1. RESEARCH STRUCTURE
The Previous chapters reviewed the existing material and theoretical debates concerning various forms of low-income housing organisations. Possible positive effects of these organisations on the process of housing production for the urban poor were examined, and their proclaimed advantages were noted. It was made clear that, the relationship between various forms of low-income housing organisations (whether community based or otherwise) and their consequent impact on the actual process of public access to resources, as a subject of attention, is only marginally dealt with. Hence debates concerning the issue is still in state of flux, and very few firm conclusions have been drawn.
At the same time, the absence of focused attention to the subject has resulted in emergence of a number of theoretical ambiguities, especially where the question of effective "public participation" is raised, which need to be resolved. As it can be noted, Turner's propositions, marxist postulations, and the so called pragmatists solutions have each emphasised on various degrees of the importance of the role of individuals and community oriented organisations in successful implementation of the low-income housing policies. In this state of debates, therefore, it is not totally clear whether the idea of public participation is still valid, whether the community based housing organisation is a suitable vehicle for such a notion, is such an organisation important actor in the process, or it can also be regarded as an ineffective, out dated and secondary element, needed to be set aside completely. It is not also clear, whether community organisations can be made more effective, and if so how it can function without totally relying on the state apparatus to
decide and provide for them.
The present work will attempt to shed more light on this neglected area by presenting a more focused investigation about it, and make a number of proposals to reduce some of the existing theoretical discrepancies.
These proposals are based on observations made in a number of low-income housing projects in Jordan which serve as exemplary cases to support the main idea of this thesis is that: neither the autonomous nor the heteronomous schools are justified in claiming to have an apt and comprehensive alternative for a successful community participation in the process.
There is missing a qualification for achieving an effective popular participation in these approaches. It is, according to the present work, the absence of attention to provide a progressive communal basis for such activities. As it will discussed later, this is the possibility of foreseeing, planning and preparing the grounds for establishment of a process through which social awareness and communal bonds of any target group may be raised. It can be based on observation, selection, promotion and utilisation of the existing communal norms and available socio-economic opportunities, hitherto unexplored/unknown to the community members. This is progressive process which may help to strengthen a collective action by allowing it to be initiated and sustained realistically, so that the members can pursue their objectives in accessing the resources. The hypothesis of this work then would be to argue that:
"The genuine public participation, in its most effective form, is establishment a process through which social awareness and communal bonds of a target group is raised and strengthened enough so that the community organisation may institute,
function and include itself adequately within the process of low- income housing production."
Disposition and elements of such a "progressive participation", as termed in this work, is discussed in the concluding part. But, here, it is necessary to point out that endorsement of such a direct relationship between this pattern of participation and its resulting form of community organisation is an important, and in itself, a positive step in the right direction (this will be clarified further in coming pages). Other types of public participatory formations, whether as a "locally assembled and labour-oriented group" (the so-called autonomous community of "user-builders") or a centrally directed reform package (as advocated by the recent WB agents) can not aspire to reach such an effective level at the grass-root, and to serve the low-income groups adequately.
Through examination of the exemplary cases, it will be demonstrated that, in this regard, the recent shifts by international organisations, such as the UN and the WB, must be seen as a reverse move in answering the growing demands of the low-income groups, and an indirect return to unsuccessful conventional housing methods. This is where, far from the initial resolutions to involve the community in the low-income housing process. There are recent approaches, in which appropriation of the community role to bureaucratic government institutions, ministries and their employees is seen as the only viable way forward and is listed on top of the agenda.
2. TH EO RETICA L PROPOSITIONS O F TH E THESIS The fundamental concern of this thesis is to show:
i) firstly that there is an existing theoretical gap within the low-income housing debates concerning the question of optimal structure of a local housing organisation; and
ii) secondly to introduce a number of new conceptual grounds by which this limitation might be reduced.
Based on investigation of a number of exemplary cases in Jordan, this thesis intends to suggest that:
i) inclusion of the local organisations in low-income housing process is a positive step towards increasing the chances of the community in accessing needs resources; and
ii) the success of these organisations in achieving their collective aims will be greatly enhanced if they can be guided to acquire a relevant level of knowledge about the working of their decision making system, which arguably will lead to better internal solidarity and social cohesion among the members concerned, adding to their bargaining power in dealing with the bureaucratic system.
An approach based on the point raised above for the establishment of local-level organisations is referred to as the progressive participation in this work. This approach is to complement the existing alternatives while avoiding their shortcomings, as summarised below.
2.1. ANALYSIS OF THE CURRENT THEORETICAL STANDS
In general, two recommended formation of such community organisations are identified so far, previously termed as "autonomous" and "state sponsored" organisations, in this work. In this particular area of debate, i.e. proposing a clear-cut and viable structure for establishment of such community organisations, the marxist writings concerned are sketchy
and generally inconclusive. Hence, they are not to be referred to any further. ^
It can be, therefore, noted that the coming discussion, concerning the autonomous" and "heteronomous" forms of housing organisations is mainly an internal debate between within the camp of the so-called "liberal" writers and among its different theoretical fractions. It can be assumed that, within this so called camp. Turner (1972), with his advocacy of an almost total isolation from the state and local autonomy, occupies the extreme left side of this theoretical spectrum. The WB, by the virtue of its gradual attempts for reforming the state apparatus and making it more responsive to the market and community demands, stands in the middle ground.
While to the right of spectrum, stand the writers (Curtis 1991; Lees& Mayo 1984; Salter 1989) who implicitly follow Foucault's (1976-1981) views, by favouring to promotion the local communities to move for getting a share in political system for themselves.^ I.e. this group advocates the idea of public based organisations becoming a key player in the game, alongside the state, aiming to have a position o f influence, similar to those of the market forces and other interest groups. The common claim among the above workers is that their suggested alternatives are aimed to identify point of action and involvement for the community, and to point out the optimum way through which the community can access to available resources.
As it stands, this commonly declared intention has blurred the boundaries of distinction between these liberal views, and complicated their independent evaluation. This is perhaps the reason that the approaches based on "relative isolation from the state", "bureaucratic