PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES TO NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

Richard S. Ondrik, Asian Development Bank

A. 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 themselves.”
- Framework for Mainstreaming Participatory Development Processes into Bank Operations, ADB. 1996

The Framework for mainstreaming participatory development processes in ADB was

introduced in 1996 in response to the need for ADB to do more to enhance the sense of
ownership among beneficiaries and DMC governments for projects supported by ADB, and for
greater beneficiary participation in all aspects of the project cycle. Although previous ADB
operations had promoted participation by concerned stakeholders in an ad hoc manner, it was
necessary to institutionalize the most effective of those practices into the ADB business
processes. Since then, the implementation and outcome activities initiated under the Framework
have been the subject of several ADB reviews.

Broader participation and engagement of key stakeholders, public transparency, and

institutional accountability have gained greater importance in the ADB. Lessons learned are
extremely helpful in facilitating the successful implementation of new policies and business
processes. These experiences have demonstrated that policies tend to be more effective when
there is stakeholder ownership of initiatives and new programs and projects that reflect their
needs and views. In 2003, ADB issued its policy on Promotion of Cooperation with Non
Government Organizations, recognizing the major role that NGO’s can play in pursuing ADB’s
overarching goal of poverty reduction and their ability to mobilize participation among
stakeholders and affected groups. The 2005 Public Communication Policy has enabled greater
access to information for those affected by ADB operations and expanded opportunities for
them to influence the decisions that shape their lives.

As shown in various studies done by the ADB and World Bank, effective development
requires the early and substantive involvement of all stakeholders in the design of activities that
will affect them. Indeed, there is high level of quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of
development initiatives when stakeholders view their participation as meaningful. In several
occasions, a consensus among development partners and intended beneficiaries is always
evident on the right of affected communities to participate in the activities. This strengthens the
justification for implementing participatory approaches in development planning.

Participating in formulating the fundamental goals as well as in planning and carrying out
an activity empowers stakeholders and fosters a sense of ownership. These facilitate effective
project implementation, conscientious monitoring of activities, and sustainable outcomes.
Effective poverty reduction also requires greater flexibility in responding to problems and
unexpected opportunities throughout project development, implementation, and monitoring.
Responsiveness and collaboration among intended beneficiaries, government, civil society, and
the private sector at local, intermediate (district, province, etc.) and national levels promote
social capital development and sound governance.1

1
ADB. 1999. Technical Assistance for Facilitating Capacity-Building and Participatory Activities II. Manila
 ADB undertook an evaluation study on capacity building and participation activities in 22
projects, poverty assessment studies, development of country strategy and program (CSP), and
other activities in 2000 and 2001. ADB and DMC personnel who participated in the study found
that it went far in supporting their work and in creating awareness among a range of
stakeholders about the needs of the intended beneficiaries (i.e., the poor). Furthermore, they
believed that the costs of participation were small compared with the gains.2 The study
concluded that:

“…participatory development can significantly enhance the effectiveness of ADB efforts

to reduce poverty in Asia and the Pacific. When citizens develop a sense of ownership of
development efforts as a consequence of their engagement in decision making about
selecting, planning, managing, and monitoring project activities, results are typically
enhanced and impact more sustained. Similarly, when relevant institutional stakeholders
are involved in designing programs or policy changes and planning their implementation,
the outcomes are usually improved. At the same time, capacities are built, social capital
enhanced, and partnerships between government, civil society, and the private sector
improved as people learn by working together in a supportive milieu. Thus, the additional
effort of early and careful participatory planning, plus facilitation and monitoring, combine
to affect poverty reduction broadly by addressing the economic, social, and governance
or institutional dimensions of poverty simultaneously and promoting more successful and
sustainable programs and projects.”

Under ADB’s enhanced Poverty Reduction Strategy, partnerships with civil society and
other development agencies were strengthened. At the country level, poverty assessments
helped to inform assistance programs while country strategies and programs (CSPs) generally
became more sharply focused on poverty reduction. However, the new PRS also provides
guidance for the future directions of ADB activities highlighting the central role that participatory
activities will play and mandates ADB staff to encourage greater participation. Prospects for
poverty reduction are greatest if DMCs lead the preparation of the NPRS and commit to its full
implementation. ADB’s resident missions are to play a leading role to strengthen operational
links to the NPRS by mobilizing all stakeholders, strengthening partnerships, and improving the
quality of its CSP. Resident missions are encouraged to forge partnerships with development
partners, including bilateral agencies and NGOs, to complement their own capacity for poverty
assessment and analyses. Furthermore, development partnerships are essential to poverty
reduction and attaining the MDGs. Close cooperation and harmonization efforts among
development partners can reduce transaction costs and thus increase development
effectiveness. ADB will further its collaboration with the International Monetary Fund and the
World Bank, United Nations agencies, and bilateral development organizations to include
country strategy, program implementation, analytical work, cofinancing, sector-wide assistance
approaches (SWAps), policy advocacy, and measuring and monitoring accomplishments in
relation to the MDGs and to other poverty indicators. Working through resident missions, ADB
will strengthen donor cooperation and will act together with stakeholders and civil society to
monitor progress in reducing poverty.

