and Development Management
This is to certify that the dissertation prepared by Bahiru Detti Heyi entitled “Public
Participation in Local Development: Context, process, and effect; the case of Bishoftu City
Administration, Oromia”, which is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Public Management and Policy, complies with the regulations
of the University and meets the accepted standards with respect to originality and quality.
Approved by Board of Examiners:
_____________________________ Signature_______________
Advisor
_____________________________ Signature_______________
Internal Examiner
_____________________________ Signature_______________
Internal Examiner
____________________________ Signature________________
Chair of Department or Graduate Programs Coordinator
Date________________
Date________________
Date________________
Date________________
Declaration
I, the undersigned hereby declare that this PhD dissertation entitled “Public Participation in
Local Development: context, process and effect, the case of Bishoftu City Administration,
Oromia” is my original work and has not been presented for a degree in any other university and
that all sources of materials used for the thesis have been duly acknowledged.
Declared by:
Confirmed by Advisor:
Name: __________________________
Name: ___________________________
Signature: _______________________
Signature: ________________________
Date: ___________________________
Date: ____________________________
Abstract
The purpose of this dissertation is to explore the situations of participation at grassroots level
with the particular reference to Bishoftu City Administration. The problems associated with
public participation are lack of genuine participation, elite domination of decision making, lack
of commitment by the state to create a space for public participation, unfavorable hierarchical
arrangement of administrative structure, and weak local government capacity and
irresponsiveness. These factors remain empowerment an empty and unfulfilled promise and
prohibit equitable access to benefits of participatory development. The aim of the dissertation is
to examine contexts, nature and extent of participation; and empowerment through participation.
Through addressing these issues the dissertation advances knowledge of participatory approach,
institution, and empowerment; and orients policy makers and administrators the institutional
gap in collective public action. Pragmatism research philosophy is adopted to guide the overall
process of the research. Mixed methods research approach is applied to address research
objectives. Concurrent/parallel triangulation mixed method design (QUAN + QUAL) with equal
orientation for both quantitative and qualitative strands is followed. The findings of the study
indicate that there are general legal provisions about the right of the public to participate in the
development of their affairs. However, there is serious gap between legal provisions and their
implementation on the ground. The capacity of City Government is inadequate to facilitate
participation in development. Participation is undertaken through financial, material, labor, and
professional services. Financial contribution is a prominent over other forms, since it is a
precondition to acquire public services and cost-sharing policy of City Government.
Participation in development is top-down approach in Bushoftu City Administration, which
characterized by elites’ domination of decisions making. Participation is influenced by
employment in civil service and Non Governmental Organization, City Government capacity and
responsiveness. The overall extent of public participation is low in Bushoftu City Administration.
Participation in development results in a relatively better personal empowerment compared to
social and political empowerment. It enhances economic empowerment through creating access
to economic resources and opportunity structure that enhance economic empowerment. I
conclude that if the public get favorable platform to participate in development activities and
their concerns are given due consideration by the Government, it has the power to solve its
problems by itself. However, public participation in development is not to the extent that brings
transformation and does not bring people who are outside the decision making process in to it.
The public is recognized as passive recipients of development benefits and clients rather than
agent and participant in development efforts. The role of government has to be limited to
facilitation rather than maker and provider of local development. The City Government needs
intensive capacity building that creates responsive and effective public administration. The
stipulation of explicit rules and regulations is required to guide participation and the sharing of
benefits of participatory development. The proliferation of Community based organizations is
necessary to facilitate public participation in local development.
Key Words: Local development, Public, Participation, institution, empowerment, City
Government.
i
Acknowledgements
First and for most, I extend my gratitude to ‘Waaqa’ (God) for creating ups and downs and
finally leading to success. Without His support all my efforts would have not come to an end.
Next, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my dissertation supervisor, Dr. Degefa
Tolossa, for his constructive comments and scholarly advice that shapes the paper throughout the
study. Dr., you really show me the way to find myself. Without your enthusiastic insight and
constructive comments my endeavor throughout dissertation work would have not completed.
I would like to thank Mr. Mekuria Meshesha and Mrs. Tsige Beyene for your persistent moral
support and your belongingness in the time of difficulties throughout my study. My deepest
gratitude goes to Dr. Jemal Abagisa for his persistent support throughout my study and his
commitment to read and comment my paper despite his busy schedule. I am grateful for my
friend Debebe Alemu, who took a trouble in administering questionnaire and assisting FGD
discussions. Debe, you really made great contribution to my study through taking the hardship of
Kality dusts and humid climate of Bishoftu, while we were generating data for the study. I would
like to thank Dr. Tamene Keneni for his commitment to edit the paper starting from the stage of
questionnaire to the final manuscript. My deepest gratitude goes to my friend Tariku Dejene, for
his relentless comments and supports throughout the study. Tariku, I have no word to state your
generous supports. A friend in deed is a friend in need; I thank you very much really. My
deepest gratitude goes to Dr. Gemechu Ararsa, Guteta Goshu, Moges Tufa, and Feyisa Girma for
your indiscriminate fight against injustices when I joined the program and persistent moral
support throughout my study. Without your efforts, my intension to pursue PhD would have been
terminated from the outset.
Lastly and most importantly, I am grateful for Bishoftu City residents for their cooperation in
providing relevant data for the study; and Bishoftu City Administration (BCA) workers,
especially Mohammed Gada, Getnet Gada, and Banti Kabata for their generous efforts to
organize FGDs, comments, ideas and persistent support throughout my field work.
ii
Table of Contents
Abstract ............................................................................................................................................ i
Acknowledgements ..........................................................................................................................ii
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................iii
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ vii
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ viii
Acronyms ........................................................................................................................................ ix
Chapter 1 : An Overview of the Dissertation.................................................................................. 1
1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Context of the Research ........................................................................................................ 1
1.3 Statement of the Problem ...................................................................................................... 4
1.4 Research Questions ............................................................................................................... 6
1.5 Research Objectives .............................................................................................................. 7
1.6 Significance of the Study ................................................................................................. 7
1.7 Scope and Limitation of the Study........................................................................................ 7
1.8 Research Site and Local Development Activities ................................................................. 8
1.9 Structure of the Dissertation ............................................................................................... 10
Chapter 2 : Review of Related Literature ..................................................................................... 11
2.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 11
2.2 Conceptual Framework ....................................................................................................... 11
2.2.1 Participation ................................................................................................................. 11
2.2.2 The Emergence of Participatory Development ............................................................ 15
2.2.3 Public Participation ...................................................................................................... 18
2.2.4 Local Development ...................................................................................................... 19
2.2.5 Empowerment .............................................................................................................. 21
2.2.6 Institution ..................................................................................................................... 26
2.3 Relationship among main Concepts.................................................................................... 27
2.3.1 Participation and Empowerment .................................................................................. 28
2.3.2 Role of Institution in enhancing Participation and Empowerment .............................. 31
2.4 Theoretical Frameworks ..................................................................................................... 32
2.4.1 Ladder of Citizen’s Participation ................................................................................. 33
2.4.2 Typologies of Participation .......................................................................................... 37
2.4.3 Empowerment Framework........................................................................................... 42
2.5 Integration of Theories and concepts .................................................................................. 49
2.6 Review of Empirical Literature .......................................................................................... 50
2.7 Summary ............................................................................................................................. 52
Chapter 3 : Research Methodology............................................................................................... 53
3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 53
3.2 Pragmatism Philosophical Perspective: Rationales ............................................................ 53
3.3 Mixed Methods Research Approach: Rationales ................................................................ 57
3.4 Types of Data ...................................................................................................................... 58
3.5 Methods and Process of Data Collection ............................................................................ 59
3.5.1 Interview ...................................................................................................................... 59
iii
3.5.2 Focus Group Discussion (FGD)................................................................................... 60
3.5.3 Document Analysis ...................................................................................................... 61
3.5.4 Key Informant Interview.............................................................................................. 62
3.5.5 Questionnaire Survey ................................................................................................... 62
3.6 Sampling Design ................................................................................................................. 67
3.6.1 Sampling Techniques ................................................................................................... 67
3.6.2 Sample Size.................................................................................................................. 68
3.7 Methods of Data Analysis ................................................................................................... 71
3.7.1 Method of Qualitative Data Analysis .......................................................................... 71
3.7.2 Methods of Quantitative Data Preparation, Analysis, and Presentation ...................... 72
3.8 Methods of Ensuring the Quality of the Research .............................................................. 75
3.8.1 Trustworthiness of Qualitative Strand ......................................................................... 75
3.8.2 Validity and Reliability of Quantitative Strand ........................................................... 76
3.9 Ethical considerations ......................................................................................................... 77
3.10 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 77
Chapter 4 : Background of the Study Area ................................................................................... 80
4.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 80
4.2 Foundation and Administrative Status of Bishoftu City ..................................................... 80
4.3 Location, Topography and Climate Condition ................................................................... 81
4.4 Administrative Structure of Bishoftu City .......................................................................... 82
4.5 Structure of Bishoftu City Government .............................................................................. 83
4.6 Socio-economic Conditions ................................................................................................ 85
4.6.1 Population .................................................................................................................... 85
4.6.2 Economic Sectors......................................................................................................... 87
4.6.3 Tourism, culture and religion ....................................................................................... 88
4.7 Infrastructure ....................................................................................................................... 92
4.7.1 Road ............................................................................................................................. 93
4.7.2 Telephone and Postal Service ...................................................................................... 93
4.7.3 Electric Power Supply.................................................................................................. 93
4.7.4 Water Supply ............................................................................................................... 94
4.7.5 Land Fill Site................................................................................................................ 94
4.8 Social services ..................................................................................................................... 94
4.8.1 Education ..................................................................................................................... 94
4.8.2 Health service............................................................................................................... 96
4.9 Summary ............................................................................................................................. 96
Chapter 5 : Institutional Contexts of Participation ....................................................................... 98
5.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 98
5.2 Characteristics of the Respondents ..................................................................................... 98
5.3 Legal and Policy Frameworks for Public Participation .................................................... 100
5.3.1 Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) ..................... 100
5.3.2 Revised Constitution of Oromia National Regional State (ONRS) ........................... 101
5.3.3 Oromia Urban Local Government Proclamation No. 65/2003 .................................. 102
5.3.4 Oromia Industry and Urban Development Bureau (OIUDB) Public Participation
Manual ................................................................................................................................ 104
iv
5. 4 Capacity of Bishoftu City Government ........................................................................... 105
5.4.1 Authority of the City Government ............................................................................. 105
5.4.2 Organizational Structure Arrangement ...................................................................... 107
5.4.3 Human Resource ........................................................................................................ 111
5.4.4 Level of Capacity ....................................................................................................... 113
5.5 Responsiveness of City Government to Public Participation ........................................... 116
5.6 Development Committee .................................................................................................. 120
5.7 Community Participation Board ....................................................................................... 121
5.8 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 123
Chapter 6 : Nature of Public Participation .................................................................................. 125
6.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 125
6.2 Forms of Participation....................................................................................................... 125
6.3 Public Participation: voluntary or involuntary .................................................................. 127
6.4 Approach of Participation: top-down or bottom-up.......................................................... 130
6.5 Comparison of Participation along Demographic and Socio-economic Characteristics .. 134
6.6 Association of Demographic and Socio-economic Characteristics and Participation ...... 139
6.6.1 Association of Employment Category and Participation ........................................... 140
6.6.2 Association of Educational Level and Participation .................................................. 142
6.6.3 Association of Occupation and Participation ............................................................. 143
6.6.4 Association of Income and Participation ................................................................... 144
6.7 Determinants of Participation ........................................................................................... 145
6.7.1 Checking Assumptions of Regression Analysis ........................................................ 147
6.7.2 Model Evaluation ....................................................................................................... 148
6.7.3 Estimates of Independent Variables Influence on Participation ................................ 148
6.8 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 150
Chapter 7 : Extent of Public Participation .................................................................................. 152
7.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 152
7.2 Extent of Participation in Needs Identification ................................................................. 154
7.3 Extent of Participation in Needs Priority Setting .............................................................. 157
7.4 Extent of Participation in Planning ................................................................................... 159
7.5 Extent of Participation in Monitoring ............................................................................... 161
7.6 Extent of Participation in Performance Evaluation .......................................................... 163
7.7 Overall Extent of Participation ......................................................................................... 165
7.8 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 167
Chapter 8 : Empowerments through Participation ...................................................................... 169
8.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 169
8.2 Checking Assumptions of Multiple Regression ............................................................... 169
8.2.1 Sample Size................................................................................................................ 169
8.2.2 Multicollinearity ........................................................................................................ 170
8.2.3 Outlier ........................................................................................................................ 170
8.2.4 Normality and Linearity............................................................................................. 171
8.3 Personal Empowerment through Participation ................................................................. 172
8.3.1 Model Evaluation ....................................................................................................... 172
8.3.2 The Effect of Participation on Personal Empowerment ............................................ 173
v
8.3.3 Item Analysis of Personal Empowerment through Participation ............................... 175
8.4 Social Empowerment through Participation ..................................................................... 178
8.4.1 Model Evaluation ....................................................................................................... 178
8.4.2 Effect of Participation on Social Empowerment ....................................................... 179
8.4.3 Item Analysis of Social Empowerment through Participation .................................. 181
8.5 Political Empowerment through Participation .................................................................. 183
8.5.1 Model Evaluation ....................................................................................................... 184
8.5.2 The Effect of Participation on Political Empowerment ............................................. 184
8.6 Economic Empowerment through Participation ............................................................... 189
8.6.1 Corruption: An Impediment to Economic Empowerment ......................................... 191
8.7 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 193
Chapter 9 : Conclusions, Contributions and the Way Forward .................................................. 195
9.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 195
9.2 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 195
9.2.1 Nature and Extent of Participation ............................................................................. 195
9.2.2 Institutional Contexts of Participation ....................................................................... 197
9.2.3 Empowerment through Participation ......................................................................... 197
9.3 Contributions of the Research ........................................................................................... 198
9.3.1 Theoretical/knowledge Contributions ........................................................................ 198
9.3.2 Methodological Contributions ................................................................................... 199
9.3.3 Policy/Practical contributions .................................................................................... 200
9.4 The way forward ............................................................................................................... 201
9.5 Recommendations for Further Research ........................................................................... 202
References ............................................................................................................................... 203
Annexes........................................................................................................................................x
Annex 1: Codebook of collapsed variables used in analysis ...................................................x
Annex 2: Codebook of defining Multiple-Response items......................................................x
Annex 3: Codebook of total scale scores used in analysis...................................................... xi
Annex 4: Collinearity Statistics of predictors included in predicting participation in
development. .......................................................................................................................... xii
Annex 5: Mahalanobis distance statistics and Cook’s Distance value of determinants of
participation .......................................................................................................................... xiii
Annex 6: Normal P-P Plot of Regression Standardized Residual ........................................ xiii
Appendices ................................................................................................................................ xiv
Appendix A: Questionnaire for Households ......................................................................... xiv
Appendix B: Focus Group Discussion Guide with Residents .............................................. xix
Appendix C: Interview Guide for Development Committee Leaders .................................. xxi
Appendix D: Interview Guide for Public Officials and Experts .......................................... xxii
Glossary .................................................................................................................................. xxiv
vi
List of Figures
Figure 2.1: Conceptual framework ............................................................................................................. 28
Figure 2.2: Eight rungs on ladder of citizen participation .......................................................................... 35
Figure 3.1: Multi-stage sampling for quantitative strand of the study ........................................................ 68
Figure 4.1: Administrative map of Bishoftu City ....................................................................................... 83
Figure 4.2: Organizational structure of Bishoftu City Government............................................................ 84
Figure 4.3: Trends of population growth, BCA .......................................................................................... 86
Figure 4.4: Irrecha Celebration, 2015 ......................................................................................................... 90
Figure 5.1: The levels of City Government structure ............................................................................... 108
Figure 6.1: Forms of Participation ............................................................................................................ 125
Figure 6.2: Factors that motivate to participation in development ........................................................... 128
Figure 7.1: Flow of development needs identification through tiers of City Government ....................... 155
Figure 8.1: Normal P-P Plot of Regression standardized Residuals ......................................................... 171
vii
List of Tables
Table 2.1: Pretty’s (1995) Typology of Participation ................................................................................. 39
Table 2.2: White's typology of participation ............................................................................................... 41
Table 2.3: Implications of different dimensions of power .......................................................................... 43
Table 3.1: Demographic and socio-economic characteristics included in the questionnaire ...................... 63
Table 3.2: Indictors of City Government capacity and their sources .......................................................... 64
Table 3.3: Indicators of empowerments and their sources .......................................................................... 65
Table 3.4: selection of proportional HHs from sample gandas ................................................................... 70
Table 5.1: Profile of the respondents ......................................................................................................... 99
Table 5.2: Item analysis for City Government Capacity to facilitate Participation (N= 418, Mean (M) =
2.05) .......................................................................................................................................................... 113
Table 5.3: Level of City Government capacity to facilitate participation in development ....................... 115
Table 5.4: The City Government responsive to participation ................................................................... 117
Table 5.5: Nature of CPB in BCA ............................................................................................................ 122
Table 6.1: Channels of participation in identifying local development needs .......................................... 131
Table 6.2: Channels of participation in setting priority of needs ............................................................. 132
Table 6.3: Mann-Whitney U Test of Females and males participation in the phases of local development
.................................................................................................................................................................. 135
Table 6.4: Kruskal-Wallis Tests of participation along demographic and socio-economic characteristics
.................................................................................................................................................................. 135
Table 6.5: Follow-up Mann-Whitney U tests between selected categories of demographic and Socioeconomic characteristics. .......................................................................................................................... 136
Table 6.6: Chi-Square test of demographic and socio-economic characteristics and participation .......... 140
Table 6.7: Overview of Variables Used and Expected Effects ................................................................ 146
Table 6.8: Model test: ANOVA ............................................................................................................... 148
Table 6.9: Regression Coefficients for determinant of participation ....................................................... 149
Table 7.1: Distribution of public participation in the phases of local development ................................. 153
Table 7.2: Items analysis for level of participation (N = 418, Mean = 2.08) ............................................ 154
Table 7.3: Overall Level of public participation ...................................................................................... 165
Table 8.1: Collinearity of predictors of empowerments .......................................................................... 170
Table 8.2: Maximum values of Mahalanobis and Cook’s Distances ....................................................... 171
Table 8.3: Model test: ANOVA ............................................................................................................... 173
Table 8.4: Multiple Regression Estimates of Personal Empowerment through Participation ................. 174
Table 8.5: Item Analysis for Personal Empowerment through Participation (N= 418, M = 2.34) .......... 176
Table 8.6: Model Test: ANOVA.............................................................................................................. 179
Table 8.7: Multiple Regression Estimates of Social empowerment through participation ....................... 180
Table 8.8: Item Analysis for Social Empowerment through Participation (N= 418, M = 2.18). .............. 182
Table 8.9: Model Test: ANOVA............................................................................................................... 184
Table 8.10: Multiple Regression Estimates of Political empowerment through participation ................. 185
viii
Acronyms
BCA: Bishoftu City Administration
BCG: Bishoftu City Government
CPB: Community Participation Board
CPE: Community Participation Expert
CSA: Central Statistical Agency
FDRE: Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
FEDO: Finance and Economic development Office
FGD: Focus Group Discussion
IAP2: International Association for Public Participation
ILO: International Labor Organization
MSE: Micro and Small Enterprises
NIEC: Northern Ireland Economic Council
OECD: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
OIUDB: Oromia Industry and Urban Development Bureau
ONRS: Oromia National Regional State
QUAL: Qualitative
QUAN: Quantitative
UNDP: United Nation Development Program
UNECE: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
VIF: Variance Inflation Factor
ix
Chapter 1 : An Overview of the Dissertation
1.1 Introduction
It is now difficult to find a development project that does not in one way or another claim to adopt a
participatory approach involving bottom up planning, acknowledging the importance of indigenous
knowledge and claiming to empower local people.
(Henkel and Stirrat, 2001)
The purpose of this dissertation is to explore public participation in local development and its
role in empowering local people. Unless otherwise stated, in this study the term ‘participation’
refers to public participation in local development. Specifically, the author deals with issues such
as: nature of participation; extent of participation, institutional context of participation; and
empowerment of local people through participation. The dissertation attempted to explore the
nature of participation along demographic and socio-economic characteristics in Bishoftu City
Administration (BCA). To this end, it examined the relationship between these factors and
participation. The author describes the forms of participation and tried to identify the dominant
means of participation in BCA. The approaches of participation along their manifestation were
assessed. Moreover, the aspect of participation, whether voluntary and involuntary with
associated manifestations, was assessed.
Institutional framework is enhancing or hindering participation. Thus, the author, attempted to
bring to light, policy and legal provisions related to participation at federal and regional level and
organizational structural arrangements and capacity of the City Government. Though
participation is a means or an end in itself is unresolved debate, this dissertation considered
participation as the means (instrumental) of enhancing efficiency and effectiveness of local
development. Moreover, the author considered participation as a means of enhancing local
people empowerment. Accordingly, the author examined the role of participation in empowering
local people along different dimensions of empowerment at grassroots level.
1.2 Context of the Research
Participatory development approach, which contains the qualities of sustainability,
empowerment, self-reliance, and equity, entered the development agenda as the response to the
failure of conventional top-down development approach to meet the needs and priorities of the
beneficiaries of development (Shah and Baporikar, 2012). Development interventions globally
have began to incorporate into its vocabulary, notions about empowerment of the poor and
1
participatory development as part of a strategy for poverty alleviation in the developing world
(Botchway, 2001). The drive for participatory development has focused on the importance of
local knowledge and understanding as a basis for local action, and on direct forms of
participation throughout the project cycle (Gaventa, 2002).
Participatory development has a great contribution to the achievement of development
objectives. Thus, it has become very popular, interesting and attractive in the context of urban
and regional development and has recently become virtually indispensable in the discussion on
development. Participation has now become an established orthodoxy in development thinking
and practice (Shah and Baporikar, 2012). Participation and empowerment have gained an
extensive use in policies, plans and reports of development projects. In this connection, Oakley
(1991) argued that it would be a very serious, even reactionary, thing to do to propose a development
strategy that is not participatory. This informs the change of development approach from top-down to
bottom-up.
Participatory development brings the people to the center of development and pays attention to
empowerment that focused on local people, local context, and local form of power and change
(Freire, 1970). Full participation of beneficiaries in the making and implementation of decisions
regarding development facilitates the process of social development (Botchway, 2001).
Participation provides an opportunity to ordinary citizens’ voice to be heard through new forms
of inclusion, consultation and/or mobilization designed to inform and to influence larger
institutions and policies, referred to as localism (Gaventa, 2004). This explains the increasing
inclusion of the public in policy decisions affecting their lives and in designing and
implementing services, especially at the local level.
Participatory approaches aspire to reduce and circumvent the power relations involved in
development and give the marginalized a voice to new levels by facilitating their involvement in
the design, implementation, and outcomes of programs. Participatory approach provides practical
means to facilitate empowerment by redistributing power and establishing more reciprocal
relationships between “insiders” and “outsiders.” Thus, it builds ordinary people’s capacity to
analyze and transform their lives (Chambers 1994, 1997).
2
Participation is a human right in itself, the exercise of which is essential to realizing other human
rights. Participation in decision-making is central to enabling people to claim their rights.
Participation empowers poor people to hold policy makers accountable. Effective participation
creates a ground that takes into account the voices and interests of the poor (Cornwall and
Gaventa, 2001). Participation helps to enhance effectiveness of decision making, implementation
of development projects, and yields higher quality decisions. It improves decisions through
providing an opportunity to understand and include all relevant information, views, needs, and
interests. It further meets needs for greater openness in decision processes and mistrust of expert
advice (Smith, 2003). As the result, participation laid the ground for making effective and
efficient public policy.
The contribution and benefits of participatory development to the achievement of development
objectives divert attentions of development practitioners and scholars as well as the governments
towards this bottom-up approach. Participation enables those individuals and group previously
excluded by more top down planning process, and who are often marginalized by their
separation and isolation from the production of knowledge and the formulation of policies and
practices, to be included in decisions that affect their life ( Kothari, 2001).
In Ethiopia, besides with the global shift in development perspective, there has been a tendency
of policy shift with the intension to involve the public in its own development. To this end, the
constitution of Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) as well as that of Oromia
National Regional State (ONRS) stipulates the decentralization of power and responsibilities to
local level government tiers. The Government of Ethiopia has claimed that the public has been
participating in making decision about the development of its affairs. The Government declares
the aim of enhancing participation in the background of its policy documents (FDRE, 2003;
2012; 2013), program (FDRE, 2002), plan (FDRE, 2016); and success of participation in
achieving development goals in its performance reports. Government Media have been
frequently arguing that participation is bringing the public into decision making and empowering
them in all aspects. The Government also has been arguing that enabling environment is created
for participation and empowerment through participation in development. Thus, this research set
out to examine the situation of institutional framework, extent of public participation in
development and empowerment through participation at grassroots level with particular
3
reference to BCA.
1.3 Statement of the Problem
Despite tremendous contributions of public participation in local development in fostering the
equality, inclusiveness and sustainability of development, it is hindered and constrained with
various problems. Debates and criticism of public participation have centered on a lack of
adherence to genuine participation, with accusations of tokenism (Cooke and Kothari 2001;
Kesby 2005). Public participation has been dominated by top-down approach, in which elites
dominate decision making in participatory development process (Ali Shah and Baporikar, 2012;
Chambers, 1997). The public are mobilized in government sponsored projects rather than
facilitating the ground in which the public initiate and mange their development. The expert
domination of decision hampered real benefits to participants and empowerment in ways that
enable participants to develop solutions in their own lives (Chambers, 1997).
The institutional contexts determine the nature, extent and benefits of public participation in
local development. There is typically a lack of commitment by the state to create a space for
communities to have a say in decisions regarding development process (Cooke and Kothari
2001; Kesby 2005). The state failed to devise particular policy direction and specific rules and
procedures that guide people’s participation in local development and sharing the benefits of
participatory local development. The failure of institutionalizing public participation in local
development remains local people unconnected with local authorities and other organizations
and reduces their participation in local development (Ali Shah and Baporikar, 2012). The
administrative structure and government bureaucracies are arranged in hierarchical mode that
remains ‘appropriate’ for top-down development approach and seldom conducive to
participatory development. Government bureaucrats are leaning to rigid mode of thinking which
inhibits participatory development (Botes and Rensburg, 2000; Thomas, 2013).
The role of public participation in local development in encouraging the process of
empowerment has been the central concern for many proponents of participatory development
(Kothari, 2001). Dynamics of empowerment and participation are by now fairly well understood
in development theory, practice and policy (Kesby, 2005). Empowerment and participation are
deeply complementary and can be considered means and ends, processes and outcomes (Pettit,
2012). However, without genuine empowerment, participation can quickly become a token
4
exercise or even a means of maintaining power relations; and without meaningful participation,
empowerment can remain an empty, unfulfilled promise (Cornwall and Brock 2005). Marginal
participation is prevalent and legitimized that constitute a new dominating orthodoxy that
exclude others’ possibilities from empowerment (Cleaver, 2001). This is what Cooke and
Kothari (2001:8) term the “tyranny of techniques”. Participation in local development loses its
empowering effect when “it becomes a stage on which participants are invited to perform
simplified dramatizations of their complex lives that make sense to an external audience”
(Kesby, 2005:2041).
Although various researches were conducted on the participatory development, the assessment of
empirical literature indicates gaps in addressing the aforementioned problems associated with
participatory development. Literatures on participatory development inclined towards externally
planned approaches and mechanism of participation and empirical studies that explore the
endogenous participatory systems were limited (El-Gack, 2007).
The roles and capabilities of development facilitators were not assessed (El-Gack, 2007). In this
regard, the capacity of local government as the facilitator of participatory development has not
been given due consideration throughout the literatures on participatory development. They
failed to deeply assesses the attitudes of bureaucrats towards participatory development and the
conduciveness of administrative structure arrangement for participation (Botes and Rensburg,
2000; Thomas, 2013).
The practical empowering effects of participatory local development were little explored, and
there were theoretical biases on empowerment through public participation for participatory
democracy with special emphasis on women empowerment (Khan, 2006; Khan and Bibi, 2011;
International Alert, 2012). The transformative value of participation did not integrate with the
instrumental value of participation. Therefore, this study tries to contribute to the endeavors to
bridge the gap in analyzing the linkages between participatory development process and
empowerment.
The literatures on participatory approaches were biased towards techniques of participatory
development (Chambers, 1994; 1995). Cleaver (1999) argues that techniques-based approach to
5
participation fails to adequately address issues of power, control of information and other
resources and provides an inadequate framework for developing a critical reflective
understanding of the deeper determinants of technical and social change.
The literatures on participatory development did not adequately address the level/extent of
people’s participation in development process (Powis, 2012; El-Gack, 2007). Moreover,
literatures on participatory development fail to assess the role of institutions in local participatory
development. Thus, this study tries to contribute to endeavors of bridging knowledge gap
regarding the roles of institution in facilitating people’s participation in local development
activities.
In Ethiopia, there have been limited researches that investigate approaches, aspects, extents of
participation. The available literatures on participation of local people in development are limited
to exogenous donor driven people’s participation in development (Abraham, 2002; Degefaw,
2008) and forest management (Yimru, 2011). The aforementioned arguments regarding
approaches to public participation, initiation, extent, contexts and empowering effect of
participation in development; and the gaps in research on public participation in local
development initiated and catch my attention to engage in this research.
Thus, this paper questions the feasibility of the institutional and administrative structures within
which participation in local development and empowerment through participation in local
development realized in BCG. It also examines the approaches, extent, and determinants of
public participation in local development. Moreover, it examines the process of empowerment
through participation in local development.
1.4 Research Questions
The following research questions are framed and answered in order to address the research
problem:
1. What are the natures of public participation in local development in BCA?
2. What are the factors determine public participation in local development in BCA?
3. To what extent the public influence decisions regarding local development process?
4. Does institutional contexts conducive to foster public participation in local development?
6
5. Does participation in local development foster local people empowerment?
1.5 Research Objectives
The aim of this study is to assess the practices of public participation in local development in
order to address their felt needs in local service provisions. Within this umbrella theme, the main
objective of the study is to assess contexts, processes, and effects of participatory development
activities in BCA. Specifically, the study intends to:
1. explore the nature of participation,
2. assess determinants of participation,
3. examine the extent of participation,
4. assess institutional contexts of participation, and
5. determine the effect of participation in empowering local people
1.6 Significance of the Study
The main advantages associated with participatory development lay in the better knowledge of
local conditions and constraints (environmental, social, and economic) that communities or user
groups possess. As the result, this study, through assessing the process, context and effects of
participation, will have various significances.
The dissertation contributes for the advancement of literature on participation, institution and
empowerment. The study advocated better application of pragmatism world view and mixed
method approach/strategy to address ever changing nature of public administration problems.
The study brings into light the importance of institution in collective public action. It orients
policy makers and administrators the effect of institutional gaps. The study contributes to the
practices of participatory development through drawing lessons, which scale up participation
from development agenda to policy intervention and local governance. It also brings into the
attention of policy makers and administrator the importance of participation in empowering local
people, in addition to making the implementation of development plans efficient and effective.
1.7 Scope and Limitation of the Study
The scope of this study was delimited in terms of area coverage; participation, deriver of
participation, and institution. To enhance the accuracy of the study and to undertake deep
investigation the area coverage of this study was delimited to urban area of the City and did not
7
concern hinter land rural gandas. The study delimited to investigating public participation in two
local development activities, basic urban services, namely electricity power provision and road
networks. The study was also delimited to endogenously born participatory development
activities and did not cover exogenous donor driven people participation being initiated by both
international and local NGOs, and private sector participation in local development. The study
only covered formal institutional frameworks, which were supposed to be an enabling
environment for public participation and empowerment through participation.
The study was constrained by a number of factors, which include: financial, lack of adequate
data, unwillingness of Government officials and other respondents to provide data. The study
was highly constrained by financial resources throughout the process of the study. Lack of
adequate previous empirical research works related to the topic under consideration in Ethiopia
highly influenced the process of research work. Lack of well documented participation practices
at City Government highly influenced the triangulation of data generated from different sources.
Government officials were not willing to give interview regarding participation. In this regard, I
visited office of Mayor and City Manager several times. Finally, the City Manager was not
interested to provide detail interview, and he opted simply to give the highlights. The then Mayor
of the City was not willing to give interview after repeated appointment and visit to his office.
The request/order of mayor office head to pay for letter written to sectoral offices and gandas
was unforgettable, which was unacceptable by any standard. The problems related to public
officials indicated that they were not aware that the provision of data was one of their
responsibility and legally binding. Moreover, many key informants selected from the public have
refused to give interview.
1.8 Research Site and Local Development Activities
Urban local government in general, BCA in particular, was purposively selected as the case for
the study for the following reasons. The selection of urban locality over rural locality emanated
from the fact that the urban centers are congested in small area and require sophisticated
infrastructure and services than rural counterparts. However, due to limited capacity, local
government cannot fully provide the required services and infrastructure. Therefore, the gap
between demand and supply in infrastructure and service is initiated the participation of local
people in order to satisfy their needs. As a result, urban centers are the local administrative units
8
where people’s participation is relatively mature enough to conduct meaningful study.
The City is inhabited by residents characterized by diversified and heterogeneous professions
and occupations. Moreover, different governmental and nongovernmental organizations, which
are involved in the development activities, are located at Bishoftu. These conditions allow
assessing the nature of participation and its effects from the point of the perspectives of different
inhabitants of the City and Government. The other reason for the selection of Bishoftu was
related to administrative convenience of the research. Due to limited budget allocated to this
project, it was difficult to undertake deep and reliable study at distant localities without
compromising the quality of the inquiry. As per the data from ONRS Industry and Urban
Development Bureau, Bishoftu was considered as the best practices in involving the residents in
development activities among the urban centers in the Region. Therefore, this initiated me to
consider the nature of people participation in development at Bishoftu to draw the lesson that can
be transcended to other localities.
I conducted exploratory research to select specific local development activities that allow deep
investigation on participation. The exploratory research was done through interview conducted
with public officials and key informant interview with experts and development committee
heads. Thus, based on the findings from exploratory research, I selected road construction and
electricity service provisions as focus of this study. Electricity power provision includes (street
light provision and new power installation). Road network includes (cobble stone, gravel road,
culverts and red ash, road side walkways, roadside open ditches, and bridge). The results of the
exploratory research suggested that the selected local development activities experienced intense
public participation; have fundamental effect on the wellbeing of the public; and have strategic
contribution to the development of the City. Moreover, these services are basic urban services.
Electricity power is one of the basic utilities in the urban center. These services have spillover
effect to boost the provisions of other urban services. Road network development plays great role
in poverty reduction through creation of employment and expansion of micro enterprises.
Furthermore, road development has spillover effect that creates access to social and economic
services.
9
1.9 Structure of the Dissertation
The paper consists of nine chapters. The first chapter deals with an overview of the dissertation.
Chapter two presents conceptual and theoretical framework systematically synthesized and
organized from different related literature. Chapter three describes the methodology of the study.
Chapter four presents the background of the study area. The empirical findings of the study are
presented in chapter five, six, seven and eight. Chapter five presents institutional context of
participation. Chapter six present the nature of participation. Chapter seven presents the extent of
participation in decisions at each phase of local development process. Chapter eight examined
public empowerments through participation. Chapter nine deals with conclusions, contribution
and the way forwards. Finally, references are listed; appendices and annexes are attached.
10
Chapter 2 : Review of Related Literature
2.1 Introduction
This chapter of the study presents theoretical and conceptual underpinnings of the study. To this
end, the chapter intended to systematically organize main concepts of the study and theories
which guide this research endeavor. Assessing theoretical works helps to evaluate the practices
on the ground. Thus, the chapter consists of basic concepts of the study, theories that guides the
study, review of related works and main research gaps. The importance of this section is to
operationalize the main concepts used in the study and to assess theoretical frameworks that were
used to examine the situations of people participation in local development and its effects in
empowering local people in BCA.
2.2 Conceptual Framework
The meaning of terms varies from study to study depending on their purpose and the context in
which they are utilized. The precise clarifications of basic concepts make clear how they were
utilized in the study. The main concepts of this study are participation, empowerment, and
institution.
2.2.1 Participation
There are a plethora of definitions of participation throughout the literature. However, the focus
here is to adopt a working definition of participation in the realm of development, rather than
enter the debate on its various definitions. Moreover, participation is an ambiguous concept that
has different meaning to different people/organizations in different contexts. Participation is an
ideologically contested concept which produces a range of competing meanings and applications
(Pelling, 1998). The concepts of participation differed over the goals, processes, agents, effects,
and value of participation (Crocker, 2003). White (1996:7) expressed ambiguity of the term
participation as follows: “The status of participation as a `Hurrah’ word, bringing a warm glow
to its users and hearers, blocks its detailed examination”. The result is a variety of views on how
participation is defined, whom it is expected to involve, what it is expected to achieve, and how
it is to be brought about (Agarwal 2001; Kelly, 2001). In common usage it simply means ‘being
present’ (Kelly, 2001:13).
11
Okaley (1991:6) considered participation in the context of decision making as follows: “it is
essentially to do with involving the people affected by decisions making, implementing and
monitoring those decisions.” Agarwal (2001:1624) views participation narrowly and broadly as
follows: ‘At its narrowest, participation is defined in terms of nominal membership and at its
broadest, in terms of a dynamic interactive process in which all stakeholders, even the most
disadvantaged, have a voice and influence in decision-making’. Oakley (1995: 3) views
participation in its broadest scope as political process: “in its broadest sense people’s
participation is a political process in which previously excluded classes or groups seek to become
involved, have a voice in and generally gain access to the benefits of economic and social
development”. Hentschel & Lanjouw (1996: xi) pursue the transformational approach to define
participation as “a process through which stakeholders influence and share control over
development initiatives and the decisions and resources which affect them.” Hentschel &
Lanjouw (1996) definition elaborates that participation is a means of influencing development
processes and decisions as well as the means to control power over resources. The consideration
of participation as power to control resources implies participation as the means of
empowerment.
Ndekha et al. (2003: 326) defines participation as “a social process whereby specific groups with
shared needs living in a defined geographic area actively pursue identification of their needs,
take decisions and establish mechanisms to meet these needs”. They determine participation
along the overall objective of community participation that is twofold in that it is a mechanism to
empower and facilitate an improvement in the lives of the world’s poor people. According to
Kelly (2001:15) definition “participation is a range of processes through which local
communities are involved and play a role in issues which affect them. The extent to which power
is shared in decision-making varies according to type of participation”. He considered
participation along the crucial role of power in decision-making.
Others emphasize the basic requirement of involvement in decision-making in their definition of
participation. Accordingly, (White 1981:3) determined participation as ‘involvement of the local
population actively in the decision-making concerning development projects or in their
implementation’. Eyben and Ladbury (1995: 192) put participation as ‘a process whereby those
with a legitimate interest in a project influence decisions which affect them’. Devas and Grant
12
(2003: 309) define participation as ‘citizen participation is about the ways in which citizens
exercise influence and have control over the decisions that affect them’.
Despite diverse meanings of participation, for the purpose of this study participation is
operationalized as a process through which the public involved in and has influence on decisions
related to development activities that affect them. This implies that development activities will
address their needs and that all phases of the development process will be characterized by active
involvement of the public.
2.2.1.1 Participation: a Means or an End
The conceptualization of participatory approaches has often revolved around whether
participation is an end or a means throughout the literatures (Oakley et al., 1991; Nelson and
Wright, 1995; Parfitt, 2004). The debate has occurred on broader goals that participation is
intended to achieve (Mohan, 2001). For Parfitt (2004: 539) the debate regarding participation as
a means or end arises from “…different perspective on the rationale for participation”. However,
Parfitt (2004: 539) indicated that participation as a means has different political implication than
participation as an end “...Whereas participation as a means is politically neutral insofar as it
does not address such power differentials, participation as an end has an emancipatory,
politically-radical component in that it seeks to address unequal power relations”.
The arguments regarding participation as a means envisages the use of local participation
instrumentally to improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of development process and
practices (Nelson and Wright, 1995). Participation, in this connection, is an approach of
exploiting the existing physical, social, and economic resources of local people in order to ensure
the project is successful; thus, the final results of participation are important, rather than the
actual act of participation itself (Oakley, 1991). Pretty (1995) pointed out that through
participation as a means local people are more likely to agree and support development
initiatives, which leads to increased effectiveness and sustainability. Thus, participation as a
means associated with lower-levels of participation where local people participate by
contributing to the project within a preset framework, rather than participating to determine their
own development agenda. Parfitt (2004) asserts that participation as a means does not address
power relations and reflects the prevalence of traditional, top-down, external- or expert-driven
13
approach to development.
Participation as a ‘means’ is essentially a static, passive and ultimately controllable form of
participation. In terms of development programs and projects it is the form of participation which
is more commonly found. In terms of such projects, however, it is seen as a temporary feature,
an input into the project which is required in order to achieve objectives. Inevitably the emphasis
is up on rapid mobilization, direct involvement in the task at hand and the disbanding of the
participatory effort once the task has been completed (Okaley, 1991).
The argument of participation as an end that refers to equity and empowerment implies
participation as a process which enhances the capacity of individuals to improve their own lives
and facilitates social change to the advantage of disadvantaged or marginalized groups (Okaley,
1991; Mohan, 2001; Parfitt, 2004). Thus, participation as the end goal of a development project
or as an end itself and is linked to the higher-levels of participation typology and empowerment
(Oakley, 1991; Nelson & Wright, 1995). Participation as an end is a situation “where the
community or groups sets up a process to control its own development” (Nelson and Wright
(1995:1). Oakley (1991) argued that participation as an end in contrary to a means approach, the
project may start without any predetermined objectives and aims. The project’s direction and
framework will evolve over time and arise from the active and dynamic interactions of local
people with one another and local government. This statement suggests that participation as the
source of political empowerment.
Development Projects can be placed on a continuum stretching from ‘empowerment’
perspectives (Friedmann, 1992 cited in Pelling, 1998) where participation is seen as an end in its
own right, to more `utilitarian' perspectives where participation is seen as a means to improve the
efficiency and sustainability of projects and reduce transactions costs for the planning agency.
Both perspectives require some re-distribution of decision-making power and transactions costs,
(Pelling, 1998).
Several authors have suggested that participation needs to be an end in itself as well as a means
to an end to have long-term benefits where different approaches are synthesized (Cornwall and
Jewkes, 1995; Pretty, 1999). In other manner Cleaver (1999) and Hayward et al. (2004) suggest
that a conflation is possible, with participation acting to bring about both increased project
14
efficiency (means) and empowerment (ends) of beneficiaries. However, Craig and Porter (1997)
argue that due to the “double accountability” in projects, this sort of synergy is unlikely.
Development projects are accountable to intended beneficiaries, i.e. they need to create
opportunities for local people to direct and control the project, while projects must also be
accountable to the source of funding and therefore effectively managed. Craig and Porter (1997:
229) suppose that “…these two aims, participation, and effective management are deeply
contradictory”, because participation means transference of control to local people, while
effective management requires central control to meet pre-existing objectives. For the purpose of
this paper, I considered participation as a means to an end that empowers local people through
taking part in development and influence decisions in development process and consequently
empowered.
2.2.2 The Emergence of Participatory Development
Participatory development is a process through which stakeholders can influence and share
control over development initiatives, and over the decisions and resources that affect them.
Historically, the concepts of participation and participatory development appeared for the first
time in the development jargon during the late 1950s and were used by social workers and field
activist who were frustrated by the failure of earlier models of development which advocated a
‘top-down’ strategy for development (Rahnema, 1992). However, the term popular participation
entered into the international discourse on development during the 1960s (Tagarirofa and
Chazovachii, 2013).
Participatory development was informed by ideas evolving primarily from four contexts: (i) the
theoretical works by phenomenologist’s of the Frankfurt School in the 1950s and 1960s, and
especially work done by Habermas since the 1970s regarding the relationship between theory
and praxis; (ii) the work on student participation in/control of their education informed by Paulo
Freire, and related questions about production of knowledge; (iii) work done within and by
development NGOs to shift power relationships within development practice and to redefine
roles of external agents; and (iv) the profound frustrations with failed development projects
experienced by many working within the world of externally funded development interventions
(Campbell and Vainio-Mattila, 2003).
15
Participatory development as the mainstream development establishment appeared to
acknowledge the failures of the top-down strategy and the failure of most development projects
to achieve their goals and targets. This was happened in part due to the fact that the main
beneficiaries of such projects had often been left out of the whole developmental process.
However, Shah and Baporikar (2012) explained the emergency of participatory development as a
remedy to the inadequacies of government-led approach to development that increased deeprooted problems in economic and social disparities between social classes, genders, regions, and
between urban and rural areas. Thus, the consensus now among various categories of
development field workers is that whenever the beneficiaries are locally involved and actively
participate in their own development endeavors, much more will be accomplished (Botchway,
2001).
On the other hand, in the so-called top-down approach to development, the entire process of
formulating and implementing polices and projects are carried out under the direction of
government. People were put in a passive position and were rarely consulted in development and
usually have no active role in development activities (Shah and Baporikar, 2012). Contrary to
this, participatory development as the alternative to top down approach pays attention on
empowerment that focused on local people, local context, and local form of power and change.
The concept of community participation in development gained prominence in development
discourse in the 1970s and since then literature on the subject has grown significantly. It was
through the influence of Paolo Freire’s work on the concept of conscientization and analysis of
the structural obstacles to the development of Latin American peasantry which stressed the
dialogical approach to project work. His argument was that the peasant should be the subject and
not the object of development, and this orientation helped affirm the importance of participation,
(Freire, 1970). This Freire’s work contributes for the wider advancement of participatory
approach to development. Participation first caught the attention of mainstream development
agencies, grappling with how to make their interventions more effective, in the mid-1970s,
(Cohen and Uphoff, 1980 cited in Cornwall, 2002).
Before 1980s, participation of local people in mainstream development initiatives typically
mirrored its ‘blue-print’ nature, and as such, local participation was prescriptive and passive.
16
Local people were seen as objects or controllable inputs of development assistance; consequently
their participation equated to contributions during the implementation stages in the form of cash,
resources, and labor, or an acceptance and efficient use of new technology (Nelson & Wright,
1995).
In 1980s Participatory local development became a major concern for scholars and United
Nations agencies. Among these scholars, most notably Chambers (1983) argued that 'putting the
last first' was the only way to achieve rural development. Since then the acceptance of
participation has become widespread (Mohan, 2001). Moreover, in this period, United Nations
Agencies such as International Labor Organization (ILO); the World Health Organization
(WHO); the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO); International Fund for Agricultural
Development (IFAD); and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO) promoted and exercised participatory development in their development projects,
(Tagarirofa and Chazovachii, 2013). Popular participation at this time was something that took
place primarily at the project level, while at the policy level thinking was still predominately topdown and technocratic. At this time, participation was undertaken at the level of consultation that
gave emphasis on consensus seeking through public meetings, (Cornwall, 2002). Furthermore,
during 1980s free participation in development was advocated by the non-aligned movement and
expressed in the Declaration on the Right to Development as a broad principle, (United Nations,
1986).
Participation seemed to gain ground again in the 1990s with the hopes that it would emancipate
people from the bedeviling crises of their collapsing livelihoods, (Tagarirofa and Chazovachii,
2013). The decade of 1990s also marked the global advocacy of poor people participation in
development endeavor that affect their affairs. In this regard, The World Summit for Social
Development held in Copenhagen in 1995 stresses that people living in poverty must be
empowered through organization and participation in all aspects of political, economic and social
life and in planning and implementing policies that affect them (UNDP, 1995). The conference
also calls for the development strategies built on poor’s’ own experiences, livelihood systems
and survival strategies determined by poor themselves.
17
2.2.3 Public Participation
Public participation is the term derived from the combination of two words ‘public’ and
‘participation’. Thus, it warrants defining the term ‘public’ before dealing with the definition of
public participation. In international conventions ‘the public’ is commonly referred to as “one or
more natural or legal persons”, (UNECE, 1991). ILO (2000: 2) defined public as “a vast and
heterogeneous group of people or stakeholders, organized or not, who are concerned by a
specific problem or issue”. Thus, for the purpose of this dissertation the term ‘public’ is
operationalized along ILO (2000) definition.
The term public participation has numerous different meanings and definitions. Different authors
have different meanings when using the term ‘public participation’ depending on who the people
are and what the setting is. It is always viewed differently depending on its contexts and
purposes. Its meaning has showed progressive development from time to time. In the past, public
participation was considered as being an opportunity to give comments in a public hearing, to
vote in referendums, or just being a member of a social movement society. Frequently, public
participation related to participation at public hearings only, but, at present, this term refers to a
diversity of procedures for facilitating members of the public to be effective participants in
deliberations in decision-making processes (Webler and Tuler, 2006).
Pring and Noe (2002) define public participation as an all encompassing label used to describe
various mechanisms that individuals or groups may use to communicate their views on a public
issue. According to this definition, public participation refers to the ways of people involvement
in initiatives that affect their lives. For Smith (2003) public participation involves both individual
and collective voices - individual voices coming directly from citizens who choose to express
their views, collective voices from communities, interest groups and other organizations able to
synthesize or aggregate shared messages. This definition determines public participation in terms
of actor. White (1992) defines public participation in terms of the level of participation as an
active involvement of the local people in decision-making concerning development projects or
their implementation. The common theme amongst these various definitions of public
participation places people at the centre stage and the emphasis is on the active participation in
their own development-related matters to ensure sustainable livelihoods.
