Ambitions on inclusion : including the narrative of African diaspora in the design of Dutch development policy

Ambitions on inclusion

Including the narrative of African diaspora in the design of

Dutch development policy.

Master thesis

Suzan Huppes 10354433

University of Amsterdam

Sociology: Migration and Integration

Supervisor: Sonja Fransen

February 2018

1

Content

Acknowledgements 3

Abstract 4

1. Introduction 6

1.1 The value of context 6

1.2 Diaspora as a solution? 7

1.3 Research Question 9

2. Theoretical Framework 10

2.1 Definitions and their historical development 10

2.2 Who plays a role in deciding upon development policy? 12

3. Methodology 21

3.1 Research characteristics 21

3.2 Research Technique 22

3.3 Ethical concerns 25

4. Findings 27

4.1 The voice of the government: development policy 27

4.2 What is the ambition of the diaspora? 31

4.3 A case: ‘Samenspraak Tegenspraak’ 41

5. Conclusion 44

5.1 Sub-question one, two and three 44

5.2 Sub-question four: Strategies of collaboration 46

5.3 Sub-question five: Pitfalls in collaboration 49

5.4 Inclusivity, a long way to go 50

7. Literature 54

8. Appendixes 59

7.1 Appendix 1; Interview Guide 59

7.2 Appendix 2 61

7.3 Appendix 3 63

3

Acknowledgements

I want to thank my colleagues at Partos for listening to my endless questions and inspiring me to conduct this research.

In addition, I want to thank Sonja Fransen for her quick replies and valuable comments. I wish the little child who’s about to arrive on planet earth and his mother all the best.

Special thanks to Jesse and Remy for their valuable input and to my brother Dick for the artwork

Abstract

This research will answer the question: How do government officials and diaspora organizations collaborate in the design of development policy in the Netherlands? Enhancing the specific local knowledge of African diaspora in the dialogue on international development was identified as valuable by the Dutch government in 2008 (Rijksoverheid 2008). Their social capital could stimulate the outcome of Dutch development cooperation. However, collaborating with this community is challenging due to their fragmented character and the often-small-scale diaspora organizations (Brinkerhoff 2008).

Important for this research is theory on participation and inclusive policy design. Especially the normative typology on participation of Pretty (1995) is used when critically analyzing the level inclusion or manipulation in participation. Cornwall (2008) explains us how complex but important the selection of participants and respondents is.

To see if the government indeed collaborates with African diaspora, this research combines in-depth interviews with members of the diaspora and government officials. In addition, policy analysis scrutinizes the intentions of the government to collaborate with diaspora from 2008 till early 2018.

During the research, five strategies of providing input to development policy design were identified. Consultation of the diaspora by the government, the diaspora giving written advice to the government, collaboration between diaspora and native organizations, alliances between African diaspora organizations and collaboration with the parliament through motions and amendments are identified as the most important strategies.

Of course, these strategies all have strengths, pitfalls and a different level of participation. The limited capacity of both diaspora organizations and governmental institutions is hindering collaboration. Collaboration becomes more complicated when taking the fragmented character of African diaspora organizations in account. A lot of small unprofessional organizations with mostly small-scale concrete activities create a situation in which it is hard to identify suitable representatives amongst the diaspora. While the government finds it hard to reach the diaspora, the diaspora also has difficulties finding them. They lack institutional integration to get access to governmental institutions.

The political climate is another component. Throughout the decade the focus of the government and its institutions did change. While in 2008 there was attention for the topic, this decreased

5

increase the capacity of the ministry appointed to the topic. In addition, the sense of responsibility is a problem too. While the diaspora organizations want the government to create an enabling environment for collaboration, the government expects the diaspora to take action themselves.

When observing the findings by using the framework of Pretty (1995) it is interesting to note that the typology ‘Interactive Participation’ seems absent in the strategies of collaboration between both parties. This form of participation is the only typology that relies on true and equivalent collaboration. Finding the time and capacity for this intense form of collaboration and appointing a party that is responsible for successful ‘Interactive Participation’ is a serious challenge. Therefore, it could be stated that although there are serious attempts for collaboration from both parties, they did not achieve an equivalent participation.

1. Introduction

In a heterogeneous society, including multiple narratives is policy design might sound logical, but it might be hard to comprehend the diverse voices.

This research focuses on the position of African diaspora in development policy in the Netherlands from the perspective of both African diaspora organizations and the Dutch government. In 2017, 657.748 people with an African background were living in the Netherlands (CBS 2018). While in 2008 the ambition was set by the government to actively work together with members of the diaspora, implementing this turned out to be challenging. Comparing the views of the government and African diaspora organizations will create an understanding of the values and pitfalls of participatory policy.

1.1 The value of context

This research follows two societal trends that are of influence within the design of development policy:

Avoiding dependency

Development support from the global north to the global south has been severely criticized the last decades. In 1984 already, Escobar stated that international development as organized since the Second World War is outdated and needs to be drastically re-designed. Escobar explains the neo-colonial characteristics and how it creates dependency from lower income to higher income countries (Sachs 1992, Escobar 1984). Since the early nineties, a growing pool of academia proposes a development framework that focuses on an equal relationship between Northern and Southern countries. This framework should provide space for- and values local cultural, economic and political context. A top down approach is slowly making space for bottom-up grassroots strategies of development. Following this discourse, space should be provided for local initiatives. These are valued because these initiatives often include local context and therefore have more chance on impacting the local community (Escobar 1984 &Aman & Sen 2001).

Representing society

In addition, in Europe and the United States, there seems to be a growing attention to the importance of policy design that reflects the diversity of society (for example Essed & Nimako

7

which extent the government and its officials are good representations of society. Incorporating multiple and diverse narratives within structures of governing are challenging, but a growing critique from society, academia and media urges the government to create space for dialogue and participation with a large range of citizens.

1.2 Diaspora as a solution?

These two difficulties merge when including African diaspora in the development dialogue. Both on European and national level, the emphasis on the role diaspora can play creates a new way of approaching development. Including minorities like the diaspora within policy design can add valuable narratives within the discourse of international development (Sinatti & Horst 2014): being familiar with the culture and society of both their home and host country puts diaspora in a unique position. They can play an intermediary role when designing development policy that values local context (Brinkerhoff 2008, p. 153-158).

