This document reports on the "Champions of Participation" event in May 2007 that brought together 44 people (24 from the United Kingdom (UK) and 20 from 14 other countries) involved in local government. The aim was to look at the challenges local governments face in responding to growing demands for citizen engagement and more participatory forms of governance. Participants were elected officials, including mayors from the Philippines and Brazil; city councillors from New Orleans, United States (US) and UK authorities; local government officials and other service providers; community activists; workers from local and national non-governmental organisations (NGOs); and academics and representatives of central government in the UK and in India. This report summarises the discussions and debates held over a five-day period which included a two-day workshop, two days of visiting sites in the UK of particular interest, and one day of policy dialogue with UK policymakers in the Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) and the Department for International Development (DFID).

Some of the approaches discussed include: participatory approaches to budgeting, participatory planning, partnerships, public scrutiny, consultation and inclusion, and participation in service delivery.

As described in the executive summary: "Broadly speaking the experiences and innovative approaches included:
• Participatory approaches to budgeting which provide more transparent methods for allocating public resources, involving citizens, elected representatives and local government officials, such as in Porto Alegre in Brazil, Malaga in Spain and Bradford, Newcastle and Salford in the UK.
• Processes of participatory planning, which range from public involvement in the construction of small community-based projects, to larger neighbourhood action plans, to strategic area planning and the rebuilding of an entire city as in the case of New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina, or in human rights participatory planning in postwar Bosnia and Herzegovina.
• New forms of partnerships between citizens, the government and other stakeholders, as in the UK Local Strategic Partnerships (LSP) and at neighbourhood level through local agreements, or in places like Brazil and the Philippines where citizens and officials sit as ‘co-governors’ on key decision-making bodies.
• New forms of public scrutiny to hold elected representatives and government officials to account, ranging from local scrutiny groups in Shropshire, citizen-led organisations holding independent public forums with politicians in East London, and citizen monitoring of public tenders in Chile.
• New methods of consultation and inclusion, such as community study circles in Wisconsin, US, and community radio and mobile phone feedback in Nigeria.
• Opportunities for citizen participation in service delivery, such as housing, employment and community safety service through neighbourhood renewal and tenant management programmes in the UK; delivery of healthcare in Brazil and education in the Philippines."

Specific examples include:


1. Village panchayats in rural India, a council of five people, chosen for their age and wisdom, who lead the community by applying traditional laws based on custom and usage. In the last 15 years panchayats have been recognised as an essential unit of self government in rural areas. There are now 250,000 panchayats with 3.2 million elected representatives, and they demonstrate a significant level of political and social empowerment. A quota of seats is reserved for women and people from lower castes, providing opportunities for the most marginalised groups to be represented. Today these quotas are exceeded, and 1.2 million women are elected representatives, while the women of the scheduled castes are amongst the most active in the panchayats. Each district in each state of India has been empowered to aggregate district-level plans which build on the democratic deliberations of the panchayats at the grassroots.

2. In Porto Alegre, Brazil, after the end of military rule, citizens have organised to participate every year in setting overall budget priorities and determining local spending. Participatory budgeting engaged people in difficult decisions and helped to challenge powerful local interests. Forty thousand people regularly take part in the process, allocating around 17 per cent of the municipal budget. As a result, economically poor communities have benefited, and participation has increased.

3. Citizens and officials of New Orleans, Louisiana, US, rejected an initial post-Hurricane Katrina recovery plan drawn up by the city, which paid little attention to the needs of low-income communities. Some local councillors and officials undertook a participatory planning process, involving displaced people all over the US, as well as many thousands of residents still in the city. Three large-scale public meetings, called Community Congresses, were called to develop and review a city-wide plan for recovery. Two congresses were held simultaneously in New Orleans and 21 other US cities with the largest number of Katrina evacuees. A third Community Congress focused on updating the residents on recovery efforts, creating a public dialogue to identify rebuilding priorities, and strengthening public awareness for continued recovery and rebuilding efforts. More than 3,000 citizens were involved in this neighbourhood planning process. They used keypad polling - balanced to take account of the demographics of the city - satellite meetings, web-casting, interactive television, as well as bussing displaced people for face-to-face meetings.

The summary of learning, expanded in the document, includes:
1. Community involvement is at the heart of sustainable change and is central to the task of revitalising democracy, improving service delivery, tackling poverty, and building strong, resourceful communities.
2. Citizens should have the right, not just an invitation, to participate which is enshrined in some form of enabling legislation, rather than simply being invited to respond to the government.
3. Citizens should be ‘makers and shapers’ of policy and practice rather than merely ‘users and choosers’ of public services.
4. Empowerment should be seen as an outcome in its own right.
5. The stakes for participation can be very high, especially in former authoritarian regimes where speaking out could mean a person risking their freedom or their life.
6. Community participation can take a variety of forms, such as through involvement in self-help projects, working in partnership, and the development of independent civil society organisations.
7. Partnerships make tough demands on community representatives where the rules of engagement mean that they can feel marginalised.
8. Civil society needs to engage ‘politically’ beyond the government and make their views heard and seek solutions through advocacy.
9. Resources should be targeted to reduce inequality.
10. The role of local government is changing and has become a key agent of social change.
11. Participation should be part of mainstream local government practice and integral to the way it works.
12. Changing political culture and entrenched views is difficult.
13. Local politicians need to ‘go deeper’ into their communities and reconnect with the people they represent.
14. Participation takes time and resources.
15. There needs to be something real on the table so people can see that their input will make a difference, that they will be listened to, and that those with power will include them in making decisions.
16. Central government needs to provide appropriate leadership by setting out a clear policy for participation and establishing systems for public scrutiny and evaluation.

Email from the University Network to The Communication Initiative on January 24 2009; and the Communication for Social Change Consortium website.