Resources

This paper reviews the available literature on participatory monitoring and evaluation, focusing on how and where it is being used, the underlying concepts and issues involved and also, challenges for its use in the field. In addition, an annotated list of manuals and resources on the 'tools' and methods used in participatory monitoring and evaluation is included in the appendices.

Development organisations need to know how effective their efforts have been. But who should make these judgements, and on what basis? Usually it is outside experts who take charge. Participatory monitoring and evaluation (PM&E) is a different approach which involves local people, development agencies and policy makers deciding together how progress should be measured, and results acted upon. It can reveal valuable lessons and improve accountability. However, it is a challenging process for all concerned since it encourages people to examine their assumptions about what constitutes progress, and to face up to the contradictions and conflicts that can emerge. This paper briefly outlines what Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation (PM & E) is, provides examples of where it has been practically applied and examines some of the challenges faced.

Why do field workers use participatory approaches as they do? This paper uses a case study of fieldworkers' use of Participatory Rural Appraisal in ActionAid The Gambia to address the question. Original empirical material that focuses on fieldworkers' perceptions of the factors that influence them is examined through the conceptual framework of structuration theory. The dissertation argues that the practice of a participatory approach emerges from a complex process of negotiation where fieldworkers are subject to unique combinations of competing influences from the organisation they work for, the communities they work with and their own personal characteristics. It suggests that fieldworkers can actively pursue personal agendas and can also be involved in changing the structures that condition their actions. However the dissertation concludes that elements of the organisational structure can leave little room for fieldworkers to use their agency positively. Managers need to change this structure if the gap between the policy and practice of participatory approaches is to be reduced. A deeper understanding of fieldworker's use of participatory approaches will make it possible to establish what changes are required to improve the implementation and institutionalisation of these approaches.

How do ordinary people, especially poor people, affect the social policies that in turn affect their well-being? What is the role of citizen participation in social policy formation and implementation? How do changing contexts and conditions affect the entry points through which actors in civil society, especially the poor, can exercise their voice and influence in critical social policy arenas? State centred conceptions of social policy often view citizens as recipients of programmes, whilst market led versions focus on the clients of social welfare as consumers who participate through choice of services. This paper explores a view that argues for an approach to social policy that sees citizens not only as users or choosers, but as active participants who engage in making and shaping social policy and social provisioning. The authors suggest that changing concepts and conditions, such as demographic change, the privatisation of provisioning and globalisation, challenge traditional approaches to participation in social policy. These concepts are discussed within a broader historical review of the ways that ordinary people have participated in policy, and it is argued that participation must be repositioned in the light of current reality which offers new spaces, as well as new constraints, for citizen engagement.

This paper synthesises the critical reflections on PRA of a small group of Nepali PRA practitioners, as part of the 'Pathways to Participation' Project. It summarises some contextual factors, including the historical moment in which PRA has spread in Nepal, and the issues that have arisen in association with this expansion. The paper reviews some of the widely varied views of practitioners - about what PRA is, what it should be and what it is for. It also compiles some of the challenges for PRA practice - raised by the practitioners - for the future, including innovation, training and continuing to learn through critical reflection on PRA.

This IDS working paper is one of a series arising from the Pathways to Participation project which was initiated in Jan 1999 by the Participation Group, with the aim of taking stock of the first 10 years of Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA). There is a tendency to call any development practice that in some way involves local people 'participatory', and a huge diversity of meanings and practices can be hidden under this umbrella term. Additionally, the term 'participation' has become uncritically associated with 'empowerment'. Such oversimplified representations ignore the fact that participatory practice will vary greatly according to the context within which it operates. The paper analyses one particular approach to participatory development developed by SPEECH, an NGO working in Tamil Nadu, India, focusing specifically on gender relations. The paper draws on fieldwork from two communities - Kottam and Maniyampatti - in which SPEECH have been working for a lengthy period. The authors suggest that SPEECH's participatory practices are shaped by how both the staff and the local actors understand participation. As a result, the two communities have developed different participatory processes. The paper describes the notion that empowerment through participation is a relational and varied process occurring in spaces where people are able to interact according to an 'unusual' set of rules (i.e. during PRA workshops). The authors contend that such a process can have wider effects on social relations in everyday life, although, in this particular case study, certain aspects of gender relations have remained unchanged.

Effective poverty reduction requires narrowing the gap between words and actions, making trust and accountability real within and between organisations, at all levels and between all actors. Aid agencies today are shifting emphasis from projects and service delivery to a language of rights and governance. They have introduced new approaches and requirements, stressing partnership and transparency. But embedded traditions and bureaucratic inertia mean old behaviours, procedures and organisational cultures persist. This Policy Briefing looks at how current practices maintain such cultures, and at how they can be changed by achieving consistency between personal behaviour; institutional norms and the new development agenda.