What Is The Highest Degree of Participation Your Organization Can Have?

In class last week Professor Talwalker assigned Duraiappah et al.’s article, “Have Participatory Approaches Increased Capabilities?” as one of our readings relevant to the general theme of participatory development. I contributed during the class’s share-out on Class Exercise 1, pertaining to Duraiappah et al.’s article. I explained how I believed that my organization, Breakthrough Collaborative, could be seen as engaging largely within the 7^th degree of participation, “interactive participation,” although not fully. Professor Talwalker then posed a very interesting question, one that I would like to further address now: What is the highest degree of participation your organization can have? That is to say, is it possible for an organization like Breakthrough to ever achieve full interactive participation, and under what conditions?

Leaving class that day I thought over what Professor Talwalker had asked. It is an interesting question because I think that it is one that many of my peers in GPP 105 can identify with. We are all in the GPP minor because we want to make a meaningful impact in the world of poverty action/alleviation, but it is difficult to find an organization that is fully participatory and will address the needs of the poor head on. The only way to do this is for the organization to operate based on the desires and input of the poor themselves, by creating an equal space for decision-making and risk-sharing between the target population and the organization workers. This in turn will increase the capabilities of the poor in the development process, just as Duraiappah et al. suggested.

As optimistic as I am about the difference that one person, or one organization can make, I do think it is idealist to think that an organization can be 100% participatory. The very fact that organization workers are trying to help the poor means that they come from a place of privilege, as one student pointed out in class (I think it was Shrey?). With this fact alone, it is almost unfathomable to think of how the poor can possibly have equal part in the decision-making process and risk-sharing as does the organization. The very fact that the target population is in need of something that the service workers are not, makes the type of risk involved with the poor inherently different than that of the service workers.

Upon further analysis, I think that my organization is less participatory than I had previously thought.     As I discussed in my class exercise, one major aspect that makes Breakthrough unable to fit neatly into one degree of participation, is the fact that it also engages in participation by consultation; the program directors, external agents, and donors involved have no obligation to implement the suggestions or information generated by the participants. In order for Breakthrough to be a truly democratic organization in the development process, it must find a way to ensure the implementation of its participant’s appropriate suggestions, just as it does for its more powerful stakeholders. In complete honesty, I highly doubt that it is even possible for Breakthrough to become a fully participatory organization, or even to reach full interactive participation. The basis of the very program itself is to teach our students four core academic classes over the summer. This means that the students have no control over what they are being taught, and I believe that is something that can’t be changed without fundamentally changing the program. This is simply because the students (6^th-9^th grade) do not have enough expertise to have involvement in the curriculum development.

But that is just my organization. GPP students have their practice experiences set in a wide range of varying areas and sectors. So I ask: What is the highest degree of participation your organization can have?