B. Who are they? - Stakeholders and Participatory Development

In its Handbook on Poverty and Social Analysis, ADB defines stakeholders as “people,
groups or institutions that may be affected by, can significantly influence or are important to the

2
ADB. 2003. Poverty and Social Development Papers No.6. Manila
achievement of the stated purpose of a project. They include government, civil society, and the
private sector at national, intermediate and local levels. These stakeholder groups are:

General public: those who are directly or indirectly affected by the project (women’s groups,
individuals and families, indigenous groups, religious groups)

Government: civil servants in ministries, cabinets, etc.

Representative assemblies: elected government bodies (parliament, national and local

assemblies, district and municipal assemblies, elected community leaders

Civil society organizations: networks, national and international NGOs, grassroots

organizations, trade unions, policy development and research institutes, media, community based
organizations.

Private sector: umbrella groups representing groups within the private sector, professional
associations, chambers of commerce.

Donor and international financial institutions: resource providers and development partners

The dynamics of development planning are changing, largely due to the increasing
participation and importance of the latter groups: (i) local government units (LGUs), (ii)
CSO/NGOs and the private sector, and (iii) development partners.

• Decentralization and devolution of authority to LGUs is a form of participation, in the

sense that sub-national agencies now play a bigger role in the bringing about national
progress. This change is particularly apparent in Indonesia and the Philippines. If more
LGUs and their constituent communities participate in the development process, the
potential for the country’s growth is stronger and more sustainable. While there are
LGUs which can operate efficiently on their own, the majority of the LGUs, particularly
those belonging to lower income classes, rely heavily on national government transfers
and external grants and technical assistance for their development needs. ADB
recognizes this constraint. As a response, ADB has been actively supporting local
government units providing access to funds for their capital expenditure requirements as
well as strengthening their capabilities to plan and manage their own resources.

• Cooperation with CSO/NGOs continues to strengthen the effectiveness and

sustainability of ADB poverty reduction efforts by harnessing NGO experience,
knowledge, and expertise. In its country-level operations, ADB acknowledges and
responds to governments as sovereign authorities and recognizes that NGOs are not
substitute for governments. Nevertheless, it recognizes NGOs as being important actors
and stakeholders in civil society and as having legitimate involvement in the national
development process, particularly in matters relating to poverty reduction and social
development.3 Thus, ADB fosters cooperation among ADB, government, and NGOs.
ADB works with NGOs under several circumstances; an example is when the underlying
causes of poverty need to be identified and confirmed at the beginning of the loan
design process: NGOs (both advocacy and operational)4 can provide alternative
analyses and suggestions for different approaches to resolving issues and concerns.

3
Guidelines for Involving Nongovernment Organization (NGOs) and Community-based Organizations (CBOs) in
Project Design.
4
Advocacy NGOs are focused on policies and actions that affect specific or broad development outcomes while
operational NGOs are focused on the delivery of development initiatives, e.g. environmental protection, and poverty
reduction.
 • Networks or consortia of regional and/or national CSO/NGOs have proliferated the past
years establishing platforms for both operations and advocacy. The NGO Forum on
ADB, an Asian-led network of NGOs and CBOs, monitors ADB policies, programs and
projects and amplifies their positions and advocacies on ADB operations. An interesting
excerpt from the history of the NGO Forum on ADB reads:

“Over the past decade and a half, the campaign has brought some modest yet significant
gains. The ADB campaign has contributed to changes in Bank policy in terms of
improved social and environmental guidelines for projects, new Bankwide lending
priorities, Bank initiatives in defining sectoral priorities on forestry, energy population,
involuntary resettlement, and information disclosure, a more open attitude to dialogue
with NGOs and communities, and more recently, the Bank’s shift to poverty reduction as
its “overarching framework”. Since the NGO Working Group (NGO Forum on ADB) was
created, practical lessons have been gained from the campaign experience.”
--NGO Forum on ADB (http://www.forum-adb.org)

• Global efforts towards harmonization among Governments and Development

Partners - The Philippines provides an excellent example where ADB has accelerated
activities with other development partners linked to these global efforts. Not only for joint
studies and shared work to support mutual frameworks of assistance, but also to expand
on-the-ground cooperative efforts. The Philippines Development Forum working groups
have been maintained, some co-chaired by ADB, that are preparing shared agendas for
support in areas such as local government and anti-corruption. There is a growing
linkage, through the sharing of design criteria and terms of reference, that provide for
ADB operations to benefit directly from LGU capacity-building programs under bilateral
grants, as well as discussions of shared personnel or consultant resources for joint
project development, feasibility studies and implementation support. In the area of
portfolio management, ADB works closely with the World Bank and Japan Bank for
International Cooperation (JBIC) through joint portfolio reviews, and regular technical
working group meetings. While joint missions with the World Bank, JBIC, and some
other bilateral partners maintain a consistent dialogue on harmonization and adoption of
country systems. ADB’s financial and technical resources complement those from
development partners, under the paradigm of “moving from coordination to cooperation”.
The range of development partners is widening to include more intensive dialogue with
civil society, members of Congress, and the private sector and ADB continues to
increase the partnerships for joint analytical and advisory work.