However, since there is no such thing as the diaspora, designing a framework to achieve this collaboration is, both by researchers as government officials, identified as a challenging process. Channeling a broad range of narratives within a policy is, as one can understand, highly complex and nerve-breaking. However, one would miss out on important information when neglecting fragmented information (Sinatti & Horst 2014, Brinkerhoff 2008, Rijksoverheid 2008, p.47).

While the above paragraph focusses on the positive aspects of incorporating the knowledge of diaspora in policy design, the discussion to which extent diaspora should actually be involved within the development policy of their home country is still going on in academia, media and politics. As stated by mr. Hoebink, professor at the Radboud University Nijmegen: ‘I was born in Rijswijk but I don’t know anything about Rijswijk; afterwards I lived in Ede but I’m very glad that I know absolutely nothing about Ede; I’ve been living in Nijmegen the majority of my live, but I would dare to advise politicians there on healthcare institutions. Therefore, I like to question if diaspora can add something to the Dutch Development policy.’ (Hoebink 2017). Even though it is an interesting discussion whether or not diaspora narratives are of value in the design of development policy, it is not in the scope of this research to find a definite answer to this question. This research will make use of the ambitions as written down in policy papers.

1.2.1 The Dutch context

A combination of the long tradition of Dutch development aid (see, for example: Rijksoverheid 1950) and the diversity of the Dutch population creates an interesting case. The government is urged to include everyone who is part of the Dutch society (See for example: In de Almeerse politiek wordt écht geluisterd naar mensen met een beperking. Volkskrant 19-02-2018), to include the voice of minorities. The inclusion of the African diaspora minority is an interesting case and example when digging into the inclusive society.

In 2008 a development policy focusing on the link between migration and development was presented by the Dutch government. Within this policy paper, one of the six focus points states ‘strengthening the involvement of diaspora organizations’ (Rijksoverheid 2008, p. 46). Even though the ambition was set, in 2015, due to a lack of success, a motion accepted by the Dutch Second Chamber (Smaling 2015) stated the potential of diaspora is still under-used. Ten years after the 2008 policy paper, this research will analyze the outcomes and the current debate on this topic.

1.2.2 Earlier research

Earlier research on diaspora in the Dutch context mainly focuses on the capacity of diaspora organizations. A significant barrier facing African diaspora organizations is, according to the African Diaspora Policy Centre (ADPC), a lack of knowledge regarding the procedures and formalities of engaging with policymakers (ADPC 2016, p.16). This leads to little advocacy of the diaspora community, they lack institutional integration (Norglo et. al. 2016). This problem is not unique for the Netherlands, it was located in Denmark too (World Bank 2011). Specific trainings were designed with the Danish Refugee Council (DRC) to stimulate the capacity of diaspora organizations in Denmark. The goal of these trainings is to provide the diaspora organizations with an understanding of Danish institutions. Improving technical, operational and organizational skills will strengthen their ‘capacity to develop and implement sustainable and effective projects’ (DRC 2017). However, research seems to focus on the role of the government or on the responsibility of the diaspora to achieve impact. Within this research, the relationship between these two actors and a discrepancy between ambitions and outcomes is analyzed.

9

1.3 Research Question

Therefore, I want to question: How do government officials and diaspora organizations collaborate in the design of development policy in the Netherlands?

The question is reciprocal: both attempts from the Dutch government to include African diaspora and the strategies of the African diaspora to play part within policy design are analyzed.

To answer this question, the following sub-questions will be answered:

• To which extent does the Dutch government include diaspora in the creation of development policy?

• What characteristics of the diaspora community does the Dutch government value within the framework of international development?

• Do diaspora communities within the Netherlands have the ambition to influence development policy and how do they expect to do so?

• Which strategies do diaspora use to influence Dutch development policy?

• What are the pitfalls and successes of these strategies for both government and diaspora? A combination of policy analysis and qualitative in-depth interviews with diaspora organizations and government officials will provide answers to these questions. Differences and similarities of their view on the case are analyzed besides policy papers and policy design. Theory on the exact concepts of development and diaspora set the stage of the research and will frame both concepts. More important for the conclusions of this research are theories on participation and inclusive policy design. These theories support the operationalization of the concepts and help to critically analyze the findings and answer the research question. The theories are explained and elaborated upon in the following chapter.

2. Theoretical Framework

In this chapter, several concepts and theories are outlined and discussed. An elaboration on the definitions and historical development of diaspora and international development will take up the first part of the chapter. Secondly, participation in policy design and former research on involving diaspora in local development is analysed.

2.1 Definitions and their historical development

2.1.1 How is diaspora framed in this research

Because of geographical, historical, religious, ethnical and political diversity, it is difficult to create a holistic understanding of the definition of ‘diaspora’ (Scheffer, 1986). Everybody has a different relationship to his or her home-country and not every migrant would consider him or herself as part of a diaspora. Whilst ‘diaspora’ was mainly identified as a catastrophically dispersed ethnic group (Brubaker 2006), this notion is widening. Even those who migrated voluntarily could find themselves as members of a diaspora. According to Scheffer (1986, p.3), modern diaspora are: “Ethnic minority groups of migrant origins residing and acting in host countries but maintaining strong sentimental and material links with their countries of origin - their homelands.” Cohen has a similar reading of the concept. He states that diaspora are migrants who share “A sense of empathy and solidarity with co-ethnic members in other countries of settlement” (Cohen 1997 p. 515). Migrants stay connected with their homeland and often take responsibility for their kin through sending remittances, return- or circular migration (van Haer, 2013).

Following Brubaker (2006) a solidarity amongst diaspora in combination with dense social relationships that cut across state boundaries create a single ‘transnational community’ (Brubaker 2006, p.6). Many diaspora members follow certain values of the host country, learned through exposure and/or social pressure, whilst simultaneously respecting other values of their home country. Within this research, it is of importance to understand that members of the diaspora, at least partly, identify themselves with the nationality of their home-country and often feel responsible for kin, other relatives or their community. Even though some groups, mainly refugees, remain bitter towards the government of their country of origin (Brubaker 2006 & Newland 2010). This could be an incentive to play part within the development policy concerning their home-country.

