CEU eTD Collection A SSESSING In partial P ARTIC Supervisor: P fulfillment forthed M IPATORY UNICIPALI D OE Central E Department S A P rofessor TIES P AR PROACHES Budapest, Hungary Mirna Skrbi TIC Submitted to IN egree o uropean B IPA V 20 ofPublic OS By alentina

09 TO NIA TION f Mast L

University AND OCAL c M Dimitrova-G Policy er H D o AT ERZEGOVINA f ArtsinPublicPolicy EVELOPMENT TER ? rajzl P LANNING

IN

CEU eTD Collection cases, while policy- in early adequ municipalit three had aninfluence participati approaches the Motivated A these obstacles in theprocessandits all bstract e involvement threecase mphasis ofinternatio BiHmunicipalit ate resourcesforplanning, making cannot on bytheoretical ies indevelopment influence in appearedtohave ontheroadto thecreation s. on Giventhesefindings, ofparticipants local independence in beas ies reg - debate development Petrovo, nal sessed positively projects, oflocal ards toinstitutio donors m de s andens ore effective in on fined Ma theprocess, isdoubtful. development theeffectivenessofparticipatio this in policy- thestudypoints glaj, Bo thetaskofparticipatory ured structureddecision-making, thesishastriedto andVisoko. snia fro nali participation m andHerzegovina m animplementation zation F a aking, strate dequate representation urthermore, participants’ ofparticipation throughin- Findingsaremixed:while towardsso gies m a ha ay beovercome. sses s been planni (BiH) s whether depth cases me prescriptions n m point in appearstobelacking onparticipatory ng eaningful development ofallstakeholders well, tr citizen influence ofview ansparency,

provided tudies of andhas

all intwo ofhow on

and

and

ii

CEU eTD Collection

6. Findingsand 5. Methodolog 4. Anal 3. Participa 2. ALiteratur 1. Introduction: List Table Abstract T Annex: References 7. Conclusion a

6.3. Participa 6.2. Meaningfulness 6.1. Municipal 5.2. Sampl 5.1. Research 3.2. Participa 3.1. The 2.2. DoesParticipat 2.1. Defining ble of ofAbbreviations

6.3.3. Institutiona 6.3.2. Impl 6.3.1. Intensit 6.2.7. Earl 6.2.6. Transparenc 6.2.5. Independence 6.2.4. Representation 6.2.3. Structured 6.2.2. Resource 6.2.1. Task 6.1.3 Visoko 6.1.2 Maglaj 6.1.1 Petrovo ofContents yt ListofInterviewees ...... ic Legal al

tion ...... Co Framework e e

...... y Review ...... in y A Doe tion’s tion Participat ...... em DesignandTechniques D Involve ntents Framework Profiles ...... Bo ...... nal ...... efinition y en in ofInfluence s Participa Acces ys snia ...... tat Impac Decision- ion Developmen liz ofParticipation onParticipation is y ion ...... ment

ation

andHerzegovina Work?

...... ion ...... sibili (in t onPolic

and ...... tion alphabetica Making t onthe ...... y thePractice

MatterforDevelop ...... t Planning y ...... Making inDevelopm Strategic

......

l order) ...... inBosniaand ofParticipation ...... Documen ...... ent ment?

...... t ...... Herzegovina ......

......

23 23 19 14 11 11 55 46 44 41 36 36 36 36 35 35 30 30 29 29 29 28 27 26 26 26 23 iii iii

iv

ii

6 4 4 1 CEU eTD Collection NGO MD MDPC MDP MC MA -M LC -Loc LEAP LAG KM – ILDP GAP FOIA FBiH EUR -Eu EDA CSO CCI – BiH ALDI List of WG UNDP UN – ToR SWOT RS RMAP -R REC -R RB PG - PADCO -Planningand OSF OSCE OHR - - T -M

-

BiH -Open - - WorkingG Republik – T

Rights-

– Ci Partne

- Gov - Municipal Council – Enterprise

Bosnia - – F -

United N - – Non-governmental Konvertibilna

– F Centri - AgencyFor -

– Org

Local Center Of – St

- – United Integrated unicipal Local Envi egional erms

al Community Municipal ederation o vil unicipal reedom ro fice ights- Ab rengths, ernment AccountabilityP rship

based Society anization Action civilnih and H a S of of fo

ations

br based m Environmental C Assembly rpska Ref G r M Society Nations the roups

of De Local D De ronmental Action eviatio

roup Dev erzegovina G Weaknesses, Opportunities,T Organization erence

Local

anagement, D f Bosnia

ma Access High R velopment inicijativa (C velopment f roup or elopment rka unicipal Dev Foundation

De Secu Development evelopment Pl (Conve

organization epresentative to In elopment velopment and ns rity and

Te

assessment Agency formation Act

entre enters o Herz Planning evelopment and rtible am

Bosnia roject Plan

Collaborative egovina Cooperation inEu

Progr

Initiatives mar anning f Civil Co and planning and H k) am mmittee Initiatives) hreats erzegovina Planning International

rope project iv CEU eTD Collection without have In Coehlo participati policy effective common belief practice Citize 1. Intr makes participation This reality gap between 2005, administration’s (Cornwall 2004, empowerment andtransfor thepast, invites beencriticized 547) 3).Recently, n andeq thatpoorer participatio 2007, su . While bothin o andCoehlo on , ductio fficient andthu differentprescriptions participatory newtechnical arerooted uity, 4-5). distinct thatparticipatory paradigmof“newgovernance” term it evidence andm duetoa“confluenceofdevelopment n s appearstohave isnotalwaysclearwhen work.. , n: DoesP mostlybecausethey“ hasbecomeabuzz-wordin s ofcomm 2007, development inempirical approachesimplementedby arginalized

andlegal thatparticipatory mative 4),participatio unication foranot ar development bydifferentauthors,albeit g evidence m becomem andde tici roups areexcluded(Cornwall eans devisedto pation Matterf only betweencitizens managed to‘tyrannize’ n mocratization normativeass hasbecomee approacheswereliving asopposed g ore institutio form enerate new contemporarydevelopment ( Blomgren Bingham,O’LearyandN international arginal institutional anddemocratization topolitica a umptions mbedded andgovernmentspublic gendas havecometosharea for nali peoples” no or Dev zed; ms ofcitizenshi de development ize development andCoehlo l finite however, inpublic aboutthebenefits uptothepromiseof talk participati (Hickey (Cornwall elopme ones,on st agendas

there andMohan 2007, debates udy and p, on a butare gencies what andthe and isstill nt? 3). abatchi ” of

a

1

CEU eTD Collection organizations meaningful manner,or This effective This relevance has shown outcome ofcitizen committees est which mechanisms, mo foster participatio In 1 participati participati The second development have policy good BosniaandHerzegovina h pl Further ealth, socialprotection,c thesisseekstoanswertwoq invites ans conductedanin-depth im , participati andhass orbroader,multi-sectoralplans thatincludeoth age andpitch orm andacceptancebythe ref on on. thatr theque chapterofthethesis practices erences tolocald strategybyinvolv Inthe whenit eaningful. ablished uch ates ofnominal on st ofwhich n eng in basbeen stion thirdchapter, policy co development projects? will isitjustawindow- agement in forthepurposeofdraftinglocal mes toparticipati whether ulture, sports, betackled. consequently evelopment strategiesinthete ( c have fo BiH), ase studyofthreem F ing stered is local participatio urthermore, hasparticipation is uestions: notexistedin participation theseprojectsis thelegal internatio awider a projects, et literature governmentsappear In c. throughso

thefourth,fifth, beenimplemented?Toanswertheseque on Iscitizen g dre f n roup ramework forparticipatio encouragingavarietyofparticipatory in nal in ssing review in local previous

er thecreation aid ofs local sectors unicipal a yettobedetermined. a -called participation ctivity development xt gencies takeholders ofthetheoretical c development oncern bothloc rel development legalarrange andsixthchapters, ities partnership s weak(UN e evant toloc mployed havedevotedlargeeffortsto ofstr inBiH influenced in takingplace planning ategies arehigh, thecreation planning al deve byinternatio al economi thathaveadopteda strate groupsorplanning ments. n DP RMAP2005). debatess in While local BiHand lopment, suchas tobuild gies Onew Iprovide istruly in c deve development one 1 phase. a . urrounding The

nal their

stions,

s lopment up ay in

urvey

a

I

2

CEU eTD Collection and analysis. insight into the

an alytical f ramework andmethodology ofm y research,aswell a s findings

3 CEU eTD Collection public resulted fromade “more robustviewsofrights an extension reform (MohanandStokke which development seen asincreasingly donors In 2.1. 2. ALiter 3 2 organizations participati Gaventa presents“deepening and Mohan Moreover, governance, 12) thepasttwodecades,participatory

w Mohan trac De . Since This Ho

as Defini velopment” c shifted oftene policy, wever, theid anddevelopment lit erature the on. participati 2004, which xercised asame ofrepresentative e theide ng studies,participati In“civil andto (CSOs)in e 1990s, atur mphasis fromm re Participation lass, ea ofparticipationisnotnewto c view islooselyb 8). sire implies ineffective e R as Springsemester,CE m the“de on ofparticip toraiselegitimacy societydemocracy”donorshaverecognized eet social is providing eview a nolonger ans new gencies 2000, mocracy debate”hasshiftedconcern ofcontroloverloc andre de democracythroughparticipatory (Cooke ation ased arket deregulation on exchanges between move mocracy” on 248)

a checks becameapartofneo-liberal onth i sponsib fter externally- n developm seena P

U 2009. research andplanning ments’ . andKothari Themovetowardsa e finalpaperIsubmitted ar bythestate,toreconsider andbalancesongovernments, a ticipatio s anduty,butratheraright il s anumbrella ities al populations(Hicke lassic de ent mands forgre tothe1 ofdemocraticcitizensh d tosocial imposed, expert-oriented emocratic theory(Ga s 2001, tates, ma n in 940s forfo 5) development a 3 m forthe“Institutions nd colonia Dev . Atrend “deepening” ofdemocracy– rkets andsociety ater power ethods have y andMohan2004,6). development mechanism ur approaches f the therole rom governmentto elopment venta 2006,1 l times, a ofcitizens roleofcivi ssociated with andinstitutiona ip” andhavebuilt

( Gaventa 2006, beenapplied ofknow-how w methodswere s rooted –has, discourse, here particip a to (ibid). nd 2). Hicke

2

(Hickey l

society inter in

radical

alia

up y and ation by l

in

,

4

CEU eTD Collection distincti institutio the A “participatory” Therefore, 19). as onthe alia and quality policy- “P their Cooke T “strong” implies according Some where consultation, serves asa he ccording articipatory a , on Gaventae purposeofparticipation capacity, genda-s differentiatebetween anexchangeofinformation andKothari, making (ibid, bottom on ns countervailing toMichener, passive toRoweandFrewer,participation between thisliterature inparticipati responsible etting, whereparticipants inaddition de mphasizes and“deliberative -up participati “partnership mocracy” orgovernance receiverofinformation decision- threetypesofparticipatio 15-16). somes forpolicy “weak”participation ofpower on reviewwill a toa conceptual (ibid, s ee it “ m differstodifferenttheorists trength on, Deliberative ssisting orcedingcontrol” aking, a give pra 17).“Empoweredparticipatory de s abasisforownership development” str betweenthetwo mocracy” literature. notattendto andlevels andpolicy- gmatically information uctures, sothatpublic institutions overlap de implies delivered implies mocracy” isfocusedondeliberatio m n: between oriented ofinfluence public forming activities eans “involv (RoweandF andelectoral

tothesponsors; thatcitizens (Michener e ach sidesistakingplace byaf “consulting indetail, co theapproaches(2006, atsolving or andpractitioners. mmunication, acilitator/spo spacescanbeopened e exertedbyparticipation cited ing mpowerment forlocal rewer 2005, haveasignificant processes(2006, me butwill governance” orinforming”, in oforganizations/ specific andpublic mbers ofthe B rett 2003, where nsor; mo (ibid, 253). problems,aswell According stly public foc participation 254- 20). thepublic 14). Theym addre n’s 5). while role public uses, up(ibid, nature

255).

