participatory development – should it be saved

Independent study project in Development Studies

Date: 19/04/2013

Title

Participatory Development – should it be saved?

Written by: Aleksandra Ciurlik

Student no: 299890

Supervisor: Michael Jennings

Word count: 9,538

Aleksandra Ciurlik BA African Studies and Development Studies

299890

Abstract

The mainstream development institutions, such as the World Bank, have been propagating

participatory development practices for more than twenty years now. Nevertheless, one of the most

important publications on the subject 'Participation: the New Tyranny' presents a radical view that

these practices conceal and reinforce oppressions and injustices in their various manifestations.

Despite the fact that this argumentation indicated many significant issues related to the subject of

participation, in my opinion contradictions of the book are significant enough to question conclusions

it draws. Despite the fact that many scholars extended the debate started by 'The New Tyranny', little

was written about the weaknesses of this book in a way that it could change the development

discourse in a meaningful way. The aim of this essay was to show that participatory development can

play a positive role not only in benefiting the recipients of various projects, but also in improving

development practices in general. This was achieved through analysing different manifestations of

participation, examining the way various agencies perceive success and the motives of choosing

participatory practices. The Barka Foundation was presented as the organization that managed to

develop and implement groundbreaking participatory programmes.

193 words

2


299890

Table of Contents

List of abbreviations used…...........................................................................................4

Section I – Introduction...................................................................................................5

Section II – Methodology................................................................................................7

Section III – Summary of leading literature on participation

Spreading of participatory ideas ...................................................................................9

Participation as tyranny..............................................................................................10

Transformational role of participation.........................................................................11

Case studies...............................................................................................................13

Section IV – Barka: history and activities...................................................................15

Section V – What does participation mean?................................................................17

Section VI – What does define success?.......................................................................23

Section VII – Why participation?.................................................................................27

Section VIII – Conclusions............................................................................................31

Bibliography...................................................................................................................34

3


299890

List of abbreviations used

GPAF: Global Poverty Action Fund

INISE: International Network for Innovative Social Entrepreneurship

KCA: Kenya Community Association

KBCL: full name unknown, national fertilizer manufacturing cooperative

KRCS: the Kenya Red Cross Society

KRIBP: the Kribhco Indo-British Farming Project

MDGs: Millennium Development Goals

ODA: Overseas Development Administration

PD: Participatory Development

PGR: Państwowe Gospodarstwo Rolne (communist State Agricultural farm)

PRA: Participatory Rural Appraisal

SHG: Self Help Group

WB: World Bank

4


299890

Section I – Introduction

The Barka Foundation has been active in Poland for more than twenty years now. The

organization's focus is placed on work with the people on the margin of the society. During the last five

years, Barka's programmes have spread into many countries of the European Union. My interest in the

organization's work began once it started working on international development programmes in

cooperation with the North West African Forum. I became particularly interested in what this Polish

foundation could offer to the citizens of various African countries, so I decided to approach it. Every

time I visited Barka, whether it was in Poland or England, I had a chance to speak to its leaders – ex

homeless and alcoholics who received help from the organization and now are a part of it. And every

time I spoke with any of them, I would hear a similar story. I've been through a lot in my life and I took

part in the programmes of different organizations. I went through rehab many times – mainly in the

winter, just to get a shelter – and then I came back to drinking again. The moment I was sent to Barka,

I was planning to escape as soon as possible. But then I liked it and I've stayed till today. No other

organization does anything as meaningful as Barka.1 It made me wonder whether Barka was really so

unique and if it was – why would that be? This made me start an ethnographic research about the

organization and the most striking thing I could notice while observing its work is how close its

workers were to the recipients of their projects. Every recipient of the projects was treated individually

and many of them were directly involved with Barka's work. Participation, I thought, was the reason of

the organization's success. However, the literature on participation that I encountered was not as

optimistic about it as I was. Hence my attempt to analyse it closely.

1 Informant 1. 12/09/2012

5


299890

Development theorists and practitioner have written quite a lot on PD. One of the most

significant works that every scholar writing on participation referred to is 'Participation: the New

Tyranny' edited by Cooke and Kothari. One of the most striking sentences I came across while reading

this book was any meaningful attempt to save participatory development requires a sincere of the

possibility that it should not be save2. Since the book was publish, scholars have referred to it in many

ways. Some of them, such as Hickey and Mohan or Williams attempted to extend the debate on

participation by indicating transformational potential of participation. However, while reading 'The

New Tyranny' I came across several contradictions of presented arguments that have not been pointed

by the other scholars and that could change completely the discourse presented throughout the book.

This is why the aim of this research will be to analyse and question the arguments of 'The New

Tyranny', and in this way I will show that PD actually should be saved. The case study of Barka will be

presented along my critique not just in order to facilitate my argumentation, but to see whether the

organization's projects have overcome the obstacles related to implementation of participatory

approaches.

After presenting the methodology used throughout the research in Section II, Section III of this

work will describe the main theoretical contributions to the subject of participation. This will lay the

foundations for further parts of the research, as the analysis of theory will be based on comparing it

with the case studies. Section IV will focus briefly on the activities of Barka as to show the complexity

of the programmes led by the organization and place its further analysis in broader context. The key

points of this work will be made in sections from V to VII. These sections will at the same time point

the contradictions of the argumentation presented by 'The New Tyranny', analyse the work of Barka

and provide the answer to the research question. First, Section V will analyse the different forms that

2 Cooke, Bill; Kothari, Uma, 'The Case for Participation as Tyranny' in Cooke, Bill; Kothari, Uma. 'Participation: the New Tyranny?'. Zed Books, 2001. p.15

6


299890

participation might take in order to point at the problems of treating this idea as a fixed concept.

Section VI will then analyse the argument presented in 'The New Tyranny' about the problem of

defining success in order to show that this points also to the limitations of the analysis presented in

Cooke and Kothari's book. Next section will focus of the causal relations between PD and the dubious

practices of development agencies. This will show that focusing on participation as the agent

legitimizing doubtful practices may not lead to the solution of the core of the problems.

Section II – Methodology

Written sources that I used could be divided into two categories. First, the books and journal

articles analysing theoretical assumptions of the concept of participation. Second, materials describing

the work of Barka. This consisted mainly of books published by Barka, reports written by outside

observers or Barka's workers, official documents and power point presentations relevant to the work of

the organization that were passed to me by its workers. I also watched the movies made about or by

Barka. One of the case studies that this research analyses in detail is David Mosse's description of a

development programme in rural India as a contribution to 'Participation: the New Tyranny'. Despite

the fact that I use this case as a base for analysis of the argument representing this particular book, my

study often refers to Mosse's article in 'A Moral Critique of Development'3 as the description put in this

publication is more detailed and explanatory.

