This column will deal with words and concepts and their changing and nuanced meanings. Indeed , many more interpretations and value additions are possible on the words and descriptions that figure in this series. The AIDEM invites further discussions on these words and concepts from readers.

Participation has become a buzz word in the domains of development and governance. We come across phrases like participatory development, participatory growth, participatory democracy, participatory governance and so on. In fact, the word ‘participatory’ has become a popular prefix to many political and social concepts. This has happened since development theorists considered people’s participation necessary for sustainable development. In fact, before a development project is undertaken, people should be consulted on it objectives and strategies. This process of consultation was called Participatory Rural Appraisal. This was experimented in India by a British Academic named Robert Chambers in Jharkhand, which was part of the State of Bihar. Conversely, absence of participation leads to undesirable consequences.

Some theorists would claim that the concept of participation has been around from ancient times. In Greek city-states, participation was a fundamental aspect of democracy where citizens participated in public affairs through ballot voting, public debates, and jury services. The concept was central even in theological practices where participation in divine grace or communion was key to salvation. In traditional Hinduism, making sacrifices or conducting the ritual of upnayanana (initiation) was considered participation.

But the concept in 20th century has emerged in a modern form with growth of social movements and political consciousness. The idea that people should have greater say in decision-making processes that affect their lives became universal; particularly in developing countries the participatory approach to development has become a preferred strategy.

Thus participation has become a key concept in various fields: development, education, social work, public policy, and so on. Also, today the concept of participation includes not only people’s involvement in decision making but also access to information, resources and opportunities, which enable people to participate effectively in society.

In a semi-official conversation, an official of the West Bengal government shared this understanding of participatory development: Suppose a school is to be built in a village. The decision is taken in the Block Development Office. Villagers are not consulted about the location of the school, the type of building, the number of students expected to enroll, the catchment area, and so on. The school is built. But students do not turn up in required numbers as the parents do not know the quality or demeanor of the teachers. Some villagers without a direct stake in the school start chipping away the tiles from the roof, or mess up the premises by letting the cattle roam on the campus. The school becomes unviable.

Why did it happen? The villagers should have been overjoyed with a new school. They were not, as they did not participate in the process of setting up the school; rather they were alienated from it. So, participation leads progressively to ownership of the outcome of the decision taken.

What do we mean by participation? Does being present in a meeting constitute participation? For instance, if villagers attend the meetings of local governments like grama sabha does it mean that they are participating? The literal meaning of the word is ‘to have a part or share in something’. But the operative meaning would be, “to have a say on or contribute to the outcome of a particular activity”. To illustrate, if the meeting is discussing the strategic plan of an organisation or development plan of a group/village or resolving a conflict, anyone contributing to any of these would mean participation.

If it is a political meeting that is making a policy or taking a decision, participation will mean contributing to the process of policy-making or decision-taking.

So, participation is contextual, depending on the nature of activities. For instance, if a student is attending a class and actively listening, they are said to be participating in the lecture. Raising a question or seeking a clarification from the lecturer would also mean participation. Some would say simply listening to a lecture is passive participation whereas reacting to the lecture would be active participation.

Let me share an anecdote. A journalist had an appointment with the Prime Minister of a European country. The journalist arrived on time and was escorted into the office of the Prime Minister. To his amazement, the journalist found the Prime Minister relaxing in a chair, looking at the ceiling and smoking a cigar. The journalist began the conversation, “Sir, you seem to be unwinding.” The Prime Minister replied smilingly, “not really, I am in fact working. I am participating in the development of my country.” The journalist’s surprise was deepened by the answer. The Prime Minister, realising the journalist’s discomfiture, explained: “I am thinking; that is what I am elected for, to think for my country. And that is how I am participating with my countrymen and women in the welfare and development of the country”.

Let us now see what is not participation? Take a couple of hackneyed phrases, almost trite. Participatory growth, which is often used by politicians, is not a correct expression. A country can grow without everybody participating in the growth process. Growth is defined and measured by the amount of wealth (GDP) the country generates. A few business houses and public enterprises can bring about that growth. Common citizens may make no contribution to the wealth creation. I raised this issue in a conference in Berlin and was endorsed by others. But participatory development is a correct phrase. As explained, development will not be effective or sustainable without the participation of the stakeholders, mainly the beneficiaries.

Is democracy participatory? This is another popular phrase. This must be contextually examined. It may be the case in some countries where direct democracy is in practice even on a limited scale Democracy underlines the primacy of the voters or citizens. In fact, they are sovereign in a democracy. Is that the case in the ‘largest democracy’ of the world or in many other democracies? If you look at the democracy index brought out by The Economist, only a few countries appear to be fair democracies and the rest are flawed or hybrid.

Another similar phrase is participatory governance. This is even more complicated and confusing. Governance consists of three main functions in a democracy: legislative, executive and judicial. How are these three functions participatory? One could accept the legislative function as participatory as Parliament and legislatures are run by elected representatives, whatever may be the merit and extent of collective deliberations! But what about participation in the executive and the judiciary? The argument could be that the executive function is led by the Cabinet but, it is the bureaucracy which carries out the administration. There have been attempts to make executive participatory by encouraging police-public cooperation. Likewise, the judiciary is being made participatory by introducing institutions like Lok Adalat and mediation centers. But they are only supplementary functions in a limited scale. So, to say that governance is participatory is a misnomer.

Therefore, let us understand clearly the concept and use it impactfully.

For past releases of Words and Concepts, Click Here.