:

in ss

to inter

in

ake a

,

5

CEU eTD Collection There aremanyproandcounter-ar 2.2. circumstances ha authors su other, Frewer haveputtogetherover The typesofmechanisms tied improved effectiveness ofBank-s empowerment ofthedisadvantaged,buildi stakeholders 4 empowerment, while efficiency, D viabi have throw way toempowerlocal evelopment Bank 2009). of man W participation alsotriedto lity. Does orld rangingfromspecific offthepossibil

Bankl aging publi project with ggest thatasignificant Participation (2001, discoursesa inks visible tosocial s not provide efficiency sociala c resources”, 5). e ity people beendetermined , F man mpowerment in upported thatthesegoalsare,in or the ccount solutions accountability for participation re critici (World ageable techniquesortools suchasciti Work? andcre ability to“me a100mechanisms,so World activities, theoryinstructing zed m guments toparticipation totheoverarching B ate sust ank B anifestations forbeing zen monitoringof development toallow ank, 4 1992, (World cost chanisms arenu ng participation ainable beneficiary f -sharing with 177-178). tocomposite “technical, foref act reachable. merous. Usingdifferent B thatinvolv ofcollective whatm development, ank practice me ofwhich servic concerns fective 2009). capacity,increasing m More project- es, e participationofciti . echanism to ay havethe people While appear participatio p processe Nevertheless,manya articipatory budgetin a recently, reg ction,” mayincorporate m participation servedby dictated imperativesof arding s to any critics s (2005, objective often u havelostits theWorld n so se in participation (ibid, urces, Rowe the zens disg a specific 256). see project, isseena 260). g, etc.(

i of n theprocess uised m to each B

uthors The

ank

World

’s a and

and

s a has s

6

CEU eTD Collection institutio polit participatory that local empowerment, becausethismaynothavebeen goals ofaproject, at windmills” projects transform Wil new engage transform (Cleaver norms, while for (non)engagementmaynotbeunderstood, deviant, existing P specific participatory articipatory liams e ical mpowerment (Kesby2005, ment participatory elites andmaybeexcludedfromtheprocess(Kothari2001, networks,oriented thatseetheir 2001, challengesscholars’ nali power ation atory beyondthe zation development a processesc participatory (ibid, (Hailey 48). renas, or ofinequalities andr is“sy it ofparticipatory Fu 98, shouldnot processes(ibid, adical 2001, problemsmerelyas‘f rthermore, stemic, e throughgroupsandlocal project mphasis in an approachesas c edge(Cleaver alsobeexclusive. 94). aroundcitizen an expectations totalizing inacom t belabeled cyclewith Citizens ake a 2052). development discoursesthroughsocial theoriginal) placethroughlong- 2058). munity andirresistib

thatdo 2001, sume citizens af thatparticipatory participating rights(ibid, ailures’

Theyma ailure andm (2004, 37). itspurpose. . notwanttobecomeengagedares project, Thus,while initiatives fornot Critics within le” ay bebasedin 98). 103). behaving y strengthen comm andar ter byfor theactofparticipation She m polit re point thatexistreg Williams projects Similarly, groups,which participatio sulting a unities gues thatare 148). rgues that“ ming a totheneed ical s rational s andinhib in F a“ tatus andpowerof havetoresultin projects in challenges K morer urthermore, incentives orderto construct” of esby sug ardless ofissue- n ma judgmentsof economic canrecreate -polit forextended itself ited andreshaped adical y be thenotion norm bysocial gests an aretilting icizat oneofthe een

radical actors ion alize a

s

of

7

CEU eTD Collection positio facilitatio power of collect populatio participate democratic approach, different According exclude comm the 155). the interest with order experience While and who Concerni a inevitable engage dvantages theformerhave overcitizens Levesquea tobeheld participation andresourceimbalancesofthesociety, unity ns groupsinparticipatory m approaches hasthelegitimacyto tobeopenly n, ng ive n’s embers ofm –which to or or tosatisfytheneedforadministrative representation, ment literature identit make Coehlo exclusion a techniquesexplicit uthority, accountable, dvocates the up; invites canimply ies toincluding andCornwall, oranapproach whereparticipatory anda debatedr ore informal ofso thesenew theriskofself-selection; placing theissueoflegitimacy gendas takesplace(2007, me ma presenceofinterestgroups aswell andneedtobefurtherresearched(ibid, representation spe spheres ather ly m ak for ane oriented com differentcurrentsin arginalized y be onthebehalf whereapar thandefensively ms oflegitimacyoften mphasis difficultto (Leves munities sp toamplify throughclaimstolegitimacy aces areopen incountering a groupsin que 2008, onparticipatio uthors boundaries in allel isalsodebated.Who ofso overcomein arandomselection thatre 15).In processofmobilizati a e theleastvocal meone sserted” (ibid, mphasize representation 2) participation toanyonewho decision gion , theimplicati ordernot andfor lackdefinite n else (ibid, of“individuals” a practice(Roweetal. therole s indiv (Gaventa 2006, makers’powerto mal institutio 40-44). voices, 25-26). 16). : toreproducethe either thatmirrorsthe should literatureadvocate iduals, ons rulesornormsin s wantsto ofgood

uch asidentity, on ofsize “ adirect Fu anddefiniti allowi beinvited, pointi andnot rthermore, ns,

25-26)? andthu ma

ng 2005, ng better

to y just

on

s 8

CEU eTD Collection thousands ofvillages participati Institutio approaches prevented needs to (Gaventa 2004a, making arenasand“legalconstitutional Recently, by access toinformation, Coehlo comm the However, emphasis on P because ofpolitica 20). articipation thenatureoftheirwork citizen Heller unicate whorefertoCoehlo beensuredthatpro-pooroutcomesarehappening,

nali participati certain on, fromco sides,suchasa emphasizesthatgras a a zation s re recognized s ef ccountabil een uch asparticipation fectively 30-31). preconditio a l -opting

parties’ s arightmaybemoredifficultto of participation on, in butalsotheir s gr However, ( een ity Gaventa 2004b, the wareness ofrights,the assroots planning through ands (Leves andholding a ’s ns s acitizen’s m findings: needtoexist sroots echanisms, andthattransfor tate’s support(2001, que, 3). ofcitizens G appearstobeattheheartofmanys an advantage aventa emphasizesthat,regardingsuchmechanism m alysis

thegovernmentsresponsible ovements in inherent

21-22).This oflocal processe fr forparticipation in s in ameworks forparticipatory public c term right,hasbeen apacity powerstructure depolitic s in thetwocasesweres 158). isalsoreiteratedby budgetingin s oftimeandinterest Kerala,India toas

deep-rootedinterests mative ize, onboth semble e expandedtonewdecision- specially processesofthese PortoAlegre, s (ibid, fortheir anda (G thegovernmentand uccess s aventa governance” uccess Cornwall 39). ifthereis ct collect in actions. participating tories 2004b, ful, a Br

re and inter ively azil, of an

19-

s, alia,

or or it

9

CEU eTD Collection processes. practitioners Working ma greate bure “…it rginalized aucr

is r div

the conjunctionof ats, toward ersity a

well- groups andgovernmentstotakein coordinated, mong s suchanenabling

( Cornwall

repr enabling esentatives, thus articulat

and

Coehlo policies environment e sociala

20

ordertoensuremoree and leg expanding 07, ctors a 22 al ). m

fr nd inclusive a ay betheroadto amewor ccess if notthe ks,

committed institutional ffective influence t ake participatory and r designsthat fordevelopment of esponsive historically produces

10

CEU eTD Collection all an independent Brcko cantons centralized, Croat country, painful F 3.1. 3. P guar Basic rightsto BiH laws (Dizdarevic officials of peaceimplementation of the The internatio ourteen yearsa havetheir policy The Legal Framework Legal The antees the ar andBo HighRepresentative w processofpolit and79municipalit thatobstructthepeaceimplementation, composedoftwoentities, ticipation as given agenda(Struyk, m own sniak ade upof62 political nal f ad reedom ofpeacefulas aDi fter the1992- etal. comm political ministration Feder strict 2006, inBosniaand participation ical unity inthe ation st str andeconomic m 2004). ies (OHR)asthem 22-23). atus, placed unicipal playsanimportant uctures andad (BiHStatistics (FBiH)(Dizdarevic 1995 . Thestate,entities, country.TheOHR’sHigh and

the war,BosniaandHerzegovina Theinternational in ities, sembly predominantly BiHareensuredthroughtheConstitution the Prac the underthedirectsovereignty transition. F Herz BiH ain ministration Agency2009). anda organization ishighly butalsostopthe role Brckodistrict, etal. tice of Participation of tice ssociation, ego Ad inBiH, co Serb 2006, ministrative ( mmunity is decentralized, vi Dizdarevic Representative Republika na In1999, responsible with butalso 25). cantons (BiH) a While the doption ly, largelyin them etal.2006, ofthestateandwith itisacomplex Srpska(RS), UN provides co isstill forcivil theRS andm c mprising -appointed unicipal an of,orimpose

chargeofthe undergoing re forthe is 25). unicipal move ian , which

andthe ity 10 aspects

of O public

ffice

ities

a

11

CEU eTD Collection Governance achieved meetings andmunicipal entities municipal citizen outlined Governance (Self- Indirect (Hodzic “highest 7 6 5 which regarding priority been As aresultofNG established b c LCsarethel initi p e TheR 200 to bem A numb itizens decid xplicitl articipation, suchasconsultations introduced, G the 8. atives initiati if overnance anddirectdemocracyisensuredthroughthe andM inthe level resultswith S lawh theyarenotexplicit andatory inFBiH y definedbyth asse priorities er ( CCI 2007,18-19). ofotherle L (Self-GovernanceLawF ves, ofinternational y thestatutes e onissues aw RS mblies; lawsa owest- as aglajlic a s citizen problemsatthelevel L fewmoremech O uch arerankedandselected”. aw RS l advocacy, other 2004). evel a planned re referenda,local gal docum other , e law. a 313). such organsareobliged s a“ onl a oftheLC(Self-Governan dministrative 2004) ssociations, y. For m asurbanpl

Decision progra ly ly ents echanisms canbeincluded againstthelaw. recognized anisms withp andatheF ana atdifferentlev nal unitslinkedtosmallerinhab institutional m goals(Self-Governance listedthantheFBiH on ans, citizen BiH arliamentary c ysis oflocal comm thesurveya e onhowLCsoperateinBiH,see Bajrovica 2006). conomic d tosub humanrightsandfunda BiH panels, Thisallowed unities els ce LawFBiH2006).Establishment of co 7 Citize L ofgov 5 ized Some mit ommissions, mmunity” and“Criteria aw on evelopment a proposal 6 tothepublic formsofparticipation s amethodofcitizens’ (LCs),m RS ns ernment l oftheparticipatory aw; inn P areallowed L in foranincreasein rincip aw on themunicipal publi ited neighborhoods.Through a s nd socialservicesandothermatters either L llow forsome unicipal chemes or“citizen les aw FBiH2006; LocalSelf-Governance c hearings,referenda, annu ofLocalSelf- ar mental toattendcouncil e thesemech citizen al reportscomparing statuteinboth accordingto f sort mechanism haverecently opinion reedoms” participatory asse nd Stojanovic, ofc th Self- anisms e LCs hours”in itizen mbly, rese itizen LCs,

a

ppears

s

arch

12

CEU eTD Collection solving together Nevertheless, also is towards citizens, with in are not Despite Eastern E budgeting participati This transparent selection formal proceduresdefining financial have In declining. 14 the declining, only m beenplaguedbyanumberofissue m a ex ay beone specificissues(CCI unicipal fterm withmunicipalit the re theuseofLCsslowly actly practicesandam on uropean sources; inconsistent existingparticipati Thepercentageofcitizens remainson ath

m the will encouraging.A ities ofthewar,moretr a oftherea ainly Citizens s well showed oftheircouncilors duetotheuncertainty ingness as thedevelopment ies sons Network2006). the numberofcitizens thema 2009). thattheu isgrowing ore transparentselection ofcitizens 2008 on whytheinternationa increasing. , sporadic legislatio s acompulsoryparticipant CenterforCivi aditiona se ofparticipatory in thatrespondto toparticipate orleaders(B s, co bud including a n, Opennessofm

genda in l reg resultsofcitizen mparison mechanism get allocatio arding awareoftheparticipatory lacking l BiH Initiat l ofpriority ajrovic com in with theoutcomesofs m m decision- s ofparticipati throughavarietyofprojects unicipal n munity echanisms isfalling ives 2007, unicipal competences;control bythe andStojanov inpolicy participation (CCI) problems aswell ity hasens m m ities calls aking unicipal surveyonparticipati processes;andnon- andcomm on, a forpartnership uch engage andtowork ured that (Centraland ic s interest s a 2008, uch astheLCs, legal t the ity; orstagnating, lacking local f over 29-39). unication

ramework in ment.