The other, more important part of my work, was conducting ethnographic research. Due to

several difficulties, mainly time limitations, I could not spend as much time with Barka as I wanted.

Still, I managed to visit the Social Integration Centre in Poznań. I attended the meetings of Barka UK

3 Quarles van Ufford, Philip; Kumar Giri, Ananta. 'A Moral Critique of Development: in Search of Global Responsibilities'. Routledge, 2003

7


299890

in their office. I also went to the meeting at the Polish Embassy where three of the organizations

working with the homeless of London, including Barka UK, were presenting their work. I went to the

fund raising party together with the representatives of Barka. I also conducted interviews with Tomasz

Sadowski – the founder of Barka, Ewa Sadowska - Chief Executive of Barka UK and Baiba Dhidha

Mjidho - Chairman of Kenya Community Association (organization based in Liverpool and working

with Barka on the Kanini Kaseo Project). This allowed me to have many conversations with the

workers and leaders of Barka, and to have an insight into the way the organization worked.

I think that a general problem about conducting a research described by Melissa Parker is very

relevant. In her text about female circumcision, she describes the publications of academics who have

explicitly stated their thoughts and feelings in their 'scientific' articles.4 As a way of dealing with

issue, she described her story and involvement in the topic she had researched in order to show the

readers of her work in which ways her feelings might have influenced her analysis. Even though my

work does not consider such an emotional subject, I still think it is relevant to state the researcher's (in

this case – my) personal perspective towards the subject as, whether one admits it or not, it might

affect the way in which the research is conducted, thus the results.. For me conducting a research about

Barka was a unique experience. The amount of help received from every single person I interacted

with was immense. I received not only what I asked for (time, documents, opinions) but also a great

amount of personal involvement. Even though I visited the offices of Barka both in Poznań and in

London, all of the interviews took place at the homes of the interviewed. Each time I was welcomed

warmly, given food and a lot of attention. When I went to Liverpool, I was hosted by the Chairman of

Kenya Community Association and his wife who sheltered me for one night in their living room. With

both Ewa Sadowska and Baiba Dhidha Mjidho, I have been in constant email contact as they have

been informing me about the news and sending any papers I requested. I am aware that they made this

4 Parker, Melissa. ‘Rethinking Female Circumcision’. Africa, 65(4), pp.506-523, 1995, p. 516

8


299890

research so much easier for me and I feel grateful for all these gestures. This is also why I consciously

made a decision of writing this text in first person. I find it more honest to write in this way as I do not

want to make an impression that it was a highly objective being, not just a human, who wrote this

analysis. Then I leave it to the readers to decide how trustworthy it is.

Section III – Summary of leading literature on participation

Spreading of participatory ideas

The idea of participation got popularized among the development theorists and practitioners after

publishing of Paulo Freire's 'Pedagogy of the Oppressed' in the late 1960s. In his book, Brazilian

educator, focused on the interaction between action and reflection that constitutes the process of

'conscientization'. He criticized paternalistic attitues towards students and what he called the 'banking'

concept of education, based on the premise that knowledge is a fixed entity. Freire, on the contrary,

claimed that learners should be treated as co-creators of knowledge.5 He stated that Attempting to

liberate the oppressed without their reflective participation in the act of liberation is to treat them as

objects which must be saved from a burning building; it is to lead them into a populist pitfall and

transform them into masses which can be manipulated.6 In the late 1980s and early 1990s these ideas

were translated into models of development practice. The emphasis then was put on participation in

setting development projects, theoretically aimed at empowering the indigenous people, capturing their

knowledge and ensuring the sustainability and efficiency of the interventions.7 Robert Chambers, a

WB scholar, was one of the leading promoters of PD. He contributed significantly to the development

5 Dagron, Alfonso Gumucio; Tufte, Thomas. 'Communication for Social Change Anthology: Historical and Contemporary Readings.' CFSC Consortium, INC, 20066 Freire, Paulo. 'Pedagogy of the Opressed: 30th Anniversary Edition', Continuum International Publish Group, 2000, p. 657 Carpentier, Nico. Media and Participation: A Side of Ideological-democratic Struggle'. Intellect Books, 2011

9


299890

of the idea of PRA that describes a growing family of approaches and methods to enable local people

to share, enhance and analyse their knowledge of life and conditions, to plan and to act. (…) In PRA it

[information] is more shared and owned by the local people.8 According to Chambers, PRA was

supposed to mean a move away from 'top down' development projects and institutions towards the

power structures that will be led by a series of personal, proffessional and institutional change. In order

to facilitate these goals, several tools were developed, such as mapping and modeling, transect walks,

matrix scoring, seasonal calendars, trend and change analysis, well being and wealth ranking and

grouping, and analytical diagraming.9 Chambers' publications, promoted by WB, contributed towards

the wide spread of development programmes based on the PRA models. However, the critics of these

models emerged along with their popularization.

Participation as tyranny

One of the most significant publications criticizing PD was 'Participation: the New Tyranny?'

edited by by Bill Cooke and Uma Kothari. Authors of the book defined tyranny as illegitimate and/or

unjust exercise of power10 and moved on describing how PD facilitates it. Eleven chapters of the book

written by different authors come together to conclude that processes of participation [such as] -

sharing knowledge, negotiating power relationships, political activism and so on – can both conceal

and reinforce oppressions and injustices in their various manifestations.11 The authors stress the

limitations of the previous criticism of participatory approaches that had focused mainly on technical

limitations of the method or on the workings of the practitioner. Cooke and Kothari, however, claim

that there are more overarching and fundamental problems with participatory approaches to

8 Chambers, Robert. 'The Origins and Practice of Participatory Rural Apprisal.' World Development, Vol. 22, No 7, 1994, p. 9539 Ibid. p. 95310 Cooke, Bill; Kothari, Uma. Op. Cit. p. 4 11 Ibid. p. 13

10


299890

development than those reflected in earlier critiques, such as naivety of assumptions about the

authenticity of motivations, behaviour in participatory processes and about the complexities of power

and power relations. Kothari suggests that development programmes based on participation draw

marginalised individuals and groups into the processes of development in the way that tie them to

structures of power so that they are not able to question them.12 This goes along with Majid Rahnema's

view that compared participation to a 'Trojan horse' claiming that the rapid growth in use of

participatory approaches meant that it was serving important economic, institutional and legitimating

functions for a mainstream vision of development, compatible with a liberalization agenda.13 The

debate on PD, however, did not finish with this book as more authors continued to explore the topic of

participation.

