HSS F362: Local Governance and Participation

Lecture 17: 19-9-2024

Mohan Kumar Bera

BITS Pilani Goa Campus
• Local democracy and clientelism : The Theory
of Citizen Participation
 Introduction

• Citizen participation is a process which provides private individuals an

opportunity to influence public decisions and has long been a component of
the democratic decision-making process.

• The roots of citizen participation can be traced to ancient Greece and Colonial
New England.

• Before the 1960s, governmental processes and procedures were designed to

facilitate "external" participation.

• Citizen participation was institutionalized in the mid-1960s with President

Lyndon Johnson's Great Society programs
 Introduction
• Public involvement is means to ensure that citizens have a direct voice in public
decisions.

• The terms "citizen" and "public," and "involvement" and "participation" are
often used interchangeably.

• While both are generally used to indicate a process through which citizens
have a voice in public policy decisions, both have distinctively different
meanings and convey little insight into the process they seek to describe.

• Mize (1972) reveals that the term "citizen participation" and it's relationship to
public decision-making has evolved without a general consensus regarding
either it's meaning nor it's consequences
 Introduction
• There are tangible benefits that can be derived from an effective citizen
involvement program.

• Cogan and Sharpe (1986) identify five benefits of citizen participation to the
planning process:
– Information and ideas on public issues;

– Public Support for planning decisions;

– Avoidance of protracted conflicts and costly delays;

– Reservoir of good will which can carry over to future decisions; and

– Spirit of cooperation and trust between the agency and the public.
 Decision-making Structures in public
participation

• DeSario and Langton (1987), in their book Citizen Participation in Public Decision
Making explore the role of technology in public policy decisions

• They conclude that public decisions are increasingly being influenced by

technology.

• Two broad decision-making structures are defined and analyzed:

– the technocratic approach; and the democratic approach.

– Technocracy (or the technocratic approach) is defined as the application of technical

knowledge, expertise, techniques, and methods to problem solving.

– Democracy, as defined by DeSario and Langton, refers to citizen involvement activities

in relation to government planning and policy making (DeSario and Langton, 1987 p. 5).
 Decision-making Structures in public participation

• Technocratic Decision Making

• The technocratic approach to decision-making has historically been applied in

most Forest Service decisions.

• A key argument is that trained staff "experts" are best suited to make complex
technical decisions.

• Experts are increasingly becoming a part of our decision-making structures in

both the public and private sectors (DeSario and Langton, 1987. p. 7).

• However, Nelkin concluded that scientific and technocratic approaches "not

only failed to solve social problems but often contributed to them" (Nelkin,
1981. p. 274).
Decision-making Structures in public participation

• The notion that the "cure is often worse than the disease" becomes
increasingly important as the technology provides alternative solutions to
public policy issues.

• Techniques and methods applied by experts are most effective when

considering technical decisions as opposed to value or mixed, decisions.

• Kantrowitz (1975) identified three separate types of policy decisions:

– (1) technical decisions that are based solely on the application and extrapolation of
scientific issues;

– (2) value decisions are concerned with the resolution of important normative or
societal issues; and

– (3) mixed decisions that have both technical and value components.
Decision-making Structures in public participation

• Technical decisions rely on scientific techniques and extrapolations to

determine the potential of "what is".

• Value issues involve normative determinations of "what should be".

• Although scientific information can provide guidance with respect to value

decisions, it is rarely the sole determinant (DeSario and Langton, 1987).
Decision-making Structures in public participation

• Democratic Decision Making, in contrast to bureaucratic or technocratic

decision making, is based on the assumption that all who are affected by a
given decision have the right to participate in the making of that decision.

• Participation can be direct in the classical democratic sense, or can be through

representatives for their point of view in a pluralist-republican model (Kweit
and Kweit, 1986).

• Kweit and Kweit (1986) go on to point out that criteria for evaluating policies in
a democratic process are the accessibility of the process and/or the
responsiveness of the policy to those who are affected by it, rather than the
efficiency or rationality of the decision.
 Public Participation In Rational Policy Making
• According to Lang (1986), a decision is rational to the extent that it is shown
empirically to match the best available means of achieving a given end.

