Mechanisms for popular participation and discursive constructions of citizenship

Abstract

In the past decade, Latin America has witnessed the emergence of a political discourse that links popular participation to citizenship accompanied by an explosion of participatory mechanisms. Yet there is little qualitative research that looks at how participatory experiences affect people's perceptions of their role as citizens or to what extent the discourse transmitted through these institutions encourages participation or compliance. This article examines conceptions of citizenship among individuals who engage in participatory mechanisms in Venezuela, Ecuador and Chile. Using discourse analysis, it finds that participants in Venezuela and Ecuador have developed a ‘radical’ conception of active citizenship that differs from the liberal interpretation in Chile. Regardless of the preferred model, however, state discourse establishes parameters around citizenship. Furthermore, the discursive repertoires of citizen participants align with those produced by state institutions, suggesting that participatory mechanisms act to socialize people into participating in ‘legitimate’ and acceptable ways.

Keywords::

• citizenship
• political participation
• participatory mechanisms
• discourse
• Latin America

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank Candace Johnson, Jordi Díez, César Andrés Pérez, Rosario Gómez, the two anonymous reviewers and the editorial team at Citizenship Studies for their insightful and helpful comments that have contributed to the final version of this manuscript.

Notes

^1. In Venezuela, this included texts produced by the Ministry of Popular Power for the Communes and Social Protection (MPComunas), Fundacomunal, the Consejo Federal de Gobierno, Servicio Autónomo Fondo Nacional de los Consejos Comunales (SAFONACC), Escuela Fortalecimiento del Poder Popular, Fondo Intergubernamental para la Descentralización (FIDES), Fundación escuela de gerencia social, Universidad Bolivariana de Venezuela and departments charged with popular participation in the states of Mérida and Carabobo and the municipalities of Libertador (Caracas) and Mérida. In Ecuador texts were analysed collected from the Secretaría Nacional de Gestión de la Política, Consejo de participación ciudadana y control social (CPCCS), Secretaría Nacional de Planificación y Desarrollo (SENPLADES) and municipalities of Manta and Montúfar. In Chile, texts were analysed from the Ministry of the General Secretariat of Government (social organizations division), the Subsecretariat of Regional and Administrative Development, the Ministry of Justice and from the Chilean Association of Municipalities and the citizen participation divisions of the municipalities of La Pintana, Maipú and Providencia.

^2. Texts are understood here in a broad sense, as written documents and websites of governments, as well as interviews and meeting transcripts (Fairclough 2010).

^3. Texts produced by Ecuadorian state agencies are somewhat more focused on citizens working with the state and local authorities through participatory mechanisms, generally affirming that participatory planning makes citizens and the state ‘jointly responsible for the design and management of public policy and action’ (SENPLADES, 2011). The Ecuadorian state has also been less eager to use these mechanisms to mobilize citizens than in Venezuela. Nevertheless, the discourse found both in these texts and disseminated by President Correa is strikingly similar to that found in Venezuela; discourse defines ‘real’ democracy as participatory, associates it with ‘the people’ and promotes the concept of a new, more democratic era.