Table 2 Potential harms of participation
From: Bringing stakeholders together for urban health equity: hallmarks of a compromised process
Cluster A: Delegated control | Cluster B: Demobilization |
o Behaviour of grassroots stakeholders shaped by process, thereby containing dissent (e.g. grassroots stakeholders positioned to act as ‘gatekeepers’ rather than as community representatives; meeting norms discourage certain types of input; paperwork/reporting begins to shape thinking) [5, 19, 22]. o Energy of grassroots groups occupied by process, thereby containing dissent. o Process embeds and transmits logic of status quo (e.g. neoliberalism, colonialism, structural racism and misogyny, etc.). | o Participants experience frustration and/or burn-out. [23, 25, 26]. o Participants lose faith in participatory processes/participation [22]. o Community leaders who have championed process lose credibility [23]. o Energy of grassroots groups sapped by process, thereby diminishing capacity. o Participants/groups face sanctions for resisting process as defined (see below). |
Cluster C: Contraction of state role in public service delivery/regulation | Cluster D: Sanctions |
o Success of project relies on free labour of participants. o Project fails to address and/or distracts from broader, systemic processes due to focus on ‘micropolitics’ [5, 21]. | The broader literature emphasizes that participants resisting or building alternatives to official processes can, in some contexts, face sanctions ranging from loss of paid work [19] to imprisonment and violence [27]. |