Other categories of public participation definitions spotlight on the extent of influencing decision
18
making. For Gluck (1999) public participation is a process by which people make decisions
about the institutions, the programs and the environments that affect them. The International
Association for Public Participation (IAP2) (2007a) defines public participation as the
involvement of those affected by a decision in the decision-making process. For ILO (2000:6)
“Public participation is a voluntary process whereby people, individually or through organized
groups, can exchange information, express opinions and articulate interests, and have the
potential to influence decisions regarding the outcome of the matter at hand” this definition
refers to the aspect of participation.
Public Participation in the context of this paper is a process through which local people
individually or collectively takes part and influence decision making in the planning,
implementation, monitoring and evaluation of local development.
2.2.4 Local Development
The meaning of local development differs from place to place and evolves over time (Pike et al,
2007). Its meaning has changed from time to time depending on social and economic changes
that has experienced at the local and global scale. In addition different scholars and practitioners
define local development in accordance to their purpose. Again the meaning of local
development varies depending on scope. The particular attributes of places shape whether, how
and to what degree specific local development definitions and varieties take root and flourish or
fail and wither over time (Pike et al, 2007). The above arguments suggested that the definitions
of local development are inevitably context-dependent. Thus, the intention here is to
operationlize the meaning of local development along the objectives of the study.
The character, form and nature of local development evolve in geographically uneven ways.
Uneven emergence of ‘globalism’ thinking about the possible kinds of local development
encourages the consideration of its different varieties and the principles and values utilized in its
determination. What local development is for and is trying to achieve are framed and shaped by
its definitions, varieties, principles and values (Pike et al, 2007).
Local development has historically been dominated by economic concerns such as growth,
income, and employment (Armstrong and Taylor, 2002). Development can even be wholly
equated with this relatively narrow focus upon local economic development (Beer et al., 2003).
19
In addition, Schoburgh (2012) opined that early theories of local development were not merely
economic based but were preoccupied with place. In terms of territoriality ‘local’ is understood
to be sub-national in scope. These arguments imply that weather development is economic or
other forms that the impetus for any form of initiative is found principally in the area in question
(Coffey et al., 1984).
Rooted in dissatisfaction with mainstream approaches and critiques of orthodox neo-classical
economics in the 1960s and 1970s, ‘alternative’ approaches began to question the dominant
economic focus of local development on firms in a national and international economic context
(Geddes and Newman, 1999). Taking a particular normative position, more local, even
community-level (Haughton, 1999), and socially-oriented approaches emerged as part of
alternative economic strategies in the UK and USA, often challenging national frameworks
through new institutions at the local level, such as enterprise boards, sectoral development
agencies and community associations, and contesting capital locally through promoting
‘restructuring for labor’ (Fitzgerald and Green, 2002).
The quest for character, quality and sustainability of local development diverted the dominant
economic focus of local development to address social, ecological, political and cultural
concerns (Geddes and Newman, 1999; Morgan, 2004). Unequal experiences of living standards
and wellbeing between places even at equal or comparable income levels has fuelled
dissatisfaction with conventional economic indicators of development (Sen, 1999). Initiating and
fostering inclusive government and governance and recognizing cultural diversity have been
emphasized to varying degrees within broadened definitions of local development (Haughton
and Counsell, 2004).
Local scale has gotten a formidable recognition of development intervention. Local development
is particularly fraught with tensions between economic and social objectives (NIEC, 2000). A
parallel move towards ‘participation’ and ‘empowerment in development practices led to the
emergency of ‘the local’ as the site of empowerment and hence as a locus of knowledge
generation and development intervention (Mohan and Stokke, 2000).
Broader understandings provide new opportunities to think about and define local development.
Among others, the sense of people in places making value-based judgments about priorities and
20
what they consider to be appropriate ‘development’ for their localities determine meaning of
local development. No uniform understanding of development of or for the localities exists (Pike
et al, 2007). Particular notions of ‘development’ are socially determined by particular groups
and/or interests in specific places and time periods. What constitutes local development varies
both within and between countries and its differing articulations change over time (Beer et al.,
2003; Danson et al., 2000).
The particular shape of local development is determined by the inhabitants of each individual
locality. It means that they use mainly endogenous approach to local development. Endogenous
development means that the local population can decide about its own development (Jehle,
1998). The aforementioned debate on local development suggests the difficulty in defining local
development in strictly operational terms. Moreover, the debate suggests that the meaning of
local development varies depends on scale, socio-economic process and institutional agents.
Accordingly, for the purpose of this paper local development is defined at the scale of urban
local government, using infrastructure development as socioeconomic process, and household as
the institutional agent of development. Thus, for the purpose of this study local development is
defined as any initiative that intended to improve the quality of local people life. Among local
development activities identified and shaped by the resident of BCA the development of road
network and electric power provision were considered as local development and selected for
consideration.
2.2.5 Empowerment
The contested nature of the term empowerment makes the attempt to define it difficult (Alsop et
al. (2006). Empowerment is a very complex concept, which is not easily defined (Craig and
Mayo, 1995; Rowlands, 1997). The complexity of the concept of empowerment arises from its
root word ‘power’ different interpretations and the contrasting views on the centrality of power
for the development process. Concepts of power may vary according to the necessity to explore
and explain diverse contexts and may be dependent on the actors involved in power relationships
(Eyben et al. 2006). In English, the concept leans on its original meaning of investment with
legal power—permission to act for some specific goal or purpose (Rappaport, 1987). A
contrasting view of power is based on the conceptualization of power as a generative force, with
a focus on the positive energy of people ‘to be able’ to transform their lives and to motivate
21
others (Hartsock, 1985). Concepts of power may vary according to the necessity to explore and
explain diverse contexts and may be dependent on the actors involved in power relationships
(Eyben et al. 2006). In order to clarify the meaning of the term empowerment, Rowlands
(1997:9) advocated that “users of the term tend to assume an understanding of the appropriate
meaning within a particular context.”
Rowlands (1997) in her study on empowerment in the context of improving the livelihoods of
poor women in Honduras distinguishes between ‘power over,’ ‘power to,’ ‘power with’ and
‘power from within.’ These various understandings of power are embedded in the concept of
empowerment and are responsible for the different approaches to empowerment in practice. In
this definition, this notion of power is based on a ‘variable sum’ whereby the increase in one
person’s power does not necessarily diminish that of another. This notion of empowerment is
based on Freire’s concept of “critical conscientization,” whereby through a process of reflection
and action (defined by Freire as praxis) the ‘oppressed’ are first becoming aware of the
structural, economic, social, political and cultural reasons for their oppression and then identify
concrete steps to take action against the oppressive elements of reality (Freire, 1972).
Based on the definition of power as ‘power to’ and ‘power within,’ Kabeer (1999a) has
developed a specific concept of empowerment which emphasizes options, choice and control as
the basic components of empowerment. Kabeer argues that empowerment is “the expansion in
people’s ability to make strategic life choices in a context where this ability was previously
denied to them” (Kabeer, 1999a: 473). This definition emphasizes personal empowerment.
Hereby, the approach entails enabling people to develop their full range of human capabilities.
This notion of empowerment draws strongly on Sen’s (1999) ‘capability approach’. Sen
conceives development as ‘a process of expanding the real freedoms that people enjoy’ and
emphasizes the need for the “expansion of capabilities of persons to lead the kinds of lives they
value” (Sen, 1999: 18). This view of development places people and their human development at
the center of the development process. Sen argues the importance of the poor’s individual
empowerment by arguing that: “greater freedom enhances the ability of people to help
themselves and to influence the world, and these matters are central to the process of
development (Sen, 1999:18).
22
The definition of empowerment also varies based on the context in which it is used (Grootaert,
2005). In the context of development initiatives, empowerment denotes an increase in the power
of local people (Rowlands, 1997). For Alsop et al. (2006) empowerment is the process of
enhancing an individual’s or group’s capacity to make purposive choices and to transform those
choices into desired actions and outcomes. The World Bank’s empowerment sourcebook defines
empowerment narrowly and specific than what could be understood from the common-parlance
use of the term “power” within the context of poverty reduction: “Empowerment is the
expansion of assets and capabilities of poor people to participate in, negotiate with, influence,
control, and hold accountable institutions that affect their lives” (Narayan 2002:14). The World
Bank’s definition of empowerment incorporate two forms of empowerment: (1) when it
determines empowerment as expansion of asset it refers to economic empowerment; (2) the
expansion of capability in different aspects refers to influence institutions; in the case of this
paper it refers to political empowerment.
Despite competing views of empowerment among scholars, empowerment in this paper is
determined as a consequence of people participation in development projects and refers to
improvement in social relations (social empowerment), improvement in personal conditions
(personal empowerment), access and controlling economic resources, creating opportunity for
generating economic live (economic empowerment), creating awareness regarding political
issues (political empowerment).
2.2.5.1 Levels of Empowerment Analysis
Empowerment takes place at different levels. Literatures determine empowerment at individual,
community and societal level. Empowerment is concurrently a consequence and a process of
development at individual or community scales (Rappaport 1987) allowed by the powerful or
conquered by the powerless (Luttrel et al. 2009).
At individual level, empowerment represents one’s capacity to gain control over personal life
and to promote changes in power structures that improve one’s well-being (Zimmerman et al.
1992 in Alsop et al, 2006). For Sen (1999) empowerment at the individual level focuses on
people’s development of self-esteem and the expansion of their capabilities to do things
ultimately reaching a state of being they value. This approach stresses the importance of human
23
agency (Kabeer, 1999a), greater access to resources (Chambers, 1993), and the ability to make
strategic life choices (Kabeer, 1999b). Thus, it is a key to better understand the psychological
aspects of empowerment (Rappaport, 1987).
Empowerment at community level, which is based on a collective view of power, refers to the
processes that make a community gain collective power in relation to a previous state (Eyben et
al., 2006). Rowland (1997) argued that the coordinated activities of people as a group can
significantly strengthen their bargaining power vis-à-vis the formal institutions of government,
the market and civil society.
Empowerment at a society-wide level put emphasis on the need for social and political change at
the macro-level of society. Friedmann (1992) developed a model of empowerment at this level
and distinguishes between states, corporate, political and social power. This notion of
empowerment is based on the conceptualization of power as ‘power over’ and implies a power
struggle between the elites and the marginalized groups, whereby the empowerment of the poor
is only possible through the redistribution of power.
Alsop et al (2006:21) prescribed the three levels of empowerment that help to easily measure
empowerment at different level.
The levels are taking place based on the distance of
administrative boundaries from the individual or group as follows:
 The local level will comprise the immediate vicinity of a person’s everyday life. This is likely to
be the level of an area contiguous with their residence.
 The intermediary level will comprise vicinity which is familiar but which is not encroached upon
on an everyday basis. This is likely to be the level between the residential and national level.
 The macro level will comprise vicinity which is the furthest away from the individual. This is
likely to be the national level.
The degree of empowerment at one level does not indicate the same degree of empowerment at
other levels. As research demonstrates, individuals or communities empowered at the local level
are not necessarily empowered at the intermediary or macro level (Fox, 1996; Moore, 2001). The
purpose of this paper is to analysis local level empowerment through participation in
development at individual and community scale.
24
2.2.5.2 Dimensions of Empowerment
Regardless of the scale at which it takes place, empowerment is multidimensional. It occurs
within sociological, psychological, political, and economic dimensions (Hur, 2006; Friedmann,
1992; Speer and Hughey, 1995). Personal/psychological empowerment relates to the way people
think about themselves, as well as the knowledge, capacities, skills, and mastery they actually
possess. It develops when people attempt to develop the capabilities to overcome their
psychological and intellectual obstacles and attain self-determination, self sufficiency, and
decision-making abilities (Hur, 2006). Personal empowerment has to do with local people
getting the skills and abilities that they need to be actors within an existing system. Personal
empowerment is about developing local people’s self-reliance and ability to deal with their own
problems (Oakley (1991). For Rowland (1995) personal empowerment is about developing a
sense of self and individual confidence and capacity, and undoing the effects of internalized
oppression.
Social empowerment refers to a situation in which participation in development strengthened
sense of cohesion and integrity among local people (Scheyvens (1999). Rowland (1995)
indicated that social empowerment is about developing the ability to negotiate and influence the
nature of the relationship and decisions made within it.
Economic empowerment of local people through participation in local development takes
different forms. When considering whether or not local people have been economically
empowered through participation in local development, it is necessary to consider economic
opportunities which have arisen as the result of participatory development. Economic
empowerment can also refer to the local community’s access to productive resources in an area
as the result of participatory development. While some economic opportunities are usually
experienced by local people, concerns may arise over inequity in the spread of economic
opportunities. The power brokers in any society will have considerable influence over who
shares in the benefits of participatory local development. Local elites often co-opt and come to
dominate community-based development efforts, thereby monopolizing the economic benefits of
participatory local development (Scheyvens, 1999).
25
Participation in local development enhances politically empowered local people, their voices and
concerns influence government actions and decisions and allow them to access to information
and government services. For local people to be able to exert some control over decision making,
however, power will need to be decentralized from the national level to the community level
(Scheyvens, 1999). Oakley (1991) opined that empowerment is essentially concerned with
enabling local people to decide upon and to take the actions which they believe are essential to
their development. In this sense, empowerment is concerned with increasing local people’s
capacity to access and influence the type of activities normative development systems provide.
For Rowland (1995), political empowerment refers to involvement in political structures and
collective action based on cooperation rather than competition.
Although empowerment is categorized in different dimension, empowerment in one dimension
or scale is not independent from others (Saegert and Winkel, 1996; Lawrence, 2006). Social and
political empowerment, for example, may be simultaneously achieved by an individual and, at
the same time, influence community empowerment (Samah and Aref, 2011). Likewise,
Rowlands (1997) pointed out that a sequence of empowerment occurs, where the various forms
of power build upon one another.
2.2.6 Institution
Institutions are widely conceptualized as any form of constraint that human beings devise to
shape human interaction (North, 1990). Following this definition, institutions prohibit, permit or
require specific type of action, i.e. political, economic or social, that are important for reducing
transaction costs, for improving information flows and for defining and enforcing property
rights. However, this definition does not have universal acceptance. It omitted other aspects of
institution such as organizational entities, procedural devices, and regulatory frameworks
(Williamson, 2000). In most of the recent articles, institutions are defined in a broader sense,
linking various different measures of institutional quality to development outcomes from various
angles and disciplines (Johannes, 2003).
Institutions consist of formal written rules as well as typically unwritten codes of conduct that
underlie and supplement formal rules. Formal rules and constraints are made up of constitutions,
laws, property rights, charters, bylaws, statute and common law, and regulations; enforcement
26
characteristics (sanctions, etc.). Informal rules are: extensions, elaborations, and modifications of
formal rules; socially sanctioned norms of behavior (customs, taboos and traditions); and
internally enforced standards of conduct (Johannes, 2003). However, for the purpose of this
paper, informal rules category of institution is out of consideration.
In the development literature, it may be used to describe a particular organization in a specific
country, such as local government, or to denote the set of “working rules” that individuals use in
order to organize repetitive activities that produce outcomes and create particular relationships
with one another (Thompson, 1995). For the purpose of this paper, institution is operationalized
along this parlance as legal and policy frameworks and local government organizational systems.
2.3 Relationship among main Concepts
The intensification of local participation in development has potential implications for local
empowerment (Chambers 2007). Local participation alone does not guarantee empowerment
because it depends upon the local context and the strategies employed in local development
process. Public participation, in their affairs, that takes social, political and economic forms is
intimately linked. Without one, the others will be incomplete and less effective (Ul Haq, 1993).
Public participation in local economic and social development activities empower them to
participate in political activities through influencing local governance. Hence, based on this
general proposition, this framework outlines the comprehensive model of public participation in
local development and its effect in empowering local people as well as the context within which
the processes take place (institution). The relationship between major concepts is presented in
Figure 2.1.
27
Theories of participation:
1. Ladder of Citizen
Participation
2. Typologies of
participation
Local Development:
- Road service provision
- Electric power
provision
Empowerment framework:
1. Rowland’s (1997)
Empowerment Framework
2. Alsop et al. (2006)
Empowerment Framework
Public Participation:
- Contributions (Labor,
finance, material, idea)
- Participation in development
decision making
Empowerment:
-
Personal
Economic
Social
Political
Institution:
-
Local government capacity
Legal and policy framework
Development Committee
Community Participation Board
Figure 2.1: Conceptual framework
Source: Own formulation
In Figure 2.1, two types of arrows are used to indicate the relationship between different
concepts and concepts and theories. Unbroken arrows are used to indicate relationship that is
addressed by this dissertation. The broken arrows are used to indicate the relationship that is not
addressed by this dissertation. The core elements of this framework are participation,
empowerment, and institution. Institution, which refers to legal and policy framework and local
government organizational factors, is the context in which public participate in development and
it contribute to empowerment of the public. Local development is the starting point for people
participation in this framework. As the result, participation in local development is supposed to
bring empowerment of local people with institutional contexts.
2.3.1 Participation and Empowerment
Participation is one of the critical components of success that is associated with increased
empowerment of the powerless and disadvantaged and strengthened capacity of people to learn
28
and act (Pretty, 1995). Participation in development serves as a means of personal growth, such
as the acquisition of new skills and useful information and the discovery of a new sense of self.
Personal growth is more salient in the minds of the participants. The creation of job as the result
of popular contribution for local development, the job incumbents got an opportunities to learn
skills. Collective problem solving offers new possibilities for solutions. As the result, it brings
hope to the people, the feeling that they can identify and solve their problem (Friedmann, 1992).
Participation as an end has a greater tendency to empower the local people; through project’s
activities they acquire the skills, knowledge, experiences, and opportunities to engage in their
own development agendas and their self-esteem, confidence, and collective consciousness
increases (Chambers, 1995; Michener, 1998).
The purpose of public participation is to build and facilitate capacity and self-reliance among the
people (Pring and Noe, 2002). The idea of participation as empowerment is that the practical
experience of being involved in considering options, making decisions, and taking collective
action is itself transformative. It leads on to greater consciousness of what makes and keeps
people poor and greater confidence in their ability to make a difference (White, 1996).
Participation in development has been associated with increased mobilization of stakeholder
ownership of policies and projects; greater efficiency, understanding and social cohesion; more
cost-effective services; greater transparency and accountability; increased empowering of the
poor and disadvantaged; and strengthened capacity of people to learn and act (Pretty, 1995;
Uphoff, 1992; World Bank, 1994).
Arnstein (1969) argued that public participation as a ‘categorical term’ for citizen power.
Arnstein conceptualized citizen participation as “the redistribution of power that enables the
have-not citizens, presently excluded from the political and economic processes, to be
deliberately included in the future”. She further argued that citizen participation as “the strategy
by which the have-nots join in determining how information is shared, goals and policies are set,
tax resources are allocated, programs are operated, and benefits like contracts and patronage are
parceled out” (Arnstein, 1969:216). The determination of participation as the strategy put
emphases on political empowerment that enables the public influencing the actions of local
government.
29
Development organizations in their definition of participation incorporate the empowering effect
of participation. For instance, Hentschel & Lanjouw (1996: xi) in their definition of participation
determined participation as “…. a process through which stakeholders share control over
resources which affect them.” This suggests that participation as the means of economic
empowerment. Participation in development is an instrument of empowerment through
enhancing an equitable sharing of power and to a higher level of people’s, in particular the
weaker groups’, political awareness and strength (Samuel, 1986 cited in Choguill, 1996).
Empowerment is an interactive process which occurs between the individual and his
environment, in the course of which the sense of the self as worthless changes into an acceptance
of the self as an assertive citizen with sociopolitical ability. Participation in development as a
process, which creates an opportunity for the public to interact with its environment, can be
considered as a means of local people empowerment. The outcome of the process is skills, based
on insights and abilities, the essential features of which are a critical political consciousness, an
ability to participate with others, a capacity to cope with frustrations and to struggle for influence
over the environment (Kieffer, 1984 cited in Sadan, 1997).
Participation and empowerment are means and ends to each other, and promoting participation
requires the dismantlement of existing power relations (Narayanan, 2003). To this end,
participation in development is strongly advised for the empowerment of local people by
development scholars and practitioners. In connection to this, (Cornwall and Brock, 2005 in
Pettit, 2012: 2) argued that participation is “a token exercise or even a means of maintaining
power relations without genuine empowerment, and without meaningful participation,
empowerment can remain an empty, unfulfilled promise”. This indicates that participation and
empowerment have a strong relationship. In other words, empowerment is an ultimate outcome
of people’s participation in development and participation is an indispensible condition for the
empowerment of local people. Platteau (2008) also pointed out that participatory development is
an ‘effective mechanism’ for reducing poverty and empowering the poor through allowing
people involved in the processes of decision-making and implementation of development
projects of which they are the intended beneficiaries.
30
Participation in development enhances the empowerment of local people in various ways.
According to Ul Haq (1993), participation widens choices and enables people to gain for
themselves access to a much broader range of opportunities. In this sense, participation serves as
a means to build the capacity of local people to bring their own development. Participation in
local development enhances empowerment of local people through improving the knowledge,
skills and the distribution of power across individuals and communities (OECD, 1995).
People’s participation in local development increases their economic empowerment through
facilitating control over resources that enables them to gain greater benefits from resources. This
scheme can be enhanced through creation of ‘formal user groups’ mechanism to reduce poverty
through creation of job opportunities and livelihoods for unemployed people. This scheme also
enhances skill development and income generation programs (Agrawals and Gupta, 2005). For
example, communal toilets and natural resources conservations enforced through participatory
development create job and livelihoods opportunities for women and youngsters who are
economically disadvantageous.
2.3.2 Role of Institution in enhancing Participation and Empowerment
Institutions reduce uncertainty by providing a structure to everyday political, economic and
social life. Accordingly, legal and policy framework and local government prohibit or enhance
people’s participation in local development. They also put a framework on the ways of sharing
the benefits of participatory local development. Therefore, they help to sustain people’s
participation in local development and foster the empowerment of local people through
participation in development.
Agencies and organizations can facilitate empowerment, making the space, creating the
conditions, removing the barriers, and encouraging empowerment. Specific actions do not lead to
empowerment; rather it is the context in which these actions and decisions are taken, which
facilitates and promotes empowerment (Oxaal and Baden, 1997)
There is argument that local government’s role in participatory processes is to facilitate and
support community initiatives through provision of information, resources and skills training
(Cavaye, 1999, Healy, 1998).These processes should allow ongoing involvement of stakeholders
31
independent of changing political and economic agendas, and be structured to be ‘meaningful
and appropriate to the capabilities and characteristics of the stakeholders concerned’ (Claridge
and Claridge, 1997).
Clearly articulated policies and strategies outlining communication, consultation and
participation processes within government agencies, developed cooperatively by all stakeholders,
will help facilitate involvement of citizens in decision-making processes. Local government
appears to be well positioned to take on the role of facilitating that citizen participation through
community capacity building (German Advisory Council on Global Change, 1997).
Effective public participation requires that government or the sponsor be competent in the
development and implementation of public participation programs. They must be willing and
able to listen - truly seeking and valuing diverse voices, making a special effort to hear and
understand those who, for various reasons, may otherwise go unheard (Smith, 2003).
Local government capacity is a critical factor for discharging the state roles in participatory
development. Local government capacity refers to its autonomy, financial strength, and
legislative and administrative capability to facilitate and enhance participatory local government.
The roles of local government, in this study, refer to enacting strategies and tactics, providing
training and technical supports, provision of credit for user group who control facilities produced
through people’s participation for sustaining local development, scaling up best practices.
Furthermore, local government is responsible to develop, test, analyze and adjust participatory
approaches that are reliable for the area.
Local government is the primary actor in the process of local development even if the
mobilization can be undertaken by local people. Thus, the support and participation of the state
through lower level tier are essential to facilitate participatory local development and sustain the
empowerment of people through participation in development.
2.4 Theoretical Frameworks
Theories represent simplifications of a more complex reality. They serve as a means of realizing
and assessing the situation of phenomenon on the ground. Therefore, this section presents a brief
highlight of theoretical underpinnings on participation and power framework that help to
32
scrutinize the nature of people’s participation in local development and assessing the
empowering effect of participation in local development respectively.
Decision-making power is the essence and epitome of participation. For sustainable development
to occur at grass-roots level, citizens must have power ('voice') to make or influence decisions
that affect their lives. Therefore, to examine the extent of public power in influencing decision
making in their own development, different theories of participation are used. For the purpose of
this dissertation, two themes of theories of participation are used to provide a clear theoretical
framework for examining extent of public participation in local development in BCA. These
themes of theories are Ladder of citizen participation and typologies of participation
Achieving empowerment is intimately linked to addressing the causes of disempowerment and
tackling disadvantage caused by the way in which power relations shape choices, opportunities
and wellbeing. There is a range of debates about the concept and operation of power, which
results in a variety of interpretations of empowerment (Luttrell et al, 2009). Thus, to determine
empowerment of local people through participation in local development in BCA Rowland’s
(1997) Empowerment Framework and Alsop et al. (2006) Empowerment Framework are used.
2.4.1 Ladder of Citizen’s Participation
To determine the extent of participation, Arnstein’s (1969) Ladder of Citizen’s Participation is
used. Despite its formulation before 40 years, Arnstein’s ladder of participation retains
considerable contemporary relevance and serves as a yardstick for many scholars and
practitioners for analyzing and evaluating participatory activities. The metaphor of the ladder has
become an enduring part of academic enquiry, policy and practice as a device to critique, design,
implement and evaluate participatory processes ever since (Wilcox, 1994; Cornwall, 2008). The
sustained reference to this model of participation arises from “its ability to reveal, in pictorial
form, the power agendas implicit in many institutionalized narratives and the differences in the
forms and strategies of participation that are desired” (Collins and Ison, 2006: 1).
Arnstein’s ladder is an influential and widely cited paper to criticize the limited extent of local
control in urban development programs. Arnstein’s concept of a ladder of participation has
influenced later thinking in urban planning and many other fields. The deliberate design of
33
Arnstein’s ladder to emphasize citizen empowerment intensified its prominence for evaluating
participatory process (Burns, 2003).
Arnstein put forward influential theoretical work on people’s participation in 1969 based on her
experience on three federal social programs in America: urban renewal, antipoverty and model
cities. This prominent hypothesis postulates different levels of participation in “a ladder pattern
with each rung corresponding to the extent of citizens’ power in determining the plan and/or the
program” (Arnstein, 1969: 216). Arnstein stresses that the ladder is a simplification and that the
eight rungs are an imperfect representation of what is really a continuum, where a clear
distinction between levels is not always possible. Still, she claims, it helps to illustrate the fact
that there are different degrees of citizen participation. Arnstein (1969) Ladder of Citizen’s
Participation is considered as the best attempt to determine the scale of participation by the
public (Choguill, 1996).
Arnstein (1969) explains that this classification is necessary to unveil the manipulation of people
in the garb of community participation projects by professionals and policyholders. This
categorization of the various types of people involvement is extremely crucial in clarifying the
confusion between “non-participation” and true “citizen power” and to identify the real motives
behind participatory projects, which are often used by critics as shortcomings of the concept of
community participation.
Despite its prominence in evaluating participatory approaches Arnstein’s ladder is not without
criticism. This model is not neutral: as pointed out by Hayward et al. (2004: 99), ‘reading the
ladder from bottom to top, it suggests a hierarchical view that promotes full participation as the
goal to be achieved. This value-laden view delegitimizes non- and/or peripheral participation.
Arnstein’s ladder looks at participation from the perspective of those on the receiving end
(Cornwall, 2008). The criterion by which the rungs of the Arnstein ladder are defined is “the
extent of citizens' power in determining the end product [of public policy]” (Choguill, 1996:433).
Her work is as pertinent today as it was then since, it is argued, much of what claims to be public
participation continues to be situated towards the lower rungs of the ladder (Cornwall, 2008).
Arnstein (1969) visualized participation as occurring at different levels and degrees in a ladder
with rungs to climb, ranging from ineffectual to citizen control (Whaley and Weaver, 2010). She
34
puts forward a model that consists of a ladder with eight rungs, as illustrated in Figure 2.2 below.
Citizen control
Delegated power
Degrees of citizen power
Partnership
Placation
Consultation
Degrees of tokenism
Informing
Therapy
Manipulation
Nonparticipation
Figure 2.2: Eight rungs on ladder of citizen participation
Source: Adopted from Arnstein (1969)
The three categories, from bottom to top, are: non-participation, degrees of tokenism and degrees
of citizen power (or what is regarded as genuine participation). The first (lowest) level of the
ladder is manipulation, a public relations exercise where citizens are placed on advisory
committees merely to gain their support. Therapy, the second level, refers to involving citizens in
activities that do not change their material conditions. A typical example of non-participation is
when government tries to push an agenda forward or uses some influence to gain support for an
idea (Krzmarzick, n.d.). “The real objectives of nonparticipation degrees is not to enable people
to participate in planning or conducting programs, but to enable power holders to ‘educate’ or
‘cure’ the participants” (Arnstein, 1969: 217).
35
Arnstein (1969: 217) indicated that placation “the highest level of tokenism degree because the
ground rules allow have-nots to advise, but retain for the power holders the continues right to
decide”. However, development organizations claim ‘tokenism’ as form of participation by
beneficiaries. For instance, the World Bank determines both giving information and consultation
as forms of participation, and equates the provision of information with ‘empowerment’
(Hentschel & Lanjouw, 1996).
At the levels termed degrees of tokenism, there is an illusion of a voice without the voice itself
(Mohammadi et al, 2010:576). At the third level, information is provided to citizens. Powerholders engage in one-way communication with citizens concerning their rights, responsibilities
and choices, with no room for citizens to air their views or negotiate. Consultation, the fourth
level, involves power-holders soliciting citizens' views through town hall meetings or surveys to
obtain feedback (Oscar, 2013). Under the ‘informing’ and ‘consultation’ conditions “citizens
lack the power to insure that their views will be heeded by the powerful” (Arnstein, 1969: 217).
Placation, the fifth level, involves inviting citizens to participate in planning committees, which
have little authority since decision-making power resides elsewhere.
Partnership level of degrees of citizen power (or what is regarded as genuine participation)
“enables citizen to negotiate and engage in trade-offs with traditional power holders.” At
delegated power and citizen control rungs “have-not citizens obtain the majority of decision
making seats, or full managerial level” (Arnstein, 1969: 217).
The third, and most empowering category of participation in Arnstein's typology is degrees of
citizen power this is where true and meaningful participation takes place, which encompasses the
sixth, seventh and eighth levels. In partnership, the sixth, through negotiation, citizens and
power-holders share planning and decision-making responsibilities. At the seventh level,
delegated power involves negotiation between power-holders and citizens, where the latter are
empowered to make decisions and take control of plans and programs. The highest level of
participation is citizen control, where citizens fully control a program or institution, govern
policy and may allow outsiders to make changes subject to specified conditions. Collectively, the
sixth, seventh and eighth levels are the most important because they represent genuine
participation. In partnerships and delegated power, citizens and officials occupy the same space
36
on decision-making governing boards. Real citizen power is realized when citizens are able to
make final decisions in matters that affect them and their communities (Krzmarzick, n.d.:7).
An important implication of Arnstein's ladder is that grass-roots citizens are better off with
having more control of their lives and livelihoods than less control or none at all. Sustainable
grass-roots development is likely to thrive in situations of genuine participation. However,
continuous capacity building, support and facilitation from local authorities are essential for
realization of sustainable bottom-up development (Oscar, 2013).
Arnstein (1969) Ladder of Citizen Participation is an appropriate theory for this study as the
result of the following realities: (1) the Theory based itself on practical public services issues,
urban services, which were the concern of this study; (2) it is an appropriate to examine extent of
public participation in decision at different phases of development process, since it attempts to
determine different level of participation. Therefore, for the purpose of this paper, Arnstein’s
Ladder of Participation is used to evaluate the extent to which people participate in the local
development processes.
2.4.2 Typologies of Participation
Two typologies of participation, Pretty (1995) and White’s (1996), are used in evaluating the
extent of public participation in development. Pretty (1995) has classified participation into
seven types on the basis of why and how people participate in development. Pretty’s typology
ranges from manipulation and passive participation to self-mobilization. Manipulation and
passive participation involves providing people the information on ‘what is to happen’ and
people ‘act out predetermined roles’. Self-mobilization is the highest form of participation in
which ‘people take initiatives largely independent of external institutions’. The problem with
participation as used in types one to four is that any achievements are likely to have no positive
lasting effect on people’s lives (Rahnema, 1992 in Pretty, 1995). The term participation can be
used, knowing it will not lead to action. Indeed, some suggest that the manipulation that is often
central to types one to four means they should be seen as types of nonparticipation (Hart, 1992 in
pretty, 1995).
He goes on to argue that his typology suggests that the term ‘participation’ should not be
accepted without appropriate clarification. He indicated that for the best results, people should be
37
involved in all stages of a project, from design to maintenance. If they are just involved in
information sharing and consultation; then, the result will be poor (Pretty, 1995). Therefore, his
typology of participation will be used to evaluate the approaches and the extent to which people
participate in local development.
A closer look at Pretty’s typology of participation suggests that this classification is largely based
on two dimensions, namely: (a) the distribution of decision making authority between participant
and interventionists in relation to (b) different key functions in development planning, such as
situation analysis, problem identification, goal setting, and implementation. Thus, decision
making and planning models are considered to be of key importance when talking about
(different modes and levels of) participation.
38
Table 2.1: Pretty’s (1995) Typology of Participation
Typology
Characteristics of each type
1. Manipulative participation
Participation is simply a pretence, with “people” representative on
official boards but who are unelected and have no power
2. Passive participation
People participate by being told what has been decided or has already
happened. It involves unilateral announcements by an administration or
project management without any listening to people’s responses. The
information being shared belongs only to external professionals
3. Participation by consultation
People participate by consulted or by answering questions. External
agents define problems and information gathering processes, and so
control analysis. Such a consultative process does not concede any
share in decision making, and professionals are under no obligation to
take on broad people’s views.
4. Participation for material
incentives
People participate by contributing resources, for example, labor, in
return for food, cash or other material incentives. In this form of
participation, yet people have no stake in prolonging technologies or
practices when the incentives end.
5. Functional participation
Participation seen by external agencies as a means to achieve project
goals, especially reduced costs. People may participate by forming
groups to meet predetermined objectives related to the project. Such
involvement may be interactive and involve shared decision making,
but tends to arise only after major decisions have already been made by
external agents. At worst, local people may still only be co-opted to
serve external goals.
6. Interactive participation
People participate in joint analysis, development of action plans and
formation or strengthening of local institutions. Participation is seen as
a right, not just the means to achieve project goals. The process
involves interdisciplinary methodologies that seek multiple
perspectives and make use of systematic and structured learning
process. As group take control over local decisions and determine how
available resources are used, so they have a stake in maintaining
structures and practices.
7. Self-mobilization
People participate by taking initiatives independently of external
institutions to change systems. They develop contacts with external
institutions for resources and technical advice they need, but retain
control over how resources are used.
Source: Adopted from Pretty (1995: 1252)
Pretty’s (1995) typology is a normative approach ranging from the weaker to stronger form of
participation. Manipulative participation and passive participation are characterized by the
inclusion of token representatives with no real power on the decisions already been taken.
Participation by consultation and participation for material incentives are better forms of
39
participation.
Functional
participation,
interactive
participation,
and
self-mobilization
participation are comparatively the stronger levels of participation. At these levels of
participation, beneficiaries are in a better position to control planning, decisions and resources.
The problem with participation as used in types one to four is that any achievements are likely to
have no positive lasting effect on people’s lives (Pretty, 1995). Some suggest that the
manipulation that is often central to types one to four means they should be seen as types of
nonparticipation (Hart, 1992 cited in Pretty, 1995).
It was when people were involved in decision making during all stages of the project, from
design to maintenance that the best results occurred. If they were just involved in information
sharing and consultations, then results were much poorer. According to the analysis, it was quite
clear that moving down the typology moved a project from a medium to highly effective
category (Pretty, 1995).
White (1996) pointed out two main ways in which the politics of participation are admitted in
development.
The first is the question of who participates that give emphasizes on the
participation of relatively disadvantaged groups. The second concerns the level of participation,
which refers to the degree to which local people take part in participatory development projects.
In order to evaluate level of local people participation in development projects, she devised
typologies of participation that indicated the function of participation and the interest of those
who design and implement development projects; and on how the participants view their
participation.
White’s typology distinguishes four major types of participation, and the characteristics of each
as presented in Table 2.2 under. The first column shows the types of participation. The second
shows the interests in participation from the `top down’: that is, the interests that those who
design and implement development programs have in the participation of others. The third
column shows the perspective from the `bottom up’: how the participants themselves see their
participation, and what they expect to get out of it. The final column characterizes the overall
function of each type of participation.
40
Table 2.2: White's typology of participation
Form: what is the
Level of
participation?
Nominal
Top-down: what is
in it for
government?
Legitimation
Bottom-up: what is
in it for individuals
and communities?
Inclusion
Function: what is
participation for?
Instrumental
Efficiency
Cost
Means
Representative
Sustainability
Leverage
Voice
Transformative
Empowerment
Empowerment
Means/End
Display
Source: White (1996:6)
In nominal form of participation, the intention of the government is basically legitimation of the
action in the name of public participation. For the public participation is seen as inclusion. The
purpose of participation is to serve the function of display. In instrumental form, participation
serves the efficiency purpose for the government that guarantees public commitment to the
project. For the public participation is seen as cost. The function of participation is as a means to
achieve cost-effectiveness (White, 1996).
In representative form, the function of participation is to allow the local people a voice in the
character of the project. From the government’s side, participation is intended to ensure
sustainability that avoids the danger of creating an inappropriate and dependent project. For the
public, participation serves to ensure leverage, to influence the shape which the project should
take and its subsequent management. Participation, thus, is being an effective means through
which the people could express their own interests (White, 1996).
In transformative form, empowerment may also be identified as the interest in participation
`from above’, when outsiders are working in solidarity with the poor. Participation is therefore at
one and the same time a means to empowerment and an end in itself, so breaking down the
division between means and ends which characterizes the other types (White, 1996). White
(1996) argues this process never comes to an end, but is a continuing dynamic which transforms
people’s reality and their sense of it.
White’s model of level of participation also demonstrated the dynamic relationship among the
forms, interests (top-down and bottom-up), and functions of participation. It also indicated power
41
relations external to development project that affect the extent of public participation in
development.
White (1996) typology intended to address several questions raised by Arnstein’s ladder of
participation by highlighting that underlying ‘politics of participation’ are tensions around who is
involved, how and on whose terms. These include: Control of what? Which citizens? What kind
of power? What is in it for the citizens to seek this power and what is in it for the state to cede it?
(Brodie, et al, 2009).
White's typology is important for two reasons. On one hand it shows the representative aspect of
participation for sustainable development and empowerment as the main goal of the
transformative dimension of participation for local people. This suggests that participation is
both means and end. On the other hand, the typology locates the place and conditions different
forms of participation can create opportunity for participation and changing existing power
relations Oscar (2013). The favor any interest has over others is clear manifestation of power
relations, because as White (1996:6) notes: “sharing through participation does not necessarily
mean sharing in power”. In other words, participation is not synonymous with empowerment; it
all depends on the level of involvement. One fundamental lesson from White's typology is that in
participation power is a win-lose game between the state and the individual, group or
community. Ideally, participation power should be held by the latter entities (Brodie, et al, 2009).
2.4.3 Empowerment Framework
The analysis of “empowerment is most effective when it draws on the full range of concepts and
meanings of power…” (Pettit, 2012:5). Thus, as indicated elsewhere in this dissertation, two
empowerment frameworks are used to determine empowerment of local people through
participation. These are Rowland’s (1997) and Alsop et al. (2006) frameworks.
Rowland (1997) identified four types of power relations: power over, power to, power with and
power within. Rowland’s Power Framework is illustrated in Table 2.3 under.
42
Table 2.3: Implications of different dimensions of power
Type of power relation
Power Over
Implications for an understanding of
Empowerment
Changes in underlying resources and power to
challenge constraints. Able to maximize the
opportunities available to them without constraints
Power To
The ability to make decisions, has authority, and finds
solutions to problems, and which can be creative and
enabling. The notion therefore refers to intellectual
abilities (knowledge and know-how) as well as
economic means, i.e. to the ability to access and control
means of production and benefit (the notion of assets)
Power With
Collective power where people, typically lowers,
together exercise power through organization, solidarity
and acting together
Power from Within
Refers to self-awareness, self-esteem, identity and
assertiveness (knowing how to be). It refers to how
individuals, through self-analysis and internal power,
can influence their lives and make changes.
Source: Luttrell et al, 2009
Empowerment based on a view of power as ‘power over’ emphasizes the need for participation
in existing economic and political structures but does not involve changes to those structures
(Luttrell et al, 2009). Conceptualization of empowerment based on ‘power over’ suggest that
empowerment is more than participation in decision making; it must also include the processes
that lead people to perceive themselves as able and entitled to make decisions (Rowlands, 1997).
Using the conventional definition, of 'power over', empowerment is bringing people who are
outside the decision-making process into it. This puts a strong emphasis on participation in
political structures and formal decision-making and, in the economic sphere, on the ability to
obtain an income that enables participation in economic decision-making. Individuals are
empowered when they are able to maximize the opportunities available to them without
constraints (Rowlands, 1997).
The other ways of understanding and conceptualizing power focus on processes, which refers to
'power to', 'power with', and 'power from within'. This is power which does not involve
domination but is generative. Within the generative, 'power to' and 'power with', interpretation of
power, empowerment is concerned with the processes by which people become aware of their
43
own interests and how those relate to the interests of others, in order both to participate from a
position of greater strength in decision-making and actually to influence such decisions
(Rowlands, 1997).
Power-to is creative, productive, and enabling and considered the essence of individual
empowerment. It involves capacity building, decision-making authority, leadership, the power to
understand how things work, and problem-solving skills (Moffat et. al., 1995). Power to refer to
the unique potential of every person to shape, direct, and control his or her life in the world, and is
also referred to as an individual’s generative or productive power (Nelson & Wright, 1995;
Chambers, 2005). Empowerment based on ‘power to’ refers to a power which includes the ability
to make decisions, have authority, and find solutions to problems, and which can be creative and
enabling. The notion, therefore, refers to intellectual abilities (knowledge and know-how) as well
as economic means; that is the ability to access and control means of production and benefit (the
notion of assets) (Luttrell et al, 2009). Important to this aspect of power are relationships – power is
not individual but is present within multiple and diverse social relations – and also knowledge –
understanding the situation enables people to act (Nelson & Wright, 1995; Rowlands, 1997).
Increases in ‘power to’ are linked to gains of ‘power within’, which is described as self-worth, selfconfidence, and inner spiritual strength (Chambers, 2005). Additionally ‘power to’ will grow through
‘power with’, that is the solidarity and collective strength of uniting with others, or as Rowlands
(1997:13) describes, “a sense of the whole being greater than the sum of the individuals, especially
when a group tackles a problem together”. In this regard, Rowlands (1992) notes that, following an
expanding ‘power to’, marginalized people will encounter situations where the control of resources is
controlled by outside agencies, and for the marginalized group to develop they must be able to
engage such people and institutions in decision-making processes.
Power-with is a collective form of power where people feel empowered by organizing and
uniting around a common purpose or understanding. It involves a sense of whole greater than the
sum of individuals (Rowlands, 1995). Empowerment attained through “power with” emphasizes
social or political power which highlights the notion of common purpose or understanding as
well as the ability to get together to negotiate and defend a common goal. Collectively, people
feel they have power when they can get together and unite in search of a common objective, or
when they share the same vision.
44
Power from within involves spiritual strength based in self-acceptance, self-respect, self-esteem,
self-awareness, consciousness raising, self-confidence, and assertiveness. Respect for self is
extended to respect for and acceptance of others as equals, recognizing complexity and
complementarities (Moffat et al., 1995). Power within has to do with a person’s sense of selfworth and self-knowledge. It includes an ability to recognize individual differences while
respecting others. Power within is the capacity to imagine and have hope; it affirms the common
human search for dignity and fulfillment (Veneklasen & Miller, 2002).
Empowerment as a power within is a process of internal change. The internal process is the
person’s sense or belief in ability to make decisions and to solve own problems, whereas
empowerment as power to is a process of external change. The external change finds expression
in the ability to act and to implement the practical knowledge, the information, the skills, the
capabilities and the other new resources acquired in the course of the process (Parsons, 1988
cited in Sadan, 1997). The internal change recognized as psychological empowerment and the
external change political empowerment. According to this distinction, psychological
empowerment occurs on the level of a person’s consciousness and sensations, while political
empowerment is a real change which enables a person to take part in the making of decisions
that affect his life. To achieve psychological empowerment a person requires only internal
strengths, while to realize his political personal empowerment a person requires environmental
conditions, mainly organizational ones, which will enable him to exercise new abilities (Gruber
& Trickett, 1987 cited in Sadan, 1997)
Rowlands (1997) suggests that our understanding of empowerment within the development
context arises from these four divisions of power. Firstly, from “power over”, empowerment
involves bringing those who are outside the decision-making processes into them. Within
development projects this entails local people making key decisions which will lead and direct
the projects’ activities. This understanding places importance on projects that enable local people
to better engage in formal and political decision-making, and projects those provide local people
with an ability to gain an income, enabling them to participate in economic decision-making
(Rowlands, 1997:13). Secondly, arising from “power to” and “power with”, empowerment
entails a process where people become aware of their own interests and how they relate to the
interests of others. This enables local people to participate in decision-making processes from a
45
position of greater strength, and actually influence these decisions. Thirdly, drawing from
“power to” and “power within”, empowerment must also involve undoing any negative social
constructs, so that “people come to see themselves as having the capacity and right to act and
influence decisions” (Rowlands, 1997:14).
This framework, encouraging the shift from a hierarchical power-over conceptualization towards
equitable individual power-within and power-to, used as an understanding of empowerment form
the theoretical framework for my research. The concept of power-with, social empowerment, is
also important, particularly when understanding collective forms of empowerment, which my
research also addresses. This study emphasizes power-within as a starting point for different
forms of empowerment, specifically power-with and power-to. It assumes a movement from
individual awakening and strength to the ability to associate productively with others and to
engage in new activities and problem solving.
Alsop et al. (2006: 9) framework argues that empowerment is the result of “dynamic and
iterative relationship between agency and opportunity structure”. The interventions to improve
agency and enhance opportunity structures can increase people’s capacity to make effective
choices, and that this in turn can bring about other development outcomes. Sound practices of
empowerment and participation, will seriously consider both agency and structure – and the
interplay between them. Meaningful empowerment and participation require significant changes
in power relations, both at the level of agency and structure (Pettit, 2012).
The capacity to make effective choice is primarily influenced by two sets of interrelated factors:
agency and opportunity structure. Even when people have the capacity to choose options, they
may not be able to use that agency effectively. They are constrained by their opportunity
structure, defined as those aspects of the institutional context within which actors operate that
influence their ability to transform agency into action. By establishing the “rules of the game” for
the exercise of agency, institutional contexts determine, to a greater or lesser extent, the
effectiveness of agency. These rules can also influence the accrual of stocks of assets and
determine the value of benefits that flow from these assets (Alsop et al., 2006).
Empowerment is based on tackling the differences in capabilities that deny actors the capacity to
make transforming choices. It is a dynamic process through which the interaction of agency and
46
opportunity structure has the potential to improve the capacity of individuals or groups to make
effective choices. This concept has similarities to Sen’s (1999a) notion of expanding human
capabilities and freedoms by focusing on people’s ability to “enhance the substantive choices
they have”.
Opportunity structure is a prerequisite to empowerment that allows people to translate their asset
base into effective agency, through more equitable rules and expanded entitlements. For
example, an individual’s human assets might be improved through completion of secondary
education, while at the same time new opportunities for citizen participation in budget
allocations might open up through the institutionalization of budget planning processes at the
local level. Using the new skills, confidence, and knowledge gained through formal education,
and taking advantage of the opportunities opened up in the planning process, that person may be
empowered to effectively participate in local-level decision making (Alsop et al., 2006).
2.4.3.1 Agency
Agency is the ability of individuals and groups to think and act in their own interests (Pettit,
2012). It encompasses the ability to formulate strategic choices, and to control resources and
decisions that affect important life outcomes (Malhotra et al., 2002: 9). Alsop et al (2006)
determines agency as an actor’s or group’s ability to make purposeful choices—that is, the actor
is able to envisage and purposively choose options. But agency cannot be treated as synonymous
with empowerment. Kabeer (1999a) described agency as related to the ability of an individual to
set his own goals and act upon them. The process involves bargaining and negotiation as well as
resistance and manipulation. For Sen (2005) agency is what a person is free to do and achieve in
pursuit of whatever goals or values he or she regards as important. A further and occasionally
explicit assumption in Sen’s account is that agency will be socially beneficial, that agents
advance goals people value and have reason to value (Ibrahim and Alkire, 2007).
In terms of both measurement of and action to enhance empowerment, a person or group’s
agency can be largely predicted by their asset endowment. Assets are the stocks of resources that
equip actors to use economic, social, and political opportunities, to be productive, and to protect
themselves from shocks (Alsop et al, 2006). These resources enhance empowerment through
increasing power that is a control or a real ability to effect change (Ibrahim and Alkire, 2007).
47
Uphoff (2005) distinguishes “power resources”, i.e. the accumulated, invested and exchanged
assets from the “power results”, i.e. the activities that are achieved by using these resources. An
empowerment process, he argues, needs to provide access to these “resources”, and also to allow
people to use them effectively to gain more “power”. Agency is influenced by people’s
individual (material, human, social and psychological) and collective (voice, organization,
representation and identity) assets and capabilities (Narayan, 2005).