11

thing as ‘the’ diaspora. Both between groups with different heritage and within a single diaspora community, characteristics differ (Sinatti & Horst 2014). Within research and policy concerning diaspora, this is often identified as a key-problem. As explained by Newland and Patrick (2004, p. 17), most ties between diaspora and their home country are individuals or small groups acting on their own initiative. One can imagine that it is hard to monitor these diverse relationships and activities. This understanding is of importance within this research. Acknowledging the diversity between and within diaspora might be complex. But, overlooking this aspect and assigning a uniform identity to diaspora will not provide a holistic approach to the matter.

2.1.2 How is international development framed in this research

This paragraph will introduce the concept and the historical framework of development. The critique to this concept, and the urge to find a new framework, create an incentive to incorporate the contextual knowledge of diaspora within development policy.

Since this research does focus on the international development as stimulated by the Dutch government, it will follow the Dutch vision on this topic: ‘fair and sustainable growth and prosperity from which everybody benefits (Rijksoverheid 2017).’ The concept of development is not only theoretical: ‘development’ is actively stimulated on a global, national and regional level through government institutions, businesses and international organizations (Aman & Sen 2001). The framing of development influences the policy accordingly.

After the second world war, the first development programs and international organizations that incorporated Western discourses within the Third World, were established (Escobar 1984). The intentions to share the economic development, as was happening in North America and Europe, led to the creation of multiple NGO’s that had the ambition to tackle global poverty (Escobar 1984). This framework is critiqued by its western/non-western dichotomy, it contributes to a maintenance of domination and economic exploitation (Escobar 1984, p. 378).

In other words, even after dependency, the Western world still has power to influence the development of their former colonies (Escobar 1995 & Nederveen Pieterse 2010, ch.1). Whilst the critique on development structures is not new, governments and NGO’s face difficulties when incorporating narratives of the local population, diaspora or other minorities in the process

of international development (Sinatti & Horst 2014). Within the process of finding a new approach to development, including diaspora narratives could be of importance.

2.2 Who plays a role in deciding upon development policy?

Stimulating inclusive policy design is a difficult process, especially when one wants to incorporate diverse and complex groups who struggle to find their way to government institutions (ADPC 2015). In this paragraph, research on diaspora involvement in the development in their home-country is observed. Secondly the reader will be introduced to theory on inclusive policy design.

2.2.1 The potentials and difficulties of involving diaspora in local

development

This paragraph explores the potentials and difficulties of diaspora involvement in local development as identified by other writers. A lot is written on the potential of diaspora but the possibility of diaspora influencing development policy remains largely untouched. The writers often focus on impact achieved through individuals and groups acting on their own initiative rather than influencing government intervention of their host country (Newland and Patrick 2004, p. 5 & Newland 2010). This highlights the interest amongst diaspora to play a role in the development of their home country and the difficulties they face to achieve this.

Migration is often identified as causing brain-drain and migrants were, according to the literature, mainly stimulating development through remittances (Bakewell 2009). But, slowly, both home- and host-countries start to identify the values of diaspora. Transforming brain-drain towards a brain-gain seems the new trend (ADPC 2015 & de Haas 2005). As explained by de Haas (2005, p. 1272): “In the medium to long run, in particular, the departure of the highly skilled may have beneficial effects in the form of a counterflow of remittances, investments, trade relations, new knowledge, innovations, attitudes and information.” Even though diaspora members can play part in the development of their home country, they might not understand their own potential. They often identify themselves as passive participants within politics and society in their country of residence. Migrants face segregation and a sense of alienation in the Netherlands and home country. This disconnection makes them reluctant to be politically active (Norglo et. Al. 2016).

13

incorporate them in policy design: “governments, international organizations, and donors increasingly recognize diasporas as important actors in peace, conflict and development, but policymakers have few, if any, guidelines or formal policies on how best to incorporate diasporas into peace and development strategies. A lack of understanding of the nature of these contributions, how to mobilize them, and the circumstances that are most likely to yield positive results hampers policymakers’ ability to maximize this expanding resource” (Brinkerhoff 2008, p.1). In 2010, Newland (p. 7) stresses the advocacy of diaspora when trying to influence development of their home country. She states: ‘As advocates, they may support development programs and policies by lobbying the governments of their countries of residence and origin, appealing to international institutions, or working to raise awareness among broader populations.’ An attentive reader might have identified the important role of social capital within this framework (Bourdieu 1986, p.88). The network of the diaspora provides them with a unique knowledge that can be of value for the government and improve the outreach of development programs. Both within the Netherlands as in their home-country they might have access to categories of people that would be hard to reach otherwise.

However, international donors, NGO’s or governments can be reluctant to cooperate with diaspora groups: they are often not formally organised and fragmented (Newland and Patrick 2004). Emigrants and their descendants who choose to engage in advocacy and diplomacy face issues of representation and legitimacy as soon as they claim to represent a broader public interest. “Who is entitled to speak for whom?” (Newland 2010, p.4). It is stated that the strengths of diaspora and international development agencies could uplift each other when they overcome their fragmented characteristic and collaborate effectively. How these difficulties should be overcome remains untouched (Newland and Patrick 2004, p. 28, Newland 2010 and Norglo et. Al. 2016).

It might seem that collaboration with diaspora is presented as the holy grail. However, understanding diaspora does not automatically provide a holistic understanding of their home-country. Brinkerhoff touches upon the negative aspect of involving diaspora. As she states (2008, p. 19): ‘Diaspora members have been known to become more ‘ethnic’ than their ethnic counterparts who remain in the homeland.’ (See, for example the outcome of the Turkish referendum in 2017. (Saleem 2017)) This provides us with the understanding that diasporas are segregated and politicized themselves, which adds extra complexity when trying to incorporate them within development policy. Therefore, it should not be considered that simply

incorporating them within policy design will create a holistic approach considering the development of their home-country.

Concluding this paragraph, it could be stated that there is a general interest in incorporating diaspora within the development of their home-country. Whilst their value seems acknowledged, their fragmented characteristics seem to create complexity for cooperation. The next paragraph will give an introduction to inclusive policy design, that could stimulate the cooperation with fragmented narratives.

