What Happened to Participation? Urban Development and Authoritarian Upgrading in Cairo's Informal Neighbourhoods

Participation appeared in development discourses for the first time in the 1970s, as a generic call for the involvement of the poor in development initiatives. Over the last three decades, the initial perspectives on participation intended as a project method for poverty reduction have evolved into a coherent and articulated theoretical elaboration, in which participation figures among the paraphernalia of good governance promotion: participation has acquired the status of “new orthodoxy”. Nevertheless, the experience of the implementation of participatory approaches in development projects seemed to be in the majority of cases rather disappointing, since the transformative potential of ‘participation in development’ depends on a series of factors in which every project can actually differ from others: the ultimate aim of the approach promoted, its forms and contents and, last but not least, the socio-political context in which the participatory initiative is embedded. In Egypt, the signature of a project agreement between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the Federal Republic of Germany, in 1998, inaugurated a Participatory Urban Management Programme (PUMP) to be implemented in Greater Cairo by the German Technical Cooperation (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, GTZ) and the Ministry of Planning (now Ministry of Local Development) and the Governorates of Giza and Cairo as the main counterparts. Now, ten years after the beginning of the PUMP/PDP and close to its end (December 2010), it is possible to draw some conclusions about the scope, the significance and the effects of the participatory approach adopted by GTZ and appropriated by the Egyptian counterparts in dealing with the issue of informal areas and, more generally, of urban development. Our analysis follows three sets of questions: the first set regards the way ‘participation’ has been interpreted and concretised by PUMP and PDP. The second is about the emancipating potential of the ‘participatory approach’ and its ability to ‘empower’ the ‘marginalised’. The third focuses on one hand on the efficacy of GTZ strategy to lead to an improvement of the delivery service in informal areas (especially in terms of planning and policies), and on the other hand on the potential of GTZ development intervention to trigger an incremental process of ‘democratisation’ from below.

International cooperation in endourology: percutaneous and flexible ureteroscopic treatment of lower pole kidney stones

Introduction Lower pole kidney stones represent at time a challenge for the urologist. The gold standard treatment for intrarenal stones <2 cm is Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) while for those >2 cm is Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL). The success rate of ESWL, however, decreases when it is employed for lower pole stones, and this is particularly true in the presence of narrow calices or acute infundibular angles. Studies have proved that ureteroscopy (URS) is an efficacious alternative to ESWL for lower pole stones <2 cm, but this is not reflected by either the European or the American guidelines. The aim of this study is to present the results of a large series of flexible ureteroscopies and PCNLs for lower pole kidney stones from high-volume centers, in order to provide more evidences on the potential indications of the flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of kidney stones. Materials and Methods A database was created and the participating centres retrospectively entered their data relating to the percutaneous and flexible ureteroscopic management of lower pole kidney stones. Patients included were treated between January 2005 and January 2010. Variables analyzed included case load number, preoperative and postoperative imaging, stone burden, anaesthesia (general vs. spinal), type of lithotripter, access location and size, access dilation type, ureteral access sheath use, visual clarity, operative time, stone-free rate, complication rate, hospital stay, analgesic requirement and follow-up time. Stone-free rate was defined as absence of residual fragments or presence of a single fragment <2 mm in size at follow-up imaging. Primary end-point was to test the efficacy and safety of flexible URS for the treatment of lower pole stones; the same descriptive analysis was conducted for the PCNL approach, as considered the gold standard for the treatment of lower pole kidney stones. In this setting, no statistical analysis was conducted owing to the different selection criteria of the patients. Secondary end-point consisted in matching the results of stone-free rates, operative time and complications rate of flexible URS and PCNL in the subgroup of patients harbouring lower pole kidney stones between 1 and 2 cm in the higher diameter. Results A total 246 patients met the criteria for inclusion. There were 117 PCNLs (group 1) and 129 flexible URS (group 2). Ninety-six percent of cases were diagnosed by CT KUB scan. Mean stone burden was 175±160 and 50±62 mm2 for groups 1 and 2, respectively. General anaesthesia was induced in 100 % and 80% of groups 1 and 2, respectively. Pneumo-ultrasonic energy was used in 84% of cases in the PCNL group, and holmium laser in 95% of the cases in the flexible URS group. The mean operative time was 76.9±44 and 63±37 minutes for groups 1 and 2 respectively. There were 12 major complications (11%) in group 1 (mainly Grade II complications according to Clavidien classification) and no major complications in group 2. Mean hospital stay was 5.7 and 2.6 days for groups 1 and 2, respectively. Ninety-five percent of group 1 and 52% of group 2 required analgesia for a period longer than 24 hours. Intraoperative stone-free rate after a single treatment was 88.9% for group 1 and 79.1% for group 2. Overall, 6% of group 1 and 14.7% of group 2 required a second look procedure. At 3 months, stone-free rates were 90.6% and 92.2% for groups 1 and 2, respectively, as documented by follow-up CT KUB (22%) or combination of intra-venous pyelogram, regular KUB and/or kidney ultrasound (78%). In the subanalysis conducted comparing 82 vs 65 patients who underwent PCNL and flexible URS for lower pole stones between 1 and 2 cm, intreoperative stone-free rates were 88% vs 68% (p= 0.03), respectively; anyway, after an auxiliary procedure which was necessary in 6% of the cases in group 1 and 23% in group 2 (p=0.03), stone-free rates at 3 months were not statistically significant (91.5% vs 89.2%; p=0.6). Conversely, the patients undergoing PCNL maintained a higher risk of complications during the procedure, with 9 cases observed in this group versus 0 in the group of patients treated with URS (p=0.01) Conclusions These data highlight the value of flexible URS as a very effective and safe option for the treatment of kidney stones; thanks to the latest generation of flexible devices, this new technical approach seems to be a valid alternative in particular for the treatment of lower pole kidney stones less than 2 cm. In high-volume centres and in the hands of skilled surgeons, this technique can approach the stone-free rates achievable through PCNL in lower pole stones between 1 and 2 cm, with a very low risk of complications. Furthermore, the results confirm the high success rate and relatively low morbidity of modern PCNL for lower pole stones, with no difference detectable between the prone and supine position.