2.4.3.2 Opportunity Structure
Opportunity structure focuses on the institutional environment, which offers people the
opportunity to exert agency fruitfully. The focus is on the opportunity structure that provides
what might be considered preconditions for effective agency (Ibrahim and Alkire, 2007).
Narayan, (2005) explains that people’s agency can be constrained by the “opportunity structure”,
i.e. the institutional climate (information, inclusion/participation, accountability, local
organizational capacity) and the social and political structures (openness, competition and
conflict) in which people live. The opportunity structure is affected by three main influences: the
permeability of the state; the extent of elite fragmentation; and the state’s implementation
capacity (Petesch et al., 2005). An effective exercise of agency entails the overcoming of
significant institutional and informal obstacles, including those mentioned above, as well as the
domination of existing elite groups or of unresponsive public programs (Smulovitz & Walton,
2003). The exercise of human agency, therefore, requires a “change in the rules of the game”, i.e.
the formal and informal institutions that condition the effectiveness of human agency (Alsop et
al., 2006).
Opportunity structure is the formal and informal institutions, rules, norms and beliefs that enable
and constrain thinking and action (Pettit, 2012). An actor may be able to choose options, but the
effective realization of those choices will largely depend upon the institutional context within
which the actor lives and works. The opportunity structure comprises these institutions that
govern people’s behavior and that influence the success or failure of the choices that they make
(Alsop et al, 2006). Institutions can be formal or informal. Formal institutions include the sets of
rules, laws, and regulatory frameworks that govern the operation of political processes, public
services, private organizations, and markets. Informal institutions include the “unofficial” rules
that structure incentives and govern relationships within organizations such as bureaucracies,
48
firms, or industries, as well as the informal cultural practices, value systems, and norms of
behavior that operate in households or among social groups or communities.
Formal institutions touch the lives of most people. Common examples include a country’s legal
framework, tax regulations, and local governance rules, such as what constitutes a quorum in a
local committee or how pasture land is managed. As with informal institutions, measurement
efforts need to track not only the existence of these institutions, but the ways they work in
practice (Alsop et al, 2006).
2.5 Integration of Theories and concepts
Integration of theories and concepts elaborates how theories are used to describe concepts and
explain the interplay between different concepts. That means it serves as the blue print to
determine the situation of concepts on the ground with respect to theoretical underpinnings. With
this intention in mind, I tried to describe how theories and concepts integrating in this research.
The extent of participation refers to the degree to which the public influences decision making.
Thus, Arnstein’s (1969) Ladder of Citizen’s Participation helps to scrutinize the extent of public
participation in development at grassroots level. This theory does this through indicating the
power the public exercised at each phases of local development. Public participation in
development at a given locality is also undertaken for different reasons and through different
methods. Thus, the extent of public participation in local development process can be discerned
through determining the methods and reasons of public participation in development. Hence,
Pretty (1995) Typology of Participation helps to determine the extent of participation through
exposing why and how the public participate in development. In the process of local
development, public participation is initiated for addressing different interest. Moreover,
different actors has involved in the development process representing the public. Thus, the extent
of public participation can be detected by considering the dynamics of these situations in the
process of development at grassroots level. Thus, White’s (1996) Typology of Participation helps
to determine the extent of participation in development process through exposing the interest of
the public and government on participation and who participates in the process of development.
As supposed in this dissertation, participation in development improves the situation of local
people power in different forms. Thus, Rowlands (1997) Empowerment framework helps to
49
examine the influence of participation on local people through indicating the form of local
people power transformed as the result of participation in development. Participation also
enhances local people empowerment through improving capacity and creating conducive
environment for public empowerment. Thus, Alsop et al. (2006) Empowerment Framework
allows to assess this relationship through exposing capacity developed and opportunity structure
enhanced.
2.6 Review of Empirical Literature
A number of scholars have interested in participatory approaches due to its contribution to the
efficiency and sustainability of development projects, the utilization of local knowledge for
development and its contribution for empowerment of the disadvantage section of the
community. Chambers (1983), the father of participatory development, emphasizes the
importance of people’s participation in improving their conditions in his book entitled “Rural
development: Putting the Last First”. In this book, by focusing on rural poverty in the Third
World, he assessed situations of rural poverty and the perceptions, attitudes, learning, ways of
thinking, and behavior of professionals. Based on the assessment, he indicated that bringing the
poor in the center of development, what he called ‘putting the last first’, is the necessary
condition to change the situations of the rural poverty. Therefore, this work indicates that
people’s participation is an important means to change the situation of the local people.
Chambers (1994a; 1994b) descriptively assessed the origin, practices and potential benefits of
participatory rural appraisal (PRA). In his articles, he pointed out that PRA is an important
participatory development tool for enhancing the interaction of local people to discuss their
situation, plan and act. Further, he indicated the explicit and implicit potentials of PRA in
empowering local people and its flexibility in allowing the application of different techniques.
Through case study approach, Agrawal and Gupta (2005) assessed the significance of people’s
participation for the achievement of government driven programs to decentralize decision
making related to resource management in Nepal’s Terai. Based on the statistical analysis of the
data, they found out that the elite group who were economically and socially better-off had
greater participation in community-level user groups. Their analysis support the argument that
for decentralization policies to be successful in dealing with equity issues, it is important to build
50
institutional mechanisms that encourage poorer and more marginal households to access
government officials, improve access to educational opportunities, and create incentives to
promote more interactions between less powerful rural residents.
Botes and Rensburg (2000) based on the analysis of community participation dynamics in the
South African urban upgrading context, identified power relation between the stakeholders in the
development process as obstacles and impediments of participatory development. Gack & ElGaili (2007), through case study approach, assessed government initiated participatory
development practices in Sudan. In her endeavor, she indicated that the process of people’s
participation was not in ways that empower local people. Botes and Rensburg (2000) and
Thomas (2013) pointed out the administrative structure of government bureaucracies and mode
of thinking of the bureaucracy as the challenge of participatory development.
Participatory development, due to its focus on local people, has a vital role in empowering
people. In this connection, Khan (2006) assessed the role of participation in local government in
empowering women through the case study of Bangladesh Union Parishad. In his endeavor, he
attested that participation is an essential first step in order to empower women. Sow (2012)
undertook research on Women’s Political Participation and Economic Empowerment in Postconflict Countries: Lessons from the Great Lakes Region in Africa. Powis (2012) explored the
interface between the new politics of localization and the political process, in India, that inclined
to the effect of general politics on participatory development.
In Ethiopia, the existing literatures on participation focused on people’s participation in NGOs
projects and participatory forest management. For instance, Abraham (2002) assessed “NGO’s
Experience with the Practice of Participatory Development with reference to Care-Ethiopia
Borana Pastoral Water Development Initiatives”. In his endeavor, he concluded that people’s
participation was limited to material and labor contribution without involvement in the initiation
and planning of development projects. Yemiru (2011) explored Participatory Forest Management
for Sustainable Livelihoods in the Bale Mountains. He concluded that the benefits of
participatory projects motivate people to further participate in local development or in his case
participatory forest management. Gedefaw (2008) assessed Community Participation in SIDA’s
Woreda Support Program Activities in Amhara Region.
51
2.7 Summary
Under this chapter, I synthesized basic concepts of the study, theoretical frameworks, and review
of related works. The basic concepts of the study participation, empowerment, and institution are
determined from diverse view points and operationalized in a manner they are used in the study.
Participation is operationalized as a process through which the public take part and influence
decisions related to local development. Participation is considered as both means and end, in
which local people empowered through participation in development. Empowerment is
operationalized as improvements in personal conditions, social relations, access and control of
economic resources, awareness about political process as a result of participation in local
development. I analyzed participation at local level along personal, social, economic and
political dimensions. Institution is operationalized as policy and legal frameworks and
organizational factors, which affect participation in local development and empowerment. I only
address formal institutions.
In order to assess the situation of public participation in development, empowerment, and
institutional contexts on the ground, I utilized different theories of participation and
empowerment. To determine the extent of participation in development Arnstein’s (1969) Ladder
of Citizen’s Participation, Pretty’s (1995) Typology of participation, and White’s (1996)
Typology of Participation were used. I examined empowerment through participation in local
development using Rowland’s (1997) Power Framework and Alsop et al. (2006). I attempted to
integrate main concepts and theories to establish their links in this dissertation. Finally, I
assessed empirical literatures in order to identify main research gaps.
52
Chapter 3 : Research Methodology
3.1 Introduction
Methodology is an area that connects issues at the abstract level of epistemology and the
mechanical level of actual methods (Morgan, 2007). It allows understanding the different ways
in which knowledge can be created. The concepts that underpin the subject of ‘methodology’
also enable to be critical and analytical in the face of ‘knowledge’ being presented as ‘fact’
(Adams et al, 2007). According to Greene (2006), a methodology for social inquiry holds four
domains of issues and assumptions: philosophical assumptions and stances, inquiry logics,
guidelines for practice, and socio-political commitments in science. This chapter presents the
philosophical underpinnings of the study, research strategy/approach, types of data, data
gathering methods, sampling design, data analysis methods, and ethical consideration.
3.2 Pragmatism Philosophical Perspective: Rationales
Research paradigm is a view of reality and an intellectual framework that specifies a discipline’s
proper domain, basic assumptions, appropriate research questions, and rules of inference
(Morgan, 1980 in Yang et al, 2007; Lawrence, 2004). Bogdan and Biklen (1998:22) considered
research paradigm as “a loose collection of logically related assumptions, concepts, or
propositions that orient thinking and research”. The philosophical aspects such as assumptions,
concepts and propositions provide a framework and direction and even lay a foundation for
techniques of conducting research (Lawrence, 2004). Guba (1990:17) determines paradigm as
“basic set of beliefs that guide action”, the action being the research activity. This definition
relates philosophical and practical aspects. The philosophical dimensions of the paradigm are
ontology and epistemology which in turn influence the practical dimension of methodology.
Ontology has been defined as the study of what exists or what is real (Crotty, 1998).
Epistemology is concerned with the ‘nature and form’ of knowledge (Cohen et al. 2007:17).
Methodology is concerned with the choice of various ways of acquiring knowledge (Crotty
1998).
The assessment of literature indicates three major categories of research paradigms: positivism,
interpretive and pragmatic (Guba, 1990; Grix, 2004; Cohen et al., 2007). For the purpose of this
study, pragmatism research philosophy or world view is selected for guiding the overall process
53
of the research over interpretive and positivism research paradigms. Pragmatism has been
considered the best philosophical foundation for justifying the combination of different methods
within one study (Howe, 1988). Pragmatism relies on the application of positivist and
interpretive ontological and epistemological perspectives that seem appropriate for the issue at
hand.
The ontological foundation of positivism (realism) looks at reality as independent, external and
objective (Cohen et al., 2007), and the application of the principles of natural sciences to the
study of social reality. This implies that reality is measureable. Reality is something ‘out there’
(Cohen et al., 2007:7) and a researcher can know it by applying the scientific method without
associating his/her being to it. However, reality in public administration in general and public
participation in development is subjective to different public interests and cannot be measured
only through applying principles of natural sciences. Thus, mere application of positivism does
not help to address the diverse aspects of my research basic concepts: participation,
empowerment and institution.
The ontological underpinning of interpretive research philosophy (relativism) (Guba & Lincoln,
1994) is “reality is socially constructed, so the focus of research should be on an understanding
of this construction and multiple perspectives” (Richards (2003:8). This implies that reality
varies from individual to individual; meaning thereby that reality is subjective. Thus, this aspect
of my philosophical stance helps to consider subjective interpretation of aspects of participation,
institutions and empowerment among the public and government officials. However, the
ontological perspective of interpretive research does not allow considering the objective aspects
of basic concepts of my study.
The epistemological foundation of interpretive approach (subjectivism) (Guba & Lincoln, 1994),
presupposes that the world does not exist independently of our knowledge of it (Grix, 2004).
Thus, reality is personal and individually varied. The researcher can understand reality only if
s/he becomes a part of this reality or the process of how it evolved through interaction between
an individual and his/her world (Cohen et al., 2007). The role of the researcher in interpretive
paradigm is subjective and participatory as opposed to objective and detached. However, this
epistemological presupposition of interpretive approach restricts the way of generating
54
knowledge without researcher’s interaction with the participants.
The epistemological foundation of positivism (objectivism) restricts flexibility of the researcher
in generating knowledge. Guba & Lincoln (1994) objectivism refers to an impartial and
dissociated relationship, and the independent and external nature of reality or truth. Positivism
prescribed that reality or truth already exists there, and researchers need to discover this reality or
truth as it exists, and also that researchers are not meaning builders but just discoverers of an
already existing meaning. It emphasizes getting objective measures of "hard facts" in the form of
numbers (Lawrence, 2004). However, the aspects of the basic concepts of this study:
participation, empowerment and institution are not independently exists and the researcher
should generate hidden aspects of them through applying his personal creativity in order to
comprehensively address the concepts.
Positivists rely on quantitative research approach. The predominant focus of positivist approach
is to discover the cause-effect relationship and scientific generalizations (Creswell, 2009). It is
nomothetic, explanations use law or law-like principles, to develop a general causal law or
principle then use logical deduction to specify how it operates in concrete situations (Lawrence,
2004). However, the nomothetic aspect of quantitative approach is not adequate to my research
endeavor since all aspects of complex nature of participation, institution and empowerment
cannot be measured objectively in the form of number. The methodology of interpretive
research, qualitative approach, is “flexible and sensitive to social context in which data are
produced” (Grix, 2010:121), and also allows the participants to share their “mind” (Dornyei,
2007:147). This methodological approach, thus, allows for greater interaction between the
researcher and the participants, and facilitates the researcher in understanding the participants’
perspective.
Pragmatists view reality from two perspectives. One reality is consistent with the positivists’ and
post-positivists’ views of reality. That is, there is a reality outside the human that is observed,
measured, and understood to some extent. Pragmatists’ second perspective of reality is that there
is no one truth, but there are several explanations of reality. Researchers who are pragmatist
choose the best explanation that makes sense within their value system (Graff, 2013).
55
Taking into consideration the underlying assumptions of the aforementioned research
philosophies, pragmatism is adopted, for this research, for different reasons. In the first place,
worldviews are shaped by the student’s discipline area (Creswell, 2009). Accordingly, Shields
(1998:199) advocated pragmatism as an appropriate philosophical inquiry for public
administration by substantiating his points as follows:
… public administration deals with the stewardship and implementation of the
products of a living democracy. They are involved in making and doing – the
instrumentality of democracy. This is an environment that is changing, organic, and
teaming with values. Public administrators are stewards in that they are concerned
with accountability and effective use of scarce resources and ultimately making the
connection between the doing, the making, and democratic values. Pragmatic inquiry
is well suited to this vision of public administration.
The above argument indicates that pragmatism allows assessing public actions in light of
practical consequences. Thus, pragmatic world view put in a better position than other research
paradigms, positivist and interpretive, to deal with interdisciplinary nature of public
administration (Yang et al, 2007) in general and to assess the empirical achievements of
participation in development, the context of participation and its effects in the study area, and to
draw up best practices that can be transcend to other localities (Graff, 2013).
In contrast to positivist and interpretive, pragmatism enables to focus attention on the research
problem and allows pluralistic approaches to derive knowledge about the problem. It arises out
of actions, situations, and consequences rather than antecedent conditions. Pragmatism concerns
with “applications what works and solutions to problems” (Creswell, 2009). The essential
emphasis of pragmatism is on actual behaviors, the beliefs that stand behind those behaviors, and
the consequences that are likely to follow from different behaviors (Morgan, 2007).
Pragmatism allows flexibility in a research process. Accordingly, it allows the flexibility of
reasoning that moves back and forth between induction and deduction (“abductive” reasoning)
(Morgan, 2007). Further, it enables flexibility in investigate techniques that help to address a
range of research questions that arise (Onwuegbuzie and Leech, 2005). In other words, it allows
using different techniques in holistic approach to achieve the research objectives.
Thus, consideration of pragmatism by empirical researchers is productive because it offers an
immediate and useful middle position philosophically and methodologically; it offers a practical
56
and outcome-oriented method of inquiry that is based on action and leads, iteratively, to further
action and the elimination of doubt; and it offers a method for selecting methodological mixes
that can help researchers better answer many of their research questions (Johnson and
Onwuegbuzie, 2004).
3.3 Mixed Methods Research Approach: Rationales
The choice of methods is chiefly driven by the philosophical assumptions - ontological and
epistemological - which frame the research or the researcher’s frame of reference (Brannen,
2005). For the purpose of this study, in line with the worldview selected, pragmatism, mixed
methods research approach is adopted. Mixed methods research is “the class of research where
the researcher mixes or combines quantitative and qualitative research techniques, methods,
approaches, concepts or language into a single study” (Johnson and Onuegbuzie, 2004:17).
Mixed methods is “a research in which the investigator collects and analyzes data, integrates the
findings, and draws inferences using both qualitative and quantitative approaches and methods in
a single study or program of inquiry” (Tashakkori and Creswell, 2007: 4). Thus, it allows
combining different aspects of research.
Mixed methods research uses a philosophy and method that attempt to fit together the insights
provided by qualitative and quantitative research into a workable solution. Mixed methods
research allows for the “opportunity to compensate for inherent method weaknesses, capitalize
on inherent method strengths, and offset inevitable method biases” (Greene, 2007: xiii). Mixed
methods research offers a practical approach to addressing research problems and questions and
the potential for increased applicability because these problems and questions are examined in
different ways (Graff, 2013).
There are several advantages of employing multi-methods in the same study. First, different
methods can be used for different purposes in a study. Second, the approach enables
triangulation to take place. Mixed methods facilitate triangulation of different methodological
issues that help to ensure the credibility and validity of a research process and results.
Triangulation allows researchers to be more confident of their results; stimulates the
development of creative ways of collecting data; can lead to thicker, richer data; can lead to the
synthesis or integration of theories; and can uncover contradictions (Johnson et al, 2007). Third,
57
the approach helps to explain on quantitative results with subsequent qualitative data, and lastly,
the multi-method approach enhances a study with a supplemental data set, either quantitative or
qualitative (Migiro and Magangi, 2011).
The importance of mixed methods is also arisen from the complexity of research purpose that
calls adopting multiple questions. In this case, mixed methods have the potential to contribute in
addressing multiple purposes and thus meeting the needs of multiple audiences for the results
(Merten, 2010). In this research, it allows dealing with a complex interplay between concepts
such as participation, institution and empowerment that particular method cannot help to address.
Qualitative approach is not allowing explanation of the effects of different factors on public
participation in local development and the effect of participation in development on
empowerment of local people. Quantitative research cannot serve the objective to discover new
aspects of the concepts under considerations. Thus, mixed methods research bridge the gap
through integrating the strengths of each strand (Graff, 2013).
A mixed method allows inclusion of issues and strategies surrounding methods of data collection
(e.g., questionnaires, interviews, observations) and related philosophical issues (e.g., ontology,
epistemology, and axiology) (Greene, 2006). Furthermore, it helps to optimize the sample using
techniques; to enhance instrument reliability that facilitate assessing the appropriateness of
existing instruments, creating new instruments, monitoring performance of human instruments to
enhance treatment integrity; and to facilitate significance enhancement (Collins et al, 2006).
For the purpose of this study, concurrent or parallel triangulation design (Creswell & Clark,
2007) with an equal orientation for both phases (QUAN + QUAL) was utilized. Mixing the
QUAN and QUAL strands occurred at a point of study design, data collection, data analysis, and
interpretation (Graff, 2013).
3.4 Types of Data
Investigating of participation is the complex process that requires interplay between government
and public at large. In order to address this complex situation, taking into consideration the view
of government and public at large required. To this end data were generated from the
government body (bureaucracy and politician) and the public at large. I used both primary and
58
secondary data which were qualitative or quantitative in nature. Secondary data generated from
official documents, books, journals, proclamations, government policies, visual records, and so
on. Based on the level of measurement, I utilized quantitative data at nominal, ordinal, interval
and ratio level of measurement.
3.5 Methods and Process of Data Collection
For the purpose of this study, the mix of data collection techniques that helps to generate data for
QUAN (Quantitative) strand and QUAL (Qualitative) strand were used. These include:
interview, Focus Group Discussion (FGD), document analysis, key informant interview, and
questionnaire.
3.5.1 Interview
Interviewing is a way to collect data as well as to gain knowledge from individuals. Kvale
(1996:14) considered interviews as “… an interchange of views between two or more people on
a topic of mutual interest, sees the centrality of human interaction for knowledge production, and
emphasizes the social situations of research data.” This definition highlights the capacity of
interview to generate detail data within its context.
Interview is a feasible instrument to generate dependable data. The dependability of data
generated through interview emanates from the fact that it enables the participants to evaluate
and decide on the data generated through explaining, justifying and describing the data. Further,
it reinforces the close relationship between the interviewee that helps to generate deep data from
the participants (Roulston, 2010).
Interview is one key strategy of research inquiry or data collection in public management.
Generally, interview in public management has different things that make it complete and
acceptable. Public administrators often ask the questions that begin with how many, how much,
how efficient, how effective, how adequate, and why of a program (O’Sullivan and Rassel,
1991). Due to the natures of administrative questions and research, interview gives deeper
insight into what other concern stakeholders might be thinking about a project or program; helps
to judge outcomes and performance of public policy and programs; represents willingness and
avenue to know on the part of a researcher; helping in the advancement of research features
59
(aims, validity, measurement, and results); and complementing other methods of research inquiry
(e.g. questionnaire survey, literature review, documentary analysis etc.) in a mixed method
(Osifo, 2015).
Interview comes with various forms ranging from structured, semi-structured to unstructured
interview. For this study semi-structured interview, which involves a number of open-ended
questions, was designed and used. Semi-structured interview is selected for this study over other
forms of interview since it combines the advantages of other forms of interview that allow
flexibility in conducting. At the same time, it enables concentration on the theme of the issue
under consideration. I employed interview to collect data from public officials such as City
manager, ganda managers, and speaker of City council. I conducted the interview at times
appropriate and location suitable for the interviewee to express and discuss the point of concern
deeply. I documented the interview by note-taking due to the fact that the respondents did not
allow me to use digital tape recorder.
3.5.2 Focus Group Discussion (FGD)
Focus group discussion is “a way of collecting qualitative data, which—essentially— involves
engaging a small number of people in an informal group discussion(s), ‘focused’ around a
particular topic or set of issues” (Wilkinson, 2004 in Onwuegbuzie et al, 2009:2). Focus group
discussion allows to obtain multiple perspectives; the group process engenders spontaneity,
discussion, and feedback; the facilitator can interact directly with participants and probe as
needed; and the process can be efficient and cost effective (Colton & Covert, 2007).
FGD was used to generate deep qualitative data on the main concepts of study from the public.
Accordingly, I used FGD to generate data regarding the nature and extent of participation,
institutional contexts and the role of participation in empowering local people. Each FGD
encompassed 6 to 8 members that have comparable characteristics through taking into
consideration heterogeneous nature of the residents. That means, the participants were drawn in a
manner which address the diverse view of the community I incorporated participants of FGD,
who could articulate and evaluate the nature, context and effects of participation. The
participants were selected based on reference made by CPE and community leaders as well as
suggestion of friends at Bishoftu. Before starting FGD, the purpose of FGD was duly clarified to
60
the participants. I documented the FGD through taking notes and digital tape recorder. Based on
reference, I conducted FGDs at selected area of sample gandas, which relatively experienced
intense participation.
3.5.3 Document Analysis
Document analysis is a form of qualitative research in which documents are interpreted by the
researcher to give voice and meaning around an assessment topic. The use of documentary
methods is concerned about the assessment of documents encloses information about the
phenomenon the researcher wish to study.
Documentary method is the technique used to
categorize, investigate, interpret and identify the limitations of physical sources, most commonly
written documents (Payne and Payne, 2004 in Mogalakwe, 2006).
For Scott (1990), a document is an artifact which has, as its central feature, an inscribed text.
Documents are produced by individuals and groups in the course of their everyday practices and
geared exclusively for their own immediate practical needs. They are written with a purpose and
are based on particular assumptions and presented in a certain way or style and to this extent, the
researcher must be fully aware of the origins, purpose and the original audience of the documents
(Grix 2001).
The nature of documentary analysis includes: content analysis, qualitative descriptive analysis,
qualitative interpretive analysis, and content analysis is a strategy for analyzing a body of text
that treats the elements of the body of text as empirical entities (Osifo, 2015). For the purpose of
this study qualitative interpretive analysis, which is the act of interpreting relevant aspects of a
phenomenon, was used in order to assess documents in line with research objective.
For the purpose of this study, I used documents such as Federal and regional constitutions,
proclamations, regulations, policy statements, census reports, statistical bulletins, City
Government profile magazine, and other City Government documents. The documents were
handled based on quality control criteria for handling documentary sources such as authenticity
(whether it is original and genuine), credibility (whether it is accurate), representativeness
(whether it is representative of the totality of documents of its class) and meaning (what it is
intended to say).
61
3.5.4 Key Informant Interview
A key informant interview is a loosely structured conversation with people who have specialized
knowledge about the topic the researcher wishes to understand. The give and take of these
interviews can result in the discovery of information that would not have been revealed in other
instruments. I employed key informants interview at early stages of the study to immerse in the
situation in the study area and gain an overall view of the problem area; and for in depth final
data collection. I conducted key informant interview with development experts, community
leaders, previous members of advisory committee established to advice City Government on
development issues, and development committees. Guideline was developed and used in order to
enhance coherent flow of ideas.
3.5.5 Questionnaire Survey
Survey can be considered as a research strategy (overall strategy to doing social research) or
specific method. However, for the purpose of this study, I used survey as specific method of data
collection. Consequently, for the purpose of this study, survey is defined as “a collection of data
on a number of units and usually at a single juncture in time, with a view to collecting
systematically a body of quantifiable data in respect of a number of variables which are then
examined to discern patterns of association” (Bryman, 1989 in Robson, 2002). The idea of this
definition indicates that survey is mostly used to raise quantitative data. Despite, some openended questions to substantiate and elaborate quantitative data results, I employed questionnaire
survey for raising quantitative data.
I developed questionnaire, which consists of four parts. These include: demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, nature of participation, institutional contexts of participation, and
empowerment through participation. The items incorporated in the questionnaire generally
included close-ended items. Moreover, open-ended questions were incorporated to generate
additional information. I conducted a systematic review of relevant literature on participation
and extracted specific information from these studies to allow me to identify items included in
the questionnaire.
Based on the careful study of available literatures, I incorporated demographic and
socioeconomic characteristics in the questionnaire, which were supposed to be related to and
62
influence participation. The socio-economic characteristics incorporated in the questionnaire
consist: sex, age, family size, occupation, employment category, education level, and income per
month.
The source and categories of socio-economic characteristics included in the
questionnaire are presented Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Demographic and socio-economic characteristics included in the questionnaire
Factors
Variable
Source
Demographic characteristics
sex
Musyoki et al. (2013); Sseguya et
al (2013); Oriakhi and
Onemolease (2012)
Age
Musyoki et al. (2013); Sheikh et
al (2014), Sseguya et al (2013);
Oriakhi and Onemolease (2012)
Family size
Musyoki et al (2013); Sseguya et
al (2013); Oriakhi and
Onemolease (2012)
Socio-economic characteristics
Occupation
Not applicable
Employment category
Oriakhi and Onemolease (2012)
Education
Musyoki et al (2013); Sheikh et
al (2014); Sseguya et al (2013);
Oriakhi and Onemolease (2012)
income
Sseguya et al (2013); Oriakhi and
Onemolease (2012)
Source: own compilation
The items about the process of public participation refer to forms of participation; factors
initiating participation; public participation in the phases of local development; ways of
participation; and extent of participation. The items about the process of participation were
binary and multiple categorical response forms except extent of participation, which was in the
form of Likert like scales.
63
The items included in the questionnaire to measure institutional contexts of participation refer to
community participation board (CPB); responsiveness of City Government to participation; and
City Government capacity to facilitate participation. City Government capacity to facilitate
participation was measured based on 6 items which contain indicators of City Government
capacity systematically drawn through consulting literature. These items were structured around
Likert scale response form in the questionnaire. The value of each response for these items on
the questionnaire is as follows: 1 = strongly agree 2 = agree 3 = undecided 4 = disagree 5 =
strongly disagree. The indicators and their sources are presented illustrated in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2: Indictors of City Government capacity and their sources
Indicators
Inclusive in enhancing participation in development
Accountability in facilitates participation in
development
Conduciveness of organizational structure
Institutional culture
Leadership commitment
Government workers attitude
Source
UNDP (1998)
Grindle and Hilderbrand (1995)
UNDP (1998); Grindle and
Hilderbrand (1995)
UNDP (1998), Grindle and
Hilderbrand (1995)
UNDP (1998); Grindle and
Hilderbrand (1995)
UNDP (2005), Grindle and
Hilderbrand (1995)
Sources: own compilation
The items devised to measure each form of empowerment were drawn from literature. After I
conducted detail consultation of various literatures on empowerment, different indicators of
empowerments were selected for this study. Accordingly, I used ten, seven, and eight items to
measure personal, social and political empowerments respectively. These items were structured
around Likert scale response form in the questionnaire. The value of each response for these
items in the questionnaire is as follows: 1 = strongly agree 2 = agree 3 = undecided 4 = disagree
5 = strongly disagree. The indicators used for measuring each forms of empowerment are
presented in Table 3.3.
64
Table 3.3: Indicators of empowerments and their sources
Forms of
empowerment
Personal
empowerment
Indicators
Accumulation of practical experience
Personal confidence
Skills
Ability to analyze and solve problem
Creating a belief that my actions can have
effects
Control over personal decisions
Development of Self-esteem
Development of freedom of choice
Development of Self-reliance
Enhance creativity that improves one’s life
Social empowerment
Political
empowerment
formation of internal mechanisms
enhance good relationship and cooperation
increasing level of trust
sense of helping each other
group work or interaction among work groups
social links
feeling of togetherness or closeness
Access to government information/services
capabilities to interact with local governments
capacity to influence local government
decisions
capacity to petition government
officials/political leaders
interest to attend a village/neighborhood
public hearing or public discussion group
awareness to notify authorities about local
problem
ability to influence public policy process
lobbying power
Source
Chambers, 1995; Michener, 1998;
Kabeer, 1999a
Moffat et. al. (1995)
(Chambers, 2005)
Rowlands, 1997, Hur (2006)
Okley, 1991; Chambers, 1995; Kabeer,
1999b
Samah and Aref (2011)
Moffat et. al. (1995)
Okley, 1991
Chambers, 1995; Michener, 1998;
Kabeer, 1999a
Zimmerman et al (1992) , Grootaert
(2004), Hur (2006)
Kabeer, 1999a
Moffat et. al. (1995)
Lawrence (2006), Speer and Hughey,
1995, Brett, 2003
Lawrence (2006); Kabeer, 1999b;
Speer and Hughey, 1995
Nelson & Wright (1995); Chambers,
2005)
Rowlands, 1997
Moffat et. al. (1995)
Rowlands, 1997
Kabeer, 1999a
Grootaert (2005)
Grootaert (2005)
Grootaert (2004), Grootaert (2005)
Grootaert (2004), Grootaert (2005)
Grootaert (2004), Grootaert (2005)
Grootaert (2005)
Grootaert (2004), Grootaert (2005)
Chambers, 2007
Agrwals & Gupta, 2005
OECD (1995)
Grootaert (2004)
Grootaert (2004)
Grootaert (2004)
OECD (1995)
Rowland, 1997; Williams et al. (2003a)
Source: Own compilation
65
The questionnaire was translated into Afaan oromo and Amharic languages in order to achieve
multicultural validity. Intensive field surveys were conducted between February 1 and 30, 2015.
Before conducting the formal field surveys, 6 local enumerators, Technical and Vocational
education students from the sample gandas were selected and oriented on how to distribute and
assist the respondents in filing the questionnaires. Attempts were made to familiarize
enumerators with all questions on the questionnaire to eliminate any confusion.
3.5.5.1 Piloting
Pretesting provides valuable information about instrument utility and the trustworthiness of the
information produced, and it facilitates correction of errors that might otherwise cause problems
during the final administration. This phase assists the identification and correction of factors
associated with instrument design and format that can lead to problems during data collection
(Colton & Covert, 2007). It was also used to produce data for demonstrating validity and
reliability, which ultimately helps to ascertain whether the instrument is producing the desired
information.
A pilot survey was conducted to avoid any possible mistakes in the questionnaire and to
determine the level of respondents’ understanding of the questionnaire. I conducted a pilot study
through questionnaires distributed to 30 respondents. The respondents of pilot study were drawn
from the general public. The participants of pilot study were not included in the final data
collection. During pilot study data collection, I observed that there was low tendency of
understanding the questionnaire and scoring system among the respondents. Problems related to
wording, syntax, format of the item and response set, order of items within the instrument, and
clarity of instructions were also observed from pretesting.
The necessary amendments were made depending on results of pilot study. Consequently,
response formats, language usage, and the content of the questionnaire were improved.
Moreover, training was provided for facilitators on how to assist the respondents and to use local
idioms for explaining the concepts and questions.
66
3.6 Sampling Design
Sampling design refers to sampling techniques and sample size for the study. Sampling is a
process of selecting subjects to take part in a research investigation on the ground that they
provide information considered relevant to the research problem. Basically, the aims of a
particular research as well as the features of the study population influence the decision of which
individuals and the number of individuals to be selected for a given research enquiry (Oppong,
2013).
Along with the world views and research strategy adopted for this study, I utilized parallel mixed
methods sampling design (QUAN + QUAL) to draw participants of the study (Graff, 2013). The
sampling design was done in a manner which compromise between the requirements of the
quantitative and qualitative samples which is called the representativeness/saturation trade-off.
Representativeness refers to the quantitative sample and the saturation concept is applicable to
the qualitative sample (Teddlie and Fen Yu, 2007). Thus, the principle of saturation was used to
determine the sample size for qualitative data collection.
3.6.1 Sampling Techniques
For the purpose of this study, I used concurrent/parallel mixed method sampling strategy. Mixed
methods sampling techniques entail “the selection of units or cases for a research study using
both probability sampling (to increase external validity) and purposive sampling strategies (to
increase transferability)” (Teddlie and Fen Yu, 2007: 78). A probability sampling technique was
used to select participants for QUAN strand, where as a purposive sampling was used to identify
participants for QUAL strand. These sampling procedures occur independently.
For qualitative strand, I utilized snowball and judgmental sampling techniques. Snowball
sampling technique was used to select participants for FGDs and key informants. Judgmental
sampling technique was used to draw samples for interviews.
For quantitative strand, I employed multi-stage sampling technique. In order to undertake this
sampling techniques house hold was determined as unit of analysis for this study. To draw
sample households, I divide the City into three blocs based on its physical layout that stretches
from western to eastern direction. Accordingly, the City is divided into Western, central, and
67
eastern blocs, each incorporate three gandas. The western bloc incorporates 01, 02, and 03
gandas. The central bloc incorporates 04, 05 and 06 gandas. The eastern bloc incorporates 07, 08
and 09 gandas. At first stage, I used simple random sampling technique to draw one ganda from
each bloc. Accordingly, ganda 01, 05, and 09 were selected from the western, the central and the
eastern bloc respectively. At the second stage, the subject households were in turn selected
through simple random sampling technique by using the house number. The multi-stage
sampling was undertaken as showed in Figure 3.1.
Figure 3.1: Multi-stage sampling for quantitative strand of the study
Source: Own Compilation
3.6.2 Sample Size
Sample size for qualitative investigation tends to be small in contrary to its counterpart
quantitative research sample. In practice, a point of data saturation determines the sample size in
qualitative research. Data saturation occurs when the researcher is no longer hearing or seeing
new information. Thus, the number of required subjects usually becomes obvious as the study
progresses, as new categories, themes or explanations stop emerging from the data (Marshall,
1996). Accordingly, I conducted 4 FGDs, 15 interviews, and 12 key informant interviews.
68
To determine the sample size for quantitative strand of the study, I projected the population of
the three sample gandas for the year 2015 from their population size according to 2007
population census. I further calculated the number of sample households (HH) of the sample
gandas using 5 persons for individual household size on average. I conducted the projection of
the total population as follows:
Pn = Po (Ert)
Where: Pn = Projected population
Po = 37,294 (The initial population)
E = 2.871 (constant)
r = 2.9 % (yearly population growth rate)
t = 8 (time in year)
Then,
Pn = 37, 294 X (2.871)0.029x8
Pn = 47,294
The sample households were calculated by dividing the projected population for the year 2015 of
the sample ganda by 5 (five), which was 9, 527 HHs. Consequently, this number of household
was the population of the study from which sample households were drawn.
Although there is no hard and fast rule that can be used to determine sample size for quantitative
research, for the purpose of this study, I employed the formula developed by Krejcie and Morgan
(1970) to draw representative samples for the study:
Where:
n = Sample size
z = 1.96 (tabular value of 95% confidence level)
N = Total population of the study
P = q = 0.5 (population proportion)
e = the degree of accuracy/ error margin expressed as a proportion of (0.05)
Therefore, the sample size for survey was the following:
n = (1.96)2 X 9,527 X (0.5X0.5)
(9,527-1) (0.05)2 + (1.96)2 (05X0.5)
69
n = 3.8416 X 9,527 X 0.25
(9,526) (0.0025) + (3.8416) (0.25)
n=
9149.7308
24.7754
n = 370 HHs
Although the above sample size is representative sample, taking into consideration the response
rate and determining the sample to which the questionnaire to be distributed is important.
Accordingly, I used 85 percent response rate and the final sample size was calculated as follows.
n=
370
.85
n = 436 HHs
The sample size from each sample ganda was selected through proportional allocation by use of
the following formula as presented in the table:
k
ni = n ( N )
Where: ni = Sample size from each stratum
n = Total sample size
k = Population size of the stratum
N = Total population size
Table 3.4: selection of proportional HHs from sample gandas
Sample
gandas
N = Number of Houses
Sample HHS from each ganda
01
3,777
173
05
2,715
124
09
3,035
139
Total
9527
436
k
( ni = n ( N )
Source: Own compilation
70
Although 436 questionnaires were distributed to the respondents, only 418 complete
questionnaires were returned. Thus, I conducted the analysis on returned questionnaires.
3.7 Methods of Data Analysis
For the purpose of this study, I adopted parallel mixed methods data analysis (Graff, 2013) that
involved QUAN analysis of data using statistical techniques appropriate for the variables, and
QUAL analysis of data using qualitative analysis approaches appropriate for the data and the
research question. The two analyses were concurrently conducted independent of each other and
provide information about the phenomenon through connecting, combining, or integrating the
findings from the QUAN analysis and from the QUAL analysis. Moreover, the results of each
analysis type (qualitative/quantitative) complement each other to enhance, expand, illustrate, or
clarify findings derived from the other strand.
3.7.1 Method of Qualitative Data Analysis
Qualitative data analysis is an activity of “working with data, organizing it, breaking it into
manageable units, synthesizing it, searching for patterns, discovering what is important and what
is to be learned, and deciding what you will tell others” (Bogdan and Biklen, 1982 in Simon,
2011:1). Data analysis in qualitative research is an ongoing process that is undertaken
concurrently with data collection, interpretation and report writing (Creswell, 2009). In this
study, the qualitative data obtained through different means were subjected to in-depth analysis
and used to complement the discussion of analyzed quantitative data.
For the purpose of this study, thematic analysis was utilized. This analysis involved five phases.
First, the data was organized and prepared for analysis. This phase involved transcribing the
interviews and focus group results, typing up field notes, or sorting and arranging the data into
different types depending on the source of information. The aim of this step was to immerse
thoroughly in the data collected. In the second phase, a thematic framework was developed in
order to identify key issues from data. Thirdly, the data was coded. Coding involved taking text
data or pictures gathered during data collection, segmenting sentences (paragraphs) or images
into categories, and labeling those categories with a term. Further, conceptual categories were
identified and tentatively named into which the phenomena observed was grouped. The goal is to
create descriptive, multi-dimensional categories which form a preliminary framework for
71
analysis. Words, phrases or events that appear to be similar grouped into the same category.
These categories were gradually modified and replaced during the subsequent stages of analysis
that follow. The fourth step was devising a series of thematic charts that allowed the full pattern
across a set of data to be explored and reviewed. The final step was mapping and
interpreting/making meaning of data that entails looking for associations, providing explanations,
highlighting key characteristics and ideas.
3.7.2 Methods of Quantitative Data Preparation, Analysis, and Presentation
For the purpose of this study, both descriptive and inferential statics were used to analyze
quantitative data generated through questionnaire based household survey. Descriptive statistics
were used to clean and scan data, preliminary analysis and final analysis. Both non-parametric
and parametric inferential statistics were used for analysis depending on whether or not the
variables fulfill statistical assumptions. The analysis of quantitative data was assisted by SPSS 20
version. The details of quantitative data analysis methods are presented in the forthcoming
sections.
3.7.2.1 Data Preparation
The quantitative data were cleaned, sorted, summarized and stored using SPSS 20. Moreover,
different techniques of data preparation activities that include: data cleaning and screening,
preliminary analysis, data manipulation, and collapsing variables (see Annex 1) were performed.
Data cleaning and screening was done to check the errors in the data. I employed frequency table
and descriptive statistics instruction of SPSS to check the error in on categorical data and
continuous data respectively.
After checking and correcting errors in the data, I conducted preliminary analysis in order to: (1)
describe the characteristics of the sample; and (2) to check the variables for any violation of the
assumptions underlying the statistical techniques (e.g. t-test, ANOVA, multiple regressions).
Preliminary analysis was done through running descriptive statistics for both categorical and
continuous variables. Descriptive statistics for categorical variables were obtained through
running frequencies in order to know the number of people gave each response. For continuous
variables descriptive command of SPSS was used to obtain summary statistics such as mean,
median and standard deviation. The descriptive statistics were also used to check the
72
distributions of scores on continuous variables through calculating skewness and kurtosis. This
provided the information on the variables used in parametric statistical techniques (e.g. t-tests,
analysis of variance). Normality on the scores of demographic independent variables, such as
age, family size and income of the respondents, was graphically checked through using
histogram.
I defined multiple response items by using Analysis – Multiple responses – define variables
command of SPSS 20 version (see Annex 2). After they were defined, their frequencies and
cross tabulation with demographic independent variables were run.
Data were manipulated in order to change the data to the form that can be used to conduct
analyses and to test the hypotheses (Pallant, 2011). Therefore, I conducted various data
manipulation activities in order to prepare the data for analysis depending on the data file,
variables of interest and the type of research questions that was desired to be addressed.
Before further manipulation of the data was done, I reversed the scores of negatively worded
Likert Scale items, in order to reduce response bias. After negatively worded Likert’s scale items
were reversed, total scores of the Likert’s Scale items were calculated. Thus, the analysis was
conducted on these total scores depending on research questions it intended to address. While the
total scores of the Likert’s Scale items were calculated, the codebook was developed (See Annex
3).
The distribution of income scores were non-normally distributed, thus the scores were
transformed using LG10 transformation formula, depending on the distribution of income scores
before transformation. After transformation the normality of the distribution was checked
through running descriptive and histogram.
A cumulative empowerment index (CEI) for three types of empowerment, quantitative strand,
were developed adding the obtained scores of ten, seven, and eight empowerment indicators for
personal, social and political empowerments respectively.
I collapsed data generated on age, Family size and income to different categories, in order to
make the data suitable for running cross tabulation through multiple response data analysis. In
73
turn this activity changed the scores of these variables from scale to ordinal data; and changed
the variable from continuous to categorical variables.
Accordingly, depending on the
distribution of the scores of the original variables they were collapsed into the following
categories: age scores into 5 categories, family size into 3 categories, and income scores into 4
categories. Furthermore, occupation category reduced from 10 categories to 5, employment
reduced from 6 to five categories and employment reduced from 7 to 6 categories.
3.7.2.2 Data Analysis and Presentation
For the purpose of this study, I employed both descriptive and inferential statistical analysis.
These analyses were conducted using SPSS 20 version. Descriptive analysis aimed at showing
the overview picture on the respondent demographic and socio-economic characteristics, the
general overview of participation. For the purpose of this study, descriptive analyses such as
Frequency table, item analysis, and multiple responses analysis were used. I presented the
findings by use of frequency tables and graphs. Bar graph was used to present the results of data
analysis regarding forms of people participation in development, and factors initiating public to
engage in development activities.
Frequency Table was used to present demographic and socio-economic characteristics; and
participation in each phases of development process. Multiple response analysis was utilized to
analyze approaches of participation along demographic factors and forms of participation. Items
analysis was used to analyze level of people participation in development; City Government
capacity to facilitate participation; the extent of participation along demographic and socioeconomic characteristics; and to determine the effect of participation on individual item
indicators of empowerments.
Non parametric analyses such as Chi square (χ2), Mann-Whitney U Tests, and Kruskal-Wallis
Test were used whenever the assumptions of parametric test were not fulfilled. Chi square (χ2)
test was used to determine the association between demographic and socio-economic
characteristics and participation in the phases of development. Mann-Whitney U Test was used
to determine the difference between male and female participation in the phases of development.
Kruskall Wallis test was used to determine the variation of participation along demographic and
socio-economic characteristics (age, occupation, employment, family size, income and
74
education). Follow up Mann Whitney-U Test was conducted for significant Kruskall Wallis test
to evaluate pair-wise differences among the different groups, by controlling for Type I error
across tests by using the Bonferroni approach. Accordingly, adjusted alpha level was calculated
as follows:
α=
The statistical significance of the difference between follow-up Mann-Whitney U tests between
pairs of groups was compared against the adjusted alpha. The effect size (r) of all significant
Mann-Whitney U Tests was calculated using the following formula:
r = z / square root of N
Where: N = total number of cases.
The size of effect was rated using Cohen (1988) criteria of .1= small effect, .3 = medium effect,
and .5=large effect.
Standard multiple regressions analysis was used to estimate factors influencing people
participation in development and empowerments of local people through participation in local
development. To perform multiple regression analysis, dummies were developed for categorical
predictors.
3.8 Methods of Ensuring the Quality of the Research
Many scholars have recommended the use of specific criteria by which the quality of quantitative
and qualitative components of the investigation can be validated separately in mixed methods
research (Creswell, 2009; Onwuegbuzie and Johnson, 2006; Creswell and Clark, 2011).
Consequently, I employed specific criteria for validating the quality of qualitative and
quantitative strands separately.
3.8.1 Trustworthiness of Qualitative Strand
Trustworthiness refers to findings that are “worth paying attention to” (Lincoln and Guba,
1985:290) and is divided into credibility, dependability, transferability, and confirmability
(Graff, 2013). Accordingly, credibility, similar to internal validity in QUAN research, was
ensured through articulating research questions in a manner that guides the data collection and
analysis process and answered by the findings. Dependability, which relate to reliability in
75
quantitative research, is only used when there are multiple coders on a team who have to reach
agreement on codes for a particular piece of qualitative data (Giddings and Grant, 2009). In this
study, since the coding activity was done by the researcher, no need of dealing with the issue of
dependability.
Transferability, form of external validity in QUAN research, was ensured through thick
descriptions (analyzing multiple levels of meaning of reality - events, phenomena).
Conformability, otherwise known as objectivity, was ensured through reflexive journal and
triangulation. Reflexive journal involves documenting steps and procedures of the study
exhaustively. Triangulation refers to using multiple sources, methods, and investigators to best
represent the reality or realities of the participant.
3.8.2 Validity and Reliability of Quantitative Strand
Establishing validity in quantitative research is concerned with enhancing the generalization of
the results drawn from the sample to population. To this end, it requires reliable and valid
construction and use of instruments/Measurement validity and the design of the study in a way
that achieves the intended purpose/ design validity (Giddings and Grant, 2009).
The instrument validity such as construct validity, content validity, multicultural validity, and
face validity were qualitatively established. I established construct and content validities of the
instrument through reviewing related research literatures. I employed topic experts’ review for
establishing face validity of the questionnaire. I established multicultural validity through
translating the questionnaire into Afaan Oromo and Amharic languages.
The reliability of the questionnaire was tested based on the result of pilot study, which allows
pre-testing the instrument. I used Cronbach’s alpha to check the reliability of the scales in the
questionnaire. I administered 30 questionnaires in order to check the reliability of the
questionnaire. Then reliability was checked based on the results of this data. The result of the
analysis of reliability for each scale indicated cronbach’s alpha of 0.67, 0.60, 0.89, 0.91, and 0.88
for level of public participation in development; City Government capacity; personal
empowerment; social empowerment; and political empowerment respectively.
76
Design validity was achieved through ensuring internal and external validity. Thus, I established
internal validity through precisely following research procedures. I ensured external validity
through selecting the appropriate sampling technique to draw the participants of the research and
using formula to draw representative sample size.
3.9 Ethical considerations
Ethical issues, in research project, are concerned with ethical obligation to participants, research
design and reporting the findings. The treatment of the participants refers to the ways of
involving the participants, the provision of incentives, and protecting the participants (Babbie,
2011).
I involved the participants of the study based on their expressed willingness and informed
consent. I secured the consent of the participants through the provision of adequate awareness
regarding the types of information required from them, the purpose of the information, how they
are expected to participate in the study, and how it directly or indirectly affects them.
I maintained the confidentiality of the information provided by the participants through
disassociating names from responses during the coding and recording processes. The privacy of
the participants was protected through adopting thematic analysis technique which did not
interest in the name of the participants; it rather focuses on the idea. I provided refreshment for
the participants after obtaining information and appreciated them for providing information and
their time for participating in the research.
