Spaces, Power

Political Spaces And User Involvement

The following are some definitions of the different kinds of political space which I have taken from John Gaventa's paper called Finding the Spaces For Change: A Power Analysis (PDF, last accessed 7 October, 2010).  He in turn cites a paper by Andrea Cornwall is cited: Making Spaces, Changing Places: Situating Participation in Development (PDF, last accessed 7 October, 2010
).

Both are available online - see below for links.



I think the concept of 'political space' is a useful one when thinking about issues to do with collective advocacy and user involvement.  Mental health service user groups are subsumed in the overwhelming volume, pace and time scale of consultations and service development, of ‘invited space’, which in turn dictates their activity and prevents them from setting their own agenda.

When users of mental health services began to demand our inclusion in all the big decisions that shaped our lives, we created a 'claimed' space.  However, now this has become ‘invited’ space, where we have been invited to participate on the terms of the providers, policy-makers and politicians.

It is important that we remember that the policies about user involvement are not simply a gift from the state.  In remembering, we are able to reclaim and recreate this space and become more aware of our own power and the existence of 'closed space'.  This is why we must look to our history and learn from it.
‘spaces’ can be seen as opportunities, moments and channels where citizens can act to potentially affect policies, discourses, decisions and relationships that affect their lives and interests.

...participation as freedom is not only the right to participate effectively in a given space, but the right to define and to shape that space.



Closed spaces. Though we want to focus on spaces and places as they open up possibilities for participation, we must realise that still many decision-making spaces are closed. That is, decisions are made by a set of factors behind closed doors, without any pretence of broadening the boundaries for inclusion. Within the state, another way of conceiving these spaces is as ‘provided’ spaces in the sense that elites (be they bureaucrats, experts or elected representatives) make decisions and provide services to ‘the people’, without the need for broader consultation or involvement. Many civil society efforts focus on opening up such spaces through greater public involvement, transparency or accountability.



Invited Spaces As efforts are made to widen participation, to move from closed spaces to more ‘open’ ones, new spaces are created which may be referred to as ‘invited’ spaces, i.e. ‘those into which people (as users, citizens or beneficiaries) are invited to participate by various kinds of authorities, be they government, supranational agencies or non-governmental organisations’
(Cornwall 2002). Invited spaces may be regularised, that is they are institutionalised ongoing, or more transient, through one-off forms of consultation.



Claimed/created spaces Finally, there are the spaces which are claimed by less powerful actors from or against the power holders, or created more autonomously by them. Cornwall refers to these spaces as ‘organic’ spaces which emerge ‘out of sets of common concerns or identifications’ and ‘may come into being as a result of popular mobilisation, such as around identity or issue- based concerns, or may consist of spaces in which like-minded people join together in common pursuits’ (Cornwall 2002). Other work talks of these spaces as ‘third spaces’ where social actors reject hegemonic space and create spaces for themselves (Soja 1996). These spaces range from ones created by social movements and community associations, to those simply involving natural places where people gather to debate, discuss and resist, outside of the institutionalised policy arenas.

Gaventa also discusses types of power - visible, hidden and invisible - which I think is also useful when thinking about mental health service user involvement.


Visible power: observable decision making
This level includes the visible and definable aspects of political power– the formal rules, structures, authorities, institutions and procedures of decision making ... Strategies that target this level are usually trying to change the ‘who, how and what’ of policy making so that the policy process is more democratic and accountable, and serves the needs and rights of people and the survival of the planet.



Hidden power: setting the political agenda
. Certain powerful people and institutions maintain their influence by controlling who gets to the decision-making table and what gets on the agenda. These dynamics operate on many levels to exclude and devalue the concerns and representation of other less powerful groups ... Empowering advocacy strategies that focus on strengthening organisations and movements of the poor can build the collective power of numbers and new leadership to influence the way the political agenda is shaped and increase the visibility and legitimacy of their issues, voice and demands.

Invisible power: shaping meaning and what is acceptable.

Probably the most insidious of the three dimensions of power, invisible power shapes the psychological and ideological boundaries of participation. Significant problems and issues are not only kept from the decision-making table, but also from the minds and consciousness of the different players involved, even those directly affected by the problem. By influencing how individuals think about their place in the world, this level of power shapes people’s beliefs, sense of self and acceptance of the status quo – even their own superiority or inferiority. Processes of socialisation, culture and ideology perpetuate exclusion and inequality by defining what is normal, acceptable and safe. Change strategies in this area target social and political culture as well as individual consciousness to transform the way people perceive themselves and those around them, and how they envisage future possibilities and alternatives.


Cornwall, A. (2002) Making Spaces, Changing Places: Situating Participation in Development, IDS Working Paper, 170, Brighton: IDS

Gaventa, John (2006) "Finding the Spaces for Change: A Power Analysis" IDS Bulletin, 37(6) 23-33