2.2.2 Participating in policy development; the challenge of inclusive

design

In a research of Norglo (et. al. 2016) he states that diaspora members often face structures of ‘passive participation’. He explains that, whilst the diaspora are invited to participate, the agenda of the meeting is often already set (Ibid 2016, p.91). This paragraph will help to identify different shapes of participation and inclusion. Incorporating multiple narratives is not only challenging in development policy but a globally acknowledged difficult process (Cornwall 2008). Highlighting theory on participation and inclusive policy design will support this research by providing a framework of analysis and an operationalization of the concepts. UNESCO (2015) provides a useful definition of inclusive policy: “a framework for public action that has the two-pronged goal of adequate inclusion of all concerned parties in the process of policy design and delivery (inclusive in means) and, at the same time, of producing the outcome of inclusion (inclusive in ends).” (Ibid, p. 7) However, UNESCO does not provide an answer on how to achieve this inclusive policy. They do not explain how to make everybody in a diverse society participate in the development of policy. A good indicator that this might indeed be a complicated process.

Policies as neutral tools?

To gain an understanding of a segregated society and the importance of inclusive design, theory of Becker (1963) on the complex society is a good starting point. Modern societies are no simple horizontal organizations in which everyone agrees on what the rules are and how these are to be applied, they are increasingly heterogeneous. The dominant group in society often has the power to create and enforce rule and policy, and ‘other’ groups are less likely to be heard or to influence governmental policy (Becker 1963a p.10-12). Four decades later Bacchi (2009) follows the theory of Becker in her approach to policy analysis ‘What is the problem

15

within the creation of policy, she does provide us with an understanding that policies are social constructs of time and space. They are no ‘neutral’ tools but shaped by political and societal climates. Policies reflect deep-seated cultural assumptions and presumptions of the dominant group within a society: the dominant group has the power to create policy. Therefore, policies are a social construct and should be analyzed as such (Bacchi 2009, introduction & p.264). When we get back to our topic, one might understand that development policy within the Netherlands is mainly framed by the ‘dominant’ Dutch group. Through this, their policy according international development is constructed by their Dutch culture and not ‘objective’. When trying to incorporate multiple narratives in policy design to obtain the valuable heterogeneous narratives, inclusion us used as an ‘end’

When is participation inclusive?

When zooming in on the creation of policy, there seems to be a general trend of stimulating participation of diverse groups in decision-making in public institutions to provide power to those who are often left unnoticed (Pretty 1995 & Cornwall 2008). The above theory of Bacchi (2009) seems to be understood by policy-makers, but often fails to translate to concrete inclusive policy design and collaboration. Rahnema and Pretty both stress the importance to remain critical when talking about participation. Rahnema (1992, p.116) states: The term ‘participation’ has been used to justify the extension of control of the state as well as to build local capacity and self-reliance; it has been used to justify external decisions as well as to devolve power and decision making away from external agencies (…) But people are asked or dragged into partaking in operations of no interest to them, in the very name of participation.’ Pretty (1995) explains how authorities both need and fear participation: they need people’s agreements and support, but they fear that this wider involvement is less controllable, less precise and likely to slow down planning processes. If this fear permits only stage-managed forms of participation, then distrust and greater alienation are the most likely outcomes (Pretty 1995, p. 1252). However, Pretty and Rahnema frame the participants as vulnerable, voiceless and therefore easy to manipulate. Of course, this is not always the case when speaking about participation and inclusion. It is important to understand, as explained by Rahnema (1992), that a diversity of situations and cultures creates endless shapes of participation and inclusion. Table 1 shows the normative typology of participation as designed by Pretty (1995, p.1251). This framework illustrates the diverse character of the term ‘participation’. Although type one to four (Passive Participation, Participation in Information Giving, Participation by

Consultation and Participation for Material Incentives) are considered as participation, one could question to which extent the participants benefit from it. One might consider these types of participation as ‘manipulation’ instead of ‘inclusion’ (Hart 1992 in: Pretty 1995 p. 1253). It shows that the motivation of those who stimulate the participation are important for the outcome and level of participation. This brings us back to Becker (1963) and Bacchi (2009): structures of power are of great influence in the policy design. It is important to make a distinction between participation and inclusion. What kind of participation is implemented and who is actively participating or invited to participate? In this research, the multiple typologies of Pretty (1995) are compared to the identified strategies of participation between Dutch government institutions and African diaspora organizations. Rahnema and Pretty teach us that it is important to remain critical when ‘participation’ is implemented. How the typology is used in this research is explained in the paragraph 2.2.3.

Who is participating?

Besides focusing on the type of participation one should also question who participates and what the participants expect to gain when partaking. Andrea Cornwall (2008) is to one who introduces us to the numerous reasons why one would or would not participate and explains us the challenges of finding representatives.

It is understandable that within processes of participation, pragmatism is needed. Involving everyone during the complete process of a project will be extremely time-consuming. Finding the right inclusion is a balanced process (Cornwall 2008). It should always be questioned whether those who participate are the optimal representatives or those ‘close at hand.’ This is risky. As she states: ‘Participatory processes can serve to deepen the exclusion of particular groups unless explicit efforts to include them.’ (Ibid 2008, p. 277)

When the preferred participants are selected, stimulating them to actually take part is also challenging. Reasons for non-participation could be as easy as having ‘no time’ or not having trust in creating an actual outcome. Factors as not feeling responsible for the cause, not being able to identify with the target group, not being able to understand the importance of participation, a fear of reprisals through a lack of trust in institutions or simply not being invited play a role too. To stimulate participation, Cornwall (2008, p. 275), stresses the importance of supportive processes that can help build capacity and enable people to empower themselves. When trying to incorporate multiple narratives within policy design, minorities within the society should feel empowered to take part in the process.

Table 1: A typology of particpation: How people participate in development programmes and projects. By: J.N. Pretty (1995)

Number Typology Components of each type

1 Passive Participation People participate by being told what is going to happen or has already happened. It is a unilateral announcement by an administration or project management without any listening to people’s responses. The information being shared belongs only to external professionals.

