Participatory Video by Shirley White, Chapter 5 (actually an essay by Stephen Crocker)
It is popularly thought that digital media destroys sense of place since distances are meaningless leading to some grotesque monoculture of capitalism at the scale of mass society.
The Fogo Process was born from an initiative called the Challenge for Change and organized by the National Film Board of Canada (NFB) and Memorial University of Newfoundland (MUN) in the late 1960's. Initial goal was to create documentaries with local video in underdeveloped regions of Canada as messages for politicians and decisionmakers who are not taking their opinions into account. "The Fogo Process provides real evidence of how peoplle who have been marginalized the economicand political structure of the world system can renew and empower their local communities and transform conditions of uneven development." p. 123
Prior to the Fogo Process was the Lumerire brothers, who invented movies, popularized their cinematograph in the 1980's - presenting film from everyday life in other parts of the woorld. Similar things were being done in the streets of Russia, and live activist scripts were filmed by filmakers like Roberto Rossellini. In the 1940's we have the British Colonial Film Unit producing films to show African colonists was England was like and attract Europeans to colonies. (Mr English at Home, and Southern Rhodesia: Is This your Country).
The first attempt by the NFB in 1966 was The Things I Cannot Change - a documentary on the social problem of poverty and the family it was based on was aversely affected by the production due to ridicule and embarrasment. Colin Low is the producer and director for the Fogo team. He wanted to put the filmaking tools into the hands of the locals and teach young ones how to be filmakers. Donald Snowden was a community development worker directing the Extension Service of th MUN. This project was incited by an article on poverty reduced to economic figures. What about the poverty of information and organization? Fogo was chosen because it had several small communities but very similar yet disconnected. 5000 lived in 10 communites with religious divides. No common voice nor communication chanell with government (p. 125).
First step was to go through a local community worker to identify some social problems and issues with the people. Much stress is placed on who you connect with to enter into the trust of the community. Suggested ideal is a local community organizer who often will look like he is the director of the set. Result was 28 short films on Fogo. Low moved away from horizontal filmmaking to try this vertical means of capturing different opinions rather than aggregating them. The people were shown the videos first and feedback elicited became the precedent for community feedback loop. A bigger loop closed by taking the video to the MUN and eventually government. A film was then made of the Fishing Ministries' response and returned.
There is much more information in this chapter that discusses a bit more on process vs product, as well as the continued need for improved development communications.
Reflection
I've been waiting impatiently to come across a more detailed account of the Fogo Process, and here it is. The best thing I learned was that vertical documentaries are real.
I would like to know how long the various feedback loops take to occur, and who filmed and edited/compiled the response from the government? Was it the government officials, or the NFB/MUN project team?
The history is interesting but the second part of the chapter is dedicated to the process that has become famously known as the Fogo Process. It has been applied by various different groups including Martha Stewart's initiative for Self-Employed Women's Association (SEWA), which produced some 400 films on their situation. It is interesting to think about how video seems to have been born into the development arena as a participatory tool, rather than evolving into one.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Empowerment: the Politics of Alternative Development
Friedman, David. "Empowerment: the Politics of Alternative Development." Blackwell Publishers: Cambridge, 1992.
In the first chapter, Friedman discusses how half the population became redundant in our current economic capitalist model. He claims that the poor are excluded from economically and politically participating alongside their richer counterparts due to capitalism's "global reach, technological innovations, centralization in giant corporations and financial institutions" (P 14). The book is meant to provide the framework for practicing alternative development, whose objective is to "humanize a system which has shut [the people] out, and to accomplish this through forms of everyday resistance and political struggle that insist on the rights of the excluded population as human beings, citizens, and persons intent on realizing their loving and creative powers within" (P13). The common doctrines of alternative development (AD) are to avoid the state (possibly entirely opposing it), trusting that a community is cohesive and collectively making right decisions, and political action should be avoided. Friedman argues that all three of these bases are incorrect: development must take place on bigger levels than just the local scale, communities are not always gemeinschaftlich (together and communal), and that political intervention is necessary in a age where common resources are controlled by the state (P7-8).
In the second chapter, Friedman discusses how the massive redundancy of the impoverished came about, pushing around some numbers and trying to make a point. After a few pages, it is lost. However, he does manage to rattle off a few reasons why modern capitalism is adverse to the modern peasant. Mainly that they spend capital for unproductive public expenditures such as housing, education, and health reasons. Additionally, they inhabit desirable land necessary for industrial growth, demand wages, and are a dangerous class that the government needs to keep their eyes on (P14). The poor are economically excluded from participation and Friedman says that, "To be economically excluded is, for all practical purposes, to be politically excluded." The poor, however, figh against this exclusion through acts of survival that include daily resistance in the form of "individual enterprise in the informal economy, protests, and community-centered initiatives." Although only mentioned briefly, he believes that "all initiatives require the cooperation of others; most require some form of outside help from students, priests, and professionals who may also provide..." (P21-22).
Some examples of 'daily resistance' include talleres, which is a simliar to a workshop where skills are swapped in order to move towards a collective enterprise. Talleres also provide a socializing aspect for marginalized groups such as women. So this economic model also provides a platform for social support. Other examples include organized protest movements as well as the bustling informal sector full of entrepreneurs. While "modernization emphasizes materialism, objective science, individualism, and liberal democracy, ... the barrio emphasizes intersubjective solidarity based on trust, reality testing based on subjective experience and intersubjective validation, anthropology of personhood, and a political order based on the strong talk of "direct democracy" (P ).
Then, what follows, may be the most amazing diagram which describes four actors in 'lifespace.' These include the state, civil society, corporations, and politics. State and corporate on the vertical axis while politics and civil society are on the horizontal. Friedman argues that the horizontal axis is weakened by the reinforcements created by the vertical axis, as seen primarily in the South. Although these actors cannot be kept from interacting with one another, the spaces of their overlapped have been named as well in an attempt to define the structure which dictates poverty and social inclusion.
Reflections
I am excited to get to the part of this book that explains how to take the entire system of global capitalism and turn it on its head... practically. Friedman's discussion of the history of how the haves and have-nots came to be is a useful and succinct (although somewhat biased) summary. This is the second book which considers power structures as obstacles to community development. I think he makes important distinctions between what AD has traditionally emphasized in order to redirect the focus onto working with governments through political intervention. This, as he argues, is the only way to really divvy up natural resources (thus wealth) equally.
