Introduction

Community participation in development projects is crucial as far as developmental goals are concerned. The ability of different groups in the community to participate in the developmental projects ensures their success and hence optimal returns. Failure of these groups to be integrated into these community projects is depicted as one of the core reasons for the increased levels of social inequalities. To overcome such trends, appropriate measures ought to be adopted in order to make the participation campaigns successful. The use of these approaches will be a vital inclusion in averting the consequences of social inequalities amongst the people. Various techniques have been erected to curb the increasing trends of inequalities in the society. The failure of the community to engage and participate fully in developmental projects is attributed to various barriers. These barriers could be economic, social or political. Social aspects such as traditions, beliefs and values could be some of the barriers to an effective community participation agenda. Development in this context may refer to the increased levels of individual well-being as a result of their ability to manage and mobilize resources. Therefore, for any developmental project to be substantive the various community groups ought to be involved, and their participation realized. The engagement of young people in community development policies has been on the rise over the last few years. The need for young people to participate in various community development projects in Britain has been emphasized. The Ministry for Young Citizens and Youth Engagement has been in the frontline to facilitate the participation of young people in the development projects. Through such efforts, young people are empowered to undertake their roles and responsibilities wisely.

The paper will explore the various reasons as to why people or different groups in the society may not be able to participate fully in development projects. The paper will further examine the reasons for limited youth engagement in Britain and the probable reasons for the same. Various barriers to participation and engagement will be explored too. The paper will further examine the various techniques and efforts that can be used to avert the problem of non-participation and non-engagement in the society. The different theoretical approaches and theories that surround the issues of participation and engagement will be examined too. Various arguments that have been raised in support of the participation and engagement of young people in the society will be discussed at length. The use of the democratic participatory as an initiative to foster engagement and participation of young people in Britain will be emphasized. The engagement and participation of young people in community development have profound impacts not only on the society but also in their individual well-being.

