An
organized outreach program may be necessary if you are to maximize
participation, at least by those important stakeholders and decision
makers you are able to identify. Such a program would give careful
attention to the flow of information and the opportunities that are
provided for open communications among participants.
Face-to-face engagement is a must.
This
brings up some interesting issues with regard to the use of
technology as a planning and participation tool. Email, chat rooms,
listservs and internet sites can improve access to information, but
can never replace face-to-face interactions. Most importantly, the
use of technology must consider the degree to which this actually
improves access to information for those minority and low-income
communities who are so important to some planning processes.
2. A history
of past mistakes has resulted in anger, cynicism and a general
mistrust of government that not everyone can overcome.
Regardless of the best efforts of local government in general –
and individual planners specifically – age-old biases and
resentments may be impossible to define, let alone address. This
problem may be exacerbated by unfriendly media coverage that
repeatedly reminds citizens of the past, and focuses on negative,
rather than positive, government action.
Although
all stakeholders should make a commitment to support planning and
policy making through their participation, none is more critical than
that of local government.
Tangible evidence of the government’s commitment -- such as
dedicated staff and adequate financial resources -- will go a long way
toward overcoming past mistakes.
3. The time between
decision and action is too long and people give up, thinking they are
not making any progress.
Government decision making takes place in cycles (often related to
budget or grant periods), and action is often delayed until the
opening of the next cycle. By constrast, community decision making is
nearly continuous and without fixed decision points -- except maybe
those imposed by government.
It
is critical that planners not lose sight of some of the broader goals
for participation in favor of a short-term, cyclical need for input,
e.g., to complete a grant application. The process itself may be more
important than the actual outcome, and, even when the internal cycle
is completed, stakeholders need regular updates on progress. In fact,
planners should consider how best to become part of the more informal
decision making that takes place within neighborhoods and communities.
They may have a role to play in building community civic and social
capital, and by doing so, have the potential to increase the
community’s capacity to solve its own problems over the long term.
4. The group attempts to
tackle issues that are geographically broad and politically, socially
and economically too complex, for it ever to achieve any degree of
success.
Regardless of the scope of the problem, it may be more important to
complete a small but certain task where the collaboration virtually
guarantees success over the short term. And once several small
successes have been achieved the collaborators may be organized and
informed enough to take on larger and more complex issues.