As seen during my trip to Peru, there is a definite need for cooperation amongst the government as well as NGOs in order to make the sweeping changes desired in the Southern regions. However under governments that are corrupt, power-hungry, or apathetic, change is impossible unless the people demand their rights as citizens. A system of accountability and transparency needs to be in place so the people can guide the reconstruction in affected areas. I think that Participatory Video is one way to fill the gaps in feedback, monitoring, and evaluation that are currently ignored. If economic exclusion truly does imply political exclusion, this explains why the poor are stuck in their vicious cycle of poverty. We witnessed many of the same programs of "daily survival" such as the olla comunal and talleres being practiced in Peru. If PV can base its roots in the barrio's point of view, keeping its practices full of trust, subjectivity, and opening up the communication lines for more "direct democracy," it may be a useful tool to create and/or demand dialog between the community and its surroundings.
Finally, the amazing diagram implicitly suggests that strengthening the civil society as well as community participation in politics can also weaken the power constructs of the state and corporation. By siphoning power from authority and decentralizing it, truly participatory democracy can be built up.
On a side note, Friedman also addresses the idea of class within communities which we also encountered during our trip. There were many NGO workers who were from Peru but were considered better educated or just came from wealthier backgrounds.
In the first chapter, Friedman discusses how half the population became redundant in our current economic capitalist model. He claims that the poor are excluded from economically and politically participating alongside their richer counterparts due to capitalism's "global reach, technological innovations, centralization in giant corporations and financial institutions" (P 14). The book is meant to provide the framework for practicing alternative development, whose objective is to "humanize a system which has shut [the people] out, and to accomplish this through forms of everyday resistance and political struggle that insist on the rights of the excluded population as human beings, citizens, and persons intent on realizing their loving and creative powers within" (P13). The common doctrines of alternative development (AD) are to avoid the state (possibly entirely opposing it), trusting that a community is cohesive and collectively making right decisions, and political action should be avoided. Friedman argues that all three of these bases are incorrect: development must take place on bigger levels than just the local scale, communities are not always gemeinschaftlich (together and communal), and that political intervention is necessary in a age where common resources are controlled by the state (P7-8).
In the second chapter, Friedman discusses how the massive redundancy of the impoverished came about, pushing around some numbers and trying to make a point. After a few pages, it is lost. However, he does manage to rattle off a few reasons why modern capitalism is adverse to the modern peasant. Mainly that they spend capital for unproductive public expenditures such as housing, education, and health reasons. Additionally, they inhabit desirable land necessary for industrial growth, demand wages, and are a dangerous class that the government needs to keep their eyes on (P14). The poor are economically excluded from participation and Friedman says that, "To be economically excluded is, for all practical purposes, to be politically excluded." The poor, however, figh against this exclusion through acts of survival that include daily resistance in the form of "individual enterprise in the informal economy, protests, and community-centered initiatives." Although only mentioned briefly, he believes that "all initiatives require the cooperation of others; most require some form of outside help from students, priests, and professionals who may also provide..." (P21-22).
Some examples of 'daily resistance' include talleres, which is a simliar to a workshop where skills are swapped in order to move towards a collective enterprise. Talleres also provide a socializing aspect for marginalized groups such as women. So this economic model also provides a platform for social support. Other examples include organized protest movements as well as the bustling informal sector full of entrepreneurs. While "modernization emphasizes materialism, objective science, individualism, and liberal democracy, ... the barrio emphasizes intersubjective solidarity based on trust, reality testing based on subjective experience and intersubjective validation, anthropology of personhood, and a political order based on the strong talk of "direct democracy" (P ).
Then, what follows, may be the most amazing diagram which describes four actors in 'lifespace.' These include the state, civil society, corporations, and politics. State and corporate on the vertical axis while politics and civil society are on the horizontal. Friedman argues that the horizontal axis is weakened by the reinforcements created by the vertical axis, as seen primarily in the South. Although these actors cannot be kept from interacting with one another, the spaces of their overlapped have been named as well in an attempt to define the structure which dictates poverty and social inclusion.
Reflections
I am excited to get to the part of this book that explains how to take the entire system of global capitalism and turn it on its head... practically. Friedman's discussion of the history of how the haves and have-nots came to be is a useful and succinct (although somewhat biased) summary. This is the second book which considers power structures as obstacles to community development. I think he makes important distinctions between what AD has traditionally emphasized in order to redirect the focus onto working with governments through political intervention. This, as he argues, is the only way to really divvy up natural resources (thus wealth) equally.
As seen during my trip to Peru, there is a definite need for cooperation amongst the government as well as NGOs in order to make the sweeping changes desired in the Southern regions. However under governments that are corrupt, power-hungry, or apathetic, change is impossible unless the people demand their rights as citizens. A system of accountability and transparency needs to be in place so the people can guide the reconstruction in affected areas. I think that Participatory Video is one way to fill the gaps in feedback, monitoring, and evaluation that are currently ignored. If economic exclusion truly does imply political exclusion, this explains why the poor are stuck in their vicious cycle of poverty. We witnessed many of the same programs of "daily survival" such as the olla comunal and talleres being practiced in Peru. If PV can base its roots in the barrio's point of view, keeping its practices full of trust, subjectivity, and opening up the communication lines for more "direct democracy," it may be a useful tool to create and/or demand dialog between the community and its surroundings.
Finally, the amazing diagram implicitly suggests that strengthening the civil society as well as community participation in politics can also weaken the power constructs of the state and corporation. By siphoning power from authority and decentralizing it, truly participatory democracy can be built up.
On a side note, Friedman also addresses the idea of class within communities which we also encountered during our trip. There were many NGO workers who were from Peru but were considered better educated or just came from wealthier backgrounds.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Participatory Video: A Process that Transforms Self and Others, Shirley White
White, Shirley, ed. Participatory Video. Sage Publications: California, 2003.
Chapter 3: A Process that Transforms Self and Others
p 63-86
Shirley White's main point of this article is to point out that there are two seperate uses to participatory video: as a process and as a product. Each has their different uses, benefits, and consequences. As a process, participatory video sets the stage for communication and self-expressiong. "Thus, it has the potential to bring about person, social, political, and cultural change. That is what video power is all about" (P64). The video power that she talks about is achievable because people are able to self-express, gain identity, and have their voice acknowledged as valid (P65). She goes on to say that PV purely as a product is very different because it is a passive entity. Watching is optional, interpretation is personal, and control only exists for the video-makers, not the viewers (P66).