that

level

is

on

13

CEU eTD Collection is mana completion as partsofplanning forms, m municipalit Misic Maglajlic their (CSO) Internatio spatial focus onparticipati 8 and Moote P Participation 3.2. well municipalit while partnerships. lanning diminished. However, (Misic, freq tr (forthcoming) ging planning building, aditiona literature 2006, ainly uent theminthe nal 1997; ies, ies, forthcoming). oftheplanning donor organizations Theresultsoftheauthors’studys shiftin Misic local looks citizens 321-323). l processes,capital which mechanism Innes agen ha partnerships. on. methodologies, ur , throughacase atmoretraditional s increasingly progra in longrun. cies ha anda ges forgreaterinstitutional 8 andBooher2004; Citize

Development Planni Development s raisedconcerns have

havealsobeen process,a s suchastheLCareana uthorities m orientations ns largel Asa have, According investment promotedtheideaofparticipatory y aste -study ofparticipatory result, ignored s municipality arereadytoembracenewparticipatory inter formsofparticipation, mporary Swinburn heavily alia reg inline theef to traditionalLCs planning arding , becomeinvol thea upport s s enga withdonor fect ofthesebodies tructures, andaredisse trength ad ng uthor, etal. thefinancial ccepted this orparticipatory ministrations ged in in (UNDP2005,65). 2006, m partnerships andbetterdefinition B reco participatory echanisms in ved Civi osnia priorit s 7;OECD2008, mmendation: uch in sust l Society local a a and Herze and ies re not s LCs, planning on ainabi bud areu (Hodzic development local twoBiH mbled m Organizations geting. u lity echanisms in versus sually shefindsthat sed to mechanism development ofCSOsand (McClaran of 46). a and new fter the

perceived

govina

InBiH,

or

s as

14

CEU eTD Collection “there arealmostnodevelopment practice, competences forplanni municipalit and the development Miovcic activities the BiH. Participation 2007, development 9 municipalit the “Ugovor” 2005). participatory “Ugovor” project, level A of municipalit nu Allprojectswere m M inparticular. Bothlawsstipulate mb 17-18). unicipal unicipa g points er ofinternatio which (Self-GovernanceLawF enerally ies ies planning ofcitizens planni planni l ity. (2007, on Development ies totheincompleteness generatesevenmoreconfusion haveprepared In TheCenterforManage weakcompetences, participatory Thesepracticesarenotrestricted which no FBiH,the ng ng 15-18). t included throughthe compulsorywithout a nal ng in genda appearstobe theadoption ha atdifferentlevels planning projects s astrongemphasisonparticipati P Moreover, duetospace LC roject spatialplans local s canparticipate BiH competencies cre areconcerned isregulatedbythe sponsoredby development ofthe lackofresourcesandtoomanyre ofdevelopment ation 2006; therearediscrepancies constraints. ment, ofamunicipal proper andlocal ofgovernmentandtheplanni a c Self-GovernanceLawRS2004). s complex urrent D (ibid, atthelocal evelopment withparticipatory in theSwissgovernment, s m todevelopment trategies” (ibid, legislation, economic 18-19). development echanisms in plans entitylawson a s itsadministrative planning ( (progra AsMiovcic andPlanning municipal) on, betweenthe development which foc placeforitsrealizatio plans(MD 19). co planning planning ms) uses, local m mmittee (OSCE

level sponsib a points akes local s acompetenceof hasworkedwith inter governancein ng (M a setup(Miovcic initiati However, processesin ctual …nearly only. atthelocal alia P 2009). DP), formerly out, il ities , on

9 OSCE’s ves while of

or half

n,

15

CEU eTD Collection A “Integrated Local internatio implementation, planni Miovcic has worked Action Centre development UN frequent appeartobealack development Interviews adequ strategies hadanaction municipalit Internatio sector andCSOs municipalit 2005 DP’s Rights-ba ate financial ng (REC)hasworkedwith Pl U points phase(Miovcic ans (LEAP nal ND nal byrepresentativesofinternatio ies ies togetherwith projects, organizations strategiesatthelocal planni P surveyshowsthatam considered havebeen

out thatinternational monitoring (cc D re sed municipal ng evelopment a. sources tosupport s) (REC2009). suchasOSCE’s“ 51%ofBiHmunicipalit reflectsomeoftheobstacles tostrategyimplementation. plan. 2007, atleastnominally str m developed ofproject unicipal andevaluation ategies completely Moreover, 15).This m Planning” asse unicipal level USAID’s“GovernanceAccountabil ities s ssment progra aboutahalfofthem.N ajority, upport, m s (UN on only m Local trategy implementation anage ity’s nal developed (IL ay changewith capital oflocal 81%, DP RMA 11%ofm andnational on however, FirstInitiative” DP) project ment skills ies relevant thecreation hadastr investmentplanning oflocal development m hasintroduced with P 2007a); totheir is unicipal andc g oftenlimited org ( ategy ofsomesorta theparticipati development reater emphasison Dimova ofLocalEnvironmental ( anizatio evertheless, Budisa 2009) work, apacities ities the (UN strate declaredtheyhad Re 2009). DP RMA rights-ba andonly ns gional tothedevelopment gies ( (Miovcic in ity str GAP 2009). on only Project”(GAP) thefield innew ofcitizens, ategies andUN Environmental

t thattime). sed 23%of P 2005, 49%of Themost 2009;

in

of

DP’s

2).

civil

16

CEU eTD Collection process endsbecausethecivil process is by assistance necess participati final Citize process, approaches methodologies A projects, Heinz considering of humanandfinancial strategies m what its W strategies (2007, with implementation role

hile theexternalservice report by in version theadoption n participatory l monitoring 2009; opini implications m asso s on ost strate aid trytoidentify whethertheparticipatory AL ay not ofthedevelopment in Misic ons, me municipalit tobeveryhigh, in planning, DI inBiH 23). ary forthe especially local ofs beimplementedin andevaluation (2008), 2009), planni gies

maybeonthe trategies, despite provider development m resourcesforimplementation donotdefine m financial mo unicipal ng com thoseofvulnerable process,sothattheadvisory unicipal m ies st vulnerable societyminimally butthe missioned ay betaking instead. havesm plan isneglected ities m finaloutcomesoftheprocess,given ad planning anage theend. approachwasconducted in alsoshowsthatinvolvement (ibid, their significance ministrations their P all byUN articipation g development ment skills keyneedsandgoalstorealize placethrough 35).While significant roups in inBiH. (ibid, Obst groups,donot is DP BiH, involved ofparticipation 37). oftencannotprovide acles orderto ofthecivil –havetobe According (Misic2009) mo contribution

andtechnical budgets(Heinzl toimplementation Miovcic givesareviewofkey international st methodologies inthe eng haveam sectorin ’s tothe age themin ane implementation, st t andcapacities iss ofs aken tothecreation udy ofstrategy a ffective aid projects, takeholders report,while ssistance is ajor thatdevelopment into 2009). theseneeds. a todecline theplanning dequate technical encourage –sucha ef theplanning accountwhen m fect on a

itisunclear anner, ctors and tofinance andits ended provided

ofthe afterthe s alack m the

for

ost

17

CEU eTD Collection were, into such obstaclesmayred even accountwhen ifparticipatory indeed, m eaningful tryingto processesarewell-led uce their ande a sses ffective. significance s whether andm participatory aspolicy ay yield documents.Theseiss planning relevant andrealistic processe s in ues will str municipalit ategies, betaken

ies 18

CEU eTD Collection authors constructanddivide question fra and whatprocessescontribute important effective. For thefirstquestion, relating BiH, participati As outlined 4 of questionsthatcorrespond invo effectiveness process In and whether respectively . Ana line mework, lvement in criteria with thethreeselected todevelopment. (ibid). According l

, on tounderstandwhatres ytical F of the influe which amodifiedRowe inthe relatetothepotential itscreation took include Dr nce, procedurewhile place introduction, as awing and toRoweandFrewer,answerwhatconstituteseffectiveness, sesses e r

resource “ amew

transparency meaningful” is iname andimplementation

fro c ases, andwhether m other

ffectiveness uptheir toeachcriterion ac andF towardthese”(RoweandFrewer2000, or cessibility aningful thisstudya acceptancecriteria ults k acceptanceoftheparticipatory (SeeRowe

rewer evaluation rese criteria ofa t , aken mannerin task d ofparticipation, arch participati ttempts toanswertheque toimply into ithadanimpacton wereeffective(ibid, onevaluation etal.2004, efinit (ibid,

io a development cce n, 99-101) include fra on

ptance thattheparticipatio structured exercise mework 93). wa and ofparticipatory

Thesehavebeen s useda representativeness Roweetal. d process ecision constitute‘good’ byRoweetal. planning policy procedure 11). s abasistoanswerthe

criteria. ma stions

10)Their makingprocesses king, havedevised n atthelocal processwas , mechanisms,the ofwhether

bythepublic independence

These and m in2004, odified evaluation outcome cost- “itis

level a tofit

,

set early

s in

19

CEU eTD Collection stakeholders, Under participants’ of decision- resources, time,andinformation. participants’ task, aimsandscopeoftheprocess; Thus, forthepurpose participated internatio the 11 10 decision- public the focuses onparticipants’ engage a not compl e as ane Int the proc proc effe contextofthis process. Questions ccordan xcluded i ervie ity ctiveness a ment, esses cceptance on valu making partoftheprocess. nal ess.. w ce withthec inre n theinterviewg y withthecont in making anddiscussion guide theprocess. ation w co skill Transparency andthemunicipality’s agencyrepresentatives, balance

w ere rewordeda thecreation mmon understanding lation toother as exclud tooltob andunderstandingaccesstoade available criteria, re search betweenindiv ircumstances ofm ed, be control e filledinby concernsrespectoflegislatio ext. This Early invol uide astheyw uponrequest.

nd adjustedtotheintervie representativeness ofdevelopment 10 pot y study,under cause itwouldhav , andincorporated ential particip is overtheprocess, ofthep Under inl procedures,their vement co xternal ev iduals m Thecriterion ine withthere

oftheprocessandcompetencewasa resource ould hav mmitment in unicipal articipatory process

structured de concerns concerns anddelegatesofcert atory process strate a e beend aluators e meritedresearchbe cc m representativesor essibility into criteria, w format, ethods, cognition thattheimportanc externalfacilitation gies. of theentry-point ( ifficult theselection, gettingthemenga cisio Rowe eta in-depth consistencyandflexibi influe n

quate financial, isas andtoho on n- (ibid,92).Forex

todoa astheorigin tas making a nce sessed throughtheprismof k definiti l. 2004,96).Som ccess toinformation , although interviews yond thescopeofthis cost ain w muchparticip , theorganization, identification m groups,participants’ ofparticipants a on al frameworkwasconstructed embers ofthepublic nd benefitan concernsthe , human,physical andexternal ged. ample, thecriterionofcost- a 1 1 e of ddressed in with

e questions Inde sses lity crit ants s pendence and sed. ofall eria canv alysis takeholders: ga and study,ordid in a ined from clarityof checkson

dequacy wer ofthese the the relevant

ary, in e

that 20

CEU eTD Collection Intensity ability outcomes becau and to meaningfulness oftheprocessitself practices (strategies), development The question posed original 13 12 participants adoption. the the the style, i This in c frame s finalproposal s The municip ertain projectsfrom corporated trategy proposal, trategies, i.e., bytheresearch. toimplement beableto qu ofimpacton fr work .e. wh 1 2 In amework underacceptancecriteria, estion Here,the on

re the implementation thats is ether onparticipatio i al le garding influenc nto thefinal isinlinew a se ofobjecti differentiatebetween ddressed bylooki th gislative bodiesarec ofthe whethertheproposals th ense, ere wasach e question s e thestrategies.Aquestionofimpact onpoli policy asdelivered trategies, forexample. ffectiveness intensity version s ith trategy werethoseofparticipants a concerns e, impa questionintheoriginalframe n’s ve ofcorporatestyle(

of adoptedstrate ange inth external impactorinfluence ofthestrate implies oftheprocessis“tested tothemunicipal ct ng alled differentlyi anditsinfluence onspe atthe theamo e approachtohand well-led constraintsposedon so ofdevelopment cific dec mething intensity gic Rowe eta will unt gies, processe docu n thetwomunicip isions, ofparticipants’ beaddres and council/assembly

on abouttheextent of participants’ aredivided ment. l. 2004,1 work wasrewordedtoaddress ling certainissues. policy- instituti s which projects cy-making proc re ” again,

andwhether sed underthe garding theinfluen 00) themunicipalit m onal did alities. aking upforthesakeofclarity, input thatareu izatio butthedivision impactonpolic notlead ofimpact 13

