Demystifying beneficiary participation and its effects in international development
Document
Description
Beneficiary participation has become popular in international development generally, and it is an essential feature of sustainable development. But there are diverse definitions of and motivations for using beneficiary participation, and empirical literature on its effects is underdeveloped. This dissertation aims to clarify what beneficiary participation is and whether there is empirical support for claims about its benefits.
I review historical trends in international development that led to the popularity of both sustainable development and beneficiary participation. This review identifies central themes in defining beneficiary participation and motivations for using it.
I also developed a new typology of beneficiary participation based on a literature review of how scholars define beneficiary participation. I found that the main dimensions of beneficiary participation are (1) participants, (2) channels, (3) types of inputs, (4) timing, and (5) goals. By making these dimensions explicit, this work helps researchers and development practitioners more clearly describe the types of beneficiary participation they study, employ, and advocate for.
To contribute to empirical literature about beneficiary participation, I conducted a case-study of two urban development projects in Bhopal, India. I collected data with a structured survey of project beneficiaries in four slums (two slums from each project) and semi-structured interviews with each project's organizers. And project documents provided secondary data on both projects. The results indicate that local elites did not capture a disproportionate share of either project's benefits, at least with respect to individual household toilets. Because project organizers rather than beneficiaries selected households that would receive toilets, both cases serve as counterexamples to the claim that beneficiaries must intensely participate for projects' benefits to be distributed equitably.
Finally, I review academic literature for empirical evidence that supports claims about the advantages of beneficiary participation. There is relatively strong empirical support for the claim that beneficiary participation improves project outcomes, but empirical support for most other claims (i.e., that it helps make projects more efficient, distribute benefits equitably, and sustain project benefits) is weak. And empirical research suggests that one claimed benefit, empowerment, rarely materializes. In general, more empirical research about beneficiary participation is needed.
I review historical trends in international development that led to the popularity of both sustainable development and beneficiary participation. This review identifies central themes in defining beneficiary participation and motivations for using it.
I also developed a new typology of beneficiary participation based on a literature review of how scholars define beneficiary participation. I found that the main dimensions of beneficiary participation are (1) participants, (2) channels, (3) types of inputs, (4) timing, and (5) goals. By making these dimensions explicit, this work helps researchers and development practitioners more clearly describe the types of beneficiary participation they study, employ, and advocate for.
To contribute to empirical literature about beneficiary participation, I conducted a case-study of two urban development projects in Bhopal, India. I collected data with a structured survey of project beneficiaries in four slums (two slums from each project) and semi-structured interviews with each project's organizers. And project documents provided secondary data on both projects. The results indicate that local elites did not capture a disproportionate share of either project's benefits, at least with respect to individual household toilets. Because project organizers rather than beneficiaries selected households that would receive toilets, both cases serve as counterexamples to the claim that beneficiaries must intensely participate for projects' benefits to be distributed equitably.
Finally, I review academic literature for empirical evidence that supports claims about the advantages of beneficiary participation. There is relatively strong empirical support for the claim that beneficiary participation improves project outcomes, but empirical support for most other claims (i.e., that it helps make projects more efficient, distribute benefits equitably, and sustain project benefits) is weak. And empirical research suggests that one claimed benefit, empowerment, rarely materializes. In general, more empirical research about beneficiary participation is needed.