I am studying participatory development as it is implemented in slum upgrading initiatives by UN Habitat. The popular discourse within the international community focuses on bottom-up development—led by local leaders and direct input by community members. I specifically looked into the Participatory Slum Upgrading Program (PSUP) which launched in 2008 and has since been implemented by 35 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean, and Pacific Islands. Among the program’s key principles, as detailed on UN Habitat’s website, are to “empower and build partnership (community, governments, private sector),” “create and enforce enabling environment,” and “promote people-centered participatory approach.[1]” The language used by the United Nations do address slum upgrading programs illustrates a plan that places power in local governments and is addresses of socio-economic factors that lead to urban poverty. This message was reiterated in a 2012 documentary released by UN Habitat regarding the success of the program in Fiji, Ghana and Haiti[2].
Though participation is deemed important in the implementation stage, the decision-making process is relatively devoid of input from slum dwellers themselves. This is evident from the New Urban Agenda, a resolution passed during the Habitat III Conference in Quito Ecuador, as it pushes for “smart cities”[3]—the antithesis of informal settlements. The initiatives summarized here clearly support replacing urban slums to “ensure sustainable and inclusive urban economies.” Here, the language shifts from people-centric bottom-up development to strategic top-down development focusing on economic growth.
[1] “Participatory Slum Upgrading Programme (PSUP),” UN Habitat, accessed November 10, 2018, https://unhabitat.org/urban-initiatives/initiatives-programmes/participatory-slum-upgrading/.
[2] Participatory Slum Upgrading Programme Documentary, Nonprofits & Activism (UN Habitat, 2012), accessed November 11, 2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KO_zxTeT87o.
[3] “New Urban Agenda” (United Nations, n.d.), accessed November 10, 2018, www.habitat3.org. 19
Notes
Participatory Slum Upgrading Programme Documentary, Nonprofits & Activism (UN Habitat, 2012), accessed November 11, 2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KO_zxTeT87o.
“Participatory Slum Upgrading Programme (PSUP),” UN Habitat, accessed November 10, 2018, https://unhabitat.org/urban-initiatives/initiatives-programmes/participatory-slum-upgrading/.
“New Urban Agenda” (United Nations, n.d.), accessed November 10, 2018, www.habitat3.org.
Naila,
The information you have presented shows that you have a relatively good grasp on what you want to focus. I am curious to understand what you really want to focus on in the language. It seems like in the first part that you want to examine the language used to include community leaders in programs in the first paragraph. Then in the second, you talk about how it switches in the decision-making process to become more top-down approach compare to the previous section. What are you looking to understand throughout the research process with abductive reasoning?
Naila — the documents that you discuss here are excellent potential sources for this methodology. As Griffin points out, though, you have a something of two different puzzles/questions in your post, so you might work on making the precise puzzle about meaning more clear. Who/what is being given meaning or “brought into being” through the discourses? (Just as lone mothers are constructed as, or brought into being as, immoral individuals in the discourses that Carabine analyzes). Remember to use the 3-part formulation from Booth et al. to specify the puzzle as the middle part of that formulation (“because I want to explain how/why…?”) should point directly to the discourses you have found and propose to analyze. Keep reading and researching and you should be in good shape!