Shayamal Kumar Saha

1. Participatory Local Governance Relational Constructionist Discourse and Positive Effects of Appreciative Inquiry Shayamal Kumar Saha

2. Favorable laws, policies, procedures and structure: are those enough? Countries have enacted policies of wider community participation but there are still gaps between policies and practices on the ground. Realization: Policies, rules, structure and procedures alone could not eliminate dominance relationships;

3. Use of participatory methods in Subject-Object Relationships There are participatory methods and techniques yet acting as knowing and influencing subjects . This suggests a hierarchical relationship in which governance dominates knowledge and voice of the community, contradicting the basic tenets of community participation, multiple voicing and initiatives.

4. Approach that has power to ----- Establishing participatory local governance obviously warrant an approach and method that has power to encourage people to see self as part of others, putting forward relationships and cooperative interaction processes as center of discourse.

5. Relational constructionism: Its potential to promote participatory local governance Relational constructionism; a discourse that places relationship at the core of all that we experience as truth, reality, and values; .. seems potential to promote participation, Multiple voicing and initiative in local governance because: (see next page)

6. cont. • relational construction centers inter-action as both the ‘unit of analysis’ and the ‘locus of transformation’. • Relational constructionist theory allows ‘relating’ to go on in ways that give equal weight to multiple local knowledges and, in ways that depart from subject-object constructions.

7. Constructing non subject-object processes: problem solving (PS) and appreciative inquiry (AI) • Problem solving (PS) generates deficit vocabularies, talks of failure, and practices blaming. All of these contribute to the construction of the individual as an autonomous entity with defining characteristics that provide the reason(s) for failure and/or the source of some solution;

8. Appreciative Inquiry Appreciative Inquiry (AI), in contrast to PS, is grounded in the assumption that every living system has many untapped, rich and inspiring accounts of the positive. AI centres discussion on what is viewed as positive, what works, what is energizing.

9. My Presentation My specific learning questions were in what ways, if any, do PS and/or AI help to: • shift development vocabularies from individual capacity and individual action to centre relational processes and inter-relatedness; • transform subject-object relationships e.g., between the barangay community and barangay council, into non subject-object relationships; • promote processes of development that: • foster multiple local creativities by barangay communities ; • enhance multiple but equal voices; • encourage generation and exploration of possibilities and positive values;

10. Research findings In all respects it can be argued that in terms of process and outcome efficiency, AI was better than PS. The following table provide comparative data.

15. What made differences? • AI generated positive effects to replace lodgement of development vocabularies from individual capacity to interaction processes while the effects of PS method were to the contrary. • PS contributed to the sustenance and extension of subject-object relationship between stakeholders. On the other hand, being involved in AI, local volunteers and barangay council members began to change subject-object relationship and reconstruct a more equal relationship with the barangay communities.

16. PS did not help community in changing their dependency mindset on external agency. This dependency of individuals reinforced power and position. In contrast, application of AI in barangay Napo began to shift subject-object relationship and reconstruct a non subject-object relationship among barangay officials, local volunteers, external agencies and the community.

17. PS in barangayBalinad failed to foster multiple voicing and wider conversational climates among different stakeholders. discouraging participation in bringing their voices in different but equal relationships thus inhibiting multiple thinking and creativity. • AI fostered a multi-voicing and wider conversational climate among different stakeholders in barangay Napo. As a result, participation of community and other stakeholders continued to grow

18. PS generated a culture of blame-game pointing fingers on the shoulder of individuals which eventually fostered an individualistic construction of responsibility. AI generated a culture of appreciating each other ; created a feeling of reward among local self-help volunteers/facilitators, barangay council members and purok officers. Affirmation of each other’s positive aspects generated feelings of reward that enhanced cooperative relationships, morals and actions.

19. PS failed to generate hopes and possibilities which could encourage spontaneous cooperation, participation and wider creativities in the barangay communities. AI generated hopes and possibilities among barangay communities which cheered their spontaneous cooperation, participation and wider creativity

20. PS not only created ‘learned helplessness’ but also defensive attitude of ‘not to discuss/think/ learn’. This situation of learned-helplessness and learning-disability largely contributed to generating regressive discussions. AI and vocabularies of hope generated learned-optimism. Hopes and imaginations together generated willingness, inspirations and motivations among barangay council members, local volunteers, and common residents of barangay Napo to be supportive of each other and to do good work for the well being of others.

21. Thank You!