Like most development agencies, ADB has learned from bitter experience that failure to
generate effective participation among its stakeholders and ownership in the implementation of
projects invariably leads to unsatisfactory outcomes. Thus, ADB promotes participatory
processes because it recognizes that, ultimately, it is the collective efforts of government and
community that determine the success of development, rather than the impact of external
investment. The critical elements in determining the “quality at entry” of ADB investments are (i)
the level of ownership, (ii) participation of stakeholders in the design process, and (iii) strategy
for ongoing participation.

C. Incorporating Participatory Approaches and Methods

Participation ranges from superficial to deep—from passive exchange of information

to full engagement. Stakeholders may be engaged in many ways; from merely informed that
“development” is “happening” to taking part in projects that serve to help them take charge
of their own development.

Information sharing (or gathering) is at the passive or shallow end of the participation
scale. This may involve disseminating information about an intended program or asking
stakeholders to give information that will be used by others to help plan or evaluate a
project or other activity. In both cases, communication is one-way rather than interactive.

ADB generally uses the term consultation to describe any engagement of

stakeholders in its activities. In participatory development, however, the term is much more
narrowly defined; it refers to people being asked for their opinion about something while
development professionals listen to their views. Typically, the people involved exercised no
responsibility in formulating the original plan or the decisions that went into it, and the
development professionals are under no obligation to incorporate their views. Yet
consultation can be more or less participatory and can evolve into collaboration or shared
control. On one hand, if people are involved in defining a desired change, or in identifying a
problem and its solution, consultation can lead to greater networking—a key component of
social capital formation—and a sense of ownership of the project or policy being discussed.
On the other hand, many consultative processes focus solely on obtaining (relatively
passive) “buy in” for the already planned activity, or prescribed policy or program.
Consultation processes that primarily seek feedback to a predefined plan or strategy fall
near the shallow end of the depth of participation continuum.

Collaboration/joint decision making and empowerment/shared control represent what

most participatory development practitioners consider to be genuine participation. In each of
these stages, stakeholders are actively engaged and sustained results are achieved. In
collaboration, for example, people are invited by outsiders to meet a predetermined
objective: the development professional or organization identifies the problem or issues to
be discussed, and calls a group together to collaborate on that topic. The stakeholders may
not have initiated the collaboration, but they significantly influence the results. Groups or
subgroups are formed that build networks and improve structures or practices. People
themselves and the projects on which they work change as a result of their interaction. The
stakeholders’ ideas change the project design or implementation plan, or contribute to a
new policy or strategy. Most importantly, the development professional or organization that
solicited stakeholder involvement takes the peoples’ perspectives seriously and acts on
them.

Shared control involves deeper participation than collaboration. Citizens become

empowered by accepting increasing responsibility for developing and implementing action
plans that are accountable to group members and for either creating or strengthening local
institutions. The development professionals become facilitators of a locally driven process.
Stakeholders assume control and ownership of their component of the project or program,
and make decisions accordingly. At this level, local participation is most sustainable
because the people concerned have a stake in maintaining structures or practices.
Participatory monitoring—in which citizens, groups or organizations assess their own
actions using procedures and performance indicators they selected when finalizing their
plans—reinforces empowerment and sustainability.
 The particular challenges, constraints, and opportunities may limit the mode of
participation, or at times, may complement and support more complex forms of participation
starting at one level and becoming deeper as the planners and stakeholders learn together.

D. Examples from the ADB-Philippines Development Partnership

The ADB-Philippines experience provides some excellent examples of participatory

approaches, not only arising from ADB’s proximity to the Philippines, but also because the
Philippines has evolved a culture of consultation and participation. Its laws, regulations and
policies mandate consultation and participation in both strategic development planning and for
individual project development. This holds true for both national government operations those
undertaken by LGUs. The 1991 Local Government Code provides a large measure of local
autonomy to the provincial, city and municipal governments. It has granted the LGUs more
powers, authority, responsibilities and resources. Among those responsibilities is the provision
of basic services and facilities for constituents. These include agricultural extension, community-
based forestry, field health and hospital services, public works and infrastructure projects
funded out of local funds, school buildings, social welfare services, tourism facilities and
promotion, telecommunication services and housing projects. LGUs are envisioned to transform
into self-reliant communities and active partners in the attainment of national goals through an
accountable local government structure. At present, the LGUs face problems and challenges,
potential cuts in local public spending, systemic inability to mobilize own-source revenues, and
lack of technical skills to develop and manage projects. These things add to the already existing
burden of problems at the community level that face any local executive. Sound development
planning is key to achieving what is good for the community. And in formulating the plan, the
consultation process, where various stakeholders are represented, is considered most
important. Consultation usually comes at various levels in planning – during strategy
formulation, data gathering and presentation and identification of action plans. The minimum
requirements for the preparation of the local development plan are shown below:

