Monopolization by interest groups in development of community priorities

Global participation is often lost when interest groups determine the priorities for the future, rather than allowing grass roots expression of concern to point to the priorities. When such decisions are monopolized by a few leaders, trust is undermined and so, therefore, is the participation of the community in acting out the decisions.

Local people have more difficulty in having their case heard with central authority than do powerful lobbies with the ear of those in authority. An example is evident in areas where hunting or shooting of game is prevalent. The rights of local people often go unheeded, while sportsmen have no difficulty in getting their needs attended to by regional or national authorities to whom local residents have difficulty in gaining access.

A UK initiative to tackle land contamination flopped when the government reversed a radical decision taken in 1990 to compile registers of contaminated land. The plan was passed by parliament but withdrawn after lobbying by business, which said that it would harm property markets.

1. Widespread community factionalism
2. Vulnerability of government to lobbying
3. Unethical practices of philanthropic organizations
4. Undue political pressure
5. Lack of participation by local communities in democratic processes
6. Incomplete utilization of external relations

1. Over-reliance on economic interest groups by policy agencies
2. Narrow context for counsel
3. Limited and fragmented outlook of civic minded groups
4. Lack of community voice
5. Blocked minority opinion

1. Reinforcement of inappropriate development by privileged classes
2. Inadequate grass-roots initiative
3. Inaccessibility of health services
4. Government complacency
5. Developing country failure to exercise leverage on international bodies

1. Unresponsive public authorities
2. Official privilege