Transcript Participatory Action Research

Participatory Action Research
Amy, Camille, Doug, and Haichen
Introduction
• Problem: International Development can
become part of the problem of
underdevelopment rather than being part of
the solution
• Participatory Action Research (PAR)
evolved in the latter half of the 20th century
in response to increasing awareness of
development failures
Definitions
• PAR is a means of putting research
capabilities in the hands of the deprived
and disenfranchised people so that they can
transform their lives for themselves
• Takes into account knowledge of
developing communities about their own
environment
Characteristics
• The "problem" originates within the
community
• The research goal is to fundamentally
improve the lives of those involved
through structural transformation.
• The people in the community or workplace
are involved in controlling the entire
research process.
Characteristics Cont.
• Participatory research plays a role in
enabling by strengthening people’s
awareness of their own capabilities
• The researchers with specialized training
may be outsiders to the community, but are
committed learners in a process that leads
to militancy (fighting for change) rather
than detachment
Considerations
• Required is an awareness of one's own
limitations
• One needs consciousness of oneself as working
with certain values, which may differ
considerably from those of the local people
• Sufficient knowledge and understanding of local
problems must be acquired
• Solutions must be achieved through dialogue
with the community
Sustainability
Case Study I
Water Management
The Situation
• Joint effort of NGO’s in six countries:
Cameroon
Kenya
Nepal
Pakistan
Columbia
Guatemala
• To develop approaches, methods and tools to
enhance the capacity of rural communities to
manage their own water supply systems with
appropriate back up support and guidance
Why PAR?
• Experience shows that success is
impossible without the full involvement
and commitment of the community.
• Advantages of community participation:
- greater efficiency in system performance
- improve cost-effectiveness
- long-term sustainability of water supply
systems.
What has been done
• Active participation of local population
from the initial design, through data
gathering and analysis to the final
presentation of results and discussions.
• Research is seen as a learning process for
all involved, learning from experiences of
social action.
What has been done (cont’d)
• emphasis on gender-sensitive appraisal and needs
assessment approaches
• Implementation:
- Preparation, Training of facilitators
- Area selection and problem identification
- Diagnosis of problems and potential
solutions
- Experimentation and evaluation of possible
solutions
Results
• Allowed rapid adjustment to the different local
conditions in the six countries in both Africa,
Asia and Latin America.
• enabled rural communities and supporting
agencies to share, analyze and enhance their
understanding of conditions and allowed them to
plan and implement problem-solving action.
• strengthened local capacity in areas such as skills
development, group building, confidence
building for women and men, and in forging links
with other communities or organizations.
Results (cont’ d)
• They also contribute to the improvement of
maintenance, payment systems, and water source
protection; a small budget from the programme
allows to fund some technical improvements to
the community water supply system itself.
• “the knowledge we gain from this research is
much more valuable than gifts. It is something
that we keep for life"
Case Study II
Nature Tourism
The Situation
• Development of nature tourism in the
Windward Islands
• Explore how nature tourism could be
instituted on 4 Windward Islands in the
Carribbean- St. Lucia, Grenada, Dominica,
St. Vincent
Why PAR?
• Many stakeholders were involved
• Including government ministries,
environmental and heritage groups, private
business, farmers’ cooperatives etc.
What has been done
• Multi-stakeholder national advisory
councils were formed
• Search conferences took place
outcome: set of recommendations and
action plans for carrying out sub-projects at
the local community level.
What has been done (cont’d)
• Extended advisory groups formed on the
islands
• National awareness activities and community
sub-projects were implemented in some cases
• Regional project meetings:
project coordinators and key advisory
members shared experiences, conducted selfevaluation, developed plans for maintaining
the process.
Results
• Varied on the different islands
• St. Vincent: successful, several viable local
developments instituted.
• Grenada and St. Lucia: mixed outcomes
• Dominica: least successful, process
curtailed by the government soon after
search conference tool place.
Why do the outcome differ?
• Willingness of the key government personnel to
“let go” and allow the process to be jointly
controlled by all participants
• Empower stakeholders, change existing power
relations.
• Threats for some decision-makers
• Effort of collaborative group of citizens is
required for accomplishment of many things.
Critiques of PAR
Main points
•
•
•
•
•
Depoliticization of participation
Roles and motives of outside facilitators
Over-emphasis on formulas and techniques
Problems with public participation
Dichotimization of participation
From Participation ‘with Justice and Dignity’: Beyond
‘the New Tyranny’ by Ute Buhler
Depoliticization of participation
• Failure to take sufficient account of the
wider power dynamics which constrain
possible impact
• Participation needs to be re-politicized and
re-scaled beyond the local
– Participation should not be a gift from the
powerful, but a genuine shift in the social and
power structure
Roles and motives of outside
facilitators
• The restriction that the outsider’s role to
‘facilitation’ may be as problematic as one who
takes over
– Both stand in the way of genuine dialog and exchange
• The assumption that whatever ‘local people’ say
is valid is as patronizing as its opposite
– Need to challenge arguments
– If we acknowledge that outsiders have something to
contribute, how can they do so without once again
marginalizing the voices of those who have been most
excluded?
• Financial, political, and/or furthering one’s career
Over-emphasis on formulas and
techniques
• Structure vs. Structurelessness
– Structure: Fails to take sufficient account of the
complexities of real people’s real lives
– Structurelessness: participation built on personal
relationships and informal networks generate its own
conclusions
– The structure of participation has consequences for
who participates, how they do it, and how effective
participation is likely to be
• Are results of ‘participation’ even legitimate
– Risky decisions where no one really agrees?
Problems with public
participation
• Reinforcement of existing privileges
• Group dynamics that are likely to lead to
‘dysfunctional group consensus’
• Creation of group identities that may
themselves be exclusive
• Decisions may ‘rationalize harm to others’
• Demands a conscious effort to avoid
‘groupthink’
Dichotimization of participation
• Participation associated with ‘salvation’
and non-participation with guilt
• In some cases, the refusal to participate
might defend the ideal of genuine
participation better than ‘participation’
itself
– Actual opportunities for dialogue between
those in power and those marginalized are
unlikely
Dichotimization of participation
(cont’d)
• Where is the cutoff point beyond which the
rejection of ‘participation’ is the only way of
affirming the idea of meaningful participation?
– Participation is social responsibility and nonparticipation is irresponsibility
• Is ‘participation’ even the most appropriate
response to inequality and marginalization?
– Cannot rely on the dichotomy, need a new basis
Further Reading on Critiques
• Participation: the new tyranny? by Bill
Cooke and Uma Kothari
– On hold at Olin, not enough time to get it from
Borrow Direct for today
• Participation ‘with Justice and Dignity’:
Beyond ‘the New Tyranny’ by Ute Buhler
– What these critiques were based on
International Organizations
• Water For People www.water4people.org
• Water Supply & Sanitation Collaborative
Council www.wsscc.org
• Global Water www.globalwater.org
• WaterCan www.watercan.com
• WaterAid www.wateraid.org