Participatory Action Research

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://knowledgedemocracydspace.com/handle/123456789/1074

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 31
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Economics among the road scholars
    (2017-12-22) Dreze, Jean
    Jholawala Economics’ is a derogatory term that the urban elites use to dismiss the arguments of social activists without having to contend with them. However, some of the jholawalas are indeed first-rate economists and their arguments cannot be dismissed easily. Jean Drèze is a prime example. His book ‘Sense and Solidarity: Jholawala Economics for Everyone’ puts together the wisdom that he and his co-authors (especially Reetika Khera) have gathered while doing research motivated by the problems they found at the grassroots level. This article is a condensed version of the thought-provoking introduction to the book. The article is a vigorous defense of the possibility of combining research with action. The argument is not that mainstream economists just interpret the world while the activists try to change it. It is about the learning value of collective action and the role of economists in society. In a country where we tend “to climb the ladder from the top” – Drèze’s characterisation of the Bullet Train project – the contribution of activists-scholars to economic research has special value.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    On research and action
    (Economic and Political Weekly, 2002-03) Dreze, Jean
    The value of scientific research can, in many circumstances, be enhanced if it is combined with real-world involvement and action. This approach should be seen as an essential complement of, not a substitute for, research of a more ‘detached’ kind.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Report on PRA workshop held at Bidda Village
    (1994) UNNATI Organization for Development Education
    This report is about a study conducted in “Bidda” village about Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) methods in rural development planning. The participants included a workshop on PRA, which helped participants develop an understanding of the tools used for generating community knowledge, such as social mapping, resource mapping, transect walks, priority ranking, timelines and trends, service mapping, pie diagrams, and wealth ranking. In addition to providing knowledge about the tools, the workshop encouraged the participants to establish connections with local people, listen actively, ask open-ended questions, and value people’s community knowledge. The field study also helped participants learn how different PRA tools can collect comprehensive village information, including natural resources, livelihood resources, services available to the residents, and personal revenues and expenditures, and timelines and trends. The field study provided valuable insight into developing integrated community development plans for the study village based on the collective knowledge about the community. This research is a significant contribution to community planning, highlighting the importance of using participatory field study methods to generate community knowledge and promote rural development planning in Gujarat at the micro-level.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Participatory action research (PAR) in women's health: SARTHI, India
    (Zed Books, 1996) Khanna, Renu
    I would like to place these reflections in the context of my own experiences, both personal and work-related. I do this because I believe that I am typical of my kind, an activist and a practitioner working on women's issues. My educational background and training have contributed to the way I see myself. I have been a practitioner concerned with pragmatic action to bring about social change. I understood research as something lofty and abstract, concerned with a world of ideas. I have had, in fact, a mortal fear of research, resulting in a tendency to distance myself mentally from anything which was even remotely research-like. Second, somewhere quite early in my working life, I began seeing myself as an enabler, a facilitator for empowerment. This commitment to empowerment grew and gradually I began recognizing this, and around nine years ago I made some very conscious choices about my future work which I decided was to be in the area of women's empowerment. It is against this background that I shall examine the topic of PAR in women's health. What implications and meaning does PAR have for practitioners and for women's empowerment? In order to arrive at a conceptual understanding of PR for women's health action, I shall draw upon the last nine years' experiences that I have had working with Social Action for Rural and Tribal Inhabitants of India (SARTHI).
