Participation for Area-Based Rural Development: Concepts, Situations and Problems

Öz

Understanding group participation in developing countries is crucial because in those countries groups and networks serve many of the functions that elsewhere are served by formal institutions and market mechanisms (e.g. they provide access to informal insurance, credit, and even jobs). Public participation became a statutory requirement in preparation of development plans. In this regard, area-based rural development structures are seen to foster civic participation. It is based upon the assumption that sustainable development can be achieved only through the involvement of all stakeholders. The motivation of the people for their development is halfway there. One of the common vehicles for community development includes voluntary community organizations such as local groups, youth groups, sporting clubs, and local resident associations. These organizations have certain characteristics that include: a resident’s commitment to their area, voluntary participation of members, and locally initiated groups that address critical community issues. A determining factor for the success of local sustainable development (SD) is the ability to contextualize it, which can be achieved through the involvement of local actors. Stakeholder participation can aid in the design of policies, plans or projects that better respond to the needs of local actors and is therefore useful in promoting SD. Local partnerships are often presented as inclusive in themselves because potentially they bring a wide range of interest groups together. In addition, they are seen as best placed to address social exclusion because of their local knowledge of social problems and local people. Social capital, social inclusion, civic engagement, and participation are all seen as desirable goals, and are sometimes used interchangeably. Strong social networks and civic engagement lead to economic development and improved democracy. This article methodology is based upon literature review on related contexts of its topic namely participation for area-based rural development: concepts, situations and problems. In this regard author gathered and analyzed a huge amount of related articles, books and documents etc... Plus, author utilized field research pictures of his participatory works and observations in the content. Also this article is an abbreviation and short communication of author’s book that published at 2025.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Participation
• Rural people
• Sustainable development
• Environment conservation
• Concepts
• Iran

Kaynakça

1. Ardehali MM. 2006. Rural energy development in Iran: Non-renewable and renewable resources. Renew Ener, 31: 655-662.
2. Arnstein SR. 1971. A ladder of citizen participation. J Royal Town Plan Inst, 57: 176-182.
3. Chirwa EW, Zgovu EK, Mvula PM. 2002. Participation and impact of poverty-oriented public works projects in rural Malawi. Devel Policy Rev, 20(2): 159-176
4. Coakes SJ, Bishop BJ. 2002. Defining the nature of participation in rural Australian communities: a qualitative approach. J Commun Psychol, 30(6): 635-646. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.10028
5. Ferrara EL. 2002. Inequality and group participation: theory and evidence from rural Tanzania. J Pubc Econ, 85: 235-273.
6. Francis P, James R. 2003. Balancing rural poverty reduction and citizen participation: The contradictions of Uganda’s decentralization program. World Devel, 31(2): 325-337.
7. Jessop B. 2005. The governance of complexity and the complexity of governance, revisited. In: Complexity, Science and Society Conference, September, 11-14, Liverpool, UK.
8. Lange E, Hehl-Lange H. 2011. Citizen participation in the conservation and use of rural landscapes in Britain: the Alport Valley case study. Landscape Ecol Eng, 7: 223-230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-010-0115-2

9. Laverack G. 2007. Health promotion practice: building empowered communities. Open University Press, Maidenhead, UK.
10. McHenry JA. 2011. Rural empowerment through the arts: The role of the arts in civic and social participation in the Mid-West region of Western Australia. J Rural Stud, 27: 245-253.
11. Otu UR. 2003. Knowledge-sharing through radio and newsletters as a catalyst to grassroot participation and management for rural water-related environmental problems in Ebo Itumbonuso, in local government areas, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. Intl Inform Libr Rev, 35: 311-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1057-2317(03)00027-4
12. Putnam R. 1996. The strange disappearance of civic America. American Prospect, 7 (No. 24).
13. Putnam R. 2000. Bowling alone– the collapse and revival of American community. Touchstone Books, New York, US.
14. Sardinha ID, Craveiro D, Milheiras S. 2013. A sustainability framework for redevelopment of rural brownfields: stakeholder participation at São Domingos mine, Portugal. J Clean Prod, 57: 200-208.
15. Shortall S. 2008. Are rural development programmes socially inclusive? Social inclusion, civic engagement, participation, and social capital: Exploring the differences. J Rural Stud, 24: 450-457.
16. Taylor J, Wilkinson D, Cheers B. 2006. Community participation in organising rural general practice: Is it sustainable? Aust J Rural Health, 14: 144-147.
17. Therrien FH, Desrosiers J. 2010. Participation of metropolitan, urban and rural community-dwelling older adults. Arch Gerontol Geriat, 51: 52-56.