all the problems arise with the lack of elected reps at the BBMP level who are for the majority completely indispensable and are the best solution for the masses better known as the "political society" as opposed to the "civil society"
current trajectories of city growth are curbing political and democratic spaces. *note on participation * a demand is generated which is expressed as a felt need and the publics basic need becomes a policy and a scheme with (possible legislative backing) and funding. e.g. the NREGA (food security and employment) and the RTI (transparency of money / govt accnts) This is expressed to elected people's reps who are to create responsiveness in the system to address common needs. and it can also be as organised to the extent of Participatory budgeting as in Porto Allegre , Brazil in 1989-2002. But this again needs Elected local government policies and schemes which are determined by public demands *bottom up planning is where the public is engaged with the system-- political, bureaucratic and administrative* and progressively everyone takes more responsibility and as equals accountability of themselves and others. amazingly it does work well when it is not imposed, it evolves as long as any impatience with the political class does not aspire to remove them from the quation On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Vijay Menon <[email protected]> wrote: > > I would really like to hear from someone who has solved the "people's > participation,bottoms up planning" riddle. > > -Where does the partciapation start and where does it end? > -What level of particiation is enough?10 people , 10 RWAs, 1 slum, a > total referendum on every decision,whether the location of a bus > stand in a neighbourhood or location of a new layout? > -Yes ,there must streamlined institutionlised local councils , the > burroughs concept or similar, but until that happens..... what? > -What is the responsibilty of the educated.priveleged ,the wealthy, > the fortunate,the elite(!!!).Do they have rights too or is evrything > they do naturally anti amm admi. > --And who defines this aam admi..a middle class household, the > slumdweller, the illiterate . > > > This discussion is put forth to highlight the quandry some have > > The damned if I do damned if I don't.quandry. > > People in vantage points of society , who have a very ,very real and > high social change agenda. > ( this can only be understood if you do not pescribe to the view that > all page 3 people are elitist and have no concern for relevant social > change) > > If they don't do anything they are living off the fat of society, if > they do they are not "consulting us" > > I'll stop here ..contriversial enough. I am sure I will get enough > hate mail on this too. > > But consider ..is CAF elitist too?Are those in the social space just > politicking for power and space and therfore bring down every one > else.It is generally accepted that no 2 NGOs can see eye to eye..and > in fact they go for each other's eyes!! > > Bye for now. > > vijayan > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Citizens' Action Forum" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/citizens-action-forum?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