Local development planning STEPS:

Major development concerns and
priorities of the locality

Development vision
and goals

Development strategy

Sectoral/spatial priorities

Medium-term fiscal plan

Public investment requirements

 There are notable experiences in LGU planning where different stakeholders took part in
formulating plans and monitoring programs to improve their own communities, without relying
too much on national government and external support. In 1992, in cooperation with academe,
civil society and local governance advocates, the Government launched a pioneering awards
program on innovation and excellence in local governance, called Gawad Galing Pook.
Through the years, it has showcased LGU programs with positive socio-economic and
environmental impact, promotion of people’s empowerment, transferability and sustainability,
efficiency of program service delivery. The Appendix provides some examples of past
awardees that demonstrate that participation by as many stakeholders as possible can help a
community move forward despite financial and political hurdles.

As discussed earlier, the maximum depth of participation occurs with empowerment

or shared control. At this level, power over decisions is concentrated in the local
communities. Communities develop action plans and manage their own activities based on
their own priorities and ideas. Central Government officials, donors and development
professionals catalyze and support, rather than direct, local development. Local groups take
control over local decisions, increasing their stake in maintaining new physical or
institutional structures and practices. ADB has shared control of project design or
implementation in the following two Philippine projects.

Philippines: Development of Poor Urban Communities5

The Development of Poor Urban Communities project illustrates the value of

participatory activities in designing a project. By participating in formulation of the
fundamental goals, stakeholders are empowered and develop a sense of ownership of the
activity. This promotes effective project implementation, conscientious monitoring of
activities, and sustainable outcomes. Furthermore, responsiveness and collaboration
among recipient communities, local and central government offices, civil society actors, and
the private sector enhance social capital and promote sound governance.

This project has a radical objective: to provide land titles to urban squatter
communities and to rehabilitate the communities by improving housing, municipal
infrastructure, and social services. In the process, both local government and community
organizations will be strengthened to serve the needs of poor communities better.

Community residents became actors in project design, rather than being simply
(passive) beneficiaries. An important step was identifying the stakeholders who would
participate in project design. The likelihood of being affected, positively or negatively, by the
project was the key criterion for selection. Dialogue with stakeholders was used extensively
and strategically throughout project design. Community residents expressed and prioritized
their needs and constraints. Their perspectives were not merely documented and
considered, as is usually the case in consultation; instead, action plans were developed with
each community. Each action plan was unique but all included a process for gaining land
title, housing rehabilitation plans, and livelihood development activities. Housing
rehabilitation plans were developed by the communities, written up by a development
professional, and then validated by the community members. The ensuing loan builds on

5
ADB. 2003. Development of Poor Urban Communities. Approved on 18 December 2003 for $32.3 million.
the community planning process in pilot communities and includes a full community
participation and empowerment component to institutionalize the community organizations.

However, the Government, not local residents, selected the project objectives of
rehabilitation of housing and provision of services for urban squatter communities. One
must wonder whether local residents would have identified the same objectives if they had
been involved in the overall conceptualization of the project. Nonetheless, this initiative
clearly went beyond collaboration by yielding significant control to the stakeholders and
allowing them to develop their own plans. Although the extent of citizen empowerment
depends on how implementation is carried out, some good examples are already arising from
the ongoing project in combining participatory city planning with slum upgrading and eradication.
Lessons from successful slum upgrading pilots undertaken in partnership with NGOs are being
incorporated to the design of a similar initiative for Metro Manila.

Box 1 : Empowering Poor Urban Communities and Strengthening Local Institutions

(Philippines)
The Development of Poor Urban Communities project in the Philippines builds
social capital through institutionalizing community organizations. The plan has four
stages:
1. Communities engage in action planning and form teams to address the four
components of the project: livelihood, land security, infrastructure, and social services.
A board is formed that includes the chairs of each team.
2. Community organizations (for each group of households) become more structured
and legitimized. A general assembly, including either the husband or wife of each
household, is formed and elects its leaders. The community organization is then
equipped to transact business with external parties.
3. Community organizations in a contiguous area are then organized into clusters,
forming a coalition or federation headed by a cluster council. The cluster council
advocates on behalf of the members of its cluster to the village development council,
based on each community’s development plans.
4. Cluster councils further coalesce into a municipal or citywide organization in order
to represent the community organizations before the local government decision-making
bodies. The citywide organization assesses city development and housing and landuse
plans, and ensures that cluster needs and priorities are incorporated into the city
development agenda. Assessments are likewise undertaken of the city and village
budgets to ensure that their use reflects balanced responsiveness and sensitivity to the
needs of the urban poor.

