Can Bottoms Up Participatory Approaches Bring Better Outcomes in Regional Development?

1
Can Bottoms Up Participatory Approaches Bring
Better Outcomes in Regional Development? Profeso
r Dato Dr Abdul Rahman Embong Institute of
Malaysian International Studies (IKMAS),
UKM Cum President, Malaysian Social Science
Association
Presentation at the Seminar on Balanced
Development in Malaysia Bringing the Poorer
States into the Mainstream organised by ASLI
YKSM at Crown Princess Hotel, Kuala Lumpur, 13
July 2006.
2

• Malaysia has since independence embarked on
  regional development as part of the overall
  strategy of national development.
• Regional development approach in the main has
  been top-down
• Federal Govts Perspective Plans 5-year plans
  -- allocating budget
• Ministries National Regional Development
  Agriculture regional agencies to oversee
  regional development

3

• State govts identify areas projects
• District officers provide info input
• Also input from party organisations community
  leaders
• Communities are targets, not actors/participants
  of develoment planning process

4

• Main Mechanisms regional development
  authorities, e.g.
• - MADA in Kedah
• - KETENGAH in Terengganu
• - KESEDAR in Kelantan
• - Other agencies Felda, Felcra RISDA are in
  some ways have also been involved in regional
  development
• Other mechanisms
• - 10 Skim Pembangunan Kesejahteraan Rakyat
  (SPKR)
• - State-based Yayasan Basmi Kemiskinan (YBK)

5
What is the score card? Effective in specific
cases - Overall poverty reduced from 50 in
1970 to about 5.7 today - Job creation -
Modernisation of rural areas schools, roads,
health, piped water, electricity, phones
6

• But balanced development between regions, between
  income groups between ethnic groups not
  achieved
• Uneven benefits -- poorer states not able to
  catch up with more developed states. Investment
  esp. FDI concentrated in developed states
• Regional disparity thus still very pronounced. It
  not only has regional dimension, but also ethnic
  dimension.
• In short, poorer states not in mainstream
  development

7
Evidence?
8
Malaysia Incidence of Poverty Regional
Comparison, 2004 Hsehld size Poverty
incidence () Hard core poverty () P.
Pinang 4.1
0.3
lt0.05 Selangor 4.6
1.0 lt0.05 N. Sembilan
4.2 1.4 0.2
Kuala Lumpur 3.9
1.5 0.2 Johor 4.3
2.0 0.3 Perak 4.1
4.9 1.1 Sabah 5.2
23.0 6.5 Terengganu 5.0
15.4 4.4 Kelantan 5.2
10.6
1.3 Sarawak 4.6
7.5
1.1 Kedah 4.6 7.0
1.3 Perlis
4.2 6.3
1.7 (2005 methodology) Source
Ninth Malaysia Plan (2006-2010), p. 329
9
Why? Complex of factors capital, politics,
culture, development planning implementation,
etc.. For this purpose, our focus is on
approach. Are there other approaches? - One
possible approach Bottoms up participatory
development
10

• What is participatory development?
• Catchphrase in development studies in policy
  planning esp. in last two decades
• Views from international agencies

11

• 1. The Peasants Charter, UN Food Agriculture
  Oganisation (FAO)
• Peoples participation in institutions systems
  that govern their lives is basic human right
• Rural development strategies can realise full
  potential only through motivation, active
  involvement organisation at grass roots level
  of rural people
• Special emphasis on the least advantaged to be
  involved in
• - conceptualising designing policies
  programmes
• - creating administrative, social and economic
  institutions including cooperative and other
  voluntary forms of organisation for implementing
  and evaluating them

12
2. - United Nations Research Institute for
Social Development (UNRISD) Participation
involves organised efforts to increase control
over resources and regulative institutions in
given social situations, on the part of groups
and movements of those hitherto excluded from
such control
13

• Participation
• Both
• - a means to an end (development)
• - also end of development
• Why?

14

• Importance of participation
• Human-centred development
• Essential for human growth development of
  self-confidence, pride, initiative, creativity,
  responsibility, cooperation,
• People learn to take charge of own lives solve
  their own problems sense of ownership.
• Learning by doing gt conscientisation -gt
  self-transformation -gt release of creative
  energies, enthusiasm.

15

• Benefits of participation
• Increased income standard of living thru own
  efforts (economic)
• Political - Empowerment
• Unity, bonding, cooperation (enhancement of
  social capital)
• Sense of fulfillment happiness
• Therell be mistakes, even setbacks but people
  learn thru own experience (learning curve).

16
Example of participatory development in
Malaysia Amanah Ikhtiar Malaysia (AIM) - Idea
based on Grameen Bank, Bangladesh - AIM formed
in 1987 focus on rural poor - Informal,
participants called sahabat - self-reliance
provision of interest-free micro-credit to start
small business.
17
Today AIM has 69 branches 3962 service
centres throughout Malaysia - Provides
micro-credit RM1.02 b. - 147,544 sahabat or
participants (mostly female single mothers in
rural areas) - Close monitoring by AIM -
Project successful loan repaid out of poverty
small business viable
18

• Important role of
• - Development agencies
• - Development workers
• - NGOs as partners
• Golden rule Dont do anything for people that
  they can do for themselves

19

• Limitations of bottoms up participatory approach
• Small scale, micro outreach limited
• Has difficulties operating in diverse conditions
  requires certain degree of homogeneity
• But communities not necessarily homogeneous,
  sometimes divided along political, ethnic,
  religious lines, sometimes divisive. Distrust
• Differences can be used as obstacle to build
  trust. This is esp true of poorer states in
  Malaysia

20

• But problems not insurmountable
• Participation complements, not alternative. Not
  polar opposite of top-down development (i.e.
  development planned from the centre)
• But top-down approach state planning must more
  more take cognizance of importance of
  participation
• Must allow people to participate, shouldnt be
  influenced by political, ethnic bureaucratic
  considerations

21
THANK YOU!