2 Participation in Information Giving

People participate by answering questions posed by extractive researchers using questionnaire surveys or similar approaches. People do not have the opportunity to influence proceedings, as the findings of the research are neither shared nor checked for accuracy.

3 Participation by Consultation

People participate by being consulted and external agents listen to views. These external agents define both problems and solutions and may modify these in the light of people’s responses. Such a consultation process does not concede any share in decision-making and professionals are under no obligation to take on board people’s views.

4 Participation for Material Incentives

People participate by providing resources, for example labour, in return for food, cash or other material incentives. Much on-farm research falls in this category, as farmers provide the field but are not involved in the experimentation or the process of learning. It is very common to see this called participation, yet people have no stake in prolonging activities when the incentives end.

5 Functional

Participation

People participate by forming groups to meet predetermined objectives related to the project, which can involve the development or promotion of externally initiated social organization. Such involvement does not tend to be at early stages of project cycles or planning, but rather after major decisions have been made. These institutions tend to be dependent on external initiators and facilitators but may become self-dependent.

Number Typology Components of each type

6 Interactive Participation People participate in joint analysis, which leads to action plans and the formation of new local institutions or the strengthening of existing ones. It tends to involve interdisciplinary methodologies that seek multiple perspectives and make use of systematic and structured learning processes. These groups take control over local decisions, and so people have a stake in maintaining structures for practices.

7 Self-mobilization People participate by taking initiatives independent of external institutions to change systems. Such self-initiated mobilization and collective action may or may not challenge existing inequitable distributions of wealth and power.

2.2.3 Adding to the theory

While Rahnema and Pretty focus on the manipulative character of participatory policy design, they focus on low-educated and rural communities. However, participation can occur with multiple communities. The framework of typologies as designed by Pretty (1995) might therefore not perfectly fit the context of this research. Other shapes of participation might come to existence or typologies could merge and create hybrid structures of participation.

It is interesting that the diaspora who participate in the development of their home-country are not directly influenced by the outcomes themselves. Their activities influence the community in their home-country. An abundance of African diaspora-organizations at the European continent (For example: Fransen and Siegel state in their article that in 2011 there were 20 Burundian diaspora organizations) and the existence of the ADPC tell us that diaspora feel responsible and actively take part in the development of their home country. A sense of responsibility is an important driver for participation (Pretty 1995, p.40). Therefore, the diaspora organizations themselves are active in supporting their home-country and could use the Dutch government as an asset to achieve this.

The theory of Rahnema and Pretty does illustrate the risks of participation and clearly frames the structures of power involved. With their theory in the back of my mind, I will look to the collaboration between African diaspora and the Dutch government. The normative typology of Pretty will, translated in the Dutch context, be of use when identifying if participation indeed leads to inclusion.

In addition, Cornwall (2008) explained how in participation representatives are of bare necessity while this is also one of the biggest pitfalls. When analyzing inclusive policy design, both the initiators and the participants need to be observed. What is the space provided, who are the people involved and what is at stake for both parties?

Summing up, this research will make use of theory on participation and inclusion to add to literature on the link between diaspora and development policy. While it was stated in this chapter that there is a growing interest in the possible outcomes of using diaspora to stimulate development in their home-country, little seems to be written on the ways they could concretely be incorporated in the policy design of official institutions in their host-country or how to find good representatives for minorities in general. In addition, the above chapter taught us that participation has many faces and one has to be careful to make a clear distinction between

manipulation and inclusion. The normative typology of Pretty (1995) will help to critically analyse the collaboration between government and diaspora organizations.

21

3. Methodology

This chapter highlights the units of analysis and the research methods that are applied in this research. It is important not to lose sight on the reciprocal identity of the research. As stated in the introduction: both attempts from the Dutch government to include African diaspora and the strategies of the African diaspora to play part within policy design are analyzed.

3.1 Research characteristics

This research is set up by analyzing policy papers and lobby material from members of the African diaspora, e-mail contact with two government officials and qualitative semi-structured interviews with a government official, a former member of the parliament and four members of the African diaspora. Four respondents are only spoken to once, two respondents have been interviewed twice. This was done to receive updates on the current process of policy design from the new minster of Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation.

The diversity of the data collection creates complexity, but through the political character of this research, keeping a broad perspective is necessary to achieve a holistic understanding of the matter. While it would be ideal to speak to those government officials with whom I’ve had contact via e-mail, they did not want to meet in person or via Skype and were reluctant to share more information.

Making use of both policy papers of the government and lobby material of the African diaspora while also speaking to them created an interesting tension that was very valuable for this research.

3.1.1 Case study design

The explanatory character and detailed analysis of the relationship between the Dutch diaspora and the government follows the framework of a qualitative case study design (Bryman 2012, p.66 & Yin 1984, p.6). Yin (1984: 23) defines a case study as “an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident; and in which multiple sources of evidence are used.” The combination between policy analysis and in-depth interviewing follows both the perspective of the government and of the diaspora organizations. This suits the definition of Yin. Policy design from 2008 onwards is analyzed and compared to

the current situation through semi-structured in-depth interviews, communication from politics and documents from organizations and the government.

While collaboration between diaspora and government in the Netherlands is a unique case, the research does add to the discussion on inclusion and participatory policy design. This case might not be representative for other cases of inclusion and participation, but thoroughly scrutinizes one case. The research will create a better understanding of incorporating fragmented narratives into policy. While the theoretical framework introduced the reader to both theory on diaspora and inclusive policy, the findings will bring these two terms together.

3.2 Research Technique

The two parties involved in this research both need a slightly different approach. To gain understanding of the government, policy papers have been of great importance while information of the diaspora was mainly obtained through the interviews.

