Citizen participation: the case of Israel Project Renewal

Abstract

Project Renewal made citizen participation in decision‐making its central principle, the core of all the activities performed at the neighborhood level. This paper describes the concept of citizen participation in disadvantaged areas, how it developed in practice, its organizational changes and its new form in Project Renewal neighborhoods in Israel. In addition, it considers which factors contribute to or impede the development of citizen participation and the lessons that have been learned during its 30 years of existence. The citizen participation concept as implemented in Project Renewal indicates significant transformation changes in neighborhood rehabilitation: from the absence of both formal and informal channels of influence to the present stage when it is an integral part of a decision‐making process. The implementation of a resident participation policy enabled inhabitants in disadvantaged neighborhoods in Israel to have their voices heard and to be part of an influential neighborhood body of stakeholders working together to build and manage a sustainable community.

Keywords:

• citizen (residents) participation
• local steering committees, “democracy shock”
• neighborhood self‐management
• Leading Groups
• decentralization
• democratization
• social and political mobility

Notes

1. For suggestions for further information, see Carmon (1996).

2. National Social Policy Team: a government forum in charge of the social strategy and policy established at the beginning of PR. Due to policy and organization changes it became the new Inter‐Governmental Committee.

3. Jewish Agency: a national organization of the Jewish communities in Israel and abroad. It became an important partner to PR during its first seven years. It created the so‐called “Twinning Project” where a Jewish community abroad adopted a community in Israel and raised funds to build community institutions (schools, kindergartens, libraries, community centers, daycare centers, elderly and youth clubs) to improve the quality of life in areas of social services, education and building community.

4. Inter‐Governmental Committee (IGC): a representative forum of all the government ministries, which takes part in PR. The IGC has five main functions: first, to decide which neighborhoods will be included or phased out of PR; second, to allocate their annual budget; third, to approve the neighborhoods' programs every year; fourth, to supervise and control how the budget is used; and fifth, to issue regulations and strategic policy guidelines.

5. Multi Service Centers: an original concept of PR whose aim was to build and focus its activities on issues to become anchors for sustainable communities after the phasing out stage. Examples are: child development centers; human capital development centers; and youth centers. The common idea is to develop services that are interrelated and offer different functions and services at one spot.

6. PR physical aspects: the housing policy engaged in PR did not use demolition or displacement policies. It rather coped with the existed housing stock to improve it by building enlargements and renovations; improving physical infrastructure and a maintenance policy. A new redevelopment policy is being considered these days. For further reading, see Weinstein (2003).

7. Development town: settlements built during the 1950s and 1960s in peripheral areas of Israel as a national policy aiming to achieve population dispersal. Most inhabitants were new immigrants from North Africa, the Middle East and Eastern Europe. Due to their location, deteriorating housing, a lack of environment infrastructure, an economy based on traditional industry, and a lack of skilled people, they become the first ones to be included in PR. For further reading, see Berler (1970).