I will focus mostly on PV as a process in this summary. PV needs to be conducted a certain way for it to be successful, that is that PV needs to focus on "interaction, sharing, and cooperation with an outcome of individual and group growth" . It is about allowing people to express as well as offer another mode of interaction (P64-65). As a process, it has many uses: self-definition, education and training, community building, message-making, mediator, and many other things. This is made possible through PVs ability to transform individuals and eventually communities (P76). The facilitator must possess certain skills and encourage PV to grow in certain ways for the community to be transformed, however. They include things such as "encouraging interpersonal encounter, promoting dialog, reconciling differences, reaching consensus, dealing with prejudice, conflict management, and fostering cooperation" (P77). This is yet another acknowledgment that PV alone is not enough to bring about change, but rather a myriad of variables need to be aligned correctly for it to occur. One of these is the attitude of the facilitator.
Each one of these topics is explained in more detail, giving examples and advice on how to exemplify these characteristics as the PV facilitator's work. The other thing that the facilitator should be aware of Maslow's concept of "self-actualization" and Kelley's concept of "fully-functioning." Maslow believed that the human continues to reach for higher levels throughout life due to their desire for "knowledge, undestanding, meaning in life, beauty, peace, and self-fulfillment." White says that this humanistic approach pushes participation in the process of development, and that PV can help address issues of self-fulfillment. "When a person is fully functioning, he/she must look at the self and feel that they are capable of peforming the task at hand... [and] facilitating persons can further assist in the process of building, helping people realize their potential for change and improvements" (P82).
White says that self is an important concept to acknowledge as a facilitator as they must deal with disparities between how the self perceives self and how others perceive that person. She explains how self is shaped by our relations with others, creating a constanly evolving and changing self-concept. Thus, interpersonal interaction has impact on self-concept (P84).
She goes onto develop ideas of self-esteem and self-respect which are two things that "require a basic process whereby individuals can examine, assess and modify their existing concepts, attitudes and behaviors." PV is one such way of "questioning the assumptions one makes about their own actions or beliefs that often forces a person to modify their self-concept in order to maintain self-esteem" (P85-86). Basically that a person's ability to change lays in critical reflection in a process of "understanding a decision, thinking about what they are doing, obersving the reaction to what they are doing, and checking out the relationship between action and observation" (P86). Again, PV is able to bring this process to the forefront fo conscious change.
Reflections:
I enjoyed the portion of this text about psychology. The claims of PV are often thrown out there without absolute proof or even pointing towards possible reasons for why "PV causes change" or how "PV can induce empowerment." Her argument feels fleshed out. Instead of simply relying on case examples, she is able to pull from theoretical evidence to prove that PV is able to propogate impact from individual to the group.
I am also a fan of how she acknowledges that there are certain pre-conditions that make PV successful. Her outline for the facilitator is fairly detailed and could be useful in part of a handbook for hosting PV. They are reminiscent of therapy or mediator characterstics, and her techniques push the boundaries between using the camera for action versus psychological aid. The process is self-reflective, but also a very conscious manner. In a way, her process feels like the participants are being treated as children or as clients.
I think White is correct when she outlines the way in which facilitation must occur. I like that she has turned the process into less of a touch-feely-we-can-change-the-world and more into science. She outlines certain characteristics needed for PV to work as a process. However, I am also wary of her clearly-defined steps as it implies that PV intervention can always been the answer or have the potential to always be successful on some level. Based off of summer experiences, I would still question whether intervention always has more positive impacts than negative.
Further reading of the text is needed for further conclusions.
Chapter 3: A Process that Transforms Self and Others
p 63-86
Shirley White's main point of this article is to point out that there are two seperate uses to participatory video: as a process and as a product. Each has their different uses, benefits, and consequences. As a process, participatory video sets the stage for communication and self-expressiong. "Thus, it has the potential to bring about person, social, political, and cultural change. That is what video power is all about" (P64). The video power that she talks about is achievable because people are able to self-express, gain identity, and have their voice acknowledged as valid (P65). She goes on to say that PV purely as a product is very different because it is a passive entity. Watching is optional, interpretation is personal, and control only exists for the video-makers, not the viewers (P66).
I will focus mostly on PV as a process in this summary. PV needs to be conducted a certain way for it to be successful, that is that PV needs to focus on "interaction, sharing, and cooperation with an outcome of individual and group growth" . It is about allowing people to express as well as offer another mode of interaction (P64-65). As a process, it has many uses: self-definition, education and training, community building, message-making, mediator, and many other things. This is made possible through PVs ability to transform individuals and eventually communities (P76). The facilitator must possess certain skills and encourage PV to grow in certain ways for the community to be transformed, however. They include things such as "encouraging interpersonal encounter, promoting dialog, reconciling differences, reaching consensus, dealing with prejudice, conflict management, and fostering cooperation" (P77). This is yet another acknowledgment that PV alone is not enough to bring about change, but rather a myriad of variables need to be aligned correctly for it to occur. One of these is the attitude of the facilitator.
Each one of these topics is explained in more detail, giving examples and advice on how to exemplify these characteristics as the PV facilitator's work. The other thing that the facilitator should be aware of Maslow's concept of "self-actualization" and Kelley's concept of "fully-functioning." Maslow believed that the human continues to reach for higher levels throughout life due to their desire for "knowledge, undestanding, meaning in life, beauty, peace, and self-fulfillment." White says that this humanistic approach pushes participation in the process of development, and that PV can help address issues of self-fulfillment. "When a person is fully functioning, he/she must look at the self and feel that they are capable of peforming the task at hand... [and] facilitating persons can further assist in the process of building, helping people realize their potential for change and improvements" (P82).
White says that self is an important concept to acknowledge as a facilitator as they must deal with disparities between how the self perceives self and how others perceive that person. She explains how self is shaped by our relations with others, creating a constanly evolving and changing self-concept. Thus, interpersonal interaction has impact on self-concept (P84).
She goes onto develop ideas of self-esteem and self-respect which are two things that "require a basic process whereby individuals can examine, assess and modify their existing concepts, attitudes and behaviors." PV is one such way of "questioning the assumptions one makes about their own actions or beliefs that often forces a person to modify their self-concept in order to maintain self-esteem" (P85-86). Basically that a person's ability to change lays in critical reflection in a process of "understanding a decision, thinking about what they are doing, obersving the reaction to what they are doing, and checking out the relationship between action and observation" (P86). Again, PV is able to bring this process to the forefront fo conscious change.