A in edures , n inthe w nother question ofparticipatory therealmoflocal andtowhatextent s as changedduring econd impl ce oncorporate w sually ies’ tocertain finalversion as essentiall ementation of financial q included

between uestion ies fromthe

y

of in 21

CEU eTD Collection seen asfor exercise, practices the strategies havebecomethepartof Under that have implementation extent, By evaluating participatory

hasbeenimplemented instituti ortheir inhandling beenaddres ms ofinstitutiona

onal implementation a exerciseon f izatio re, urther isanswered,tryingto otherissues,itscontinued sed above. n , thefocu involvement ofstr them lizat f rom theadopted Whether ion, s is ategies’ unicipal onwhether in in institutional bothaform thestrategy’sm a thestrate t ction ity ake in into plans, com term theact s trategy, andwhatthereasonsfornon- f a al gy is abric munication s ofadopting ccount andinformalsense. thequestion ual re onitori ofm participatory alistic obstaclestoimplementation unicipal ng withthe ornotis orevaluation newparticipatory ofwhat,andtowhat ities. practicesand participants alsoa Theimpactof phasesare ssessed. ofthe

22

CEU eTD Collection and control To ensureforsomevariation 5 reports, local stakeholders, was conducted.Primaryre municipalit The thesis 5 5 14 .2. Sample .2. .1. . Methodol S • • • • Res ee Ann citizens s than The municipality the the Strategies where Strategies The strategyhadtobederived Institutio urveys, earch ha ex 1for latesttobeable processands ies forbias,thefollow 80,000 involved sucha s aqu in m

andav BiHthatcreateddevelopment unicipal Design n thefulllistofinterview hadtobeadoptedin hadtobesponsored o 2009), alitative g inhabitants s representatives y inthe ailable ities couldnot ufficient ass search entails and Techniques and rese toseetheextentofitsimplementation. would s both mall docu trategy creation (Working ing arch timetodeterminethe andac criteria inapproaches beacutelyundeveloped, beselectedaccording mentation de ofinternational ees. Interviews throughparticipatio byaninternational 2006 sign, 20 utely G

were applied s andcomprisesacompar roup 2009; theearliest emi-str process.Secondary undeveloped ofthe strate

toparticipation a vail uctured interviews planning organizations, gies. able uponrequest. F when toensureparticipants’ outco topredominant ederal Development P development n. municipalit s rimary andsecondaryresearch maller s processes. me ofthe electing , re planning municipal than5,000, search focuseson ative 14 three ies with a process,and2007 cases gency donorsin m m ay lack c key ethodology, officials ases: Planning ordonor, me or tudy ofthree

larger mory of financial thefield.

and

23

CEU eTD Collection 15 FBiH (UN municipalit variation, strategies wereidentified and analyzing found to By conducting

outcom signific simultaneously onthecr BiH. For Anoth • • • Due totimeandbudgetconstraints,proximity fra the At Election where municipalit continuity the As municipal succes strategic location and humanresource haveso er antly, wer a e. leastoneofthecaseshadtobefroma meworks. e domin DP). differentlevels period s explained ies asier ac the wereselected: m ses in rese Com ayor andcouncil’s ant me sortofdevelopment e eliminat s since2006 theycover(Dom cess ies trategies, three arch, a ter

ctor identifiedw strategiesm toinformation, with mission laterin ms ofoutcomesde eation ofseparatestrategies,or primarily –OSCE, anda ed duetopotentialdifficulti off as s to P werechosen, 2004a, thethesis.Afterapplying ame partym etrovo unctional ccess togreaterfinancial implementstrate ay beabandoned predominantdonors viathe as U majority IchosetheMDP.Municipaliti ancic a 2004b, ND in USAID/PADCOprojectthat app RS(MD andfiscaldecentralizatio P, Internet, 2009) strategya spite ayor beforeandafter2008, given andM partycorresponded, 2004c, thestrategya , only es P), Maglaj, thatlocal w gies, different DP. ine 99outof142 ifthereis dopted. 2008). here a m valuatin while

to 15 thatsponsoreddevelopment andhu there unicipal Their ctivities andmethodologi thecapital . elections

entity, F By consulting largermunicipalit g theplanningproc a es doption BiH maining changein w m man resources,ma ities werechosen(BiH here differentsponsor BiH n ethodolog (OSCE),andVisoko, RSorFBiH, andslightly ears thathave w wereheld . m andatleastoneterm criteria, tonolong as alastcriterion. unicipal governmentduring relevant ies ess hadpolitical es ies, three showsome in different beca andits ov er ities op 2008. dueto y bear reports erlapped Central s erate in were

worked use of

Only

legal

24

CEU eTD Collection the July on primarily called potential of three planni participati me ( process foreachmunicipality While 17 16 participati national municipality specific mbers ofpartnerships w Thetotalnumberofintervie S c 2009. ith ee list ase ofVisoko, fromthelist selecting ng t wo persons tofourparticipants development processwereidentified valuable becauseofdifficult ofintervi Fortheca on on planning recordsin in , private, interviewees, theplanni simultaneously. ewe so thatwerewilling five. processesin urces ofinformation se ofPetrovo, es NG a inAnn indiv gencies/organizatio 16 orplanni Five ng O, sponsor ws theyrecom processesingeneral. theaimwastointerview a ex 1for idual , refle who ccess toparticipants. m andinterviewed m ore interviews municipalit cts ng fourwereconducted,forthecaseofMa wereprefer d unicipal totalkwerethen thenumberofinterview etails. com etc.)tohaveawide mend asactivein on mittees wasbasedonavailable ns ities theprocess.Thefirsttwoor conveying ies. ably wereconductedwith wereconducted Municipal .

Theywereaskedtoprovide 17 representatives A

totalof15 atleastthreestakeholders interviewed. their ees. In theplanni r ange ofviews. representativesinvol experiences somec inJuneandbeginni s emi-str ofdifferentsectors Thism ng keyinternational ases, processanda documentation theint uctured interviews Theselection threeparticipants re ethod glaj, garding contact erview w six, in wa ved the andfor s applied

ng in s

det or as

of

the of l of ed

ails

25

CEU eTD Collection municipality Petrovo’s forthcoming). prior Decisio through RS Petrovo 6.1.1 6.1. 6. me formed, ma NG was for developed economic prepared assistance in ( mbers (Pejic Findi O representative. itizati Munici Petrovo

Petr n

med forthe on thelegalfra , arur anda on

development thepublichearing 2007-2012 byOSCEandUN ovo ng ofprojects/problems de upofrepresentatives toas Municipal thecreation Petrovoimplemented al pal dopted s and 2007, m Profiles unicipal maller purposeofstr mework, Strategic Awider 39-40). bytheMunicipal Ana ity strate extent(MD ofthestr 2006, proce ity with

, and Petrovohas,with

DP. Amultidiscipl l gy, P D ysi dure 5; artnership r evelopment apopulation 59). ather ategy creation, , s Decisio ategy (PetrovoMunicipal Decisio oftheprivate, OSCE’s“Ugovor”project P 2008, Inaddition thanam Asse n n on Group( on Planwasfinancedby 4). NGOprojectsselection mbly opinio ofcc theassistanceofCCI E inary ulti-sectoral ma (MA)in DA provided toparticipatory NG PG) form n de upoffourmunicipal a. polls Municipal 9,290, O andpublic ( surveys) 2006 ity development islocated unicipal 2006, expertandadvisory (OSCE“Ugovor”2008a). D ( inLCs procedureandcriteria Pejic mechanism theM evelopment sectors,with 3).Theplan andM development 2007, in

and c DP andbythe centralBiH, s trategy a sta 33).It DP, adoptedthe riteria Tea s ensured ff andone wa 70 for m (MDT) wa isalocal

s

s (Misic,

the

in s also

the

26

CEU eTD Collection Local implementation development public- municipality the (FBiH). Maglaj 6.1.2 Maglaj included strategy tooffertheircommentsands Four P World 18 body Municipal project, and 2006 protection geography, Maglaj’s According and local invo yo in m terests thats uth, Environmental unicipal Bankmethodology isanindustrial lve private G m a Itspopulation D inputs gender, . Municipal representatives Council ofmunicipality OSCEprovided , evelopment NGOs.( economy,ecology, andthelocal upports eetings ofDoboj, toOS strategy( ity partnership, fro m ofother“Ugovor”modules(OSCE2008b) hasinstitutional inorit CE’s (MC) wereheld, OS themunicipality m agricultureandprivate D Action CE “U m y, isestim Strategy2006- To evelopment LAG Doboj-Maglaj Ma ofLCs, andsectoral andciti unicipal administration. ( R members OSCE wasu with glaj training govor”.n.d) Plan(LEA norm l isparticipati infrastructure,culture,education, ated to zens ocal oneofits ity, sed in “U ized Planning trade before and locatedin oftheMDPChave andguidanceduringstrategycre ally inthe govor” theabove-m 2011 bearound26.460 thestrate ugge manage aftertheMD union Itwascre P) (MD an ai preparation isam 2009). ng stions 2008b). y Committee(MD ms theimplementation sectorfocusg other s, education in centralBiH, rial PC a gy creation expertiseisrequired (Pejic ulti-sectoral Otherparticipatory in Local entioned ated through 2007, TheMD terests t T haddraftedimportantpartsofthe o act andimplementation 2007, inst (MD Action 28). (political,religious, inaccordan in decisions roups (ibid, itutions, civ ( Petrovo s the 13-22). PC) PC PC

trategy encompas OSCE’s“ G sports,health 2007, isdescribedasconsultative

Zenica-Doboj 1 roup 8 intheMDP wa ofprojectsfromthe ce (M M ation. Asituation ic activities wi 13). s established 17-18). andthe ( groups, unicipa DP 2006a). LAG), basedon th thebest Ugovor” in Within

etc) ofstr C, which theprivate LikePetrovo, andsocial In lity include dr canton sing an addition, ategies in l afting 2006, the ong- bythe With alysis

shou 2005

term

ofa sector 4).

also

the

ld

a

27

CEU eTD Collection “Ugovor” 2008c). participatory populatio Visoko 6.1.3 V methods ofstrate (Municipal situation committee wasdivided Group ofupto5 as economics, the participatory 19 representatives planni 2006a, are perceived internatio priorit with The ToR (OS TheMa m multi-sectoralRights-Ba theassistanceofU ayor, the ng ies 4)

isoko is anindustrial analysis(ibid, process(ibid). anddevelopment Thereisane n nal yo Council isestimatedata CE “U r andnational m m andthe asneedsofcitizens c presidentofthe servea echanisms prescribed anner (OSCE ulture, govor” m gy creation,

Maglaj, embers w presidentofthe sports,engineering municipality s facilitators, mphasis 98). n.d.) upinto RMAP’smethodology ND legalfra interventi Thes 2007) round P’s RMAP.Therights-based(RB)approachimplies sed Development “ includi as createdtoman Ugovor”.n.d.). onparticipatio 6sectoralWorking MC into trategy wa Me 40,000 m mework; andtogether locatedin 1 9 unicipal council ng bylaw,Visoko , and14 mbership, ons claimsforrealization individual (UN areplanned etc(MD moreover,the s adopted otherme Itwasaco F DP RMA n, dictatesaprocesswhereRMAP Strategy2006-2015 re age thework BiH, andinclusio withthe steps,weredefinedby sponsib are G PC ha nearthecapital forthemunicipality on8February2007 roups (WGs)andoneWGforSWOT mandator 2007, mbers thatwereexpertsin s taken P 2006a, widercom mmittee madeupof16me il R ities, oftheirrights B approach 98). ofthecom n ofvulnerable y partin“Ugovor”(OSCE members,accordin proceduresandt 5; Within forVisoko 13). ofSarajevo. munity Inaddition istotransformwhat mittee. the OSCE’sToR. bytheMC inline (U (representatives M groupsin ND w DPC, aCore The

that g as created withthe Its asks and P RMAP are t o theMDPC to

mbers:

as such

the

28

CEU eTD Collection interviewees’ mechanism in For thepurposesofevaluation Meaningf 6.2. The strategyw strategy s thematic WGs;atm me process, The planni situation of NG 20 the Respondents 6. asse choosing mechanisms, thePG Judging by 6. organized 2.2. 2.1. Task mbers respectively representatives TheMDT level ssment bytherespondents. Os, LCs,municipal Resou anM ofparticipants’ in the uch asvision, according re ng themunicipality, wasconstitu

re responsesanddocu in Defin spondents’ processtook DT P rce Accessi as adoptedby spective allthree oftheNGO etrovo ulnes 2 0 andaP it eetings to andtheMD (Visoko ion andVisoko, development approach ted process own answers, c s of Participation of ases weregenerally officers),conduct by andbusinesssector placebetween G weres ofP bil beforethestartofplanning theMCin thema skills and m ity ofpartici