3.2.1 The Dutch Government

This research will start with an analysis of government policy documents on partnerships within international development. This shows if and how the Dutch government aspires to incorporate diaspora narratives in their development policy. Because of their clear reflection of the government policy and the political climate, the following documents are of main importance when illustrating the interest of the Dutch government in diaspora narratives:

• Beleidsnotitie 2008; Internationale Migratie en Ontwikkeling. Rijksoverheid, 04-07-2008

• Wat de wereld verdient: een nieuwe agenda voor hulp, handel en investeringen Beleidsnota: 05-04-2013

A world to gain: A New Agenda For Aid, Trade and Investment. Policy Paper: 05-04-2013

• Kamerbrief over beleid inzake migratie en ontwikkeling Kamerbrief: 28-11-2014

• Voortgangsrapportage internationale migratie en ontwikkeling 2013 Rapport: 27-06-2014

• Motie van het lid Smaling. Hulp handel en investeringen Motie: 29-04-2015

23

• Begroting Buitenlandse Handel en Ontwikkelingssamenwerking 2018 Plenair debat: 23-11-2017

• Motie van het lid van den Hul. Motie: 23-11-2017

After this broad policy analysis, the research will shortly zoom in to the policy of the development program ‘‘Samenspraak Tegenspraak’’ (Dialogue and Dissent). A program that is mainly relying on strategic partnerships with civic society and has the goal to increase civic power in developing countries. Both an analysis of program papers and semi-structured in-depth interviews with involved government officials will give a view on the design of this program (See: Appendix 1). Analyzing a single program will provide an illustration of the strengths and pitfalls of Dutch policy design and will be a valuable addition to the general policy analysis. It is chosen to focus on the program ‘Samenspraak Tegenspraak’ because it focuses on civic power, the voice of the society, in developing countries. The development of civic power differs on a local base. Therefore, incorporating local knowledge could be of special value.

3.2.2 The African Diaspora

It is beyond the scope of this research to speak to former citizens of all 54 African countries. Therefore, I decided to speak to a selection of pan-African, regional and national diaspora-organizations. The World Bank (2011, p.149) makes a distinction between three types of diaspora organizations:

1) Ethnonational associations: those focus mainly on the integration of diaspora in the country of residence,

2) Religious associations: focus on religious worship but also host other types of social activities,

3) Development-oriented associations: which are organized around development projects Even though ethnonational and religious organizations might also have development projects, I will focus on development-oriented associations to avoid side-tracks within the research. Members of these organizations have a perspective on the development of their home-country and the role diaspora could play in this process. Organizations that include some non-diaspora members or employees are not excluded from the research, as long as the organization focuses

on the role of diaspora in developing the African continent and the respondent is member of the diaspora him or herself.

The interviews will firstly ask about their involvement within Dutch development policy design. Do they feel like their knowledge could be of value within the Dutch development policy? To which extent are they invited to participate and do they have actual power to influence the policy? How would they like to collaborate with the Dutch government? How do they try to get their message communicated to the Dutch governmental institutions? It will also be asked to which extent they felt like they participated or felt invited to participate with the design of the ‘‘Samenspraak Tegenspraak’’ program or to apply for a strategic partnership. The framework of Pretty (1995) as introduced in the theoretical framework will, during the analysis, assist when framing the level of participation the respondents experience. What kind of participation do government officials think they provide towards diaspora and, in contrast, which level of participation does the diaspora experience? Could we state that the level of participation provides inclusive policy design?

In addition, the think-tank ‘African Diaspora Policy Centre’ provided another perspective on the question. They don’t have a development prospect themselves but are state sponsored to study and provide advice on the nexus of migration and development. From 2014 till 2017 they hosted the ‘diaspora academy’: a programme that would stimulate the lobby and advocacy capacity of members of the African diaspora who have the ambition to positively influence the development of their home-country.

Shifting between small organizations and bigger groups like the ADPC will hopefully provide multiple perspectives on the question. However, coping with the differences between regional and continental development will be a challenge during this research. The diversity of the African continent creates an array of challenges and ambitions within the development sector. These multiple perspectives will be of great value and of great difficulty.

3.3.3 Selecting respondents

Three organisations are selected through the network of Partos: the umbrella-organization of Dutch development organizations. Partos is intensively collaborating with both the government and development organisations. Therefore, they are a valuable entrance into the network of professional Dutch diaspora organisations. Secondly, to enter another pool of information, an interview with the director of the African Diaspora Policy Centre (ADPC) is conducted. This centre is specialized in the relationship between migration and development in Africa and will

25

advocacy is of special interest.

To sum up, table 2 shows a short overview of the data-collection of this research.

Table 2: Data-collection

Diaspora

Government

Four in-depth interviews Two in-depth interviews Communication to government; letters

from organizations to ministry or members of the second chamber

Three e-mail conversations

Lobby material Policy papers of ‘Samenspraak

Tegenspraak’

Report of consultation meeting General policy papers

Report of parliament meeting: ‘begroting buitenlandse handel en ontwikkelingssamenwerking 2018 ’

3.3 Ethical concerns

For both the interviews with government officials and members of diaspora organizations it is important to explain the goal of my research and promise them anonymity. The interviewees should also be aware that I’ll speak to both diaspora members and government officials. The two sides of the story must be highlighted and therefore they might not agree with all the findings of the research. Because of this disagreement, I chose to protect the identity of the respondents. While most of the respondents of the diaspora organizations did not mind to reveal their identity, I am not sure if their critical attitude towards their inclusion in policy design could harm their future position when collaborating governmental institutions.

However, due to the importance of information provided by the ADPC, the combination of information by interview and by policy papers and the small size of the organization, it was chosen not to force this information into anonymity. The ADPC did agree to do so and therefore they are the only organization that is explicitly named within the research.

In addition, mr. Koffi and mr. Smaling provided important information considering the motion that they presented to the parliament. Since they are the initiators of this motion and the only ones who could explain the process to me, hiding their identity would be arbitrary.

27

4. Findings

This chapter will present the findings of the policy analysis and the interviews. To gain an understanding in the ambition of the Dutch government to include the narrative of diaspora in development policy, policy papers from 2008 onwards are analyzed. Secondly, through the interviews the execution of this collaboration is scrutinized and structures of five structures of collaboration and influence are identified.

4.1 The voice of the government: development policy

In the Dutch political structure, every four years, through national elections, the government and parliament change. This chapter will start in 2008 and chronologically follow the institutional framework on collaboration with diaspora. From 2013 till 2017 Lilliane Ploumen was minster of foreign trade and development cooperation. She presented her policy in the paper ‘A world to gain’. She was succeeded by Sigrid Kaag in 2017, who is, by time of writing, working on her policy paper.