Barriers to Participation

The inability of people to engage or participate in the society is a multifactorial aspect. This is because various factors tend to determine whether one will be able to engage or participate in various community development aspects. Participation in may refer to the kind of collaboration that exist among the people in their attempts to pursue their goals and objectives (Sanoff 2000). The existence of various barriers is the core reason for minimal participation and engagement of people in the society especially the young generation. The idea of participation is based on various factors such as the level of participation, power and purpose, control, initiation, and process, the role of practitioner, commitment, partnership and ownership of ideas. For instance, the ability of people to show and uphold a commitment to a proposal or a community development project ensures full support and subsequently the realization of the anticipated goals. Lack of commitment by the specific groups in the society is one of the barriers to engagement by the youths. The existence of partnership among the people will initiate the sharing of commitment and confidence. With such commitment and confidence, all the relevant groups will participate fully and engage in various projects. This aspect is based on the differences in funds and skills among the individuals in the society. The aspect of the partnership is a barrier to effective participation and engagement because of the long timeline that is involved in order to realize it. Additionally, the inability of the peoples’ skills and funds to coincide together is another reason as to why the partnership is hard to implement. The level of participation is one of the key setbacks to participation and engagement processes. The aspect is vital due to the significance of some of its components. For instance, for the participation aspect to be realized, the components of information, consultation and togetherness ought to be realized. Therefore, the ability to pass information on the people on the overall plans is essential in that all the people will be quite informed about the project. Additionally, upholding consultation among the people and hearing their views on the issue of community development is very essential. With this regard then, the views and feedbacks of the people should be respected. The inability to accept new ideas from other people is another setback to the engagement process. The young people feel that their decisions and views will not be accepted hence little cases of engagement and participation. Ability to decide and act together is a key factor that ensures success in participation and engagement of the people. The ability engage in collective decision-making processes and upholding the virtue of partnership is another factor that can bring forth the anticipated engagement and participation of the people. On the contrary, the inability of the people to be engaged in collective decision-making procedures is a major setback to engagement and participation. The failure to act and decide together limits the participation and participation of the young generation. The influence of power and position is a key determinant of engagement and participation. In this context, the lack of power results in low levels of participation and engagement among the people. The low levels of participation in young people are attributed to their low powers. The position that an individual holds in the society determines his levels of engagement. For instance, people who hold senior positions have more engagement and participation levels as compared to their minors. Hence, the participation levels for the less powerful in the society are lower as compared to the powerful and those who held higher positions. Public participation has led to the discussion of various aspects of engagement such as the issue of power, participation, and political renewal. With strict adherence to the issue of participation, the future policies and practices will be formulated hence proper co-existence of people in the society. The lack of proper participatory policies and guidelines for all is one of the major setbacks for the participation and engagement of people especially the youths.   The failure to initiate and uphold democracy and its principles is one of the major barriers to participation and engagement. The lack of democracy and democratic principles will scare away people from participating in various issues of the society. The lack of democracy contributes greatly to the build-up of unworthy practices and undertakings in the society such as corruption and imbalanced regional growth and development practices. The aspect further scares away the potential participants in the political scenes hence low levels of participation and governance. The power inequality among and political renewal are some of the barriers that block the participation of people in various community developmental projects. The young people in such societies are not spared by these antics hence their low levels of participation. The lack of professional power, experience, and the individual expertise tend to block the process of free participation and engagement of the people (BARNES et al., 2007). The identity issue in the society is another setback to the participation of people in the society. People whose identities and reputations are branded as low have low tendencies of participation and engagement in the society. The ability of people to engage in local area forums and participate in collective decision-making would help to bridge the gap between the locals and the various societal needs. Therefore, the inability of the person to embrace and engage in the local forums will automatically result to low levels of participation and hence increased the societal gap. In Britain, for example, the low participation of people in the local forums reduces the contributions of elected officials in the decision-making process in their respective local authorities. With such low participation by the elected officials due to increased levels of opposition, the anticipated goals in the society will be unachievable and practically impossible. The lack of teamwork and cohesion among the children and young people tends to expose them to serious societal antics such as theft and burglary. Embracing teamwork and togetherness among the young people would help to avert the many vices that may arise as a result. Lack of teamwork will result to bullying among the children and hence low participation levels in the societal affairs. Additionally, the availability of low levels of social capital by the people reduces the levels of engagement between children and their parents. With such low capitals, the participation and engagement of children and young people will be restricted. Limitations of the young people and children in terms of material and territorial restrictions are other barriers to their participation and engagement (TISDALL 2006). Such aspects tend to reduce the inclusion of the young people and children in the society. Territorial restrictions reduce the movements and engagement in some territories hence the build-up of unethical behaviours such as robbery. On the other hand, the inability of the children to engage in such restrictive places and territories will tend to foster and uphold his moral uprightness hence his ability to overcome the vices associated with such places. The low levels of social capital and material wealth will reduce the levels of participation among the young people because of the low levels of exposure attributed to such poverty levels. The career paths for children and the young generation will be affected by their levels of exposure to the current trends in technology, medicine and so forth. In such a scenario then, a child who is not exposed to the various trends and advancements in careers may not be able to choose a better career. With such low career developments, the exposure and participation rates will be reduced. The ability of the government and society to provide the young people with all their necessities will have a positive impact as far as the urge for participation and engagement will be concerned. The involvement of children and young people in the economy will help to facilitate their participation and subsequently their inclusion in the society. In the United Kingdom, the adoption and implementation of various children Acts and provisions greatly influence their participation and engagement in various societal matters. The engagement of children in anti-poverty campaigns will have some profound impacts on their engagement in the long run. For instance, reduced levels of poverty will increase the social capital and hence higher wealth levels. The final product of such wealth is the ability of these children to pursue better careers and subsequently higher levels of participation the society. Children and young people from poor backgrounds experience higher levels of discrimination on the various societal issues. Lower levels of income in such households lead to low levels of participation (Zappala & Family 2003). The discrimination is as a result of low levels of social wealth and resources. Discrimination of the young people and children on such basis leads to low engagement and participation in the society. Additionally, the higher levels of discrimination lead to increased levels of social exclusion not only among the children and young people but the community as a whole. The inability of the young people to engage in various community-based services is a major setback to effective participation and engagement. The failure of the young people to engage in community-based services such as clubs, recreational and other social organizations will reduce their engagement in various community development aspects (TISDALL 2006). The existence of disabilities among the people is another cause for the low engagement levels.

The levels of participation in the society can be influenced by the social and psychological limits that exist within the individual (Cooke & Kothari 2001). Social psychology is an important aspect in the realization of a mutualistic kind of interaction in the society. In such a scenario, the various interactions within the groups will be portrayed in several ways. The analysis of risky shift, groupthink, Abilene paradox and coercive persuasion helps to evaluate the impacts of psychological limits on community development. Risky shift entails an action by a group whose impacts outweigh that of an individual action. The existence of such risky shift among the group members tends to affect their decisions that concern the issue of participation in the society. Therefore, the participation and engagement of such a group in community development may be restricted by their overall decision. Groupthink is associated with a false judgment by a group of people due to exposure to various isolation mechanisms. The groupthink scenario is brought about by the existence of directive leadership, isolation and higher levels of cohesiveness among other factors. Directive leadership and cohesiveness within a group is a core cause of low participation and engagement among the group members. This is due to the existence of strong group links that bind the members together. The existence of groupthink among the young people acts as a barrier to their effective and efficient participation and engagement in the society. Abilene paradox involves a scenario that is different from the groupthink but differs because individuals in a group may not be able to object the group decisions (Kim 2001). The existence of loyalty to these group decisions may deter the participation of the group in various projects of the society. The members of the group are obliged to their group decision because of the psychological impact of the decision on their cognitive abilities. Coercive persuasion is the fourth psychological limit that reduces participation and engagement of people or a group of people in the society (“Coercive Mind Control Tactics | Factnet Public Dialog on Social Justice & Human Rights Issues,” n.d.). The coercive psychological systems tend to force an individual to engage in certain beliefs and subsequently engage a particular action. The existence of such beliefs will limit the engagement of people in the societal.

