I. Learning Context Richel B.

Benedicto, BSSW 3
B. PEOPLES CONTRIBUTION TO DEVELOPMENT
C. PEOPLES INVOLVEMENT IN THE DECISION MAKING REGARDING THE
NATURE AND PROCESS OF DEVELOPMENT
II. Learning Objectives
On this topic we’ll be able to:
 create individual development plans.
 provide Performance metrics
III. Teaching/ Learning activities
 lecture
 discussion

IV. Context/ Topic

B. PEOPLES CONTRIBUTION TO DEVELOPMENT
People being involve at the center of decision making so that:
 Their voices directly affect decisions about their lives
 People in professional roles understand hoe their actions impact on peoples lives
 Services and communities work in ways that reflect what people say they want and
need-not what others think they need.
“People have more control over their lives”
In Other Words:
 Power
 Control
 Influence
 Rights
 Respect
 Co-production
 Being listened to
 Being heard
 Being included
 Being a partner
 Being a citizen
 Being a person

1
What authority do we give to peoples voices?
 Information- we tell people what is happening
 Communication-we tell people what we are doing might change things if they make
a really good case
 Consultation-we discuss what we intend doing,but at the end of the day we have
the right to decide what happens
 Negotiation- both parties must be happy with the end position
 Handling over control

C. PEOPLES INVOLVEMENT IN THE DECISION MAKING REGARDING THE NATURE

AND PROCESS OF DEVELOPMENT

We need to think about participation in decision making in a number of different

places:
 Peoples own lives-overall hopes and day to day decisions(personal context)
 Organizational decision making -including about a persons own service and
support (service context)
 Major strategic decision-making at regional or national level (policy context)
 What happens in a persons own community-beyond the boundaries of service land
(community context)
A QUICK WORDS ON PEOPLES INVOLMENT IN THE DECISION MAKING:
If services are not supporting people to be participating members of their local
communities,then what sort of life are people being supported to achieve? Services need
to think of strategies to:
 Promote social and community inclusion
 Use tools like community mapping
 Support people to be community members not tourists
 Support activities that promote real relationships eg.paid work
 Evaluate services by whether they promote inclusion

2
Person Centered Planning
 People working out their own vision for their lives
 A set of hopes and aims that informs services assessments
 A living process that changes as peoples lives change
 Support plans that then describe how this will be made to happen

DECIDING TOGETHERS SIX BUILDING BLOCKS ORGANISATIONAL

PARTICIPATION
1. Leadership that leads by example, builds committed teams and allows time for
change to happen
2. Communication, listening to people, improving staff communication skills, esp.
For those who don’t use words.
3. Changing organizational practice, nothing about us without us, do meetings
differently, employ people.
4. Work with advocacy groups, as partner, with everyone having access to
advocacy (in all its form)
5. Empower staff, because disempowered staff will not empower the people they
support.
6. Partnership working, think whole-life, multi-agency partnership include people
themselves.

Co-production
 It is a practice in the delivery of public services in which citizens are involved in the
creation of public policies and services.
 It is contrasted with a transaction based method of service delivery in which
citizens consume public services which are conceived of and provided by
governments.
The concept of co-production;
 People are recognized as experts in setting their own support needs and those of
their peers.
 People have things to contribute to planning and decision making about their lives.
 People are involved from the outset in a partnership around decision making.
 These ideas are built into the whole organizational and planning system.

3
SEVEN PRINCIPLES OF COPRODUCTION:
1. People are involved throughout; think about who needs to be engaged.
2. People feel safe up and are listened to: agree how to support each other in making
decisions.
3. We work on the issues that are important to people: work together to agree the
issues.
4. It is clear how decisions are made agree what it is you want to be different and
what success looks like.
5. People’s skills and experiences are used to achieve changed: Identify who has
what skills and how to use them.
6. Meetings, materials and venues are accessible: these are different ways to be
involved and be heard.
7. Process is evaluated by looking at the changes in people’s lives.
Take action - just do it!
“Don’t wait until you’re ready to co-produce, just make a start”

Co-production - pro’s and con’s

Potential Benefits; Potential Challenges;
 Value for money  People will often need support to co-
 Additional expertise produce
 Health benefits and prevention  Those with the power will feel
 Practical skills challenged or threatened
 Social capital  It needs sustained support and
independence

Proper managing and unity in achieving long term goals.