Transformational role of participation

Samuel Hickey and Giles Mohan in the publication 'Participation: From Tyranny to

Transformation?', responded to Cooke and Kothari's work, claiming that there are good reasons for

remaining optimistic concerning the potential of participatory approaches to development and

governance to effect genuine transformations at range of levels.14 This book does not reject the

criticism presented by the other scholars, but notes that, in some cases, the issues of power and politics

have been addressed, for example through the radical political projects on the bases of promoting

citizenship. According to the authors, both critics and proponents of participation need a greater level

of honesty and clarity as to what form of participation is being debated. They also call for greater

conceptual and theoretical coherence on participation and more considered claims regarding its

12 Kothari, Uma. 'Power, Knowledge and Social Control in Participatory Development' in Cooke, Bill; Kothari, Uma. 'Participation: the New Tyranny?'. Zed Books, 200113 Rahnema, Majid. 'Participation'. in Sachs, Wolfgang. The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power. Zed Books, 1992 14 Hickey, Samuel; Mohan, Giles. 'Participation: From Tyranny to Transformation? Exploring New Approaches to Participation in Development '. Zed Books, 2004. p. 20

11


299890

potential to transform the power relations that underpin exclusion and subordination.

Another analysis that acknowledged the arguments of Cooke and Kothari, but sees the potential

for positive transformation is Glyn Williams' 'Evaluating Participatory Development: Tyranny, Power

and (Re)Politicisation'.15 It states that incorporating participation into the mainstream practices moved

it away from its initial roots in NGO practice. Moreover, the author of the publication claims that

participatory development might have contributed to the bureaucratic non-state power of 'NGO

governmentality' acting to discipline smaller NGOs across South, thus limiting the range of valid

projects, actors and activities within the NGO sector. Enlisting and demonstrating popular

participation in development programmes has become an end in itself, a crucial measure of

scheme success and a key condition of donor approval.16 On the other hand, he argues that the

denial of experts' agency acts against the important aspects of the development process from public

scrutiny. He also criticized the metaphor of 'Trojan Horse' used by Majid Rahnema, claiming that there

is a 'two-way traffic' that refashions and reproduces the spaces of political action. For him, using

participation to spread an intelligible debate on the nature of political rights would be a step in a good

direction as Actually existing participation, for all its short- comings, provides a range of

opportunities through which state power can be actively called to account.17

Despite the fact that these two publications contributed significantly to the discourse on

participation, I still find that not enough attention has been drawn towards the limitations of 'The New

Tyranny'. This is why, the three sections of my essay will explore the contradictions of this book,

drawing mainly on the argumentation presented by two contributors to 'The New Tyranny' – David

Mosse and John Hailey.

15 Williams, Glyn. 'Evaluating Participatory Development: Tyranny, Power and (Re)Politicisation'. Third World Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 3, 200416 Williams, Glyn. Op. Cit. p. 56317 Ibid. p. 573

12


299890

Case studies

I have decided to narrow the focus of my research mainly to the works of Mosse and Hailey as

the projects they describe share many similarities with the activities conducted by the Barka

foundation. This will allow me to combine the critique of 'The New Tyranny' with the analysis of the

case study I am particularly interested in. In this way, I might omit some points about the book edited

by Cooke and Kothari. However, my argumentation will question crucial assumptions stated in that

book.

The article 'People's Knowledge. Participation and Patronage: Operations and Representations in

Rural Development.'18 by David Mosse describes the KRIBP project, conducted in India for which the

author had been a social development consultant over several years. In his work, he criticized

participatory approaches for their contradictory role as he claimed that they actually have been

compatible with top-down planning systems and have not questioned the prevailing institutional

practices of development. One of his arguments states that the projects can clearly influence the way in

which people construct their needs. By describing the case study, he concludes that the villagers' needs

were shaped by perceptions of what the agency could deliver. Moreover, he states that the pressure to

get things done was another obstacle preventing meaningful participation from taking place. Mosse

described how participatory planning was more of a marketed 'commodity', distributed with a

corporate image of the agency behind the project, than anything else. Moreover, it enabled the project

organization to extend its client-focused networks of patronage in the region. The author criticized the

project for displaying its concern with people's participation, yet having little impact on rural

livelihoods.

18 Mosse, David 1. 'People's Knowledge, Participation and Patronage: Operations and Representations in Rural Development' in Cooke, Bill; Kothari, Uma. 'Participation: the New Tyranny?'. Zed Books, 2001

13


299890

I also decided to present John Hailey's article 'Beyond the Formulaic: Process and Practice in

South Asian NGOs'19 because of the three reasons. First, it is the only article in Cooke and Kothari's

book that describes effective work of the NGOs. Second, despite the fact that it shows potential

directions in which participatory approaches could move, this article, together with its main

conclusions, seems to be almost completely ignored in most of works on participation that I came

across. Third, already mentioned, the case studies presented in the article have got a lot in common

with the work of Barka. A very interesting thing is that non of the case studies presented by Hailey

referred to the use the PRA techniques as these NGOs did not base their work on a set of formal tools

or participative techniques. Hailey claimed that informal, non-formulaic, personal interactions are a

key element of participative decision-making.The scholar also stressed the importance that values such

as respect, trust and friendship played while developing the relations between the project staff and its

recipients. The understanding of, and responsiveness to, the needs of local communities is, according

to Hailey, the cause of the organizations' success.

The theories and arguments presented in this section will be analysed throughout Sections V to

VII. Before that, however, Section VI will describe organization studied by me in order to place further

analysis in a broader context

Section IV – Barka: history and activities

The Barka foundation was created in Poland as a response to increasing social problems of the

transformation system. Barbara and Tomasz Sadowscy wanted to create environments and social

structures that would enable the 'forgotten and unwanted' members of the Polish society to develop

19 Hailey, John. 'Beyond the formulaic: Process and Practice in South Asian NGOs' in Cooke, Bill; Kothari, Uma. 'Participation: the New Tyranny?'. Zed Books, 2001

14


299890

personally and socially. This lead to the creation of alternative system of help, that focuses on

members the marginalised groups, enabling them to rebuild their personality, educates them in various

ways and helps them to find their way in the new socio-economic system.20

In late 1980s two psychologist set up the first house of Barka in the abandoned school building

in Władysławowo and started living with 25 people finding themselves in very difficult life situations.

These included people living prisons, reformatories, prostitutes and alcoholics This first community

became a platform for development of the movement of mutual help not only for the needing ones but

also for informal groups of citizens and NGOs from Poland and abroad. Its main goal has been to

deliver living spaces, workplaces and education for people marginalised by the neoliberal system.

Since then economically independent and self-sufficient communities have been created all over

Poland, promoting the model of an economy of inclusion.21

Activities of Barka develop along two paraller schemes. First one aims at the rehabilitation of

people rejected by the society. Second focuses on implementation of developed models of

rehabilitation and social entrepreneurship through building local partnerships and through the

education of local leaders to engage in creating local activities and markets.22 Barka has developed

programmes and structures that would serve as platform for self development of the disadvantaged

members of the society (rural communities, homeless, disabled, addicts, illiterate and many others).

