Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Notice:
Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and
are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Publisher's Note
The publisher has gone to great lengths to ensure the quality of this reprint
but points out that some imperfections in the original copies may be
apparent.
Disclaimer
The publisher has made every effort to trace copyright holders and welcomes
correspondence from those they have been unable to contact.
Introduction 1
Conclusions 131
Bibliography 142
Appendix l 168
Appendix 2 172
Appendix 2 181
Index 186
v
Figures and Tables
vi
Acknowledgements
Numerous individuals and groups made the researching and writing for this
book, which started as my doctoral dissertation, possible. Sincere gratitude
goes to my guru, Dr. James B. Mayfield, who gave his unending support and
encouragement, from the start, the completion and revisions of this project. I
would also like to thank my other mentors at the University of Utah who
showered me with constructive ideas and thoughts: Drs. Daniel McCool,
Howard Lehman, Yangi Tong and Stephen Reynolds. After graduate school,
valuable intellectual guidance and stimuli were provided by Ed Campos,
Manny Jimenez, John Page, Lyn Squire, Bhuvan Bhatnagar, Aubrey
Williams, Julie Viloria, David Steedman and David Williams during my two-
year stint at the World Bank in Washington, DC. My sincere appreciation to
many friends and colleagues at the National University of Singapore, Centre
for Advanced Studies, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Philippine
Embassies in Singapore and the United States of America, the University of
the Philippines, De La Salle University and the Philippine Department of
Health. Special mention goes to Assoc. Profs. Jon and Stella Quah, Assoc.
Prof. Leo Suryadinata, Assoc. Prof. Lee Boon Hiok, Dr. Ho Khai Leong, Dr.
Shamsul Haque, Dr. Gambhir Bhatta, Dr. Peggy Teo, Mr. Ronald Holmes,
Mr. Rizal Buendia, Mr. Benito Bengzon, Dr. Trinidad Osteria, Dr.
Exaltación Lamberte, Dr. Ledivina Carino, Dr. Amelia Varela and Dr.
Victoria Bautista. This study would not have taken off the ground without the
generous financial and technical support of FHP Health Care (Utah) and the
Policy Research and Operations Policy Departments of the World Bank.
Moreover, I am indebted to two anonymous referees who gave helpful
comments and excellent suggestions. Thanks to Edith Gonzalez and Susan
Lopez-Nemey for providing editorial assistance. Acknowledgements also go
to the Gonzalez and Borbon families for being there during the emotional
“ups” and “downs” inherent to long-term endeavors such as this book. Above
all, I am grateful to my wife Edith Borbon Gonzalez and my daughter Elise
Borbon Gonzalez for their patience, understanding and inspiration.
Vll
Introduction
J. Rice, 1990
United States Agency for International Development
and World Vision Relief
Yet, despite the widely shared view that participation improves project
performance, clear and convincing evidence on the link between
participation and project outcomes is surprisingly scarce. Advocates of
participation have relied primarily on case studies to document the link
between participation and performance. But these are easily dismissed by
skeptics because of the small number of cases and the informal testing of
the findings.
J. Page, 1998
The World Bank
Many social scientists all over Asia and the world are caught up in what seems
like a never ending search for ways and means around obstacles that hinder
project and program success in developing countries. One of the “miracle cures”
that they have been prescribing since the mid-1970s is the use of increased
community participation. In broad tenus, community participation implies
increasing stakeholder or client involvement in almost all aspects of a project cycle1
1
2 Development sustainability through community participation
from the planning and design to the actual implementation and monitoring. With
the help of academics and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), community
participation became the virtual panacea of the 1980s. Consequently, the 1990s
witnessed bilateral and multilateral development agencies like the Asian
Development Bank (ADB), the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development (IBRD/World Bank), the United States Agency for International
Development (USAID), which traditionally emphasized the economic, financial,
and technical aspects of development projects, slowly began to place more serious
concern for a programs social and civic dimensions primarily to increase the
likelihood of development sustainability—the continuation of the benefits and
activities of a development project beyond donor funding or supervision (See, for
instance: UNDP, 1993; World Bank, 1995). At the local government level of
developing countries, increased stakeholder participation was encouraged,
empowering the community to take responsibility for maintaining a project’s
output(s) with less or even no central government support. Some specific
examples of these socioeconomic development outputs are: better quality
educational opportunities, preventive health care habits, or environmental
conservation and preservation consciousness.
As a result, concern for community participation intensified in both
development research and practice in Asia and the rest of the developing regions in
the world. It became imperative for development projects in the 1980s and the
1990s to have a community participation component to ensure sustainability (See
Bamberger, 1986; Briscoe and de Ferranti, 1988; Bhatnagar and Williams, 1992).
Overwhelming empirical support for this panacea poured in from both researchers
and practitioners of social development. The latest international conferences to
throw in its endorsement was the 1994 World Bank Workshop on Participatory
Development in Washington, DC and the 1995 Social Development Summit in
Copenhagen. These conferences and many more have spawned a multitude of
published and unpublished papers on issues surrounding community participation.
To empirically verify this growing prescription, a computer-aided data
mining1 approach w'as utilized in this study to search through the following CD-
ROMs to develop a database of records on these two interesting development
concepts. In this era of databases compiled in high-volume hard drives, floppy
diskettes and electronic tapes, CD-ROMs, on-line networks and systems, and
recently Web-sites, information now abounds on almost any topic or area a
research scholar can conceptualize. However, this phenomenal growth of high
speed access to large-scale information has its pros and cons. For instance, a big
advantage of computerization and access to databases is that it gives one an
abundant amount of information to gather, process and analyze, making his or her
research very exhaustive. But, the amount of information that databases yield can
Introduction 3
1990
after the shift to a more decentralized health care delivery system. It evaluates
these project and programs to determine the significance of community
participation to their success.
Chapter 4 is an in-depth evaluation of four cases: (1) Matabungkay
Population Project, (2) Hanunuo Mangyan Community Health Project, (3)
Mindanao Schistosomiasis Control Project, and (4) Nueva Ecija Primary
Health Care Project. These four cases were taken from the 38 health care
projects described in the previous section and are highlighted in this chapter.
These development project experiences are examined to determine the degree
of community participation, institutional arrangements, project
characteristics, and contextual factors that contributed to their sustainability
or nonsustainability. The first two provided support to the affirmative view
that community participation is a strong determinant of project sustainability
while the last two reinforce the dissenting perspective about community
participation’s significance to the development effectiveness.
Based on the empirical evidence presented in the previous chapters,
the book concludes with a verdict on whether community participation really
matters to development sustainability. It also reveals some conceptual and
policy constraints on which present and future public health care managers
and provider should reflect on.
Note