 |
| Comrade Waheed Saka |
Without fear of human contradictions and historical differences, citizen engagement has continued to aids human existence and development. From documents such as the Magna Carta and the Code Napoleon, to informal engagement at local levels, the concept of citizen engagement is a universal concept with varying approaches. Kin-based societies from East Africa and the Amazonian rain-forest have traditionally made decisions by consensus and persuasion rather than by top-down diktat. Dated to 2,500 years ago, the city-state of ancient Athens rose to unprecedented political and economic power by giving its citizens direct voice and an active role in civic governance. The city’s uniquely participatory system of democracy helped unleash the creativity of the Athenian people and channel it in ways that produced the greatest good for the society as a whole. However, citizen engagement is not only applicable in a democracy, as shown by countries such as China, North Africa and the Middle east with varying forms of citizen engagement, such as informal rules and norms created by community solidarity group with high moral standard or base on social contract as in the case of first Islamic state Medina Compact. Furthermore, a common feature of many Muslim, particularly Arab societies throughout history are the ‘shura’, often translated as “consultative assembly.”
Analyzing FixMyStreet, a UK‐based online platform that allows citizens to participate by reporting problems with local infrastructure to the authorities has shown that their participation makes a difference and enhance development. Moreover a sustained engagement is generally better than a temporary engagement, whether the cost and benefit is justified or not, productive engagement contribute significantly to development. Whether the engagement is thin or thick, the practice is being used to monitor elections, locate and fix potholes (as in the case of FixMyStreet), circulate health information, and help people react during natural disasters. These have also been used all over the world, from Kenya to Brazil, from Copenhagen to Brooklyn. The most promising direction for innovation may be to find ways of combining the best features of engagement.
Moreover a large critical mass of participants is usually crucial for affecting policy, even when public officials are supportive of the idea of civic engagement. 2012 Occupy Nigeria protest is a typical example on how critical mass of people can change a policy and by extension a government. By participating in that 2012 Occupy Nigeria protest, Nigerians became more informed about national issues. Sometimes the broad awareness of a key set of facts, combined with opportunities for people to express their preferences, can swing the pendulum in a policy debate. The 2012 protest was a combined thick and thin engagement in the protest. Citizen engagement also bridge divides.
When engagement brings together citizens on different sides of a policy debate, they can often find common ground, which can break a legislative deadlock Engagement increases the accountability of elected officials. Engagement can connect citizens and public officials during the course of an effort, and inspire more communication afterward. More importantly, when a critical mass of people is involved it can build the political will necessary to affect policy. This sometimes even happens in situations where public officials initially reject the recommendations by citizens. Such as in places like Eugene, Oregon in the US, and Coffs Harbour in Australia, public officials eventually changed policy in response to public engagement.
Finally, citizen engagement has change the course of humanity; it has change authoritarianism to democracy, alters capitalism and eventually drained life out of socialism and now enhancing and creating people’s democracy across the world and therefore a game changer for development.
Analyzing FixMyStreet, a UK‐based online platform that allows citizens to participate by reporting problems with local infrastructure to the authorities has shown that their participation makes a difference and enhance development. Moreover a sustained engagement is generally better than a temporary engagement, whether the cost and benefit is justified or not, productive engagement contribute significantly to development. Whether the engagement is thin or thick, the practice is being used to monitor elections, locate and fix potholes (as in the case of FixMyStreet), circulate health information, and help people react during natural disasters. These have also been used all over the world, from Kenya to Brazil, from Copenhagen to Brooklyn. The most promising direction for innovation may be to find ways of combining the best features of engagement.
Moreover a large critical mass of participants is usually crucial for affecting policy, even when public officials are supportive of the idea of civic engagement. 2012 Occupy Nigeria protest is a typical example on how critical mass of people can change a policy and by extension a government. By participating in that 2012 Occupy Nigeria protest, Nigerians became more informed about national issues. Sometimes the broad awareness of a key set of facts, combined with opportunities for people to express their preferences, can swing the pendulum in a policy debate. The 2012 protest was a combined thick and thin engagement in the protest. Citizen engagement also bridge divides.
When engagement brings together citizens on different sides of a policy debate, they can often find common ground, which can break a legislative deadlock Engagement increases the accountability of elected officials. Engagement can connect citizens and public officials during the course of an effort, and inspire more communication afterward. More importantly, when a critical mass of people is involved it can build the political will necessary to affect policy. This sometimes even happens in situations where public officials initially reject the recommendations by citizens. Such as in places like Eugene, Oregon in the US, and Coffs Harbour in Australia, public officials eventually changed policy in response to public engagement.
Finally, citizen engagement has change the course of humanity; it has change authoritarianism to democracy, alters capitalism and eventually drained life out of socialism and now enhancing and creating people’s democracy across the world and therefore a game changer for development.
*Being the answer to a question on a World Bank Sponsored on-line Course on Citizen Engagement. He can be engaged on Twitter @wahidSaka
Comments
Post a Comment