Public participation is not civic education, don’t confuse the two

There is a new lexicon in Kenya today: Public participation. This is a term that has gained currency in the last five years after the promulgation of the new Constitution in 2010.

This term is now popular since everyone is using it but in very different ways.

But the drafters of the Constitution provided for this term in order to ensure that people provide input in the making of key decisions that affect their lives.

The drafters wanted to ensure the people provide checks or oversight on what the national and the county governments do.

Public participation was specifically embedded in public decision making to prevent government officials from thinking for the people.

In the past, government officials assumed they had knowledge about people’s needs.

They went ahead to impose many grand and non-grand ideas on them. Some of these did not work well.

They certainly imposed these ideas because they (government officials) had certain interests in the implementation of projects coming with such ideas. They often had something to gain from failed ideas.

CONSTITUTION

The Constitution cures this by providing for people to participate in the making of decisions by governments at the county and national levels.

But public participation has now become a challenge for some of the county governments.

This past week, the third devolution conference in Meru revealed there is apathy in public participation. People are not coming to meetings to discuss “budgets” and other technical proposals. Projects belong to mheshimiwa.

But even before the conference, studies had begun to show that all is not well with participation.

In many instances, people do not identify with the local development projects because they were not involved in identifying them as a priority.

They view the projects as belonging to the governor, or the MCA, or even the local MP. You often hear them talk about “hii project ni ya mheshimiwa”.

In a recent study, respondents were asked to tell how much they were involved in making decisions on devolution-related matters.

The survey also asked how much influence they thought they have had in making decisions relating to development of policies by both the national and county governments.

Only 9 per cent said they have had a lot of influence in making decisions on national government projects in their area.

Eleven per cent said they have had a lot of influence in county government development projects.

NO INFLUENCE AT ALL

More than half of Kenyans said they had no influence at all in decisions that inform development projects by the county and the national governments.

When asked whether they had ever participated in county forums for making budgets, 92 per cent said they have never been involved.

A similar number has never been involved in making development plans. Eighty seven per cent have never been involved in the making of policies or laws at all.

These figures show little public participation in local and national development processes. One factor contributing to this challenge is the failure by the county and the national governments to give full meaning to public participation.

Public participation is not civic education. Today, many county assemblies pass laws that tend to use these two as if they mean one and the same thing.

The counties also use them inter-changeably. This confusion has certain costs. First, it leads to misconception that public participation is expensive.

CIVIC EDUCATION

Yes, civic education is expensive because, like any other form of education, there are transaction costs. There are investments made in providing civic education.

Civic education involves giving people knowledge and imparting them with ideas to improve their understanding on a certain issue.

It involves planning, preparing materials with the relevant information to give to people, and even employing a trainer to pass the information.

It is costly because it means engaging with people for a while until they improve their understanding on certain issues.

In fact, civic education improves people’s abilities for public participation. It gives them the knowledge that they require so that they can give ideas in making decisions that affect them.

On the other hand, public participation has no similar costs. It simply concerns getting people’s ideas on what matters to them.

It simply means involving people in making decisions on matters that affect their own lives. It means getting their ideas through open and frank discussions on what they consider important in their lives.

PUBLIC BARAZAS

A good example of this is the public barazas which chiefs and sub-chiefs often convene to inform people about government policies or to address a communal challenge.

When there is a matter concerning the community, the chief convenes a baraza in which people discuss the matter and pass decisions on what should be done.

People attend the baraza without expecting payment by the chief. Many communal self help development projects are initiated through this form of public participation: people meet, discuss, and make recommendations, which are binding on all members who are present as well as those absent.

Secondly, public participation is a process and not an event. It is not a one off meeting convened to generate ideas and then you leave.

It is a process that takes a long period of time depending on what people are discussing or what they want to address.

Third, through this process of involving people, those who have an interest in a project or an issue get the opportunity to make key decisions.

And because there is no single public but many groups with an interest in an issue, a successful public participation process leads to inclusion of inputs by everyone.

BETTER OWNERSHIP

Public participation serves several purposes. One, it leads to people identifying with the projects or an issue. And once they identify with an issue, then they are capable of defending the issue and protecting it.

Two, effective public participation results in better ownership of the project by those it is intended to serve. They develop a sense of ownership.

They also use a different language in describing the project. They often say “project yetu” or our project as opposed to “hii project ni ya governor”.

Three, and most important is that public participation improves on local governance and quality of the projects.

Giving the community a voice in making decisions entrenches better checks on the development programmes. It also improves on accountability.

These may sound simple or unimportant benefits but they are very critical to how the local people relate to their leaders.

Where there is limited public participation, people often think that money for the projects has been stolen or that someone is cheating them. It leads to suspicions and mistrust everywhere.

Both the county governments and the national government are making a conceptual error in using civic education and public participation interchangeably.

Many county governments are indeed providing civic education and calling it public participation.

DISMAL FAILURE

This is what is leading to dismal failure in mobilising people to participate in devolution-related matters at the county level.

From the look of things, these errors especially at the county level are not an accident. The errors are deliberate in some instances. They are made with a view to provide opportunities for rents.

Notably, those involved in making budgets certainly know that public participation takes place at no costs. It is about involving the local people to give their input on what concerns them.

In the end they design civic education and call it public participation. Take for instance the county forums on budgets.

It is a useless idea for anyone to call a village to come and discuss budget lines without relating the budget to the community projects.

The community has done budgets for their own water projects, schools, local bridges and other self help projects. Why then do we find them getting disinterested in county budget forums?

It is simply because someone is using a technical language in order to get the local people off the eating trough.

County governments must begin by getting it right: civic education is not public participation. And public participation is not expensive; it does not require a budget line.

The chiefs did it well through barazas. Politicians do it often in small rallies. There is listening allowance attached to people attending these meetings.

There is something going wrong with public participation today.

Prof Karuti Kanyinga is based at the Institute for Development Studies (IDS), University of Nairobi; [email protected]