These structures involved the Social Integration Centres (for those being long term unemployed),

20 Sadowska, Barbara. 'New Beginning. Social Market Economy.' Fundacja Pomocy Wzajemnej Barka, 201021 'Oblicza szczęścia'http://barka.org.pl/node/2322 World Habitat Award, Building Partnerships to Eradicate Povertyhttp://www.worldhabitatawards.org/winners-and-finalists/project-details.cfm?lang=00&theProjectID=18AD7EF2-15C5-F4C0-993FDB14AEC692EF

15

http://www.worldhabitatawards.org/winners-and-finalists/project-details.cfm?lang=00&theProjectID=18AD7EF2-15C5-F4C0-993FDB14AEC692EF



299890

Social Economy Centres (for those not eligible for Social Integration Centres), co-operatives, social

enterprises, eco-farms and programme of house building.23 The report from 2009 stated that the

system of accessible housing provided 750 people with housing.24 Until then 25 successful social

enterprises had been created (35 more were being in the process of creation at that point). 8 Social

Integration Cetres have been created. Two PGRs were renovated and transformed into ecological

farms. On top of that, the organization runs the street paper. The structures of Barka are also based on

partnerships with Public Centres of Social Help, NGOs, training institutions, housing co-operatives,

district job centres, commercial companies, committees of housing estates and parishes. The founders

of Barka have also had a chance to play a key role in introducing acts that support development of civil

society and social enterpreneurship in Poland.

In 2006 Barka Poland was contacted by the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham in

association with Housing Justice UNLEASH and The Simon Community. This resulted in the

organization coming to London in order to run the programmes of working with the Eastern European

homeless25. Since then Barka's actions have then spread into other countries of the European Union

such as Germany, Netherlands or France. Barka's unconventional programmes have attracted the

attention of various charities and NGOs worldwide. Recently, several African organisations aiming at

introducing such models of community driven developments in their own countries, have approached

the Polish foundation. The INISE programme has been set up by Barka as a response to interest from

such countries as Ghana, Ethiopia, Kenya or Uganda26.

23 Sadowska, Barbara. Op. Cit. 24 World Habitat Award, Op. Cit. 25 Barka UK, Abouthttp://www.barkauk.org/news/about/26 INISE, Board of Trusteeshttp://inise.org/?page_id=188

16


299890

At the moment, the activities of the African programmes are at the beginning phase. In this

research, I will focus particularly on the actions carried out in Kenya, particularly on self – help

programme being implemented in assistance of KCA in Kanini Kaseo village, in Kenya. This projects

started as a response to the Horn of Africa Drought 2009-2011. One of the main aims of this

programmes is to achieve food security in the region abolish the dependency of villagers on food aid.

The project carried out by Barka and KCA is based on assumptions of PD as these are the members of

local SHG that are claimed to be in charge of designing and implementing the activities.27 The nature

of this undertaking is quite different to the works carried out by Barka in Europe. This is why the next

sections of this research will refer to the activities of the organization on both continents to show how

the assumptions of the PD might vary. I will start with presenting different understandings of the

concept of participation.

Section V – What does participation mean?

A simple way to describe participation is to say that to participate means to take part, to become

involved, and there is little more to it than that.28 However, in practice there is definitely a lot more to

it than that and this is what I will show in this section. So far, the debate about PD focused mainly on

the PRA model developed by Chambers. The problem with Cooke and Kothari's book is that it focuses

mainly on criticising these models and draws the conclusion that participation – not just PRA – should

not be saved. I agree with the point stated in 'From Tyranny to Transformation' that greater conceptual

and theoretical coherence on participation is very often missing in the debate29. In this section I will not

try to develop a universal definition of participation, but will show the different forms that

27 Dhidha Mjidho, Baiba 1. 'Kanini Kaseo. Hope and Vision for Africa'. Kenya Community Association, 201228 Richardson, Ann. 'Participation'. Routledge, 1983. p.8 29 Hickey, Samuel; Mohan, Giles.Op. Cit.

17


299890

participation might take basing on the WB's assumptions, Mosse's and Hailey's arguments, and on the

experience of the work of Barka.

According to the WB scholars there are four forms that PD might take. First, passive

participation, is when the recipients of the projects are only being informed about the decisions that

had already taken place without having any influence on them. Second, participation by consultation,

is an extractive process when recipients provides the answers to the questions prepared by the outside

institutions. Next, participation by collaboration, does not make much impact on the aims of the

projects, however, it requires recipients' active involvement in the decision-making process about how

to achieve the goals. The last one, empowerment participation, takes place when the recipients are

capable and willing to initiate the processes and take part in the analysis which leads to joint decision

making.30 It can be already seen that participation might be implemented in many ways – each of them

resulting in different levels of engagement from the recipients. I will now move to present the critique

of these methods.

One of Mosse's main argument is that the creators of the KRIBP were designing it mainly in the

way that it would fit the ODA requirements. On the other hand the recipients of the project were not

making the same choices as they would without the influence of the KBCL.31 And these are the main

obstacles preventing a meaningful participation from taking place. Mosse claims that the way

participation should work is that the villagers would be the ones to make decisions on what they need

and how to run the projects without and the role of the outside agency would be narrowed to the

implementation of recipients' ideas. At the same time, he also states that the presence of the outside

agencies will inevitably influence the way in which the programme functions. This is, he concludes, a

30 Mefalopulos, Paolo. Tufte, Thomas. 'Participatory Communication: A Practical Guide.' The World Bank, 200931 Mosse, David 2. 'The making and marketing of participatory development' in Quarles van Ufford, Philip; Kumar Giri, Ananta. 'A Moral Critique of Development: in Search of Global Responsibilities'. Routledge, 2003

18


299890

contradiction impossible to overcome.32

Hailey, on the other hand, describes the work of the NGOs he claims to be successful and

pointing on the development of personal relations, friendship and trust between the NGO workers and

the recipients of the projects resulting in the efficient mode of decision making. On top of that, the

scholar prepared a set of the characteristics of all the successful NGOs: a fundamental belief in

participative development, an ethos of close collaboration with local communities, and a clear vision

based on a strongly held, well articulated set of values. Their work is based on the conviction that the

poor and uneducated can take control of their lives with some outside encouragement, assistance and

support. As a result, NGOs bring to local communities new technologies, new organizational

capacities, and management competencies compatible with local experiences and preferences. Their

staff demonstrate a willingness to experiment and learn, to listen and discuss, and also to initiate and

inspire.33 Hailey claims that the participation discourse should be shifted from formulaic approaches

towards the focus on personal interactions. I points to the conclusion that participation, if understood

and implemented in ways differed than ones prescribed by PRA, might actually be a concept worth

saving.