Reflections:
I enjoyed the portion of this text about psychology. The claims of PV are often thrown out there without absolute proof or even pointing towards possible reasons for why "PV causes change" or how "PV can induce empowerment." Her argument feels fleshed out. Instead of simply relying on case examples, she is able to pull from theoretical evidence to prove that PV is able to propogate impact from individual to the group.
I am also a fan of how she acknowledges that there are certain pre-conditions that make PV successful. Her outline for the facilitator is fairly detailed and could be useful in part of a handbook for hosting PV. They are reminiscent of therapy or mediator characterstics, and her techniques push the boundaries between using the camera for action versus psychological aid. The process is self-reflective, but also a very conscious manner. In a way, her process feels like the participants are being treated as children or as clients.
I think White is correct when she outlines the way in which facilitation must occur. I like that she has turned the process into less of a touch-feely-we-can-change-the-world and more into science. She outlines certain characteristics needed for PV to work as a process. However, I am also wary of her clearly-defined steps as it implies that PV intervention can always been the answer or have the potential to always be successful on some level. Based off of summer experiences, I would still question whether intervention always has more positive impacts than negative.
Further reading of the text is needed for further conclusions.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Cities for Citizens: Friedman, ed.
Friedman, John and Mike Douglas, eds. Cities for Citizens. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd: Sussex, England, 1998.
-Chapter 2: "Planning and Civil Society in the Twenty-first Century: An Introduction" (Friedman)
-Portions from "Empowering Civil Society: Habernas, Foucault and the Question of Conflict." (Bent Flybjerg)
-Chapter 12: "Civil/Uncivil Society: Confusing Form with Content" (Janet Abu-Lughod)
Summary:
Friedman's introduction includes a definition of civil society as well as a broad overview of the chapters that follow. His arguments mostly focus on the idea of the individual and organization's power, rights, and responsibilities as the 'citizen.' He argues that the elite have no connection or allegiance while the "disempowered great majority of the world's population value local traditions and inhabit specific places, but thier voices have been rendered silent." "Civil society is that part of social life which lies beyond the immediate reach of the state, and which, we would argue, must exist for a democratic state to flower." (P2) The citizen is part of a political struggle to maintain or strengthen their rights to demand that the state work for the people, especially those without power (P3)
The planner's jobs, Friedman argues, is to avoid the ruckus of politics in order to "discover and give voice to the broad interests of people in a long-term future perspective." (P19) Organizations, like the NGO, were developed to address the social needs that the city was not able to, but "their collective efforts inevitably fall far short of the probelms with whose symptoms they engage." As they proliferate, however, the NGO beginst to step on one another's toes and are forced to fight amongst their increasing numbers for non-increasing funding sources.
Maybe good for a beginning or ending quote: "The market economy doesn't solve urban problems; it creates them. Its patheticaly narrow vision for the future comes down to one syllable, 'more.' More is better than less. Growth is mandatory. Consumption is a civil obligation. But in fact, the materialism of the consumer society has very little to do with the good life, which is rather about the quality of human relationships" (P20).
Friedman also talks briefly about how poverty is defined, again offering no solutions. He says that concept of the household as a consumer leads to poverty being thought of as a problem of low-income. In turn, this leads anti-poverty movements to frame their raise this income as a way of increasing their spending power. Friedman argues that poverty is also a result of low access to necessary resources for household production which he calls the "bases of social power and include a secure lifespace, surplus time over and above time required for the reproduction of life, social networks, knoweldge and skills..., social organizations, good health, instruments and tools of domestic production, and ... financial resources" (P24).
His concern for poverty doesn't remove his belief that civil societies are in the business for themselves. The most incredible thing that I found within the reading was the unexpected remark that "within the constraints of structural imperatives, it is in its attention to small that the quality of our lives are found." He gives a few examples such as communities forcing cities to care for how the streets look or marking commemorative sites (P28).
Finally, Freidman steps back to look at some characteristics of successful planners within civil societies. He says that "reciprocity and trust counts for a good deal more than one's salary... [and] although shared experiences serves as an important foundation for trust, it is only the first and not neccessarily the most important basis. Trust develops in the course of working together..." Planners must withhold from judgment in order to understand points of view with which they are unfamiliar. Social transformation, however, is possible through the "enlargement of space for the workings of the moral economy based on relations of trust, reciprocity, and dialogue, ... and second, to make its multiple voices heard and respected through active participation in decisions that affect its conditions of life and wellbeing..." (P32-33). For delf-development to occur, someone needs to remove the obstacles to inclusion, opportunity, and "a form of social justice that acknowledges the different priorities and needs of different groups" (P34).
Abu-Lughod challenges Friedman's advocacy for supporting civil society as good planning practice. She first questions Friedman's usage of the term - "almost as a synonym for decentralization and local empowerment exercised through associational (and oftentimes voluntary) organizations," and points out that even these organizations are not neutral and can even be evil (P232). Her argument is that civil society needs to operate within certain confines of enough, too much, and too little (P236) as well as to point out that civil societies will have little change unless they change the current dominant political systems. She quotes Friedman, "reintegrating ... an existing political community in which [the people] exercise their rights, cannot be done in any meaningful sense unless the systems-in-dominance - authoritarianism, peripheral capitalism, and patriarchy - are themselves changed in fundamental ways." She then goes on to say that the planners job is not to listen and give the people what they want but to create and change the ways in which the people can GET what they want (P237).
To wrap up this intense round of quotes and reading, let's end on Flybjerg's idea that "'validity' is established via the mode of communication rather than through rational arguments concerning the matter at hand" (P194).
Reflections:
Although this book was meant for planners, it was good to get a broad overview of "civil society" and its present place in society. Friedman is a bit of an idealist with his notion that civil society is the opposition to unjust political structures and wealth but has been proven right many times in the cases when social movements (anti-slavery or feminists) has been a successful organization by the people, for the people. Although it advocates autonomy as the answer, again there are no concrete examples given of how "autonomy" may be achieved. Friedman presents a contradiction in the first part of his chapter that involves the idea that civil society is bound for failure while planning has the chance for change while the problem truly lies in the fabric of the concept of development. Overall, his general ideas are useful for supporting PV's place in social change as a way of creating those spaces necessary for representing many voices.