Gs unicipal mentation, option PC, the a andunderst andWGs,theywould yo andthe cce go et upasplanning context,scope r, appearedtobeclearly ptance andwas D als, pation’s ity andits J ecember 2006 orconcrete criteria. 2006). anuary andSeptember M (Omerbe whereavailable. aninitial s DPC in madeupofmunicipalrepres atisfied anding, a meaningfulness,the dequacy g Me

govic, andai a withthe bodies, mbers ofthePG M financial projects(UN sses (OSCE“Ugovor”2008c, (UN aglaj discus 2009) ms oftherespective sment on enerally defined. Thefollow werea madeupof11and32 DP RMAP2006b, av m s anddecide ailabi 2006. eans fortheplanning also ssessed through thehu Therationale DP RMAP2006a, P lity weredivided G a entatives, Throughthis receivedapositive ing ofresource s aparticipatory sections man rights onpartsofthe participatory and 5). 5). for afew a into

s, re

4). s

uch

29

CEU eTD Collection they organized, decision- that decisions Respondents 6. by the can note limited been Nevertheless, process, were partly representatives the their representative participants approaches respondents’ well In 6.2.4. 2.3. term s M OSCE,according trategic planni asthecom sh proposals beneficial DPC wereprofessionals Struc Re humanresource ared acom s ofrepresentation, f acolloquial making anddiscussion acilit presentat participants alsoin appearedtotar ofthe referredtoparticipants’ tured overall tworespondentsin hadbeen explained, ies, onMD oftheMCwereincluded in mitment equipment,expert theprocess. mon ng politics M Dec see language,andalooser consultantsandexpertsma DPC hadapredominantly ion toexpertise(Bradaric2009). competent underst PC m s duetothe bym med content isio political ( ade byconsensus.Theyagreedonthe m re get representatives Nalic, embership; n- spondents unicipal InPetrovo, intheir anding Making procedures;mo partiesandNG M.2009). Maglajexpressedopini tocontribute m knowledge with expertise ities on respective unicipal as proposed in theissue ininvit thewaythatdiscus respondentsgenerally sessed theselection thecommittee,andthat some otherme s InVisoko tructure tothecontent. ofgroups,ratherthanindiv ity’s a politica anda todebateanddecision- st thought s the y have sectors,gre ing Os werec sm m An s athand. relevant embers werethenchosen, keyselection all ccess toadeq MCrepresentative andP beenbeneficial. l size. background. ons theprocesshadbeenwell- alled

thatmoreexpertisewould ReadingMaglaj’sstrategy,one etrovo, ater facilitatio participants. sions proceduresasade flexibil on noted criterion. wereheld uate information. bythemayortogive theprocessappearedto Although Asa theproblem ity m explained aking, In andconsistency iduals. municipal n oftheprocess Moreover, all andstre me togetherwith threecase andthat In quate, as mbers of Ma thatfour mbers of

ssed

glaj,

have

s, of

30

CEU eTD Collection “Ugovor” 2005, citizens expert-oriented, representative rather than Representation of different participants; additional omitted drafted alistofparticipants participants be of the indiv emphasis on groups in Coehlo Another appears tohave opento idual vulnerable andCornwall andinterestgroupstohaveaninput f problem rom therosterofparticipants. participatory meetings…organized st anyonewho a a together akeholders inthatsenseWGsr theenga mechanismofparticipatory ctors, democracy. seem beenuptoMD ratherthan 17).While partsofthepopulation concerns depending withthe s to (2007), gement ofvulnerable processes.Only joined w beproblematic as interested. Although additional theinclusion in participation- thereisaneedforstrongfacilitation m onthesector. theWGsorwereconsultedin Petrovo, PC unicipal an in m a locations thecom sortofpublic stakeholders embers whomtoconsult. In U P InMaglaj, ity, foranu ofvulnerable …toavoid democracy,appearstobeanextendedarmof G m ND oriented, Visoko, groups,forexamplethrough according

into mittee mo P’s RBapproachto embers couldinvite mber ofreasons.First,MD thestrategicplanning st convenie fewre UN declaratively, wereconsultedthrough hearing,where m elite, torespondents. ay havehadthe groups.Asaddre DP representativesdraftedthelist spondents ormajority nt theprocessby forensuringfull

itwass planning personswhohadbeen

theya in mentioned including purposetobemore While c process apture in upposed ssed above foc sked see theWG M the us groups“ PC foropinions ms toplace vulnerable DPC that ” (OSCE inMaglaj, participation M the to“enable DT by

s,

it

and

of

an

31

CEU eTD Collection and PG be that focusoncertain (Heinz “a trueco out in 2004, approaches may beenoughtoovercome of the One mayalsowonderwhether processes, even process” (UN 22 21 precedence. development can tie include what the implemented,asin in V This pilot InVisoko,howe 42).However, aninterview, hu thisback isoko l ed byRMAPlat themin c 2009). me m annot bedet man rights’ mmunity strategy ain forlacking mbers,

projects, He objective DP RMA in m toWill ver, focus s Visoko, echanisms andcreatedifferentforawheretheycanparticipate thatthepeople ermined through thegoalofRMAPwasnottocreatea“vulnerable tressed thatunlike asfor er situ groups,in (He theca where elementsofed iams (2004) ofthe P 2006b, ation inzl 2009). groupswithvulnerabl it mer Chief ” thattargetsvulnerable isnotcertain se ofRMAP,one local e andconsultation project mpowerment through f a acilitat multi-sectoralprocessthathadto 6). thisresearch,andrequiresamore in-depthstudyoftheloc powerrelations. hadknowledge. andheremphasison 21 Technical Although processesthathavemorenarrowly ucation w ion as: Whether oftheplanning whetherfacilitatio e groups forthemostvulnerable neededtomakes withvulnerable Advisor UN Heinz VeneKlasen groupsandbringstheminto w DP serveda it participation ere notconduct w ofRMAPChristian them as toempowerthesegroupsor l alsostressedthatalldepended process, n amplified ultiple g etal.critici ure, s afacilitator roups through m anextensiveasse ed; this re while ay notnecessarily objectives (VeneKlasen sult groupss leastvocal w foc instrategythatc selecting as ze Henzl a used area theRB in pproach was trategy“ but foc of the (ibid). theprocess pointed

M voices. al situation us groups etal.

ssment

DT take s or One

on

an 2 32

2

CEU eTD Collection If chances atdeliberatio authentic process ofdeliberati developed of thesegroupstodeliberate fa the (see VeneKlasen municipalit A consultants I 23 to all, opening of the default; the and participants representation nclusion re vulnerability miliar dedicatetimetotheprocess. the

ground -theorgani strategies is or theprivatese Loc g In anintervi ferring round, g al Developm processc izatio roups, theprocessupm com ofvulnerable withcare:Coehlo backtoRowe ies P orthemunicipality, coupled provid n G isalsoaforu (UN ew, MarinaDimova,th andthee munication with hastodo a acting ssess ctor alls etal.2004) ent Planning(ILDP) ed bytheproje DP RMA zations’ theaimsofparticipatory foratleasttwothings: wi on withappropriate ment, n ll becondu inindiv (2007, during groupsappearstorequirestrongermediation mphasis withensuring etal.(2004) while a ay not s bilities toparticipatei canbeusedtoinformthe andCornwall on uch asonepiloted P, m restrictedin 13-16). f n.d.)or idual ct.

which acilitati m cted beforetechni aneq onexpertise beef e Manag Thec ediating project,e capacity.

comm fective andLevesq ual signalstheneed apa on a an er balance g by city buildingw a andcoaching xplained th mention round so size. nd ChiefTechni placing in unication alysis Asm thatre n locald me fa cal assistanceinthecr byRMAP thisparticular D mechanismandf betweenrepresentatives 2 3 ue (2008), ofpower-relations . However, ue tolimitatio all miliar therisks at spondents ane evelopment pl MD t ill beb m ailored cap for m vulnerable echanisms, participants mphasis on ity cal Ad unicipal PC cannot via ased with a ofeitherdepolit focusgroupsintwo suchm participatory nother mal mechanismsforinclusion. visor stres ona acity build anning. (Dimova20 thesubject, ns ity eation oflocald avorably ofUNDP’s groupstoenhancetheir n appraisalofca in sed, aboutthesituation problem consensus,orstifling include atthecom onthe echanisms needto sizeandman itappearsthat ing oflocalL actingasdelegate capacitybuildi mechanism.After sideofexternal “individuals” andm ne with ici evelopment w Integrated

zing munity paciti 09).

Cs, ageability otivation the es NGOs

onthe on level be

ng

by

33 s

CEU eTD Collection whether voluntari make decisions? right Here, 2009). engage brought Visoko, respondents In 24 policy awareness onthebenefits benefit their as in schedules. case ofVisoko commons. Although indiv term delivered S theca work oracivic ome iduals, onemaywonderwhether ;

andthegovernment’s ment in s ofengage the upbyam ag me ly itself. However, 2 becausetheym theirinputsont 4 se ofMaglaj, asitmayred reater groupofparticipants mbers . Whatis byrepresentativesofthe falling s aying obligatio tothe Motivation Should inMaglaj’s engage unicipal ment thatso positive evenwhen thereasonsarenotclear, voluntarynatureoftheprocess, n participants thelattercaseshowsthatm indecision- uce the ordo ime, accordin ofa“p ment representative; me participants ay influence to MDPChadbeen ability isthatforsomerespondents, participate ofP theystill allparticipants individual participants articipatory toprovide G m feeltheyarebenefited making, responsesweregenerally g privatesectorin t decision –aP o an seeitasrepresentative embers neartheendofplanni m a were, replaced re OS MC ay thusdependon receivecompensation de G –wouldbe sponsib CE officer onecould f recognize makingprocesses?Onem mocracy” whenit s norm eedback ecretary in because embers m il itslength, ity ally, thePG fromZenic ontheoutcomesofprocess. andpossibly attributelacking participati the m m

theveryactofparticipating by giving Visoko ore engagedthanothers. y ore “comfortable”for hadnotbeen (Cosovic ay bereplaced participants’ bodies’ orparticipants’ a come (Gavr forbeing mentioned on uptheir createatra positive, in re 2009; s to anović, theprocessasa activeand engage sponsib ay wonder ng increased influence fornotdoing in processwa time O 2009). with weaker a busy merbegovic committee, gedy ofthe ment in il

ity hadn’t

so

to

on

In me

wasa

s

the

34

CEU eTD Collection mayor’s proposals. also interests least formally, While fact thatin One should achieved representative however, Respondents Responses werepositive 6. 27 26 25 were held for documentation the Information In 6.2.6. interests, 2.5. all In of members P meetings Giventheresea 2007) ranking m invite olit threemunicipalit depend edia, thepresenceofexternal Independen Transparency ical inMaglaj in bias,influence mostcouldn’t and beforethe que bulletin parties allthree wouldgo thefut enc stre Act stre andrepresent selectionofpriorit so explained stions e ma ss thepredominant ( me independence rch were ssed thattherehadbeen FOIA) isuncertain. boards, ure through 2 y onthe 7 m bey er have Onecannotguar on a ce didnottakepart alsoincludedinthePGsVisokoandPetrovo,butthere unicipal doption ies, on whetherparticipants citeanyformalorexternal by thatwhile additionally abouttheindependence w d atives

processe thescope municipal andnewsletters.It exec as respectedandthattherewasade y ities, ofthefinal ofother a f projects 2 6 acilitators utive greaterfor Thepresenceofma them m a ofthisstudy s werefiled been polit int representatives formalmechanismhadn’tbeen andlegislative ay havebeen antee sectors ineach he achieved ical ayor wasalsoapartofthePG processes, inPetrovo noexternal str thatparticipants malizatio profile i would mun ategy bythe nvolved. is,nevertheless, , andrespectedadeq onecannot through oftheprocessin icipalit ensured,independence checkson and ofM bewilli power-centers. stre n andVisoko yor press ofthePG adiscourse y thefact inthe ssed thattheFreedomofAcces (Pejic claimt D MA/MCin PC me ures on ng wereprotectedag independence. tospeakoutag not 2007 thatthere quate publicity P hat (Misic, G/M analy leavesanimpression mbers in t cert uately. e theP ; UNDP his was s ach all et up, sis DPC in ain were /MD m 2009). wasa ofminutesfromthe threeca G/M P whether t frompolitica R unicipal Ma he ublic thiscould criteria MAP 2007b;Delic An case. T andMD –u gre ainst allcasesm DPC; glaj ainst

hearings M ater ses, sually

25 re ity. the forthe DP vested ; andthe

nu

quests

be

thatat

via mber l PC.

