Planning from Below. Marta Harnecker

      22. In this book, we will take as our starting point the fact that we want to build a society that is radically democratic, solidarity-based and respectful of nature. This will be a society consciously built by the people, where the people, and not an elite, decide how they want to live and how to share the social wealth produced within that society so that everyone can live a full and meaningful life (Sumak Kawsay⁴). Such a life will be based on equity, solidarity, efficiency and efficacy. To accomplish these several goals, we have to create spaces and methods that allow us to achieve these objectives.

      23. We need geographic spaces where people have the opportunity to become informed, state their positions and make decisions (community level, workplace, schools, universities, interest groups).

      24. We also need methods that can facilitate the greatest possible participation of the people, where they become informed, discuss and vote, where their decisions become a reality. With properly defined units and appropriate methods, they can actively participate in the construction of that more just and solidarity-based society we all want to live in. We believe that the best method for achieving these objectives is locally based participatory planning.

2) WHAT WE MEAN BY PLANNING

      25. Before turning to the issue of participatory planning, we would first like to explain what we mean by planning.⁵

      26. One can govern in a good or bad manner. Sometimes we are not sufficiently clear about the goals we want to reach or we base them on an incorrect reading of the reality we are trying to change, and therefore make mistakes that drag us away, rather than bring us closer to those goals. It is also possible that, even having clearly set out our intentions and correctly chosen our actions, we underestimate the resources we need to carry them out or are not capable of visualizing sufficiently in advance certain obstacles that could prevent us from reaching our goals.

      27. What distinguishes a good government from one that isn’t good? Why do some achieve their aims while others get shipwrecked along the way?

      28. A good government does not improvise; instead it reflects before moving into action and makes decisions based on appropriate information that allows it to achieve the results it is looking for.

      29. Decisions based on concrete facts, something that should accompany all government actions, are part of what we understand planning to be.

      30. Planning therefore requires thinking before moving into action. The opposite of planning is improvisation; that is, making decisions without thinking about or having prior knowledge of the possible consequences of our intentions. Of course everyone in government has to plan to some extent given that, in one way or another, they have to think before moving into action. Sometimes however, they think things through so little or base their thoughts on such flimsy information, that their actions come across as if they were improvising.

      31. This process covers different elements that are closely linked to the tasks that any government must carry out. The planning process includes:

      ■ have a goal to strive towards;

      ■ closely study the reality you are seeking to change;

      ■ clearly define the sought after changes;

      ■ explore the different actions that could be taken to achieve these changes, and the material, human and financial costs required to implement them;

      ■ select the most efficient and viable actions;

      ■ carry out the selected actions; and

      ■ evaluate the final results in order to make any necessary adjustments.

      32. A society may decide to plan its development because it believes that in order to achieve the objectives it has set out, this process cannot be left to chance or to the whims of the market. Conscious collective actions are required to overcome injustices and redesign economic policies and practices so as to improve people’s wellbeing.

      33. Achieving these objectives in their totality takes years and involves actions that go beyond simply improving services and public infrastructure, as important as these are. Development requires actions that will impact on society as a whole: eliminating or reducing inequality; creating jobs; using available resources in a sustainable manner that protects the environment; developing cooperatives and other initiatives that go in the direction of eliminating exploitation; and reducing dependency on foreign markets, among others.

      34. Lastly, we should not forget that development occurs in a defined geographical area that has particular characteristics: watersheds, mountains, coastlines, rivers and lakes, land that is more or less fertile, tourist regions, land that is suitable for building houses, high-risk zones, urban areas, etc. Every area will also go through a particular process of demographic change that, in one way or another, is inter-related to what happens in neighboring communities and in the country as a whole. That is why it is also important to take demographic information into account.

3) TOWARD DECENTRALIZED PARTICIPATORY PLANNING

      35. Now, there is no single formula for planning. It can be carried out behind closed doors by a technical team or involve different levels of people’s participation, from a simple consultation to direct involvement in decision making.

      36. The type of planning we advocate is the antithesis of the centralized planning implemented in the former Soviet Union. There it was thought that to coordinate all efforts towards building a new society, a central authority had to decide objectives and means. It was a process in which decisions were always made from above, on many occasions without taking into consideration the fact that down below was where people best understood their problems and possible solutions.

      37. On the other hand, processes that claim to be participatory budget processes often limited themselves to being processes of consultation only. Rather than promoting a process of decision making by citizens, those in power restricted participation to only consulting them in regards to public works and services that need to be implemented. A willingness to listen to people represents a step forward, but it is very limited. In such cases people in local areas are called upon to participate in working groups where they are asked to point out their main priorities for public works and services for their respective communities. A technical team collects these priorities. Here it is the technicians and not the people who then decide which projects to implement.⁶.

a) The need for planning to be participatory

      38. We advocate a more empowered participation process, in which the people genuinely discuss and decide their priorities, as much as possible design their own projects and implement them if they are capable of doing so without having to depend on higher levels (although the door is always left open to ask for specialized technical assistance if required).

      39. If the project is too big, or is technically very complex, or its impact will affect a more extensive area, then the capacity to execute it should be assumed by a higher up level. We are therefore talking about a planning process that seeks to involve the citizenry in as many aspects of the process of planning as possible; that is why we call it participatory planning.

b) The need for planning to be decentralized

      40. If the state decides everything, there is no room for local initiatives. Therefore, in order to ensure the full participation of people, we must take the plans of small localities as our starting point – where the potential of people’s participation is greatest – and apply the principle that everything that can be done at a lower level should be decentralized to that level. Only those tasks that cannot be carried out at the lower levels should be assigned to the higher levels of administration and technical proficiency. This approach is referred to in much of the development literature as the “principle of subsidiarity.” In addition to providing a logic for decentralization, this principle allows for a back-and-forth planning process as the different levels communicate their needs and their competencies (responsibilities) to each other. We describe this principle