In order to advance the rigorousness, I thoroughly designed the research and followed all the
research steps. I avoided using language or words that are biased against persons. I reported both
negative (if they are at all related to the analysis) and positive findings.
3.10 Summary
This section synthesizes the philosophical perspective, approach and methods of the study.
Pragmatism research philosophy is selected for this study due to different reasons. Pragmatism
allows assessing action in light of practical consequences. It allows pluralistic approach to derive
knowledge about problem and enables focusing attention on the research problem. It also allows
77
flexibility of reasoning and selection of techniques that help to address a range of research
questions. Thus, pragmatism offers an immediate and useful middle position philosophy and
methodology and practical and outcome oriented methods of inquiry.
Mixed methods research approach is adopted for this research. It is selected based on its
advantages over quantitative and qualitative approaches for better addressing the research
questions. It compensates for inherent methods weakness, capitalize on inherent method
strengths, and offset inevitable method biases. It allows triangulation of different methodological
issues that ensure the credibility and validity of a research process and results. It enhances
explanation of different factors of participation and effect of participation on empowerment and
help to discover new aspects. To this end, parallel triangulation design with equal orientation to
both strands is adopted.
The study utilized both qualitative and quantitative data generated from primary and secondary
sources. Qualitative techniques such as interview, FGD, document analysis and key informant
interview were used to collect qualitative data, whereas questionnaire survey was use to collect
quantitative data. Parallel mixed methods sampling design was used to draw participants of the
study. Accordingly, participants were selected using probability (for quantitative) and purposive
(for qualitative) sampling techniques were used. Thus, snowball and judgmental sampling
techniques were used to draw participants for qualitative strand; whereas multistage sampling
was used for quantitative strand. Based on data saturation principle I conducted 4 FGDs, 15
interviews, and 12 key informant interviews. For questionnaire survey about 436 households
were enumerated.
The data were analyzed concurrently independent of each other and information about the
phenomena was provided through connecting, combining, or integrating findings from each
strand. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis, where as quantitative data were
analyzed through descriptive statistics (frequency table, bar graph, and item analysis) and
inferentially through chi-square, Mann-Whitney U test, kruskal-Wallis test, amd multiple
regression.
78
The quality of quantitative and qualitative approaches was ensured separately. Accordingly,
trustworthiness of qualitative strand was checked through articulating research questions in a
manner that guide data collection and analysis, thick description, reflexive journal and
triangulation. The quality of quantitative strand was ensured through ensuring instrument and
design validities. Instrument validity was checked through reviewing related literatures, topic
expert review, through translating the questionnaire to local languages. The reliability of the
questionnaire was checked through Cronbach’s Alpha. Design validity was checked through
precisely following research procedures and selecting appropriate sampling techniques and
formula methods.
79
Chapter 4 : Background of the Study Area
4.1 Introduction
This chapter presents and overview of BCA background. The chapter specifically focuses on
establishment and administrative status of the City; location, topography and climate condition
of the City; Administrative Structure and form of City Government; and socio-economic
condition of the City. The chapter concentrates on important aspects of City’s background. I
depend mainly on data generated from BCA FEDO.
4.2 Foundation and Administrative Status of Bishoftu City
Bishoftu City was established in 1917 in concurrence with the establishment of Ethio-Djibouti
Railway. The name of the City, Bishoftu, was derived from Afan Oromo language Bishanoftu,
which means the land of excessive water body. Literally speaking, the name Bishoftu was
givinen to the City based on the locally available many crater lakes. The area of present day
Bishoftu and its surrounding was known collectively as Ada’a. Ada’a was then inhabited by
different branches of the Tulama Oromo such as Jida, Liban, Ada’a, Abu, Wara jarsa, and
Gadula (Chala, 2013). Bishoftu is located at the center of Ada’a District. Due to its endowment
in natural resources and its location, the City expanded from time to time.
After 1941, as part of administrative reforms made by the restored government, Bishoftu was
recognized as administrative centre of Ada’a district and the municipal institution was founded
in the same period, by the name Debre Zeit that literally means Mount Zion was introduced in
1947 on the inaugural ceremony of Rufael church by Emperor Haile Silassisie. Hence, it is
claimed that the Emperor ordered the name change due to its topographical similarities to the
said location in the Israel. But, after the downfall of military regime in May 1991, the town
regained its original name Bishoftu. However, the City maintained its status-quo with little
reform until the recent proclamation No. 65/2003 that brought about wider role through the
establishment of the Bishoftu Urban Local Government (challa, 2013).
The City served as administrative centers for different purposes. During the 1935-1941 Italian
occupation, apart from being a strategic check point and defense ground, Bishoftu was designed
as an agricultural developer centre for undertaking Italian agrarian settlement. The City served as
80
the administrative center of Ada’a Liban District from 1942 to 1990. As the result of the division
of Ada’a Liben District to two Districts, Ada’a and Liban, the City became the administrative
center of Ada’a District from 1991 to 2002. Currently, the City is self-contained medium sized
City and one of the first grade of the five cites of Oromia National Regional State, since 2003
(BCA FEDO, 2015).
4.3 Location, Topography and Climate Condition
Bishoftu City is located at about 47 Kms south east of Finfinne, the capital of Oromia National
Regional State and at 52 Kms North West of Adama on the way to south eastern part of the
country and to the Djibouti port and the Federal Republic of Somalia. Astronomically, Bishoftu
City is located between 80 43’ to 8045’ latitude North and between 38056’ to 39001’ longitude
East. Bishoftu City covers the area of about 15,273 hectares (BCA FEDO, 2015).
The landscape of Bishoftu owes its origin to volcanism Quaternary which gives rise to the
existing peculiar geomorphology of volcanic environment. This was later modified, to a limited
extent, by recent alluvial depositions and formation. As a result, numerous cinder and spatter
cones as well as old volcanic craters occur within and in the vicinity of Bishoftu (BCA FEDO,
2015).
The town and its immediate vicinity are surrounded by relatively highly elevated areas like
Mountain Yerer to the North Mountain Sokoru to South, and some scattered cinder and spatter
cones to the East and West. Under this setting, Bishoftu is located at the North Western tip of the
Gorge of the Great East African Rift Valley within in the southern part of the Awash River
Basin. Specifically, it is within the woodchat river catchments, a tributary of the Mojo River that
goes into the Awash and into the Koka Lake (BCA FEDO, 2015).
The City is naturally endowed with beautiful crater lakes such as Hora Arsadi, Bishoftu,
Cheleleka, Kuriftu, Kilole, Hora Hado (Green Lake), and Babogaya. These lakes have given
Bishoftu a peculiar feature. For one thing, the lakes have steep banks and flat beds and are
generally aligned in north- south direction with respect to each other. This is probably related to
the general trend of faults and fractures in the Rift. There are also about three other smaller
moors which are empty. These lakes have been utilized mainly for recreation and in some cases
81
for irrigation purposes. What makes Bishoftu unique is also the colorful ceremony of Irrecha
(thanks giving) at Lake Hora Arsadi as a true manifestation of original Oromo religious practice,
wakefena, and culture as part of the egalitarian democratic Gada system that the splendid
ceremony attracts millions (BCA FEDO, 2015).
Currently, Irrecha has drawn large-scale attention and received wide media coverage. Thus, in
addition to its significance as a shrine for the worship of Oromo religion, it has a magnificent
potential as a valuable source of foreign exchange earnings through international eco-truism.
Apart from its scenic beauty, Bishoftu is also known as the head quarter/ base of Ethiopian Air
Force, higher institutions of learning, national and international research centers, thousands of
nationals and international visitors (BCA FEDO, 2015).
Its topography ranges from 1900 to 1995 altitude above sea level that is generally characterized
by undulating landscape dominated by hills. Its North and Eastern part is a buffer land featured
by flat landscape that locked by the swamp and lakes. The southern part is characterized by
undulating landscape. The western part is characterized by undulating landscape dominated by
hills (BCA FEDO, 2015).
Its climate condition is classified as moderate zone. On average, its temperature and annual
rainfall are 260C and 723 mm respectively. Relatively, it experiences the highest and the lowest
temperature in the months of May and November respectively. February is the driest month with
zero mm rainfall whereas August is the rainiest month with 242.7 mm rainfall. The highest wind
speed is experienced in March with the speed of 4.25 meter per second. Easterly wind direction
is the most dominant in the City (BCA FEDO, 2015).
4.4 Administrative Structure of Bishoftu City
Bishoftu City attained the municipal status in 1951. The first Master Plan of the City was
prepared in 1969 and consecutively revised in 1986, 2000, and 2010. Administratively the City is
divided into nine urban gandas and four rural hinterland gandas (BCA FEDO, 2015). This
administrative division of the City is depicted in Figure 4.1.
82
Figure 4.1: Administrative map of Bishoftu City
Source: BCA FEDO, 2015.
4.5 Structure of Bishoftu City Government
The kind of departmentalization process followed determines the type of organization structure
adopted by a given organization. The arrangement of organization activities should be in a
83
manner that contributes to the achievement of organizational goal. Organization structure
determines the responsibility of each parts of the organization, authority and reporting
relationships and mechanism of coordinating the efforts of the parts of organization. The
prominent types of organizational structures are functional, process/divisional, matrix, network,
modular, virtual, and learning organization. The organizational structure of Bishoftu City is
presented in Figure 4.2.
City Council
Mayor
Communication
Office
Municipal
office
Youth &
Sport Affairs
Children &
Women’s Affairs
Education
Bureau
Investment
office
MSEs devt
office
Cooperative
Dev’t office
Environment
protection
Health
Bureau
Technique &
Skill dev’t
Labor & Social
Affairs
Water &
Sewerage
Culture &
Tourism
Finance &
Economic
Development
Ganda
Administrations
Figure 4.2: Organizational structure of Bishoftu City Government
Source: Own Compilation
Bishoftu City Government organizational structure presented in Figure 4.2 revealed that the City
Government adopted functional organization structure, which depends on the types of activities
performed in an organization. The activities performed in Bishoftu City are divided into two
84
major categories: municipal functions and state functions. Municipal functions are activities
which are mostly prevalent in the urban center such as solid waste, City beautification, housing,
land management, etc. and managed by Municipal office of the City. Municipal office is headed
by City Manger. The head of offices directly responsible to the mayor make up the cabinet of the
City, which have collective power to make decision on major administrative issues. The ultimate
administrative power is vested on the cabinet. The members of the cabinet have both individual
and collective accountability for their decisions.
The general mode of governance of the City Government or structure of urban government of
Bishoftu City Government is Mayor- council model. An ideal or “pure“ type of Mayor-council
governments assign legislative authority to the council and executive authority to the mayor,
creating a separation of powers similar to the federal government that enhances check and
balance among branches of government. The Council is the legislative branch of the government
up on which legislative authority of the City is vested. Mayor is the head of the executive branch
of the government and responsible for administrative activities of the City.
The Strong Mayor variant of Mayor-council model characterized Bishoftu City Government
mode of governance, which grants considerable powers to the Mayor. In the strong-mayor
arrangement the mayor has substantial executive powers as compared to those of the council.
The mayor is highly visible. The mayor prepares the budget, controls the city administration and
has the power to appoint chief officers and to veto legislation passed by the council. The council
can be responsible for developing policy, authorizing the budget, reviewing the performance of
the mayor and can retain executive responsibility in specified areas. The council can insist on
regular reports from the mayor and can have a system of committees to examine issues and
scrutinize decisions.
4.6 Socio-economic Conditions
4.6.1 Population
Population dynamics of a given area is the result of fertility, mortality and migration. These
demographic processes are complex phenomena that are affected by social, cultural, economic,
political and psychological factors. In urban environment, migration dominates the role in
changing the population characteristics and reflects the urbanization rate. Moreover, it indicates
85
the interaction with their respective hinter lands and can exhibit different kinds of relationship.
CSA (2013) population projection indicated that the total population of Bishoftu City reached
154, 310 with the annual growth rate of 2.9%. Out of these 75612(49%) were males and 78,698
(51%) were females. In terms of age distribution, 35.7% and 3.3% of the total population are
under age 15 and above 64 years, respectively while 61% of the total populations are categorized
under ages ranging from 15-64 years old.
The population of the City increases from time to time as the result of factors which affect
population dynamics. In similar fashion with other urban centers in-ward migration play a
predominant role in changing the population characteristics of the City as the result of conducive
climate condition and the strategic location of the City.
The high rate of migration to the City from the surrounding rural areas and other localities also
create the problem of high unemployment rate and the demand for urban services. As the result
the City experience high rate of unemployed work forces with different educational level and sex
composition. The trend of population growth of the City from 2007 to 2013 is presented in
Figure 4.3.
Figure 4.3: Trends of population growth, BCA
Source: CSA population projection for the year 2013 based on the 2007 Census of Ethiopia
86
Therefore, public participation in local development can serve as the remedy for this problem
through improving the quality and quality of urban services and creating employment
opportunities. Public participation in development creates a favorable condition for the
expansion of economic activities, which in turn create temporary as well as permanent
employment opportunities.
The increase in size of the population from time to time in the City increased the demand for
urban services. This results in gap between demand and supply of urban services. As the result
the provision of public service as per the demand of the residents becomes beyond the capacity
of City Government. Therefore, this population dynamics can be the factor which triggers the
public to engage in the provision of public services through popular participation.
4.6.2 Economic Sectors
The main economic activities of the City are trade, manufacturing, and tourism. The majority of
the residents are engaged in trade activities. The rest are employed in the
government and
private organizations. The large number of the residents are engaged in different trade and
manufacturing activities through Micro and small enterprises (MSEs). MSEs have considered as
the strategy to eradicated deep rooted poverty and unemployment in the City. As the result
different MSEs were established in the City (BCA FEDO, 2015).
The data from Micro and Small Enterprises office indicated that there were about 1, 074 actively
operational MSEs in the city at the end of 2012/2013 fiscal year. About 4,281 (1,910 males and
2, 371 females) persons were organized along different economic activities such as
manufacturing, construction, services, different trades and urban agriculture (BCA FEDO, 2015).
Trade is the main economic activity of the City. The location of the City played a great role in
enhancing trade as the main economic activities of the City. The trade activities in the City are
varies in scale and type. They include wholesale, retailing, and service activities. The major good
and services of trade activities in the City were agricultural products, which include cereals, oil
seeds, fruit beans, peas, live animals and other cash crops. There are two standardized market
centers and other small market centers at which trade activities are mainly undertaken in the City
(BCA FEDO, 2015).
87
Urban agriculture is also the major economic activity and source of livelihood for a great deal of
residents. The existence of agro-climate zone and fertile soil type make the City more suitable
for different types of urban agriculture. Many households have based their economy on urban
agriculture such as horticulture, production of vegetables, animal husbandry, dairy farm, poultry,
pig husbandry, cattle fattening, gardening and other related activities. These urban agricultures
are operated in private ownership and MSEs holdings (BCA FEDO, 2015).
4.6.2.1 Financial Institutions
Financial institutions play a great role in enhancing different forms of economic activities and
the expansion of the tourism sector in the City. In BCA, there are different financial institutions
such as banks, insurances and micro financial institutions. In 2015, there were five government
commercial banks, eight private commercial banks, three insurance companies, and six micro
financial institutions (BCA FEDO, 2015).
4.6.2.2 Industry
Bishoftu City is the center of small, medium and large industries. Different factors contributed
for the advancement of industry in Bishoftu. To mention the few, the proximity of the City to
national capital, Finfinne, accessibility to the market center, sufficient man power, availability of
raw materials, and relatively good infrastructure. There are more than 32 medium and large
industries in the City. The composition of the industries in the City includes metal and
engineering, chemical, agro processing, textile and garment, leather and leather products, paper
products, mineral and furniture. The industrial sector created large proportion of employment for
the residents (BCA FEDO, 2015).
4.6.3 Tourism, culture and religion
Bishoftu is naturally endowed with many lakes and conducive weather condition that contribute
to make the City a tourist center. The major attractive lakes that play great role in tourism
development are Hora Arsadi, Lake Bishoftu, Lake Cheleleka, Lake Kuriftu, Lake Kilole, Green
Lake, and Lake Babogaya (BCA FEDO, 2015).
In addition to the presence of these lakes, there are also international hotels that accommodate
domestic and foreign tourists. Bishoftu has many hotels, which maintain different status. The
88
development of hotels has a great share in the development of tourism and other social relations.
There were many standardized hotel resorts, recreation centers, and lodges with diversified
services in the City. Accordingly, there were about 50 hotels with 664 beds, 7 resorts with 213
beds, 3 lodges with 27 beds, 7 recreation centers, 16 pensions with 281 beds, 43 groceries, 40 bar
and restaurants in the City (BCA FEDO, 2015).
The residents of the City are the followers of different religions such as Wakefena, Muslim,
orthodox, protestant, catholic, and others. There are cultural reserving facilities such as museum
and art galleries. Irrecha is the major thanksgiving event of Wakefena religion that attract tourist
to Bishoftu (BCA FEDO, 2015).
4.6.3.1 Irrecha Ceremony
Irrecha means a celebration where people get together and perform their prayers and thanks
giving to God (Tsegaye, n.d.) Thus, Irrecha is the religious practice, thanksgiving to God
(Waaqa), among Wakefena religion followers. Wakefena means believing in one God that is the
creator of the whole universe. Wakefena, the faith being in the gada system is a religious
ceremony that is free from anything. The Hayu (elders, wise men, the learned) officiate the
celebration of Irrecha. The hayus thank God and bless the nation. They remind their audience to
uphold the Oromo ethics of safuu and nagaa (respect and peace), reconcile among themselves
and pray to God to reconcile with them.
Irrecha, has been celebrated bi-annually, Irrecha Bira and Irrecha Afrasa, in different parts of
Oriomia. Irrecha Birra festival is celebrated on the first Sunday of last week of September or the
first Sunday of the first week of October according to Oromo time reckoning (Dhahaa). Irrecha
Arfasa is celebrated in the month of April.
Bishoftu hosts Irrecha Bira, the major gathering of a festival, believed to be one of the largest in
Africa. As such, it has no parallel in Africa (Mekuria, 2015). Irrecha Bira is centrally celebrated
by Oromo people from all over Oromia at Lake Hora Arsadi. Though it is Wakefena religious
practice, Oromo people from all over Oromia are participated in Irrecha Hora Arsadi regardless
of their religious background. Irrecha Bira is celebrated in different localities across Oromia.
However, Irrecha Hora Arsadi is celebrated at the national level that brings millions of Oromos
89
from all over the Oromia and non-Oromo visitors from other parts of the world to the shores of
Hora Arsadi Lake in the city of Bishoftu in central Oromia.
Figure 4.4: Irrecha Celebration, 2015
Source: Participant field observation
As can be observed from Figure 4.4, the participants of Irrecha are keeping fresh grasses and
flowers. The fathers of Oromo religion and the people, keeping fresh grass and flowers, perform
their prayers and thank their God going to mountains, to sea or to river bank. They move to the
top of mountains or bank of seas or rivers not to worship the mountains or rivers and seas. They
go to sea and a river because they believe that green is holy, water is life and the places are
peaceful where the spirit of God is found. Moreover, they go to sea and a river to distract
themselves from any noise and to worship their God (Waaqa) with concentration.
Oromo considers the rainy season as the symbol of darkness. At the beginning of September, the
darkness is gone, rivers run shallower and cleaner, and the mud is gone. As sunshine rules the
90
land, the Oromo people go out to celebrate this great natural cycle with the spirit of worshiping
God (Waaqa). Irreecha Bira marks the beginning of a new lunar calendar and a seasonal change
from winter to spring, and more particularly the end time of starvation (Gadaa Belbaa), disunity,
chaos (Mormor), and the auspicious occasion to wish plentiful harvests in the upcoming year.
Irrecha Bira is the celebration of the transition from the dark and challenging rain season to the
sunny new Birraa (Spring) season. The huge numbers of people are moving ahead, all beautifully
dressed, peacefully and cheerfully to the shore of Lake Hora Arsadi. As such it is real festival of
colors.
Waves of joy and happiness bring the pilgrims to the shores of Lake Hora Arsadi. The elders stir
long grasses in the Lake and sprinkling the blessed water before millions of the participants do
so. Then the participants also dip their grass in the water, trying to imitate the repetitive hand
movements to reject all possible bad vibrations while making wishes. The participants sprinkling
the blessed water to get blessed as well and that it will bring them closer to Waaqa (God). They
also made presents to thank God for the blessings and mercies received in the previous year. The
Oromos praise God for peace, health, fertility and abundance with regards to the one who matter
to them, their livestock and the upcoming harvest.
Irrecha is a symbol of peace (nagaa), freedom (bilisummaa), unity (tokkummaa), and
reconciliation (araara), that bringing people closer to each other and making religious, political
and social bonds. Irrecha is also a symbol of an identity and world view. Everything related to
Irrecha has a meaning and purpose. The participants wear a scarf in the traditional
black/read/white colors (from top to down) and a green tree on it, as well as the green grass and
yellow flowers (umama) are to comply with the tradition. The black color of the scarf represent
God, the red represents maturity and the white indicates purity. Green tree is being a symbol of
fertility, peace, abundance and rain.
Irrecha celebration is a colorful festival in which diverse culture of Oromo people is reflected. At
Irrecha ceremony different Oromo cultural clothes, foods and artifacts are reflected by the
attendants of the thanksgiving ceremony. In this parlance, Irrecha marks the union of religious
and cultural dimension. Irrecha thanksgiving embraces all Oromo from different religious
persuasions: Wakefena, Christians and Muslim. The holiday is the occasion that brings together
91
Oromo from all religious persuasions to honor it. They all came to thank the higher force and
pray for a fruitful harvest. On the other hand, Oromos from all ages and all stripes gather to
Irrecha, sharing the same values and respect for the traditions. Thus, Irrecha united all ages
instead of generations divided, all social classes brought together rather than class struggle, all
confessions in harmony unlike so many parts of the world. Seeing the masses attending Irrecha
Hora Arsadi is evidence to how Oromo people have not abandoned their traditional values even
as they embrace modernity.
Irrecha demonstrates pan-Oromo democratic tradition that reflected in the artifacts displayed in
the irrecha parade, in the blessings of elders who officiate it, in the environmental ethics
articulated and in the performances of artist who entertain the celebrants. The boku which are
carried by men and sike carried by women reinforce the memories and values shared by the
multitude gathered at the festival sites. The boku and sike are the symbols of the democratic
ethos of the gadaa system. The boku, a scepter which is carried by elderly men, is the symbol of
the gadaa system, signifying both power and justice. As a symbol of gadaa democracy the sike
stood for the inalienable rights of Oromo women and the inviolability of their human dignity. It
is a symbol for an institution within the gada system. A woman is “accepted” into such an
institution on her marriage day and thenceforth she is protected by it against any violation of her
rights or human dignity, be it by her husband or other men. The sike entitles Oromo women to
participate in many instances of decision making, in conflict resolution and other important
matters that concern their society. The authenticity of the irrecha festival is reflected not only in
the artifacts displayed in the parade or the blessings conducted by the hayu and a song sung by
the artists, but is also in the amazing harmony which pervades the gathering of millions of
people: the festival is serene; it proceeds peacefully and ends without incidents (Mekuria, 2015).
4.7 Infrastructure
The level of infrastructural development affects the wellbeing of the public in all aspects. The
availability of infrastructure determines access of the residents to social, economic and
administrative centers. Among the basic urban infrastructures road network and electric power
are the major ones.
92
4.7.1 Road
Road has a direct and indirect effect on economic activity of a given City through creating
accessibility. Moreover, road network determines the access of the public to different services
and the economic development of the City. Bishoftu City has 25.8 kilo meters asphalt, 215 kilo
meters gravel (Red ash) and earth drain roads, and 106 kilo meters cobble stone that made up the
road net work in the City. The road network condition of the City has come to improve as a
result of the newly expansion of cobble stone road construction at large. Bishoftu City is
connected with the Zonal capital, Adama City, and Finfinne, Regional capital, by 52 and 47 kilo
meters asphalt road respectively. It also connected to the surrounding rural areas and urban
centers via different kind of roads. In Bishoftu transportation service has provided through
different means of transportation. The major means of transportations are taxi, minibuses, bajaj,
and horse carts (BCA FEDO, 2015).
4.7.2 Telephone and Postal Service
The availability of different means of communication enhances the development activities of any
kind undertaken in a given area. Telephone and postal services are the major communication
infrastructures in the City. The distribution of telecommunication network and postal services in
a given city has a direct impact on its development activities. Specially, telecommunication
services directly and indirectly affects the economic activity of Bishoftu City through posing
effect on the tourism activity in the City.
There are about one automatic digital telephone and 623 wireless telephones providing telephone
services in the City. There are also 79, 896 mobile phone customers and 9,697 fixed telephone
lines. Bishoftu City has been the beneficiary of postal service since from 1955. Currently, the
City has one postal service branch, which provides postal services to its residents. There are
about 1990 postal boxes available in Bishoftu City that providing both domestic and foreign
postal services (BCA FEDO, 2015).
4.7.3 Electric Power Supply
Bishoftu City is accessed to 81.20 Mega watts potential hydro electric powers, from which the
City actually accessed to only 76.30 Mega watts. About 26,951 households, 757 government and
non-government organizations, and above 32 industries get electric power counter at their
93
houses, offices and industries respectively. In addition to these the extension of modern street
light has reached 47 kilo meters and the extension of higher line is increased to 153 kilo meters
and the lower lines are 359 kilo meters till 2015 (BCA FEDO, 2015).
4.7.4 Water Supply
Water provision is one of the basic urban services. Bishoftu City Administration naturally
endowed with many creator lakes which is called the land of excess water body. In addition to
surface water sources, the City is accessed to 15 deep water wells, which have a capacity to
produce 14 to 19 liters clean water per second. There are also four water reservoirs, two of them
are with the volume of 1000m3, the third one contain 500m3 and the fourth one contain 200m3.
There are about 55 water taps those giving services to many dwellers. On the year 2014 the
amount of water produced in the City was estimated about 4, 424, 185m3. About 20,154
households have got water pump line in their houses (BCA FEDO, 2015).
4.7.5 Land Fill Site
The development of land fill site will contributed to the reduction of sanitation problems of
Bishoftu City, which affects the City’s vision to become the first tourist attraction in the country
and Horn of Africa. Accordingly, the City built a new land fill site on area exceeds eleven
hectares (BCA FEDO, 2015).
4.8 Social services
4.8.1 Education
Educational institutions owned by government, private, and NGOs ragging from kindergarten
(KG) to higher educational institutions provide educational service in the City. Accordingly,
there are about 2 government and 57 private and NGOs KGs; about 24 government and 37
private and NGOs first cycle primary schools; about 13 government and 21 private and NGOS
second cycle primary schools; 2 government and 7 private and NGOs secondary education (9 -10
grade); 1 government preparatory school; 3 government and 1 NGOs Technical and Vocational
Education and Training Colleges (TVET); and 3 private colleges and 1 private and 2 government
universities. This fact showed that private and NGOs play a great role in the provision of
educational service in the City (BCA FEDO, 2015).
94
Among the educational institutions, TVET plays a great role in supporting public participation in
local development and enhancing public empowerment through participation in development. In
Bishoftu there are different TVETs, which have provided training along different skills on level
III and IV. The development of these institutions played a great role in training MSEs engaged in
the development activities undertaken through public participation. The existing TVETs have
provided training along different skills, to mention the few surveying technology, water supply,
community service work, carpentry and concrete work, food preparations, hair dressing, and
hotel management (BCA FEDO, 2015).
There was high school enrolment rate in the City. For the year 2014, there was gross enrolment
of 6,667 (3,422 male and 3,245 female) students for KGs; 14,234 (6, 518 male and 7, 716
female) for first cycle primary school; 12,492 (5,709 male and 6,783 female) for second cycle
primary school; 9,695 (4,697 male and 4,998 female) for secondary school; and 3,198 (1,781
male and 1,417 female) for preparatory schools (BCA FEDO, 2015).
Factors such as teacher student ratio and text student ratio are affecting quality of education.
There was 1 to 44, 1 to 32, 1 to 47, 1 to 61, 1 to 80 class room student ratio in KG, first cycle
primary school, second cycle primary school, secondary school and preparatory schools on
average respectively. The teacher student ratio was 1 to 39, 1 to 35, 1 to 37, 1 to 43, and 1 to 52
in KG, first cycle primary school, second cycle primary school, secondary school and
preparatory schools on average respectively. The text book student ratio was 1 to 1 in KG, first
cycle primary school, and secondary school; and 1 to 2 in second cycle primary school and
preparatory schools. A critical look at these data indicated that the teacher and student ratio at all
levels is lower than the Regional standard i.e. is 1 to 45 on average. The student class room
ration is at Regional standard on average (BCA FEDO, 2015).
In BCA, teachers of different educational level engaged in teaching profession. Accordingly,
there were about 104 grade 12 complete and below, 37 certificate, 66 diploma educational level
teachers teaching at KG. There were about 19 grade 12 complete and below, 168 certificate, 161
diploma and 52 first degree educational level teachers teaching in first level primary school.
There were about 6 certificates, 236 diplomas, 92 first degree educational level teachers teaching
in second cycle primary schools. There were about 8 diplomas, 204 first degrees, and 10 masters
95
educational level teachers teaching in high school. There were about 2 diploma, 53 first degree,
and 6 master educational level teachers teaching in preparatory schools (BCA FEDO, 2015).
4.8.2 Health service
Health service is the most important urban service that plays a great role in creating healthy and
productive manpower. To this end, in BCA, there were about nine government health institutions
that include two hospitals, three health centers, four junior centers, one malaria control center
that serves on the outpatient bases and 92 bed rooms for providing inpatient services. There were
also about 19 private clinics which provide health services in the City. Medicine provision in the
City was undertaken by 17 private pharmacies and 2 private rural drug venders. There were also
about two cultural medicine centers in the City. The health service coverage of Bishoftu City
administration was 75% (BCA FEDO, 2015).
The provision of quality health services and coverage mainly depends on the availability of
qualified medical personnel. In BCA, there were about 29 medical doctors, 21 health officers, 64
nurses, 11 pharmacist, 6 sanitarians, 2 health assistances, 42 community health extension and 70
technicians engaged in the provision of health services in government and non government
health institutions. The health professionals and people ratio was 1 doctor to 5,321 people; 1
health officer to 7, 348 people; 1 nurse to 2, 411 people; 1 pharmacist to 14, 028 people; 1
sanitarian to 25, 718; 1 health extension worker to 3, 674 people; one laboratory technician to 5,
144 people; and one X-ray technician to 38,577 people (BCA FEDO, 2015).
4.9 Summary
The establishment of Bishoftu City was associated with Ethio-Djibouti rail way. Bishoftu
derived its name from the abundant water in the area. the present day Bishoftu was collectively
known as Ada’a, which was inhabited by different branches of Tulama Oromo. The City has
been served as administrative center of different government levels since from the Emperor
Regime. Currently, the City is a self-contained first rank urban center in Oromia. The City is
located to South East of Finfinne and North West of Adama at central Oromia. The topography
of the City is characterized by undulating landscape dominated by hills. Its climate condition is
classified as moderate zone. Bishoftu is naturally endowed with beautiful lakes, which serve for
recreational and irrigation purpose. Above all the colorful ceremony of Irrecha at Lake Hora
96
Arsadi, which is a true manifestation of original Oromo religion Wakefeta makes Bishoftu
unique.
Administratively, Bishoftu City is divided into urban and rural gandas. It adopted functional
organizational structure. The city also adopted Mayor-Council form of urban government. The
population of the City is increasing from time to time that raise the demand for sophisticated
urban services. The economic activity of the City ranges from primary to tertiary sector. The
City has infrastructure and social services, which satisfy the need of the residents on average.
97
Chapter 5 : Institutional Contexts of Participation
5.1 Introduction
An enabling environment at the national and local level promotes and sustains participation. The
institutional context plays a fundamental role in enhancing participation in development.
Institutional context, in the case of this study, encompasses the capacity of City Government and
its responsiveness to participation and policies of government devised to manage participation.
Therefore, this chapter presents characteristics of respondents, City Government capacity, legal
and policy frameworks, and other organizational issues related to participation.
5.2 Characteristics of the Respondents
This sub-heading provides a description about main relevant characteristics of respondents; such
as socio-economic factors and demographic characteristics of respondents: sex, age, family size,
educational status, occupational status, employment categories and income. Assessing relevant
characteristics of the respondents helps to determine the capabilities of the respondents to
evaluate the concept under consideration, as well as their capacity to participate in development.
The background characteristics of respondents generated through survey questionnaire are
presented in Table 5.1.
The result in Table 5.1 shows that majority of the respondents were males (62.7%). This could
emanate from the fact that males are responsible for key decisions at the household level. In
addition, women’s personal and household attributes constrain their participation. Women are
quite disadvantaged due to their social and household chores such as childcare, fetching water,
cooking, and farming. Respondents age distribution in Table 5. 1 indicated that the majority of
the respondents were younger people. Younger people are more participating compared to aged
people since they are more concerned about the future developments as they have a higher life
expectancy and a longer planning horizon. The distribution of family size in Table 5.1 indicated
that more than half of the respondents (57.7%) had family size of 2 and below. This finding
contradicts with the fact that family size has positive relationship with participation as the result
of availability of labor force. In addition, large family size has a greater demand for local
development.
98
Table 5.1: Profile of the respondents
Characteristics
Sex
Age
Family Size
Occupation
Employment
Educational Level
Monthly Income
Categories
Female
Male
Total
< 29
30 - 35
36 - 40
41 - 45
46+
Total
<2
3-4
5+
Total
Managerial, professionals & Supervisory occupations
Clerical, sales & service occupations
Agriculture
Skilled & Unskilled labor
Others
Total
Civil servant
Self-employed
Private organization
NGO
Other
Total
Illiterate
Primary school
Secondary school
Certificate
Diploma
First degree & above
Total
< 1000
1000.01 - 2000
2000.01 - 3665
>3665
Total
Responses
No.
%
156
37.3
262
62.7
418
100.0
101
24.2
92
22.0
77
18.4
68
16.3
80
19.1
418
100.0
241
57.7
151
36.1
26
6.2
418
100.0
115
27.5
94
22.5
21
5.0
135
32.3
53
12.7
418
100.0
127
30.4
130
31.1
90
21.5
25
6.0
46
11.0
418
100.0
37
8.9
47
11.2
116
27.8
53
12.7
96
23.0
69
16.5
418
100.0
110
26.3
108
25.8
96
23.0
104
24.9
418
100.0
Source: Field survey, 2015
The result in Table 5.1 revealed that skilled and unskilled labor (32.3%) experienced high rate
participation followed by Managerial, Professionals, and supervisory occupation group (27.5%).
High rate participation of skilled and unskilled labor could associate with benefit acquired by this
occupational group from local development. High rate participation of managerial, professionals,
and supervisory occupations could result from their responsibilities in facilitating participation.
The distribution of employment type in Table 5.1 revealed that higher proportions of the
99
respondents are self-employed (31.1%) and civil servant (30.4%). High rate participation of selfemployed could arise from the availability of flexible time to participate. High rate participation
of civil servants could arise from their responsibilities in facilitating participation. The result in
Table 5.1 indicated high rate participation of people attaining secondary school education. High
rate participation of this educational level could associate with their employment in local
development implementation. The distribution of monthly income of the respondents in Table
5.1 indicated relatively high rate participation (26%) of those earns less than 1000 Birr per
month. This finding implies that there was high gap of local service provisions at portion of the
City inhibited by poor people.
5.3 Legal and Policy Frameworks for Public Participation
In most cases, the enabling environment substantially emerges from broad policies and
pronouncements at the central level. Proper government policies and legal provisions facilitate
effective participation that favors the local situation under consideration. Based on this idea the
provisions of government policies related to the topic were assessed.
5.3.1 Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE)
The Constitution of FDRE, Proclamation No. 1/1995, enacted general provisions about public
participation. Article 43 (2) of the Constitution, which concerned about right to development,
asserts that “Nationals have the right to participate in national development and, in particular, to
be consulted with respect to policies and projects affecting their community.” The proclamation
did not point out the constitutional mechanisms on how public participate in development except
general provision of the right of the public to participate in the development of their affairs.
Moreover, Article 43 (4) of the Constitution enacted general provision that postulated “The basic
aim of development activities shall be to enhance the capacity of citizens for development and to
meet their basic needs.” The provision of this article implies that participation in development
has fundamental role in empowering the public and improving public services at the local level.
Article 52 (2) (c) of the Constitution granted the regional states the power to formulate and
execute economic, social and development policies, strategies and plans of the State. This
implies that the power to formulate public policies, which guide participation, is decentralized to
local governments. Thus, to discharge this responsibility the concerned local government, in the
100
case of my study BCG, should possess capacity to implement this general provision on the
ground. However, the results of FGDs and interview with key informant from the public
indicated that the City Government was not in a position to fully implement this provision. This
finding infers that the weak capacity of the City Government resulted in gap between policy
formulation and implementation regarding participation.
5.3.2 Revised Constitution of Oromia National Regional State (ONRS)
In line with FDRE Constitution, ONRS Constitution also stipulated general provision about the
rights of the people of the region to participate in development. The general provision at
constitutional level, the supreme law of the land, affects the consecutive provisions about
participation. Other bylaws are driven from these general constitutional provisions. Thus, general
provisions of the constitution of the Region about participation in development are assessed in
what follows.
Article 43 of ONRS Revised Constitution, Proclamation No. 46/2001, stipulated the right to
development. Article 43 (1) enacted that “The peoples of the Region have the right to protect and
develop their environment, improve their living standards and sustainable development”. This
sub-article enacted three general provisions about participation in development. The first is
participation in developing and monitoring environment. The second is the right to improve their
living standard. The third is participation in enhancing and sustaining development. These
findings imply that ONRS Constitution recognized that participation in development helps to
improve the life of the public. Moreover, they imply that participation plays great role in
enhancing and sustaining local development.
Article 43 (2) of ONRS Revised Constitution stipulated that “All the people of the Region have
the right to participate in Regional development, and, in particular, to be consulted in respect to
policies and projects affecting their community”. This provision is the direct replication of the
provision of FDRE Constitution regarding the right to development. It endorsed participation at
different levels. The first is participation at regional level whereas the second is participation at
grass root or local development. The second provision, which is directly related to my study,
refers to the right of the public to participation at development policy level and at project level
that directly influences their life. However, this provision considered consultation as a means of
101
participation, which is the lower level of participation. Therefore, this provision creates a
condition that allows the power holders to manipulate the voice of the public.
Article 43 (3) stipulated that “The aim of development policies and programs shall be to enhance
the capacity of residents of the Region for development and meet their basic needs”. The
provision of this article advocate that public policies should create the condition that enhances
empowerment. The provision emphasizes the role of public policies in fostering participation in
development that boost empowerment of local people. That means participation should result in
empowering the public that in turn enables them for further participation in governance.
5.3.3 Oromia Urban Local Government Proclamation No. 65/2003
According to the preamble of this Proclamation, one of the rationale for enacting the
Proclamation was “to streamline the operation and organization of urban local governments on
the basis of good governance and democratic principles so as to enable them create huge
development capacity for the development of the Region and improvement of the living standard
of the residents” (ONRS, 2003:1).
A close look at this rationale suggested that the Proclamation is intended to create conducive
urban local government structure, which facilitate participation. Moreover, this provision implies
that urban local government structure is crucial institutional context for the empowerment of
local people through participation that directly improve their living standards. However, the
results of document analysis and FGDs advocated that the structure of the City Government on
the ground was not conducive for participation.
Article 7 (1) of the Proclamation stipulated that one of the objectives of urban local government
is to “promote self rule or community governance by encouraging the involvement of residents
in the overall activities of the city and to facilitate conditions in which residents benefit from the
development.” This provision specified two important issues regarding public participation: (1)
it provided self rule that should create favorable environment for participation; (2) it stipulated
community governance that enhances the empowerment of the public through sharing the
benefits of development. However, the results of FGDs and Key informant interview from the
public revealed that these provisions were not fully implemented in a manner that empowers the
102
local people. The institutional contexts at local level did not create transparent and accountable
system that allow the public to access the benefits of participatory development. This condition
hampered the role of participation in empowering the local people.
Article 7 (7) stated that one of the objectives of urban local government is to “Promote close
resident-government relationship and strengthen partnership with various bodies and the
community.” The provision of this sub article bestows responsibility on government to work
with the public to enhance their participation. Furthermore, the provision of this article suggested
that the government should serve as a main actor to facilitate the condition that fosters people
empowerment through participation. However, the results of FGDs disclosed that the
relationship between Government and the public deteriorating from time to time. The results
indicated that lack of trust by the public on government due to its empty promises to address
public demands was the major factor for deterioration of relationship between them. This finding
implies that there was poor implementation of the proclamation to foster participation.
Article 32 (1) of Proclamation No. 65/2003 enacted general provisions which directly related to
participation as follows: “Residents, mass organizations and the private sector shall discuss,
debate and express their views on the city annual work program, budget proposals, project ideas,
performance as well as financial and audit reports.” This provision call up on public participation
in all activities of government at all stage. A glance at the provision of this sub article suggested
that public has exclusive right to participate at each stage of local development process from
initiation of local development project ideas to performance evaluation. However, the results of
FGDs and Key informant interview revealed that the public did not participate in the
performance evaluation. This finding implies that there was gap in implementing the provision to
the extent that foster public participation that enhances empowerment of local people.
Article 32 (2) of the proclamation put up the obligation to create methods of public participation
on government as follows:
The urban local government shall organize public forums at least once every three months
to enable the residents, mass organization; and the private sector to discuss and debate on
issues mentioned in sub-article (1) of this Article stated somewhere else in this
proclamation. A public meeting may also be called by the City Government where
circumstances so require.
The examination of the above provision in line with Arnstien’s (1969) Ladder of Citizen
103
Participation put forward that it advocated participation technique which cannot allow genuine
participation. This implies that there is also gap in legal and policy framework in fostering
genuine participation.
Article 50 (1) of the Proclamation enacted the right of the public to participate in the planning
process as follows: “the residents of the City shall have the right to participate in all phases of
plan preparation and implementation process”. The provision of this sub article granted the
public the right to participate in development planning at all phases. However, the results of
FGDs and key informant interview from the public revealed that the public were not allowed to
participate in local development planning. Although planning is an important stage of local
development process at which the public determine the schedule and program activities of local
development, the City Government did not involved the public in planning. This finding implies
that there was high gap in policy implementation in BCA.
5.3.4 Oromia Industry and Urban Development Bureau (OIUDB) Public
Participation Manual
The then OIUDB prepared Public Participation Manual in 2012 that was intended to be
implemented throughout the Region’s urban centers. The manual was prepared in order to
implement Oromia Urban Centers Administration Proclamation No. 65/1995 provisions
regarding participation in development and good governance. Section 1.2 of the manual pointed
out two rationales for preparing the manual. The first rationale is to enhance participation in
development. The second is to enable the vulnerable section of the society (women, youth, and
elders) to participate in development based on their capacity and to foster their relation with the
government. However, as per the results of interviews conducted with public officials, Key
informant interview with Community Participation Experts (CPE) and FGDs unanimously
indicated, the contribution for local development was not taken into consideration the capacity of
residents. The amount of contribution by the public for local development was determined by
Government.
The manual endorsed top-down approach to participation. This can be observed from the
provisions of the manual regarding the responsibility of leading participation. The manual
prescribed agenda setting as the responsibility and authority of sectoral office head. Thus, the
public neglected from participating in development activities at initial stage. This implies that the
104
public participate in programs designed by government without their consent. This provision
enhances exclusively control of agenda setting by elites. Moreover, the manual advocates leading
of participation as normal bureaucratic routine of City Government, which is not compatible to
the very nature of participation.
The manual prescribed the establishment of four organs of government that supposed to
coordinate participation. These organs include: (1) Council that supposed to be elected by public;
(2) public participation board; (3) office of public participation in development; and (4)
permanent public participation process owner. However, as per the results of interview with
government officials and CPEs, among these organs, only board of public participation was
established along government tiers in BCA. There was no separate office, which is responsible to
lead participation in the City. Participation was led by Infrastructure Development Work Process
along with the normal bureaucratic routines. Participation in development was coordinated by
one expert in this work process, who had no appropriate qualification.
The manual was prepared, as stated, to enhance the process of participation through identifying
and solving the problem on the spot in order to sustain participation. However, the results of
FGDs indicated that this rationale of the manual was not achieved in BCA as intended. In many
places of the City, participation was ceased once the public satisfy minimum needs for public
services. Thus, the implementation of this manual was poor in BCA.
5. 4 Capacity of Bishoftu City Government
Capacity of the government is made of a composition of different factors. Government, as the
actor and facilitator of development, is expected to possess capacity that enables it to discharge
its multiple responsibilities. For the purpose of this study, BCG capacity to foster participation is
specifically assessed in terms of authority of the City Government, organizational structure
arrangement, and human resource.
5.4.1 Authority of the City Government
The authority vested on local government is one aspect of capacity that allows the government at
grass root level to facilitate participation. The authority grants the level of the government
closest to the public determines the power to make decisions that related to the provision of local
105
public service. This authority is obtained through decentralization of service delivery power to
lower level governments. The decentralization of adequate authority enables the level of
government proximate to the public to timely and adequately responds to the needs of the public.
Along this general principle, the capacity of BCA was assessed in terms of the authority it
possess on local development activities under investigation in this paper.
Participation in installation of new electric power line was one of the subject matter of this paper.
The results of FGDs and interview with key informant from the public indicated that despite its
basic necessity and publics’ keen interest to participate in the provision of electric power,
adequate support was not provided by the Government. The results of interview with government
officials and development committee heads revealed that the problems arise from lack of
authority regarding electric service provision by City Government. The results stressed that this
condition prohibited the City Government to address the needs of the public adequately. This
finding implies that failure to decentralize full power of local service provision hampers
participation.
Article 9 (4) of ONRS Urban Local Government Proclamation No. 65/2003 prescribed that one
of the objective of urban local government is “to provide efficient, effective and equitable public
utilities including water, electricity, telephone, public transportation service.” However, the
authority to provide electric power was not given to BCA. This finding implies that adequate
authority to deliver public service was not fully decentralized to lower level government tiers.
The results of interview with development committee and FGDs validated that the centralization
of electric power provision was the major problem of participation. These results further
indicated that Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation had fundamental institutional problem to
address the effort of the public to provide the service. The results of interview with development
committee and FGDs suggest that the central agency responsible to provide electric power was
unable and unwilling to cooperate and respond to the demands of the public. The results of FGD
at Ganda 01 highlighted the irresponsiveness of Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation as
follows: “It is independent government in itself that does not respond to the needs of the public”.
This cote implies the degree of irresponsiveness of this organization to the public needs. Thus, it
can be inferred from this finding that the institutional arrangement is not conducive to facilitate
106
participation. These findings imply that the problem was emanated from lack of subsidiarity i.e.
the provision of electric power is centralized and became out of the jurisdiction of BCA.
In case the delegation of power to provide electric power to BCA was associated with one of the
principles of subsidiarity i.e. efficiency, Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation in the City was
not capable to provide the service. As the result, there was failure to respond to the demand of
the public on time and adequately. As indicated by the results of FGDs and Interview with
development committee heads the delay in providing electric power provision imposes additional
cost on the residents due to inflation. The above results further indicated that this situation
offended the residents and reduce their interest to participate. This implies that authority of local
government is an institutional factor that adversely affected participation in development.
5.4.2 Organizational Structure Arrangement
Organizational structure is an important device to enhance and facilitate participation. Proper
organizational structure facilitates the effectiveness of participation that favors the local
situation. To this end, the organization structure should be established based on scientific
principles in manner that enhance efficiency and effectiveness in its operation. Accordingly, it
should be based on the activities that should be performed; it should coordinate different
stakeholders; and should create clear responsibilities and authorities. Based on these general
structural principles, the City Government Structure devised to facilitate participation is
assessed.
The organizational structure of the City Government to manage participation was extended from
City Government level to shane (an organization encompasses 1 to 5 residents) following topdown hierarchical arrangement. This arrangement was not suitable to the nature of participation
(which needs bottom up approach). The structural arrangement is depicted in Figure 5.1.
107
Figure 5.1: The levels of City Government structure
Source: Researcher’s own construction
Figure 5.1 shows hierarchical structural arrangement of the City Government to facilitate
participation. The organizational structure depicted in Figure 5.1 appears that it created
government unit proximate to the public. However, facilitating participation depends on the
capacity of the concerned government level. In this regard, the results of interview conducted
with CPEs and Manager of the City and gandas (administrative unit below central City
Administration) indicated that City Government tiers, especially gote (administrative tier below
ganda that encompasses 40 to 120 residents), gare (Administrative arrangement below gote that
encompasses 20 to 40 residents), and shane lacked capacity to facilitate participation. The
administrative tiers below ganda had no legal background that grant an authority to make
decision regarding participation in development. Moreover, they lacked management capacity to
facilitate participation. They were only used by City Government as a tool to collect resources
and to control the public. This finding puts forward that the structural arrangement was not in a
position to facilitate participation.
108
The institutional arrangement of BCG to facilitate participation was based on traditional
Weberian bureaucratic arrangement that emphasized experts, monocratic (top-down) hierarchy,
and administrative autonomy. As the result, its performance and responsiveness to the demands
of participation was inadequate. The results of Interview with ganda managers indicated that the
structural arrangement of BCG was not feasible to facilitate participation. It was divided into
unmanageable units without taking in to consideration the optimal level of division of activities
upon which the scientific structural arrangement depends on. The results of interview with CPEs
and FGDs reveals there was no participatory development project, which was solely undertaken
by separate gare and shane. Therefore, gare and shane was not necessary to facilitate
participation. This finding suggests that there was duplication of effort that result in loss of effort
and prohibited the public from holding comprehensive idea about development projects.
