This document is intended as a summary of and reference guide to the Citizenship DRC’s work. Though it is not comprehensive, the aim of the document is to highlight the major findings whilst signposting the original research. For readers who wish to reference these ideas in future publications, it is preferable, where possible, to cite the original Citizenship DRC research. In instances where this document must be cited directly, please list the author as the Citizenship DRC. The document has been compiled by Nicholas Benequista with major contributions by John Gaventa.

Violence and everyday insecurity are amongst the root causes of poverty: a simple and true statement that has at last been acknowledged in several international agreements, including the Geneva Declaration on Armed Violence (2008) and Dili Declaration (2010). Several new funding mechanisms have even been established to support efforts to reduce violence, including those that address the special security needs of excluded groups, women, youth and children. What recent policies have failed to adequately consider, however, is that poor and dispossessed people often perceive the state as a perpetrator or accomplice - whether by active complicity or passive omission – in the violence visited upon them. For policymakers and practitioners eager to move beyond top-down approaches to reducing insecurity and violence, this policy briefing offers insights into how local residents can be directly involved in finding solutions for their security and livelihood needs. Research from a range of contexts characterised by violence and everyday insecurity suggests that external actors can help to broaden spaces where citizens can take action in non-violent, socially legitimate ways, but that success depends on gaining a locally nuanced understanding of the complex relationship between violent and non-violent actors, and between forms of everyday violence and political violence.

This summary note provides a guide to key findings, especially those that link to contemporary policy debates on how citizen participation and engagement can contribute to development, strengthen democratic and responsive states, and help to realise human rights. For each message, reference is made to key documents that support these findings and articulate them in more detail.

The Pioneers of Participation workshop highlighted the importance of recognising country context. Yet international experiences shared by participants also highlight the gains of recognising and adapting Public Participation Best Practice. Om Prakash from PRIA in India, Tricia Zipfel from the UK and Nina Best from Polis in Brazil emphasised how both the state and civil society ‘learn’ effective participatory strategies through ongoing engagement and the adaptation of legislation and policies. This emphasises a recurring theme of the workshop: innovation is as important as legislation, and legislation needs to be flexible enough to allow adaptation.

Over the past decade, around the world, there has been an explosion of interest in more participatory forms of governance. This has happened partly in response to demands from citizens to have more say in decisions that matter to them; but it also reflects a growing recognition, by those in power, that community involvement is central to the major challenges of revitalising democracy, improving service delivery, tackling poverty and building strong communities. The need to address these complex issues has led to a shift in thinking from narrow ideas of local government to broader concepts of community governance, in which multiple actors play a part in public policy and the delivery of public services at neighbourhood, local government and even national levels. In developing new forms of community or participatory governance, the challenge is twofold. On the one hand it requires empowered local communities whose citizens are able to participate in decision-making, claim their rights and hold institutions to account. And critically, it also requires government institutions and service providers to have the will and the capacity to respond to communities, to engage in more open and accountable ways and to recognise their right not only to have a voice, but also to influence the decisions that affect them.

Citizen action plays a critical role in confronting poverty and social injustice at the national level. It can bring about significant changes to policy and help to build responsive and accountable states. The challenge is not only how best to support and enable national-level advocacy, but how to ensure the changes it brings about are sustainable. This In Focus Policy Briefing explores positive examples of citizen action and highlights how government, donors and civil society organisations can help citizens bring about pro-poor national policy change.

Many citizens are disillusioned with government and democracy. Corruption, state failures to respond to poor people’s needs and a lack of connection between citizens and elected representatives and bureaucrats are major concerns.At the same time, citizens are challenging corporations and global institutions to be more responsible. This four-page policy briefing draws upon the Citizenship DRC's research to look at how policy can help address these issues.

Science and technology are key to tackling poverty and promoting better well-being in the modern world, as the Millennium Development Goals and the Commission for Africa’s findings underline. But how can scientific and technological advances – often played out on a global or corporate stage – translate into innovations that will meet poor people’s needs and concerns at a local level? How do rapid scientific advances and new technologies engage with issues of participation and accountability? And in what ways do these rapid changes challenge notions of citizenship and identity? Based on work undertaken by the Science and Citizens programme of the Citizenship, Participation and Accountability Development Research Centre, this IDS Policy Briefing argues that public engagement in scientific debates and policy processes is necessary to address how research agendas are framed and the social purposes they serve, and to ensure that poorer people and communities will benefit from them.

A policy briefing which looks at the central debates on accountability, dispels some myths, identifies some cases drawn from recent research on citizen participation and accountability and addresses policy implications.