Introduction
A project can be defined as a set of planned activities that are used to come up with clear and specific objectives within a given timeline and budget. The activities of a project are generally involving and painstaking, beginning with the identification of resource mobilization team and task force that helps to develop the necessary resource allocations and core operational lending to fund the project.
A full participatory approach that entails a multi-disciplinary/multi-sectored approach is necessary to expedite the project cycle activities. The design phase of a project cycle is very crucial because it is the design process that determines the most feasible way through which the problem can be tackled, or objectives can be met.
The involvement of a multi-disciplinary approach in participation ensures that the project is successful and sustainable. However, as a development practitioner, one experiences various challenges while conducting a multi-disciplinary stakeholder analysis hence affecting the actual outcome of the project.
This paper aims at discussing the challenges/problems that a development practitioner experiences while conducting the aforementioned analysis.
Discussion
Stakeholders/beneficiaries are people who have a direct, significant and particular interest in given natural resources hence, have the liberty to express their views in a proposed project. Primary and secondary stakeholders, who have personal interests in the proposed project that addresses the problems concerned, are identified through a stakeholder analysis.
Stakeholder analysis is very important as it helps in the development of strategic views that can be applied to address the problem. Multi-disciplinary stakeholder analysis entails the identification of the different kinds of stakeholders who will take part in project development.
These stakeholders are very important at every stage of the project cycle because each stage is related to the needs of the stakeholders in one way or the other (Caldwell, 2002). Appendix 1 represents a table that could be used in multi-disciplinary stakeholder analysis (Gawler, 2005).
There are primary/direct stakeholders and these are very essential with regard to conservation. They are directly affected by any outcome of the project based on action taken hence; they are a very critical component of the project design process because wrong action will not yield into the desired impact of the project.
The development practitioner should ensure that he/she clearly identifies the primary stakeholders as they are very essential in ensuring sustainability of the project. Secondary stakeholders are those with an indirect interest in the project.
They entail donors, national government officials, consumers and private enterprises. Despite the fact that they are not included in all stages of the project, their periodic contribution is required (Guijt & Woodhill, 2002).
Opposition stakeholders adversely affect outcome of the project as they have the power to influence and control resources. They are mainly political leaders and mainly also known as gate-keepers. As a development practitioner, it is very important to establish a very good rapport with these stakeholders.
In addition, it is very important that the practitioner develops amicable strategies of handling such stakeholders because they usually have personal interests. These stakeholders are interested in gaining favor from the rest of the population hence will seek to have all the credit given to them irrespective of the fact that they did not contribute much (Howlett, et al., 2000).
Marginalized stakeholders are suppressed and their voices not given the importance they deserve. Irrespective of their input to project design and management, they lack the capacity of getting equally involved in a participatory approach during project design, implementation and management.
It is left to the development practitioner to ensure that the marginalized stakeholders gain the recognition they deserve during problem identification, formulation of objectives, establishing the relevant approaches to addressing the problem and evaluating the strategy selected to determine its relevance in achieving the formulated objectives (Dickinson, 2002; Parpart, 1999).
The development practitioner should determine the nature and limits of every stakeholder’s role in the project. This is important to avoid misunderstandings that may prevent successful implementation of the program. Some stakeholders can only play their roles to a certain point hence, the practitioner should know the limitations and the type of stake each stakeholder is willing to offer.
Failure to identify what each stakeholder is willing to offer may lead to disagreements thereafter thus affecting the success of the project. Multi-disciplinary stakeholder analysis is a very critical process that requires adequate time for the development practitioner to explore stakeholders’ views, values and perspectives and obtain their insight with regard to human and institutional landscape.
The stakeholder’s insight determines whether collaboration is necessary (WWF Ecoregion Conservation Strategies Unit, 2000; Rahman, 1995).
Multi-disciplinary stakeholder analysis is very inherent to any participatory approach because it helps planners to confirm the effects of a certain activity, identify marginalized groups who will be affected by the project’s development activities. In addition, it ensures cost-effectiveness of the project because different disciplines come together to identify a common ground for action.
This way, each discipline contributes partly to the success of the project cycle rather than leaving the entire project burden and budget to one party. The involvement of various disciplines in a project prevents duplication of resources hence saves on resources and avoids wastage.