I found it interesting to read the respond of Abu-Lughod to Friedman's essay because it offered points that I hadn't considered. Finally, while Flybjerg's essay was mostly unhelpful, portions of it resonated so I quoted it.
-Chapter 2: "Planning and Civil Society in the Twenty-first Century: An Introduction" (Friedman)
-Portions from "Empowering Civil Society: Habernas, Foucault and the Question of Conflict." (Bent Flybjerg)
-Chapter 12: "Civil/Uncivil Society: Confusing Form with Content" (Janet Abu-Lughod)
Summary:
Friedman's introduction includes a definition of civil society as well as a broad overview of the chapters that follow. His arguments mostly focus on the idea of the individual and organization's power, rights, and responsibilities as the 'citizen.' He argues that the elite have no connection or allegiance while the "disempowered great majority of the world's population value local traditions and inhabit specific places, but thier voices have been rendered silent." "Civil society is that part of social life which lies beyond the immediate reach of the state, and which, we would argue, must exist for a democratic state to flower." (P2) The citizen is part of a political struggle to maintain or strengthen their rights to demand that the state work for the people, especially those without power (P3)
The planner's jobs, Friedman argues, is to avoid the ruckus of politics in order to "discover and give voice to the broad interests of people in a long-term future perspective." (P19) Organizations, like the NGO, were developed to address the social needs that the city was not able to, but "their collective efforts inevitably fall far short of the probelms with whose symptoms they engage." As they proliferate, however, the NGO beginst to step on one another's toes and are forced to fight amongst their increasing numbers for non-increasing funding sources.
Maybe good for a beginning or ending quote: "The market economy doesn't solve urban problems; it creates them. Its patheticaly narrow vision for the future comes down to one syllable, 'more.' More is better than less. Growth is mandatory. Consumption is a civil obligation. But in fact, the materialism of the consumer society has very little to do with the good life, which is rather about the quality of human relationships" (P20).
Friedman also talks briefly about how poverty is defined, again offering no solutions. He says that concept of the household as a consumer leads to poverty being thought of as a problem of low-income. In turn, this leads anti-poverty movements to frame their raise this income as a way of increasing their spending power. Friedman argues that poverty is also a result of low access to necessary resources for household production which he calls the "bases of social power and include a secure lifespace, surplus time over and above time required for the reproduction of life, social networks, knoweldge and skills..., social organizations, good health, instruments and tools of domestic production, and ... financial resources" (P24).
His concern for poverty doesn't remove his belief that civil societies are in the business for themselves. The most incredible thing that I found within the reading was the unexpected remark that "within the constraints of structural imperatives, it is in its attention to small that the quality of our lives are found." He gives a few examples such as communities forcing cities to care for how the streets look or marking commemorative sites (P28).
Finally, Freidman steps back to look at some characteristics of successful planners within civil societies. He says that "reciprocity and trust counts for a good deal more than one's salary... [and] although shared experiences serves as an important foundation for trust, it is only the first and not neccessarily the most important basis. Trust develops in the course of working together..." Planners must withhold from judgment in order to understand points of view with which they are unfamiliar. Social transformation, however, is possible through the "enlargement of space for the workings of the moral economy based on relations of trust, reciprocity, and dialogue, ... and second, to make its multiple voices heard and respected through active participation in decisions that affect its conditions of life and wellbeing..." (P32-33). For delf-development to occur, someone needs to remove the obstacles to inclusion, opportunity, and "a form of social justice that acknowledges the different priorities and needs of different groups" (P34).
Abu-Lughod challenges Friedman's advocacy for supporting civil society as good planning practice. She first questions Friedman's usage of the term - "almost as a synonym for decentralization and local empowerment exercised through associational (and oftentimes voluntary) organizations," and points out that even these organizations are not neutral and can even be evil (P232). Her argument is that civil society needs to operate within certain confines of enough, too much, and too little (P236) as well as to point out that civil societies will have little change unless they change the current dominant political systems. She quotes Friedman, "reintegrating ... an existing political community in which [the people] exercise their rights, cannot be done in any meaningful sense unless the systems-in-dominance - authoritarianism, peripheral capitalism, and patriarchy - are themselves changed in fundamental ways." She then goes on to say that the planners job is not to listen and give the people what they want but to create and change the ways in which the people can GET what they want (P237).
To wrap up this intense round of quotes and reading, let's end on Flybjerg's idea that "'validity' is established via the mode of communication rather than through rational arguments concerning the matter at hand" (P194).
Reflections:
Although this book was meant for planners, it was good to get a broad overview of "civil society" and its present place in society. Friedman is a bit of an idealist with his notion that civil society is the opposition to unjust political structures and wealth but has been proven right many times in the cases when social movements (anti-slavery or feminists) has been a successful organization by the people, for the people. Although it advocates autonomy as the answer, again there are no concrete examples given of how "autonomy" may be achieved. Friedman presents a contradiction in the first part of his chapter that involves the idea that civil society is bound for failure while planning has the chance for change while the problem truly lies in the fabric of the concept of development. Overall, his general ideas are useful for supporting PV's place in social change as a way of creating those spaces necessary for representing many voices.
I found it interesting to read the respond of Abu-Lughod to Friedman's essay because it offered points that I hadn't considered. Finally, while Flybjerg's essay was mostly unhelpful, portions of it resonated so I quoted it.
Autonomous Development: Carmen
Carmen, Raff. Autonomous Development. Zed Books Publishing: New Jersey, 1996.
Part 1: Maldevelopment
Chapter 3 "Demystifying Participation: of Beneficiaries and Benefactors"
Development, Carmen argues, is terminology that will never translate. He begins the chapter by asking the question of how the ideas of "development" can be communicated when the word itself does not exist in the language of the people we want to develop. Instead, it is simply a cover up for "acculturation" which is exemplified in the US' imperialistic spread and transfer in many of its seemingly humanitarian efforts. Aculturation is when "a culture of foreign origin profoundly influences or takes over an indigenous culture." He asks that the reader redefines development in other terms than the current mindframe of qualitative (bettering) and quantitative (goods, services, and skills). (P41-42).
