Civil Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Table 4.4
Responses to arguments against community engagement
Barriers and arguments against
community engagement
Response
Politicians are elected to represent
the public and know what their
constituents want.
Politicians are seldom elected unanimously yet
they are supposed to represent and help address the
concerns of all their constituents. In many cases,
even with the best intent, it is impossible for them
to be in touch with the wide diversity of their
stakeholders' needs. The process and outcomes can be
a litmus test for an approach, a possible lifesaver at
election time.
Engagement will delay the process:
fear of increased time and costs.
The cost of engagement is a small proportion of the
total cost of any planning or development process. A
well designed process can be cost-effective and save
time overall by reducing delays due to conflict.
Decisions are technical and the
public is not qualified. Technical
experts know the right solution.
Unlikely to use input if community
is not highly educated, or believe
greater good should prevail.
Community can contribute local knowledge and
suggestions to mitigate negative impacts. A good
process will ensure that information is presented in
an understandable way and investment is provided to
enable informed participation, e.g. if literacy is low
or access to technology is poor.
Past experience of poor process,
possibly token, or seen as 'therapy'.
Lack of skills in facilitation and conflict resolution.
Lack of agreement to process.
Management and support of advisory
committees is too resource intensive
with unhelpful outcomes.
Good facilitation, communication and project
management skills can contribute to a good process.
A team member allocated to consultation can be a
long-term cost-effective solution.
Consultation provides a platform
for dissidents and unrepresentative
groups, and leads to paralysis and
inaction.
Lack of skills in facilitation and conflict resolution.
Lack of agreement to process. Ensure techniques
are tailored to outcomes sought and diversity of
stakeholders.
Government concerned with
change; unwillingness of planner,
administration, or politician to share
power.
Consultative processes requires specific skills to
manage well.
Fear of public scrutiny of
decision-making process. Lack of
transparency; possible insecurity.
Knowledgeable, unbiased and skilled staff can
support good policy and decisions.
to test assumptions held by participants, work more effectively across
organisations, and have a clearer delineation of roles. Basic public partici-
pation practice recommends that the facilitator is selected, approved, and/
or acceptable to all parties. In fact, participants should be able to raise
any concerns about a facilitator, and to change practitioners if necessary
(Sarkissian
et al.
2003).