Policy papers of the ministries of Foreign Affairs provide a first insight into the position of the Dutch government related to the engagement of African diaspora in the debate on international development. It shows to which extent the Dutch government wants to include diaspora in the creation of development and which characteristics of the diaspora are valued within the framework of international development.

4.1.1 Framing collaboration in 2008

This policy analysis starts with the Beleidsnotitie Internationale Migratie en Ontwikkeling 2008 (Policy paper International Migration and Development 2008), a collaboration of the ministry of Development Cooperation and the ministry of Justice. While the first policy paper concerning this topic was already written in 2004 (Rijksoverheid 2004), in 2008 the importance of collaboration with diaspora from various continents is stated explicitly. This paper sets the framework of collaboration between diaspora organizations and the Dutch government and is therefore scrutinized thoroughly in this paragraph. It introduces six points of focus according the nexus of migration and development. One of these is ‘strengthening the involvement of migrant organizations.’ It is stated that the narrative of diaspora has the capability to improve the Dutch knowledge of other countries and will therefore strengthen the development

cooperation. Their network in the home country and the know-how of local regulations are useful for the Dutch development discourse. In addition, trade, entrepreneurship and development cooperation are seen as intertwined. It is acknowledged by the Dutch government that diaspora can stimulate entrepreneurship in their home country. Therefore, when quickly drawing back on the article of Cornwall (2008) it could be stated that participation is, in this case, used instrumentally, it is used to achieve better results in development cooperation. It is also stated that, amongst the diaspora, finding representatives for a whole country will be challenging. This indicates that the fragmentation within the diaspora community is identified. Being alert for controversial activities of diaspora organizations is of necessity, according to the paper. In addition, the paper states that it is desired that diaspora organizations organize themselves in a platform. The primary responsibility to do so is, according to the paper, with the diaspora organizations themselves, but the government is willing to provide support. The main points to stimulate the input of diaspora organization are:

• An annual consultation with diaspora organizations

• An active collaboration with diaspora on subjects concerning their country • Research if migrant organizations have enough access to funding

• A focus on collaboration between ‘autochtone’ (native Dutch) organizations and migrant organizations

The paper does not explicitly state how these main points will be achieved and who is responsible for executing it.

4.1.2 2012 and onwards

Now the framework is set, we jump ahead in time and find two important papers from 2013 and 2014.

At first, the global economic downturn in many western countries has implications for the funding, focus and capacity of the ministry of Foreign Affairs. The budget for international development decreased since 2010 and the sub-ministry was now called ‘Ministry of Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation’ (Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken 2013a).

In 2013 the new minister, Lilliane Ploumen, presents her policy in a paper called ‘A world to gain’. Whilst little is written about the role of diaspora (the word is not used within the paper), the framing of development is done cautiously. A shift in the global stage of international

29

identified:

‘The influence of the Netherlands as a country is decreasing due to the emergence of new actors on the world stage (…) Our relations with low- and middle-income countries are on a more equal footing now that an increasing number are not only recipients of aid but also trading partners. It is becoming increasingly difficult to use aid to exert influence on poverty and equity issues. Recipient countries are taking a much more assertive attitude towards the aid they receive (Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken 2013b, p.16).’

In addition, it is stated that the Netherlands needs bilateral and EU collaboration to:

‘ensure that migration has a greater impact on development. The government will therefore fund projects that help countries of origin build their migration management capacity and projects that enhance the contribution of migrant communities to development in their countries of origin (Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken 2013b, p.34).

A third point of interest within this paper is a focus on the importance and power of civil society organizations both in the Netherlands as in low- and middle-income countries. This focus led to the development of the program ‘Samenspraak Tegenspraak’ (Dialogue and Dissent). This framework does not name diaspora organizations specifically as possible supporters of civil society within their home country (Rijksoverheid 2013b, p.54).

In 2014 the Voortgangsrapportage internationale migratie en ontwikkeling 2013 (progress report International Migration and Development 2013) was published. It analyzes to which extent the priority points as set in 2008 are met. It explains certain activities and programs that should stimulate the capacity of diaspora organizations. Following the Dutch Development discourse, the program did mainly focus on stimulation of civic power and entrepreneurship. Two attempts to unite African diaspora in a national or European platform did not succeed and the ambition to organize consultation meetings nor the active collaboration with organizations on cases concerning their home-country are named in the report.

Whilst from 2008 till 2013 there have been attempts to achieve the six goals stated in 2008, a change within the political climate seems to occur from 2013 onwards. The absence of policy according diaspora organizations and the fact that the Voorgangsrapportage internationale migratie en ontwikkeling 2013 was not succeeded by a 2014 nor another edition provide the first indications that the focus of the ministry is shifting away from this topic.

4.1.3 A new government, a new development policy

The elections of March 2017 led to a new government and a new minister of Foreign Trade and Development: Minister Sigrid Kaag. In cooperation with her ministry and with advice from third parties, she will create a new policy on Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation that suits the government declaration. While the policy is not finished yet, this paragraph explains how this document will come into being and analyzes documents that might give a glimpse of the focus of the new ministry.

While in 2008 and 2013 it was stated by the government that diaspora could play an important role in the development of their home-country, the government seems to have lost its focus on this theme. As explained by both respondents of the government and mr. Mohamoud, during the ‘migration crisis’ from 2015-2016 many Syrian refugees entered Western Europe due to the civil war in Syria. This resulted in both a shift of financial and human capacity in the ministry of Foreign Affairs. It was explained to me that a big part of the capacity of the ministry was needed to manage the influx of refugees and little space was left for other programs. In addition, from 2013 onwards, severe cuts in the funding did also impact the capacity of the ministry (Rijksoverheid 2013b). The conversation and the capacity of the governmental institutions shifted towards and created a political climate in which the topic of migration is often limited to national identity, avoiding migration and forced/voluntary return.

While the above focusses on refugees, it is also stated that a lack of employment in the global South is one of the root causes of migration towards the Netherlands. Therefore, stimulating entrepreneurship and employment is one of the key development strategies of the Netherlands (Ploumen 2016, Rijksoverheid 2017, Kaag 2017). As stated in the coalition agreement: ‘We contribute to the welfare and wellbeing in other countries and, by this, combat root-causes of migration’ (Rijksoverheid 2017, p.2). In addition, stimulating entrepreneurship in the global South does also provide opportunities for the Dutch economy (Kaag 2017). In none of the policy documents that I analyzed in the scope of this research, it was explained if and how diaspora could play a role in doing so.