However be affected by cultural values and beliefs of a people. Gender issues are a main I pediment to the success of projects. This is because, discrimination by gender excludes some stakeholders from the project cycle hence, the project address the problems of all stakeholders (Razavi, 1998; Lind, 1997).
Multi-stakeholder analysis in project cycle involves various parties from national, international organizations, private sector and the civil society. The recent notion in project cycle development is that networking in an integrated way should be embraced so as to achieve the actual objectives of the project.
A participatory approach in project development is assumed involve each and every person with a stake, choice and voice in the project cycle development process. Unfortunately, this approach may be governed by gendered interests hence, not giving the least powerful the chance to voice in their views and opinions.
A development practitioner experiences difficulties related to, equity and inclusion during multi-disciplinary stakeholder analysis given the fact that participation discourse has shifted from mere beneficiary participation to involve questions related to rights, governance and citizenship (Gaventa, 2002; Becker, 2001).
The involvement of stakeholders in a project participation discourse in most occasions, boils down to a situation whereby only the few vocal voices are raised and heard. Women have been seen to lose out where their presence and views are marginalized in the so called ‘participatory processes.’ In such a case, it becomes very difficult for a development practitioner to foster full participation in projects.
Gender and full participation with regard to development is considered to be rather fraught and is associated with tensions and contradictions that are too much for a development practitioner to handle.
Gender and development assumes a top-down approach since the views of both genders are not adequately considered due to prevailing frames of references and lack of wide participation in setting agenda and implementing proposed ideas (Guijt, 1994; Razavi & Miller, 1995.).
Every beneficiary has a right to his/her voice in development while integrating various disciplines to help alleviate poverty and injustice in the society.
It would be important to entail political, organizing, practical and creative factors to help in addressing poverty and injustice, where the political factor would play a great role in ensuring that legal frameworks defend and advance the rights of the poor and marginalized. Organization focuses on ensuring that people organize themselves in a proper way for collective struggle (Fals-Borda & Rahman, 1991).
In a culture where gender discrimination is evident, it becomes difficult for the development practitioner to fight against cultural values and ways despite the fact that full participation is achieved without discrimination of any sort. Women, just like men, have important roles to carry out in project management and design.
Women and children are the most vulnerable in society and therefore, involving women just the same way as men would enhance the success of the project. Gender mainstreaming, where the development practitioner creates an environment in which both men and women have an equal role to play and voice in their views unanimously, should be developed.
This way, varied responses encompassing all genders are incorporated into the project. However, gender mainstreaming in an environment where gender discrimination is evident would not easy to achieve as a development practitioner (The Netherlands, ITAD Ltd, 1999; McPhail & Jacobs, 1995).
The involved stakeholders are the key parties that identify problems and issues that need to be addressed. In developing countries, a participatory rural appraisal (PRA) has been used to foster participation in prevailing projects.
PRA entails the use of semi-structured but highly participatory activities that draw on the local communities’ knowledge and skills, while assisting them to assess their environment and resources. This approach is bent on the fact that solutions should derived from the local community (Pratt, 2001; Leach, Mearns & Scoones, 1997).
Multi-disciplinary stakeholder analysis helps to establish a rapport between the facilitator and the stakeholders, which is very essential for the success of a project.
It is the first step in any project cycle because conducting a multi-stakeholder analysis is important for developing the required task force necessary to ensure that every stage of the project cycle is successful, addressing the relevant issues affecting the stakeholders. However, it is very important that the facilitator suitably identifies the relevant stakeholders
A multi-disciplinary stakeholder analysis helps to formulate SMART objectives. In addition, this analysis helps to identify the locally available resources that can be included while addressing the problem at hand. The analysis also helps to identify conflicts of interests among the stakeholders hence; it will be easy to manage the stakeholders.
Unfortunately, the conflicts can be very overwhelming for the facilitator such that it could lead to derailment of the project. The development practitioner should use the multi-stakeholder analysis process to develop appropriate strategies that will ensure that stakeholders’ conflicts of interests do not interfere with the success of the project (Insight Partnership, 1995).
The analytical importance of gender as a vital element is obscured by the narrow focus on gender relations. When a project fails to address gender related issues at the start of the project, then it becomes difficult to incorporate them in the subsequent stages of the project cycle.
A project that does not include the varying needs of men and women in social, linguistic, economic and cultural contexts is likely to be ineffective, unsustainable and inefficient.