Philippines: Cordillera Highlands Agricultural Resources Management

The Cordillera Highlands Agricultural Resources Management (CHARM) project was

designed to help 82 local communities in 3 provinces in Northern Luzon to develop and
implement their own action plans. The process involved participatory community analysis,
priority setting, and action planning, followed by multistakeholder review and overall ranking
at municipal and provincial levels to identify which projects would be funded. NGOs
facilitated a participatory planning process in each community (Box 2). Projects ranged from
small-scale infrastructure and basic facilities to enhancement of local governance, capacity
building and training, income-generation activities, and natural resource improvement.
 This was the first time these villagers engaged in participatory planning. A midterm
evaluation indicated that they supported the process and had developed a sense of
ownership of the outcomes. The evaluation also showed that the results of activities
planned this way were better than those of activities identified by Government agencies in
previous projects. The participatory community exercises elicited a broad range of ideas
and allowed community members to identify those with the greatest potential. They
considered all possibilities and produced a barangay (village) natural resource management
plan (BNRMP). The process was community driven; no outsiders, except the facilitators,
were present. All meetings were conducted in the local dialect. Thus, the plans were
grounded in local knowledge and only later enhanced with outside expertise when reviewed
at municipal and then provincial levels.

Each BNRMP was unique, although all contained information on community history;
geography; current social, economic, and political conditions; institutions, including the
types of civil society organizations and local government; and village finances. Usually the
BNRMPs were accompanied by community maps as well as charts and graphs to illustrate
land use, livelihoods, incomes, etc. Also included were the results of the participatory
planning process: stakeholder and problem analyses, prioritized issues and concerns, and
the five-year and annual plans in logical analysis format (which clarified goals, activities,
and results indicators). Projects were categorized according to specific political, economic,
social, cultural, and environmental objectives.

The participatory nature of the project strengthened collaboration among

government agencies, NGOs, and local government officials. Before CHARM was
implemented, these actors rarely had opportunities to work together and generally
distrusted one another. This project led NGOs to develop solid working relationships with
regional and local government officials, which continues to this day

Box 2 : Planning Method used by Communities in the Cordillera Highlands Agricultural

Resources Management Project (Philippines)

A unique feature of the Cordillera Highlands Agricultural Resources Management

(CHARM) project was its use of a multilevel participatory planning approach to maximize
stakeholder participation in project decision making. The participatory planning process
began at the village level and moved to the municipal an provincial levels to promote
institutional integration and to enhance sustainability through improved operations and
management.

Village level
At the village level, a nongovernment organization (NGO) facilitator initiated dialogue with
elected village officials and leader's of people's organizations. The latter then provided an
orientation for community members on the project and the participatory planning process to
be undertaken. In each community, a core group was established to ensure inclusion of
existing groups and traditional institutions. It was composed of village officials, elders,
teachers, youth leaders, and representatives of such people's organizations as farmers'
groups, irrigators' associations, women's groups, and local self-help groups.
Community workshops for participatory planning were then organized by the core group and
the NGO facilitator. A general public announcement was issued asking all village residents to
attend. Each workshop took 3–5 days. The first step was a comprehensive village profile.
Various methods were used: secondary data collection, household surveys, and participatory
rural appraisal (PRA) exercises including community maps, seasonal calendars, land
 transects, and socioeconomic and livelihood analysis. In the second phase, core group
members and village residents analyzed the data. They identified and prioritized community
issues and problems, outlined goals and objectives, and then created a plan of action using a
project planning matrix. Finally, they consolidated the outputs of the Barangay (village)
Natural Resource Management (BNRMP).

Municipal and Provincial Levels

The BNRMPs including prioritized projects were then forwarded to the municipal level where
a municipal management group composed of local government officials, relevant line agency
personnel, people's organization representatives, and elected officials, plus NGO project staff,
assessed the technical merits of projects and prioritized them across the area. These project
lists were forwarded to the provincial management group for final review and ranking at the
provincial level.
The municipal and provincial project management groups coordinated the various line
agencies, local government units, and NGO field staff in screening and prioritizing projects,
providing technical support, and working closely with elected community leaders and people's
organization leaders. Consensus among the key project stakeholders at each level was
obtained while finalizing the priority lists in their areas.

Participatory approaches are not convenient exercises. Project managers, who focus
mainly on logistics, finance, and contribution, fear that beneficiaries may lose patience with
participatory processes or a proposed activity, if they are unable to meet beneficiary demands
for discussion time or for substantive input to design and implementation. Extremely tight
schedules for producing feasibility studies, project proposals or processing loans make the
approach difficult because participatory decision making requires flexibility and sometimes
unpredictable amounts of time. Many Government agencies are unwilling to attempt
participatory approaches as the countries are unfamiliar with more inclusive/participatory ways
of working and have limited skills for consultation and poverty analysis. Lastly, clarity about
partnerships is lacking and some feel that NGOs and other social intermediaries should not be
treated differently than political lobbyists, contractors or consultants. Although these
constraints, among others, have been raised time and again by both Government personnel and
development professionals opposed to using participatory methods for project development,
experience has shown that it produces better projects and better results. The same holds true
for strategic planning, as discussed below.

