Tag Archives: participation

In Celebration of International Women’s Day

iwd_square

Women comprise the majority of world’s population, are heads of households, have outpaced their male peers in educational attainment and contribute to the social and economic wellbeing of their families, communities, and countries.

Yet, for all of these advances, women in leadership position are still a minority. According to the latest estimates, women comprise just 20.2 percent of corporate board members of Fortune 500 companies, representing a slight increase over previous years. And just 4.8 percent of Fortune 500 companies are headed by female CEOs. In terms of political leadership, the United Nations estimates that women hold just 22 percent of parliament seats globally. Currently, there are 10 female heads of state and 14 heads of government among the 195 UN member states. Finally, women hold only 17 percent of posts globally at the ministerial level, mainly in the education and health sectors.

Much has been written about how women could overcome the myriad of obstacles that stand in their way to personal and professional success. Whether it’s to take a seat at the table, find a mentor, or a sponsor and lean-in, these techniques fall short of naming the real reason women are shut out of professional opportunities in many societies.

The simple answer is that women must work within the confines of rules and regulations that were institutionalized without their input. When women have agency in their personal and professional lives, they have the ability to change norms, rules and regulations and to fully participate in decision-making processes in the government, public and private sectors.

Inclusive and participatory decision-making is at the heart of democratic governance and yields better social, political and economic outcomes. Economic empowerment is one of the most important means of attaining global gender parity and should be a central point of discussion. When women become breadwinners, they have real decision-making power within their families and communities. Women’s entrepreneurship and participation in the workforce are avenues for their political participation and ability to influence how rules are made and laws passed.

Read More…

Citizen security begins at the local level

An IRI-supported discussion on local security. (Photo: IRI)

Dan Fisk is Vice President for Policy and Strategic Planning for the International Republican Institute.

Every day there are tragic killings in Juarez, Caracas, San Salvador, and Rio, as well as any number of other cities throughout the Western Hemisphere. Security, along with jobs, consistently remains as the top concern for many throughout this hemisphere. It is, therefore, appropriate that the Organization of American States (OAS) has made “citizen security” the focus of its General Assembly, to begin on June 5, 2011, in El Salvador.

That citizen security is receiving attention is good news. The far more relevant question, however, relates to the extent to which citizens will be involved in addressing this challenge. Too often at diplomatic conclaves, security becomes an intellectual exercise cloaked in a nomenclature of bureaucratic jargon between policymakers. What often gets lost in the mix are the communities and the individuals who live, work, and raise families in them.

In the final analysis, all insecurity is local. No criminal or criminal organization simply springs to life as “international” or “transnational.” They all start as local actors or entities. But while crime may start as something local, it can reach a point where it overwhelms a community, and all the more quickly where institutions are weak, corruption is rife, and citizens do not have confidence in the authorities.

When criminal actors overwhelm a sub-regional unit of government, this causes the problem to become a national concern. This sequence has been repeated throughout the hemisphere, including in the United States. In fact, it is a worldwide phenomenon. And in many countries it is facilitated by the heavily centralized nature of authorities and resources, including law enforcement.

Once it becomes a national issue requiring a national entity to respond, the result is generally national in vision, scope, and measures of performance. Regardless of how well-intentioned the design and implementation of any national response, somewhere the notion of a community often gets lost. Instead, a locale becomes an “operational zone” and the citizens become statistics; personal tragedies are reduced to a mark on a map with tiny flag pins, or their electronic equivalent, in some faceless command center.

As officials discuss citizen security, the focus should not simply be on what governments can do to make their citizens feel safe, but equally on what citizens can do to make their specific communities a safer and more secure environment and on what governments and citizens can do together to identify threats and implement solutions that address them.

The place to start in formulating a response is to determine what average citizens think. From an abundance of polling data, we know there is a generalized lack of confidence in police. This is the case throughout Latin America and for police at every level. In many instances this lack of confidence is connected to the level of corruption perceived by citizens. It is also generated by actual experience with the police, namely the failure of police to respond when called upon to help or a belief that a citizen’s complaint will only result in retribution against them by the very criminals from whom they seek protection.

Despite this lack of confidence, citizens identify “more police” as essential to reducing crime and increasing security. Citizens also identify “more jobs” and “more opportunities for youth” as equally fundamental to reducing crime. Furthermore, citizens express an interest in participating more actively in the decision-making process to address insecurity in their communities. The fact of the matter is that citizens “get it” when it comes to security.

Ironically, experience has shown that citizen interest in active participation can be news to government officials. For example, while an official may understand the threat that youth gangs pose, he/she may not be aware of other issues contributing to citizen insecurity, including things like the lack of street lighting or the absence of community watch groups. Filling such gaps should be part of the programmatic “citizen security” response.

For example, in Mexico, the International Republican Institute (IRI) works to bring local residents and civil society organizations together with the mayors’ offices and police officials to analyze and develop solutions to local safety concerns. As a result of these interactions, community alarm systems, whistle-carrying neighborhood watch groups, anti-graffiti campaigns, and improved relations between local police and residents are helping to reduce robberies and other local crimes.

