Knowledge Democracy / Participatory Research
Permanent URI for this communityhttp://192.9.200.215:4000/handle/123456789/123
Welcome to the Knowledge Democracy / Participatory Research Community. This community serves as a comprehensive repository of resources on participatory approaches, community-based research, and collaborative inquiry methods. Our mission is to foster knowledge sharing and support initiatives that empower communities to contribute to research, ensuring their voices shape the knowledge that impacts their lives.
Explore a wealth of materials, including case studies, policy papers, training guides, and research publications that highlight the practice and principles of participatory research worldwide.
Browse
138 results
Search Results
Item Decolonisation of knowledge, epistemicide, participatory research and higher education(2017) Hall, Budd L.; Tandon, RajeshWhat does the word ‘knowledge’ refer to, and whose knowledge is recognized within higher education? In this paper, Dr. Budd Hall draws on some 40 years of collaborative work on knowledge democracy. Hall suggests that higher education institutions today are working with a very small part of the extensive and diverse knowledge systems in the world. Following de Sousa Santos, Hall illustrates how Western knowledge has been engaged in epistemicide, or the killing of other knowledge systems. Community-based participatory research is about knowledge as an action strategy for change and about the rendering visible of the excluded knowledges of our remarkable planet. Knowledge stories, theoretical dimensions of knowledge, democracy, and the evolution of community-based participatory research partnerships are highlighted.Item Mobilizing community and academic knowledge for transformative change: The story of the UNESCO Chair in community based research and social responsibility in higher education(The Canadian Commission for UNESCO’s IdeaLab, 2017) Hall, Budd L; Tandon, RajeshWhat role can higher education play in advancing knowledge democracy and fulfilling its social responsibility? This paper co-authored by Dr. Budd L. Hall and Dr. Rajesh Tandon reflects the establishment, evolution, and contributions of the UNESCO chair in community-based research and social responsibility in higher education. Established in July 2012 as a unique co-chair partnership bridging the University of Victoria (Canada) and Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA, India). This paper outlines the effectiveness of a distinctive global North-South co-chair method in connecting academic institutions with grassroots practitioners to promote knowledge and democracy. The paper explores how universities should collaborate with communities in the co-creation of knowledge to promote social responsibility, inclusion, and sustainable development. Through its three core domains, knowledge mobilization, policy advocacy, and capacity building, the chair has generated substantial, systemic impact. Through global reports, policy dialogues, and training programs, the Chair has influenced higher education policy, fostered international networks, and contributed to embedding engagement and participatory research into the everyday functions of universities. This paper demonstrates how universities can contribute to social change by working closely with communities, promoting sustainable development, and strengthening their social responsibility.Item Monitoring and evaluation(Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), 1997) Satyamurthi, V.These writings on Monitoring and Evaluation, compiled by V. Satyamurthi, provide a succinct and practical introduction to key tools of project planning and management. They clearly explain Logical Framework Analysis, including its meaning, strengths, and limitations, while showing its relevance for objective oriented and participatory planning. The notes further discuss important concepts such as early start, early finish, late start, late finish, total slack, critical path, and critical jobs, along with how these may be calculated to improve project efficiency. Comparisons between Program Evaluation and Review Technique and Critical Path Method help clarify their use in different contexts. The notes also explain outputs and checklists and their role in implementation and review. Overall, this document brings together essential monitoring and evaluation concepts in an accessible format.Item Social development monitoring: A process to ensure accountability(Prashasnika A Journal of Administrative Processes, 2006-12) Dwivedi, AnjuWhat does it mean to monitor development processes, and who holds the power to do so? In this paper, Anju Dwivedi situates social development monitoring within the broader shift toward people centred development that emerged in the 1990s, where participation became central to planning and implementation. Instead of viewing monitoring as a technical exercise carried out by experts, the paper argues for a process rooted in community participation, where citizens continuously observe, question, and engage with development interventions. Social development monitoring is presented as a means of strengthening accountability and governance by creating spaces for those historically excluded to articulate concerns, influence decisions, and exercise control over resources. The process moves beyond an instrumental function of tracking outcomes, and instead operates as a political act that redistributes power and challenges hierarchical decision making structures. By involving communities in identifying issues, generating information, and taking collective action, monitoring becomes a site of learning and citizenship in practice. The paper ultimately positions social development monitoring as a process that not only ensures accountability but also enables communities to shape development pathways in ways that reflect their own priorities, knowledge, and autonomy.Item Seeing like a