BIMP-EAGA: Developing a Strategy for Small and Medium Enterprise Development

This operation shows that consultations involving stakeholders in dialogue can

strengthen strategies and increase the likelihood of program success. ADB is committed to
help stimulate the development of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the Brunei-
Indonesia-Malaysia-Philippines East Asia Growth Area (BIMP-EAGA) to improve living
standards and reduce poverty. This program expects to catalyze the effort by defining and
implementing a new strategy for SME development in this region.

Initially, three regional consultation meetings were planned: one in Manila, with
representatives of the governments of Indonesia and the Philippines, and one in each of the
two focal provinces—Mindanao and Sulawesi. The goals of the initiative were very
challenging and their implementation equally complex, so it was determined to engage a
broader group of stakeholders in refining the strategy and drafting action plans for project
implementation. The number of (day-long) workshops was increased to 10. Seven
subregional workshops were scheduled following the initiation workshop in Manila.
Representatives from these subregional events attended the final workshops in the two
focal provinces. There were more than 500 participants in total, representing much greater
geographic and cultural diversity. This diversity increased the range of knowledge and
perspectives brought into the discussion. It also created new horizontal and vertical linkages
among stakeholders, promoting an increase in social capital.

Five key constraints or limiting factors to SME development—policy, business

support, finance, infrastructure, and coordination/integration—were identified by ADB in its
proposed strategy. An analysis of these constraints was distributed to the people invited to
the workshops. In the workshops, facilitated participatory processes allowed participants to
respond to the draft strategy, to clarify the framework, to identify opportunities, and to
discuss features of the constraints. During each subregional workshop, participants were
divided into small groups, usually of 8 to 12 participants from diverse organizations. Each
focusing on one constraint (policy, business support, finance, infrastructure, or regional
coordination/integration) and was given a matrix with questions to guide its discussion.

The groups recommended (i) changes to the proposed strategy, (ii) specific
development partners for program implementation, (iii) strategies for addressing the limiting
factors, (iv) priority sectors or industries and the support required by each, and (v) key
development projects to promote these initiatives. Groups presented their results to all
workshop participants for further discussion and refinement. Participants from each
subregional workshop were chosen to carry the groups’ ideas forward to the provincial
workshops in Mindanao and Sulawesi.

In contrast with conventional “consultations,” in which participants typically gather to

listen to a stream of speeches, these regional workshops actively engaged the participants.
Each person had time and opportunity to contribute. Although ADB had pre-identified key
constraints and questions, the discussion was open-ended and evolved in response to
participants’ interests. Perhaps if ADB had engaged stakeholders from the very start to help
identify the major constraints and define the strategy, participation could have been deeper
and more meaningful, with ADB’s experience simply one point of reference complementing
those brought by the stakeholders, rather than the starting point for discussions. However,
by taking time to fully explain the proposal and inviting critique of the draft strategy, ADB
demonstrated the sincerity of the SME development effort and won significant participant
“buy-in,” thereby strengthening the potential of the initiative to succeed. As a consequence
of holding subregional and then provincial workshops, participants gained much deeper
knowledge about the constraints in their areas and were able to contribute more
constructive and feasible recommendations for the final project design. The program was
stronger, more cost effective, and more likely to produce significant impact on poverty. The
experience increased the probability that participatory approaches will be used in designing
programs and projects in the future.

The Philippines MTPDP and the Country Strategy and Program (CSP) 2005-2007

The Government’s development agenda centers on the Medium-Term Philippines

Development Plan (MTPDP), prepared every six years to coincide with the term of the incoming
administration. Previous plans had provided sound conceptual frameworks for the
Government’s development strategies; however, they did not always effectively set priorities.
The MTPDP for 2005–2010 establishes a new paradigm for development planning. Departing
from a sector-based approach, it focuses on outcomes, and all agency activities (including
projects) are prioritized against their potential contribution to outcomes, regardless of sector.
The process for developing the MTPDP is highly participatory, including an iterative process
from local planning through the provincial plans, as well as national line agency priorities. As a
responsible stakeholder, the challenge for ADB was to develop a CSP that was not only in
alignment with the MTPDP, but that also served as input to the Government’s own planning
process.