In Venezuela, exchanges between the Caracas Metropolitan Mayor’s office and citizens has resulted in the implementation of local solutions and the emergence of a sense of “shared responsibilities” between citizens and their city government. Recreational areas once considered dangerous due to poor maintenance or inadequate lighting have been revitalized, with citizens now using these spaces and taking steps to deter criminal activities from occurring in them.

Other examples can be found in Colombia, where polling data has helped officials design and implement initiatives to create safer neighborhoods. In the Bogota suburb of Soacha, the mayor and his staff successfully obtained funding from the central government for 200 more police officers for sectors of the city that were in particular need of additional patrols. This need was identified through polling. Citizens also expressed the need for improved street lighting in their neighborhoods to reduce the incidence of crime. Consequently, the mayor implemented a low-cost street lighting initiative, which simply required the replacement of burned-out bulbs in already existing street lamps. This simple step has contributed to a deterrence of criminal activity.

The Cartagena municipal government has begun a “Pavement Revolution” to pave roads, install street lighting, and construct sidewalks in four of the city’s poorest neighborhoods. IRI has teamed up with the Presidential Program to Fight Corruption and citizens from these four neighborhoods to create citizen oversight committees to ensure the completion of these infrastructure projects within the timeline, budget and standards laid out in the contracts. It is expected that the timely and proper completion of these projects will have a positive impact on citizen security.

While these initiatives may seem simplistic, such common sense responses can result in communities that are less susceptible to criminal infiltration and control. This, however, is not to argue that simply adding more police, or replacing burned-out street light bulbs, paving streets, or creating recreation spaces solves the security problem. There can be no illusions about the difficulty of overcoming the security challenges in many parts of this hemisphere. Many elements need to come together to address public security challenges, including:

  • establishing and/or enhancing the capacity on the ground of a professional law enforcement presence that has public confidence;
  • improving collection and use of information;
  • ensuring the capacity to investigate, detain, prosecute and incarcerate those charged and convicted of crimes; and
  • eroding the opportunities for corruption rather than corruption eroding the public trust.

But community engagement and activism have to be a part of the strategy as well. This is one lesson IRI has learned from its programming experience.

Another lesson is that it is essential to enhance local government capacity to deliver services, including but not limited to security. It is equally important to empower citizens so they can participate in finding solutions to challenges and threats to their community.

While national government-to-national government programs and assistance are important, these often take too long to trickle down to the local level. Addressing citizen insecurity requires more than night vision goggles and helicopters. Success in addressing security challenges is largely influenced by the ability of the state to build citizen trust in its capacity and, in doing so, enhance and strengthen that capacity. Strong and resilient communities constitute a necessary element in building that societal trust and in the ultimate success of any effort to transform public insecurity into public security.

If the June OAS General Assembly can encourage its member states to focus on that reality, then this meeting may contribute something more useful than another declaration on the very real challenge of enhancing citizen security.

Creating Economic Opportunities for Political Participation of Women

Globally, women members of parliament comprise less than 20% of the total – that’s a fact.  Perhaps not surprisingly, they achieve the highest representation in Nordic countries (42%), but when Nordic countries are combined with the rest of Europe the number goes back down to just under 22%.  Also not surprisingly, women have the lowest representation in the Arab states (10%).

There are many ways of interpreting these numbers, but focusing on the numbers alone may be misleading. What is the right rate of representation? Is it 40%? 50%? 60% or more? There is no right answer.

One way of approaching the problem can be changing the number directly (such as through a quota system).  Yes, it can lead to some positive results, like in Rwanda where high representation of women in government has led to the development of many policies that facilitated the engagement of women in the economy.

Read More…

Attitudes Towards Citizenship in Romania

Last week I was invited to make a presentation about participatory democracy in a seminar organized by the Association for the Development of Women Entrepreneurship (ADAF) in Romania. The goal of the seminar was to develop a network of active European citizens, which in my opinion was and is a challenging task. ADAF is part of a European project together with other women business organizations from Belgium, Spain, Italy, Slovenia and Croatia. I care for this association, so I have accepted Cornelia Rotaru’s invitation. Cornelia is ADAF’s President and a very close friend of CIPE.

I promised to talk about participatory democracy to a very mixed audience: trade unions, public officials, police department representatives, prefect office, business associations, NGOs and students. Once I made that promise, however, my enthusiasm started to decline. Romania is a country fed up with presentations, a country in which words lost their meaning, where politicians have done everything in their power so that we lose even the concept of values. How and what can I tell these people that would be meaningful, interesting, and make them think? Why haven’t I stuck to what I know best – talking about how to do things, instead of making presentations?

So I thought a lot about Romania, about who we are and what we want to be. And I have thought about our values and how we want our life to be. I didn’t give answers to the question about what Romanian democracy should look like. It’s not for one person (or even for the politicians) to give such an answer. Rather it should be our joined task to find answers.

So, instead of preparing a presentation, I started to prepare a motivational/mobilizing sort of speech, something that would make the audience think about their own responsibility. I wanted to convey the idea that this is our job, that democracy should stop being for us another imported concept. We have to build our own democracy, based on our values. And it’s our job to determine our values, the values that represent us as a nation.

Read More…