The results of FGDs and interview with Key informant from the public indicated different
adverse effects of this structural problem, which follows. It led to confusion rather than
facilitating participation. Furthermore, the public develop negative attitude towards the structure
of City Government, especially shane. The FGDs results stressed that the public held the
perception that the government created this tier in order to tightly control the public rather than
facilitating participation. The organizing of the public into 1 to 5 involuntarily creates fear
among the public since they lack trust among each other. This finding advocates that the
structural arrangement of the City government was not conducive for participation.
There was overlapping of responsibilities at different tiers of City Government established to
facilitate participation. The results of interview with ganda managers and community
development experts revealed that the responsibilities of ganda administration and the tiers
below it were coincided. For example as per the results of document review, awareness creation
was stipulated as the responsibilities of ganda, gote, gare and shane simultaneously. This kind of
duplication of responsibilities led to confusion among these tires of City Government rather than
creating clear responsibilities of each organ. There was also overlapping of authority of different
tiers of City Government in making decision at different phases of development process. The
results of interview with ganda managers and CPEs suggested that needs identification and
priority setting of local development were stipulated as the responsibilities and authority of both
gote and ganda administration.
109
The structure of ganda administration was also not appropriately organized in manner that
facilitate participation. In this regard the results of FGD at Babogaya, Ganda 09, attested that
ganda administration structure was inappropriateness in fostering participation. Further the
results of the above FGDs indicated that Babogaya is relatively isolated area in ganda 09 and one
of the areas neglected by Government. The Government failed to establish structure proximate to
the area that takes into consideration the unique condition of the area. This finding implies that
the heterogeneous nature of public needs was not taken into consideration in an attempt to
facilitate participation.
One of the functions of organizational structure is enhancing coordination among the parts of the
organization. However, the results of FGDs revealed that BCG structure could not foster
coordination in facilitating participation among different offices of the City Government. The
results of FGDs further indicated that lack of coordination among different branches of BCG
shortened the life span of output of participatory development. For instance, after cobble stone
roads are constructed, Water Bureau excavated the road to install water and left it unrepaired. As
the result, the flood further damages the road. The results of FGDs stressed that the damage by
Water Bureau was a widespread problem that threat cobble stone throughout the City. This
finding puts forward that coordination was the serious problem of City Government structure in
facilitating participation.
As can be learned from the results of interview with CPEs, lack of clear responsibility among the
hierarchy of the City Government was serious institutional challenges of participation. The
results of FGDs indicated that no clear responsibilities of institutions involved in the process of
development activities. The results of FGDs revealed that in some places there is development
committee in the other places CPB supposed to play the role of development committee, though
it was not effective in leading participation in development. In some places there was
overlapping of CPB and development committee responsibilities. In some places both of them
were existed. This finding implies that lack of clear responsibility among organs devised to
facilitate participation created role ambiguity.
110
5.4.3 Human Resource
Human resource is an important organizational variable in channeling other resources of City
Government to enhance participation. Therefore, human resource is an important capacity
dimension of the City Government. For the purpose of this study, the City Government human
resource was assessed along competence, commitment and attitude to initiate and facilitate
participation.
Job position devised to facilitate participation was created in the structure of City Government at
City level and ganda level. The positions were at expert capacity at both levels of City
Government. There was no separate unit in the City Government to manage participation. The
assessment of employees profile assigned to handle participation disclosed that they do not
possess qualification required to handle participation. The results of interview with City Manager
attested that the workers assigned on the position of CPE at City and ganda levels did not
possess the knowledge of participatory techniques, which are crucial to facilitate participation.
The results of the aforementioned interview further indicated that the experts were not holding
qualification, which was even closely associated with participatory technique. The results of key
informant interview with one of CPEs revealed that the workers assigned to facilitate public
participation lacked experience and possess low level of qualification. The interview with City
Manager verified the fact that the persons assigned on CPE positions were not qualified for the
position. The above finding implies many things about manpower of the City Government. One
of the implications is assignment of manpower on community participation experts is not based
on merit/competence. Other implication is that since CPEs lack participatory technique
knowledge, they were performing their duties based on rule of thumbs. The employees are not
capable to enforce participatory techniques. Thus, the capacity of City Government was weak in
terms of manpower.
The results of key informant interview with one of CPEs disclosed that besides lack of experts,
the persons assigned on the position of CPE were those demoted from other positions. The above
result further indicated that CPEs’ positions were used as the dumping place for those who were
not favored by City Government officials or displaced from their former position in some way.
In addition to lack of qualification, the persons were involuntarily assigned on CPE positions.
One can imagine that with lack of expert/knowledge and concurrent lack of interest of the job,
111
how much this person became efficient and effective? This finding implies that though
participation in development is crucial factor for solving the problem of the public and enhancing
the sense of ownership, the City Government gave little attention to it.
As per the results of key informant interviews with ganda managers and CPEs the
responsibilities of CPE at ganda level were compiling community participation information in
the ganda; preparation of community participation report in the ganda; serves as a liaison person
between ganda and gote heads; collection of public participation plans form gote heads;
summarizing and compiling community participation plan of ganda; awareness creation about
the benefits of participation; and follow up performance of participatory development activities
and similar activities. A close look at the above job description of CPE implies that the position
lacks responsibilities related to participatory approach. The responsibilities of CPE are the
normal bureaucratic routines. It only assigns clerical responsibilities to the experts. This finding
suggests that the position of CPE did not stipulate participatory techniques as the responsibilities
of the position and the assignment of unqualified persons on the position emanated from this job
description.
The other dimensions to assess manpower are job attitude and commitment of human resources
of the City. In this regard, the results of FGDs conducted at ganda 05 and 09 stressed that
majority of City Government workers had no good attitude towards participation. These
evidences attested that they resisted bottom-up nature of participation. They strived to maintain
status quo that follow top-down hierarchical bureaucratic nature of public service delivery.
Article 43 (1) of ONRS Urban Local Government Proclamation No. 65/2003 confers the power
to administer its human resource on City Government. It stipulated that “Every urban local
government shall have the power to recruit, promote, determine the functions, salaries and
benefits, mange, discipline and dismiss its staff in accordance with the law of the Regional
State”. This provision grants the City government the power to determine and hire appropriate
employees for facilitating participation. Despite the presence of this provision, the City
Government failed to place appropriate manpower on the positions of CPEs. This finding
advocates that the City Government had no good attitude towards participation and intentionally
assign unqualified manpower on CPE positions. Thus, the City Government human resource was
not qualified to foster public participation in local development.
112
5.4.4 Level of Capacity
The level of BCG capacity to facilitate participation was determined along the following
parameters: inclusiveness, accountability, structure, institutional culture, leadership and attitude
of bureaucracy towards participation. These parameters were systematically drawn from
literature related to measuring organizational capacity. The intention to determine the level of
City Government capacity was done through collecting public opinion using 5 point Likert scale.
In order to determine the level of City Government capacity the scale was combined to three
rating scale low, moderate and high. The analysis was undertaken on items analysis and overall
scale in the subsequent paragraphs. The results of individual items analysis of City Government
capacity was presented in Table 5.2.
Table 5.2: Item analysis for City Government Capacity to facilitate Participation (N= 418, Mean
(M) = 2.05)
Level
Items
Low
Moderate
(1-2.33) (2.34-3.66)
High
(3.67-5)
Mean
SD
The City Government is inclusive in enhancing
participation in development
2.26
.88
28.7%
16.5%
54.8%
The City Government facilitates participation in
development in an accountable manner
2.16
.89
32.5%
18.9%
48.6%
The structure of City Government is conducive to
the participation in development activities
1.77
.88
52.2%
18.4%
29.4%
The institutional culture of the City Government
foster participation in development
1.75
.86
52.6%
19.6%
27.8%
The City Government has a strong leadership
committed to facilitating participation in
development.
2.28
.84
25.1%
25.1%
52.9%
The City Government workers have better
attitude towards participation in development
2.09
.88
34.4%
21.8%
43.8%
Source: Survey data, 2015
The result of data analysis depicted in Table 5.2 revealed that the overall mean of items analysis
of level of City Government capacity was M = 2.05. The level of City Government capacity
113
along individual item was determined through comparing individual item mean with overall
mean.
The comparison of the mean of item analysis of City Government inclusiveness (M = 2.26) with
the overall mean suggests that the City Government was inclusive in facilitating participation. In
similar fashion, the mean of item analysis of facilitating public participation in accountable
manner (M = 2.16); strong and committed leadership (M = 2.28); and the City Government
workers attitude indicated better position of the City Government to facilitate participation.
However, the results of qualitative data analysis refuted this finding. The results of FGD
conducted in Ganda 05 indicated that leadership of the City was weak to facilitate participation.
The results of the above FGD further revealed that they lacked leadership qualities; especially
failed to serve as the role model for the public. For instance, the results of the above FGD
reflected that government officials’ lack of commitment to enforce the preparation of land, such
as fence demolition and cutting trees, for road construction. The results of FGD conducted at
Babogaya also verified the results of FGD in Ganda 05 that government officials’ lack of
commitment as follows: “the public officials lack the sense of national interest”. These findings
imply that City Government officials were not committed to create enabling environment for
participation. As per my observation in the process of data collection the capacity of City
Government was weak along the aforementioned parameters. Thus, the divergence between the
results of quantitative and qualitative data needs further research.
The comparison of the mean of structure of City Government (M = 1.77) and institutional culture
(M = 1.75) with the overall mean indicated that the City Government’s capacity was low along
these parameters. Institutional culture is the composition of different organizational variable, as
the result unconducive culture is the major factor which affects participation. These finding
implies that organizational structure and institutional culture of BCG was not conducive for
participation. Thus, these factors hindered public participation in development in BCG.
The institutional capacity of City Government was also analyzed by taking into consideration the
overall capacity. This was done through merging individual levels to composite variable through
transformation. The result of the analysis was presented in Table 5.3.
114
Table 5.3: Level of City Government capacity to facilitate participation in development
Levels
Frequency
Percent
Low (6 – 14)
52
12.4
Moderate (15 – 22)
335
80.1
High (23 – 30)
31
7.4
Total
418
100.0
Mean
SD
18.41
3.41
Source: Field Survey, 2015
The result of data analysis in Table 5.3 revealed that the overall capacity of City Government to
facilitate participation was at moderate level (80.1%). However, the result of qualitative analysis
refuted this finding. The results of FGDs and key informant interview with respondent drawn
from the public indicated that the overall institutional system of the City government was weak.
Moreover, the results of FGDs reveals that the City Government failed to work in close
cooperation with public. These results further stressed that the City Government was partial
while undertaking development activities. These finding imply that the City Government
experienced serious institutional capacity gaps to enhance participation.
The weak capacity of the City Government had adverse effect on the sustainability of
participation. In this regard, the results of FGDs and interview with key informant from the
public pointed out that a trend of participation decline from time to time due to the inability of
the City Government to facilitate participation. Specifically, the result of FGD conducted in
Ganda 05 indicated that the practice of participation decline at model places in the City like
Abinet Mender due to lack of City Government support.
The results of FGD conducted in Ganda 05 revealed that the capacity of the City Government
was weak at each tiers. This could be the duplication of poor administration at the City level to
ganda level. The above results associated weak capacity of the City to its Cabinet inability to
initiate and facilitate participation. The result further indicated that Cabinet became ignorant to
facilitate and initiate participation. Moreover, the aforementioned results of FGD indicated that
the lives span of cabinet membership also the contributing factors to lack of commitment among
the cabinet members to enforce participation of the public. This finding implies that there was no
115
political commitment to facilitate participation in BCA.
The results of FGD in Ganda 09 also indicted lack of commitment among ganda officials to
facilitate participation. The results of this FGD attached the sources of this problem to various
reasons that follows. The officials of ganda administration were not elected by the public and
assigned by City Government without the knowledge of the public. They came from different
areas and had no knowledge about the problem in the ganda. They attempted to consult the
public through meeting; however, the public was not willing to participate on meeting except
women and elderly. The results of this FGD attached the disobedience of the public to lack of
trust on the officials. The result of the above FGD further stressed that they were more concerned
about political issues and did not worry about development issues in the ganda. This finding
implies that there was no close relationship between Government and the public. Moreover, the
City Government officials did not make their door open to the public. The finding also implies
that this condition downplayed public political empowerment.
The results of FGD conducted in Ganda 05 pointed out that capacity of the City Government
decline from time to time to facilitate and oversee participatory development activities. The
result further indicated that lack of good governance and poor administrative system of the City
Government was also serious obstacles to participation. The result of the FGDs and interview
with key informant from the public stressed that this condition discouraged the public to
participate in development activities.
5.5 Responsiveness of City Government to Public Participation
Responsiveness of City Government is an important ingredient of institutional context of
participation. Responsiveness is a principle of public service delivery, which indicates how
government entertains public demand. It is one way to measure the will of City Government
regarding fostering bottom-up approach nature of participation. So as, to determine the
responsiveness of City Government towards participation, public opinion was acquired through
five point Likert Scale. The result of the analysis was presented in Table 5.4.
116
Table 5.4: The City Government responsive to participation
Rating Scale
Frequency
Percent
Very responsive
12
2.9
Responsive
71
17.0
Medium
208
49.7
Irresponsive
92
22.0
Very irresponsive
35
8.4
Total
418
100.0
Source: Field Survey, 2015
As can be observed from Table 5.4 about half (49.8%) of the respondents indicated that the
responsiveness of City Government to participation was at medium level. This finding implies
that BCG responds to participation at average level.
Though the result of quantitative analysis indicated average level of City Government
responsiveness, the result of qualitative analysis refuted this finding. The results of FGDs
pointed out that responsiveness of the City Government to the public demand was unchecked
area. The results of the FGDs and interview with CPE key informant suggested that the City
Government did not adequately respond to public needs. The Government only gave lip services/
empty promise. The results of FGDs further indicated that the City Government was not
accountable to its failure in addressing public demand/need/interest. Thus, as the result of City
Government inadequate responsiveness to public motives, the priorities of development needs
were not addressed based on the urgent need of the public. This finding implies that the City
Government did not give serious attention to participation. The finding further advocated that
low responsiveness to public demand was a challenge to participation.
As per the results of FGDs and interview with key informant from the public, the aspects of City
Government irresponsiveness can be categorized into two: (1) delay in responding to public
needs on time; and (2) ignoring public needs at all. The above result stressed that the City
Government had fundamental problem in facilitating and implementing participatory
117
development activities on time. The results of FGDs further indicated that as the result of
inadequate Government responsiveness the urgent public needs for basic services was not met.
This finding implies that despite its responsibility to facilitate participation the City Government
became an obstacle for public role as a development force to alleviate its problem.
The other aspect of irresponsiveness, as indicated above, was failure of creating conducive
environment for the implementation of participatory projects, which was in turn manifested in
different aspects. The results of FGDs indicated that the Government failed to give title deed.
This hindered the construction of road through participation. This situation became obstacle to
undertake development activities. The City Government failed to provide technical assistance
and did not open the roads upon which participatory development activities are undertaken. This
implies that the irresponsiveness of the City Government was the major obstacle to participation.
The results of FGDs conducted in Ganda 05 and Babogaya (Ganda 09) pointed out that the City
Government did not respond to public complaints on poor quality of participatory development
implementations. The above results further revealed that though the residents complain about the
quality of participatory development outputs, the City Government took over the low quality
constructed road from the contractor and enforced payment. The above results also revealed that
this was an intentional act that was done through neglecting the public a chance to participate in
the evaluation. This situation discouraged the public to participate in the future. This, finding put
forward that the Government, despite the main actor in facilitating participation, became a
challenge for sustainability of participation.
The results of FGD conducted at Ganda 05 pointed out that the irresponsiveness of the City
Government to participation was high at lower level tiers of Government. The result further
indicated that the upper Government structure was relatively supporting participation. The result
also stressed that the lower hierarchy of the Government even did not respond to simple demand
of the public like maintenance of development outputs. The irresponsiveness of the Government
to the needs of the public at grassroots level is the dangerous situation since this is the level of
government that have direct contact with the public in their daily routines.
118
The results of FGDs conducted at Ganda 05 and 09 revealed that bureaucratic obstacle was also
among factors that led to irresponsiveness of City Government to participation. The bureaucracy
was highly resisted bottom-up approach of participation. The bureaucracy was approaching
participation through top-down mechanisms. The bureaucracy had the intention to coerce the
public rather than initiating the public through creation of awareness about the benefits of
participation.
The results of the above FGDs also pointed out that City Government’s failure to provide
awareness creation for its workers about participation was other aspect irresponsiveness to
participation. This situation was a major reason for weak performance of workers regarding
participatory development. As the result, the attitude that “it is up to the public to participate or
not” reflected among public officials and workers. This finding advocates that government
officials’ and workers’ resisted bottom-up development approach that contradicts with their
interest of top-down bureaucratic approach.
The results of FGD conducted at Ganda 09 pointed out that Government officials are not
concerned for the need of the public and simply devoted to address their own needs. These
results further indicated that the main reason for irresponsiveness of the City Government
officials to the needs of the public associated with their origin. The above results also pointed out
that since Bishoftu is not their birth place they do not worry for the development of the City. As
the result, their aim is to extract the resource of the City as long as they possess power than
working for sustainable development of the City. This finding implies that there was lack of
ownership among the public officials, which became main obstacle to participation.
The results of interviews with key informant from the public and CPEs indicated that failure of
City Government to recognize participation as the force of development was the main problem
that faced participation. Thus, the weaknesses of the City Government to facilitate participation
jeopardize the sustainability of participation. For instance, once the residents’ met minimum
level of service needs they withdrew from participation due to lack of Government support.
The review of documents revealed that the irresponsiveness of City Government to the needs of
the public was contradicting with the legal provision. In this connection, article 32 (4) ONRS
119
Urban Local Government Proclamation No. 65/2003 stipulated that “the urban local government
has a duty to give prompt response to questions and complaints brought by the residents”.
Despite this legal provision in most of the cases the City Government failed to respond to public
complaints and suggestions regarding the quality of participatory development outputs. This
finding implies that there was high gap in policy implementation regarding participation in BCA.
5.6 Development Committee
In addition to City Government structure, people self organization such as development
committee was also the responsible body to facilitate participation. The results of key informant
interview with CPEs and ganda managers revealed that Committee was only common at new
areas of the City. The aforementioned results further indicated that in most parts of the City
development committee was replaced by CPB, which was the other face of hierarchical City
Government structure. Development committee was established by the public in order to manage
their effort in local development. It was relatively autonomous residents’ organization that
operates its activities independently. However, the prominence of this people organization
approaching to disappear from the City. This finding implies that the government was the major
actor in undertaking local development activities rather than creating favorable condition for the
proliferation of people’s organization.
As per the results of interview with ganda managers, the committee was closely working with
City Government in the provision of local services. The results of interview with development
committee heads indicated that the Committee plays a great role in facilitating and organizing the
community on local development activities such as installation of new electric power and road
construction. The aforementioned results also indicated that the committee was initially
organized by members from different gotes to identify and set priority of cobble stone roads to
be constructed. However, through time the responsibilities of the committee were surrendered by
City Government structure. As the result, the committees were banished at different places in the
City. This finding implies that the committee was efficient and established along development
projects performed in a given area rather than dispersing the efforts as that of government
structure such as gote and shane.
120
The results of interview with City Manager and development committee heads unanimously
indicated that development committee was made more efficient and effective contribution in
initiating and facilitating participation than the City Government did. This finding confirms that
people’s own organization, which functions outside the top-down bureaucratic structure, was
appropriate for participation.
However, different factors affected the performance of committee in facilitating participation.
The results of interviews with development committee heads pointed out that the failure of the
City Government to adequately support the effort of the Committee was major problem that
hindered committee performance. The delay to install electric power that partially funded
through public contributions was the major challenge of committee performance. This finding
implies that the City Government did not create conducive environment for peoples’
organization to lead participation in development.
5.7 Community Participation Board
CPB was the organ established by City Government to manage public participation in the City at
all levels. As per the results of interview with CPE at the center, CPB was responsible for all
stage of development process. The results of interview with City Manager and CPEs revealed
that the structure of CPB was extended from City level to gote level along the tiers of City
Government. The result of the interview with CPE indicated that CPB was headed by City
Government officials at different levels through co-opting members from different parts of the
society. At City level, Mayor of the City was the head of CPB. At ganda level the chairman of
the respective ganda was the head of CPB of the ganda. It continues to gote level, where the gote
head was the head of CPB of the respective gote.
The above facts imply that CPB was simply the extension of City Government structure. That
means it was another version of the Government structure devised by the City Government to
deceive the public that participation is led by independent organ. Thus, CPB was pseudo organ
that was established to lead participation. The attachment of CPB to Government structure
enhances bureaucratic rigidity that cannot fit to the bottom up approach of participation, which
needs flexible structure that fit the diversified interest of the public.
121
Table 5.5: Nature of CPB in BCA
Items
Knowledge of the existence of
community participation board
in the City
How the members of
Community participation
board are usually selected?
Response Categories
Number
Percent
Yes
240
57.4
No
178
42.6
Total
418
100
Elected by the residents
Assigned by the government based
on political loyalty
Prominent person in the
community takes the position
other
66
27.5
150
62.5
22
9.2
2
.8
240*
100.0
Yes
No
89
155
37.08
62.92
Total
240
100
Total
CPB influence on the decision
making process regarding need
identification, planning and
implementation of
development activities in the
City
Extent of CPB effectiveness
in managing the development
process
Highly effective
Effective
13
30
5.42
12.5
medium
61
25.42
Ineffective
92
38.33
Highly ineffective
44
18.33
Total
240
100.0
* Applies to those who know the existence of CPB
Source: Survey data, 2015
The result of analysis presented in Table 5.5 pointed out that more than half of the respondents
(57.4%) knew the existence of CPB in the City to lead participation. The rest, (42.6%) of the
respondents did not know the existence of CPB in the City. However, the results of FGDs
indicated that the public recognized CPB as the Government structure. The results of FGDs
further indicated that the public had no information about the roles of CPB and its contribution to
participation. This finding implies that CPB board was the extension of Government structure
that enhances top down approach rather than becoming an organ to enhance bottom up approach
to development.
122
The way members of CPB were selected can also indicated whether or not CPB was community
organization or the Government structure which intended to manage participation in
development. In other words, how the members were selected is an indication of status of CPB.
The result of analysis depicted in Table 5.5 (62.5%) pointed out that members of CPB were
assigned by government based on political loyalty. The data also indicated members of CPB
were selected through other ways such as by the Community (27.5%); and prominent person in
the community takes the position (9.2%). These facts suggest many things. First, there was no
uniform way of selecting members of CPB, which indicated that the administration of CPB itself
was not guided by rules and principles. Second, the selection of member by government in most
cases indicated that it was the version of government structure. The results of interview with key
informant from the public and FGDs conducted in Gandas 09 and 05 also verified that there was
a confusion regarding responsibilities of CPB. These finding imply that it was not the people self
organization and in a position to manage participation in development.
The extent to which CPB influences decision making regarding participation is the manifestation
of its power. The result of data analysis presented in Table 5.5 (62.92%) indicated that CPB had
no power to influence decisions regarding participatory development process.
If the
responsibilities assigned and authority delegated to a given organ is not equal, it is not in a
position to discharge its responsibilities. This is what can be inferred from the above fact
regarding the power of CPB. Moreover, the results of FGDs revealed that there was confusion
regarding the power and duties of CBP among the public. These results indicated the tendency of
perceiving it as a pseudo-institution. As indicated in Table 5.5 the majority of the respondents
(56.66%) indicated that CPB was not effective in managing participation in BCA. These findings
imply that CPB have no clear responsibilities and lacks adequate authority to influence decision
making regarding participation in development.
5.8 Summary
The assessment of demographic characteristics of the participants indicated that high proportion
of them were male, fair participation of different age groups and majority of participant with two
and less family size. The socioeconomic characteristics of the participants pointed out small
agricultural and other occupational group, more or less similar proportion of civil servant and
self-employed followed by private organization employment categories, highest proportion of
123
secondary education followed by diploma educational level relative to other educational levels,
and almost similar proportion of all income groups were participants of the questionnaire survey
for this study.
Institutional contexts encompass policy frameworks and organizational variables which are
related to participation development. Accordingly, general provisions about participation in
development were enacted at national and regional level in terms of the right to development.
These broad general provisions were enacted through federal and regional constitutional
provisions. At Regional level, urban centers management proclamation and public participation
manuals were enacted. The proclamation specifically enacted the provisions regarding
participation in development. Public participation manual was prepared in order to enhance the
implementation of constitutional provisions and urban centers management proclamation.
However, there was high gap in implementation of policy provisions on the ground.
The overall institutional capacity of the City Government was weak to facilitate participation.
The institutional culture of the City Government was not conducive to bottom up nature of
participation. The City Government lacked adequate authority to deliver public services.
Organizational structure of the City Government was not capable and appropriate to foster
participation. The structure was not devised based on scientific principles that arise from the
nature of participation; failed to foster coordination of activities; and creating clear
responsibilities of bodies concerned with participation in development. The City Government
lacked appropriate quality of human resource to manage participation in development. The
capacity of the City Government to facilitate participation in development was declined from
time to time. This condition discourages participation in development. The City Government was
not adequately responsive to public participation in development. The irresponsiveness of the
City Government to participation in development was high at lower level tiers of City
Government. There was little prevalence of peoples’ own organization.
124
Chapter 6 : Nature of Public Participation
6.1 Introduction
This chapter brings to light different issues related to nature of participation. Under this chapter I
assessed forms of participation, willingness to participate in development, and approach of
participation through combining descriptive statistics, and the result of qualitative data analysis. I
also assessed the difference in participation along categories of demographic and socioeconomic
characteristics. The association of demographic and socioeconomic characteristics was also
determined. Finally, the determinants of participation in BCA are presented.
6.2 Forms of Participation
The residents contribute for local development in different forms. The prominent forms of
participation are financial, labor, material and professional service. The prevalence of a
particular form of participation is affected by the capacity of the public as well as the mode of
contribution imposed by local government. The forms of participation in BCA are presented in
Figure 6.1.
*the percentage was the result of multiple response analysis: which cannot sum to 100 percent
Figure 6.1: Forms of Participation
Source: Field survey, 2015
125
As indicated in Figure 6.1, the public participated in all forms in BCA. However, the proportion
of participation in each form varies. Participation through financial contribution (70%) was
dominant relative to other forms of participation. Participation through labor (68.1%) was almost
the same with financial contribution. There were almost similar proportion of participation
through material contribution (27.8%) and professional service (26.4%). The result of interview
with ganda managers’ indicated that labor contribution was undertaken by those who had no
capacity to participate through financial contribution and other forms. The result of the interview
also pointed out that material contribution was done through provision of materials in kind for
development activities.
The results of interviews with public officials and FGDs revealed that two City Government
policies contributed for the prominence of participation through financial contribution. One of
the policies refers to the obligatory contribution by the residents for development to get public
services provided by City Government. The other policy is cost-sharing of the expenditure of
public service provision among City Government and the public. The results of interview with
CPEs and FGDs show that roads (Coble stone) and installation of electric power were
undertaken for a given area only and only if the public cover half of the costs of development
projects. The amount of public contribution has increased from time to time. The results of
interview with City Manger and FGDs pointed out that initially residents required covering 30%
of the cost of road construction and electric power installation. However, the City Government
increased public contribution to 50% of the total cost of the project. The results of FGDs further
indicated that the decision regarding public contribution was done by City Government without
consultation with the public. The City Government was not taken into consideration the capacity
and the interest of the public. This implies that participation involves involuntary aspect that
contradicts the very nature of participation.
The results of interview with key informant CPE at central City Administration pointed out that
participation through professional service/idea provision was prevalent at the inception of formal
participation in development. The results of FGDs attested that due to City Government failure
to take into consideration public comments, participation through professional service decline
from time to time. The results of the above interview further revealed that professional service
was provided in planning local development and determination of quality and quantity of
126
development activities. This finding implies that though professional service contributes in
enhancing the implementation and quality of participatory development activities, it was not
given due consideration by City Government.
6.3 Public Participation: voluntary or involuntary
Participation can be through free will or involuntary participation induced by government
machineries. The result of data analysis revealed that there was the prevalence of both voluntary
and involuntary aspects of participation in BCA. The voluntary and involuntary aspects of
participation could be discerned from the inception of participation; factors initiating to
participate; and cost sharing principle enforced by City Government. The results of FGDs and
key informant interview with CPEs show that willingness of the public to demolish their
property for development activities; and invention of new development ideas (example - road
side greenery development) were the manifestation of voluntary aspects of participation. The
above results further indicated that the public design development projects by themselves and
takes initiative to implement. The public voluntarily demolish their home and fences for
extending road size.
The results of key informant interview with CPEs indicated that participation, especially cobble
stone, was involuntary at its inception. Meanwhile, the City Government enforced participation
through cost sharing mechanism. The above results further pointed out that participation was
involuntary without taking into consideration public interest and need. This involuntary
participation enhanced lack of ownership of outputs of development activities among the public.
The results of the above interview also revealed that at the inception of participation, the public
destroyed infrastructures developed through public participation since it was forcefully initiated
by City Government. The results of the above interview further revealed that the public lacked
ownership for two reasons: (1) the way City Government tries to mobilize the public to
participate in development; and (2) the favoritism made by City Government, the major problem,
in the construction of cobble stone around the home of City Government officials. These
findings imply that involuntary participation impedes genuine participation and ownership of
development outputs.
Moreover, voluntary or involuntary aspect of participation was determined based on factors that
127
motivated the public to participate in development activities. To this end, the respondents were
asked whether they participated in development to bridge the gap of local service delivery, as a
precondition to acquire government services, and in some case to improve their own capacity.
The results are presented in Figure 6. 2.
*the percentage was the result of multiple response analysis: which cannot sum to 100 percent
Figure 6.2: Factors that motivate to participation in development
Source: Survey data, 2015
A glance at Figure 6.2 indicated that about 81.4% of the respondents were motivated to
participate to improve the gap in basic service delivery. The results of FGDs verify that there
was high rate of participation to bridge the gap of public service as the result of government
failure to provide basic infrastructures, especially in new areas. The residents of new areas
organized and attempted to satisfy their felt needs through committee leadership. For instance,
the results of FGD conducted at Babogaya area in Ganda 09 revealed that the public contributed
40 Birr per month for provision of basic services through their association. Furthermore, the
results of key informant interview with Development Committee Head at Kurkura 1 in Ganda 01
showed that the public made great efforts to install new electric line and road network
development by covering all costs.
128
The result in Table 6.2 divulged that about 24.2% of the respondents reported that they were
motivated to participate for the reason that participation was a precondition to acquire
government services. The results of key informant interview with CPEs and FGDs substantiated
that the public obliged to pay contribution set by City Government in order to obtain public
services. This finding implies that the public neglected the basic right to obtain government
services without direct transaction and involuntarily engaged. The results of FGDs revealed that
in most cases, the provision of street light was involuntary through coercion by City
Government. This advocated that there was involuntary participation in local development. Only
16.4% of the respondents’ motivated to participate to improve their capacity. This advocated that
there was a tendency of understanding participation as the means of improving one’s own
capacity among the public in BCA. This situation implies that there was recognition of
participation as a means of enhancing personal empowerment among the public in BCA.
The above findings put forward two major issues. In the first place, participation as the means of
development in BCA is high; and secondly, the City Government is not capable to provide basic
services to the public. Consequently, the public initiated to solve their problem by themselves.
Participation to improve basic services carries on the intention of both voluntary and involuntary
nature of participation. On one hand, the incapability of the City Government to provide
adequate local services forced the public to participate in local service provision. Therefore, even
participation to address their felt needs indicate involuntary aspect of participation. On the other
hand, participation to improve basic services indicates the existence of co-production of public
service delivery, one aspect of New Public Management (NPM). In other words, the initiation of
the public to bridge the gap of public service delivery indicates high level of development that is
development by the public for the public.
The results of FGDs and key informant interviews with CPEs pointed out that in some cases; the
public participated through their own social mechanism in the development of different
infrastructures. The situations in Abnet Mender in Ganda 05 and Babogaya area of Ganda 09
were the best practice in this regard. At Abnet Mender the public engaged in the development of
their affairs through creating different association based on social organizations. These
organizations include children association, women association and men associations. At
Babogaya, in addition to development committee the public participated through local
129
institutions like idir. In addition to designing and implementing development projects the public
voluntarily demolish their houses and fences for road expansion. This implies that the public is
capable to solve their problems independently without government intervention. These finding
attested the argument that participation through Community Based Organizations is more
effective than participation through government structure.
The results of FGDs and interviews with City Manger and CPEs pointed out that despite a
tendency of dependency syndrome among some residents; the public was willing to participate in
development. The willingness and interest of the residents to participate can also be understood
from the information provided by one of the key informants from the public regarding the
interest of poor women sustains her life through baking budena. The informant said that this poor
woman expressed her willingness to participate in development as follows: “if the government
comes to my vicinity and perform development activities, why I refuse to participate in
development through providing 150 Birr”. The key informant further indicated that the
aforementioned woman contributed for the construction of road. This cote implies that capacity
to pay is not fundamental barrier to participation rather context of participation affect
participation.
6.4 Approach of Participation: top-down or bottom-up
I determined the approach of participation, top-down or bottom-up, based on who makes
decision; the organization through which public participates; whether or not public ideas are
taken into consideration in decision; and how the efforts of public are handled. Along these
parameters, the result of the study revealed that the approach of participation was top-down in
BCA.
The results of FGDs and interview with CPEs show that participation was initiated by City
Government and undertaken through participation at different tiers of Government. The above
results further indicated that the majority of participation was undertaken through shane and gote
government structures. Thus, I examined the approach of participation at two important phases
of local development process: need identification and priority setting. I emphasized on these two
development phases since they involve interest aggregation.
130
Need identification is the first phases of local development process. It is an important stage at
which the real problem of the public is identified for action. It is also a stage at which the public
should be involved in the decision making regarding local development. In order to determine
the approach of participation in development needs identification, data were collected on
channels of participation. The result is presented in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1: Channels of participation in identifying local development needs
Channels of public participation
No.
Percent*
126
Through ganda meeting
50.2
124
Through shane meeting
49.4
120
Trough gote meeting
47.8
102
Through gare meeting
40.6
46
Through committee representation
18.3
* Percents do not add up to 100 as the result is obtained from multiple responses.
Source: Field survey, 2015
A glance at Table 5.2 disclosed that the public participated in needs identification through ganda
meeting (50.2%), shane meeting (49.4%), gote meeting (47.8%), gare meeting (40.6%), and
committee representation (18.3%). The results of FGDs verified that the public participated in
needs identification through meeting held at different tiers of City Government and committee
representation at some places. However, participation through committee representation (18.3%)
takes the lowest position when compared to the other ways. Development Committee is
considered as peoples’ organization that enhances genuine participation. Thus, lower rate of
needs identification through committee can be considered as an indication of insignificant people
participation in determining their urgent needs through their organization. Participation in needs
identification was almost undertaken through government structure. This finding implies that
participation follow top-down approach in BCA.
Setting priority of development needs requires relatively autonomous decision by the public that
enables them freely select their urgent needs rather than incorporating in tight bureaucratic
decision making. However, the results of the study suggest that participation in needs priority
setting was also top-down approach in BCA. The channel of participation in needs priority
setting is an indication of approach of participation. The channel of participation in setting
131
priority of needs is depicted in Table 6.2.
Table 6.2: Channels of participation in setting priority of needs
Channels of public participation
No.
Percent*
130
Through ganda meeting
55.3
100
Through shane meeting
42.6
114
Trough gote meeting
48.5
86
Through gare meeting
36.6
46
Through committee representation
19.6
* Percents do not add up to 100 as the result is obtained from multiple responses.
Source: Field survey, 2015
A close look at Table 6.2 indicated that the proportion of participation in needs priority setting
fairly descending from ganda meeting to lower level tiers with the transposition of gare meeting
with shane meeting. The highest proportion of participation in needs priority setting took place
at ganda meeting (55.3%) and gote meeting (48.5%). Next to gote meeting, participation in
needs priority setting was through shane meeting (42.6%). Participation in needs priority setting
through gare meeting (36.6%) took the lowest position relative to other tiers. The proportion of
participation in needs priority setting through Committee representation (19.6%) was small. The
results of FGDs validate that participation through committee representation, people’s
organization, was rare and not uniform throughout the City. Committee was prevalent only at
new areas of the City. This finding advocates that participation in needs priority setting was also
top-down in BCA.
The results in Table 6.2 revealed that in most of the cases, participation in needs priority setting
took place at higher tiers of City Government. In principle, participation in the highest level of
local government tiers is not suitable to the public to express their will and to influence decision
making. Moreover, the results of FGDs verified that ganda and gote meeting encompasses wide
areas that lead to neglecting the situation in particular area. The results of FGDs further indicated
that the meeting place, especially in large gandas, was not comfortable for the residents to
participate. This finding suggests that the public was not given the chance to prioritize their
development needs independently through people’s organization like development committee.
Rather, they were co-opted at different tiers of City Government. The results of FGDs data
132
analysis revealed this top-down approach to participation created favorable conditions for elites’
domination of decision-making concerning development activities. This finding puts forward
that participation followed bureaucratic nature, which was characterized by clear hierarchy of
authority and rules established at the top in BCA. This condition contradicts with the bottom-up
nature of participation.
As per the results of interview with public officials at different City Government tiers, the
incorporation of public contributions in City Government annual plan was also another aspect of
top-down approach to participation in BCA. The Government incorporated public contribution in
its annual plan in different sectors and mobilize the public in line with the plan. The results of
key informant interview with CPEs revealed that the Government strives to achieve its plan of
participation at any cost rather than initiating genuine participation. This advocates that the
public was participated in the Government program, which is top-down approach, rather than
their own self initiated development projects.
The management of participatory development activities in BCA was also the manifestation of
top-down approach. The results of FGDs and key informant interview with CPEs suggested that
management of participatory development implementation was the responsibility of City
Government with less consideration of public concern. The results of interviews and FGDs
revealed that the public neglected financial management of their contribution. The public only
concerned in collecting their share for development activities and depositing in bank account 389
opened at Cooperative Bank of Oromia in the name of public participation by City Government.
After the public deposited their contributions in the bank, the management left for City
Government. Thus, the public had no chance to manage their contributions.
The results of FGDs indicated that performance evaluation of participation was done by City
Government without giving chance to the public. The public did not get the chance to determine
or approve standards of participatory development outputs. Public complaints on quality of
development were neglected by City Government experts and officials. The results of FGDs and
interview with key informant from the public validated that neglecting the public from
performance evaluation created favorable ground for embezzlement of public money and adverse
effect on the quality of development outputs.
133
Who makes the decision about the amount of contribution for development activities is also an
indication of approach of participation. The results of FGDs and key informant interview with
CPEs also revealed that the amount of public contribution was decided by City Government
Cabinet. The decision was made and communicated to the public without consulting them and
taking into consideration their capacity to pay. The results of interview with public official
indicated that financial contribution from the public for the provision of local service was
initially 30% of the cost of development project, which later increased to 50%. The results of
FGDs verified that the public required obeying the decision in order to get local development
activities are performed at their vicinity. These issues are a typical feature of top-down approach.
The results of FGDs and interview with key informant from the public forwarded that the failure
to take into consideration the concern of the public in development process decisions was also
manifestation of top-down approach to participation. The power to make final decision on
development needs priorities for action vested upon public officials and experts. Although, the
public consulted in proposing their urgent needs the officials and experts did not seriously take
into consideration the public interests. The above findings advocate that all aspects of
participation were characterized by top-down approach in BCA.
6.5 Comparison of Participation along Demographic and Socio-economic
Characteristics
Participation can vary along different categories of demographic and socio-economic
characteristics. In order to determine the existence and absence of this difference Mann-Whitney
U Test was used for sex, whereas Kruskal Wallis H Test was utilized for the remaining
demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Follow up Mann Whitney U tests were
conducted to evaluate pair wise differences among the three groups for significant Kruskal
Wallis H Test. Furthermore, effect size was determined for statistically significant Mann
Whitney U tests. Whenever related previous works are available, the results of this dissertation
are compared with these works.
134
Table 6.3: Mann-Whitney U Test of Females and males participation in the phases of local
development
Sex
N
Mean
Rank
MannWhitney U
Z
Participation in the
Female
156
229.01
17393.00
-2.61
phases of development
Male
262
197.89
process
Total
418
Dependent variable
Asymp.
Sig. (2tailed)
.01
Effect
size
(r)
-0.13
Source: Field Survey, 2015
The result of Mann-Whitney U Tests analysis indicated in Table 6.3 revealed statistically
significant difference between females’ (Mean Rank = 229.01, n = 156) and males’ (Mean Rank
= 197.89, n = 262) participation, (U = 17393, z = -2.61, p = 0.01). The values of the mean rank
(229.01) indicated that females participated more than males in BCA. However, the effect size (r
= -0.13) indicated small difference between females’ and males’ participation. This implies that
the variation of participation was not significantly different.
Table 6.4: Kruskal-Wallis Tests of participation along demographic and socio-economic
characteristics
Independent Variables
Age Categories
χ2
0.51
df
4
p
0.97
Family size Categories
3.52
2
.17
Occupation categories
11.33
4
0.02
Employment categories
21.63
4
0.00
Educational levels
13.63
5
.02
Income categories
11.87
3
.01
Source: Field Survey, 2015
The results of analysis presented in Table 6.4 divulged that there was no statistically significant
pattern of participation over age and family size. However, it indicated a statistically significant
difference among occupation, employment, education and income categories. Therefore, posthoc Mann Whitney U tests were conducted to evaluate pair wise differences among the
significant groups. The results of post hoc Mann Whitney U test are presented in Table 6.5
135
Table 6.5: Follow-up Mann-Whitney U tests between selected categories of demographic and
Socio-economic characteristics.
MannWhitney
U
p
Effect
size
(r)
-2.16
0.03
-
7185.50
-1.03
0.30
-
Clerical, sales & service Vs. Skilled &
Unskilled labor
5684.50
-1.37
0.17
-
Civil servant Vs. Self-employed
6366.00
-3.23
0.00
-0.20
4629.000
-2.43
.02
-0.17
Self-employed Vs. Private organization
5658.50
-.42
.67
-
Illiterate Vs. Secondary school
1817.50
-1.44
0.15
-
Illiterate Vs. First degree & above
795.00
-3.25
.00
-0.32
Secondary school Vs. First degree & above
3157.50
-2.45
.01
-0.18
< 1000.00 Vs. 1000.01 - 2000.00
5116.00
-1.83
.07
-
< 1000.00 Vs. 2000.01 - 3665.00
4398.500
-2.14
.03
-
< 1000.00 Vs. 3665.01+
4189.00
-3.46
.00
-0.24
1000.01 - 2000.00 Vs. 2000.01 – 3665.00
5025.50
-.39
.70
-
1000.01 – 2000.00 Vs. 3665.01+
4891.50
-1.65
.10
-
2000.01 - 3665.00 Vs. 3665.01+
4642.50
-.87
.38
-
Variables
Categories
occupation
Managerial, professionals & Supervisory
Vs. Clerical, sales & service
4482.50
Managerial,
professionals & Supervisory
Vs. Skilled & Unskilled labor
Employment
Civil servant Vs. Private organization
Education
Income
Z
Source: Field survey, 2015
A close look at Kruskal-Wallis Test results in Table 6.4, indicates statistically significant
difference between occupational groups (χ2 (4) = 11.33, p = 0.02) participation. The values of
mean rank disclosed that other occupational group (MR = 247.71, n = 53) participation was high
compared to the rest occupational categories. Clerical, sales & service occupations (MR =
224.81, n = 94) experienced the second higher participation next to other occupational groups.
The rest occupational groups Skilled & Unskilled labor (MR = 203.41, n = 135), agriculture (MR
136
= 199.26, n = 21), and Managerial, professionals and Supervisory occupations (MR = 188.40, n
= 115) were ranked third, fourth and fifth in their participation. This finding implies that
occupation is an important variable in participation in BCA.
The post-hoc Mann Whitney U tests of occupational groups were conducted to evaluate pair wise
differences among the three groups to maintain alpha at manageable level. The result of followup Mann-Whitney U tests presented in Table 6.5, when compared to adjusted alpha (α) = 0.02,
indicated no statistically significant difference between selected occupational categories:
Managerial, professionals and supervisory occupations and Clerical, sales and service
occupations (U = 4482.50, z =-2.16, p = 0.03); Managerial, professionals and supervisory
occupations and Skilled and unskilled labor (U = 7185.50, z = -2.16, p = 0.30); and Clerical,
sales and service occupations and Skilled and unskilled labor (U = 5684.50, z = -1.37, p = 0.17).
An observation of the result of Kruskal-Wallis Test in Table 6.5 revealed a statistically
significant difference between employment categories participation (χ2 (4) = 21.63, p = 0.00).
The difference in degree of participation among employment categories was determined using
mean rank of each group. Accordingly, other employment categories (Mean Rank = 246.86, n =
46) was highly participated compared to the rest categories. It was followed by self-employed
employment groups (Mean Rank = 227.58). Private organization employment category (Mean
Rank = 220.45, n= 90) took the third position in its degree of participation. Civil servant
employment category (Mean Rank = 180.79, n= 127) ranked fourth in its participation. NGO
(Mean Rank = 153.20, 25) employment category took the least position in its participation.
The comparison of the results of follow up Mann Whitney U tests illustrated in Table 6.5
revealed significant difference between civil servant and self-employed (U = 6366.00, z = -3.23,
p = 0.00) participation compared to adjusted alpha (α) = 0.02. However, the effect size statistics r
= -0.20 showed small difference between Civil servant and self-employed participation.
Likewise, Follow-up Mann-Whitney U tests revealed significant difference between Civil
servant and private organizations employment (U = 4629.00, z = -2.43, p = 0.02) participation.
The effect size r = -0.17 indicated small difference between civil servants and private
organization participation. Therefore, the difference between participation of employment
categories arose from these groups. This finding implies that employment type was an important
137
variable in participation in BCA.
The Kruskal-Wallis test result in Table 6.4, divulged statistically significant difference between
educational levels (χ2 (5) = 13.63, p = 0.02) participation. This agrees with the observation made
by Alemayehu (2014) in Amhara region, Ethiopia that participation varies based on the level of
education attained. This implies that education is an important determinant of participation in
BCA as other localities in Ethiopia. Accordingly, the highest participation was observed among
Illiterate (Mean Rank = 248.85, n=37) followed by primary school (Mean Rank = 225.35, n =
47) educational level. The rest educational levels participation ranked secondary education
(Mean Rank = 216.54, n = 116), Diploma (Mean Rank = 214.45, n = 96), certificate (Mean Rank
= 192.51), and first degree and above (Mean Rank = 171.93, n = 69) from third to the least
respectively. An observation of the mean ranks of educational levels indicated that while
educational level increases participation decreased in BCA.
The result of follow up Mann-Whitney U test indicated in Table 6.5 revealed that no statistically
significant difference between Illiterate and secondary school participation (U = 1817.50, z = 1.44, p = 0.15). Mann-Whiney U test indicated statistically significant difference between
Illiterate and First Degree and above educational levels participation (U = 795.00, z = -3.25, p =
0.00). The result of effect size statistics (r = -0.32) indicated moderate difference between
Illiterate and First Degree and above educational levels participation. Similarly, Follow-up
Mann-Whiney U test revealed statistically significant difference between Secondary School and
First Degree and above educational levels participation (U = 3157.50, z = -2.45, p = 0.01). The
result of effect size statistics (r = 0.18) indicated small difference between Secondary School and
First Degree and above educational levels participation. Therefore, the difference of educational
levels participation happened from the difference between Illiterate and first degree and above;
and secondary education and first degree and above educational levels.
The result of Kruskal-Wallis Test in Table 6.4 indicated statistically significant difference among
income categories participation (χ2 (3) = 11.87, p = 0.01). The comparison of mean ranks of
income levels brought to light that those who gained 1000.00 and less Birr per month (Mean
Rank = 238.92, n = 110) were highly participated in BCA. The rest income categories 1000.01 2000.00 (Mean Rank = 210.05, n = 108), 2000.01 - 3665.00 (Mean Rank = 202.31, n = 96),
138
3665.01+ (Mean Rank = 184.45, n= 104) were ranked from second to least in their participation
in development. This finding suggested that income and participation were inversely related in
BCA.
The result of post-hoc Mann-Whitney test presented in Table 6.5 revealed statistically significant
difference between less than and equal to 1000.00 and 3665.01and above monthly income
categories participation (U= 4189.00, z = -3.46, p = .00). The effect size statistics (r = 0.24)
indicated small difference between these income categories. Therefore, the difference in income
groups’ participation happened from the difference between participation of these groups.
6.6 Association of Demographic and Socio-economic Characteristics and
Participation
The association between demographic and socio-economic characteristics and participation
shows the influence of these factors on participation. Chi-square test was run to determine the
association between these characteristics and participation. To this end the following general
hypothesis, which was customized to each characteristic, was developed and tested:
H0:
“Demographic
and
socioeconomic
characteristics
and
participation
are
independent.”
H1: “Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics and participation are not
independent.”