A high value participatory process was crucial for arriving at a quality CSP. The
preparation entailed extensive and intensive dialogue with a wide range of stakeholders:
representatives of national and local governments, Congressional leaders and committee
chairpersons; non-government organizations and civil society; academic institutions; private
sector associations and chambers of commerce; beneficiary communities; and other official
development partners, including multilateral and bilateral agencies. Workshops were held with
stakeholders to validate the diagnosis and conclusions of the background thematic
assessments. A parallel review by ADB of its governance and anti-corruption policies provided
additional opportunity for stakeholder feedback from a country-specific workshop. Several
development partners, including World Bank and bilaterals, were preparing revised strategies
on similar timetables, allowing synchronized efforts in several areas, including assessment of
the fiscal consolidation program, the Government’s planning process, decentralization and
forging partnerships with selected LGUs, and the results-based framework. Dialogue with
Government counterparts covered technical-level meetings, as well as policy discussions with
the oversight departments to obtain feedback and guidance on the proposed strategy.

The CSP takes into account lessons from the partnership experience, covering upstream
strategy formulation and programming, and downstream portfolio management and project
implementation. It is informed by ADB’s assistance assessments, the intensive portfolio work of
the past years, and economic and sector work. The CSP has been informed by five
comprehensive thematic assessments (i.e., poverty, governance and institutional capacity,
private sector, gender, and environment, and a joint study on the investment climate conducted
with the World Bank), which were undertaken and validated through participatory consultations.

As emphasized in the CSP document, ADB will strengthen existing, and forge new,
partnerships with selected GOCCs, GFIs, LGUs, and CSOs. The objectives are to enhance
autonomy and resource mobilization of GOCCs and LGUs, improve financial intermediation of
GFIs, and involve a broader range of stakeholders in ADB’s partnership with the Philippines
through engagement with civil society. Greater engagement with LGUs will be based on their
commitment to sound planning and public resource management, ability to borrow and service
debt, and willingness to improve services and the local investment climate, including local
public-private partnerships. For example, ADB has established new partnerships with the (i)
Supreme Court, to improve governance through support for increased judicial autonomy and
accountability (ii) Office of the Ombudsman to strengthen and carry forward anti-corruption
initiatives and the (iii) Bangsa Moro Development Authority and other civil society groups to
support the peace and development process in Mindanao.
E. Conclusion

Participation works at the project, program and strategic level. An inclusive and
participatory planning process will produce a national plan that addresses the perceived
needs of the citizenry and have strong ownership by all stakeholders in the country. Plans
developed through these approaches will have resilience and integrity over the medium
term. A widely accepted national plan will help mobilize foreign and domestic resources,
both human and material, from the private sector, NGOs, local governments and
communities. The integrity of the planning process will allow development partners to “buy-
in” to the national plans, thus reducing the transaction costs of development assistance
without the need for donors to develop their own plans and strategies for the country.

Participatory methods can be used by Government planners and development

institutions for data collection, consultation, collaboration, joint decision making, or for
empowerment through shared control. The methods can be employed at different stages,
from initial conceptualization through implementation, monitoring and evaluation.
Frequently, a single initiative involves various groups and organizations in several levels of
public participation interacting with government agencies and development partners.

Participatory information-gathering exercises are useful for identifying the

perspectives of affected citizens and for supplementing quantitative and other qualitative
(nonparticipatory) data. Yet, they are usually extractive and the subjects of inquiry do not
gain a sense of ownership of the project or research. Consultation processes in which
themes or problems and proposed solutions are predetermined by outsiders are similarly
unlikely to generate commitment. Therefore, consultation per se, should be understood as a
limited modality for engaging stakeholders. Collaborative processes invite stakeholders to
become partners in the decision-making process so that citizens, constituents, and
institutional stakeholders develop a sense of ownership which enhances the likelihood of
attaining effective and sustainable results. Finally, shared control or empowerment allows
affected stakeholders to be actors in their own development, with Government and
development partners helping communities plan together and build local networks.

In summary, the theme of this conference is towards integrating the PRSP processes
and procedures into the national planning paradigm. One of those processes is
‘participation’, but effective participation requires action. Too often, the processes of
participation are referred to in the passive sense with, perhaps, the three most overused
terms being: (i)”broad-based participation”, (ii) “wide consultation”, and (iii) “providing an
opportunity for all stakeholders to express their views.” However, it is not enough to gather
participants, advise them what you are planning and allow them to speak. Participation
requires action and you must be prepared to act as well. Therefore, I would counter with
three “action” words as you integrate participatory processes into national planning:

• Listen to what the stakeholders have to say;

• Engage them in planning their future, including shared responsibilities;
• Respond appropriately; for as citizens they deserve a response, even if the answer
is no (often the case when Government officials have to balance the greater public
good against parochial interests).
 Appendix

Top ten outstanding local government programs

Joint Systems Improvement in Education Project

Province of Bulacan
BOOKS and school buildings alone do not make a learned child. Bulacan learned this the hard way when results of the
National Education chievement Test (NEAT) given to public elementary school students came back with horrendous results.
In 2000, a typical student from Bulacan showed a report card thatwould make his mother weep: a rating of 39.40% in
Math and a slightly better 40.23% in English. The national averages were hardly any better at 50% and 52% butwith this
dismal performance, Bulakeño students were already scraping the bottom of the pan.

