Work in Phd. Phd into work.

I think I had thought about this Phd topic before I started working with The Advocacy Initiative, after all funding is an issue that is very hard to get away from, but I did intend it to be as complementary as possible.

That said, I don't really think there has been as much 'feeding in and feeding out' as I initially would have anticipated.  I think the Phd reading is beneficial to work (more so now than the first chapter), and maybe when it comes to field work I will be relieved to have The Advocacy Initiative stuff to draw on.  But so far I don't think the Phd is getting that much from the day job.  And if I am honest, the day job does at times undermine the Phd when it comes to time management.  It rarely happens that I postpone work stuff to meet a Phd deadline, but the other way around it a frequent enough occurrence.  Inevitable, but true.

The way I am trying to manage it at the moment, is that I ring fence my Thursday and Friday mornings as much as I possible can, and then every quarter or so I want to take a week off work and do some writing.

April is makeup month.  The only trick is to find a week clear of work commitments!

Chapter 1, Draft 1

I've sent it. Nervous.

So before I get any feedback on it here's what I think are the strengths and weaknesses of my first attempt at a theoretical chapter on participatory democracy.

Strengths:

1. Its a bona fide piece of writing, written down into paragraphs with a structure!
2. I think it ends up connecting to my research question, in other words it has the beginnings of an 'NGO test' which might be applicable - a lot of work to do on it though.
3. I think I have a basic handle on the literature - it covers quite a broad range.
4. I think it develops a case for participatory democracy which is on its way to standing up (I might be wrong about that!).
5. It has references, and Zotero is pretty much functioning now (thanks to Charles and his style sheet).

Weaknesses:

1. Perhaps too broad and definetly too long. Twice as long as it should be in fact. What am I going to send to the PhD roundtable in the next couple of weeks, the whole thing is much too long?
2. Do I read too fast and not spend enough time digesting particular arguments.
3. Not sure about the four fold structure - does the section on 'difference democrcy' really belong?  Or is it the same thing as participatory democracy?
4. Is the first section on the democratic debates too basic and a bit waffly?
5. I am nervous that I do not actually say very much about what participatory democracy would practically look like? Is this actually what I should be doing?
6. I still think there are big gaps in my review of the literature - there is plenty more I could do ( perhaps revisit after I have looked at other areas?).

Next on the agenda: This, then civil society, advocacy and government funding.  Then Irish government policy on NGOs.

What does it do?

This is the published text of a letter I wrote to the Irish Times just before Christmas, and was published on 31 December.  It responds to a particular editorial, but reflects some of the reading I have been doing about associative democracy and the functions of nonprofit organisations.

Sir, – In reading your editorial, I am struck that you pose a challenge to the community and voluntary sector which is not without precedent. Within a broader awareness of the need for change and innovation, many have asked themselves about the possibilities of consolidation, and indeed there have been mergers within the sector.

However mergers are not necessarily the easiest or most effective solution. The first question is, what is the role of the sector and how best can it support those who experience poverty and exclusion? Only then can we consider structures and institutions. In my view the community and voluntary sector has three core roles.

First, the sector responds to new and emerging challenges, innovating in ways that the State is unable to. However innovative service delivery requires quality mainstream public services, which are unfortunately being dismantled by austerity.

Second, NGOs advocate for better mainstream provision of services, as well as other decisions that lead towards a more just and equal society. It is important that decision-makers and their institutions are supportive of and responsive to advocacy. The Advocacy Initiative report, referred to in your comment, raises serious concerns regarding the capacity of the sector and the State to maximise the benefit from advocacy.

Finally, the sector fosters citizen empowerment, critically engaging people and communities in the decisions that will impact their lives and futures. For this work to be more effective we need participative and inclusive democracy, a democracy in which many participate and feel they can make a difference. Voting levels in recent referendums suggest our democracy is not what it should be.

Some within the community and voluntary sector do all three of these things – providing services, advocating for change, and empowering citizens — others do one or two. Different responses to complex challenges.

So yes, the sector has a responsibility to deeply reflect on its future, and that should include the question of consolidation.

However the reality remains that there are immediate urgent reasons — such as the 4,000 phone calls received by the Society of St Vincent de Paul in Dublin in the last week – as well as broader societal challenges, that need to be placed front and centre of any debate on the future of the sector. – Yours, etc,

Anna Visser

So will your thesis have a gender perspective?

Uhm....

The G question, always throws me... 'where is the gender analysis in that?' ... ah... uhm.... yes of course, not problem, its just....

So it happened again tonight at the PhD roundtable, we were discussing someone's work about gender and and the 1913 lockout, interesting stuff says I - in a 'has nothing to do with what I am doing', sort of a way.

The reading was an article providing a framework for taking a gender analysis to history, not the easiest read, but ploughed through it happily enough, and if I am honest did not think about it too much.  Grand stuff, job done.

Until... so, Anna, how do you think this reading is relevant to your work?