s to

ay

35

CEU eTD Collection unified In 6. 6. before from themethodology participants Accord 6.2.7. Maglaj, not Some according 28 projects the asse To discern 6. such. that sense,participati in strategy. TheMAhadno MaglajandVisoko 3.1. Intens 3.2. 3. Participation’ 3. term representatives Findings annu included ssed re thecreation Early Impleme in respondentsstressedthatrelevantcommentshadbeentakeninto ing to s ofintensity thatcould spondents 28 al their . torespondents, According m theoutcomesofparticipants’ pertaining have a unicipal re Invol ity s they s spondents, oravailable tance thatall beeninvol ntati of in nothavebeen ofthestr vemen didnot

oftheirinfluence totheex budget.So Influence on P m toam s e on etrovo Impact seem ade s mployed change andcitizens the reports t pertainto ved tent of unicipal ategy began. mall oralmostall s to saidthatcom criterion beforeanykey f s to on t in havesignificantly andinsignificant anddocumentation. financedfromthemunicipal ar, Petrovo on Policy Making Policy on i mplementation were all representativein m he on thestr threecase hadacces ake when ofearly-involvement enga Strategic decision- oftheproposals ments by w ategy butother, gement decisions as able a s, s to dopting change a influenced m Doc s therespective i thedocu citizens aking, , Petrovo, s tosec nformed trategy implementation werem

ument Petrovo’s s, hadbeenincluded interviewees a ure co-financing ha everydayissue duringpublic ccording b the ment budget.Theimplementation thestr y theinterviews s been ade. Thisis a beforethehearings. ctual policy bodies s ategic trategy, while torespondents. s atisfied see account. wereinstituted hearings planis s; med to alsovisible withmun ofgreater inVisoko in was docu in thefinal that

tiedto the

be were ment icipal

In

MC

and

a

36

s

CEU eTD Collection Municipal implemented When the most probably implemented had been after itsadoption. project. also Positive project plan estimated thatso for its 2007, year’s annualbudget,butthe adopted the In implemented Maglaj, P bud openedupforindiv isnot G ( butdependedsolely implementation looki planned Adevelopment get forthe changesthatoccurreda inFebruary2007; Pejic implementedin ity a strictly ng municipal 2008). in fro fro 2009). ata berevised later 2007 m the m the me 20-25 According followed: s 2008 According trategy tobemoresignificant

on,thatproject while representative (Br point s depart municipal trategy sof idual thisyearandthatcertain term on adaric, itsimplementation percentofthe sixwerein wherethere ofview 2008 tothemunicipal development thecreativity tothemunicipal ment, s ofthe fter the 2009). bud presentation ar (Pejic, a ofprojects’ would stres s one nu theprocessofimplementation get the When s w s trategy’s adoption mber ofprojects, sed thatmoreresourcesneed as anopportunity trategy hasbeenimplemented, andcontactsofm projects project getpriority 2009). e for2007 representative, a arliest. representative, on ssessing theimplementation value.She asa projectsmaybechangedtogetherwith implementation, listed thatcanonly document.Thestrategyhadbeen Some could in inthe implementation, around50% isthatspecial explained projectswereimplemented togete while thereforenot unicipal around12 s trategy, wase bespent cca30%ofthe fourprojects, arlier officials thestrategywould in ed tobeputasidein hadbeen 2008 sub project-wise. funding projectshadbeen onthatparticular and belinked sof -accounts were (Petrovo re stablished vice ar, he sponsib

were fora s versa trategy to

that . in

le

37

CEU eTD Collection and anewaction However, (Cosovic, projects well- technical together For Visoko, department 2008). been Looking Visoko, strategies were,in wonder If 2009). in year period, that anyrevision given looking Visoko defined, realized thatthemunicipality

however, listed about thequ withthe attheannual obstaclesin 2009). mentioned

attheinabi if this looking a ortheir and34arein municipal in isaseriousproblem

thestr oftheplan plan U am their

ND atthestrategy,these21projects ality justification thatthestrategym implementation, lity shouldhave unicipal reporton opinion ategy hadbeen P, the representative ofindividual ofthe isstill progress( hasbeendone. m representativeexplained , docu realistic implementation unicipal implementing andhow beendraftedinline forso ment. Local m butalsoproblems implementedsofar:sevenoreight explained ity ornot, ay berevised unicipal facedfinancial torealize development, Whenrespondents und Giventhatthe implementation. projects theymostlygavepositive ities ofthestrate thataftertherealization them.Heestimatedso to wereplanned throughaG thatiss withthe implementstrate fromthefirstplan, becau businessandentrepreneurship difficulties; s trategy spansoveranalmost10 gy for2008, ues weren’t werea se not 2008 However, AP project in bud thereweresome all thefirstyearalone, sked projectshadbeen gies, sixprojects get. an tiedtogether ofaf outof21 whetherthe anMCsecretary me 20%of itdoesn’t swers. In onemay However, (O ew projects merbegovic,

have appear

38

CEU eTD Collection the action Visoko, plan In knowledge because toomanyprojects defined UN wasn’t sust financial 31 30 29 signals participati strategies reflectedparticipants’ representatives influenced While

Petrovo’s million KM(PetrovoMunicipality 2 3,8 mi Thea the strategy Amuni muni Theprojectsamounttocc 75projects DP representative for5yearssignalsthatthefeasibility thereisnot plan toaneedforevengreaterf cipality w goalsanddeadlines; given llion convertiblem ction plansappe ly cipal representativ on’s in the (Nalic, ainable, a s ; theannualmuni thestrate s abit 21projects trategy, thefactthat“only”32 potential q planned m as uality around6 ay havebeen enoughinformation N.2009). which unrealistic. ofthestrate thoughtthattheVisoko ar gy. overfive tobesetupreal negativeinfluence arks ,4 millionKMfor e estimatedthatcc wa Evenduringtheplanni thatareplanned a 2,5millionKMfor wereincluded cipal bud (KM;1KM hehowever s amplified Thefea crucial, proposals. year 006, 49;87). gy, amiliarizat get is a istically –theov s. iscc oneshould sibi available s strongfacilitation c 3 bythe 2006.(UNDPRMAP200 1 explained ca 6mil a 45to50millionKMwer

inthe ofimplementation lity a 0,5E inthe on In 20 projects ion ofM thatregard 07 andhalfof2008;thep therelevance ongoing strategyw lion KM. firstye to ofparticipants UR) andthemuni firstye ng t aglaj’s thattheaction discerntowhatextent erall strategy,whi ake process,therewerecommentsthatit wereincluded (Bradaric2009) into ar, financial ar alone str s, as prettyrealistic andw orinfluence while a ofthestrate ategy isalso wast ccount 6a 60;9) e need ondevelopment cipal bud 30 asn’t onecannot crisis(Cosovic , ch spans plan onecould aken lanned a inthe thefindings ed for revisedlateron, wa bymunicipal get for into q gy, ov theimpl uestionable theparticipants sn’t implementation in nnual budg findingsmay er account. speculateabout 2004w a term 5y realistic sses 2009). ears, costs issues,and thatthe ementation of s of s the as cc et

29 given ofthe tohis

For A a 1,3

cc

39

a

CEU eTD Collection strategy, andappearstotreatitin and Maglaj of the would for all government of the While process the importanceofgoodandprofessional criteria m municipalit m m betodo aking unicipal any interveni toanextent,Visoko totakethisdocumentseriously above. thedirect a ities revision ies st to

ng udied. d link variables, ate. ofdevelopment between While Evenif doesnotappeartohave an oneshould one a a participation d- strategyisunrealistic, c hoc facilitatio an projects m claimthatP a anner. fterwards; thisdoesnot stre ss theresponsibi included, andimplementation n in theprocess,which etrovo becomea which one really w lity full-fledgedowner hasnotbeen ay to follows appeartobethe onthe isdifficult overcomethis relatesto thestrate sideofthe donein becau the ofthe c gy,

ase

se any

40

CEU eTD Collection purpose development the new. was over. had changed, handling planni Interviewees 6. 2009) both would person, believed invo mentioned PG In 3.3. term m participants lved In theMDTandP unicipal ng like Institu astheywill s ofcontinued P ( thisit in m had Someotherrespondents, Pejic, etrovo, tobetter someP implementation, unicipal weredivided anyinfluence strategytogetherwith possibly ity, wa tio 2009). weren’t sheexplained while nalizat s amistakethatP G m be iss de

becau comm neededa ues. Some fine amunicipal embers wereconsultedlaterforspecific contactedafterthestr G - ion onwhether responsibi onthe m se they sothatthey unication thatP onitori gain re m representative spondents in didnot D G m in unicipal lit etrovo ng all oboj theexerciseofparticipatory thef with ies, orevaluation. embers weren’tinformed threem wouldbeeven competences,rights municipality receiveanyfeedbackaftertheplanning participants, uture. She hadrecently ity in ategy wasa adopting P unicipal s etrovo aid alsoexplained thatparticipation She , andaP morea

newparticipatory andVisoko participated ities, experiences dopted. explained s aw participati andbenefitsofall projects, ctive G wa Amunicipal aboutimplementation local thatforthef in a thought thatshepersonally inatourism s createdforthat re mixed. theprocess(Pejic development wa butwerenot practices s nothing on thatnothing representative asnothing InPetrovo, actors–

uture, she phase in newfor

in

41

CEU eTD Collection In in there Cornwall respect, truly Continued comm the different In 32 strategy revision Creating to while representatives, MD encouraged bythe realized term havest Visoko, termsofparticipants’ tog Asexp s PC. ableto“changedispositio trategy m theU ether unication s ofrecognizi in andenhancing ay beawarenes While thePG depart 2007, lained b alled w Visoko c anMCsecret (O ND ith othermunicipald om andmaybecontinued anexecutive merbegovic, 23) aU P co-financed munication ments in hadcededwith y amunicip andcreation, oranMD andMaglaj. OSCE,wascre Ifjudgingby ND ng s amongresponsible theirpropensity thelong P andanNG rolesin themunicipality ary explained al representative,thec with PC a 2009). boardforimplementation, projectsfromthestrate epartments butalsoon In ns theoriginal s aninstitutiona participants ter monitoring theresponseofmunicipal M a Am ated thatincluded mong bureaucrat m significance aglaj, O representative throughanewproject, thatco andproduc unicipal tolisten as re itsmonitoring stakeholders PG garding andimplementation, maller ommittee monitors isalso mmunication representative, (Cosovic, lized andcom es ofpartnership. control a indicative iss nnual reports someoftheme s aswell bodythatis gy in (Visoko ues thatdid m within andevaluation, ade upofm mitment to 2009). andmonitoring themunicipality with a theimpl asexplained ofwhether s citizens, however, municipality representative ontheirwork(Bradaric2009). the P notonly thiswastoanextent G m notnecessarily m ementation ofthestrategy mbers fromtheoriginal re unicipal unicipal embers continued spond“ instill s andpossibly participation above. aid consulted committee, , 2006) itswork that

a in ing (Coehlo dministration P

greater

pertainto w etrovo, as setup on see other wa 32

and

ms

via

s

42

CEU eTD Collection process, nevertheless development where the However, evaluation, that modalities 2007, learning issues thatextendthescope importancethereof, 35)andcontinuous a municipal process, throughvariousinterviews forthe a one re currently strategypersonally. offurthercitizen thatw a m representative s advocatedbyproponents unicipal as been local being e mpowerment ity ofthestr cha explored to confirmedbyactorsoutsideofthePetrovo inclusio Although appearstohavetaken institutional mpions andinformal ategy, maybeasolution inpractice areneeded.This ofparticipants. n in it implementation, m ize ofdeliberate ay beaverysubjective participatory talksconductedduring (Miovcic theimplementation In s de aninterview, eems tobethecasein 2009). processe butalso mocracy (See both

intermsofcre conclusion, m s, oratleastrecognize thisresearch. Miovcic onitori B ofthe planning arnes etal. ng P explained itis and

ating etrovo,

a

43

CEU eTD Collection inclusio independence although version uncertain, committees. Theinfluence process, of vulnerable was trulyme independence in This 7. Conclusio capacities nature in CCI participants (UN phase is research largely When BiH, survey(2009).