139
Table 6.6: Chi-Square test of demographic and socio-economic characteristics and participation
Variables (Demographic and Socio-economic characteristics)
Phases of
Development
Need
Identification
Priority setting
Planning
Implementatio
n
Monitoring
Performance
evaluation
Values
χ2 -Value
df
P-Value
Cramer's V
χ2 -Value
df
P-Value
Cramer's V
χ2 -Value
df
P-Value
Cramer's V
χ2 -Value
df
P-Value
Cramer's V
χ2 -Value
df
P-Value
Cramer's V
χ2 -Value
df
P-Value
Cramer's V
sex
Age
Occupation
Employment
Education
Income
0.00*
1
1.00
-0.00**
3.98
4
0.41
0.11
3.21
4
0.52
0.09
2.18
4
0.70
0.08
6.12
5
0.30
0.13
2.07
3
0.56
0.08
0.00*
1
1.00
0.01**
2.55*
1
0.09
-0.09**
0.62*
1
0.37
0.05**
0.82*
1
0.31
0.05**
1.70*
1
0.16
0.08**
1.93
4
0.75
0.07
1.10
4
0.89
0.06
1.31
4
0.86
0.06
3.38
4
0.50
0.10
3.71
4
0.45
0.10
1.90
4
0.76
0.07
8.39
4
0.08
0.15
10.54
4
0.03
0.17
6.70
4
0.15
0.14
3.48
4
0.48
0.10
8.43
4
0.08
0.15
18.69
4
0.00
0.23
12.61
4
0.01
0.19
16.75
4
0.00
0.22
14.84
4
0.01
0.20
1.31
5
0.93
0.06
12.05
5
0.03
0.18
22.69
5
0.00
0.25
18.96
5
0.00
0.23
16.60
5
0.01
0.22
5.81
3
0.12
0.13
6.12
3
0.11
0.13
4.93
3
0.18
0.12
7.88
3
0.05
0.15
4.30
3
0.23
0.11
* χ2 represents Continuity Correction for sex
**Cramer's V (a measure of association between two nominal variables) represents Phi value
for sex
Source: Field Survey, 2015
The result of Chi-square test presented in Table 6.6 revealed statistically significant association
between considerable number of demographic and socio-economic characteristics and
participation. Thus, the detail interpretation and presentation for significant tests were
undertaken in subsequent sub-sections. Whenever related previous works are available, the
results of significant tests are compared to them.
6.6.1 Association of Employment Category and Participation
The result of chi-square analysis depicted in Table 6.6 divulged statistically significant
association between employment category and participation in planning, implementation,
monitoring, and performance evaluation. The association between employment category and
140
participation in planning was very high. The calculated value of χ2 (18.69) is far greater than the
table value of χ2 (9.49) at P = 0.05 level, df = 4). The calculated coefficient of contingency was
(C = 0.23). Thus, employment category had high influence on participation in planning. The high
association between employment categories and participation in planning can be happened from
the fact that civil servants (41.5% of those participated in planning, the highest) have high
chance of participation in planning as experts. This implies that participation in planning was
top-down approach in BCA.
The result in Table 6.6 also indicated statistically significant association between employment
category and participation in implementation. The calculated value of employment categories χ2
(12.61) is greater than the table value of χ2 (9.49, 4) at P = 0.05 level. The calculated coefficient
of contingency was C = 0.19. This advocates that a type of employment has small influence on
participation in implementation in BCA.
The result in Table 6.6 revealed statistically significant association between employment
category and participation in monitoring. The calculated value of employment category χ2
(16.75) was greater than the table value of χ2 (9.49) at P = 0.05 level, df = 4), Cramer's V= 0.22).
This suggests that employment category had relatively very strong association with participation
in monitoring. The result of crosstab analysis of employment category and participation in
monitoring indicated that civil servants (38.1%) were fairly more than two third of those
participated in monitoring. Self-employed (21.2%) and private organization (20.3%) accounted
about one fifth of those who participated in monitoring. The high rate of civil service
participation in monitoring put forward that monitoring local development was expert dominant.
A close look at the result of chi-square analysis in Table 6.6 revealed statistically significant
association between employment category and participation in performance evaluation. The
calculated value of employment category χ2 (14.84) was greater than the table value of χ2 (9.49)
at P = 0.05 level, df = 4. This recommends that employment category had highly strong
association with participation in performance evaluation. The calculated coefficient of
contingency was C = 0.20. The coefficient of contingency indicated low influence of
employment category on participation in performance evaluation. The strength of association
could be indebted to the participation of civil servant (38.6%), which accounts about more than
141
one third of those participated in performance evaluation. This suggests the dominance of experts
in performance evaluation. The public was not given the chance to participate in performance
evaluation.
Therefore, the null hypothesis (Ho) “Employment category and participation in planning,
implementation, monitoring, and performance evaluation are independent” was rejected while
the alternative hypothesis (H1) “Employment category and participation in planning,
implementation, monitoring, and performance evaluation are not independent” was accepted.”
6.6.2 Association of Educational Level and Participation
The result of chi square analysis in Table 6.6 revealed strong association between educational
level and participation in planning. The calculated value of χ2 (12.05) is greater than the table
value of χ2 (11.07) at P = 0.05 level, df = 5). The calculated coefficient of contingency was (C =
0.18) indicated that the influence of education level on participation in planning was small.
The result of chi square analysis in Table 6.6 also indicated strong association between
educational level and participation in implementation. The calculated value of χ2 of education
level (22.69) is greater than the table value of χ2 (11.07, 5) at P = 0.05 level. The calculated
coefficient of contingency of educational level is C = 0.25. This implies that education level had
high influence on participation in implementation.
A close look at the result of Chi-square analysis in Table 6.6 further indicated statistically
significant association between educational level and participation in monitoring. The calculated
value of educational level χ2 (18.96) was greater than the table value of χ2 (11.07) at P = 0.05, df
= 5, Cramer's V= 0.23). This implies that educational level had relatively very strong association
with participation in monitoring.
A glance at the result of chi-square analysis in Table 6.6 revealed statistically significant
association between educational levels and participation in performance evaluation. The
calculated value of educational level χ2 (16.60) was greater than the table value of χ2 (11.07) at
P = 0.05 level, df = 5. The calculated coefficient of contingency was C = 0.22. This implies that
educational level had low influence on participation in performance evaluation.
142
Therefore, the null hypothesis (Ho) “Educational level and participation in planning,
implementation, monitoring, and performance evaluation are independent” was rejected while
the alternative hypothesis (H1) “Educational level and participation in planning, implementation,
monitoring, and performance evaluation are not independent” was accepted.”
This finding agrees with the findings of Nwachukwu (2011) in South Africa; Agbelemoge and
Adebanjo (2013) in Nigeria; Adesiji et al (2014) in Nigeria; Adisa (2013) in Osun State, Nigeria,
that there is significant association between educational level and participation in development.
This puts forward that education level is important for local development participation in BCA as
other African countries such as South Africa and Nigeria.
6.6.3 Association of Occupation and Participation
The result of chi-square analysis depicted in Table 6.6 revealed statistically significant
association between occupation and participation in the implementation. The calculated value of
χ2 (10.54) is greater than the table value of χ2 (9.49) at P = 0.05 level, df = 4). This advises that
occupation had strong association with participation in implementation. The calculated
coefficient of contingency was C = 0.17. This proposes that occupation has small influence on
participation in implementation. Therefore, the null hypothesis (Ho) “Occupation and
participation in implementation are independent” was rejected while the alternative hypothesis
(H1) “Occupation and participation in implementation are not independent” was accepted.” This
agrees with the observation made by Oyegbami et al. (2016) in Iddo Local Government area of
Oyo State and Adisa (2013) in Osun State, Nigeria that there is significant association between
occupation and participation. This implies that occupation is important in local development
participation in BCA as local governments in Nigeria.
The result of crosstab analysis demonstrated that the variation of strength of association between
occupation and participation in the implementation arose from different reasons along each
category. Accordingly, Managerial, professionals & Supervisory occupations (35.4%) took a
leading position that accounted for more than one third of those who participate in the
implementation. Their high rate of participation in the implementation explained from the fact
that as a government official and experts might be involved in supervision of the
implementation. Moreover, the implementation stage requires professional support like
143
engineering activities, thus, participation in the implementation through professional contribution
was high.
Skilled and unskilled labor (32.9%) also experienced higher rate of participation in
implementation next to managerial, professional and supervisory occupations. This arose from
the fact that this position was involved in the implementation through labor contribution since
implementation is labor intensive. Clerical, sales, and service occupations (20.7%) also
experienced relatively high rate of participation in the implementation compared to the rest
occupation categories. It accounted about one fifth of those participated in implementation. They
were relatively highly participanted in the implementation, motivated by opportunities of
participatory development outputs that contributed to the flourishing of service business
activities.
6.6.4 Association of Income and Participation
The result of Chi-square analysis in Table 6.6 revealed statistically significant association
between income and participation in monitoring. The calculated value of income χ2 (7.88) was
greater than the table value of χ2 (7.82) at P = 0.05 level, df = 3). Hence, income had strong
association with participation in monitoring. The coefficient of calculated contingency was C =
0.15. Therefore, the null hypothesis (Ho) “Income and participation in monitoring are
independent” was rejected while the alternative hypothesis (H1) “Income and participation in
monitoring are not independent” was accepted.”
This verifies the findings of Nkonjera (2008) in Tanzania, Oyegbami et al. (2016) in Nigeria and
Bagherian (2009) in Iran that income generally determine participation. Since participation in
project activities require financial contributions, it is most likely that the most affluent and
influential take the lead in participation. The positive association between income and
participation indicates that household with higher income will have higher tendency to
participate. This implies that income is important in local development participation in BCA as
other countries such as Iran, Tanzania and Nigeria.
144
6.7 Determinants of Participation
Different factors influence participation in development. Among the factors demographic and
socio-economic factors, and the context in which public participate have tremendous role.
Multiple regressions analysis was used to estimate factors influencing participation. To this end,
the following general model of Multiple Linear Regressions Equation was developed. The best
fit Multiple Linear regression equation is given as follows:
Y = βo + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3 + β4X4 + β5X5 + … + βnXn + ε
Where: Y = outcome variable
βo = Constant term
ε = Error term
β1 – β25 = Regression coefficients
X1 – X25= Predictors
The description and expected influence of predictor variables on participation was hypothesized
as indicated in Table 6.7.
145
Table 6.7: Overview of Variables Used and Expected Effects
Predictors
X1
X2
X3
X4
X5
X6
X7
X8
X9
X10
X11
X12
X13
X14
X15
X16
X17
X18
X19
X20
X21
X22
X23
X24
X25
Explanation
Sex (male)
Age G 1 (30 – 35)
Age G 2 ( 36 – 40)
Age G3 (41 – 45)
Age G 4 (46+)
Family size G1 (3 – 4)
Family size G2 (5+)
Occupation G1 (Managerial…)
Occupation G2 (Clerical…)
Occupation G3 (Agriculture)
Occupation G1 (Others)
Education G1 (Illiterate)
Education G2 (Primary)
Education G3 (Certificate)
Education G4 (Diploma)
Education G5 (Degree +)
Employment G1 (Civil servant)
Employment G2 (private)
Employment G3 (NGO)
Employment G4 (Others)
Income G1 (1000.01 – 2000)
Income G2 (2000.01 – 3665)
Income G3 (3665+)
CG Responsiveness
CG capacity
Unit
Male = 1; Female = 0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
yes = 1, otherwise =0
Number
Number
Expected sign
(+)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(+)
(+)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(+)
(+)
(+)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(+)
(+)
(+)
(+)
(+)
Source: Own compilation
The expected signs of each independent variable were determined relative to reference group for
dummy variables. Except sex, which considered female as reference group, in all cases category
with largest frequency was used as reference group. Accordingly, for age those 29 and less years
old; for family size those have family size of 2 and less; for occupation skilled and unskilled
labor; for employment self-employed; and for income those obtained 1000.00 Birr per month
were used as a reference group.
146
6.7.1 Checking Assumptions of Regression Analysis
The assumptions of multiple regression analysis were checked based on the result of preliminary
analysis. Accordingly, assumptions of sample size, Multicollinearity, outliliers, normality,
linearity, and homoscedasity were checked.
Assumption of sample size was checked using the formula, N > 50 + 8m, Where N = number of
respondents; m = number of predictor variables (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007). Therefore, using
this formula, the minimum sample size required (greater than 98 participants) for multiple
regression analysis was satisfied since the sample size for this study was 418, which was far
greater than the assumption.
The assumption of multicollinearity was checked using tolerance value and VIF (variance
inflation factor) (Pallant, 2011; Field, 2009). Tolerance values of each indicator were more than
.10 and VIF values were less than 10 (see Annex 4). Therefore, the assumption of
multicollinearity was satisfied for the predictors included in the model that intended to evaluate
factors influencing participation.
The assumption of outliers was checked using Mahalanobis distance statistics and Cook’s
Distance value (Pallant, 2011) (see Annex 5). Accordingly, the maximum value of Mahalanobis
distance (60.98) was greater than the critical value of chi-square (52.62) with degree of freedom
25 at alpha level of 0.001. This indicates the existence of outliers in the data. However, the
maximum Cook’s Distance value (.02) for this study was less than 1. As the result, the outliers
had undue influence on the results of the model as a whole. Therefore assumption of outliers was
satisfied.
Normality and linearity assumptions were checked by using Normal P-P Plot of Regression
Standardized Residuals (Platt, 2011). Normal P-P Plot of standardized residuals lied in a
reasonably straight diagonal line from bottom left to top right (see Annex 6). Therefore, using
Platt (2011) guideline the assumption of normality and linearity were satisfied.
147
6.7.2 Model Evaluation
Model evaluation involves the determination of the significance of the model in evaluating the
dependent variable. To this end, the following hypothesis was developed and tested:
Ho: β = 0 (For all the independent variables Coefficient of determination is zero)
H1: β ҂ 0 (For all the independent variables Coefficient of determination is different from
zero)
The significance of Multiple Regression Model in estimating factors influencing participation
was checked by referring to ANOVA table of the results of the analysis. The result is presented
in Table 6.8.
Table 6.8: Model test: ANOVA
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
p
2.43
.00
Regression
276.44
25
11.06
Residual
1787.11
392
4.56
Total
2063.54
417
Source: Multiple Regressions Output
The result in Table 6.8 revealed that the model was statistically significant in estimating factors
that affect participation, F (25, 392) = 2.43, p = 0.00. Therefore, the null hypothesis β = 0 (For all
the independent variables Coefficient of determination is zero) was rejected while alternative
hypothesis β ҂ 0 (For all the independent variables Coefficient of determination is different from
zero) was accepted. This means that at least one predictor has a coefficient different from zero
and determined the variations in the dependent variable i.e. participation.
6.7.3 Estimates of Independent Variables Influence on Participation
Multiple regression was performed in order to determine the influence of different factors on
participation. This involved the determination of the combined effect of all predictors and the
influence of each predictor on dependent variable.
The determination of the influence of each independent variable on dependent variable varies
from dummy and continuous variables. To estimate the influence of dummy predictors on
148
participation, the result of each dummy was compared against respective reference group.
However, the influence of each continuous predictor was tested through determining the change
in outcome variable as the result of one unit change in predictor variable. The result of multiple
regression analysis is presented in Table 6.9.
Table 6.9: Regression Coefficients for determinant of participation
Model
Sex (male)
Age G 1 (30 – 35)
Age G 2 ( 36 – 40)
Age G3 (41 – 45)
Age G 4 (46+)
Family size G1 (3 – 4)
Family size G2 (5+)
Occupation G1 (Managerial)
Occupation G2 (Clerical)
Occupation G3 (Agriculture)
Occupation G1 (Others)
Education G1 (Illiterate)
Education G2 (Primary)
Education G3 (Certificate)
Education G4 (Diploma)
Education G5 (Degree +)
Employment G1 (Civil servant)
Employment G2 (private)
Employment G3 (NGO)
Employment G4 (Others)
Income g1 (1000.01 – 2000)
Income G2 (2000.01 – 3665)
Income G3 (3665+)
CG Responsiveness
CG capacity
(Constant)
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std error of estimate
Unstandardized
Coefficients
B
SE
-.21
.24
.26
.32
.28
.35
.60
.37
.24
.37
-.33
.24
-.74
.47
.22
.36
.49
.30
.04
.52
.52
.43
.58
.44
.21
.39
-.20
.37
.17
.33
-.05
.41
-.71
.30
-.04
.31
-1.28
.49
.12
.46
-.19
.33
-.42
.35
-.67
.36
.31
.12
.09
.03
7.32
.76
0.37
0.13
0.08
2.14
Standardized
Coefficients
Beta
-.05
.05
.05
.10
.04
-.07
-.08
.05
.09
.00
.08
.07
.03
-.03
.03
-.01
-.15
-.01
-.14
.02
-.04
-.08
-.13
.12
.13
---
t
-.90
.82
.80
1.63
.65
-1.36
-1.57
.62
1.62
.08
1.23
1.34
.54
-.55
.52
-.11
-2.33
-.14
-2.59
.27
-.57
-1.20
-1.86
2.53
2.69
9.61
p
.37
.42
.43
.10
.52
.17
.12
.54
.11
.94
.22
.18
.59
.58
.60
.91
.02
.89
.01
.79
.57
.23
.06
.01
.01
.00
95.0% Confidence
Interval for B
LB
UB
-.68
.25
-.37
.90
-.40
.95
-.12
1.33
-.48
.96
-.81
.15
-1.67
.19
-.49
.93
-.11
1.08
-.99
1.07
-.31
1.36
-.27
1.44
-.55
.97
-.93
.52
-.48
.83
-.86
.76
-1.30
-.11
-.64
.56
-2.25
-.31
-.78
1.02
-.83
.46
-1.11
.27
-1.39
.04
.07
.55
.02
.15
5.82
8.82
Source, Calculated from field Survey, 2015
As indicated in Table 6.9, all the independent variables included in the model explained
approximately 13% (R square (0.13) x 100%) of the total variance in dependent variable
(participation). Among the predictor variables, employment category dummies (civil servant and
NGO), City Government capacity, and City Government responsiveness to public participation
found to be the major determinant of participation in BCA. Thus, the model of multiple
149
regression analysis is found to be:
= 7.32 - .71X17 – 1.28X19 + 0.31X24+ 0.09X25
As can be observed from the model of multiple regression analysis, participation is lower for
those employed in civil service and NGO as compared to self-employed. Participation increases
with the increase in responsiveness and capacity of City government to facilitate participation.
That means there was positive relationship between City Government responsiveness and
capacity and participation.
The amount of influence of employment categories on participation was considered relative to
reference group self-employed employment category. Accordingly, participation of civil servant
employment category was 0.15 standard deviation lower than the participation of self-employed
on average. The participation of NGO employment category was 0.14 standard deviation lower
than the participation of self-employed employment category. The higher rate of self-employed
employment category participation happened from two factors: (1) self-employed have flexible
time that allows them more participation, (2) they have the chance to be employed in
participatory development activities.
A glance at Table 6.9 indicated that two continuous predictors, City Government responsiveness
(p = 0.01) and City Government capacity (p = 0.01) significantly influenced participation.
Therefore, one unit change in City Government responsiveness to participation on average
results in 0.12 standard deviation average increases in participation assuming all other factors are
unchanged. On the other hand, a one unit changes in City Government capacity on average
results in a 0.13 standard deviation average increase in participation.
6.8 Summary
The central theme of this chapter was assessing the nature of participation through utilizing
various attributes. In BCA, the public participated in the forms of financial, labor, and material
contribution, and professional services. Among these forms, financial contribution took the
leading position followed by labor contribution. The dominance of financial contribution was
attributed to the involuntary contribution to obtain selected public services and cost sharing
policy of City government.
150
There were both voluntary and involuntary aspects of participation in BCA. The general
approach to participation was top-down approach and expert dominant. There was variation in
participation along various demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Female and male
participation was varied with small size difference. There was also the variation among
occupational categories, employment categories, educational levels and income categories
participation.
Participation in planning significantly associated with employment categories and education
level. Participation in implementation significantly associated with occupation categories,
employment categories and education level. Participation in monitoring significantly correlated
with employment categories, education level and income categories. Participation in
performance evaluation significantly correlated with employment categories and education level.
The result of Multiple Regression analysis pointed out that the variables included in the model
developed to determine factors influencing participation had a combined effect of 13% on
participation. Among the predictors employment category dummies (civil servant and NGO);
City Government capacity; and City Government responsiveness found to be the major
determinant of participation.
151
Chapter 7 : Extent of Public Participation
7.1 Introduction
Public participation in the development of their affairs allows them to articulate their urgent
needs and preferences that address their real problems. The articulation of these needs depends
on the extent of participation. The extent of participation dictated the degree to which the public
involved in the decision making at each phases of development process. Therefore, the overall
concern of this chapter was examining the degree to which the public influence decisions
regarding local development. Discussion was carried out by integrating the results from both
quantitative and qualitative analysis and underpinned on the basis of participation theory
discussed under chapter two.
The frequency distribution of participation at each stage was presented in Table 7.1. The total
number of respondents indicated at each stage of development refers to those took part in
development activities among the total respondents of the study. As indicated in Table 7.1 most
of the respondents (86.1%) generally took part in local development, at least, in one form, while
the rest 13.9 % were not participated in development.
152
Table 7.1: Distribution of public participation in the phases of local development
Items
Participation in development activities in general
Participation in identifying needs
Participation in setting priority of needs
Participation in planning
Participation in the implementation
Participation in the monitoring
Participation in performance evaluation
Proper consideration of public opinions in needs
identification, priority setting, planning, monitoring as
well as performance evaluation
Yes
No
Total
Yes
No
Total
Yes
No
Total
Yes
No
Total
Yes
No
Total
Yes
No
Total
Yes
No
Total
Yes
No
Total
Responses
No.
360
58
418
252
108
360
236
124
360
142
218
360
164
196
360
118
242
360
114
246
360
90
225
315
%
86.1
13.9
100.0
70.0
30.0
100.0
65.6
34.4
100.0
39.4
60.6
100.0
45.6
54.4
100.0
32.8
67.2
100.0
31.7
68.3
100.0
28.6
71.4
100.0
Source: Survey data, 2015
The results of analysis presented in Table 7.1 indicated that being taking part in local
development regardless of the extent to which the public influenced decision and their views
were taken into consideration. In order to determine the extent to which the public influenced
decision in development process the results of item analysis of level of participation compared
with the frequency distribution of being taking part in development. The results of item analysis
of level participation were presented in Table 7.2. In order to obtain these results, the data
collected through five rating scale were condensed into three levels to determine whether public
participation at each stage was low, moderate and high in BCA. The application of item analysis
as a method of analysis to determine level of participation is adopted from Samah & Ndaeji
(2014). They applied item analysis to determine women’s level of participation in group
approach activities. Thus, this method is tested in analyzing level of participation and can be
transcend to the analysis the level of participation in local development.
153
Table 7.2: Items analysis for level of participation (N = 418, Mean = 2.08)
Items
Level
Low
Moderate
(1-2.33) (2.34-3.66)
High
(3.67-5)
Mean
SD
Public participation in identifying
development needs
1.89
.83
40.2%
30.6%
29.2%
Public participation in setting priorities
development needs
1.98
.82
34.2%
33.5%
32.3%
Public participation in development
planning
1.94
.84
38.0%
30.1%
31.8%
Public participation in local development
implementation
2.07
.80
28.9%
34.9%
36.1%
Public participation in monitoring
implementation of local development
2.23
.78
21.5%
34.4%
44.0%
Public participation in local development
performance evaluation
2.36
.76
17.2%
29.2%
53.6%
Source: Field Survey, 2015
In the forthcoming sections the extent of participation in decision making in the development
process was examined through corroborating the results of qualitative and quantitative (Table
7.1 and Table 7.2) data analysis. Further, the results of integration of both strands further
examined using different theories of participation described in chapter two.
7.2 Extent of Participation in Needs Identification
Needs identification is the stage at which the problem of the public scrutinized. Real
participation at this initial stage of development allows the public to express its problem and
serve as the means to know the gap in local public service delivery. As indicated in Table 7.1,
among the respondents participated in development, about two-third of the respondents’ (70%)
took part in needs identification, while one-third (30%) did not take part in need identification.
This finding advocates that there was pretence in the needs identification in major cases.
However, being present is not influencing decision making in the development process. The
result of item analysis of level of participation in needs identification depicted in Table 7.2
verified this reality. It revealed that the mean of participation in identifying needs (1.89) was
154
lower than the overall mean score of level of participation (M = 2.08). This comparison
suggested that though about more than two third (70% in Table 7.1) of those participated in
development in general took part in identifying needs, the extent to which they influence
decisions regarding needs identification was low. The frequency distribution of item analysis of
level of participation (40.2%) was also confirmed that there was low level of public influence on
decision regarding identification of needs. The result of frequency distribution (71.4 %) about
consideration of public opinions in Table 7.1 indicated that public opinion did not taken into
consideration in development process. This finding also validated that the degree to which public
influence decision regarding needs identification was low.
The results of key informant interview with CPE at Ganda 01 revealed that at the inception of
participation in development, the City Government centrally identified needs without involving
the public. This finding also corroborates the result of item analysis. The result of the above
interview further pointed out that this situation resulted in confrontation of the public and City
Government. The confrontation was due to the fact that the needs identified did not address the
priorities of the public. The failure to take into consideration public voice in need identification
by City Government resulted in lack of sense of ownership among the public and destroying the
outputs of local development. To alleviate the problem, the City Government delegated the
activity of need identification to its lower level tiers: shane and gote. The needs identified at this
level were still subject to final approval at City Government level. Decision making regarding
needs identification was undertaken throughout the tiers of City Government as depicted in the
Figure 7.1.
Shane
Gote
Ganda
Cabinet
City Council
Figure 7.1: Flow of development needs identification through tiers of City Government
The results of FGDs and interview with public officials and key informant CPEs revealed that
there was contrasting view among the public and public officials on who identified needs. The
City Government officials and experts claimed that the public directly participated in identifying
needs. However, the results of FGDs indicated that the heads of each tiers of City Government
were identified needs. I learned from my observation during various discussions and throughout
155
my endeavor to collect data, the need was identified by City Government tiers. After the needs
were identified by City Government officials at different tiers, the public was informed on yearly
ganda meeting. The power to approve budget for identified needs was vested on City Council.
The majority of the public did not appear on this meeting due to inconvenience of the meeting
place and lack of trust on City Government officials and experts. This finding implies that needs
identification was the stage at which politics of participation (the question of who identified
needs, which involves value difference between the public and the officials) was reflected.
The results of interview with key informant from the public and FGDs indicated that public lack
of trust on City Government emanated from two factors. One of the factors, the main reason for
public lacks of trust on City Government, was its failure to perform the promise, incompetence,
delay, failed to inform about the changes and the lack of flexibility in a direction. The other
factor was corruption practices committed by City Government officials and experts in relation
to participatory development activities. As the result, the highest proportion of the public
rejected the invitation of the City Government on annual meeting to inform the identified needs.
This finding implies that the meeting became the stage for elites to dominate decision regarding
needs identification.
The above analysis pointed out that needs identification was undertaken by City Government
through co-opting elite’s portion of the public. Using Pretty (1995) Typology of Participation,
participation in needs identification was at its lowest level of participation, ‘manipulation’. This
can be learned from the fact that the City Government involved unelected public representatives
who have no power in the shane and gote structures. Using White’s (1996) Typology of
Participation, participation in needs identification was at ‘nominal’ form. This implies that the
City Government use participation to legitimatize its action by name of public participation. The
interest of the public was ‘inclusion’ to improve local public services.
The results of interview with public officials indicated that the City Government used annual
meeting as the method to consult people. However, the results of FGDs revealed that the concern
and ideas of the public regarding local development needs were not taken into consideration by
City Government as the final approval was vested on City Council. The results of FGDs further
pointed out that the involvement of the public at this phase was simply for coverage. The
156
activities upon which local development activities carried on was based on the will of experts
and officials; and in most cases gote heads suggestion was taken for granted rather than the view
of the public. The results in Table 7.1 substantiate this finding that the government was not fully
taking into consideration public opinions on needs identification. Using Arnstein’s (1969)
Ladder of Citizen Participation, this finding implies that the extent of participation in needs
identification was at ‘consultation’ level, which is the middle level of ‘degree of tokenism’. This
finding implies that the public had no final say on needs identification. The above findings
generally imply that the City Government identified development needs in the name of public
participation through its machineries at different levels. Hence, public participation in local
development needs identification was remained just ‘window-dressing ritual’.
7.3 Extent of Participation in Needs Priority Setting
Development needs priority setting depends on the availability of resources and urgency of a
given activity. However, participation of the beneficiaries in needs priority setting plays a crucial
role in bringing the interest and fundamental need of the public to fore front. As indicated in
Table 7.1, among those took part in local development through different forms, majority of the
respondents (65.6%) took part in setting priority of local development needs. Whereas about
one-third (34.4%) of those who took part in development activities have not participated in
setting priority of needs. The result of this frequency distribution showed high rate of pretence in
the setting priority of development needs.
However, the comparison of the mean of item analysis of level of participation in setting priority
of needs (1.98) with overall mean score of participation (M = 2.08) reveals that the extent to
which the public influence needs priority setting decision was low in BCA. The frequency
distribution of item analysis of level of participation in setting priority of needs (34.2%) also
verifies the above finding. This finding advocates that participation at this stage was simply
pretence without influencing decision regarding setting priority of needs. The result of frequency
distribution about consideration of public opinions in development process (71.4 %) in Table 7.1
also validated that the degree to which public influence decision regarding priority setting was
low.
157
The results of FGDs and key informant interview with CPEs revealed that decision about setting
priority of needs was undertaken by City Government tiers. The results further indicated that
after priority for local development needs was set at shane and gote, the public was informed on
general yearly ganda meeting. The results of key informant interview with CPEs pointed out that
ganda administration gave priority for development activities depending on the strategic
importance for general development of the City. The public meeting was also used for
identification of unaccomplished activities in the last year and to give priority for those needs.
The above results also indicated that sector offices presented the plan to public on yearly meeting
for comment after setting priority of needs. The tendency of using strategic importance for the
development of the City contradicted with the heterogeneous nature of public interest. This
negated the core purpose of participation to address the heterogeneous interest, especially those
of disadvantaged places in the City. In other words, this situation over ran the need of poor
portion of the residents in the name of general development of the City.
The results of interview with City Manager substantiated the above finding that public
participation in setting priority of needs was at low level. The results further indicated that the
power to give final decision/approval on the development needs for action through public
participation was vested on City Council. The Council through its standing committee
undertakes detail evaluation in prioritizing needs, planning as well as the final evaluation of
participatory development activities. This finding suggests that the public had no power to make
decision in setting priority of needs.
Using Arnstein’s (1969) Ladder of Citizen Participation, the extent of participation in decision
making regarding priority setting was at ‘manipulation’ level, which is the lowest level of
participation. While setting priority of needs, shane and gote heads invited social elites to
engineer their support and setting priorities in the name of participation. The social elites
involved in setting priority needs have no legitimate function or power. Informing the identified
priority of local development through general ganda meeting was also another indicator of
‘manipulation’ level participation in setting priority of needs. This finding advises that the voice
of voice less was not addressed and they were neglected their right to decide up on their affairs.
158
Based on Pretty (1995) Typology of Participation, telling what has been decided about local
development priority to the public on general ganda meeting, suggests ‘passive participation’ of
the public in decisions regarding priority setting.
Using White’s (1996) Typology of
Participation, public participation in priority setting was at ‘nominal’ level. Setting local
development priorities based of the strategic importance of general City development rather than
the diverse needs of the public was an indication of ‘nominal’ participation. This finding
recommends that the interest of the City Government was to legitimatize its decision regarding
local development priority in the name of public participation. As per White (1996) typology of
participation, the overall function of participation in this case was simply display. As the result,
the priority determined through this form of participation could not achieve the general goal of
participation, which intended to address heterogeneous public needs. This finding also implies
that the City Government neglected the voice of voiceless or poor people as the primary concern
for participatory development.
7.4 Extent of Participation in Planning
Although planning stage of participatory development is highly technical and needs experts (the
how), public participation is important to address at least the when and how much questions of
planning. That means the public play a great role in shaping planning of local development
through determining the schedule of local development implementation and allocation of
resources to different activities among others. The involvement in the allocation of resources is
where the politics of participation is exercised since it determines ‘on whose terms’ the resources
are allocated.
In BCA, there was low level of participation in planning local development. As indicated in
Table 7.1, the majority of the respondents’ (60.6%) who participated in development activities
did not take part in planning. The rest respondents (39.4%) have taken part in planning. This
finding implies that even the pretence of the public in planning local development was low.
In addition to low rate of taking part, the degree to which the public influence decision regarding
planning local development was also low. The comparison of
item analysis of level of
participation in planning showed in Table 7.2 indicated that the mean score of item analysis of
participation in planning (1.94) was lower than the overall mean score of participation in
159
development (M = 2.08). Frequency distribution of item analysis of level of participation in
planning (38%) also validated this finding that the level influencing decision regarding planning
was low. The result of frequency distribution about consideration of public opinions (71.4 %) in
Table 7.1 also indicated that the degree to which public influence decision regarding planning
was low.
The results of FGDs and key informant interview with CPEs revealed that planning of
participatory development activities was performed by City Government. Infrastructure
development work process prepared draft plan without public participation and presented to the
public on annual ganda meeting. As per the results of FGDs, the intension was to mobilize the
public for the implementation of the plan. This finding implies that the City Government used
participation as a cover that the plan is that of public plan.
A close look at the above facts suggests many things regarding participation in planning. First,
the public was not given the chance to determine important planning decisions: how much
development activities should be performed, when to implement, and what activities to perform.
Second, the public did not participate at initial stage of planning. Third, the diverse interest of the
public was not taken into consideration. This implies the level of participation in planning was
very low.
Using Arnstein’s (1969) Ladder of Citizen Participation, participation in planning was at
‘informing’ level, which is the lowest level of ‘degree of tokenism’. Although this level can be
the most important first step towards legitimate public participation, it is associated with various
problems. The draft plan was presented to the public in order to inform them their responsibility
and their share about cost of development projects. The provision of information at later stage of
planning granted the public little opportunity to influence planning. The result of frequency
distribution about consideration of public opinions (71.4 %) validated that though the
Government presented its plan to the public for comment; it did not take into consideration their
opinions. The results of FGDs further pointed out that in case the City Government took into
consideration public opinions regarding the time of implementation, the implementation was not
as per plan. The above result stressed that the implementation of development activities were
started in April or May at the last quarter of the fiscal year to create conducive environment for
160
corruption. This finding implies that the Government was not kept its promise regarding
participatory local development. Further, it implies that there was no accountability in
government activities.
The examination of participation in planning in terms of White’s (1996) Typology of
Participation advocated ‘instrumental’ level of participation. As per this theory, the interest of
City Government was ‘efficiency’ that intended to bridge shortage of budget through mobilizing
resources from the public through informing their responsibilities. The function of participation
was to use participation as the means of implementing local development plan. The consequence
of this type of participation for the public was cost that incurred through supporting Government
plan that rarely address their urgent needs.
In line with Pretty’s (1995) Typology of Participation, participation in planning local
development in BCA was rated as ‘participation by consultation’. The City Government
controlled the process of planning from problem definition to data analysis. The public views
were not taken into consideration at the latest stages. The City Government experts were not
accountable for their failure to take into consideration public views. This finding implies that the
system of participation in planning allowed manipulation by experts.
7.5 Extent of Participation in Monitoring
Participation in monitoring is crucial for ensuring quality and effectiveness of local development.
Moreover, participation in monitoring enhances ownership of participatory development outputs
among the public. The result of analysis indicated in Table 7.1 revealed that among the
respondents took part in development activities, about two-third of the respondents (67.2%) were
not participated in monitoring, whereas only one-third (32.8%) of the respondents were
participated in monitoring. The results of FGDs and key informant interview with CPEs
indicated that lower pretence of the public in monitoring emanated from the fact that monitoring
was undertaken through committee representation.
Despite low pretence, the comparison of mean of item analysis of level of participation in
monitoring (2.23) and overall mean score of participation (2.08) indicated the extent of public
influence on decision regarding monitoring was high. The frequency distribution (44%) of item
161
analysis of level of participation in monitoring also verifies this finding. This finding puts
forward that monitoring the implementation of local development activities was the phase of
participatory local development at which the public exercised their power in BCA.
The results of FGDs and key informant interview with CPEs unanimously indicated that the
committee had got ceased poor quality construction of cobble stone and changed the organ
engaged in the construction. This implies that monitoring was the stage at which the City
Government relatively took into consideration the ideas and complaints of the public and
enforced corrective measures. The above results also indicated that the major problem of the
committee was lack of capacity in terms of experts to monitor the implementation of
development activities. The committee lacked knowledge (engineering) of development project
under consideration (especially cobble stone) to fully identify the gap in implementation. The
results of FGDs stressed that the committee could not identify the quality of material or stone
used to prepare cobble stone. They simply watch whether or not cobble stone is paved by
contractor. In some cases, the voice of the public on the quality of construction is not accepted
by the Government. This finding proposes that people’s own organization (Development
Committee), which operates beyond bureaucratic government arrangement, is effective in
making participation more efficiently and effectively.
As per the results of interview with Ganda 09 Manger, Gote 8 in the Ganda was a typical
example where the public exercise their power in monitoring. The residents of this Gote
attentively monitored the construction of cobble stone road in their vicinity. Whenever, the
residents identified poor quality construction, they had got the contractor ceased construction and
changed. The residents even identified that the contractor used poor quality stone and poorly
paved cobble stone. As the result of public action the contractor was prohibited from
participating in the auctions of the City Government cobble stone works. In the same Ganda the
public stopped poor quality construction of cobble stone around Addis-Adama express road that
pass through the City. As the result, the cobble stone road was reconstructed three times due to
poor construction. This finding implies that genuine participation enhances ownership of
development outputs among the public.
162
The results of FGDs revealed that despite better extent of participation in monitoring, in some
parts of the City, monitoring was done by experts (City Government engineers), gote heads, and
shane heads. As the result, City Government engineers were negotiating with the contractors
engaged in the construction of cobble stone on the quality of construction. In this cases, when
public found poor quality and reported to the City Government, it failed to take into
consideration public comments. Although, the public is vested with the power/right to monitor
the implementation of development activities, they had neglected by City Government. This
implies that there was a tendency of manipulating public power and neglecting public voices
rather than articulating them among government experts.
Using White’s (1996) Typology of Participation, public participation in monitoring was at
‘representative’ level of participation. The public interest of ‘leverage’ was achieved through
getting the quality of construction maintained except in some cases. As the result the function of
participation to address the voice of the public was achieved in most cases. In line with
Arnstein’s (1969) Ladder of Citizen Participation, the extent of participation in monitoring was
at ‘delegated power’ level, the middle level of degrees of citizen power. At monitoring stage of
development process, the public exercised the power to make accountable the failure to maintain
right quality in implementing local development. As the result, this stage was the phase of local
development at which the public influence the decision regarding participatory local
development activities. This finding implies that genuine participation enhances accountability
that in turn contributes for improvement of local governance.
7.6 Extent of Participation in Performance Evaluation
Participation in performance evaluation is crucial to ensure that the activities are performed at
the standards that meet the needs of the beneficiaries. Another basic importance of participation
in performance evaluation is ensuring proper utilization of public resources for intended local
development projects. This, in turn, enhances the ownership of outputs of participatory local
development among the public.
Despite great contribution of public participation in performance evaluation, there was little
public participation in it. The result of analysis depicted in Table 7.1 revealed that two-third of
the respondents (68.3%) were not taken part in local development performance evaluation, only
163
one third (31.7%) engaged in local development performance evaluation. This finding implies
that the public was neglected to take part in financial and performance evaluation of local
development. As the result, the public could not determine how their resources were disbursed
and whether their contribution achieved what it intended to achieve.
The absence of participation in performance evaluation created favorable ground for the
embezzlement of public money. The results of FGDs pointed out that it was an intentional act of
the experts and public official in order to kick back public money in collaboration with those
employed for carrying on development activities. The results of FGDS further indicated that in
addition to misappropriation of public money, this situation also resulted in the production of
low quality participatory development outputs. Moreover, this condition hampered the role of
participation in enhancing transparency of government operation. This finding implies that
genuine participation enhances transparency of government operation, which in turn, fosters
good governance.
The result of item analysis of level of participation in performance evaluation in Table 7.2
refuted the results of qualitative analysis. The mean of item analysis of level of participation in
performance evaluation (2.36) was greater than the overall mean score of participation (2.08).
This finding implies divergence between qualitative and quantitative results. Thus, it needs
further investigation.
The results of FGDs bears out the results of frequency distribution indicated in Table 7.1 that
there was little participation in performance evaluation. I also hold the position that there was
little participation in performance evaluation based on my observation throughout my field work.
Thus, the extent of participation in decision and pretence in evaluation of local development
performance were low. The method followed by City government to involve the public in
performance evaluation, annual general public meeting, did not allow real participation. The
public took part in local development performance evaluation on yearly meeting. The public
engaged in evaluating the previous performance of the committee and also financial performance
of the development projects.
Using Pretty’s (1995) Typology of Participation, the extent of participation in performance
evaluation was at ‘passive participation’, which is the lowest level of participation. This can be
164
observed from the features of participation reflected in performance evaluation. At first place,
the information regarding performance evaluation was belongs only to experts and public
officials. Second, the City Government used annual public meeting, which is not suitable to
much debate, to tell what had decided or already happened.
Using Arnstein’s (1969) Ladder of Citizen Participation, public participation in performance
evaluation was at ‘manipulation’ level, the lowest level in the ladder. Different features of this
level of participation identified from performance evaluation in BCA. As indicated by results of
FGDs, the City Government used annual meeting to persuade the public about the effectiveness
of the projects and utilization of resources rather than taking into consideration public
complaints. The government made decisions by itself without the involvement of the public. The
information was described at the general meeting in most general terms rather than detail report
of individual project. This finding implies that the City Government used participation only as a
public relation vehicle rather than fostering genuine participation in performance evaluation.
7.7 Overall Extent of Participation
Participation at different stages of development activities becomes meaningful only and only if
the ideas of the public taken into consideration. Otherwise it becomes cover for the government
to decide through the name of public participation. The overall extent of participation was
determined through combining the results of quantitative and qualitative data analysis. The result
of quantitative analysis is presented in Table 7.3.
Table 7.3: Overall Level of public participation
Levels
Low (6 – 14)
Frequency
86
Percent
20.6
Moderate (15 – 22)
229
54.8
High (23 – 30)
103
24.6
Total
418
100.0
Mean
18.79
SD
5.35
Source: Field survey, 2015
Table 7.3 shows the composite score of extent of participation at different stages of local
development process. It indicated moderate level (54.8%) of overall extent of participation in
165
BCA. However, the results of FGDs and key informant interview with CPEs pointed out low
level of overall participation. As per the above results, low level of participation can be inferred
from various aspects of participation at different stages of local development process. The
public at large involved in decision making process through annual meeting. On meeting, there
were low level of pretence and low chance to deliberate on local development issues. The
programs were not discussed with public or described at a meeting in the most general terms.
The Government made decisions in development process through incorporating socially elites’,
which was not elected and had no legitimate function and power to influence decision.
The results of FGDs and interview with key informant from public revealed that the public did
not take part in the management and decision making of local development. The implementation
of participatory projects was fully managed by the City Government without involving the
public. The examination of extent of participation at each stage of local development process in
line with theories of participation proposed lower level forms of participation. In most cases,
though the public took part in the phases of development, their views were not taken into
consideration by the City Government. This implies that physical appearance does not ensure
influencing decision making.
The results of FGDs indicated that the extent to which the public influence decision making
regarding participatory local development was good at the inception of participation in the City.
However, the City Government gradually ignored the voice of the public and made decision by
itself. As the result, the power of the public to influence decision making regarding local
development dwindled alarmingly from time to time.
Therefore, the result of the quantitative analysis could be inflated to medium level from the result
of extent participation in performance evaluation, which was contradicted with qualitative
analysis results generated through triangulating various methods. Moreover, the result of
quantitative data analysis regarding how the City Government takes into consideration public
opinion at each stage of local development also support qualitative findings. This result indicated
low tendency of taking into consideration the opinions of the public at each stages of
development process by City Government. As the result of the analysis presented in Table 7.1
reveal, about two-third of the respondents (71.4%) attested that the opinions they provided at
166
each stages of development process were not taken into consideration by City Government.
Whereas about one third (28.6%) indicated that their opinions were taken into consideration by
City Government. This suggests that in BCA, there was no real participation in local
development decision making.
Using White’s (1996) Typology of Participation, participation in BCA was at ‘nominal’ level. As
per this theory, the interest of the public in participation was inclusion to improve access to
public services. The interest of the City Government was to solve the shortage of budget through
mobilizing resources from the public by legitimatizing in the name of participation.
Using Pretty’s (1995) Typology of Participation, the extent of participation in BCA is termed as
‘participation for material incentives’, in which the public contribute labor, material and finance
to improve the condition of public services. As the result, once the need for public service was
satisfied at minimum level, their participation was ceased. This was the common trend
indifferent parts of the City. This finding advocated that lack of genuine participation hampers
sustainability of public participation.
Using Arnstein’s (1969) ladder of Citizen Participation, public participation in BCA was at
‘manipulation’ level, in which ‘socially elites’ were invited by City Government. The City
Government used ‘socially elites’ to prove that the public was participated in local development.
The City Government officials use general annual meeting to persuade the public about the
priority and implementation of local development. The result of qualitative strand indicated the
overall level of public participation in BCA was low. However, the result of quantitative analysis
indicated medium level of participation. Therefore, the divergence of the results of the two
strands suggested further investigation on this issue.
7.8 Summary
In this paper, the extent of participation was examined through assessing level of influencing
decisions at each phase of development process. The pretence of the public in identifying local
development needs and priority setting were high. However, public pretence in planning,
monitoring, and performance evaluation of local development was low.
167
Although the pretence of public in identifying and setting priority of local development was
high, the extent to which the public participate in decision making was low. Needs identification
and priority setting were undertaken by City Government through incorporating unelected social
elites who had no power to influence decision. The failure to take into consideration public views
resulted in adverse effect such as lack of ownership of development outputs and lack of trust on
City Government. Thus, participation was used only as coverage to legitimatize decisions made
by City Government. The extent of participation and pretence in planning were low. The draft
plan prepared by City Government was presented to the public on annual general meeting, which
grant low chance for deliberation. The public was not involved at initial stages of planning
process.
The extent of participation in monitoring was high. It was the phase of development process at
which the City Government relatively took into consideration the views and complaints of the
public on quality of development activities and enforced corrective measures. There was little
pretence and extent of participation in performance evaluation. The absence of public
participation, which was intentionally done by City Government, created favorable ground for
the embezzlement of public contributions. In general, the overall extent of participation was low
in BCA.
168
Chapter 8 : Empowerments through Participation
8.1 Introduction
Participation in development plays a tremendous role in empowering local people.
Empowerment
through
participation
in
development
takes
different
forms:
personal/psychological, social, and political and economic. These forms of empowerment
emanate as the result of participation in development and from the opportunities have been
engendered by output of participatory development. Accordingly, the aforementioned forms of
empowerments through participation in development were assessed on the bases of quantitative
and qualitative data.
Under this chapter, first I checked the assumptions of multiple regressions that should be
fulfilled in order to determine the effect of participation on local people empowerment. After
checking the assumptions, the effects of participation on personal, social, and political
empowerment was checked through running multiple regressions. Meanwhile, the significance of
the model employed to determine the effect of participation on empowerments was tested. For
significant models, the degree of empowerment along individual indicators was examined
through item analysis. The finding of quantitative analysis was substantiated by qualitative
results. For the purpose of this study, I assessed economic empowerment based on qualitative
data.
8.2 Checking Assumptions of Multiple Regression
The assumptions of sample size, Multicollinearity, outliers, Normality, and linearity were check
in order to apply multiple regressions (Pallant, 2011). Checking assumptions along these
parameters refers to multiple regression analysis of personal, social and political empowerment
through participation. Assumptions were checked based on the outputs of preliminary/screening
multiple regressions.
8.2.1 Sample Size
The assumptions of sample size were checked using Tabachnick and Fidell (2007) formula:
N > 50 + 8m, where:
N = number of participants and
m = number of independent variables
169
By substituting the independent variables included in the model the minimum sample size should
be more than 98 participants. The sample size for this study was 418, which was reasonably
greater than the assumption. Therefore, the minimum sample size required for multiple
regression analysis was satisfied.
8.2.2 Multicollinearity
Multicollinearity was checked using tolerance value and VIF (Variance Inflation Factor) cut-off
points (Pallant, 2011; Field, 2009). These values were the same for the three kinds of
empowerment (personal, social, and political). The similarities of these values arise from the fact
that the independent variables were the same for all forms of empowerment. The results of
tolerance value and VIF of each predictor are depicted in Table 8.1.
Table 8.1: Collinearity of predictors of empowerments
Independent variables
Tolerance
VIF
Participation in needs identification
.45
2.24
Participation in setting priority of needs
.41
2.42
Participation in planning
.42
2.36
Participation in the implementation
.43
2.34
Participation in monitoring
.48
2.09
Participation in performance evaluation
.57
1.75
Source: Output of Multiple regression analysis
As indicated in Table 8.1, the results of tolerance value of each independent variable was greater
than 0.10. The results of each predictor VIF was less than 10. These suggest the absence of
multicollineartity between predictors included in the model. Therefore, the assumption of
multicollinearity was satisfied for multiple regression analysis.