Unlike many of the other literature that has been reviewed, Carmen traces participation back to the 60's with the WB's community development and green revolution and then into the 70's with the "Basic Needs Approach." These deceivingly top-down approaches of "participation" encourage development through "import substitution, technology transfer, and agricultural extension" which all, he concludes, will continue to fail as solutions. "To control a people's culture is to control their tools of self-defintion and relation to others." (P43)
Participatory development is not possible without the donor agency and thus paradoxical. Carmen points out that this methodology simply allows the third party (NGO, planner or otherwise) to avoid true development of the peasantry class by intervening and offering solutions while posing projects as 'participatory.' By leaving out the government, the organization can work directly with the people but also fails to address power structures from which poverty springs. Peasantry, which is the "obstacle to the march of modernity," could now be utilized and 'developed' in ways like technology transfer or skills aquisition while avoiding confrontation of true development like political activism and large structural projects (P45)
The technique of "Community Developmen"t was created not as a humanitarian effort but rather sprung from post-colonial relationships between the mother country and its territory and thus "suits the maintenance of colonial rule." It keeps the colony peaceful, transfers the economic burden from national to local governments, and helps in creating a stability during development. In a 1976 study that was conducted by The Cornell Development Research Group, four types of participation arose (1) Implementation (2) Benefits (3) Evaluation (4) Decision-Making. The implementation part of participation was the most common (P47).
Carmen also thinks that Rapid Rural Assessment is just terminology to cover up what is the "most cost-effective ways for outsiders to learn about rural conditions - ways that lead cloesr to optimal trade-off between the cost of collection and learning, the relevance, time and actual beneficial use of the information and understanding that is gained (P50).
Reflections:
The language is very formal, yet educated. This literature is incredibly theoretical. However, I totally disagree with what he is saying. What I dislike the most is the way that he tries to be so appealing. His definition of autonomous hinges on chance, pre-existing conditions being a certain way, and people having small amounts of power to increase their own power... somehow ... in places where the people who have power keep getting more power at everly increasing rates. The literature that he does draw on is well-pieced together and carefully selected. And although this chapter is formally backed with many documented sources, the feeling is much more like an opinion article that rants and raves without drawing from personal experience. However, his "about the author" section includes things such as 15 years as a preacher in Zambia as well as several other years in Burkina Fasa working at a manager of a UNDP research station. I expect and hope claims later will be supported with this.
Carmen's view point on participation, in my interpretation, is that participation is a result of TOTAL control, achieved at economic and social levels, by the institution in the brainwash to get culture to transfer.
If the implementation kind of participation is the most commonly found in development, then I would tend to assume that "implementation" is a euphemism for labor. This way projects employ local labor while the decisions are still made by the institutions. Drawing on my experiences from Peru, I would say that I don't necessarily know that finding labor within the community is such a bad thing. Looking at houses being built by NGOs where the labor force was the homeowner, more cost-efficient labor could have been hired from outside. So is it really about money? Or power? What do those four groups of "participation" really consist of.. ? I would like to find this research done by the Cornell students.
I doubt though that all of Carmen's criticisms in this chapter are well-deserved by many people in the field who may be accomplishing "autonomy," but mistakenly call it participation. Mix-ups in jargon may be the root of the issue at hand. Arguably, changes in linguistics of a subject are a true reflection of changes in the subject itself. His title of the chapter, "demystifying participation" is misleading as it merely provides a viewpoint on the subject.
Part 1: Maldevelopment
Chapter 3 "Demystifying Participation: of Beneficiaries and Benefactors"
Development, Carmen argues, is terminology that will never translate. He begins the chapter by asking the question of how the ideas of "development" can be communicated when the word itself does not exist in the language of the people we want to develop. Instead, it is simply a cover up for "acculturation" which is exemplified in the US' imperialistic spread and transfer in many of its seemingly humanitarian efforts. Aculturation is when "a culture of foreign origin profoundly influences or takes over an indigenous culture." He asks that the reader redefines development in other terms than the current mindframe of qualitative (bettering) and quantitative (goods, services, and skills). (P41-42).
Unlike many of the other literature that has been reviewed, Carmen traces participation back to the 60's with the WB's community development and green revolution and then into the 70's with the "Basic Needs Approach." These deceivingly top-down approaches of "participation" encourage development through "import substitution, technology transfer, and agricultural extension" which all, he concludes, will continue to fail as solutions. "To control a people's culture is to control their tools of self-defintion and relation to others." (P43)
Participatory development is not possible without the donor agency and thus paradoxical. Carmen points out that this methodology simply allows the third party (NGO, planner or otherwise) to avoid true development of the peasantry class by intervening and offering solutions while posing projects as 'participatory.' By leaving out the government, the organization can work directly with the people but also fails to address power structures from which poverty springs. Peasantry, which is the "obstacle to the march of modernity," could now be utilized and 'developed' in ways like technology transfer or skills aquisition while avoiding confrontation of true development like political activism and large structural projects (P45)
The technique of "Community Developmen"t was created not as a humanitarian effort but rather sprung from post-colonial relationships between the mother country and its territory and thus "suits the maintenance of colonial rule." It keeps the colony peaceful, transfers the economic burden from national to local governments, and helps in creating a stability during development. In a 1976 study that was conducted by The Cornell Development Research Group, four types of participation arose (1) Implementation (2) Benefits (3) Evaluation (4) Decision-Making. The implementation part of participation was the most common (P47).
Carmen also thinks that Rapid Rural Assessment is just terminology to cover up what is the "most cost-effective ways for outsiders to learn about rural conditions - ways that lead cloesr to optimal trade-off between the cost of collection and learning, the relevance, time and actual beneficial use of the information and understanding that is gained (P50).
Reflections:
The language is very formal, yet educated. This literature is incredibly theoretical. However, I totally disagree with what he is saying. What I dislike the most is the way that he tries to be so appealing. His definition of autonomous hinges on chance, pre-existing conditions being a certain way, and people having small amounts of power to increase their own power... somehow ... in places where the people who have power keep getting more power at everly increasing rates. The literature that he does draw on is well-pieced together and carefully selected. And although this chapter is formally backed with many documented sources, the feeling is much more like an opinion article that rants and raves without drawing from personal experience. However, his "about the author" section includes things such as 15 years as a preacher in Zambia as well as several other years in Burkina Fasa working at a manager of a UNDP research station. I expect and hope claims later will be supported with this.