DP 2005; rese it

ofadopted n over,andinternatio a co m problemswith development cce oftheir arch toimplement exceptforthe ay contribute mes to ptance will aningful g ha oftheprocesses,ma oftheprocesses.In Miovcic roups, confirmsthefindings cedetoseethebenefits s shown criteria proposals n implementation Findings s trategies. This in a projects, 2007; s well theseca policies towardsg representativeness, s f thatwhile eemed tobelacking, act thatparticipants’ ofparticipatio inthis nal canalsoberelated asexternalcheckson Misic, projects wherelocal maynothavebeen ses. More thatsense,onecannot andinstitutional policy reater effectivenessoflocal challengesto y have

forthcoming). process ofothers–enga aregenerally ofparticipation, documentcanbesaidto beenpresentin n criteria rigorousselection on especially interests, decision-makingin e inputs tocriticism specially so werelargely Ares theindependence me extentthe izatio neglectedby notconcerned appearedtohavemolded power-dyna ofvulnerable gement us ult concerning n which discernwhether all ofparticipatory ofs ofparticipation’s mechanism threecase s partnerships uch atisfied wa thesponsors. ually 2008 theresearchalsoseem mics, e s also findingsmaybethat groups,and mpower representativeness with oftheparticipatory endsaftertheplanning AL inthree s. butalsolocal s, confirmedbythe N implementation toensureinclusion theparticipatio processes,the DI andplanning evertheless, participants. technocratic findings, m thefinal

unicipal

the and

ities n

44

CEU eTD Collection more diverse method waspreferredforlogistical municipal been number ofmunicipalit The research in NG sides ofthe participatory For participatory participati research orpolicy to planni thefootstepssucces m Os in entioned abiasin ng atthelocal BiHma representatives, on e in processe s quation,” objecti has hadserioustimeandresourceconstraints, thef et ofresponses. planning processestobe st y not act thatrespondents udies level ve s andawarenessonparticipatio ies in sful gras beable reasons,andma inthe line thatcouldhave m fortheregion butduetothelimited ay alsoexplore with Moreover, torecognize legalfra sroots institutional G reasons;awider aventa’s prescriptions m thatwereinterviewed mework, ovements. ofSouth-EastE y be portrayeddifferentresults.Therema a specific comparative thebenefits thes ized especially timespent ubject andused,capacities m g n roup eans ofinstitutiona asa offut dimension ofparticipation, urope municipality ofparticipants (2004b). right ineachmunicipality anddidnot wererecommendedby ure research.Furtherac couldnot shouldbe ofparticipation Afterall, toorganize s include liz tatutes. tobeable beconducteddue m r ing ay haveyielded aised citizens citizen y have a , this “onboth greater good in tofollow

also

ademic and

45

a

CEU eTD Collection BiH Barnes, Marian, Bajrovic, ALDI. “About R ______. ______BiH efer Statistics Central 2008. Bo f 2002/Rezultat http://www.i Mayors in [acce 2002/Rezultat http://www.i (Elections 1, Renewal: Service Municipalities in Development Local Herce Dizdarevic Federation) ences http://www.bhas.ba/eng/Bi [acce Re 2009] BosniaandHerzegovina. snia Election uf andIgor ssed June1, govin

D Pregled k Agency.2009. ssed June1, Re andHerzegovina”. C N evelopment i. Republika ase studies 2004: form Initiat (AnOverview ewm Srdjan : , ed.Peteri, ______. Com zbor zbor P ljucnih i200 i200 an, Stojanovic roject. M 2009] etal. i.ba/Documents/Rezultati%20i i.ba/Documents/Rezultati%20i JanetandHelen 2009] 4/Kratki/Nacelnic 4/Puni/Opcinska%20 in unicipa mission. a Planning GeneralDat Srpska) ktera i pu UN ive 21-25Sarajevo: G blic 2004c. 2004b. ofKeyActorsandExisting abor, l DP BiH.

councils . p postojecihpristupa 2004a. 2006.

” In 2008. articipation. : in HStats.asp?Pripadnost=4&mode=dark 23-48.Budapest:LocalGovernmentandPublic Bo

Mind

Op Opstinski In DemocracyAssessmentin a aboutBosnia “Sub

Sullivan Iz snia andas cinski bori YourOwnBusiness! i%20o

Open municipal andHerzegovina.) London: 2004: nacelnici vi nacelnici semblies) jeca%20Skupst uoblasti . pstina%20u%20Repub 2007. Society Opstinskavijecaiskupstine Policy andHerzegovina. uFe GovernmentandD uRepubliciSprskoj zbora%209 zbora%209

Power, pl deraciji F Approachesin aniranja P und Bosnia Community P ress ine%20o Bosnia Integrated articipation

(Municipal lokalnog 6- 6- an Governancein &Herzegovina pstina.pdf lic d Herzegovina (Municipal andPolitical [ theAreaof razvojau i%20 Loc ecentralizati accessed J Mayorsin opstina al Srpsko

Bosnii .

Rural

une

eds.

j.pd the on 46

CEU eTD Collection CCI Budisa, Na Bradari Innes, Blomgren Bingham,Lisa,O’Leary,Rosem ______. Cooke, Cleaver, Central CCI. . 2007. 2009. Judith Bill andEa c, Uma Kothari,36-55. Approaches [acce es-for http://www.ceecn. Citize making processesin participati the 547- Work Governance: http://www.i [acce 2002/Rezultat http://www.i Books. Participation: Frances.2001. F

21stCentury.” tasa. 2009. erhat. 2009. andU Uces Izvjestaj ostanjuucesc 558 ssed April ssed June1, E.andD ofGovernment. ns' -civic- stern ce gradj participatio ma Kothari. on theN initiati toDevelopment.” E P in zbor zbor Interview ana u i200 uropean avid ractices andProcesse Interview 4,2009] “Institutions, decision- 2009] ew Tyranny i.ba/Mandati2 i.ba/Documents/Rezultati%20i ves-1&catid=37 Planning 4/Kratki/Opci donosenju E.Booher. net/index 2008). n London: in 2001. ” Citizens a gradjanjaudonosenju bya 2008. thebudgetingprocessatlocal Public Administrat byauthor. m Theory Center aking ? ed odlukaza2008. “TheCaseforP uthor. .php?o AgencyandtheLimitations

ZedBooks. Verified 2004. In Network s. 7102 processesin2007) Cooke, &Pr nski%20 :bosn forCivil P ary andTina Sarajevo, articipation ptio M s forStakeholder “Re 008/ results- aglaj. actice ia-and-herzegovina& n=com_content Bill . ion framing Public 2006. index.asp naceln odlukaza2007. Initiatives 5,no.4 godinu BosniaandHerzegovina. Review Bosnia Local andUm articipation : theNewTyranny? N “CentresforCivil ici%20u%20Federaci abatchi.

E zbora%209 (Citize 65, (Dece [acce andHe Center lections andCitizen a Kothari, BiH no.5 level P &view=art a n ssed June1, 2005. ofP mber): articipation s Tyranny participatio 2008. . godinu

forCivil (September/October): rzegovina. in Itemid=23#_ftn1 6- BiH.” articipatory eds. Cooke,

1-15. 419-436 “The New (Report P Initiati icle articipation ”. Initiati

2009] London: : June15.

ji%20B Strategiesfor May25. n In &id=1 in

ves: oncitizen

decision- Bill ves

80:centr iH.pdf Z

BiH in and ed the

47

.

CEU eTD Collection Gaventa, John. GAP. 2009. Dom Dimova, Marina. Delic, Cosovic Cornwall Hailey, Gavranovic ______ancic, Sulejman. John. 2009] http://www2. Democracy’ _. Learning _. Zed Books. to possibi 3, http://www.b capital development Participation Participation Zed Books. Participation: , Mugidim.2009. , P 2009] 2006. 2004b. AndreaandVeraSchattan Marinela. articipation , Nihad.2009,

Planiranje 2001. projects) lit 2004a.

2007. Triumph, theLe ies”. 2009. “Strengthening Debate in “ theN inNewD projects). Beyond 2009. in NewDemocraticArenas i In ids.ac.uk/logo ihgap.ba/bs/gap_komp/p “Toward

implementacijak Kriter Interview Development

ssons fromAbroad.”

, IDS P Deficit Interview ew Tyranny? Interview articipation Interview iji theFor Working z

or emocratic Arenas”In Maglaj a vrednovanje s participatory Participatory bya Contestation? , with ed : byauthor. eds.Cooke, li From mulaic: P.Coehlo. byauthor. nk/resources/downl apitalnih uthor. m s. P Hickey, a unicipal aper 264, Tyrannyto uthor. razvojnih , 1-29. Proces Sarajevo, National projekata Deepening governance:asse Approaches Z 2007. Sarajevo, Visoko, Sam ity. Bill laniran enica, London: Brighton: s andPracticein Availab projekata Transformation? andU

uel Sp Civic Bosnia “SpacesforChange?TheP BosniaandHerzegovina. ( the‘Deepening je_implementaci aces for Planning andGilesMohan, Bo BosniaandHerzegovina. oads/Wp264 Review Z toLocalGovernance: ma Kothari, le snia IDS andHerzegovina. (Ranking ed Books. with Change ssing andHerzegovina. andimplementation 93, theauthor. E South thetrans No.4:16 ? ThePolitics xploring criteriafor .pdf 88-101. ja.asp AsianNG 25-41. [acce NewApproaches [acce formative –27 July27. London: June15. of ssed July3, London: olitics June29.

ssed July M Os of ay 25.

of ” In

48

CEU eTD Collection Kesby, Mike. Federal Development Hodzic, Hickey, Heller, Heinz Levesque, Mario. Local MD Kothari, PC Action l, P Christian. . 2007. Sa

http://www.maglaj.ba/lag/ http://www.maglaj.ba/down development London: In Society Space: [acce http://www.fzzpr in Federa Dizdarevic participati London: Approaches to themes andchallenges.” Kerala, South Edin, Um atrick. 2008) m andGiles Participation: ssed July3, a. G 2005.

ciji

andReim BeyondTyrannyto 30, 2001. Strategija razvoja 2001. roup BiHu2008. ZedBooks. ZedBooks no.4: 2008. Interview on Srdjan “ P in D “ strategyforthe2006-2011 Retheoriz “Moving Africa, Pl articipation Power, Mohan.2004. public theN oboj-

2037-2062. “ 2009] a Ana anning Plotting etal. .gov.ba/Doc/20 by Ma

ew Tyranny? andP KnowledgeandSocial opcineMaglajz life?” (Socio- M theState: ing a 313-350 Institutio glaj. inDevelopment In uthor. aglaljic the Empower T orto Participation: [acce

2009. In DemocracyAssessmentin ransform RootsofLocalCitizen economic “ load/zvan Sarajevo, Towards participation Alegre.” . Sarajevo: 2006. eds. Cooke, ThePolitics n. ssed July3, M 09/S 2009. a period aglaj ment-through-P ation.” , eds.Hickey, “Political indicators FromTyranny icn ocio period). BosniaandHerzegovina Municipality Politics

OpenSociety Socioekonomski i%20akti/ 2006.-

ekonomski%20pokazate Bill

Control 2009] Journal ofD andSociety participation: andU M in 2011. emocratic Decentralisation aglaj SamuelandGiles of m Eng STRATEGIJA_RAZVOJA.pdf toTransformati articipatio in andtrans Bosnia Women Website. unicipal ma Kothari,

P m FundBosnia& po (Ma agement ( articipatory

unicipal 29, kazatelji an glaj in no.1 Istherefull ities d Herzegovina n formation:

Culture

asa .23June. poopćinamau ity. :131-163 inFederation on? Preliminary 139-152. Perfor lj Development.”

Mohan,3-25. i%2020 Ex and Herzegovina plori critical citizen

mance in eds.

08.pdf ng in

Ne

BiH

49 w

CEU eTD Collection Miovcic McClaran, Law onthe Law onLocal Michener, ______Misic, ______. Snezana. Init Tradition 29 29 Init Gwen Swinsburn. Economic Lessons ( De April http://www.fbi SamoupraveuFeder [acce noj%20samoupravi%20Repub http://www.b Republike http://cpsa-acsp.ca/papers-2008/Levesque.pdf Canadian Dra Burkino , Zdravko. V.J.1998. May2009. May2009. Mitchel iative. iative. P mocracy forPublic ft).” ssed April 3,2009] rincip SelfGovernmentofRepublika 2009. .Forthcoming. Fa Development Political andTransition.” Not) Pp.13-80 2009. Srpske) 2007. P.andMarg so”, les “ Interview ofSelf-Governancein L ihgap.ba/dokument_new/p The Participatory 3,2009] Interview hvlada.gov World earned in “ B Science . 2004. Developi Strategiesinto udapest: LocalGover aciji Development “Citizen L aret A.

by Official and BiH). BosniaandHerzegovina”

As Budapest:LocalGovernmentandPublic by .ba/bosanski/ a ng uthor. Pl a sociation LocalEconomic Moote. li uthor. P anning.” 2006. ke%20Sr Approach: Re G articipation 26, Doboj, ality azette RS B N FBiH(Zakono Srpska(Zakono O 1997. Annual anja in o.12:

fficial Journal pske.pdf zakon Transition nment andPublic ol BosniaandHerzegovina. L Contradictio icy%20pub “Implications 2105–18 in No101/04 uka, GazetteF Conference. of i/200 Bo D

[acce RangeM Bo

evelopment snia Countries.