The process of writing a new policy has to happen quick and smooth. It was explained to me in the first phase of writing the new policy, many consultations take place and many institutions sent advice and lobby for their case. Civil society is consulted and they lobby actively to get their message through (See, for example, Partos 2018). Diaspora organizations are considered part of civil society, but do not necessarily get invited for a private consultation. Consultations

31

invited. As the minister stated in November: ‘I will shortly get together with representatives of Dutch organizations to use their ideas and experiences in the writing and executing of the new development policy’ (Minister Kaag: November 23th 2018). These consultations therefore do not take part systematically, but when the government is in need of information.

4.2 What is the ambition of the diaspora?

All the above focused on the discourse of the Dutch government and its institutions. In this chapter, the view of the diaspora is highlighted. In the first part of the chapter, it will be highlighted how the diaspora relate to bigger institutions and then explain how they cope with the Dutch standards of development cooperation. Afterwards, the strategies used by the diaspora to collaborate with government institutions are identified. In the last part of the chapter, ‘Samenspraak Tegenspraak’ is analyzed as a case that illustrates the pitfalls of collaboration between governmental institutions and the African diaspora.

Again, it should be stated that there is no such thing as the diaspora or the African diaspora. In addition, one might understand that within those of African heritage there are multiple levels of concern with the development of the home-country. However, the consultation meetings for diaspora as organized by the ministries of Justice and of Foreign Affairs were well visited by members of global diaspora communities (Rijksoverheid 2014c).

4.2.1 Understanding institutions

During a conversation with one of the respondents in the early phase of this research, I asked why it seemed that so little employees of regular development organization in the Netherlands have non-western roots. Whilst the background of those working in Dutch NGO’s in the Netherlands was not checked within this research, the respondents shared this feeling. Two respondents explained that many migrants simply do not consider working for an NGO as an option. They don’t reckon that they will fit into the organization, they don’t have the ambition to start a career in a development organization and do not understand that NGO’s are a way to enhance positive change within their country. A respondent explained to me that African diaspora have difficulties with understanding that they can make use of Dutch institutions for the development of their home country. Continuing with this topic, the respondents noted that other migrants from their home-country face challenges in the process of integration in the Netherlands. In addition, they are often economically responsible for kin whom remained at home, they need to send remittances. All these structures create a framework in which, when

trying to stimulate development in their home country, diaspora rather gather in smaller home-town associations. These, according to the respondents, often lack professionality, a long-term vision and capacity to make a long-term impact.

However, enhancing the specific local knowledge of diaspora within the dialogue on international development is identified as important by both government and respondents. Policy documents and interviews reveal an important tension: there is no consensus on responsibility for this dialogue.

The interviews also revealed that a cultural discrepancy between African diaspora communities and Dutch governmental institutions seems to play part in the contact between the two. In the Dutch culture one has to stand up for himself, find a way into governmental institutions, speak up and actively ask questions. In their home country, there are often reasons enough to mistrust institutions (see for example the Corruption Perceptions Index 2017). Therefore, members of the African diaspora are often reluctant to look for contact with development organizations or the government. While not all members of the African diaspora will be interested in playing part in the bigger structures of the development of their home-country, an abundance of migrant organizations shows that there is indeed ambition to do so within the community. Even though there are many smaller organizations, there are definitely people who want their voice to be heard within the national debate concerning international development.

4.2.2 Meeting the standard

The respondents of the African diaspora did not agree on the role the government has in incorporating diaspora in policy design. While some stated that the government has to actively invite diaspora organizations, others explained that the government should support the capacity and institutional integration of the diaspora organizations. After this, the organizations would more easily live up to the expectations of the government. They agreed that the government has the capability to create an enabling environment and identified that the government has difficulties with creating a framework that includes diaspora in the dialogue.

Diaspora organizations are welcome to apply for funds from the government. To acquire these funds, organizations have to meet the requirements of the project as set by the government. (see for example the chapter on ‘Samenspraak Tegenspraak’) The government wants to collaborate with professional partners, but diaspora organizations explain that they face difficulties to achieve the professionality of Dutch development organizations and governmental institutions. Understanding the institutional processes and requirements is a challenge for those born and

33

“A significant barrier facing African diaspora organizations is a lack of knowledge regarding the procedures and formalities of engaging with policymakers.” (ADPC 2016, p. 16).

In addition, they miss the network that ‘native’ organizations do have in the field of Dutch development organizations. Some organizations already exist for decades and have been collaborating with other organizations, the government and organize themselves through Partos. In the case of the policy concerning the program ‘Samenspraak Tegenspraak’ (Dialogue and Dissent), at the end of this chapter, I will picture the struggles diaspora organizations and the government face when trying to collaborate professionally.

4.2.3 Making use of the institutions: five strategies of collaboration and

influence

Now that the policy framework of the government and the diaspora concerning collaboration in development policy is explained, strategies of influence by the diaspora and strategies of collaboration by the government, will be analyzed. These strategies are extracted from the interviews with diaspora members and government officials.

The execution of the ambition of the government is analyzed through the interviews conducted with members of diaspora organizations and government officials. It shows how diaspora make use of governmental institutions to get their voice heard and to which extent they sense that the ambitions of the government are carried out. This provides a framework to analyze the dynamic between the governmental institutions and the diaspora organizations.

Throughout the research, five strategies of influencing development policy were identified. To provide a comprehensive understanding, these strategies, their successes and pitfalls are analyzed separately on the following pages.

1. Consultation meetings

In 2008 the ambition to organize annual consultations with diaspora organizations was set (Rijksoverheid 2008, p. 47). During those consultations, members of diaspora organizations were invited to reflect on the development policy of the government and provide them with advice. Dutch citizens with roots on different continents and an ambition to play part in the development of their home-country joined the conversation with government officials. Gathering the migrant voices to prepare for the annual Global Forum for Migration and Development was the direct reason for the ministry to initialize these meetings.