The way in which Barka's programmes work depends on the problems being dealt with. The

actions of Barka within the European countries focus mainly on the work with the long term

unemployed and the problems related to their condition, such as homelessness, alcoholism etc. In the

movie from 1994 Tomasz Sadowski describes that their aim was to create family relations with the

people as, according to him, A person who found himself on the margin of social life does not

necessarily need a hat or to be well informed, but mainly social support.34 I had a chance to observe

32 Mosse, David 2. Op. Cit.33 Hailey, John. Op. Cit. p. 9534 'Oblicza Szczęścia'. Op. Cit. Translated by me.

19


299890

Barka's work in Poland and in London. Indeed, development of personal involvement was a

particularly visible during my encounters with the organization. For example, during the meetings of

Barka UK it was evident that the destiny of every single homeless that the workers of Barka had

encountered was the main concern of the organization. Ewa Sadowska, the Chief Executive of Barka

UK kept inquiring about cases of the individual persons, knowing their names and stories.

Having a chance to see the way Barka works, it appeared to me that a very important factor was

the focus of the founders of the organization on increasing self-esteem of every single individual by

making them realize their potential. Barka developed various methods as a way to achieve this goal.

This includes not only the educational programmes and workshops. A very important role in the work

of Barka within European countries is played by the leaders. Leaders are the ex homeless, very often

alcoholics, who have been helped by barka. Right now they work with Barka, patrolling the streets,

looking for the homeless, trying to persuade them to take part in Barka's programmes and mentoring

them once they agree to cooperate. My informal conversations with different leaders showed me that

they were aware that their knowledge of the realities of being homeless together with their testimony

of their own recovery thanks to Barka's programmes was a very important part of building trust

between the organization and the homeless. It was evident the awareness of being useful and

appreciated, and that they could meaningfully participate in helping others, was the core of the process

of their retrieval. It can be seen that Barka shows many of the characteristics that Hailey pointed to be

shared by the NGOs he claimed to be successful. At the same time, Barka does base its work on

participatory assumptions making its programs highly efficient.

As it was described earlier in this section, according to WB the empowerment participation takes

place when the recipients of projects have influence on the decisions made by development agency.

20


299890

The case of Barka, however, shows how to go beyond this theory. It is not only that the recipients of

the organization influence the way the programmes are run. Very often they run the programmes

themselves. For example, the recipients of Barka have turned the PGRs into ecological farms that they

now administer. The important aspect of Barka's work is breaking the passive attitudes of the

beneficiaries. As it was acknowledged by the chairman of Kenya Community Association, the system

developed by Barka makes it possible to develop programs, in which people do not wait for free lunch,

but contribute to build and develop mutual interactions.35 This is one of the reasons why the KCA

decided to create partnership with Barka and work together on the projects in Kenya.

According to the statement prepared by the Kanini Kaseo SHG, this organization wrote several

proposals to different donors which had not been supported before the KCA decided to engage with the

project and work on achieving the food security in the area.36 I spoke with Baiba Dhidha Mjidho about

the process of decision making in the programme. Potentially it is INISE that is going to take the

decisions about the programmes. However, the organization allows the SGH to try the solutions that

they think are best for them. As I was told during the interview Unless you are able to understand and

appreciate what people are doing, you won't develop trust and you will not succeed with what you

want to do.37 I was quite pleased to hear these words from the chairman of the KCA, especially as I had

not told him that participation was the main theme of my research. It is the SHG that defines what the

goals are and what is needed to achieve them, KCA provides funds for and assistance in implementing

the ideas.38 At the time of the interview, trenches had been dug, the irrigation system had been

developed and the output of the crops had increased. At the same time, members of the SHG noticed

the problem of high evaporation and made a decision about building a green house. Baiba Dhidha

35 Dhidha Mjidho, Baiba 2. 'Human Enterprise Triumph – Barka Foundation'. Kenya Community Association. p. 936 Kanini Kaseo Kyunyu Self Help Group. 'Statement on Thursday 9th February 2012'37 Dhidha Mjidho, Baiba. 2/03/201338 This can also refer to Williams' argument about NGO governmentality as it seems lik KCA together with Barka

do not restrict small local organizations, but assist them in their initiatives.

21


299890

Mjidho described Kanini Kaseo as a living laboratory where they allow the recipients of the funds

make their own decisions and even make the mistakes. Moreover, Between April and 2012, the

founders of Barka, accompanied by Baiba Dhidha Mjidho, went for a study visit to Kenya. Then the

discussions with urban and rural communities, diplomats, government officials, intellectuals, bankers

and and the marginalized people in the slums of Nairobi took place.39

This section showed that participation is not a fixed concept. Different people understand it in

different ways and various agencies implement it in various ways. The case of Barka presents the

example of projects going beyond the theory of participation that not only shifts the decision making

processes towards the recipients. It shows that the factors that come together to build participatory

programmes can extend towards acknowledging and developing potential of every single individual,

and even allowing people to run the programmes. This particularly shows the problem of the

argumentation used within 'The New Tyranny'. The book dwells mainly on the limitations of PRA, not

acknowledging the fact that participation might be incorporated into development programmes in

different ways. It is understandable to criticise a particular model, but rejecting the whole concept on

the basis of the problems related to a single manifestation of it should not be acceptable. The case of

Kanini Kaseo project undermines Mosse's idea of participation being unimplementable. There are,

however, some problems related to the Kanini Kaseo project. This section pointed only to the fact that

participation can take place even at the form that Mosse claimed was impossible to implement. The

next section, on the other hand, will examine the idea of the projects' success and how the situation

might change in the long run.

39 Dhidha Mjidho, Baiba 1. Op. Cit.

22


299890

Section VI – What does define success?

Another problem pointed by Mosse is how different agencies define success. I find this argument

extremely relevant as the judgement about PD is very often based on what one perceives as the most

desirable outcome of a project. The scholar pointed to the fact that the participation provided a strong

basis for defining the programme success. On the other hand, from the point of view of the agency and

its PR For policy to succeed it is necessary it seems that it is not implemented, but that enough people

firmly believe that it is.40 These arguments, in my opinion, are not very relevant when to comes to

discussing participation as they could definitely be used in relation to many different development

approaches, not just the participatory ones.41

Hailey states that understanding of, and responsiveness to, the needs of the local communities

are the factors that led to the success of the described NGOs. The limitation of his analysis is that he

did not describe what defines a successful development project. This is a serious limitation of his

argument as he tells the readers what are the right ways to run a project, without stating what the

outcomes of the projects are.