• Traditional rational planning and policy analysis processes typically have five or
six steps. Patton and Sawicki outline six steps in the policy analysis process:
– (1) problem definition;
– (2) identification of goals and objectives;
– (3) development of alternatives;
– (4) development of evaluation criteria;
– (5) identification of the "best" alternative; and
– (6) monitoring and evaluation of the outcome (Patton and Sawicki, 1986, p.26)
The Policy Analysis Process
 Public Participation In Rational Policy Making

• Kweit and Kweit (1986) suggest that policy analysis tends concentrate power
in the hands of a few experts and that policy analysis is most compatible with
bureaucratic decision-making which is "antithetical to citizen participation"

• Because the policy analysis process relies on specialized techniques, expertise

is an inherent component of policy analysis.

• As such, the role of citizen participation in the traditional policy analysis

process is minimized.

• Citizens often lack technical expertise and can be emotionally involved in

issues of concern rather that being detached and rational (Kweit and Kweit,
1986 p. 22).
 Public Participation In Rational Policy Making

• For a number of reasons, a purely rational decision-making process is

difficult.

• One major limitation inherent in the process is the lack of comprehensive

information.

• However, input from citizen groups outside organizational boundaries can

help provide more comprehensive information on all aspects of the policy
analysis process.

• Kweit and Kweit(1986) state: In a democracy, it is the public that

determines where it wants to go, and the role of its representatives and
bureaucratic staff is to get them there. In other works, ends should be
chosen democratically even though the means are chosen technocratically
 Public Participation In Rational Policy Making
• Lang (1986:35), suggests that traditional comprehensive and strategic
planning processes are insufficient for current resource management planning
and advocates a more interactive approach to planning.

• Lang suggests: An integrated approach to resource planning must provide for

interaction with the stakeholders in the search for relevant information, shared
values, consensus, and ultimately, proposed action that is both feasible and
acceptable (Lang, 1986 p 35).
 Public Participation In Rational Policy Making
• According to Lang (1985:39) conventional planning tends to be dominated by
a technical/analytic style where the planner is a detached value-neutral expert
advising decision makers about the best way to accomplish their goals and
serve the public interest.

• The emphasis is on data collection and analysis as the means for finding the
best solutions to problems and developing a technically sound plan.

• The implicit assumption is that better information leads to better decisions.

• Success in conventional planning is measured by the extent to which the

objectives of the plan are achieved.
Public Participation In Rational Policy Making

• According to Lang (1986:39), interactive planning is based on the assumption

that open, participative processes lead to better decisions.

• The planner engages directly with stakeholders to gain support, build

consensus, identify acceptable solutions, and secure implementation.

• Success in interactive planning is measured by the extent to which balance can

be achieved among competing interests and consensus is reached on
appropriate actions.
 Public Participation In Rational Policy Making
Interactive Planning Conventional Planning

Includes information/feedback, consultation and Limited information/feedback; maybe some

negotiation consultation

Interaction occurs early on and throughout the Early interaction with implementers; affected
planning process, with full range of stakeholders interests not involved until late in process

Assumes that open participation leads to better Assumes that better information leads to
decisions better decisions

Planner as value-committed advocate Planner as value-neutral expert

Focuses on mobilization of support Focuses on manipulation of data

Plan = what we agree to do Plan = what we should do

Success measured by achievement of Success measured by achievement of plan's

agreement on action objectives
 Principles Of Citizen Participation
• Cogan, Sharpe and Hertberg, in the book The Practice of State and Regional
Planning provide a concise overview of citizen participation in the planning
process (Cogan et al, 1986 p. 283-308).

• Public participation is often a requirement for planners, however, it is always

optional for citizens.

• Citizens choose to participate because they expect a satisfying experience and

hope to influence the planning process.

