09.07.2015 Views

View/Open - Sokoine University of Agriculture

View/Open - Sokoine University of Agriculture

View/Open - Sokoine University of Agriculture

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

administrative boundaries. She further emphasis that by defining a community it willinvolve the identification <strong>of</strong> who are included or excluded. This can involve theexclusion <strong>of</strong> poor people, <strong>of</strong> some people not being invited, or <strong>of</strong> people not beingallowed to or able to participate etc. Paradoxically then, participatory approaches mayreduce conflict between implementers and the communities but lead to increasedconflicts locally (Vedeld 2010). In addition, communities are <strong>of</strong>ten overlapping whereinteractions may cross boundaries and may be linked to kinship, churches or otherreligious groups.Thirdly, Cleaver rises the point <strong>of</strong> a community as the place where Power and processis highly present. She argues that we may see “the community as the site <strong>of</strong> bothsolidarity and conflict, shifting alliances, power and social structures”. As a result,when implementing a resource regime such as REDD some groups might be in favourand willing participants while others might oppose it. Likewise, given the apparentpower relations within a community, some might benefit more through the exclusionand detriment <strong>of</strong> others.Fourthly, Cleaver makes a point entitled The resourceful community where she statesthat there is a “myth that communities are capable <strong>of</strong> anything, that all that is requiredis sufficient mobilization...” (1999, p.604). There might however be other factorsmore influential than mobilization, such as availability <strong>of</strong> time and access to resourcessuch as funding or tools.Finally, the fifth point put forward by Cleaver is called Culture and foundationalismwithin which culture is in different participatory development contexts seen as aconstraint (for example, restricting the participation <strong>of</strong> women) and at the same time,the glue that keeps the community together (common values and norms) (Cleaver1999).Whereas the above mentioned issues which should be taken into consideration whenemploying participation are concerned with the role <strong>of</strong> institutions, Cleaver comeswith another set <strong>of</strong> issues concerned with the individual.54

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!