IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jodeso/v30y2014i3p273-295.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ownership and Participation

Author

Listed:
  • Adrian Flint

    (University of Bristol, United Kingdom)

  • Christian Meyer zu Natrup

    (MzN International Development Experts)

Abstract

This article makes the case for a development paradigm shaped and determined by the people affected directly by aid and assistance programs: in essence, it is a call for beneficiary-led aid (BLA). Over the past two decades, input from beneficiaries has become increasingly important in the design of development programs. At the same time, the donor model remains one that is top-down, agenda driven, and expert led. Similarly, the use of information and communications technology (ICT) by donors in the interests of facilitating closer engagement with beneficiaries has been ongoing for over a decade. However, while the ICT4D (ICT for development) model has generated a great deal of enthusiasm within the donor community, the approach has yet to generate a discernible paradigm shift where the provision of aid and assistance is concerned. Taking inspiration from initiatives both within and outwith the field of development, we explore the extent to which ICT can indeed offer a route through which to revolutionize the meaning of “participation†in an aid context, for beneficiaries, donors, and development experts alike.

Suggested Citation

  • Adrian Flint & Christian Meyer zu Natrup, 2014. "Ownership and Participation," Journal of Developing Societies, , vol. 30(3), pages 273-295, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jodeso:v:30:y:2014:i:3:p:273-295
    DOI: 10.1177/0169796X14536972
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0169796X14536972
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0169796X14536972?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cornia, Giovanni Andrea & Jolly, Richard & Stewart, Frances (ed.), 1987. "Adjustment with a Human Face: Volume 1, Protecting the Vulnerable and Promoting Growth," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198286097.
    2. Richard P. Larrick & Jack B. Soll, 2006. "Erratum--Intuitions About Combining Opinions: Misappreciation of the Averaging Principle," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 309-310, February.
    3. Richard P. Larrick & Jack B. Soll, 2006. "Intuitions About Combining Opinions: Misappreciation of the Averaging Principle," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(1), pages 111-127, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Armstrong, J. Scott & Green, Kesten C. & Graefe, Andreas, 2015. "Golden rule of forecasting: Be conservative," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1717-1731.
    2. Atanasov, Pavel & Witkowski, Jens & Ungar, Lyle & Mellers, Barbara & Tetlock, Philip, 2020. "Small steps to accuracy: Incremental belief updaters are better forecasters," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 19-35.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:4:p:395-411 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Gino, Francesca, 2008. "Do we listen to advice just because we paid for it? The impact of advice cost on its use," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 234-245, November.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:2:p:91-105 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Phanish Puranam, 2021. "Human–AI collaborative decision-making as an organization design problem," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 10(2), pages 75-80, June.
    7. Patrick Afflerbach & Christopher Dun & Henner Gimpel & Dominik Parak & Johannes Seyfried, 2021. "A Simulation-Based Approach to Understanding the Wisdom of Crowds Phenomenon in Aggregating Expert Judgment," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 63(4), pages 329-348, August.
    8. Alison Wood Brooks & Francesca Gino & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2015. "Smart People Ask for (My) Advice: Seeking Advice Boosts Perceptions of Competence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1421-1435, June.
    9. Mirko Kremer & Enno Siemsen & Douglas J. Thomas, 2016. "The Sum and Its Parts: Judgmental Hierarchical Forecasting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(9), pages 2745-2764, September.
    10. Julia A. Minson & Jennifer S. Mueller & Richard P. Larrick, 2018. "The Contingent Wisdom of Dyads: When Discussion Enhances vs. Undermines the Accuracy of Collaborative Judgments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(9), pages 4177-4192, September.
    11. Ilan Yaniv & Shoham Choshen-Hillel, 2012. "When guessing what another person would say is better than giving your own opinion: Using perspective-taking to improve advice-taking," Discussion Paper Series dp622, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    12. Schlag, Karl H. & Zapechelnyuk, Andriy, 2017. "Dynamic benchmark targeting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 145-169.
    13. Wang, Xiaoqian & Hyndman, Rob J. & Li, Feng & Kang, Yanfei, 2023. "Forecast combinations: An over 50-year review," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 1518-1547.
    14. Graefe, Andreas, 2023. "Embrace the differences: Revisiting the PollyVote method of combining forecasts for U.S. presidential elections (2004 to 2020)," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 170-177.
    15. Irene Scopelliti & Carey K. Morewedge & Erin McCormick & H. Lauren Min & Sophie Lebrecht & Karim S. Kassam, 2015. "Bias Blind Spot: Structure, Measurement, and Consequences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(10), pages 2468-2486, October.
    16. Johannes Müller-Trede & Shoham Choshen-Hillel & Meir Barneron & Ilan Yaniv, 2018. "The Wisdom of Crowds in Matters of Taste," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 1779-1803, April.
    17. Healey, Mark P. & Bleda, Mercedes & Querbes, Adrien, 2021. "Opportunity evaluation in teams: A social cognitive model," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(4).
    18. Yael Grushka-Cockayne & Kenneth C. Lichtendahl Jr. & Victor Richmond R. Jose & Robert L. Winkler, 2017. "Quantile Evaluation, Sensitivity to Bracketing, and Sharing Business Payoffs," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 712-728, June.
    19. Graefe, Andreas & Armstrong, J. Scott & Jones, Randall J. & Cuzán, Alfred G., 2014. "Combining forecasts: An application to elections," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 43-54.
    20. Kausel, Edgar E. & Culbertson, Satoris S. & Leiva, Pedro I. & Slaughter, Jerel E. & Jackson, Alexander T., 2015. "Too arrogant for their own good? Why and when narcissists dismiss advice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 33-50.
    21. Albert E. Mannes, 2009. "Are We Wise About the Wisdom of Crowds? The Use of Group Judgments in Belief Revision," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(8), pages 1267-1279, August.
    22. Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang, 2024. "Group efficiency and individual fairness tradeoff in making wise decisions," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jodeso:v:30:y:2014:i:3:p:273-295. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.