8.2.3 Outlier
The assumption of outlier was checked using Mahalanobis distance statistics and Cook’s
Distance value (Pallant, 2011; Field, 2009). The values of these statistics were presented in Table
8.2.
170
Table 8.2: Maximum values of Mahalanobis and Cook’s Distances
Criteria
Values
Maximum value of Mahalanobis Distance
20.59
Critical value of Chi-square
22.46
Maximum value of Cook’s distance
0.06*
*0.05 for political empowerment
Source: Output of Preliminary Multiple regression analysis
As indicated in Table 8.2, the maximum value of Mahalanobis distances (20.59) was less than
the critical value of chi-square (22.46). The maximum Cook’s Distances value (0.06) was less
than 1. Therefore, there were no outliers, which cause due effect on the result of the analysis.
8.2.4 Normality and Linearity
The assumptions of normality and linearity were checked through Normal P-P Plot of Regression
Standardized Residuals (Pallant, 2011).
The results of Normal P-P Plot of Regression
Standardized Residual are illustrated in Figure 8.1.
Figure 8.1: Normal P-P Plot of Regression standardized Residuals
Source: Multiple regression output
A glance at Figure 8.1 indicates that Normal P-P Plots of Standardized Residuals of the three
regression analysis are laid in a reasonably straight diagonal line from bottom left to top right.
Therefore, normality and linearity assumptions of multiple regressions were satisfied.
171
8.3 Personal Empowerment through Participation
Personal empowerment is the foundation of empowerment process, that is, the transformation of
the individual or the group and the circumstances that appear to encourage or inhibit the process.
Personal empowerment through participation was assessed through determining skill acquired
and psychological improvements as the result of participation. To determine the effect of
participation on personal empowerment through running multiple regression analysis, the
following hypothesis was developed and tested:
Ho: β = 0 (Participation does not significantly predict personal empowerment)
Ha: β ҂ 0 (Participation significantly predicts personal empowerment)
To test the above hypothesis, the following general model of Multiple Linear Regressions
Equation was used. The best fit Multiple Linear regression equation is given as follows:
= βo + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3 + β4X4 + β5X5 + β6X6 + ε
Where: Y = Outcome variable (Personal empowerment)
βo = Constant terms
ε = Error term
β1 – β6 = Regression coefficients
X1 = Participation in needs identification
X2 = Participation in setting priority of needs
X3 = Participation in planning
X4 = Participation in the implementation
X5 = Participation in monitoring
X6 = Participation in performance evaluation
8.3.1 Model Evaluation
Model evaluation involves the determination of the significance of the model in explaining the
dependent variable. To evaluate the model, the following hypothesis was developed and tested:
Ho: β = 0 (For all the independent variables Coefficient of determination is zero)
H1: β ҂ 0 (For all the independent variables Coefficient of determination is different from
zero)
172
The significance of the Model was tested depending on ANOVA Table of the results of the
analysis, which is presented in Table 8.3.
Table 8.3: Model test: ANOVA
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
4.12
.00
Regression
1007.93
6
168.00
Residual
14403.00
353
40.80
Total
15410.91
359
Source: Multiple regressions Model
A close look at the results in Table 8.3 revealed that the model was statistically significant in
explaining personal empowerment through participation (F (6, 353) = 4.12, p = 0.00). Hence, the
null hypothesis β = 0 (For all the independent variables Coefficient of determination is zero) was
rejected while alternative hypothesis β ҂ 0 (For all the independent variables Coefficient of
determination is different from zero) was accepted. This means that at least one predictor has a
coefficient different from zero and determined variations in the dependent variable i.e. personal
empowerment through participation.
8.3.2 The Effect of Participation on Personal Empowerment
The combined effect of all predictors and the influence of individual predictor variables on
dependent variable were determined through multiple regression analysis. The result of the
analysis is depicted in Table 8.4.
173
Table 8.4: Multiple Regression Estimates of Personal Empowerment through Participation
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
B
SE
Standardized
Coefficients
Beta
95% Confidence
Interval for B
t
Sig.
LB
UB
Participation in needs
identification
-.59
1.10
-.04
-.54
.59
-2.75
1.57
Participation in setting priority
of needs
-3.28
1.10
-.24
-2.98
.00
-5.45
-1.11
2.33
1.06
.17
2.21
.03
.25
4.41
-1.38
1.03
-.11
-1.34
.18
-3.41
.65
Participation in monitoring
.26
1.04
.02
.25
.80
-1.78
2.30
Participation performance
evaluation
.01
.96
.00
.01
1.00
1.88
1.89
(Constant)
25.53
.65
---
39.30
.00
24.26
26.81
R
0.26
Participation in planning
Participation in the
implementation
R Square
0.07
Adjusted R Square
Std error of estimate
0.05
6.39
Source: Field survey, 2015
The result in Table 8.4 revealed that all the independent variables included in the model
explained approximately 7% (R square (0.07) x 100%) of the variance in dependent variable
(personal empowerment through participation). Among the predictor variables, participation in
setting priority of needs (β = -.24, p = 0.00); and planning (β = .17, p = 0.03) were found to have
an influence on personal empowerment in BCA. Thus, the model of multiple regression analysis
is found to be:
= 25.53 - 3.28X2 + 2.33X3
174
The finding indicated negative relationship between participation in setting priority of needs and
personal empowerment. In other words, when participation in setting priority of needs increased
by one standard deviation personal empowerment decreased by .24 standard deviation. The
results of FGDs pointed out that negative relationship between the variables was the result of low
level public participation in decision regarding priority setting. There was positive relationship
between participation in the planning and personal empowerment. Accordingly, when
participation in planning increased by one standard deviation, personal empowerment increased
by .17 standard deviation.
8.3.3 Item Analysis of Personal Empowerment through Participation
In order to determine the effect of participation on different indicators of personal empowerment,
item analysis of indicators of personal empowerment was conducted. Then, the mean of
individual indicators were compared against the overall mean of personal empowerment in order
to determine the degree to which participation influence individual indicator. The analysis was
carried up on the data collected through five levels Likert’s scale on different indicators of
personal empowerment through participation. The results of the analysis are illustrated in Table
8.5.
175
Table 8.5: Item Analysis for Personal Empowerment through Participation (N= 418, M = 2.34)
SA: strongly Agree; A: Agree; UD: Undecided; DA: Disagree; SDA: Strongly disagree
Items
Mean
SD
SA
(%)
A
(%)
UD
(%)
DA
(%)
SDA
(%)
Boosting strategic accumulation of practical
experiences
2.03
.94
29.9
48.6
12.4
7.2
1.9
Improvement in personal confidence that I could
do things
2.55
1.16
12.9
50.5
15.6
10.5
10.5
Skills improvement
2.19
1.01
23.0
51.4
13.4
8.4
3.8
Improvement of ability to analyze own situation
and solve problems
2.50
1.12
12.9
53.1
13.4
12.2
8.4
Creating the belief that your actions can have
effects
2.35
1.06
16.5
53.6
13.6
10.5
5.7
Enhancing capacity to control over personal
decisions that affect ones everyday life
2.43
1.07
14.4
52.6
14.6
12.2
6.2
Enhancing the development of self-esteem
2.20
1.03
23.4
50.5
11.5
11.5
3.1
Enhancing the development of feeling of freedom
of choice
2.44
1.06
13.2
54.8
13.2
12.9
6.0
Enhancing self reliance to improve one’s life
2.27
.98
19.1
51.7
15.1
11.7
2.4
Enhancing creativity that improves one’s life
2.39
1.09
15.3
55.3
12.4
9.3
7.7
Source: Field survey, 2015
As indicated in Table 8.5, the overall mean score of item analysis of indicators of personal
empowerment through participation was 2.34. The comparison of individual mean and overall
mean score of item analysis indicated that participation influence indicators of personal
empowerment in various degrees. The means of strategic accumulation of practical experiences
(M = 2.03); skills improvement (M = 2.19); development of self-esteem (M = 2.20); and
enhancement of self-reliance to improve one’s life (M = 2.27) were lower than the overall mean.
These findings imply that participation influences these indicators relatively in lesser degree.
However, still participation influences personal empowerment along these indicators. This can
be observed from frequency distribution of item analysis of these indicators.
176
A glance at Table 8.5 revealed that participation relatively better enhanced personal confidence
that I could do things (M = 2.55); capacity to control over personal decision (M = 2.43); freedom
of choice (M = 2.44), creativity that improves one’s life (M = 2.39), improvement of ability to
analyze own situation and solve problems (M = 2.50); and creating the belief that my actions can
have effects (M = 2.35) indicators of personal empowerment.
The results of key informant interview conducted with ganda managers and FGD at Ganda 05
also revealed personal empowerment along predictors other than those hypothesized in
quantitative strand. Accordingly, participation enhanced personal empowerment of local people
through providing the chance to share problem and get support. The above results further
advocated that participation also created a wider opportunities for interaction. The individual has
the chance to develop particular skills, both practical (such as literacy) and social (participation
in meetings and discussions).
Using Rowlands (1997), the above finding implies that participation generated ‘power within’
and ‘power to’ forms of power among the public. Power within refers to development of selfefficacy, freedom of choice, the belief that one’s action can have effect. Power-to refers to
development of capacity to control over personal decisions, creativity that improves one’s life,
and ability to analyze personal situations.
The above forms of empowerment developed through participation focus on the process to
understand and conceptualizing power. These powers is generative, the power people have of
stimulating activity in others and raising their morale. More than participation in decision
making, personal empowerment through participation will have positive impact on people to
perceive themselves as able and entitled to make decisions. Thus, participation gave scope to the
full range of human abilities and potential (Rowlands, 1997). Although participation in decision
making was low, personal empowerment was developed as the result of participation. Because,
‘power within’ needs experiential recognition and analysis of issues to do with own
subordination and how it is maintained. Such power cannot be given; it has to be self-generative
(Kabeer, 1999a).
177
8.4 Social Empowerment through Participation
People’s collective action on common matters creates opportunities that cultivate social
empowerment. Collective action engenders favorable conditions that enhance social relationship
among the members of the public. It crafts a forum through which the residents share their social
values with each other. The interaction escalates the bond between members of the public. Based
on these facts social empowerment through participation was assessed.
The effect of participation on social empowerment was determined through multiple regression
analysis. To this end the following hypothesis was developed and tested.
Ho: β = 0 (Participation does not significantly predict social empowerment)
Ha: β ҂ 0 (Participation significantly predicts social empowerment)
The above hypothesis was tested using the following general model of Multiple Linear
Regressions Equation:
= βo + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3 + β4X4 + β5X5 + β6X6 + ε
Where:
Y = Outcome variable (Social empowerment)
βo = Constant terms
ε = Error term
β1 – β6 = Regression coefficients
X1 = Participation in needs identification
X2 = Participation in setting priority of needs
X3 = Participation in planning
X4 = Participation in the implementation
X5 = Participation in monitoring
X6 = Participation in performance evaluation
8.4.1 Model Evaluation
The model formulated to predict the effect of participation on social empowerment was checked
to learn the significance of the Model in predicting the effect of participation on social
empowerment. To test the significance of the model, the following hypothesis was formulated
178
and tested:
Ho: β = 0 (For all the independent variables Coefficient of determination is zero)
H1: β ҂ 0 (For all the independent variables Coefficient of determination is different
from zero)
The model was evaluated based on ANOVA Table of the outputs of multiple regression. The
result of the analysis was presented in the Table 8.6.
Table 8.6: Model Test: ANOVA
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
2.10
.05
Regression
289.51
6
48.25
Residual
8118.10
353
23.00
Total
8707.61
359
Source: Multiple regressions output
A glance at Table 8.6 suggests that the model was statistically significant to predict social
empowerment through participation (F (6, 353) = 2.10, p = 0.05). This finding implies that
participation and social empowerment were related in the study area.
Therefore, the null hypothesis β = 0 (For all the independent variables Coefficient of
determination is zero) was rejected while alternative hypothesis β ҂ 0 (For all the independent
variables Coefficient of determination is different from zero) was accepted. This means that at
least one predictor has an influence on the outcome variable and determined variations in the
dependent variable i.e. social empowerment.
8.4.2 Effect of Participation on Social Empowerment
The result of multiple regression analysis performed to determine the effect of participation on
social empowerment indicated the combined effect of all predictors and individual predictors
separately. The results of the analysis were portrayed in Table 8.7.
179
Table 8.7: Multiple Regression Estimates of Social empowerment through participation
Unstandardized
Coefficients
B
SE
Model
Participation in needs
identification
-.99
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Beta
Sig.
95% Confidence
Interval for B
LB
UB
.82
-.09
-1.20
.23
-2.61
.64
Participation in setting priority of
needs
-.85
.83
-.08
-1.03
.30
-2.48
.78
Participation in planning
1.92
.79
.19
2.42
.02
.36
3.48
-1.24
.78
-.13
-1.60
.11
-2.77
.29
Participation in monitoring
.03
.79
.00
.04
.97
-1.50
1.56
Participate in performance
evaluation
-.27
.72
-.03
-.37
.71
-1.68
1.15
16.45
0.19
0.03
0.02
4.80
.49
33.72
.00
.00
17.41
Participation in implementation
(Constant)
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std error of estimate
Source: Field survey, 2015
A close look at Table 8.7 suggested that all the independent variables included in the model
explained approximately 3% (0.03 x 100%) of the variance in dependent variable (social
empowerment). Of all the six variables included in the model only participation in planning (β =
.19, p = 0.02) significantly predicted social empowerment. Thus, the model of multiple
regression analysis is found to be:
= 16.45 +1.92X3
The result of the finding indicated positive relationship between participation in planning and
social empowerment. In other words, when participation in planning increased by one standard
deviation, social empowerment increased by .19 standard deviation.
180
The examination of the above findings clearly indicated very low level of social empowerment
through participation in BCA. The result of FGD conducted in Ganda 09 attached this low
degree of social empowerment to institutional problem. According to this result, the main
challenge of social empowerment was the co-option of public participation to formal top-down
approach of City Government structure and mainly involving loyal party members. The above
results stressed that the involuntary organizing of the public to 1 to 5 government structure
fostered fearing of each other among the public. This resulted in lack of trust among the public,
which in turn hindered social empowerment through participation. Moreover, the result revealed
that Government officials’ lack of interest to work with public also exacerbated lack of closeness
among the public. These findings imply that there was no conducive institutional environment,
which facilitate empowerment through public participation. That means the Government
facilitates public participation through structures that was not suitable for enhancing social
empowerment through participation.
Furthermore, institutional assessment indicated that the absence of people’s own organization
through which they participate was also the major reason of lower degree of social
empowerment. Rather than facilitating the creation of people organization that foster favorable
ground for social empowerment, the government forced the public to participate along the
government structure. This in turn hampered social empowerment through participation.
8.4.3 Item Analysis of Social Empowerment through Participation
The result of multiple regression analysis indicated social empowerment through participation.
Thus, it is imperative to determine the degree of social empowerment along the hypothesized
indicators. The influence of participation on different indicators of social empowerment varies.
The analysis was done on five level Likert’s scale. The result of the analysis was illustrated in
Table 8.8. The degree to which participation influence each indicator was determined through
comparing mean of individual item against overall mean of social empowerment.
181
Table 8.8: Item Analysis for Social Empowerment through Participation (N= 418, M = 2.18).
SA: Strongly agree; A: Agree; UD: Undecided; DA Disagree; SDA Strongly disagree
SA
A
UD
DA
Items
Mean SD
(%) (%) (%) (%)
SDA
(%)
Enhancing formation of internal
mechanisms for cohesion of the people
1.98
.93
32.3
47.1
13.4
4.8
2.4
Enhancing good relationship and
cooperation among the people
2.31
1.01
16.5
55.5
13.9
9.1
5.0
2.03
.91
27.8
52.2
12.0
6.0
2.2
Increasing the sense of helping each other
among the people
2.34
1.12
16.7
54.1
12.4
8.4
8.4
Enhancing group work or interaction
among work groups in the City
2.17
.95
21.3
54.8
12.0
9.8
2.2
Enhancing social links among the people
2.33
1.04
16.3
55.3
13.6
8.9
6.0
Enhancing the feeling of togetherness or
closeness among people
2.13
.98
24.9
51.7
12.0
8.6
2.9
Increasing the level of trust among the
people
Source: Field survey, 2015
A close look at Table 8.8 indicated that participation influenced formation of internal
mechanisms for cohesion of the people (M = 1.98); level of trust among the people (M = 2.03);
group work or interaction among work groups (M = 2.17); and feeling of togetherness or
closeness among people (M = 2.13) relatively in less degree. Participation influenced
relationship and cooperation among the people (M = 2.31); the sense of helping each other
among the people (M = 2.34); and social links among the people (M = 2.33) relatively in higher
degree.
Despite low level of social empowerment indicated by the result of quantitative analysis, the
results of FGDs elucidated some emerging aspects of social empowerment through participation.
Participation improved conflict resolution capacity or the tendency to solve conflict among
public in their surrounding by use of elders. The conflict resolution was done through Jarsuma
(conciliation). This implies that participation enhanced optimal utilization of local resources
182
(local knowledge of the elders). Using Rowlands (1997) empowerment framework, this refers to
‘power with’, the capacity to solve its own problem by the public.
8.5 Political Empowerment through Participation
Participation in development can result in public awareness about public policy process. It also
improves the relationship between government and the public. It can achieve these through
improving the capacity of the public to demand their right, to negotiate with government and to
influence public policy process. Based on these general facts, the effects of participation on local
people political empowerment were assessed in BCA. To this end both quantitative and
qualitative data were corroborated.
The contribution of participation to political empowerment of local people was quantitatively
determined through multiple regression analysis. Hence, the following hypothesis was developed
and tested:
Ho: β = 0 (Participation does not significantly predict political empowerment)
Ha: β ҂ 0 (Participation significantly predicts political empowerment)
The following general model of Multiple Linear Regressions Equation was employed to test the
above hypothesis:
= βo + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3 + β4X4 + β5X5 + β6X6 + ε
Where:
Y = outcome variable (Political empowerment)
βo = Constant terms
ε = Error term
β1 – β6 = Regression coefficients
X1 = Participation in needs identification
X2 = Participation in setting priority of needs
X3 = Participation in planning
X4 = Participation in implementation
X5 = Participation in monitoring
X6 = Participation in performance evaluation
183
8.5.1 Model Evaluation
The significance of multiple regression model devised to estimate political empowerment
through participation was checked. To this end, the following hypothesis was formulated and
tested:
Ho: β = 0 (For all the independent variables Coefficient of determination is zero)
H1: β ҂ 0 (For all the independent variables Coefficient of determination is different
from zero)
The Model was test based on ANOVA Table of the outputs of multiple regression. The result of
the analysis is presented in Table 8.9.
Table 8.9: Model Test: ANOVA
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
Regression
222.04
6
37.01
Residual
10867.55
353
30.79
Total
11089.59
359
F
Sig.
1.20
.31
Source: Multiple regressions output
As indicated in Table 8.9 the model was not statistically significant to predict political
empowerment through participation (F (6, 353) = 1.20, p = 0.31). This indicated that
participation and political empowerment were not related in BCA. Therefore, the null hypothesis
β = 0 (For all the independent variables Coefficient of determination is zero) was accepted while
alternative hypothesis β ҂ 0 (For all the independent variables Coefficient of determination is
different from zero) was rejected. This finding implies that participation did not bring political
empowerment of local people in BCA.
8.5.2 The Effect of Participation on Political Empowerment
The effect of participation on political empowerment was determined through multiple
regression analysis. The result is presented in Table 8.10.
184
Table 8.10: Multiple Regression Estimates of Political empowerment through participation
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients
Coefficients
95.0%
Confidence
Interval for B
Lower Upper
Bound Bound
t
Sig.
-.06
-.75
.46
-2.59
1.17
.96
-.06
-.71
.48
-2.56
1.20
1.19
.92
.11
1.29
.20
-.62
2.99
Participation in Implementation
-.91
.90
-.08
-1.02
.31
-2.68
.85
Participation in Monitoring
.67
.90
.06
.75
.46
-1.10
2.44
Participation in Evaluation
.79
.83
.07
.95
.35
-.85
2.42
34.66
.00
18.45
20.67
B
SE
Beta
Participation in need identification
-.71
.95
Participation in Priority setting
-.68
Participation in Planning
Model
(Constant)
19.56
R
.14
.02
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std error of estimate
.56
.00
5.55
Source: Field survey, 2015
The result of analysis in Table 8.10 revealed that there were no statistically significant
relationship between all predictors and political empowerment. This finding implies that
participation did not bring political empowerment in BCA. Since none of the predictors had
effect on political empowerment, I did not conducted item analysis.
Despite the above result of quantitative data analysis, which indicated the absence of political
empowerment through participation, the results of FGDs in Ganda 05 and 09 highlighted
development of some aspects of political empowerment. These include: improvement in access
to government services, improvement of public capacity to demand the government to fill the
gap in public service delivery, an attempt to petition public officials and make accountable for
failure to discharge his/her responsibilities. There was also an improvement in recognizing the
right to better public service and asking the provision. This result suggests the divergence
between qualitative and quantitative results. Thus, this needs further investigation.
185
Despite some aspects of political empowerment exhibited, participation did not create an
opportunities to influence decision in public policy process. As per the results of FGDs and
interview with Key informants from the public, different factors hindered political empowerment
through participation in BCA. The factors include: (1) the approach of participation; (2)
involuntary aspect of participation; (3) low extent of participation in decision making; and (4)
institutional contexts.
The above results indicated that leading public participation through top-down bureaucratic
structure of government became the challenge of political empowerment through participation.
This finding implies top-down approach is not enhancing political empowerment through
participation. As per the above results, the involuntary participation also made the public to
develop bad attitude towards the City Government. This condition constrained close relationship
between the public and City Government. The results further indicated that public attitude
towards the structure of the City Government was also the major factor which hindered publicgovernment relationship.
The results of interview with key informant from the public and FGDs pointed out that decision
making regarding participatory development was controlled by Government officials and experts
without real involvement of the public. As the result, little political empowerment of local people
through participation was exhibited in BCA. Using Rowlands (1997) empowerment framework,
the City Government exercised ‘power over’ in its negative definition. This indicates power as a
‘zero sum’ (Chambers, 2007). This implies that the government exercise ‘power over’, ‘ability to
exert control and influence over others’ (Friedmann, 1992), in facilitating participation in
development inevitably resulting in the loss of power by the public. This leads to, as attested by
the evidence from FGDs and Key informant interviews, the marginalization of the public from
influencing public policy making process. As the result, participation failed to create access to
political structures and formal decision-making processes in the economic, social and political
spheres of the public.
Using ‘power over’ in its positive sense (outside zero-sum commodity) (Chambers, 2007), the
above problems hold back power of the public over political decision making. That means it
failed to bring people who are outside policy decision-making process into it. The institutional
186
contexts failed to enable the public to maximize empowerment opportunities available to them
through participation without constraints.
The results of key informant interviews with CPEs stressed that the absences of communities
own development project was also the major factor which held back political empowerment. The
above results pointed out that the public was not allowed to develop their own projects that help
them to develop the capacity to exercise political issues. They were forced to participate in
government projects, which were top down in nature. This approach was not empowering by its
nature. Using Rowlands (1997) empowerment framework, lack of public own project prohibited
the public to develop ‘power to’ influence public policy process. These findings imply that the
failure to enhance political empowerment impedes the public, opportunities to develop political
capacity to influence government activities.
The results of FGDs and interviews with key informant from the public indicated that lack of
access to government information hampered transparency that in turn reduced the potential to
empower the public politically. The above results further advocated that low level of
participation impeded political empowerment of the people that could be acquired through
evaluating the systems, interpreting results of evaluation, and improving management. As the
result, using Rowlands (1997) empowerment framework, the public lost ‘power to’ influence
government activities.
As stated somewhere else in this paper, the extent of participation in different phase of local
development was very low. In many cases the public officials make decision regarding
participatory development and communicate to the public through channel, which were not
allowed much debate. As the result, the public did not get the chance to influence decision
making that help to develop the capacity to exercise political issues. This condition hampered the
opportunity of the public to develop power to influence political process. Thus, elite dominance
of decisions regarding participatory development hampered political empowerment through
participation.
The results of analysis conducted in chapter 5 indicated that the structural arrangement of the
City became the main actor rather than facilitator of participation. Moreover, the base for
187
determining Government structure was not in a manner that enhances empowerment. For
example shane was organized in more detail that prohibited the interaction among the large
portion of the public. This hindered the interaction among the wider number of the public to
acquire experience. Using Rowlands (1997) empowerment framework, the opportunity to
develop capacity (power to) to negotiate government was not developed.
The results of FGDs and interviews conducted with Government officials and experts indicated
divergent views among Government officials and the public regarding political empowerment
through participation. Public officials and experts argued that political empowerment was
enhanced as the result of participation. Whereas, the public argued on the contrary that political
empowerment was at its lowest stage. The public further argued that political empowerment was
set back due to public officials and experts’ domination of decision making regarding
participatory development. This fact implies that public officials considered empowerment as
something provided by the government. However, by its nature empowerment is bottom up. It
could be claimed by the incumbent rather than the external party declaration that someone is
empowered. Using Rowlands (1997) empowerment framework, this finding suggested that the
City Government exercised “power over’ in its negative sense that is controlling and influencing
the public.
The results of FGDs indicated that lack of accountability by public officials and lack of trust on
them by public hindered political empowerment through participation. Public officials were not
made accountable for their failure to discharge their responsibility to enhance participation. They
were only accountable for the failure to enforce government political philosophy. Although, the
public complained on the failure of officials to listen to their demand; and that they abused
government money, the government did not take any measure.
The result of FGDs revealed that the public had no trust on Government officials, since they
were not elected by them. They were assigned by government from other places out of the
knowledge of the public. Hence the public hesitated that these officials serve their interests. This
adversely affected interaction between Government and the public, one form of political
empowerment.
188
8.6 Economic Empowerment through Participation
Determining actual economic gain as the result of participatory development became difficult
task. Thus, the role of participation in economic empowerment of local people can be considered
in terms of the actual economic gain or the opportunity to generate economic resources. For the
purpose of this study, economic empowerment of local people through participation was
assessed by determining the opportunities created as the result of participatory development. I
employed qualitative data to assess potential economic empowerment created as the result of
participation. Accordingly, the analysis and interpretation were based on the data generated
through interviews, key informant interviews, and FGDs.
The results of interview with Government officials and FGDs pointed out that the improvements
of crucial urban services, road networks and electric service, as the result of participation paved
the way for economic empowerment of the public in various forms. Thus, the effect of
participation in empowering local people was considered along three dimensions, namely, its
role in creating business activities, increasing the value of existing assets, and creating
employment opportunities.
The results of interview with key informant CPEs and FGDs disclosed that participation was
resulted in actual and potential business activities. These business activities include: opening of
new shops, cafeterias, greenery, clinics, kindergarten, primary schools, butchery and petty trades
like pot coffee and selling budena, bread, and akayi. This situation has double edge benefits. In
one hand, they improved the life of those engaged in business activities; on the other hand they
created market for those living trough renting houses. Using Alsop et al (2006) Empowerment
Framework, the widening of economic activities enables the public to develop ‘agency’; the
capacity to make purposive choice. Using Rowlands (1997) Empowerment Framework,
participation developed ‘power to’ among the public, the capacity to improve living conditions
and ‘power over’, which is the power over the means of livelihoods.
The results of FGDs and interview with ganda managers and CPEs pointed out that the
improvements in road conditions through participation, in turn, improve transportation services
that contribute to potential economic empowerment of the residents. For example, cobble stone
roads constructed through participation in Ganda 05 from Libenedingle to Millennium Schools
189
can be mentioned. The results of FGD in Ganda 05 revealed that prior to the construction of
cobble stone, in this area, horse carts were the means of transportation on this road. As the result,
there was serious transportation problem in the absence of carts. The construction of cobble
stone transformed the means of transportation from cart to bajaj. This condition played two
important roles: (1) the transformation of means of transportation from traditional to modern
one; and (2) reduced the distance from 500 meters to 100 meters. Using Alsop et al (2006)
Empowerment Framework, improvement in transportation service enhances opportunity
structure that paved the way for the development of ‘agency’. Furthermore, it saves time that
could be invested on other living activities performance.
Petty economic activities like mini shops, pot coffee and selling budena were flourished as the
result of road renewal through participation. As per the result of FGD at Ganda 05, the
flourishing of these petty business activities at Berhan Mender and Sefere Misale in Ganda 05
were best example. These business activities flourished as the result of cobble stone construction
in the area.
The above findings imply that the flourishing of new shops and cafeteria services, in addition to
improving the economic well being of those engaged in these activities, it also helped to improve
the provision of service for the residents. It also created simple access to services for the public
at their vicinity. The opening of clinics in one hand enhances economic empowerment of the
service providers; on the other hand it improves social service and access to the services in the
City. As the result, it contributed for the production of healthy work force. Using Rowlands
(1997) Empowerment Framework, this finding implies that participation created ‘power over’
economic resources. Using Alsop et al (2006) Empowerment Framework, it created agency, the
potential work force that contributed to further economic development of the nations in general
and the City in particular.
The results of FGDs and interview with CPEs show that improvement in road network
contributed for the development of greeneries along the roads. The development of greenery
areas in turn played great roles in improving environmental conditions and beautification of the
City. The improvement of environmental condition, in turn, contributed to economic
empowerment through creating healthy work force. The above results further pointed out that
190
the development of greenery areas along the newly opened roads enhanced economic
empowerment for the youth people in the City through creating employment opportunities.
Using Alsop et al (2006) empowerment framework, this finding implies that participation created
opportunity structure, which facilitate for the development of ‘agency’.
The result of interview with CPEs and FGDs conducted at Babogaya and Ganda 01 indicated
that participation created both temporary and relatively permanent employment opportunities in
the construction of cobble stone and other road constructions. Using Rowlands (1997) the
creation of employment suggested the development of ‘power to’, the capacity to improve the
living conditions. Based on Alsop et al (2006) empowerment framework, job opportunities
enhance the development of ‘agency’, the ability to make purposive choice on one’s live.
The results of FGDs and interviews with key informant from the public revealed that
participation increased the value of assets through improving the quality and quantity of roads
and security of the area. The security of the area was improved as the result of street light
provision through participation. Participation increased the value of assets through increasing
land values; and demand and price of house rents. Moreover, the above data indicated that the
increase in value of asset was indebted to improvement in environmental condition which played
a great role in making the area attractive and livable. The results of interview with CPE of Ganda
09 pointed out that Village 15 of Ganda 09 was prominent example where increase in house rent
was exhibited as the result of participation. Using Rowlands (1997) Empowerment Framework,
these findings implies that the development of ‘power to’, the capacity to generate asset. Using
Alsop et al (2006) Empowerment Framework the above findings suggests that participation
created ‘agency’, the resource for making purposive choice to improve the living conditions.
8.6.1 Corruption: An Impediment to Economic Empowerment
Corruption became the serious challenge of economic empowerment through participation in
BCA. The results of FGDs attested that multifaceted corruption practices hampered
empowerment through participation. The above results further pointed out that corruption
practices impeded participation from creating employment opportunities for poor people
(especially youth) and access to economic resources.
191
The results of FGD conducted at Ganda 05 exclusively indicated that the residents were not
benefited from employment opportunities created by participatory development activities. The
above results revealed that Government officials bring their relatives from other areas to
capitalize on the opportunities created by participatory projects. As the result, the residents of the
City excluded from the job opportunities created by participatory development projects. The
FGDs results conducted at different places further pointed out that the residents are employed
only and only if they have relative in the City Administration. The above result stressed that this
unfair employment activity is deep rooted in the City. The FGDs results further indicated that
this problem exacerbated from time to time as previous officials give lesson to new coming
experts and officials. This finding implies that corruption was a systematic practice in relation to
participatory development.
The results of FGDs showed that as the result of corruption, participation failed to play its role in
reducing poverty through elimination of unemployment and creating access to economic
resources. As per the above results, lack of fair employment opportunities and failure to provide
equitable and quality infrastructure were among the contributing factors. Hence, the corrupt
practices related to participatory development affects the spillover effects of participatory
development on the achievement of other policies goals. Among these, the major one is the
poverty alleviation roles of participation in development through economic empowerment. Thus,
using Rowlands (1997) Empowerment framework, corruption hindered the abilities of
participation to develop ‘power to’ and ‘power over’ resources.
The results of FGDs and interviews with key informant from the public suggested that only who
had close relationship with officials and experts had access to the benefits of participatory
development. The above results further stressed that this was intentionally done to grasp the
benefit derived from participatory development activities. These finding imply that there was the
absence of fair distribution of benefits of development among the public in BCA. This
systematic alienation of the local people from access to benefits of participatory development
hampered economic empowerment through participation.
As indicated by FGDs results the major forms of corruption prevailed in relation to participatory
development includes: giving cobble stone construction and red ash paving contracts to relatives;
192
and organizing pseudo MSEs and winning auction by government officials and experts. As the
result of above FGDs indicated the assignment of inappropriate person on responsible positions
to manage cobble stone was the fundamental causes of corruption. The FGDs results and
interview with key informant from the public revealed that Government official and experts
played dual role in corruption activities. In one hand, they commit corruption by themselves; on
the other hand they created favorable ground for other to commit corruption. The result of FGD
conducted at Ganda 05 elaborated the corruption practices as follows: “The previous officials
give lessons on the corruption to the successor and aggravated corrupt behavior in the society.”
This put forward that corruptions becomes a systematic problem in BCA. Moreover, it
contributed to the sustenance of corruption from time to time in the process of participatory
development. This finding implies that government officials and experts utilized official power
for their personal interests.
It was learned from the assessment of documents that the absence of legal framework that guides
local development benefit sharing also created a favorable ground for corruption practice related
to participation. This implies that the gap in legal and policy framework was also one of the
factors which contributed for proliferation of corruption related to participatory development.
8.7 Summary
In this chapter, I assessed different forms of empowerment (personal, social, political, and
economic) empowerments through participation. The predictors hypothesized to influence
personal empowerment through participation had low effect on personal empowerment of the
local people. Institutional problems were factors which results in low personal empowerment.
Among the predictors included in the model, participation in setting priority of needs and
planning were found to be significantly influence personal empowerment. Participation
influenced indicators of personal empowerment in various degrees. Accordingly, participation in
local development relatively better enhanced personal confidence that I could do things, capacity
to control over personal decision, freedom of choice, creativity that improves one’s life,
improvement of ability to analyze own situation and solve problems, and creating the belief that
my actions can have effects indicators personal empowerment.
193
Participation in local development results in low level social empowerment in BCA. Among the
predictors included in the model participation in planning local development was significantly
influence social empowerment in BCA. Once more, institutional problems are the reason for low
level of social empowerment through participation in development. In BCA, participation in
development had relatively high degree of influence on relationship and cooperation of people;
sense of helping each other; and social link among the public indicators of social empowerment.
There was little political empowerment of local people through participation in BCA. The major
factors hampered political empowerment through participation was approach of participation;
involuntary participation; low level of public influence on decisions; and institutional problems.
Participation enhanced economic empowerment through creating access to economic resources
and opportunity structure. The outputs of participatory development such as improvements in the
road condition and security as the result of street light provision created favorable conditions for
the proliferation of small scale business activities and increase value of existing assets such as
land and house rent. It also created job opportunities. Corruption, in the form of favoritism and
nepotism, was the serious challenge of economic empowerment through participation.
194
Chapter 9 : Conclusions, Contributions and the Way Forward
9.1 Introduction
I explored the context, nature and effects of participation at grass root level with particular
reference to BCA. To this end, appropriate theories of participation and empowerment were used
to address the problem, interpret and elaborate the empirical findings. I employed theories of
participation such as Arnstien’s (1969) Ladder of Citizen Participation, Pretty’s (1995)
Typologies of Participation and White’s (1996) Typology of Participation. Rowlands (1997)
Empowerment Framework and Alsop et al. (2006) Empowerment Framework were also used to
explain and interpret empowerment through participation in development.
To achieve the objectives of the study pragmatic worldview and its contingent mixed method
approach were applied in the research. I underwent intensive field work through utilizing mixed
methods including: interview, key informant interview, FGD, document review, and
questionnaire survey. I also utilized mixed data analysis technique in order to come up with
sound data in line with the research problem.
This chapter presents general conclusions drawn based on the findings of the study in line with
the research objectives. It, then, presents what the researcher thought to be the major contribution
of research. This section also forwards major propositions that help to improve and enhance
participation. Finally, further research issues were forwarded depending on the gaps identified
throughout research endeavor.
9.2 Conclusions
9.2.1 Nature and Extent of Participation
In BCA, the public was aware about the benefits of participation in development. If the public
get favorable platform to participate in development activities and their comments are given due
consideration by the Government it has the power to solve its problems by itself. Participation
was not linked to a serious systemic economic effort to enhance the socio-economic capabilities
of communities. More attention was given to mobilize the public to raise their initial share of
contributions for local development. There were fewer efforts to participate the public directly in
managerial and technical responsibilities of development project implementation. Though there
195
were attempts to enhance public ownership and commitment of local development
implementation, still these efforts were inadequate to enhance full ownership and responsibilities
of the public. This condition hindered the advancement of participation from inclusion to
transformative level of participation. Thus, from the view point of BCG, the notion of
participation refers to contribution in different forms.
The extent of participation in decision making regarding participatory development was below
average in BCA. The findings of this study shed light on the dominance of the government
power over people in decision regarding participatory development. Inadequate public
involvement in decision making regarding local development would have hampered the ‘people
first’ philosophy of participatory development in BCA. The failure to enhance genuine
participation would hamper its contribution to enhance effective management of development at
local level; and creation of resource for local development. In turn, it hindered the role of public
participation in bridging the gap of City Government in local service provision. Inadequate
participation of the public in decision making regarding local development process would
enhance the tendency of passive receiver of development benefits rather than becoming ‘Agent’
of development among the public.
The politics of participation, which refers to who participate, was the major manifestation of low
level of participation in BCA. The City Government dominated decision making in the process
of development. Participation contributed less in bringing the voices of voiceless into decision
making in the process development. Thus, the role of participation to bring people who are
outside the decision making process into it was inadequately addressed.
BCG limited participation as a means/instrumental to facilitate the implementation of
development projects rather than creating the conditions which allow the spillover effect of
participation in enhancing democratic governance.
The notion of public participation in
development activities is pretty much aligned with traditional state-led, top-down models of
development where participation as an obligation to acquire local public service. This condition
would hamper the decentralization of governance as a tool to promote public participation. BCA
needs and fears public participation in local development. On one hand, it needs public
participation to fill its gap in public service provision. On the other hand, it intended to limit
196
public participation at lowest level.
9.2.2 Institutional Contexts of Participation
There are fundamental policy and legal provisions regarding public participation. Despite
fundamental provisions, still there were gaps in policy and legal provisions to adequately address
the needs and priorities of local people. Moreover, high gap was reflected between policy/legal
provisions and their implementation. BCG had inadequate capacity to implement constitutional
provisions regarding the right of the public to participate in development. As the result, the
institutional context would hamper the role of participation in enhancing decentralized
development policy.
The overall institutional condition of the City Government was weak to facilitate participation.
The institutional support and facilitation was top-down approach, which was incompatible for
bottom up nature of participation. The process of participation was not transparent and could not
enhance accountability. These conditions restrained the public from capitalizing the empowering
opportunities available to them through participation.
Though there were good efforts to institutionalize participation, there was high gap in
institutionalizing it. The strategic goal of participation in improving public service was not
formulated. There was only binding obligation that stipulated the amount of contributions the
public should fulfill in order to acquire local development activities performed by City
Government. It only imposed sanction on the public to get local service. However, the obligation
of and sanctions on the government in case it failed to carry on development activities was left
untouched. This conditions, in turn led to arbitrary handling of participation in development.
9.2.3 Empowerment through Participation
Despite lack of genuine participation in BCA, participation resulted in empowerment of local
people in different forms. However, there was low level of local people empowerment through
participation. As the result, participation in local development contributed less to enable ordinary
people to take charge of their lives, to make communities more responsible for their
development, and to make governments listen to their people. What contributed to some aspects
of empowerment of the people in BCA was “their endless struggle by which people tries to
197
master their own destiny – the process of humanization of man” (Friendman, 1992). The
autonomous power of the people that is legitimately theirs was not fully exercised through
participation.
Corruption practices associated with participatory local development prohibited participation
from playing its crucial role of distributing resources and power among the public. Public
officials and experts, in their own right created invisible rules of the game that effectively
prevent a less powerful from capitalizing up on opportunities of participatory development. As
the result, ordinary public especially unemployed youth and poor section of the public were not
fully entertaining the fruits of participatory development. Thus, participation in local
development contributed less in enabling the have-nots access to political and economic
processes. This agrees with the argument of Friedmann (1992: 20) “to be economically excluded
is, for all practical purpose, to be politically excluded”. Inadequate public participation in setting
their priority hindered the notion of the publics’ autonomy and development of people’s capacity
to maintain and sustain local development in the longer terms. Participation contributed less in
enhancing the proliferation of Community based organizations and enthusiasm for development.
9.3 Contributions of the Research
The findings of this paper have contribution to theoretical/knowledge and methodological
advancement, and policy/practical applications.
9.3.1 Theoretical/knowledge Contributions
The findings of this study advance the knowledge of participatory approach to development
through the following contribution:
The dissertation contributes to the ongoing debate regarding the empowering effect of
participation by investigating their relationship at grassroots level. It contributes to
bridge the gap between participation and empowerment rhetoric and practice.
It contributes to the knowledge of participation and empowerment through showing how
these buzz/catch all words can be operationalized and studied in particular situation and
settings.
198
This dissertation contributed to Post Modernist Theories of Development that emphasizes
diversity and politics of difference. Participation is an enabling approach, which respects
people’s abilities to identify and express their own needs and priorities.
The findings of this dissertation are contributing to the debate on whether participation is
a means or an end by arguing participation as both instrumental/transformational. The
dissertation did this through relating the instrumental value of participation (as means to
enhance local development) to its transformative value (empowerment through
participation in development).
This dissertation contributed to the advancement of literature of participation and
empowerment through indicating how theories and concepts are integrated. The author
attempted to integrate the concepts of participation and empowerment with appropriate
theories in order to explain the actual situation on the ground.
9.3.2 Methodological Contributions
This dissertation will have the following methodological contributions:
This research contributes for the advancement of public administration research through
the application of mixed methods on catch all concepts of participation and
empowerment. Hence, it emphasized the appropriateness of mixed methods in dealing
with fluid public problems. That means it helps to shift the bias of public administration
research towards qualitative approach. Hence, I hold the belief that I shed light on the
broader application of mixed method research in public administration
It will contribute to a better understanding and further development of methods and tools
for assessing participation, empowerment and the role of institutions in facilitating public
participation in development and empowerment. Thus, it highlights better application of
non-parametric test for public administration research. The importance of non-parametric
methods arise from the nature of public administration problems that by their nature do
not normally distributed in large cases.
199
9.3.3 Policy/Practical contributions
The dissertation contributes to the advancement of public policy through showing the
effect of the gap between policy formulation and implementation on the effectiveness of
public programs. It clearly indicated the impact of failure to devise appropriate policies
to implement meta-policies like constitution on the ground. It orients government the
importance of formulating and implementation of appropriate policies to enhance the
efficiency and sustainability of development projects.
The results of the study also contribute to the advancement of public policy through
emphasizing the interplay between actors in public policy. The two major actors in public
policy process are the government and the public at large. The power relation between
the government and public play great role in achieving policy goals and making the
policy people centered.
The finding of this study contributed in enhancing the development of public capacity to
influence policy process. Participatory development enhances the development of policy
capacity through empowering the public to negotiate with institutions and bureaucracies.
Thus, they influence public policy and providing a check on the power of government.
This dissertation will play great role in enhancing effectiveness of public policy and
transparency of policy decision process. Participation plays great role in effectiveness of
policy implementation through securing public consent and commitment. Participation
makes policy process transparent through making access to government operations.
The results of this dissertation contribute to good governance through ensuring
accountability and transparency of
government performance.
Participation
in
development enhances transparency of government performance through creating public
access to activities of the government. It also improves good governance through
enhancing effectiveness and efficiency. It builds responsive government through creating
strong, aware, responsible, active and engaged citizens.
The results of this dissertation contribute for community capacity building. Participation
in development builds community capacity through empowering the local people
200
economically, socially and psychologically. Empowerment increases the capacity of local
people to initiate actions of their own or negotiate with powerful actors.
9.4 The way forward
The following recommendations will have greater contributions for improving public policy and
development at grassroots level. The recommendations were forwarded depending on the
conclusions drawn along the objectives of the study for critical consideration by concerned body.
The recommendations are based on participation experience in BCA that can be transcending to
other localities, particularly urban centers, to alleviate problems related to participatory
approaches. Moreover, the recommendations indicate institutional context, as an important
enabling environment for participation and sharing benefits of participatory development.
Accordingly, I put forward the following recommendations:
Public participation has to extend beyond occasional meeting in which local people are
briefed about plans by project implementers. It is essential to make public participation,
the process in which local people discover the possibilities of exercising choices and
becoming capable of managing what they understand as development. It has to be active
involvement and foster public empowerment in different aspects.
The public has to be fully involved in decisions making regarding local development to
enhance the effectiveness of participation. It is required to extend public participation in
development beyond passive delivery of local public goods. It is vital to advance
participation at project level intervention to broader policy making agenda, which allow
the public to struggle a given set of policy priorities and reversing them.
It is imperative to foster partnership between the public and government, with the
government helping the public to help itself. In the end, it is the public itself, which will
determine the success of their projects. Thus, the government becomes partner in
participatory processes to enable beneficiaries to assert themselves to solve their own
problems.
The role of government has to be limited to facilitators of participation rather than
becoming the main actor of maker and provider of development. Government officials
and experts are required to serve as a change agent rather than dominating decision
201
making in development process. They have to provide only technical advice and
specialist inputs. Their primary role is to release the creative energy in people, the
beneficiaries of development.
The City government needs intensive capacity building that enables it to discharge its
responsibilities of facilitating participation. Capacity building is required to focus on
creating competent manpower, conducive organizational structure and supportive
institutional culture. Adequate authority on local public services should be decentralized
to the City Government.
The stipulation of explicit rules and regulations is required to guide participation and the
sharing of benefits of participatory development. These rules and regulations have to
confer autonomy to participate in development activities and decisions on the public.
The creation of an enabling environment is vital to enhance the proliferation of
Community Based Organizations (CBOs) that fit to bottom up nature of participation.
These organizations allow the public to actually exercise direct control over decision
making and implementation of participatory local development process.
9.5 Recommendations for Further Research
This study assessed the role of participation in empowering local people. However, the
subsequent effect of public empowerment on public policy process was not investigated.
Thus, the impact of empowerment through participation in development on public policy
process needs further investigation.
This research attempted to assess potential economic empowerment created as the result
of participation in local development. Therefore, the concrete economic empowerment at
household and individual level needs further investigation.
The process of empowerment is both experienced as a feeling of personal change and
development, and also manifested, or demonstrated, in changed behavior. Therefore, the
change in behavior or action as the result of personal empowerment through participation
in development needs further investigation.
202
References
Abraham, F. (2002). NGO’s Experience with the Practice of Participatory Development: the
Case of Care-Ethiopia Borana Pastoral Water Development Initiatives, Unpublished Master
Thesis, Regional and Local Development Studies, Addis Ababa University.
Adams J. et al (2007). Research Methods for Graduate Business and Social Science Students.
Sage Publications Inc. New Delhi, India.
Adesiji, G. B., Omotesho, K. F., Komolafe, S. E., Oni, K. J., & Adereti, F. O. (2014). Rural
youth participation in infrastructural development in Isin local government area of Kwara
state, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 59(1), 91-100.
Adisa, B. O. (2013). An assessment of participation of rural women in community based
development activities (CBDAS) in Osun State, Nigeria. Journal of Sustainable Development
in Africa, 15(7), 1-11.
Agarwal, B. (2001). Participatory exclusions, community forestry, and gender: An analysis for
South Asia and a conceptual framework. World development, 29(10), 1623-1648.
Agbelemoge, A., & Adebanjo, S. A. (2013). Participation of Youth in Rural Leadership
Development Activities in Yewa South Local Government Area of Ogun State,
Nigeria. American Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(4), 278-283.
Agrawal, A., & Gupta, K. (2005). Decentralization and participation: the governance of common
pool resources in Nepal’s Terai. World development, 33(7), 1101-1114.
Alemayehu, B. (2014). The impact of education on rural womens participation in political and
economic activities. International Journal of Educational Administration and Policy
Studies, 6(2), 23-31.
Alsop, R., Bertelsen, M. F., & Holland, J. (2006). Empowerment in practice: From analysis to
implementation. World Bank Publications.
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of
planners, 35(4), 216-224.
Babbie, E. R. (2011). The basics of Social Research, 5th ed., Cengage Learning, Wadsworth,
USA.
Bagherian, R., Samah, B. A., Samah, A. A., & Ahmad, S. (2009). Factors influencing local
people's participation in watershed management programs in Iran, American-Eurasian J.
Agric. & Environ. Sci., 6 (5): 532-538.
Beer, A. P., Haughton, G. and Maude A. M. (2003). Developing Locally: An International
Comparison of Local and Regional Economic Development. Bristol, Policy Press.
203
Ben-Meir, Y. (2009). Participatory development and its emergence in the fields of community
and international development. Doctoral thesis. The University of New Mexico,
Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theory and methods, 3rd ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Botchway, K. (2001). Paradox of empowerment: reflections on a case study from Northern
Ghana. World Development, 29(1), 135-153.
