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.

Equine and human mutual welfare: a whole subject? Critical aspects and possible strategies in equine-assisted activities and therapies

General aim of the study is equine welfare, particularly concerning different husbandry methodic and inter-specific relational factors. Specific aim is the evaluation of possible mutual (to humans and to equines) benefits and the analysis of critical factors/strength points, of human-horse relationship within Therapeutic Riding context (TR). The peculiarities of human-horse relationship (compared to the bond with “Pet”) are analyzed, concerning their socio-anthropological, psychological, psycho-dynamic distinctive characteristics. 8 European representative therapeutic riding centers (TRC) were therefore selected (on the basis of their different animals’ husbandry criteria, and of the different rehabilitative methodologies adopted). TRC were investigated through 2 different questionnaires, specifically settled to access objective/subjective animal welfare parameters; the quality of human-horse relationship; technicians’ emotional experienced. 3 Centers were further selected, and behavioral (145 hours of behavioral recording) and physiological parameters (heart rate and heart rate variability) were evaluated, aimed to access equine welfare and horses’ adaptive responses/coping (towards general environment and towards TR job). Moreover a specific “handling-task” was ideated and experimented, aimed to measure the quality of TR technicians-horses relationship. We did therefore evaluate both the individual horses’ responses and the possible differences among Centers. Data collected highlight the lack of univocal standardized methodic, concerning the general animals’ management and the specific methodologies (aimed to improve animal welfare and to empower TR efficacy). Some positive and some critical aspects were detected concerning TR personnel-horse relationship. Another experimental approach did evaluate the efficacy (concerning the mutual benefits’ empowerment) of an “ethologically-fitted” TR intervention, aimed to educate children to and through the relationship with horses. Our data evidenced that the improvement of human horse relationship, through structured educational programs for TR personnel might have important consequences both to human and equine welfare.