The development practitioner, who is mainly the facilitator/chairperson, may have a difficult time trying to identify the relevant stakeholders so they can take part in needs assessment, planning, implementation and evaluation of the project.
This is because; individuals with personal interests may mislead the practitioner and he/she ends up identifying the wrong program and as a result, the project will not achieve intended objectives due to poor targeting (Rahman, 1995).
A project may fail if the development practitioner does not adequately factor in the interests and groups of the different stakeholders in the area where a project is to be implemented. In such a case, stakeholders who feel that their interests are not adequately taken into account may use their power to prevent attainment of objectives.
Therefore, it is very important that a development practitioner ensures that the interests of all the involved stakeholders are factored in during throughout the project cycle (Robb, 1999).
Stakeholders may not be willing to accept the project. Such a case happens when the project was done while using a top-down approach hence, it may not be relevant to the stakeholders. Assuming the case of Australia’s aid program, environmental management system is developed and executed with the aim of achieving sound environmental performance.
It establishes a structure through which environmental issues are addressed by allocation of resources, assignment of responsibilities and evaluation of practices, procedures and processes useful during the development, implementation, achievement, review and maintenance of policy and legal setting (Standards Australia/ Standards New Zealand, 1996 cited in Commonwealth of Australia, 2003).
The EMS undergoes five steps to successfully develop a project/program that will ensure that environmental objectives in Australia are met.
The first step entails comprehending policy and legal setting under which the desired useful activities will be implemented. Different stakeholders, that is, the AusAID staff, contractors, NGOs and associated development partners are required to fully understand the legal obligations related to AusAID’s activities to successfully carry out the assessment and properly manage the associated activities.
The AusAID is involved with poverty reduction and environmental growth, stability and prosperity. The involvement of the relevant stakeholders helps to establish essential links that greatly fosters the effectiveness of the program in as far as poverty reduction was concerned (Commonwealth of Australia, 2003; Rademacher & Patel, 2002).
Multi-disciplinary approach of the AusAID is important as the Minister for Environment and Heritage is required to give advice before executing a project. Involving the Minister is very important because he/she is well aware of the objectives that the nation seeks to attain hence, will be in a position to give his/her opinion regarding the feasibility of the project with regard to the desired program effects.
This example clearly indicates that the AusAID program identifies the desired stakeholders by conducting a training to create awareness. In this example, it is evident that the stakeholders involved are staff, contractors, NGOs and related parties involved in the implementation of the program’s activities.
This example shows that while conducting a project, relevant stakeholders should be included in the project. This fosters the success and ability of the project to achieve its objectives. In addition, this network of stakeholders does not specify a certain gender or group of social group of people.
The main focus is the ability to perform and objectives of the project. Depending on the role of each stakeholder, all will work collectively to carry on with assessment, implementation, monitoring and evaluation, and review.
Assuming that a different group of stakeholders were selected, that which did not have knowledge about AusAID, its objectives and policies, the successful execution of the project would be jeopardized (Commonwealth of Australia, 2003).
A development practitioner encounters a hard time trying to involve all the relevant stakeholders within a location into the project. This is because; some of the stakeholders are overwhelmed with responsibilities thus present themselves as secondary stakeholders. The AusAID example shows this.
Therefore, a practitioner is not able to create a mainstream environment that allows for multi-disciplinary stakeholder analysis because some of the stakeholders are tied up in other events or responsibilities. In such a case, the practitioner is obliged to continuously update other stakeholders, who are not able to frequently avail themselves.
The development practitioner is faced with the responsibility of making the stakeholders aware of the fact that power is not a priority at the time. The most crucial thing during multi-disciplinary analysis is to ensure that various aspects of the society integrate with one another for the good of everyone and not for only those to whom power has been bestowed upon.
Different stakeholders may discriminate against one another yet, when selected applying the recommended protocol, all the stakeholders are very important for the success and effectiveness of the project (Howlett, et al., 2000).
When multi-disciplinary stakeholder analysis is done correctly, the stakeholders’ interests are met and they gain capacity development, which is very important for project sustainability and ownership. In addition, the stakeholders are able to integrate the locally available resources to ensure the sustainability of the project.
Sustainability is successful when a full participatory approach is achieved involving a mainstreamed environment. Some stakeholders would want to use their power to govern the use and control of the project yet, the project is meant to benefit everyone regardless of their status.
