Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hoddinott, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow I38 - Government Policy; Provision and Effects of [...]
Right arrow O15 - Human Resources; Human Development; [...]
Right arrow Z13 - Social Norms and Social Capital; Social Networks
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

J Af Eco 2002; 11:146-168
© 2002 Centre for the Study of African Economies


Article

Participation and Poverty Reduction: An Analytical Framework and Overview of the Issues

John Hoddinott

Dalhousie University

Abstract

This paper examines the relationship between community participation and the efficacy of interventions designed to reduce poverty. It outlines a simple model that identifies three actors involved in the provision of antipoverty interventions: financiers, providers and beneficiaries. This model is used to illustrate what happens when the poor move from being passive beneficiaries to being the providers of these interventions. Beneficiary participation has the potential to lower the cost of providing these interventions. It can ensure that they more closely reflect the preferences of the population that they are designed to serve. However, this benefit is contingent on the ability of communities to engage in collective actions. In fractionalised communities, or where trust and/or social capital are weak, there is a risk that community participation may result in the capture of benefits by local elites, to the detriment of the poor. Further, we argue that the failure to delegate true decision-making authority (allowing for de jure but not de facto participation), may result in beneficiaries being reluctant to act because of concerns that they will be subsequently overruled.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.