Carmen's view point on participation, in my interpretation, is that participation is a result of TOTAL control, achieved at economic and social levels, by the institution in the brainwash to get culture to transfer.
If the implementation kind of participation is the most commonly found in development, then I would tend to assume that "implementation" is a euphemism for labor. This way projects employ local labor while the decisions are still made by the institutions. Drawing on my experiences from Peru, I would say that I don't necessarily know that finding labor within the community is such a bad thing. Looking at houses being built by NGOs where the labor force was the homeowner, more cost-efficient labor could have been hired from outside. So is it really about money? Or power? What do those four groups of "participation" really consist of.. ? I would like to find this research done by the Cornell students.
I doubt though that all of Carmen's criticisms in this chapter are well-deserved by many people in the field who may be accomplishing "autonomy," but mistakenly call it participation. Mix-ups in jargon may be the root of the issue at hand. Arguably, changes in linguistics of a subject are a true reflection of changes in the subject itself. His title of the chapter, "demystifying participation" is misleading as it merely provides a viewpoint on the subject.
Friday, October 23, 2009
The Art of Technique
White, Shirley A. The Art of Facilitating Participation:. Minneapolis: Sage Publications Pvt. Ltd, 2000. Print.
Overview of the essays in Part 2: The Art of Technique.
Shirley White's book 'The Art of Facilitating Participation', is the result of White facilitating a regular discussion group that stemmed from the prodding of her graduate students. This means she is metaphysically facilitating a book of essays on facilitation by students and practitioners in the field of facilitation. Her role in this book comes out quite clearly in the way she introduces the essays written by those in the discussion group. Though she has talked to many people on this topic and heard many stories of the same (or at least similar) lessons learned by so many students, she mentions the work of each of them as unique learning experiences and is honored to help share these stories with others.
The book is divided into three sections. The first section's essays are described in the last post; in this post I will focus on the second section: The Art of Technique. The word choice is intentional, and explained on p.22. Technology is vital, but technique and the application of technical proficiency is arguably more important. The 'art of technique' is the 'thoughtful articulation and interpretation of the need for technology, and the culturally sensitive way people are involved in assessing, acquiring, and applying that technology to benefit their development'. “Technique must serve the content of development and be the art that effectively promotes learning and effective communication.”
The first essay in this section is an interview between a young Colombian interested in participatory development and a widely recognized Colombian facilitator who has dedicated his life to participatory development: Orlando Fals Borda.. This is followed by Colverson's essay on her experiences using PAR (Participatory Action Research) with campesino women in two rural Honduranean communities. The next essay witnesses how successful an agricultural program in Nepal can be at implementing a participatory model. Galper proceeds this with an essay on the topic of empowerment via teaching basic statistics for understanding the processes the NGO is using to make decisions and how information from surveys are translated and used.
Three African writers team together to emphasize the benefits of training rural development facilitators via Participatory Rural Communication Appraisal (PRCA). This process is focused on built-in field work. Next, Renuka Bery proposes the discovery principle which states that learning by discovery stimulates individual development and thus, 'contribute to the mot important issues in their societies. Finally, we move into access to media technologies. “The importance of access to communication technologies and public media cannot be overstated as an important force in a community's development. Hochneimer discusses community radio and the issues surrounding community-based journalism, themes that are 'pertinent to any media system, and important tools for community building' (p. 27). Richardson follows with his essay on the considerations inherent to establishing a 'FreeSpace' network in Canada; his example has apparently led to a rural internet access to the poor in Peru, Mexico, and the Philippines. 'Communication relationships are no longer restricted by space., but access to communication resources is another matter.' (p.28)
Reflection
This book has inspired me to consider facilitating a forum, (at least initially) informal, on international development experiences of MIT students. The important qualities of this gathering would be student-sprouted and informative. This of course requires prior interest and students who would immediately view this as a valuable use of their time. If started correctly, with a precedent on student interest and informal yet useful exchange of ideas, (as well as possibly output), this could be a worthwhile pursuit. The output of such a gathering could be one of new ideas and opportunities horizontally traveling from one student to another. I am especially interested in having a space where international development can be delved into and researched without feeling the reigns of power often associated with the grants, paperwork, and rules that tends to define and limit access to development work by students. Of course, the fact that it does not yet exist leads one to believe that there may be a low enough percentage of students with this type of experience that such a gathering only has merit on the graduate level.
Stepping back we can see clearly that White is cleverly showing us what she means by effective facilitation by the actual form in which the book is produced. The book is facilitation at its best. However, it also is facilitation between presumably similarly-minded people with similar recent international exposure in the field of development. Each of them is interested in understanding the role of communication in development, so admittedly the students are not an accurate representation of the complexities in international development caused by vast formative discrepancies. Still, she is contextualizing the facilitation role to the academic environment, and the result seems to be an interesting collection of hope-giving accounts. It is possible that sometimes White goes overboard and says things like 'Kathy had become one of them...erased any apprehension they might have had' which is simply an overexaggeration.
I like how the author writes the book so that one can quickly find what essays they are interested in reading, and leave the rest. This is accomplished by dedicating one to three paragraphs to a brief, but long-enough description of right at the beginning. Doing something similar to my work might be an interesting approach to facilitating its applicability as a useful document to someone.
Overview of the essays in Part 2: The Art of Technique.
Shirley White's book 'The Art of Facilitating Participation', is the result of White facilitating a regular discussion group that stemmed from the prodding of her graduate students. This means she is metaphysically facilitating a book of essays on facilitation by students and practitioners in the field of facilitation. Her role in this book comes out quite clearly in the way she introduces the essays written by those in the discussion group. Though she has talked to many people on this topic and heard many stories of the same (or at least similar) lessons learned by so many students, she mentions the work of each of them as unique learning experiences and is honored to help share these stories with others.
The book is divided into three sections. The first section's essays are described in the last post; in this post I will focus on the second section: The Art of Technique. The word choice is intentional, and explained on p.22. Technology is vital, but technique and the application of technical proficiency is arguably more important. The 'art of technique' is the 'thoughtful articulation and interpretation of the need for technology, and the culturally sensitive way people are involved in assessing, acquiring, and applying that technology to benefit their development'. “Technique must serve the content of development and be the art that effectively promotes learning and effective communication.”