• Cogan (p. 287) indicates that participation can offer a variety of rewards to
citizens. These can be intrinsic to the involvement (through the very act of
participation) or instrumental (resulting from the opportunity to contribute to
public policy).
 Principles Of Citizen Participation
• The planner's expectations are also important in that an effective public
participation program can lead to a better planning process and product as
well as personal satisfaction.

• Well-planned citizen involvement programs relate the expectations of both

the citizens and the planner.

• Arnstein's "ladder of citizen participation" can assist the planner in

determining his or her perceptions of a program's purpose and compare this
with the anticipated perceptions of citizen participants).

• In successful citizen involvement programs, the disparity between the

planner's and the participant's expectations in minimal. If expectations are
different, conflict is probable.
 Principles Of Citizen Participation
• This conflict is damaging to the planning process (as well as the agency's
reputation), and to the relationship between the participants and the planner.

• Often, it is avoidable because it's source is in conflicting expectations rather

than conflicting demands (Cogan, et al., 1986, p 287).

• Clearly, citizen participation programs can

increase costs and the amount of time
a project takes.

• Further, as discussed above, there is a certain level of risk associated with

citizen participation programs.
 Principles Of Citizen Participation
• Cogan suggests that citizen participation programs can make the planning
process and planners more effective by:
– Reducing isolation of the planner from the public;

– Generating a spirit of cooperation and trust;

– Providing opportunities to disseminate information;

– Identifying additional dimensions of inquiry and research;

– Assisting in identifying alternative solutions;

– Providing legitimacy to the planning effort and political credibility of the agency; and

– Increasing public support.

• An effective public participation program may actually save time and money by
insuring that the proposed solution is acceptable to all of the interested
stakeholders.
 Techniques of Citizen Participation
• There are a variety of techniques available to planners to solicit public input in
the planning process.

• These range from basic open meetings to more sophisticated techniques such
as the Delphi and Nominal Group techniques

• Cogan states "with few exceptions, a successful public involvement program

incorporates several techniques" (Cogan, et al. 1986 p. 292).

• These techniques can be graphically presented as a continuum that ranges from

passive involvement to active involvement

PUBLICITY PUBLIC EDUCATION PUBLIC INPUT PUBLIC PUBLIC

INTERACTION PARTNERSHIP

Building public Disseminating Collecting Two-way Securing advice and

support information information communication consent

<----------------- PASSIVE ACTIVE------------------>

 Techniques of Citizen Participation
• Cogan provides the following description of each of the forms of
public involvement follows (Cogan, et al. 1986 p. 292-294).

– Publicity — Publicity techniques are designed to persuade and facilitate

public support, relating to citizens as passive consumers.

– Public Education — Public education programs present relatively complete

and balanced information so that citizens may draw their own conclusions.

– Public Input — Public input techniques solicit ideas and opinions from
citizens.

public inputs are most effective when combined with feedback mechanisms
which inform participants of the extent to which their input has influenced
ultimate decisions.
 Techniques of Citizen Participation
– Public Interaction — Public interaction techniques facilitate the exchange
of information and ideas among citizens, planners, and decision makers.

When these techniques are effectively utilized, each participant has the
opportunity to express his or her views, respond to the ideas of others, and
work toward consensus.

– Public Partnership — Public partnerships offer citizens a formalized role in

shaping the ultimate decisions.

• Not all techniques fit exclusively into one category.

• A key point Cogan makes is that the number of citizens who can be involved is
inversely related to the level of active involvement.
Criteria for an Effective Citizen Participation Program

• A successful citizen participation program must be:

– integral to the planning process and focused on its unique needs;

– designed to function within available resources of time, personnel, and

money; and

– responsive to the citizen participants (Cogan, et al. 1986 p. 298).

• Cogan (1986) indicates that most successful citizen participation

programs contain some common elements. To be effective, Cogan
suggests that citizen participation programs must:

– Meet legal requirements;

– Clearly articulate goals and objectives;

Criteria for an Effective Citizen Participation Program

– Command political support;

– Be an integral part of the decision making structure;

– Receive adequate funding, staff, and time;

– Identify concerned or affected publics; and

– Delineate clear roles and responsibilities for participants.