Overcoming the Barriers

Barriers to participation and engagement in the society ought to be averted in order to realize the full potential of the community. The elimination of the barriers to participation helps to foster teamwork and subsequently helps in the realization of the society’s full potential. Overcoming the barriers to participation will further help to reduce the social inequalities in the society. Through the critical reflection of participation in the society, the vice of non-participation will be averted and hence the optimal inclusion of all the members of the society. The adoption of sound development policies to curb the aspects of non-participation and non-engagement should be enhanced in each and every society. The rights of young people and children ought to be respected in order to facilitate their participation and engagement in community development strategies. Participation and engagement of people should be initiated at all levels of governance in order to realize optimal returns from the various developmental strategies (Bochel et al., 2008). The adoption of better and steadfast policies should be prioritized so as to realize the anticipated goals. The use of the various democratic, participatory initiatives should be enhanced in order to realize higher levels of participation and engagement especially among the youths. In the United Kingdom, the Ministry for Young Citizens and Youth Engagement strives to foster the involvement of young people in the country’s developmental projects. This has been evidenced by the efforts of the government to incorporate the children and young people in developing and facilitating a sound social policy (Cockburn 2005). The policy is geared towards the realization of higher levels of participation and engagement by the youths. Through the increased levels of democracy in Britain, young people will be empowered and facilitated to undertake their democratic rights optimally. Increased power and empowerment principles in children hence higher levels of participation and engagement. The adoption of volunteering principles and active participation of people in various governmental and non-governmental institutions will help to break down the barriers of participation and further foster the rates of involvement. The increased levels of participation will enhance the participation levels in the community and hence their control. The ability to control the community through participation leads to wise voting, activeness and volunteering endeavours to foster empowerment(“Communities in control: real people, real power – Publications – GOV.UK,” n.d.). The ability of young people to participate in the democratic processes ensures higher levels of participation and subsequently empowerment.

Conclusion

Increased levels of engagement and participation lead to the realization of the community’s full potential. There exist various barriers that reduce the levels of participation and engagement of people in the society. The major barriers to participation have economic, psychological and political dimensions. The availability of low-income levels in the society is one of the major setbacks to effective participation of the people. For instance, children from low-income households are unable to access better educational courses. Low-level courses have low impacts on the society and hence the inability of such children to participate fully in the community development endeavors of the society. The existence of various group psychological aspects such as groupthink, risky shift, coercive persuasion and Abilene paradox influence the participatory aspects of each and every group member. The inability of an individual to object any group decision in the case of Abilene paradox will deter the participation levels of the individual due to his loyalty to the group. The four aspects have adverse effects on the cognitive status of the individual hence the ability to have adverse effects on the individual’s ability to participate in various community development strategies. The failure of the individual to participate and exercise his democratic rights as per the rule tends to limit their participatory efforts.

The existence of the numerous barriers to participation especially among the youths and children has prompted various adjustment measures to avert the trend. The Ministry for Young Citizens and Youth Engagement in Britain is entitled to increase the levels of participation among the youths in the country. Through its various efforts, the ministry has been able to uphold and facilitate the democratic participation among the youths through the adoption of various policy measures. Facilitating volunteering processes and the active participation of the people in various governmental and non-governmental institutions has helped to increase the participation of the youths and children. The adoption of sound social policies will help to empower youths democratically hence higher levels of engagement and participation.

From the essay, it is clear that the participation of people in the society is a vital component for the realization of the community’s goals. Additionally, the essay has emphasized on the merits that the community will be able to accrue as a result of fostering the optimal participation of the citizens. The paper has clearly spelt out the need for a sound democratic participatory of the youths in attempts to realize their significance and role in the society. The economic, social and political barriers to participation have been explored at length. The way forward for any society is based on its ability to embrace and foster effective participatory practices of its people. The efficient engagement and participation by the people ensures the realization of the community’s full potential.

Works Cited

Communities in control: real people, real power – Publications – GOV.UK. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/communities-in-control-real-people-real-power

Cockburn, T. (2005). Children’s participation in social policy: Inclusion, chimera or authenticity?. Social Policy and Society, 4(02), 109-119.

Bochel, C., Bochel, H., Somerville, P., & Worley, C. (2008). Marginalised or enabled voices?‘User participation’in policy and practice. Social Policy and Society, 7(02), 201-210.

Zappala, G., & Family, S. (2003). Barriers to participation: financial, educational and technological: a report into the barriers to societal participation among low-income Australians.

Sanoff, H. (2000). Community participation methods in design and planning. John Wiley & Sons.

Coercive Mind Control Tactics | Factnet Public Dialog on Social Justice & Human Rights Issues. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://factnet.org/coercive-mind-control-tactics

Top of Form

BARNES, M., NEWMAN, J., & SULLIVAN, H. (2007). Power, participation, and political renewal: case studies in public participation. Bristol, Policy.

TISDALL, E. K. M. (2006). Children, young people, and social inclusion: participation for what?Bristol, Policy.

Cooke, B., & Kothari, U. (2001). The social psychological limits of participation?.Participation: the new tyranny?, 102-121.

Kim, Y. (2001). A comparative study of the” Abilene Paradox” and” Groupthink”. Public Administration Quarterly, 168-189.

CLICK BUTTON TO ORDER NOW