Don't get me wrong, I am a 'feminist' (see earlier blog),  in fact I would say I am pretty clear about the gender equality case, and what it means in my life and in society more generally.  I am after all a working mother, loads of gender stuff going on there.  But could I honestly say I deeply connect with the women's movement? Probably not, though I am not sure why.  Maybe a movement of 50% of the population, is just to diverse to feel a deep sense of connection to the entire thing?  Bits of it absolutely - violence against women, abortion, childcare, employment discrimination, sharing care work - all subjects I would get out on the streets for (and likely bore the pants of an unsuspecting relative after a few drinks).  And yet still, somehow the whole gender thing, just does not seem to crop up instinctively for me.

So, what does all this have to do with my thesis... probably needs more than the back of an envelope response but here is a start:

1. Gender informs different NGOs in different ways  - generalised women's organisations, specific issue based orgs that disproportionatley affect women, and others who do (or at least should) integrate a women's persective in their work.
2. Who does the advocacy and on whose behalf - why is the CEO of the Irish Nurses Organisation a man? Does it matter?
3. If the 'targets' of advocacy are by definition more mainstream, how does gender play out - often women are accused of being 'screechy' in the media, not a charge you are likley to hear against men.
4. Another interesting though from today's roundtables: the 'Us and I' conflict. Women talk about 'the movement' or 'we', men tend to talk more about 'I did' - this was a historical take but does resonate with NGO activism today.

Just thoughts, but this is likely to play out, and I should probably get my head around it (at last?!) ... not least in the the case studies I select.

"the subordination of women pre-dates capitalism and continues under socialism"
"We can write the history of that process only if we recognise that 'man' and 'women' are at once empty and overflowing categories"
(Joan W. Scott, 1986)

Reading

Well its taken a bit longer than I anticipated, but beginning to feel like I am getting into the reading on participatory democracy. Some if it is very tough going, some of it really exciting.  The problem is now I don't know where to stop, the more I read the broader it gets. How important is the earlier theoretical stuff, should I concentrate on more recent writing?  How much do I need to know before I start to structure something? And all the while, the more I read the more it feels like I am forgetting.

Every time I go to the library I discover another immobile pile of books, each online search reveals more articles.  It always was going to be a very broad area of reading, I guess I thought I could keep it narrow, just participatory democracy says I.

With a pile of books to one side, a stash of photocopying on the shelf above me, and a drop box folder full of unread journal articles, do I keep going or stop, take stock of where I am and have a go at describing how I might write about this literature?

Recently, I lot of people have started asking 'how is the PhD going?'.... Slow, says I, but it is going.

Challenge?

Reading about democracy at the moment and came across this:

The first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class, to win the battle of democracy.

- Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels The Communist Manifesto

It cannot all be about participation in the sense of consultation, participation has to mean being the decision-makers not just influencing the decision-makers. Is there a risk with the focus on civil society and NGOs that the response to the democratic deficit becomes about one elite talking to another elite, rather than any substantial shift in power. Then again, how is such a shift imaginable if the conditions do not become more conducive, and maybe that where the NGOs come in?

The last three months reading have focused on participatory democracy, there are 42 references in my Zotero folder, and I have moments of beginning to think the reading is forming into something  - just fleeting senses mind you that disappear rather rapidly!  At a guess I would say I am half way to being able to write something.  That's just a stab in the dark mind you.

42 reference in 3 months that does not seem particularly speedy.

Summer time, and the living is?

I think perhaps I and every other Phd student I have met to date, has/had fantastic plans for increased summer productivity.  Well at least for me, despite the cooperative and miserable weather, the results have been disappointing.

That's not to say I have not done a bit.  I dealt with my doctoral panel, and have got a reasonable start on my literature review on participatory democracy, however I don't have a deep sense of satisfaction that that nut has been cracked... far from it.  And I do feel a bit disappointed with myself.

So what went wrong? What happened to the long endless summer days, filled with books, journal articles, and my yellow highlighter (albeit a virtual one)?

Well first, I got to May and the end of the course work and assignments, and I was really really tired.  It was a long slog between January and May, and we ended up travelling a good bit in June, so I took a very legitimate break.

July and August?  Not too sure, a few things going on there:

1. Fell into the perennial trap of assuming these months would be blissfully long with loads of spare time, shockingly they were just as short as any other month.
2. Monday is my core PhD day, and this may sound a bit lame, but there are a lot of bank holidays over the summer!
3. We had a bunch of visitors - not really the done thing to slope off with the books when you are supposed to be entertaining.
4. A very long Danish murder mystery series called 'The Killing' - 20 episodes... enough said!
5. I was still tired.

The last week has been much better though, think I just had to reconcile myself with more realistic expectations.

Still planning on getting that draft lit review on democracy done for October though, and looking forward to getting back into the swing of term.

The living is not easy, but it is interesting, varied and satisfying... next year though I might just remind myself that there are 30 days in June, 31 in July and 31 in August.  It is the summer, not a parallel  temporal reality.