Program on Gender and Development of Capoocan

Capoocan Leyte
YOU’D know you have reached the municipality of Capoocan in Southern Leyte if you see giant billboards placed
strategically along the National Highway, proudly proclaiming the place as a zone where the rights of women and children
are fiercely protected. The situation now in Capoocan is a far cry from four years ago. Ninety percent of the population of
the fourth-class municipality was poor, and women were the most vulnerable to abuse–both within and outside their own
homes.

Harnessing Synergy in Integrated Population,

Health & Environment Programming
Conception Iloilo
IN the town of Concepcion, people think twice about the matter of conception. For the last five years, family planning has
been serious business in this coastal town of 34,000 people. Managing population growth has been key to its survival.
After all, what determines quality of life is how well a community feeds its population. The trouble Concepcion faced five
years ago can be summed up in a simple equation: too many people, not enough resources, a depleted environment and
shrinking income. On March 15, 2000, Dr. Raul N. Banias, the town mayor, launched an all-encompassing program that
sounded all too ambitious.

Coastal Resource Management Program

Dauin, Oriental Negros
WILL you entrust the protection of the environment to a mining engineer? Fishermen and farmers in the small town of
Dauin, Negros Oriental bravely did, and that decision secured for them a stable future. The mining engineer happened to
be the town mayor, Rodrigo A. Alalano, who did not sell them out to mining concessionaires. Instead, the Mayor revived a
Coastal Resource Management (CRM) program that his predecessor had started.

Promoting Child Rights

Maitum, Sarangani
GEORGE Yabes has waited a lifetime for a child. But what fate could not give him, destiny would. Fate is what you wait for;
destiny is what you make. The Mayor of Maitum town in Sarangani province was destined to be “father” to hundreds of
children grateful for his caring protection. In his town, Mayor Yabes makes sure babies are born healthy; mothers and kids
get medical attention; children of school age learn, get time to play, and express their ideas. In his town, children are
shielded from harm and abuse.

The Bicycle--friendly City

Marikina City
IN Marikina City, a fifth of the workforce will roll on two wheels and shear sweat power soon. That’s because up to 20% of
Marikina City residents will be able to ride a bicycle to work when “The Bicycle-friendly City” program of Marikina is
completed in 2006. Thanks to a novel idea thought up by the city government, which has introduced a cycling revolution of
sorts since 1999 “Cycling is our answer to the soaring gas prices,” said Mayor Ma. Lourdes C. Fernando. “Bicycles are our
provider of affordable mobility.” Aside from lower transport cost over short distances, cycling also reduces vehicle gas
emissions thereby leading to better health.

Aquamarine Development and Protection Program

Misamis Occidental
NATURE gifted Misamis Occidental with 162 kilometers of coastline dotted with shoals and reefs. A huge part of the
population calls this coastline home, and heavily depends on the bounty of its waters. Unbridled fishing coupled with the
use of dynamite, however, has threatened the waters by the very people who rely on it for survival. These led to even
lesser yield, trapping the fishermen in a vicious cycle that threatened to destroy the waters while still mired in poverty.
Gulayan at Palaisdaan Alay sa Kabataan (GPAK)
Oriental Negros
STRONG, intelligent and capable people usually have one thing in common: good nutrition at an early age. Oriental Negros
Governor George P. Arnaiz realized this early and conceived a program in 2002 dubbed GPAK, or Gulayan at Palaisdaan
Alay sa Kabataan. The concept was simple: Children were given garden tools, fertilizers, and vegetable seedlings to be
planted on unused lots in their schools. Ponds were also built so they can tend tilapia fingerlings. The harvests provide the
children and their families the required vitamin and protein daily requirements.

Molave Youth Home

Quezon City
THERE is still such thing as a free lunch and in Quezon City, this courtesy is extended to minors who had a run-in with the
law. The local government of Quezon City, however, is not doing this out of charity. The Molave Youth Home, where
accommodations are free, is the city’s alternative to throwing minors in cramped jail cells together with hardened
criminals. “Youth offenders need to be treated with love,” said Mayor Feliciano Belmonte, Jr. “They should be treated
differently from criminals.”

Tuguegarao Agricultural
and Fishery Modernization Program
Tuguegarao City, Cagayan
OF the nearly 11,000 households in Tuguegarao, 6,132 were dependent on farming and fishing for survival. Many were
impoverished, heavily beholden to traders or landlords for various basic needs–from seedlings to school tuition. Due to l
ack of access to new farming techniques and to better facilities, the annual harvest was on a steady decline along with the
income of the farmers. The result was a Tuguegarao highly dependent on its neighboring towns for food and other
produce. The Tuguegarao City Agricultural and Fishery Modernization Program was developed in 2000 to address the
worsening condition in agriculture. The vision was to achieve an improved quality of life for the farming and fishing
households.