View/Open - Sokoine University of Agriculture

She argues that participation has become narrow and naïve and just seen as a “goodthing” and therefore stresses the need of getting away from narrow project approacheswhere there is a lack of clarity around who is to be empowered; the individual, thecommunity, the poor, the socially excluded or categories of people such as women.The same applies for what to be empowered in relation to; cash transfers, rights ofresource access and level of control, right to participate in decision-making etc. Aslaid out participation can be summarised and viewed in terms of two overarchingtopics; institutionalism and model of individuals.2.3.7.1 InstitutionalismCleaver argues that discourses of participation have been strongly influenced by thenew institutionalism. Here participation is seen as fundamentally ensuring an efficientdelivery of development. This is interpreted as; allowing the exercise of sanctions fornon cooperation, reducing cheating and free riding, increasing cooperation and socialcapital, denoting initiative and responsibilities, securing good citizenship and politicalengagement, enhancing collective endeavours, creating a sense of ownership, and canin this respect be seen as empowerment. She puts forward five specific issues to takeinto consideration.Firstly, on Formalizing and functionalism, a point is made that although theimportance of informal and formal institutions is recognized in the literature,formalized institutional arrangements are seen as more robust than informal ones.Mentioning Ostroms´ model, her design principles are thus referred to as a way of“crafting” and formalize the institutions to create a more robust system (clearboundaries, formal rules and sanctions etc.). This then warrants that there is a goodunderstanding of the informal institutions which are to be formalized, and whenREDD is to be implemented, how well the newly established formal institutions fitthe already established norms and values for forest management will greatly affect theoutcome.Secondly, according to Cleaver there persists a Myth of community, where falsely acommunity is seen as unitary. There are strong assumptions that in any given situationthere is an identifiable community, in consistence within its own natural, social and53