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Social research for social action: An introduction
    (Indian Social Institute, 1998) Fernandes, W; Tandon, Rajesh
    Though claims are made about the objective and value-free nature of social research, in reality, oftener than not it leads to some form of social action, sometimes aimed at questioning the status quo and usually by maintaining it. In fact, social research and social action are similar and interdependent. Both entail human activity within a given human setting and feed each other. Social research is allied with social action though it may not always lead to it directly while social action is invariably based on some research. One can argue that even coercive and repressive social action entails a certain data-base as is evident from the deeds of investigative and police agencies all over the world. Studies have shown bow aggressive marketing practices of multinational corporations, exploitation of the Third World markets and over-pricing-are based on extensive research of their market potential and methods of making a given product acceptable to the consumer i.e., creating a need that docs not really exist.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Report of the meeting on participatory research held at Dehradun, India April 22-24, 1983
    (Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), 1983) Society for Participatory Research in Asia
    This report is about a three-day meeting on Participatory Research (PR) held in Dehradun, India, in April 1983, organized by the Society for Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA). It was attended by twenty-four participants, who discussed the role of ideology in PR, and the overlapping nature of participatory research, evaluation, and training. The meeting also explored the complex and often conflicting roles researchers assume in the field, illustrated through a participant's work with a Dalit theatre group. To examine these issues further, participants formed four interest groups. These groups focused on primary education, forest studies, baseline survey design, and women's issues, highlighting distinct methodological tensions in each area. The report closes with a review of PRIA's role as a support organization and suggestions for its future direction, including promoting PR more widely, producing materials in local languages, and building a resource pool of trained practitioners.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Participatory training for promotion of social development
    (1996) Acharya, Binoy; Verma, Shalini
    How can participatory training and learning be undertaken with disadvantaged groups? In this article, Binoy Acharya and Shalini Verma discuss approaches to training that move beyond the mere transfer of information and place people’s confidence, experience, and critical awareness at the center. They argue that many marginalised communities have long experienced the devaluation of their own knowledge and capacities, which weakens participation and self belief. Therefore, participatory training must begin by helping people analyse their own realities, articulate their experiences, and recognise what they need to learn further. The article highlights the important role of grassroots trainers in understanding why people do not participate- including fear, exclusion, low confidence, and past experiences of being ignored. Training is therefore presented as a process of creating safe spaces for dialogue, reflection, and collective learning. Drawing from training designs adopted by Gujarat based NGOs, the authors show how structured modules on facilitation, group dynamics, self development, and training methods can build local leadership. Participatory training is thus presented as a means of fostering critical thinking, restoring confidence, and strengthening people’s capacities for social change.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Participatory training and self development
    (0000) Acharya, Binoy; Verma, Shalini
    How should training be undertaken to encourage critical thinking and instill confidence in people? In this article, Binoy Acharya and Shalini Verma discuss the growing emphasis on training within the development sector while questioning approaches that reduce training to the mere transfer of information or techniques. They argue that many people, especially the poor and marginalised, experience the systematic devaluation of their own knowledge and capacities which weakens self confidence and participation. For this reason, simply providing more skills cannot by itself lead to empowerment, though external knowledge may still be useful. The focus of training, they argue, must be to foster critical thinking so that people can analyse their own realities, articulate their experiences, and identify what they need to learn further. Participatory training is highlighted as a process that breaks the culture of silence, restores faith in people’s own knowledge, and builds confidence for collective action. Social development, the authors emphasise, begins with the development of the self.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Involving communities in planning and assessing the impacts of development programmes: Report on a pacific NGO workshop on participatory approaches to development, Nadi, Fiji, 23–25 June
    (2023-06-23) Quinn, Marion; Clark, Kevin
    This report documents a Pacific NGO workshop on participatory approaches to development held in Fiji in 2003, aimed at strengthening the capacities of civil society organisations to use participatory impact assessment, stakeholder analysis, indicator setting, and community based monitoring in their own contexts. Its central concern is how development can move beyond expert driven models toward processes where primary stakeholders influence decisions, resources, and outcomes. The report covers practical sessions on identifying stakeholders, understanding gender relations, designing meaningful indicators, collecting and analysing data, and using participatory tools such as mapping, ranking, focus groups, seasonal calendars, and time use studies. Through examples from Pacific countries, it shows how communities can define priorities, generate knowledge, and evaluate change on their own terms. This report offers an important lesson that monitoring and evaluation are not merely technical exercises but democratic processes linked to power, voice, and accountability. It demonstrates that when communities participate from the beginning of a project cycle, development interventions become more relevant, more sustainable, and more responsive to local realities.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Participatory impact assessment. August 20- 25, 2001
    (Particiaptory Research in Asia (PRIA), 2001-08-25) Dwivedi, Anju
    How can development interventions be made more accountable to the people they are meant to serve? In this paper, Anju Dwivedi examines how participatory impact assessment can reframe conventional approaches to evaluation by placing communities at the center of the process. She begins by tracing shifts in development thinking from a focus on economic growth in the 1950s to an increasing emphasis on participation and human development by the 1990s, where people’s involvement became central. Dwivedi argues that social development is not a linear process that can be captured through simple output and outcome measures. Impact must instead be understood as change from a given starting point, including intended and unintended effects on people’s lives. Participatory impact assessment therefore becomes a continuous process across the project cycle, engaging communities and other stakeholders in defining indicators, collecting data, and interpreting findings. The paper also foregrounds the importance of integrating a gender lens to understand differentiated impacts. For practitioners and researchers, this paper offers a grounded way to rethink impact assessment as a political and learning process rather than a technical exercise.