Uruguay

Techo Uruguay

City/State/Region
Begin – End: 2003 – ongoing
Name of organization in charge: Techo Uruguay
Type of organization in charge: civil society
Level: local national

Impact

?

Implementation: was the innovation effectively, partially or not put into practice at all?

Fulfillment of Aims: were the goals of the innovation completely, partially or not achieved at all?

Output: has the innovation generated recommendations, initiatives, decisions or policies?

Outcome: if there were a policy output, was it enacted or implemented?

Implementation: yes
Fulfillment of Democratic Innovation’s aim: yes
Output: yes
Policy Outcome: unknown

"Techo" came to Uruguay in 2003, while it expanded throughout the Latin American region. The main objective of this project is the community development of precarious settlements in the country, the promotion of social action and the denunciation of the social exclusion of vulnerable populations. The project is carried out in three phases: the first consists of the evaluation of the area; the second in the participatory planning of solutions to different problems (especially related to community infrastructure) that is carried out jointly with volunteers and citizens and is based on the results of the initial diagnosis; and the third phase in the implementation of said agenda. Within the framework of this methodology and until 2016, Techo Uruguay has built 3,397 emergency homes, implemented work tables in 21 settlements, and created a pilot project to deliberate on permanent solutions to infrastructure problems and basic services. In addition, this organization also conducted a census of settlements in the country.

Institutional design

?

Formalization: is the innovation embedded in the constitution or legislation, in an administrative act, or not formalized at all?

Frequency: how often does the innovation take place: only once, sporadically, or is it permanent or regular?

Mode of Selection of Participants: is the innovation open to all participants, access is restricted to some kind of condition, or both methods apply?

Type of participants: those who participate are individual citizens, civil society organizations, private stakeholders or a combination of those?

Decisiveness: does the innovation takes binding, non-binding or no decision at all?

Co-governance: is there involvement of the government in the process or not?

Formalization: not backed by constitution nor legislation, nor by any governmental policy or program
Frequency: sporadic
Mode of selection of participants: open
Type of participants: citizens private stakeholders
Decisiveness: democratic innovation yields a non-binding decision
Co-Governance: no

Means

Deliberation
Direct Voting
E-Participation
Citizen Representation

Ends

Accountability
Responsiveness
Rule of Law
Political Inclusion
Social Equality

Policy cycle

Agenda setting

Formulation and decision-making

Implementation

Policy Evaluation

Sources

http://www.techo.org/paises/uruguay/