| Why are some groups able to act collectively while others fail? Drawing on responses of diverse groups of people in Zambia, to the work of a development project called the Micro-projects Unit that is jointly funded by the World Bank and European Union, this study principally contends that the pattern of people's responses to the organization's social interventions has been determined not simply by considerations of need, but also by an institutional logic. This institutional logic is principally founded on socio-political relations and notions of political community but is more importantly consolidated by authority structures. One of its crucial features is that it mediates local politics and accordingly influences collective action. Thus, this study examines current efforts to engage citizens in the provision of public goods, using participatory approaches, in an institutional perspective. In particular, this study challenges the technical approach to empowerment that has elevated participatory approaches into something of a theory of social action yet without accounting for politics at the group level. The state in this approach is postulated as omnipotent while poor citizens are characterized as powerless. This dichotomous and one-sided analysis of power in approaches to empowerment is challenged by closely examining power relations in local collective initiatives. A principal finding from this study of three urban and six rural social projects is that collective initiatives are political expressions of group cohesion rather than are simply a sociable thing to do. Accordingly, this study proposes that we move from the current attention that is given to social capital building and focus instead on building 'political capital' at the local level. The notion of building 'political capital' is in turn about creating conditions that not only encourage group action in local initiatives but also creates the conditions for citizens to actively participate in political processes at a higher level. However, while this study pushes the theoretical boundaries on participatory approaches and frames the broader challenges of public sector reform, it only provides a small glimpse into the very complex socio-political and institutional logic behind collective action. |