In his conclusion in 'The making and marketing of participatory development', Mosse states that

meaningful engagements between staff and villagers still produced important local benefits even under

conditions of severe drought.42 This shows that using PRA actually led to the interaction between the

staff and villagers and that it did bring benefits to the people. One of Chambers' claim, however, was

that that using PRA models would lead to challenging top-down development processes. Cooke and

Kothari remained within the same discourse by defining the success of the projects by the criterion

40 Mosse, David 2. Op. Cit. p. 7041 This matter will be explored more in the next section. 42 Mosse, David 2. Op. Cit.

23


299890

developed by Chambers. For them local benefits produced by the implementation of the PRA models

were not enough to describe the project as successful as long as it did not challenge the existing power

relations. Another theoretical goal of KRIBP, imposed by the donor agenda, was to make the villagers

self reliant. This too could be used as measure of the programme's success. The villagers, however, did

not become independent from the organization as the agency behind the project – KBCL - was a

leading national commercial organization involved in the production and marketing of agro inputs and

it was its interest that the recipients of KRIBP remained dependent on the products produced by the

company.43 Mosse, however, wrote as well that disincentives to innovate or to challenge prevailing

preconceptions were shared by both – staff and villagers44. This shows another contradiction of his

argument. If participation is supposed to be about decision making – this shows that it was also a

decision of the local people to maintain the existing power relations for their own benefit. Mosse

pointed to the fact that the local knowledge is not a fixed factor and that it can be manipulated by the

outside agencies for their profits. Kothari, in her chapter on power, based on Foucauldian approach to

the understanding of power states that By not recognizing that knowledge is produced out of power

relations in society and through practitioners' acceptance of 'local knowledge' as some kind of

objective truth, participatory methodologies are in danger of reifying these inequalities and of

affirming the agenda of elites and other more powerful actors.45 My question, however, is whether the

fact that the recipients of development programmes may choose not to challenge the existing power

relations is enough to entirely condemn the concept of PD. As Foucault also stated the point is not that

everything is bad, but that everything is dangerous, which is not exactly the same as bad.46 The

challenge is to find the balance between the limitations and benefits of a discussed project.

43 Mosse, David 1. Op. Cit. 44 Mosse , David 2. Op. Cit. 45 Kothari, Uma. Op. Cit. p. 145 46 Kelly, Michael. 'Critique and Power: Recasting the Foucault/Habermas Debate'. MIT Press, 1994, p. 22

24


299890

It is not straight forward to analyse the case of Barka in relation to the concept of power as the

relations between the founders, workers and recipients of the programmes are quite complex. The

founders of the organization do have a potential power and control over their beneficiaries, particularly

the ones who become members of the organization and run various programmes. The fact that this

power is not abused, however, makes the relations even more meaningful. When it comes to the idea of

self sufficiency, some of the recipients of Barka's programmes, mainly the educational ones, manage to

get into the employment sector and become independent. Others stay with Barka on the long term

basis. One could state that they never became autonomous as they remained permanently within the

structures of the organization. However, if this is status at which everyone benefits, why should that be

considered as something wrong? Basing on my conversations with the workers of Barka I concluded

that for them the success lies in helping the individuals to get out of homelessness, get over their

addictions and live meaningful lives. In order to achieve these goals, the founders of Barka did

question the prevailing development schemes and created a system of help in which participation has

played and still plays an important role.

When it comes to the case study of Kanini Kaseo, according to the presentation prepared by

KCA, so far the tools supplied to the SHG improved the capacity of farming, rations of food boosted

productivity, water retention increased crop yields and, all in all, the output of farming doubled.47 Still,

the state of self sufficiency, which is one of the goal listed in the Kanini Kaseo project, has not yet

been achieved.48 One of the agencies involved in the project is Twiga Chemicals - the company

engaging in the supply and distribution of explosives, agrochemicals, industrial chemicals and

pharmaceuticals49. It is highly probable that the goals of the company are parallel to the ones of KBCL.

So far the company has donated three bucket drip irrigation kits and declared the willingness to

47 Kenya Community Association, 'Kanini Kaseo'48 Barka Foundation, 'Projekt MSZ Fundacja Barka Kenia 1'49 Twiga Chemicals – Abouthttp://www.twigachemicals.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2&Itemid=23

25

http://www.twigachemicals.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2&Itemid=23


299890

provide trainings on pesticides and crop storage.50 In the long term, the dependency on the company's

products might be created just as it was described in Mosse's article. Only the time will show whether

it happens or not. Even if it does, one needs to take into consideration the origins of the project. So far,

strongly affected by drought, the people of Kanini Kaseo were dependent on food aid delivered by the

World Vision organization51. It has been the decision and desire of the inhabitants of Kanini Kaseo to

improve their agricultural capacity so that they would no longer be dependent on food aid. They

developed a programme and the KCA was the first organization to respond to their initiative. As it is

shown above, the villagers of Kanini Kaseo have already benefited from the programme. Again, one

needs to balance between the benefits gained and potential limitations of the introduced project.

This section showed another contradiction of the rhetoric of 'The New Tyranny'. The argument

presented in the book is that the development projects influence the recipients' decision about what

they need most. However, what is not acknowledged is that by stating that the success of a programme

depends on whether it alters existing power relation, another point of view (convergent with the

assumptions developed by the creators of the PRA!) might be imposed on the recipients of

development projects. My question is whether it would not be more appropriate to define success of

any development programme on the basis of to what extent it actually benefits the people? This could

change the whole discourse in favour of saving PD, as even the PRA models did benefit the recipients

of the KRIBP. Another problem presented in this (and the previous) section is how the motives of the

agencies assisting the projects affect its outcomes. It will be the aim of the next section to explore the

extent to which participation might facilitate the dubious work of certain institutions.

50 Kenya Community Association, 'Kanini Kaseo'51 Dhidha Mjidho, Baiba 1. Op. Cit.

26


299890

Section VII – Why participation?

The issues related to the influence that the outside agencies, such as donor agendas or

commercial companies, might have on development programmes were briefly mentioned as a part of

arguments presented in the previous sections. This section will analyse the reasons for which

participatory approaches were chosen by different agencies. The topic will be explored even more in

terms of the causal relations between these agencies and participatory approaches in order to show

further limitations of the argument used in 'The New Tyranny' that so far have been omitted.

A very important, argument presented by Mosse is one about the influence of donors – in this

case ODA – on shaping the development projects. As funding of the project presented by the scholar

was dependent on how much it fitted the donor's requirements, its design followed these requisites too.

At the time when the project started, participation was the policy recommended by the WB, thus

focusing on participatory approaches in the project design was one of the main conditions to get the

funds. On the other hand, as the donors were putting pressure on the timely implementation of

development programmes, at some point project staff started taking on more of activities. This made

villagers retreat from temporary planning and decision-making to the more familiar role of passive

beneficiary or low status project employees52. However, once DIFiD's (formerly ODA) India program

realigned towards the funding of state-wide government programmes, sectoral reforms and donor-

government partnerships, KRIBP unable to articulate this policy, lost its support and had to come to an

end.53 This points to the fact that one of the main reasons participatory approaches were used in the

project was that otherwise the chances of gaining the funds would be close to zero. At the same time,

donor's attitude of putting time pressure made it difficult for the project to allow villagers to participate

52 Mosse, David 1. Op. Cit. 53 Mosse, David. 2. Op. Cit.

27


299890

in decision making process.