It is difficult for the facilitator to ensure that the project maintains an impartial approach that does not favor anyone due to their individual power or position. Every stakeholder involved in the design and management of the project has an equal right to the project (The Unit for Social and Environmental Research at Chang Mai University (USER), 2004.).
Conclusion
Multi-disciplinary stakeholder analysis is the initial and critical process of any project cycle. It is the determinant factor with regard to the success of the project. Understanding the views and opinions of the different stakeholders helps in designing a project that is relevant to the stakeholders.
Identifying the ideal and relevant stakeholders to take part in the project management and design process is not easy but it should be carefully carried out. The stakeholders identified are a representative of the rest of the population hence; it is assumed that the needs of the stakeholders are a representation of the entire population within a particular society.
If the stakeholder analysis is not carried out correctly, then the project ends up not addressing the desired society needs. Gender discrimination therefore, should be avoided and a full participatory approach encouraged.
Reference List
Becker, H. A., 2001. Social impact assessment. European Journal of Operational Research, 128, 311–21.
Caldwell, R., 2002. Project Design Handbook (Working Draft Full Version 1.0). Atlanta: CARE International.
Commonwealth of Australia, 2003. Environmental Management Guide for Australia’s Aid Program 2003: AusAID. Canberra: AusAID.
Dickinson, P., 2002. Preparing monitoring plans for the TDPs. Gland, Switzerland: WWF International.
Gaventa, J., 2002. Introduction: exploring citizenship, participation and accountability. IDS Bulletin, 33, 1–11.
Gawler, M., 2005. Project Design in the Context of Project Cycle Management. Prévessin-Moëns: Artemis Services.
Guijt, I., 1994. Making a difference: integrating gender analysis into PRA. PRA Notes, 19, 49–55.
Guijt, I., & Woodhill, J., 2002. Managing for Impact in Rural Development: A Guide for Project M & E. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Office of Evaluation and Studies.
Fals-Borda, O., & Rahman, M. A., 1991. Action and knowledge: Breaking the monopoly with Participatory Action Research. New York: Apex Press.
Howlett, D., et al. 2000. Stakeholder Analysis and Local Identification of Indicators of the Success and Sustainability of Farming Based Livelihood Systems. Sustainability Indicators for Natural Resource Policy, Working Paper No. 5, Department for International Development (UK)
Insight Partnership, 1995. Goal Oriented Project Planning Facilitator Training: Individual Procedures. The Netherlands: Little & van der Geer.
Leach, M., Mearns, R., & Scoones, I. Eds. 1997. Community based sustainable development: consensus or conflict. IDS Bulletin, 28 (4), 12.
Lind, A., 1997. Gender, development and urban social change: women’s community action in global cities. World Development, 25, 1205–1223.
McPhail, K. & Jacobs, S., 1995. Social Assessment. Washington D.C: The World Bank.
Parpart, J., 1999. Rethinking participation, empowerment and development from a gender perspective. In J. Freedman (Ed.), Transforming development. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Pratt, G., 2001. Practitioners! Critical reflections on PRA and participation in Nepal. IDS Working Paper no. 122. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies.
Pretty, J., 1995. Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture. World Development, 23, 1247–1263.
Rademacher, A., & Patel, R., 2002. Retelling worlds of poverty: reflections on transforming participatory research for a global narrative. In Brock, K., & McGee, R. Eds. Knowing poverty: Critical reflections on participatory research and policy. London: Earth scans Publications.
Rahman, M., 1995. People’s self-development: Perspectives on Participatory Action Research. London: Zed Books.
Razavi, S., 1998. Gendered poverty and social change. Discussion Paper DP. 94, Geneva: UNRISD.
Razavi, S., & Miller, C., 1995. From WID to GAD: Conceptual shifts in the women and development discourse. Occasional Paper no. 1, Geneva: UNRISD.
Robb, C., 1999. Can the poor influence policy? Participation in the World Bank’s poverty assessments. Washington, DC: World Bank.
The Netherlands, ITAD Ltd, 1999. Project Cycle Management Training Handbook. EC, Brussels: ITAD.
The Unit for Social and Environmental Research at Chang Mai University (USER), 2004. Sustainable Production-Consumption Systems. Thailand: Chiang Mai. Web.
WWF Ecoregion Conservation Strategies Unit, 2000. Stakeholder Collaboration: Building Bridges for Conservation. Washington, DC: WWF US.
Appendix