citizen’ re-claiming citizenship in a neoliberal world. November 28-29,2005(Institute of Development Studies, 2005-11-29) Gaventa, JohnWhat does it mean to be a citizen, and how is that meaning shifting under neoliberalism? In this paper, Prof. John Gaventa discusses how citizenship has increasingly moved away from a rights centered approach towards a more consumption-based approach. Depoliticised notions of citizenship have taken precedence under neoliberalism, where individuals are framed as consumers, users, voters, or beneficiaries rather than as rights bearing actors in their own right. He situates this shift within broader transformations of the state as well, which is not simply withdrawing but is being reconfigured to actively advance market logics, often weakening its role as a guarantor of rights. Through this paper, Gaventa proposes “reversing the telescope” by centering the perspectives of citizens as actors in development processes. This approach foregrounds what he terms thick forms of citizenship, where participation, contestation, and collective action are central. Moving beyond market, state and democracy first forms of citizenship, he argues that placing citizens first enables a re-politicisation of citizenship, strengthening claims to rights, accountability, and more meaningful democratic engagement.Item Knowledge as a commodity and participatory research(UNESCO, 1979) Hall, Budd LWhat is knowledge? How is it formed? Who has the authority to “make” it? and who does it ultimately serve? These are the central questions Dr. Budd Hall raises in this article. He critiques the way traditional intellectuals such as scientists and scholars, often trained in elite universities and supported by international funding agencies, are institutionally positioned as the legitimate producers of knowledge. Embedded within particular class locations, this group often produces knowledge that serves its own class interests and maintains dominant social relations. In this process, organic intellectuals engaged in critical reflection and grassroots organising are sidelined as knowledge makers. Drawing on the works of Freire, Mao and others, Hall reflects on the role of intellectuals. He advances a systematic critique of survey research and outlines the guiding principles of participatory research. The article is a critical inquiry into the nature of knowledge within the new international order. It calls for moving beyond viewing knowledge as intellectual commodities such as papers and conferences and toward recognising and valuing local and indigenous knowledge systems, while developing more decentralised ways of legitimising people as producers of knowledge.Item Participatory research handbook for community groups(International Council for Adult Education, 1978-06) Barndt, Deborah; Conchelos, Greg; Etherington, Alan; Galindo, June; Hall, Budd L; Harasim, Linda; Jackson, Ted; Marino, Dian; Tobias, Kathy; Vigoda, Al; Correia, Dianne; Icaza, Bernardita; Mansfield, JenniferItem Leave no one behind. Repositioning Higher Education for achieving SDGs(UNESCO Chair, 2022-11-05) Vargiu, Andrea; Tandon, Rajesh; Kaul, NiharikaRecent global disruptions connected to financial turbulence, pandemic outbreak, and global political instability up for hybrid warfare put the 2030 Agenda's vision at risk. Higher Education (HE) is central to the 2030 Agenda, but its potential hasn't been fully deployed thus far. A stronger role of HE in tackling the world's most pressing issues is therefore necessary. Which requires the repositioning of HE and the reshaping of its principles and practices. By referring to extensive experience on the ground of the Knowledge for Change Consortium members, and a wide range of contributions from the Global South and the excluded North, this policy brief approaches this need by discussing four interrelated themes: 1. HE for the public good 2. Socially inclusive HE 3. Diversity of epistemologies and knowledge systems 4. Contextual responsiveness and place-based learning This policy brief calls on HE leaders and actors to promote transformations within their institutions and HE systems, using the recommendations to critically reflect and act to reposition HE for achieving the 2030 Agenda.Item Knowledge democracy and diverse epistemologies: Inspired by the book “Socially responsible higher education: International perspectives on knowledge democracy”(UNESCO Chair, 2021) Tandon, Rajesh; Hall, Budd LItem Social responsibility in higher education: An International perspective(UNESCO Chair, 2022-03-06) Tandon, Rajesh; Hall, Budd L; Gauthier, Maéva; Kaul, NiharikaIn this post-pandemic world, it is important to have a new, more inclusive and robust framework of social responsibility in higher education. This brief will highlight key features of socially responsible higher education pertaining to the World High Education Conference (WHEC) themes of Inclusion in Higher Education, Higher Education Governance, Quality and Relevance of Programmes, and the Futures of Higher Education. Key elements include 1) Recognition of diversities of knowledge systems and epistemologies; 2) Integration of teaching, research and engagement missions; 3) Contextually responsive, locally rooted, place based and linguistically plural; 4) Socially inclusive, seeking diversity amongst students and academics; 5) Pluriversality replacing universality; 6) Transcending rankings and 7) Reclaiming the purpose of higher education as a common good. This policy brief, will review these key elements in more detail to advance the prevalent discourse on social responsibility of higher education. This set of principles strengthens a new, more societally oriented, knowledge democracy perspective on social responsibility of higher education. In the emerging aftermath of COVID- 19, such a knowledge democracy perspective is required to re-position and re- align higher education institutions, policies and systems around the world.