The first essay in this section is an interview between a young Colombian interested in participatory development and a widely recognized Colombian facilitator who has dedicated his life to participatory development: Orlando Fals Borda.. This is followed by Colverson's essay on her experiences using PAR (Participatory Action Research) with campesino women in two rural Honduranean communities. The next essay witnesses how successful an agricultural program in Nepal can be at implementing a participatory model. Galper proceeds this with an essay on the topic of empowerment via teaching basic statistics for understanding the processes the NGO is using to make decisions and how information from surveys are translated and used.
Three African writers team together to emphasize the benefits of training rural development facilitators via Participatory Rural Communication Appraisal (PRCA). This process is focused on built-in field work. Next, Renuka Bery proposes the discovery principle which states that learning by discovery stimulates individual development and thus, 'contribute to the mot important issues in their societies. Finally, we move into access to media technologies. “The importance of access to communication technologies and public media cannot be overstated as an important force in a community's development. Hochneimer discusses community radio and the issues surrounding community-based journalism, themes that are 'pertinent to any media system, and important tools for community building' (p. 27). Richardson follows with his essay on the considerations inherent to establishing a 'FreeSpace' network in Canada; his example has apparently led to a rural internet access to the poor in Peru, Mexico, and the Philippines. 'Communication relationships are no longer restricted by space., but access to communication resources is another matter.' (p.28)
Reflection
This book has inspired me to consider facilitating a forum, (at least initially) informal, on international development experiences of MIT students. The important qualities of this gathering would be student-sprouted and informative. This of course requires prior interest and students who would immediately view this as a valuable use of their time. If started correctly, with a precedent on student interest and informal yet useful exchange of ideas, (as well as possibly output), this could be a worthwhile pursuit. The output of such a gathering could be one of new ideas and opportunities horizontally traveling from one student to another. I am especially interested in having a space where international development can be delved into and researched without feeling the reigns of power often associated with the grants, paperwork, and rules that tends to define and limit access to development work by students. Of course, the fact that it does not yet exist leads one to believe that there may be a low enough percentage of students with this type of experience that such a gathering only has merit on the graduate level.
Stepping back we can see clearly that White is cleverly showing us what she means by effective facilitation by the actual form in which the book is produced. The book is facilitation at its best. However, it also is facilitation between presumably similarly-minded people with similar recent international exposure in the field of development. Each of them is interested in understanding the role of communication in development, so admittedly the students are not an accurate representation of the complexities in international development caused by vast formative discrepancies. Still, she is contextualizing the facilitation role to the academic environment, and the result seems to be an interesting collection of hope-giving accounts. It is possible that sometimes White goes overboard and says things like 'Kathy had become one of them...erased any apprehension they might have had' which is simply an overexaggeration.
I like how the author writes the book so that one can quickly find what essays they are interested in reading, and leave the rest. This is accomplished by dedicating one to three paragraphs to a brief, but long-enough description of right at the beginning. Doing something similar to my work might be an interesting approach to facilitating its applicability as a useful document to someone.
The Art of Participation
White, Shirley A. The Art of Facilitating Participation:. Minneapolis: Sage Publications Pvt. Ltd, 2000. Print.
p. 7-22: Introduction and an overview of Part I: The Art of Participation.
This book aims to catalyze improved participatory approaches to development, The focus is placed on the importance of proper facilitation, and does this by combining a set of different essays by White and others on the topic of findings on participatory development. White starts off with a broad generalization that NGOs spent the 90's talking about involving the socially excluded, but have yet tlo effectively do so (p. 16). In addition, development has become a business. “We quickly forget that development starts from the heart” (p.17). “Reaching across the barriers of diversity, power, caste, and class to touch the life force of a person and lift them to a 'higher ground' becomes the objective of the challenge” (p.18)
Underlying assumption of the book: 'communication is the foundation of participation'. With this as an anchor, the story introduces the array of essays that will be presented to the reader. Each of them is written from a practitioners standpoint, but with the academic integrity of a university graduate research department. Together, the essays provide a set of lessons learned from their personal experiences working in development around the world.
The first essay is by White and Nair, and it explains how the facilitator role is one of a catalyst communicator (CC). A CC is responsible for setting up an environment for continual learning and honing communication for building partnerships for participatory development. Kiiti and Nielsen's essay validates the use of reflective thinking as well as contextualized definitions of roles and purpose. Specifically this essay distinguishes between the role of a facilitator and an advocate, and the importance of the ability to fill both roles depending on the situation. This theme of facilitator vs advocate continues into the next essay, by Ndunge and Erik. This essay discusses how facilitating starts from where the community is at, whereas advocating often has an external motivation and paints near-sighted pictures.
Simone St. Anne follows with an essay on the importance of creativity in synergy, or connection, which is the key to autonomous participation. “Synergy is the spark that triggers thinking and helps form innovative connections to allow others to see what they see – that's the essence of creative collaboration.” (p. 21). This essay is followed by an essay on the enabling conditions of development communication for giving voice to different stakeholders to negotiate their positions and common interests. Then comes on essay that appears to be written by someone recently faced with the harsh divisions associated with development, choosing to write on the personality and character requirements for someone to be a quality facilitator. These include selflessness, willingness to take risks, commitment, persistence, sensitivity, and others that are difficult to understand without extended time working in the field of development (p.21). The last essay included in the section titled the Art of Participation is by Jim Lees and Sonali Ojha who write it while in the midst of a project trying to do participation-based work in the midst of the harsh conditions of the streets of Mumbai.
Reflection
Interesting, how the book 'Autonomous Development' has affected the reading of this story. As much as Autonomous Development appears to be academic and critical in an almost witty way, White's book is much more open, personable, and lightly written. For this reason, her book is soaked with phrases that Carmen, the author of Autonomous Development, would and does tear apart in his book on the failings of participatory development. Of course, in some ways they are acknowledging the same failings, only in very different manners and with very different messages. One example of this is where White talks about 'reaching across' divisions of all kinds and 'lifting' people to a 'higher ground'. Carmen would point out that lifting implies that we are in control and thus are actually reinforcing those very stark power differences.
The essays listed included in this book are very interesting to me. It seems like an interesting opening The introduction to the essay by Ndunge and Erik is interesting because it seems to hint that facilitators are important in bridging the gap between the development goals of the outside world and the sheltered way of life of the people being developed. I certainly hope they would not agree with this assessment, but I wonder if it is not a subconscious reality in the minds of many development workers, especially those with academic training. I also am really excited to read the essay about using creativity to connect to people.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