One more problem raised by Mosse is that of the motives of particular agencies taking part in

development projects. According to him, the involvement of KBCL changed the project in order to

facilitate the expansionary practices of the company. He described the process of breading, testing and

popularising seeds by scientists and farmers jointly, which then out-performed both local and officially

recommended varieties in poor soil and low input conditions. For Mosse, however, this programme

had little to do with participation as he described it as a sophisticated form of market research54.

One interpretation of why participation was chosen could go along with Rahnema's view that the

promotion of participatory approaches served economic, institutional and legitimating functions for a

mainstream vision of development, compatible with a liberalization agenda.55 However, one needs to

bear in mind that participation itself was not the cause of the way in which the international system of

development worked. Would it not be more logical to focus the critique on the way in which the

international development agencies work instead of on the concept they promote? If one criticizes the

concept promoted by donors, it can be replaced by another one, but it will not change the way

development functions. This shows another limitation of the argument presented by Kothari. One

could argue that her argumentation focuses too much on the idea of participation, forgetting that it is

just a part of wider system that should be questioned. This would mean that her work does not

challenge the existing power relations in a meaningful way.

Hailey, in his article did not mention the source of funding of the NGOs he described. This is

another factor preventing the full analysis of the topic. However, he clearly stressed that non of the

54 Mosse, David 2. Op. Cit. 55 Rahnema, Majid. Op. Cit.

28


299890

presented case studies referred to PRA techniques, which means that they did not have to implement

them in order to get funds. Similarly, Barka receives funds for its work mainly from the local councils,

local trusts and European Union56. As these institutions work in different ways than DIFiD, not much

pressure is placed on Barka to implement participatory techniques in European countries.

During one of our meetings, Ewa Sadowska told me that other organizations working with homeless in

London were showing the signs of anxiety when it comes to the way Barka UK operates, and the

significant role played by 'not trained' leaders of Barka who turned out to be more efficient than 'well

qualified' staff these organizations. This, she said, could be a fear of the workers of other organizations

of loosing their jobs if this model became generally acknowledged.57

When it comes the activities in Kenya, so far they have been funded with £ 3,200 collected by

the KCA during the Africa History Month for the response to the Horn of Africa Drought 2009-2011.58

The members of KCA could choose from different options to spend the money, one of them being

donating them to the World Vision or the KRCS. However, they decided to spend the money on the

project initiated by the Kanini Kaseo SHG as it shows more potential to create long term benefits to its

recipients.59 The fact that the project in Kanini Kaseo was started with the funds that had already been

collected shows the willingness of the organization to encourage participation for reasons different

than just getting the funds. However, the funds raised by the KCA are not sufficient to keep the project

going in the long term or to implement more complex programmes. This is why the organization

applied for the funds to GPAF, appointed by DIFiD. Despite the fact that GPAF acknowledged the

project for being participatory, the funds were not given to Barka UK due to little reference of the

project to MDGs and the claim that the project did not seem achievable within 12 months period.60

56 Sadowski, Tomasz. 'Wielkopolskie Centrum Ekonomii Solidarności'. Fundacja Pomocy Wzajemnej Barka, 201257 Sadowska, Ewa. 12/09/201258 Dhidha Mjidho, Baiba 1. Op. Cit. 59 Dhidha Mjidho, Baiba. 2/03/201360 DFID as Fund Menager for the Global Poverty Action Fund, 'Detailed Feedback on the Concept Note', 19 February 2013

29


299890

This shows that the main focus of DIFiD has changed again. Participation does not play the crucial

role anymore, so the argument of using it in order to get the funds in not as relevant as at the time

when 'The New Tyranny' was written. If one wanted to follow the rhetoric of Cooke and Kothari, the

arguments about legitimising the power relations and using the slogans as a way of marketing could

shift from the concept of participation towards MDGs. During my interview with Tomasz Sadowski, I

was asking him about the practices of gaining people's trust. Among many explanations, he said that

often it takes years to build trust.61 The donor agenda, however, expects the goals of the project to be

achieved within one year period. This is another point, questioning more the validity of DIFiD's

methods than of participation itself.

So far the Kanini Kaseo project has managed to give the power of decision making to SHG. The

reasons for it include not only the belief of Barka and KCA in the efficiency of PD but also the fact

that the funding for it came from the source controlled by KCA. It is difficult to predict in which

direction this programme will evolve at the point when other institutions such as DIFiD or Commercial

Companies get involved. However it only reinforces the point that the critique presented by 'The New

Tyranny' should have been addressed more towards the development institutions than towards PD

itself. In his articles, Mosse indicates two main reasons for participatory approaches to be chosen in

project. First one was to meet the donor's requirements in order to get the funds. Second, for the

marketing purposes serving KBCL. My point, however, is that any concept, no matter how noble,

could be turned into a tool for achieving dubious means. Moreover, organizations discussed by Hailey

together with Barka did implement meaningful ways of engaging with their recipients even though it

was not a requirement imposed by any outside institution. Basing on the analysis of the case studies, it

seems that if imposed, participation (and probably any other approach) is more likely to serve

superficial role. On top of that, the anxiety shown by other organization not willing to employ 'not

61 Sadowski, Tomasz. 15/03/2013

30


299890

qualified' workers shows that many NGOs themselves fear the meaningful participation as it might

question the relevance of their work. This shows that saving participation and enforcing modes of

implementation developed by Barka might significantly change development processes.

Section VIII – Conclusions

Should PD be saved? The answer to this question depends highly on how we understand the

word participation and what we consider to be a successful project. The arguments presented in this

research, however, show significant limitations of the discourse of 'The New Tyranny'. Firstly, authors

and contributors to the book did not acknowledged the fact that participation might take different

forms. By focusing solely on PRA, they rejected the whole concept of participation. By doing this,

they remained within the discourse reinforced by Chambers. This is particularly evident when it comes

to analysing power relations. Chambers', partially basing on Freire's work, assumed that participatory

approaches would lead to the shift in existing power structures and self reliance of the project

recipients. Again, by simply referencing to the assumptions of the creator of PRA, 'The New Tyranny'

did not recognise other roles that participation might play and other benefits that it might bring.

Another limitation of the Cooke and Kothari's work is that they blamed participation for legitimising

the 'tyrannical' practices of development and commercial agencies without taking into consideration

that other concepts (such as MDGs) can serve the same purpose. The sole critique of participation can

lead to the shift of the trading idea, but not to change in the behaviour of the aforementioned agencies.