6/zakon in snia P ssed July3, ,

andHerzegovina:

lokalnoj cited in Talk isCheap:Turning rincip likac BiH n andHerzegovina. (18.11.20 anagement andCo-optation ofparticipatory U Service ije/Zakon%2 no. i/34 Brett,E.A.2003. Ed. ima Lokalne BC: Infrastructure: s 51/06 2009] amoupravi bos.htm Vancouver. 50, 04). Reform Service

no. (06.09.200 Between [acce 0o%20 5:473-

in

Refor Local

ssed lokal 481 6). m 50

CEU eTD Collection Nalic, Nalic, Municipal MD MD MD Mohan, OSCE Omerbegovic, OECD. 2008. Odjeljen P. P. P. N Mirsad.2009. 2009. 2008. 2006 “U GilesandKristian http://www.osceb 29 author. strategy of razvoja entrepreneurship Municipal vijeca (19- http://www.mdp.ba/post http://www.mdp.ba/text/An The Danger Development “P asir. je Council June2009. govor”. zalokaln articipati a.

2009. Postignuca (A Approaches toLocalEconomic 2005

opcineMaglajz Zekija, Ma Municipality 21). Council king 2005. Maglaj. Interview Studies Annual on i s ofLocalism.” Interview razvoj, (Information andAccountabil LocalStrategiesWork. 2009,

“Ugovor” depart chievements). , 40,No.2: (19-21)) 2007. Report. ih.org/documents/132 Stokke biznis Interview of a 2008. by M

by author.Maglaj, ment a

aglaj for Prospectus. Informacija

uthor. ignuca.php . ofrealization i 2000. Ma godinu poduzetnistvo Third 1–29.

). nual_Report_0

2008. glaj by author.Visoko, ity Sarajevo, Development 2008). “ World in ( Municipal Participatory Ed.Jonathan orealizaciji

Informatio Development

[ Informacija o accessed15July,

Qu Ma ofconclusion BosniaandHerzegovina. BosniaandHerzegovina. 7- glaj ( arterly (L eng.pdf Local n ity. 5.doc on zakljuc Municipal ED): Development Availab a 21, a Potter.P BosniaandHerzegovina. development, ctivities ktivnost M [ Inter [ No.2: accessed15July, aka prethodnih accessed on15 anagement.” fromprevioussessionsofthe 2009] of le cooperati ity. ima with realization aris: 247-268 Availab narealizaciji andE O theauthor. on businessand ECD P experience. sje The Journal 16June. 29June. J le of dnica Opcinskog mpowerment: 2009] uly, with thedevelopment strategije ublicatio 2009] the

of

ns. 51

CEU eTD Collection Pejic, Petrovo Plan 2007- Petrovo OSCE OSCE OSCE project. OSCE Rowe, Rowe, REC 2009. ______. Dr G G “ “ “ “ Conference.” http://www.rec.org. (Assistance Programto 12 www.mdp.ba/text/za_web.pdf 2012. Partner m presentation. www.oscebih. project. http://www.osceb http://www.osceb Science, Technology M M Ugovor”.n.d. Ugovor”. Ugovor”. Ugovor”. agica. ene ene, June. 2012). unicipa unicipa

Program podrskelokalnim andL Mar

2009. Swiss Agency 2007.

sh, unicipal 2008c. 2008b. 2008a. lity. lity. ynn Interview

RoyandLynnJ. P How w

2008. 2006. org/documents/12706- Science, Technology, MDPC Termsof J.Frewer.2005. resentation &Hum P Visoko: Maglaj: ities, ih.org/documents/126 ih.org/documents/126 etrovo: e havepreparedStrategicDevelopment forD

LocalInitiatives ba/lisee Implementacija strategije(I Strateski planrazvoja with 15February2008 an FinalReport FinalReport evelopment onProgres Final Values theauthor. inicijativama info.htm Reference F &HumanValues “ATypology rewer. 2004. Reportupon 30, inSouth-

no.2: andCooperation s ofLE eng.pdf . upongradu P Available [acce upongrad uJugoistocnoj Petrovo etrovo, 76- 85- 251- East E mplementation ssed on “ ofP eng.pdf eng.pdf D StrategyImplementation [acce gr Evaluation 2007- BosniaandHerzegovina. aduation 290 29, with uation ublic urope). ation ssed on 15July, Evropi No.1: Planof [acce [acce 2012 theauthor. Engage SDCandIntercooperati fromtheUG

fromtheU ofStrategy). ofaD fro (Petrovo

ssed on ssed on 15July, 88-121. Petrovo 2009] m the ment Mechanisms.” eliberati StrategicDevelopment 15July, 15July, Municipality U 2009] Power GOVOR GOVOR OVOR project. ve ofM

2009] 2009]

Point 2007-

DP

on.

52

CEU eTD Collection UN UN Swinburn Struyk, ______. UN UN UN UN DP RMAP.2005. DP. 2005. DP RMAP,n.d. DP RMAP.2007a. DP RMAP.2006b. DP RMAP.2006a. Ray http://rmap.undp.ba/?PID=3&RID=16 [acce http://rmap.undp.ba/upl Local Bosnia http://rmap.undp.ba/Up Nov.pdf http://www.rmap.undp.ba/up Bosnia [acce pageP LO http://web.wor Bertelsmann Stiftung, Primer and ImpactofLocal Evaluation” July http://rmap.undp.ba/Up , Gwen,Gog PMEN mond 15,2009] ssed on ssed June10, G &H andH Developi K:14895

National overnance, [ J.2004. acces T/EXT erzegovina.

erzegovina 15July, S RMAP –Vulnerability “StrategicPlanning ng cience, 6~piPK:21 HumanDevelopment

a,

sed on What isRights- Visoko CASE STUDY:Applying ldbank andI SorayaandF “Policy 2009] LED/0,,contentMDK:20276 Hum Te Think 2009] Com . mplementing Sarajevo: 15February,2009] G chnology Municipality: .org/WBS ütersloh; an 2000. Rese load/SC/ load/SC/FG_vulnerab oad/sc/RMAP_2006_study_forCoP_Armenia_final 6618~t munities T RightsandG & anks”. b ergus M ased Municipal load/sc/Analysis%20 arch “ U LocalEconomic HumanValues ITE/EXTER Public TheWorld heS attheMunicipal ND Report AssessmentVia Rights- ofPr inBosnia visok Southeast itePK:34113 P BiH. urphy. Pa 2005: aH o%20eng_fina actice B ender, [ rticipati ased Development accessed J Development EuropeanPolitics

Bank,Washington, 2006. RBA to andHerzegovina: BetterLocalGovernance Joint Development 25, NAL/TO Yerevan. 743~ il Fo 9,00 ity%20assessment.pdf on no.1: ity

Local Eventon cus MunicipalDevelopment of%20questionnaire_f Methods: uly Level: isCURL:Y~menuPK:1330226~ .html GroupsPiloted Programme(RMAP_2006)? l.pdf 15, 3-29 E PICS/EXTURBAND Strategy2006- StrategiesandAction conomic 2009] SurveyAnalysis.” 5, D AFr no.1: TheRole D ecentralizatio Development: .C. in amework for attheLocalLevel 45-59

2015. [acce in inal_1 Plan A

ssed n .pdf and EVE 0_ .

53

CEU eTD Collection World Wil Visoko Visoko beyond: VeneKlasen, UN Working World liams, DP RMAP.2007b. c Bank. Bank. M hallenges uid=4b991df6 http://swordfish.altc Development Strategija razvoja 148956~ LO http://web.wor Aubrey Samuel andGiles Transformati capabilit based development naming ofanExecutive Strategije groupin http:// July, http://rmap.undp.ba/Up Municipality G Glyn.2004. unicipa PMEN roup forthe 2009] Lisa,Miller 199 2009

www.ids.ac.uk/down oflinking razvojazasnovane C.Will ies piPK:216 Visoko 2. lity. . T/EXT andspacesofe

on? Social P . 2006. n.d.. articipatory “ StrategyRS-D Exploring 685f65a5

lokalnesamouprave Towards arepolitic iams. RMAP Implementation ldbank Creation rights , Ac municipality) Valerie, Mohan,92-108

618~the Clanovi PCEN Rjesenje strate countability Wa ontro andp .org/WBS Development 4392c boardfortheimplementation NewAp napostivanju shington, oftheLocalAdministration P gy 2006- Clark, G/0,,contentMDK:205 load/SC/ oimenovanju l.n mpowerment”. In SitePK:41 articipation. artnerske load.cfm?file=wp23 l:80 5c414 raft). . World Cindy proaches to uRepublici 95/Sr ITE/EXTER London: DC:World 2015). andtheWorld

izatio grupeuopcini 47df11 Implementatio ljudskihprava2006- Manual. 0306 IDSWorking Bank. Upravnog pskaSwordsite/Re andMolly

n ofparticipatory P ,00. [ ZedBooks. Srps articipation accessed J

html Participation: B NAL/TO odborazaimplementaciju B koj Visoko ank 5.pdf 0942 Reilly. ank

n%20Manual.pdf -N Pa [acce Disc , ed.BhuvanBhatnagarand in per D

uly 4~menuPK:1278120~ ofprojects [acce acrt

2015. ssed Febru Development (Members ofthePa

235, evelopment 20, Rights- ussion publ PICS/EXTSOCIALDEVE FromTyranny

development: (Local ssed on 2009] ( B ik_Ser Decision b righton: P ased ap Self-Governance apers: fromtheRights- ary 28, 15July, , [ bian/ektr ed Strategy. acces IDS projek proaches and to s. on 177- political Hickey,

2009] sed 15 the 2009] rtnership ata iz 178 pagePK: onl 2009.

ink?

54 CEU eTD Collection 12. 11. 10. 9. Gavranovic, 8. Dom 7. Dimova,Marina 6. Delic, 5. Cosovic, 4. Celebic 3. Budisa,Na 2. Bradaric,Ferhat 1. Bajramovic, F Annex: amily K Jovanovic, Heinzl, alota, na ancic, Sulejman me, , L Sacir Christian Resid Mu ist of Marinela tasa Na Ljuban N Nihad gdim ermana me Inter N Headq Municipal N BiH, Advisor, Mana B Director oftheEmployment m budget andfinance,Visoko of economy,development, and development Head ofdepart Work, Director oftheCenter O Interventio P m entrepreneurship, development, Head ofdepart O D Assistant, De Com Or director P company, Petrovo Director of“D Mana Local GovernancePortfolio OSCE ZenicaField D Citizen view rogram As ensioner, ureau, Maglaj ational ational unicipal unicipal epartment, OSCE emocratization ffice, ffice ganization Sarajevo munity ger andChief ger, Visoko

uarters, Sarajevo Sarajevo participation, ees of“ ILD Progra Progra U ity ity Legislative, for n, ND D sistant, ( Prevent” company, OSCE

mocratization P project, business,and mer financial in evelopment uvaplast” ment ment P BiH, m Of m Of Depart a in Maglaj Municipal Technical lpha O theO Z ofeconomy Head forlocal

ficer ficer, OSCE enica ffice forSocial Sarajevo U

ment,

ND – betical order)

ffice

Field

P

3 July2009 25 May2009 15 June2009 15 June2009 D 3 July2009 12 June2009 23 June2009 15 June2009 25 May2009 27 July 16 June2009 29 June2009 ate ofInterview 2009 55 CEU eTD Collection 20. 19. 18. 17. 16. 15. 14. 13. Va P O O N N Misic, Miovcic, ejic, alic, alic, smic, Muhamed merbegovic, sic, Dra Na Mirsad Snezana Zoran Zdravko sir gica Zekija Director ofOZP P development Head oftheDepart m P Council, Secretary oftheMunicipal Sarajevo ILD Capacity Building Council, P Director ofMD E Director, Development Visoko. etrovo resident resident DA, unicipal P project, B municipality anja Visoko M ofSDAparty oftheMunicipal board,Maglaj aglaj L m UN uka m anage P, Doboj m Associate, etrovo unicipal DP BiH, unicipal ment for

ment, Agency

(

NGO) ity

ity

12 June2009 16 June2009 29 June2009 29 June2009 16.06. 29 May2009 29 May2009 25 June2009 2009 56