 There must be a firmness of decision making by the leader or head then able to
foresee and control themselves in all the possible risk by the agreement, active and
unceasing collaboration of each people in a certain project for for their goodness and to
all involve in that particular organizations/ institution to attain the balance between the
implemented choice and possible risk on it.
 Maximizing choice and control, whist effectively managing risk.

4
a. From the other source
Over the past few decades the phrase “community participation” has gained
increasing usage in academic literature, policy making documents and international
conference papers as a key element in attempts to attain sustainable development in
countries. The issue of community participation is now an established principle when one
considers issues dealing with decision-making to achieve sustainable
development. Societal structures in the developing world still revolve around small clusters
of communities defined by geo-political, economic and cultural bonds especially in the rural
areas. To such societies, the top-down decision-making regime has been seen to be most
ineffective in terms of achieving sustainable development. In this regime policy is dictated
by those in power and the rural communities are relegated to the position of recipients and
implement. Because of this, rural communities are alienated from resources they should
rightfully control, manage and benefit from, There is a need to engage communities
particularly in the Philippines about the participatory planning and budgeting.

Participatory planning is a process by which a community aims to reach a given

socio-economic goal by consciously diagnosing its problems and drafting a course of
action to resolve those problems. Experts are needed, only as facilitators. Plans prepared
by outside experts, irrespective of their technical soundness, cannot inspire the people to
participate in their implementation. While Participatory budgeting is a process where
people have the opportunity to affect the allocation of public resources by means of a local
government perspective taking into account sectoral priorities.

Engaging civil society and citizens’ groups in resources management has enabled
improved service delivery and accountability of the public sector. It has given the people
greater opportunities to influence policy making processes and the implementation of
policies, programs and projects. Empowerment of communities through their involvement
in the decision-making processes, from top levels to low levels, is vital for supporting pro-
poor policies, programs, projects, improved service delivery, poverty reduction, and the
attainment of the millennium development goals. This will contribute towards preparing
appropriate policies, programs, projects that improve service delivery, poverty reduction,
and the attainment of the millennium development goals.

5
b. Involving communities in local decision - making
Presently, all countries recognize the need to involve communities and other actors,
such as Non-Government Organization and the private sector, as partners in sustainable
natural resources management programs. Results from these have convincingly
demonstrated that when communities are empowered with responsibilities and rights for
the management, and receive benefits from them, they come to recognize the importance
of sustainable natural resources management and respect forest management rules. It is
important that governments of developing countries involve communities in participatory
planning and budgeting in local decisions. This can be achieved through involving the
communities in local policy formulation which can be adopted at national level thus
guaranteeing a bottom-up approach in governance and management. Policy formulation
can integrate the communities through granting them veto power in voting for programs,
projects and activities. The communities should also be awarded the opportunity to
formulate their own ideas which will be supported financially and technically by the
government, Non-Governmental Organization and other institutions. This will increase
community ownership of resources and processes thereby encouraging sustainable
utilization of natural resources.

c. Conclusions
Therefore, it is more meaningful and effective where the local population is involved not
as co-operating users but as natural resource managers and even owner managers, in
their own rights. In this regard, arrangements based on use interests are less attractive
because they ignore local custodial and socio-environmental interests. The study revealed
that local communities were not involved in policy formulation or in decision - making
processes through planning and budgeting. However, the communities were heavily
involved in the implementation stage of different projects and are key elements in the
success of any resource management program, project or activity. The lack of participation
by the local communities caused conflict between project managers and members of the
communities leading to resentment.This ultimately resulted in conscious and sub-
conscious sabotage of resources. That is why when there is lack of active community
participation in project formulation and provided a sure recipe for failure.

6
d. Recommendations
 It is necessary to create awareness among communities about the need to participate,
manage, and own their natural resources. Government officials and Non-Government
Organization agents should not ignore indigenous knowledge systems so that they do
not propose and impose irrelevant solutions to the communities they seek to assist.
Moreover there is need for authorities to create a harmony, trust with communities and
to advance their interests above all other things.

 There is need to institute legal mechanisms for benefit sharing as this improves
commitment towards sustainable natural resources management. Legal frameworks
are also imperative to ensure accountability and transparency of all stakeholders.

V. References:
 http://www.fedvol.ie/_fileupload/Sharing%20Innovative%20Learning/Decision
%20Making%20Event/Rob%20Greig%20Presentation.pdf
Related Source:
 https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTED_00.htm
 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/12460125.2016.1187395
 www.tandfonline.com