Thus, 'The New Tyranny', despite all the appearances, has not meaningfully contributed to the

discourse in a way that could lead to a shift in existing power relations. However, this does not mean

that all of the points stated in the book were not relevant. Cooke and Kothari's description demonstrate

significant problems related to the implementation of PD. It definitely shows that the use of

31


299890

participatory approaches is not a panacea. However, conclusions drawn in 'The New Tyranny' are

definitely too extreme in relation to what is presented through the case studies. It has been shown that

PRAs are not what Chambers claimed them to be. They can be easily manipulated in order to serve

different interests, they do not produce meaningful shifts in power relations and not necessarily they

lead to the self reliance of the 'participants'. Nevertheless, Mosse's article showed that they might bring

significant benefits to the recipients.

The case studies presented by Hailey and the way that Barka works showed possible directions

in which participatory approaches should head. Developing personal relations and having individual

approach towards each of the recipients can definitely be a part of a successful development project. I

agree with Hailey that formulaic approaches are not as meaningful in building understanding than

creating friendship and trust, and the case of Barka is a good example of that. These factors are rarely

studied as it is probably impossible, to measure and control levels of trust or friendship. This work,

however, shows that more attention should be focused on the role of these values in development (and

not only development) programmes. The case of Barka has not only shown that participation can be a

very important part of a project. This organization has moved beyond the theory of participation at the

time that this idea has not even fully entered mainstreams of development theories. The fact that the

recipients of Barka bear very responsible roles, such as running the farms or mentoring the new

recipients, indicates how meaningful forms PD might take and other organizations should probably

take inspirations from these kind of practices. This could lead to significant changes in power relations.

The Kanini Kaseo project has already brought significant changes in the lives of the villagers through

the means of implementing PD. There is a great potential in this project to be revealed on condition

that Barka and KCA manage to achieve balance between the influence of donors, other institutions and

and the wishes of the villagers. On top of that, complexity of Barka's programmes presented in Section

32


299890

IV shows that participation is not the only area in which the innovative thinking should be

implemented in order for the organizations' work to succeed. I think other ideas developed by this

organization are as worth analysing as their approach towards PD. But this could be a aubject of

another research.

33


299890

Bibliography

Textbooks

Carpentier, Nico. 'Media and Participation: A Side of Ideological-democratic Struggle'. Intellect Books, 2011

Dagron, Alfonso Gumucio; Tufte, Thomas. 'Communication for Social Change Anthology: Historical and Contemporary Readings.' CFSC Consortium, INC, 2006

Freire, Paulo. 'Pedagogy of the Opressed: 30th Anniversary Edition', Continuum International Publish Group, 2000

Hickey, Samuel; Mohan, Giles. 'Participation: From Tyranny to Transformation? Exploring New Approaches to Participation in Development '. Zed Books, 2004

Kelly, Michael. 'Critique and Power: Recasting the Foucault/Habermas Debate'. MIT Press, 1994

Mefalopulos, Paolo. Tufte, Thomas. 'Participatory Communication: A Practical Guide.' The World Bank, 2009

Richardson, Ann. 'Participation'. Routledge, 1983

Sadowska, Barbara. 'New Beginning. Social Market Economy.' Fundacja Pomocy Wzajemnej Barka, 2010

Sadowski, Tomasz. 'Rozwój. O tym jak integracja środowisk lokalnych oraz uspołecznienie gospodarki budują nową jakość.' Fundacja Pomocy Wzajemnej Barka, 2012

Sadowski, Tomasz. 'Wielkopolskie Centrum Ekonomii Solidarności'. Fundacja Pomocy Wzajemnej Barka, 2012

34


299890

Articles in Textbooks

Cooke, Bill; Kothari, Uma, 'The Case for Participation as Tyranny' in Cooke, Bill; Kothari, Uma. 'Participation: the New Tyranny?'. Zed Books, 2001

Hailey, John. 'Beyond the formulaic: Process and Practice in South Asian NGOs' in Cooke, Bill; Kothari, Uma. 'Participation: the New Tyranny?'. Zed Books, 2001

Kothari, Uma. 'Power, Knowledge and Social Control in Participatory Development' in Cooke, Bill; Kothari, Uma. 'Participation: the New Tyranny?'. Zed Books, 2001

Mosse, David 1. 'People's Knowledge, Participation and Patronage: Operations and Representations in Rural Development' in Cooke, Bill; Kothari, Uma. 'Participation: the New Tyranny?'. Zed Books, 2001

Mosse, David 2. 'The making and marketing of participatory development' in Quarles van Ufford, Philip; Kumar Giri, Ananta. 'A Moral Critique of Development: in Search of Global Responsibilities'.

Routledge, 2003

Rahnema, Majid. 'Participation'. in Sachs, Wolfgang. The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power. Zed Books, 1992

Articles in Journals

Chambers, Robert. 'The Origins and Practice of Participatory Rural Apprisal.' World Development, Vol. 22, No 7, 1994

Parker, Melissa. ‘Rethinking Female Circumcision’. Africa, 65(4), 1995

Williams, Glyn. 'Evaluating Participatory Development: Tyranny, Power and (Re)Politicisation'. Third World Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 3, 2004

Websites

Barka UK, Abouthttp://www.barkauk.org/news/about/

INISE, Board of Trusteeshttp://inise.org/?page_id=188

Twiga Chemicals – Abouthttp://www.twigachemicals.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2&Itemid=23

World Habitat Award, Building Partnerships to Eradicate Povertyhttp://www.worldhabitatawards.org/winners-and-finalists/project-details.cfm?

lang=00&theProjectID=18AD7EF2-15C5-F4C0-993FDB14AEC692EF

35



http://www.twigachemicals.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2&Itemid=23

http://www.barkauk.org/news/about/


299890

Reports

Barka Foundation, 'Projekt MSZ Fundacja Barka Kenia 1'

Dhidha Mjidho, Baiba 1. 'Kanini Kaseo. Hope and Vision for Africa'. Kenya Community Association, 2012

Dhidha Mjidho, Baiba 2. 'Human Enterprise Triumph – Barka Foundation'. Kenya Community Association

DFID as Fund Menager for the Global Poverty Action Fund, 'Detailed Feedback on the Concept Note', 19 February 2013

Kanini Kaseo Kyunyu Self Help Group. 'Statement on Thursday 9th February 2012'

PowerPoint Presentation

Kenya Community Association, 'Kanini Kaseo'

Movie

'Oblicza Szczęścia' http://barka.org.pl/node/23

Personally Conducted Infotmal Interviews

Dhidha Mjidho, Baiba. 2-3/03/2013

Informant 1. 12/09/2012

Sadowska, Ewa. 12/09/2012

Sadowski, Tomasz. 15/03/2013

36

http://barka.org.pl/node/23

participatory development – should it be saved

Education