Many arguments have been advanced to emphasise the
importance of the local sphere as the primary domain within which citizens can
enjoy more complete democratic participation.
The ‘local’ is seen as the level where citizens can best establish the
requisite “two way voice channels” with their political leaders, where the
potential for feedback from “output to input” can be maximised and where
complexities-of-scale arguments can be most effectively rebutted. However, the parameters of the “local” remain
ill defined. This paper argues that while issues of scale and distance are not inconsiderable,
the most significant factor in determining the likelihood of success of participatory
processes is, in reality, the disposition of key local elites towards citizen
participation. Thus, the paper suggests
that in the absence of democratic stretching; an appropriate pro participation,
administrative ethic; and a more nuanced understanding of social justice,
citizen participation is unlikely to move beyond a limited focus on citizen
responsibility or, at best, a narrow functional approach to civic engagement.
On the other hand, where these three domains exhibit more positive dispositions
towards participation, the potential to move towards a deeper form of citizen engagement
emerges. However, the paper also argues
that such a change agenda is only likely to be
incorporated into local government merger processes by a renewed focus on
capacity building. It concludes by asserting that while distance is an issue,
disposition is of more fundamental and far reaching importance