Botes, L., & Van Rensburg, D. (2000). Community participation in development: nine plagues
and twelve commandments. Community Development Journal, 35(1), 41-58.
Brannen, J. (2005). Mixed methods research: A discussion paper. Economic and Social Research
Council National Centre for Research Methods Review Papers 005.
Brodie, E., Cowling, E., Nissen, N., Paine, A. E., Jochum, V., & Warburton, D. (2009).
Understanding participation: A literature review. National Council for Voluntary
Organizations.
Bruns, B. (2003). Water tenure reform: Developing an extended ladder of participation. Politics
of the commons: Articulating development and strengthening local practices, Chiang Mai,
Thailand.
Burns, D., Heywood, F., Taylor, M., Wilde, P., & Wilson, M. (2004). Making community
participation meaningful. A handbook for development and assessment.
CAG Consultants ( n.d). Participation: a theoretical context.
Campbell, L. M., & Vainio-Mattila, A. (2003). Participatory development and community-based
conservation: Opportunities missed for lessons learned. Human Ecology, 31(3), 417-437.
Cavaye J. (1999). The Role of Government in Community Capacity Building. Brisbane:
Department of Primary Industries.
Challa, S. (2013). Hora Harsadi Irrecha. Afan Oromo version. Dukem, oromia.
Chambers, R. (1983). Rural Development: Putting the Last First, London: Longman Group
. (1993). Challenging the professions: frontiers for rural development. Intermediate
Technology Publications Ltd (ITP).
. (1994a). The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal. World
development, 22(7), 953-969.
204
. (1994b). Participatory rural appraisal (PRA): analysis of experience. World
development, 22(9), 1253-1268.
. (1995). Rural Appraisal: Rapid, Relaxed and Participatory. Chapter 1: In Mukherjee
A., ed., Participatory Rural Appraisal Methods and Applications in Rural Planning. New
Delhi: Concept.
. (1997). Whose reality counts?: putting the first last. Intermediate Technology
Publications Ltd (ITP), London.
. (2005). Ideas for Development, London: Earths can.
. (2007). Who counts? The quiet revolution of participation and numbers. IDS
Paper 296. University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
Working
Choguill, M. B. G. (1996). A ladder of community participation for underdeveloped
countries. Habitat international, 20(3), 431-444.
Claridge, G., & Claridge, C. L. (1997). Expanding the role of collaborative management and
stewardship in the conservation management of Australia's Marine and Coastal Resources.
Department of the Environment.
Cleaver, F. (1999). Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to
development. Journal of international development, 11(4): 597 – 612.
. (2001). Institutions, agency and the limitations of participatory approaches to
development. Participation: The new tyranny, 36-55.
Coffey, W. J., & Polese, M. (1984). The concept of local development: a stages model of
endogenous regional growth. Papers in Regional Science, 55(1), 1-12.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. London:
Routledge.
Collins, K., & Ison, R. (2006). Dare we jump off Arnstein's ladder? Social learning as a new
policy paradigm. In: Proceedings of PATH (Participatory Approaches in Science &
Technology) Conference, 4-7 June, Edinburgh.
Collins, K. M., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Sutton, I. L. (2006). A model incorporating the rationale
and purpose for conducting mixed methods research in special education and
beyond. Learning disabilities: a contemporary journal, 4(1), 67-100.
Colton D. and Covert R. (2007). Designing and Constructing Instruments for Social Research
and Evaluation. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, San Francisco, USA.
Cook, B., & Kothari, U. (2001). The case for participation as tyranny. Participation: The new
tyranny, 1-15. Zed Books.
205
Cornwall, A., & Jewkes, R. (1995). What is participatory research? Social science &
medicine, 41(12), 1667-1676.
Cornwall, A., & Gaventa, J. (2001). Bridging the gap: citizenship, participation and
accountability. PLA notes, 40(2001), 32-35.
Cornwall, A. (2008). Unpacking ‘Participation’: models, meanings and practices. Community
Development Journal, 43(3), 269-283.
Cornwall, A., Eyben, R., & Kabeer, N. (2008). Conceptualizing empowerment and the
implications for pro-poor growth. A paper for the DAC Poverty Network.
Craig, G., & Mayo, M. (1995). Community empowerment: A reader in participation and
development. Zed Books.
Craig, D. & Porter, D. (1997). Framing participation: Development projects, professionals, and
organizations. Development in Practice, 7(3), 229-236.
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches,
3rd ed, Sage publications Inc, California, USA.
Crocker, D. (2003). Participatory Development: The Capabilities Approach, and Deliberative
Democracy. College Park, Maryland, unpublished manuscript, 14, 02-09.
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research
process. Sage.
Danson M., Halkier H., & Cameron G. (2000). Institutional change, governance and regional
development: problems and perspectives. Governance, institutional change and regional
development. Aldershot (Ashgate), 266-275.
Gedefaw A. (2008). Assessment of Community Participation in Sida’s Woreda Support Program
Activities in Amhara Region: The case of Awabal Woreda, Unpublished Master Thesis,
Regional and Local Development Studies, Addis Ababa University.
Devas, N., & Grant, U. (2003). Local government decision‐making—citizen participation and
local accountability: Some evidence from Kenya and Uganda. Public Administration and
development, 23(4), 307-316.
Ernest, P. (1994). An introduction to research methodology and paradigms. Exeter, UK: School
of Education, University of Exeter.
Eyben, R. and Ladbury, S. (1995). Popular participation in aid-assisted projects: why more in
206
theory than practice? In ‘Power and Participatory Development’. (Ed. S Wright).
(Intermediate Technology Publications: London).
Eyben, R., Harris, C., & Pettit, J. (2006). Introduction: exploring power for change. IDS
bulletin, 37(6), 1-10.
FDRE (1995). Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Proclamation No.
1/1995.
_______. (2002). Ethiopia: sustainable development and poverty reduction program. Ministry of
Finance and Economic Development.
_______. (2003). Rural development policy & strategies. Ministry of Finance and Economic
Development.
_______. (2012). Construction industry policy. Ministry of urban development and construction.
_______. (2013). Urban development policy, third version. Ministry of urban development and
construction.
_______. (2016). Growth and transformation plan II (GTP II), 2015/16 – 2019/20.
Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS, 3rd ed, Sage Publications.
Fitzgerald, J. & Green, L. N. (2002). Economic revitalization: cases and strategies for City and
suburb. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Fox, J. (1996). How Does Civil Society Thicken? The Political Construction of Social Capital in
Rural Mexico. World Development 24 (6), 1089–103.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder.
. (1972). (Translated by Myra Bergman Ramos). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London :
Sheed and Ward: London.
Friedmann, J. (1992). Empowerment: Politics of alternative development. Malden, MA:
Blackwell Publishers
Gack, E., & El-Gaili, N. (2007). Participatory approaches to development: an analysis of the
experiences of development projects in Sudan: a thesis presented in fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Development Studies at Massey
University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Gaventa, J. (2002). Towards participatory local
discussion. Currents, 28, 29-35.
governance:
Six
propositions
for
207
.(2004). Towards participatory governance: assessing
possibilities. Participation: From tyranny to transformation, 25-41.
the
transformative
Geddes, M., & Newman, I. (1999). Evolution and conflict in local economic development. Local
Economy, 14(1), 12-26.
Gedefaw A. (2008). Assessment of Community Participation in Sida’s Woreda Support Program
Activities in Amhara Region: The case of Awabal Woreda, Unpublished Master Thesis,
Regional and Local Development Studies, Addis Ababa University.
German Advisory Council on Global Change (1997). Local government implementation of
Agenda 21. Ways Towards Sustainable Management of Freshwater Resources: Annual
Report, 36-40.
Giddings, L. S., & Grant, B. M. (2009). From rigor to trustworthiness: validating mixed
methods. Mixed methods research for nursing and the health sciences, 119-134.
Gluck, P. (1999). National Forest Programs–significance of a forest
framework. Formulation and implementation of national forest programs, 1, 39-51.
policy
Graff, C. (2013). Mixed Methods Research (Chapter 3): In Hall R. & Roussel A. (2013)
Evidence-based Practice: An Integrative Approach to Research, Administration and Practice,
Jones & Bartlett Learning, LCC.
Greene, J. C. (2006). Toward a Methodology of Mixed Methods Social Inquiry, Research in the
Schools, 13 (1): 93-98.
. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Grindle, M. S., & Hilderbrand, M. E. (1995). Building sustainable capacity in the public sector:
what can be done? Public Administration and Development, 15(5), 441-463.
Grix, J. (2001). Demystifying Postgraduate Research, Birmingham: University of Birmingham
University Press.
. (2004). The foundations of research. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Grootaert, C. (2004). Measuring social capital: An integrated questionnaire (No. 18). World
Bank Publications.
. (2005). Assessing empowerment at the National level in Eastern Europe and Central
Asia. Measuring Empowerment: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives, 309-340.
Guba, E. G. (1990). The Alternative Paradigm Dialog. In. EG Guba (ed.) The Paradigm
Dialogue (p. 17-27).
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Handbook of
qualitative research, 2(163-194), 105.
208
Hartsock, N. (1985). Exchange theory: Critique from a feminist standpoint. Current perspectives
in social theory, 6, 57–70.
Haughton, G. (1999). Community Economic Development. The Stationary Office/Regional
Studies Association, London.
Haughton, G. & Counsell, D. (2004). Regions, spatial strategies and sustainable development.
Routledge.
Hayward, C., Simpson, L., & Wood, L. (2004). Still left out in the cold: problematizing
participatory research and development. Sociologia Ruralis, 44(1), 95-108.
Healey, P. (1998). Collaborative planning in a stakeholder society. Town planning review, 69(1),
1 - 21.
Henkel, H., & Stirrat, R. (2001). Participation as spiritual duty; empowerment as secular
subjection. Participation: The new tyranny, 168-184.
Hentschel, J., & Lanjouw, P. (1996). The World Bank participation sourcebook. The World
Bank.
Hur, M. H. (2006). Empowerment in terms of theoretical perspectives: exploring a typology of
the process and components across disciplines. Journal of community psychology, 34(5), 523.
IAPP (2007a). Spectrum of Public Participation. Thornton, CO: International Association for
Public Participation
Ibrahim, S., & Alkire, S. (2007). Agency and empowerment: A proposal for internationally
comparable indicators. Oxford development studies, 35(4), 379-403.
ILO (2000). Public participation in forestry in Europe and North America: Report of the team of
specialists on participation in forestry (Vol. 163). Sectoral Activities Department,
International Labour Office.
Jehle R. (1998). The concept of endogenous rural development in the framework of its
introduction in the regional policy in the Czech Republic. Zemědělská ekonomika, 44. Praha
Johannes, J. (2003). Institutions and development: a critical review (No. 210). OECD
Development Centre Working Paper.
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm
whose time has come. Educational researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed
methods research. Journal of mixed methods research, 1(2), 112-133.
209
Kabeer, N. (1999a). Resources, agency, achievements: Reflections on the measurement of
women's empowerment. Development and change, 30(3), 435-464.
. (1999b). The Conditions and Consequences of Choice: Reflection on the Measurement
of Women’s Empowerment. UNRISD Discussion Paper 108, United Nations Research
Institute for Social Development, Geneva.
Kelly, D. (2001). Community participation in rangeland management: a report for the Rural
Industries Research and Development Corporation. RIRDC.
Kesby, M. (2005). Retheorizing empowerment-through-participation as a performance in space:
Beyond tyranny to transformation. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30(4),
2037-2065.
Khan, M. R., & Ara, F. (2006). Women, participation and empowerment in local government:
Bangladesh union Parishad perspective. Asian Affairs, 29(1), 73-92.
Khan, A. R., & Bibi, Z. (2011). Women's socio-economic empowerment through participatory
approach: a critical assessment. Pakistan Economic and Social Review, 49(1), 133-148.
Kothari, U. (2001). Power, knowledge and social
development. Participation: The new tyranny, 139-152.
control
in
participatory
Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research
activities. Educational and psychological measurement, 30(3), 607-610.
Krzmarzick, A. (n.d). The Govloop Guide: innovation at the point of citizen engagement: making
every moment count. Washington,DC.: Govloop.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lawrence, A. (2006). ‘No personal motive?’Volunteers, biodiversity, and the false dichotomies
of participation. Ethics Place and Environment, 9(3), 279-298.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry (Vol. 75). Sage.
Luttrell, C., Quiroz, S., Scrutton, C., & Bird, K. (2009). Understanding and operationalizing
empowerment. Working Paper 308, 1-16. London: Overseas Development Institute.
Malhotra, A., Schuler, S. R., & Boender, C. (2002). Measuring women’s empowerment
as a variable in international development. Social Development Group, World Bank.
Mayo, M., & Craig, G. (1995). Community participation and empowerment: the human face of
structural adjustment or tools for democratic transformation? Community empowerment: A
reader in participation and development, 1, 1-11.
210
Mekuria, B. (2015). Oromia’s Irreecha Festival: a revival of an ancient African Culture. An
Attempt to Understand and Explain.
Mertens, D. M. (2010). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating
diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods, 3rd ed. Sage publications.
Michener, V. J. (1998). The participatory approach: contradiction and co-option in Burkina
Faso. World development, 26(12), 2105-2118.
Migiro, S. O., & Magangi, B. A. (2011). Mixed methods: A review of literature and the future of
the new research paradigm. African Journal of Business Management, 5(10), 3757-3764.
Mogalakwe, M. (2006). The use of documentary research methods in social research. African
sociological review, 10(1), 221-230.
Mohammadi, S.H., Norizizan, S. & Ahmad, N. (2010). Citizens' attitude towards (sic) local
government and citizen's (sic) participation in local government. Journal of American
Science, 6(11), 575-583.
Mohan, G., & Stokke, K. (2000). Participatory development and empowerment: the dangers of
localism. Third world quarterly, 21(2), 247-268.
Mohan, G. (2001). Participatory development. In: Desai, Vandana and Potter, Rob eds, The
Arnold companion to development studies. London, UK: Hodder, pp. 49–54.
Moore, M. (2001). Empowerment at last? Journal of International Development, 13(3), 321-329.
Morgan, K. (2004). Sustainable regions: governance, innovation and scale. European Planning
Studies, 12(6), 871-889.
Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained methodological implications of
combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of mixed methods research, 1(1),
48-76.
Musyoki, J. K., Mugwe, J., Mutundu, K., & Muchiri, M. (2013). Determinants of household
decision to join community forest associations: a case study of Kenya. ISRN Forestry, 2013.
Narayan, D. (2002). Empowerment and poverty reduction: A sourcebook. World Bank
Publications.
. (2003). Empowerment through participation: How effective is this approach? Economic
and Political Weekly, 2484-2486.
. (2005). Measuring empowerment: Cross-disciplinary perspectives. World Bank
Publications.
211
Ndekha, A., Hansen, E. H., Molgaard, P., Woelk, G., & Furu, P. (2003). Community
participation as an interactive learning process: experiences from a schistosomiasis control
project in Zimbabwe. Acta Tropica, 85(3), 325-338.
Nelson, N., & Wright, S. (1995). Participation and power. In N. Nelson & S. Wright (Eds.),
Power and participatory development: Theory and practice, (pp. 1-18). Intermediate
Technology Publications.
Nkonjera, A. M. (2008). . Community participation in water development projects in Mbeya
district, Tanzania (Doctoral dissertation, Sokoine university of agriculture).
Northern Ireland Economic Council (NIEC) (2000). Local Development: A Turning Point.
Occasional Paper 1.
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge
university press.
Nwachukwu, P. T. T. (2011). The impact of socio-economic status of the people towards
participation in developmental programs (Doctoral dissertation, University of Zululand).
Oakley, P. (1991). Projects with people: The practice of participation in rural development.
International Labor Organization.
. (1995). People’s participation in development projects: A critical review of current
theory and practices.
OECD (1995). Participatory Development and Good Governance. Development Co-Operation
Guidelines Series, Paris.
OIUDB (2012). Public Participation Manual. ONRS Industry and Urban Development Bureau.
ONRS (2001). Oromia Regional State Revised Constitution. Proclamation No. 46/2001.
. (2003). The Urban Local Government Proclamation of the Oromia National Regional
State. Proclamation No. 65/2003.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2005). On becoming a pragmatic researcher: The
importance
of
combining
quantitative
and
qualitative
research
methodologies. International journal of social research methodology, 8(5), 375-387.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Johnson, R. B. (2006). The validity issue in mixed research. Research in
the Schools, 13(1), 48-63.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Dickinson, W. B., Leech, N. L., & Zoran, A. G. (2009). A qualitative
framework for collecting and analyzing data in focus group research. International
journal of qualitative methods, 8(3), 1-21.
212
Oppong, S. H. (2013). The problem of sampling in qualitative research. Asian journal of
management sciences and education, 2(2), 202-210.
Oriakhi, H., Onemolease, E., & Amla, R. (2012). Determinants of Rural Household’s willingness
to participate in community based health insurance scheme in Edo State, Nigeria. Stud
Ethno-Med, 6, 95-102.
Oscar, D.M. (2013). Towards localism: providing for grass-roots citizens' 'voice' in policy and
decision-making for sustainable development. Journal of African & Asian Local Government
Studies, 2(4), 21 – 41.
Osifo, O. C. (2015). Public management research and a three qualitative research
strategy. Review Public Administration and Management, 3(1): 149.
O’Sullivan E. & Rassel G. (1991). Research Methods for Public Administrator. Longman, New
York.
Oxaal, Z., & Baden, S. (1997). Gender and empowerment: definitions, approaches and
implications for policy (No. 40). Bridge, Institute of Development Studies.
Oyegbami, A., Fabusoro, E., Awotunde, J.M. & Apantaku, S. O. (2016). Extent of Rural
Women’s Participation in Community Development Projects in Iddo Local Government Area
of Oyo State, Nigeria. British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioral Science 16(1), 110.
Pallant J. (2011). SPSS Survival Manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS (4th
ed). Australia: Allen & Unwin.
Parfitt, T. (2004). The ambiguity of participation: a qualified defence of participatory
development. Third world quarterly, 25(3), 537-555.
Pelling, M. (1998). Participation, social capital and vulnerability to urban flooding in
Guyana. Journal of International Development, 10(4), 469-486.
Petesch, P., Smulovitz, C., & Walton, M. (2005). Evaluating empowerment: A framework with
cases from Latin America. Measuring empowerment: Cross-disciplinary perspectives, 39-67.
Pettit, J. (2012). Empowerment and Participation: bridging the gap between understanding and
practice. United Nations Headquaters.
Pike, A., Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Tomaney, J. (2007). What kind of local and regional
development and for whom? Regional studies, 41(9), 1253-1269.
Platteau, J. P. (2008). Pitfalls of participatory Development. United Nations. http://www. fundp.
ac. be/pdf/publications/61702. pdf.
213
Pretty, J. N. (1995). Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture. World development, 23(8),
1247-1263.
. (1999, July). Assets-based agriculture: A new model for sustainability thinking and
practice. In International Symposium on Society and Natural Resources (pp. 7-10).
Pring, G., & Noé, S. Y. (2002). The emerging international law of public participation affecting
global mining, energy, and resources development. Human Rights in Natural Resource
Development, 11-76.
Rahnema, M. (1992). Participation. The development dictionary: A guide to knowledge as power.
London: Zed Books.
Rappaport, J. (1987). Terms of empowerment/exemplars of prevention: Toward a theory for
community psychology. American journal of community psychology, 15(2), 121-148.
Richards, K. (2003). Qualitative inquiry in TESOL. Springer.
Robson, C. (2002). Real world research. 2nd. Edition. Blackwell Publishing. Malden.
Rowlands, J. (1995). Empowerment examined. Development in practice, 5(2), 101-107.
. (1997). Questioning Empowerment: Working with Women in Honduras. Oxfam.
Sadan, E. (1997). Empowerment and community planning: Theory and practice of peoplefocused social solutions. Tel Aviv: Hakibbutz Hameuchad Publishers.
Saegert, S., & Winkel, G. (1996). Paths to community empowerment: Organizing at
home. American Journal of Community Psychology, 24(4), 517-550.
Samah, A. A., & Aref, F. (2011). The theoretical and conceptual framework and application of
community empowerment and participation in processes of community development in
Malaysia. Journal of American Science, 7(2), 186-195.
Samah, A. A., & Ndaeji, M. N. (2014). Participation and Empowerment Through Self Help
Groups: Does Volunteerism Mediate the Relationship? British Journal of Applied Science &
Technology, 4(16), 2344.
Scheyvens, R. (1999). Ecotourism and the empowerment of local communities. Tourism
management, 20(2), 245-249.
Schoburgh, E. D. (2012). Local government and local development: Bridging the gap through
critical discourse: Evidence from the Commonwealth Caribbean. Commonwealth Journal of
Local Governance, (10), 5 – 31.
Scott, J. (1990). A Matter of Record: Documentary Sources in Social Research. Cambridge:
Polity Press.
214
Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford University Press.
. (2005). The argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian history, culture and identity.
Macmillan.
Shah, I. A., & Baporikar, N. (2012). Participatory approach to development in Pakistan. Journal
of Economic and Social Studies, 2(1), 111-141.
Sheikh, M. J., Redzuan, M. R., Abu Samah, A., & Ahmad, N. (2014). Factors influencing
farmers' participation in water management: a community development perspective. IOSR
Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 19(11), 59-63.
Shields, P. M. (1998). Pragmatism as a philosophy of science: A tool for public administration.
Research in Public Administration, 4, 195-225.
Simon M. (2011). Analysis of Qualitative Data, Dissertation and Scholarly Research: Recipes
for Success. Seattle.
Smith, B. L. (2003). Public policy and public participation: engaging citizens and community in
the development of public policy. Health Canada.
Smulovitz, C, Petesch, P., & Walton, M. (2005). Evaluating empowerment: A framework with
cases from Latin America. Measuring empowerment: Cross-disciplinary perspectives, 39-67.
Sow, N. (2012). Women’s Political Participation and Economic Empowerment in Post-conflict
Countries: Lessons from the Great Lakes region in Africa. International Alert, 1-47.
Speer, P. W., and J. Hughey (1995). Community organizing: an ecological route to
empowerment and power. American Journal of Community Psychology 23(5):729-748.
Sseguya, H., Owusu, F. Y., Mazur, R. E., & Njuki, J. M. (2013). Determinants of participation
and leadership in food security groups in Southeast Uganda: Implications for development
programs and policies. Journal of Rural and Community Development, 8(1), 77-97.
Tabachnick, B.G. & Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed). Boston: Pearson
Education.
Tagarirofa, J., & Chazovachii, B. (2013). Exploring the politics of local participation in rural
development projects: small dams rehabilitation project in Zimbabwe. Russian Journal of
Agricultural and Socio-Economic Sciences, 14(2), 74 – 88.
Tashakkori A. & Creswell, J. W. (2007). Exploring the Nature of Research Questions in Mixed
Methods Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 207 – 211.
Taylor, J., & Armstrong, H. W. (2000). Regional economics and policy, 3rd ed. London,
Blackwell.
215
Teddlie, C., & Yu, F. (2007). Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of
mixed methods research, 1(1), 77-100.
Thomas, P. (2013). Challenges for Participatory Development in Contemporary Development
Practices, Development Bulletin No. 35.
Thompson, J. (1995). Participatory approaches in government bureaucracies: Facilitating the
process of institutional change. World Development, 23(9), 1521-1554.
Tritter, J. Q., & McCallum, A. (2006). The snakes and ladders of user involvement: moving
beyond Arnstein. Health policy, 76(2), 156-168.
Tsegaye Gebremedhin (n.d). The story of Irrecha. Ethiopian studies publication.
Ul Haq, M. (1993). Human development report 1993: people's participation. In Human
development report 1993: people's participation. UNDP.
UNDP (1995). Human Development Report, New York, Oxford University Press.
. (1998). Capacity Assessment and Development: in a Systems and Strategic
Management Context. Technical Advisory Paper No. 3.
. (2005). Measuring Capacities: an Illustrative Catalogue to Benchmarks and
Indicators. Capacity Development Group Bureau for Development Policy.
United Nations (1986). Declaration on the Right to Development. General Assembly resolution
41/128.
United Nations Economic Commission For Europe (UNECE) (1991). The Convention on
Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context. Espoo Convention, Espoo
Finland.
Uphoff, N. T. (1992). Local institutions and participation for sustainable development. London:
Sustainable Agriculture Program of the International Institute for Environment and
Development.
. (2005). Analytical issues in measuring empowerment at the community and local
levels. Measuring Empowerment: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives (W ashington, DC, The W
orld Bank), 219-246.
VeneKlasen, L., & Miller, V. (2002). Power and empowerment ‘. PLA notes, 43, 39-41.
Webler, T., & Tuler, S. (2006). Four perspectives on public participation process in
environmental assessment and decision making: Combined results from 10 case
studies. Policy Studies Journal, 34(4), 699-722.
216
Whaley, D.L. & Weaver, L. (2010). Approaches to more community engagement. Waterloo,
Ont.: Tamarack.
White, A. (1981). Community participation in water and sanitation: concepts, strategies and
methods. In IRC Technical Paper Series (Vol. 17). IRCCWSS.
White, S. C. (1996). Depoliticizing development:
participation. Development in practice, 6(1), 6-15.
the
uses
and
abuses
of
Wilcox, D. (1994). Community participation and empowerment: putting theory into
practice. RRA Notes, 21, 78-82.
Williams, G., Veron, R., Corbridge, S., & Srivastava, M. (2003). Participation and power: Poor
people's engagement with India's employment assurance scheme. Development and
Change, 34(1), 163-192.
Yang, K., Holzer, M., & Zhang, Y. (2007). Dealing with multiple paradigms in public
administration research. In Handbook of Research Methods in Public Administration, Second
Edition. CRC Press.
Yemiru T. (2011). Participatory Forest Management for Sustainable Livelihoods in the Bale
Mountains, Southern Ethiopia. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Swedish University of
Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.
Zimmerman, M. A., Israel, B. A., Schulz, A., & Checkoway, B. (1992). Further explorations in
empowerment theory: an empirical analysis of psychological empowerment. American
journal of community psychology, 20(6), 707-727.
217
Annexes
Annex 1: Codebook of collapsed variables used in analysis
Original variable name
Age
Collapsed SPSS Variable
name
Agegroup5
Fam_Size
Famsizegroup3
Income
Incomegp4
Coding instructions
Visually bin Age
Category 5
Visually bin Family size
Category 3
Visually bin income
Category 4
Annex 2: Codebook of defining Multiple-Response items
Full variable name
Multiple response of means of part
in LD
SPSS Variable name
$Part_Approach
Multiple response of factors
initiating participation in LD
$Initiation_factors
Multiple response of ways of part
in need identification
$Needident_Ways
Multiple response of ways of
setting priority of dev’t needs
$Priorityset_Ways
Multiple response of challenges of
people part in dev’t
$Part_Chalenges
Coding instructions
Identify variables in list
Indicated counted value
Give name and label of new variable
Identify variables in list
Indicated counted value
Give name and label of new variable
Identify variables in list
Indicated counted value
Give name and label of new variable
Identify variables in list
Indicated counted value
Give name and label of new variable
Identify variables in list
Indicated counted value
Give name and label of new variable
x
Annex 3: Codebook of total scale scores used in analysis
Full variable name
SPSS Variable name
Total Extent of Part in Development
process
TEPDP
Total City Government Capacity
TCGCap
Total personal Empowerment
TPemp
Total Social Empowerment
Tsemp
Total Political Empowerment
Tplemp
Total part in phases of dev’t process
Tpart_Devprocess
Total empowerment through part in
dev’t
Temp
Coding instructions
Add all items Identifying_level to
Evaluation_level
Range 6 to 30
Reverse items CGCap2, CGCap3,
CGCap6
Add all items CGCap1 to CGCap6
Range 8 to 29
Reverse items Pemp2, Pemp4, Pemp6,
Pemp8, Pemp10
Add all items Pemp1 to Pemp10
Range 10 to 50
Reverse items Semp2, Semp4, Semp6
Add all items Semp1 to Semp7
Range 7 to 35
Reverse items Plemp2, Plemp4,
Plemp6, Plemp8
Add all items Plemp1 to Plemp8
Range 8 to 40
Add all items Need_identi to
Part_evaluation
Range 1 to 2
Add Tpemp, Tsemp and Tplemp
xi
Annex 4: Collinearity Statistics of predictors included in predicting participation in development.
Independent variables
Tolerance
VIF
Sex
.830
1.205
Age
30 - 35
.614
1.628
36 - 40
.610
1.640
41 - 45
.585
1.710
46+
.528
1.892
Family size
3-4
.793
1.261
5+
.844
1.185
Occupation
Managerial
.421
2.376
Clerical
.684
1.461
Agriculture
.831
1.203
Others
.546
1.832
Education level
Illiterate
.715
1.399
Primary
.732
1.366
Certificate
.727
1.375
Diploma
.558
1.791
Degree +
.467
2.143
Employment category
Civil servant
.566
1.768
private
.692
1.445
NGO
.796
1.256
Others
.531
1.884
Income
1000.01 - 2000
.529
1.889
2000.01 - 3665
.500
1.999
3665
.443
2.257
CG Responsiveness
.913
1.095
CG Capacity
.917
1.090
Source: Multiple Regressions Analysis Output
xii
Annex 5: Mahalanobis distance statistics and Cook’s Distance value of determinants of participation
Residuals Statistics
Predicted Value
Std. Predicted Value
Standard Error of Predicted
Value
Adjusted Predicted Value
Residual
Std. Residual
Stud. Residual
Deleted Residual
Stud. Deleted Residual
Mahal. Distance
Cook's Distance
Centered Leverage Value
Minimum Maximum
7.3876
11.5340
-2.653
2.439
Mean
9.5478
.000
Std. Deviation
.81420
1.000
N
418
418
.387
.823
.527
.077
418
7.2644
-4.58080
-2.145
-2.211
-4.86327
-2.222
12.685
.000
.030
11.6593
3.47517
1.628
1.670
3.65945
1.674
60.978
.021
.146
9.5512
.00000
.000
-.001
-.00338
-.001
24.940
.003
.060
.82715
2.07018
.970
1.002
2.21004
1.003
7.936
.003
.019
418
418
418
418
418
418
418
418
418
a. Dependent Variable: recoding total score of part in dev't process
Annex 6: Normal P-P Plot of Regression Standardized Residual
xiii
Appendices
Appendix A: Questionnaire for Households
The purpose of this questionnaire is to collect data for the study entitled "Participatory Local Development:
Processes, contexts, and effects in the case of Bishoftu City" for partial fulfillment of PhD degree in Public
Management and Policy. The genuine responses you forward will be used as input for the study and have great
contribution to the success of the study. Your privacy will be kept anonymously and, therefore, no one knows who
provided the information. Furthermore, any information you provide in the questionnaire will be kept confidential
and only used for the purpose of the study. Therefore, you are kindly requested to provide your genuine responses
to different questions below.
…Thank You in advance for your cooperation!
If you have any question concerning this questionnaire, please feel free to contact me: Bahiru Detti;
Tel.0911865669; E-mail: bahirudetti@gmail.com. Alternatively or as deemed necessary, you can contact
department of Public Administration & Development management, AAU, at 0111-229763.
General Instruction: - Circle your response for closed -ended questions among the provided alternatives but write
your response in the space provided for open-ended questions.
Note: Local development activities in this questionnaire refer to:
 Electricity (new power installation, provision of streetlight, maintenance of old power lines)
 Road (preparation of land, improving road size, cobble stone, red ash, bridge, ditch)
I. Socio-Economic Characteristics
1. Sex: 1. Female
2. Male
2. Age (in year):
3. Family size (productive age)
4. Occupation status:
1. Legislators, Senior Officials and Managers
2. Professionals
3. Technicians and Associate Professionals
4. Clerks
5. Service, Shop or Market sales workers
6. Skilled Agricultural and Fishery Workers
7. Craft and Related Trade Workers
8. Plant and Machine Operators and Assemblers
9. Elementary Occupations
10. Member of Defense forces
11. Other (please specify)
5. Employment category :
1. Civil servant
2. Self-employed
3. Private organization
4. Non-Government Organization
5. Unpaid family work
6. Other (not else classified)
7. Education level (Highest level attended)
1. Cannot read and write
2. Read and write
3. Primary school
4. Secondary school
5. Certificate
6. Diploma
7. First Degree and above
8. Income level per month (in Birr)
xiv
1. salary/Wage
2. Interest from saving money
3. House Rent
4. Rent of (land, Machinery, Drought animals, and storage, etc.)
5. Remittance
6. Dividend (profit share)
7. Pension
8. Livestock
9. Profit from business activities
10. Others (not else classified)
II. Process of public Participation in Development
8
Did you participate in development activities
1. Yes
2. No
9
If your answer for question 8 is “yes” how do you
participate in development?
10
1.
What were the factors initiate you to participate in local
development activities?
1. Financal contribution
2. Material contribution
3. Labor contribution
4. Professional service
5. Other (please specify)_____________
1. As a precondition to acquire benefits from
government opportunities
2. To improve basic service delivery
3. To improve my capacity
4. Other (please specify) _____________
_______________________________
11
Did you participate in identifying local development
needs?
12
13
14
If your answer for question 11 is “yes” how do you
participate in development?
Did you participate in setting priority of local
development needs?
If your answer for question 13 is “yes” how do you
participate in development?
1.
2.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Yes
No
Through Shane meeting
Through Gare meeting
Through Gote Meeting
Through Kebele meeting
Through committee representation
Other ______________________
1.
2.
Yes
No
1. Through Shane meeting
2. Through Gare meeting
3. Through Gote Meeting
4. Through Kebele meeting
5. Through committee representation
6. Other ______________________
15
16
17
18
Did you participate in planning of local development
activities in the City?
1.
2.
Yes
No
Did you participate in the implementation of local
development activities?
Did you participate in the monitoring of the
implementation of local development activities?
Did you participate in the local development activities
performance evaluation?
1.
2.
1.
2.
1.
2.
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
xv
19
20
Do you think that your opinions are considered properly
in needs identification, priority setting planning,
implementation as well as evaluating local development
activities?
What are the major challenges to people participation in1.
development in the City?
1.
Yes
2.
No
1. Incompatibility of Government policies
2. Credibility and behavior of the City
Government staff
3. Socio-cultural norms
4. Power relations
5. Communities previous experiences
6. Organization and level of education
7. Other (please specify) _____________
21. How do you rate the extent of people’s participation in the process of local development in Bishoftu City in
general? Please indicate "√" in the box beneath your rating.
Scale: 1= Very high; 2=High; 3= Average/medium; 4= Low; 5= Very low
S/N
Item
21.1
21.2
21.3
21.4
21.5
21.6
1
2
3
4
5
The participation of people in identifying development needs
The participation of people in setting priorities for development needs
The participation of people in development planning
The participation of people in the implementation of development
activities
The participation of people in monitoring the implementation of
development activities
The participation of people in evaluating the performance of
development activities
III. Institutional contexts of people participation in development
22. Do you know the existence of Community Participation Board in the City?
1. Yes
2. No (Skip to Q 26)
23. How the members of Community Participation Board are usually selected?
1. Elected by the residents
2. Assigned by government based on political loyalty
3. Prominent persons in the community take the positions
4. Other
24. Do you believe that Community Participation Board influence the decision making process regarding need
identification, planning and implementation of development activities in the City?
1. Yes
2. No
25. To what extent is the Community Participation Board effective in managing development process?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Highly effective
Effective
Medium
Ineffective
Highly ineffective
26. To what extent is the City government responsive to public participation in development?
1. Very responsive
2. Responsive
3. Medium
xvi
4. Irresponsive
5. Very irresponsive
27. City Government Capacity to facilitate people participation in local development
The following questions refer to the City Government capacity to facilitate people participation in local
development. Please respond to them by putting "√" for the alternative that best represent your degree of agreement
to the items. Rating scale ranges from strongly agree to strongly disagree and it is represented by numbers 1 to 5.
Scale: 1= Strongly agree; 2= Agree; 3= Undecided (neither agree nor disagree); 4= Disagree; 5= Strongly disagree
S/N
Items
1
2
3
4
5
27.1
The City Government is inclusive in enhancing people’s participation in
development
27.2
The City Government facilitates people’s participation in development
in an unaccountable manner
27.3
The structure of City Government is not conducive to the participation
of people in development activities
27.4
The institutional culture of the City Government foster people’s
participation in development
27.5
The City Government has a strong leadership committed to facilitating
participation in development.
27.6
The City Government workers have no better attitude towards peoples
participation in development
IV. Empowerment of local people through participation in development
The following questions refer to personal, social and political empowerments of people through participation in
development. Please respond to them by putting "√" for the alternative that best represent your degree of agreement
to the items. Rating scale ranges from strongly agree to strongly disagree and it is represented by numbers 1 to 5.
Scale: 1= Strongly agree; 2= Agree; 3= Undecided (neither agree nor disagree); 4= Disagree; 5= Strongly disagree
28. Personal Empowerment of residents through participation in local development
S/N
Item
1
2
3
4
5
Participation in development boosts my strategic accumulation of
28.1
practical experiences
Participating in development does not improves my personal
28.2
confidence that I could do things
28.3
Participation in development improves my skills
Participation in development does not improve my ability to analyze
28.4
my own situation and solve problems
Participation in development creates in me the belief that my actions
28.5
can have effects
Participation in development does not enhance my capacity to control
28.6
over personal decisions that affect my everyday life
Participation in development enhances the development of self28.7
esteem in me
Participation in development does not enhance the development of
28.8
feeling of freedom of choice in me
Participation in development enhances on self reliance to improve my
28.9
life
Participation in development does not enhance creativity that
28.10
improves my life
29. Social empowerment of local people through participation in local development
S/N
Item
1
2
29.1 Participation in development enhances formation of internal
mechanisms for cohesion of the people
29.2 Participation in development does not enhance good relationship and
cooperation among the people
3
4
5
xvii
29.3
29.4
29.5
29.6
29.7
Participation in development increases the level of trust among the
people.
Participation in development does not increase the sense of helping
each other among the people
Participation in development enhances group work or interaction
among work groups in the City
Participation in development does not enhances social links among the
people
Participation in development enhances the feeling of togetherness or
closeness among people
30. Political Empowerment of the local people through participation in local development
S/N
Item
1
2
Participation in development improves people’s access to government
30.1
information/services
Participation in development does not improve people’s capabilities to
30.2
interact with local governments
Participation in development improves the capacity of people to
30.3
influence local government decisions
Participation in development does not improve people’s capacity to
30.4
petition government officials or political leaders for something
benefiting the community
Participation in development improves interest of people to attend a
30.5
village/neighborhood public hearing or public discussion group
Participation in development does not improve awareness of people to
30.6
notify authorities about local problem
Participation in development enable people to influence public policy
30.7
process
30.8
Participation in development does not increase people lobbying power
3
4
5
31. Any comments that you have
Thank You Once Again for Your Cooperation and Helpfulness!
xviii
Appendix B: Focus Group Discussion Guide with Residents
I. Process of people participation in development
1. What were the fundamental triggering factors that initiate people’s participation in Bishoftu City?
2. Have the residents initiated any development projects or created new ideas for local development activities? If
yes, please give examples.
3. How did people’s participation in development start initially at Bishoftu City?
4. In what form/approach people participate in development activities?
 Labor
 Funding
 Idea/Professional
 Material
5. Which form of people participation in development is/are dominant in Bishoftu City? Why?
6. What are the types of development activities up on which people participate in the City? On which ones people
intensively participate? Why?
7. How do the needs for local development identified and priorities set?
8. If, people involved in identifying the need, what are the roles played by local people in identifying and
evaluating the needs?
9. Are people participated in:
 The process of planning local development? How?
 Monitoring the implementation of development activities?
 the evaluation of development activities? How?
10. What roles do the people play in managing financial and other resources they provide for local development?
II. Institutional Issues
11. How development committee/Community participation Board (CPB) members are selected in the city?
12. What are the criteria for selection of development committee/ Community participation Board (CPB) members?
13. Are there rules, procedures and regulations formulated and enforced by city government to guide people’s
participation in development? Do the public have knowledge of these rules and regulations?
14. Does the city government have the commitment to facilitate people’s participation in development through
policies, conducting trainings, and the like?
15. How do government workers respond to people’s participation in development?
16. Do you think that the city government is inclusive and accountable in enhancing people’s participation in
development and empowerment of people through participation?
17. How do you rate the institutional culture of the city government in fostering people’s participation in
development?
18. Does the city government provide community capacity building to facilitate people participation in
development? If so what are the capacity building activity undertaken by city government?
III. Empowerment of people through participation in development
19. Personal Empowerment:
 Improvements in (experience, confidence, skills, beliefs, creativity, control over own decisions, feeling
of freedom of choice, self reliance, capacity to challenge their problems by themselves) of the people as
the result of participation in development.
20. Social Empowerment:
 enhancement of (formation of internal mechanisms for cohesion of the people; good relationship and
cooperation among the people; group work or interaction among work groups in the City; social links
among the people; the feeling of togetherness or closeness among people ) and
 improvements in (the level of trust among the people; the sense of helping each other among the
people;)of people as the result of participation in development
21. Are there social organizations engineered such as youth groups, women’s groups and others as the result of
participation in development?
22. Does people participation in development result in considerable improvements of social and economic
infrastructure in the City? Can you mention these improvements?
23. How much peoples’ participation in development improves the access of people to economic and social
services?
xix
24.
25.
26.
27.
Are there economic opportunities created as the result of people participation in local development?
Does participatory development create access to economic resources? What are these resources?
Who is benefited from the fruits of participatory development: women, youth and poor people or all?
Political Empowerment as the result of people’s participation in development:
 Improvements in people relationships with City Government? What are the manifestations of the
improvements?
 Improvements in the capacity of people to influence city government decisions
 Enhancement people’s awareness about political process and governance?
 Improvements in people’s access to government information/services
 Improvements in people’s capabilities to interact with local governments
 Improvements in people’s capacity to petition government officials or political leaders for something
benefiting the community
 Improvements in interest of people to attend a village/neighborhood public hearing or public
discussion group
 Improvements in awareness of people to notify authorities about local problem
 enable people to influence public policy process
 Participation in development does not increase people lobbying power
28. What are the major challenges to people participation in development and empowerment of the people through
participation in development in the City?
29. Any additional comments you have
Thank You Once Again for Your Cooperation and Helpfulness!
xx
Appendix C: Interview Guide for Development Committee Leaders
I. Process of participation in development
1. What were the fundamental triggering factors that initiate people’s participation in development in Bishoftu
City?
2. Have the residents initiated any development projects or created new ideas for local development activities?
3. How did people’s participation in development start initially at Bishoftu City?
4. In what form/approach people participate in development activities?
- Labor
- Funding
- Idea/Professional
- Material
5. Which form of people participation in development is/are dominant in Bishoftu City? Why?
6. What are the types of development activities up on which people participate in the City? On which ones people
intensively participate? Why?
7. How do the needs for local development identified and priorities set?
8. If, people involved in identifying the need, what are the roles played by local people in identifying and
evaluating the needs?
9. Are people involved in the process of planning local development? How?
10. Are people get participated in monitoring the implementation of development activities?
11. Are people get participated in the evaluation of development activities? How?
12. What roles do the people play in managing financial and other resources they provide for local development?
II. Institutional Issues
13. How do development committee members elected?
14. What are the roles/responsibilities of the committee in the process of local development (planning,
implementation, monitoring and evaluation)?
15. How frequently the committee discusses with the public about the progress of development projects?
16. Are public officials and bureaucracy interested to facilitate people participation in development?
17. What are the supports provided by City government to enhance people participation in development?
18. Does the city government have experts capable to facilitate people’s participation in development?
19. Are there rules, procedures and regulations formulated and enforced by city government to guide people’s
participation in development? Do the public have knowledge of these rules and regulations?
20. How do you rate the institutional culture of the city government in fostering people’s participation in
development?
21. Does the city government provide community capacity building to facilitate people participation in
development? If so what are the capacity building activity undertaken by city government?
III. Empowerment through participation in development
22. Personal Empowerment:
 Improvements in (experience, confidence, skills, beliefs, creativity, control over own decisions, feeling
of freedom of choice, self reliance, capacity to challenge their problems by themselves) of the people
as the result of participation in development.
23. Social Empowerment:
 enhancement of (formation of internal mechanisms for cohesion of the people; good relationship and
cooperation among the people; group work or interaction among work groups in the City; social links
among the people; the feeling of togetherness or closeness among people ) and
 improvements in (the level of trust among the people; the sense of helping each other among the
people;)of people as the result of participation in development
24. Are there social organizations engineered such as youth groups, women’s groups and others as the result of
participation in development?
25. Does people participation in development result in considerable improvements of social and economic
infrastructure in the City? Can you mention these improvements?
26. How much peoples’ participation in development improves the access of people to economic and social
services?
27. Are there economic opportunities created as the result of people participation in local development?
xxi
28. Does participatory development create access to economic resources? What are these resources?
29. Who is benefited from the fruits of participatory development: women, youth and poor people or all?
30. Political Empowerment as the result of people’s participation in development:
 Improvements in people relationships with City Government? What are the manifestations of the
improvements?
 Improvements in the capacity of people to influence city government decisions
 Enhancement people’s awareness about political process and governance?
 Improvements in people’s access to government information/services
 Improvements in people’s capabilities to interact with local governments
 Improvements in people’s capacity to petition government officials or political leaders for something
benefiting the community
 Improvements in interest of people to attend a village/neighborhood public hearing or public
discussion group
 Improvements in awareness of people to notify authorities about local problem
 enable people to influence public policy process
 Participation in development does not increase people lobbying power
31. What are the major challenges to people participation in development and empowerment of the people through
participation in development in the City?
32. Any additional comments you have
Thank You Once Again for Your Cooperation and Helpfulness!
Appendix D: Interview Guide for Public Officials and Experts
I. Process of People’s Participation in Development
1. What were the fundamental triggering factors that initiate people’s participation in development activities in the
City?
2. Have the residents initiated any development projects or created new ideas for local development activities? If
yes, please give examples.
3. How did people’s participation in development start initially at Bishoftu City?
4. In what form/approach people participate in development activities?
- Labor
- Funding
- Idea/Professional
- Material
5. Which form of people participation in development is/are dominant in Bishoftu City? Why?
6. What are the types of development activities up on which people participate in the City? On which ones people
intensively participate? Why?
7. How do the needs for local development identified and priorities set?
8. If, people involved in identifying the need, what are the roles played by local people in identifying and
evaluating the needs?
9. Are people involved in the process of planning local development? How?
10. Are people get participated in monitoring the implementation of development activities?
11. Are people get participated in the evaluation of development activities? How?
12. What roles do the people play in managing financial and other resources they provide for local development?
I. Institutional Issues
13. What are the roles of City Government in the process of people’s participation in local development?
14. What are the actions taken by City Government that allows active people participation in development to be
aroused?
15. Are there rules, regulations and procedures designed and formulated by City Government to guide the
participation of peoples’ in development?
16. Is there performance appraisal system designed by City Government for guiding performance evaluation of
people’s participation in development?
xxii
17. Does the City Government have adequate manpower to facilitate people’s participation in development?
18. How does the City Government allocate resources on pro poor participatory development activities?
19. What is the relationship between development committee/CPB and the City Government?
20. Formation, responsibilities and performance of CPB
II.
Empowerment of people through participation in development
21. Personal Empowerment:
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
 Improvements in (experience, confidence, skills, beliefs, creativity, control over own decisions, feeling
of freedom of choice, self reliance, capacity to challenge their problems by themselves) of the people as
the result of participation in development.
Social Empowerment:
 enhancement of (formation of internal mechanisms for cohesion of the people; good relationship and
cooperation among the people; group work or interaction among work groups in the City; social links
among the people; the feeling of togetherness or closeness among people ) and
 improvements in (the level of trust among the people; the sense of helping each other among the
people;)of people as the result of participation in development
Are there social organizations engineered such as youth groups, women’s groups and others as the result of
participation in development?
Does people participation in development result in considerable improvements of social and economic
infrastructure in the City? Can you mention these improvements?
How much peoples’ participation in development improves the access of people to economic and social
services?
Are there economic opportunities created as the result of people participation in local development?
Does participatory development create access to economic resources? What are these resources?
Who is benefited from the fruits of participatory development: women, youth and poor people or all?
Political Empowerment as the result of people’s participation in development:
 Improvements in people relationships with City Government? What are the manifestations of the
improvements?
 Improvements in the capacity of people to influence city government decisions
 Enhancement people’s awareness about political process and governance?
 Improvements in people’s access to government information/services
 Improvements in people’s capabilities to interact with local governments
 Improvements in people’s capacity to petition government officials or political leaders for something
benefiting the community
 Improvements in interest of people to attend a village/neighborhood public hearing or public
discussion group
 Improvements in awareness of people to notify authorities about local problem
 enable people to influence public policy process
 Participation in development does not increase people lobbying power
What are the major challenges to people participation in development and empowerment of the people through
participation in development in the City?
Any additional comments you have
Thank You Once Again for Your Cooperation and Helpfulness!
xxiii
Glossary
Akayi: fried cereals specially barely
Bishanoftu: land of excessive water body
Budena : Traditional Food prepared from some sort of Cereals
Ganda: administrative unit below central City Administration
Gare: Administrative arrangement below gote that encompasses 20 to 40 residents
Gote: administrative tier below ganda that encompasses 40 to 120 residents
Shane: an organization encompasses 1 to 5 residents.
xxiv