making voices count

1
making voices count

• An Experiment in Participatory Policy Monitoring

PROJEKTA
Organization for Women and Development VOICE HAS
NO MEANING IF NO ONE LISTENS
2
Capacity program in the beginning
GOAL improve quality of life

• TARGET GROUPS
• Indigenous villages
• Local organisations in Nickerie
• Youth Organisations

STRATEGY Capacity strengthening of persons,
organisations and communities
3
Evaluation after 6 years

• Some success in integrated community development
  in Indigenous Villages
• Varying results at organisational level
  (Nickerie)
• High turnover in organisations (no quick results)
• Outcomes not sustainable.

4
Some more evaluation

• Bureaucracy is greatest obstacle
• Political influence (elections!)
• Little connection to other processes no dialogue
  / cooperation between actors
• In short Fragile, short term results.

Garbage The Case of Kaizen
Conclusion participation in decision making is
necessary
5
And so...

• Voice has no meaning if no one listens
• VOICE AND ROOM (or space)
• (Participation is a Right Meaningful
  Participation is a Capacity.)
• New Program
• ROOM/SPACE FOR DIALOGUE (Ruimte voor dialoog)

6
SPACE/Opportunity

• Start of Decentralisation Program in Suriname
• But (as usual) we were not happy
• decentralisation only financial (budget taxes)
• Lots op new buildings (very empty)
• Citizens participation hearings
• Hearings little known, individual citizens
  requests
• ultimately Central Government decides on budget

7
What to do, how to do..

• How do we make participation meaningful
• How to bridge the gap between Govt and Citizens?
• Introduce (yes, really!) Accountability and
  Transparancy on a very small scale

8
Challenges

• Everything is Politics Patronage/Clientelism
• Very small community
• Winti wai, lanti pai
• What does it pay
• Immense distrust of NGOs by Political parties
  and thus Government

9
Participatory Policy Monitoring
10
Nickerie PPM
11
Who participates?

• Local organisations, in each ressort
• Local Government (District Commissioners Office)
• Ressort and District Council Members
• Members of Parliament
• Other institutions Police, Fire Brigade, etc.
• Representatives of Ministries
• Individual citizens
• Business Community Banks, hotelmanagers,
  shopkeepers

12
Problem Parents concerned about traffic safety
near schools
Example

• Results (2nd interface)
• 8 speed bumps in the Eastern polders
• 2 speed bumps in the Western polder

• Agreements 1st Interface
• Parents committee will list where speed bumps are
  needed.
• Committee will submit list to Traffic Police
• Traffic Police will discuss with District
  Commissioner (DC)
• Parents, Police and DC-office will meet in 2
  weeks.

13
Example results (Henar Ressort)
14
What happened?

• 
  
  
• Citizens feel more involved. (Its my thing)
• Citizens learn to deal with policy.
• Government offices are triggered to work more
  efficiently.
• They are happy (They are not alone, and they get
  praised)

15
What has this process changed?

• Slow but sure change in citizens thinking.
• Govt offices are more willing and accessible
• Local organisations have more access to DC,
  Police, Banks, etc.
• Government departments and citizens work
  together on projects

16
Lessons Learned

• Dont wait till everybody is on board, but let
  the results win them over.
• Uncover all social and power relations
• Take into account the diversity of organisations
• It takes a long time

17
Thank you...