Participatory Action Research
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://knowledgedemocracydspace.com/handle/123456789/1074
Browse
43 results
Search Results
Item Re-Visiting participation third course development professional from south asia countries(Participatory research in Asia (PRIA), 2000-09-07) Satyamurthi, VThis paper compiled by V. Satyamurthi examines the concepts, methods, and limitations of monitoring and evaluation in development programmes. The paper traces the evolution of M&E from its origins in the 1950s UN system through the 1970s expansion of international development assistance. It critiques the conventional M&E system, arguing that it fails to capture the complex, qualitative dimensions of social change. The paper then assesses in detail, and distinguishes between monitoring as an internal management activity providing regular feedback on implementation progress, and evaluation as a broader assessment of programme appropriateness, results, and impact. Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation and its key elements are presented as an alternative based on the belief that those most closely involved can analyse their own problems. The paper then outlines six categories of PM&E indicators, from group operation and management, economic performance, technical operation, financial management, group institutionalisation and self-reliance, to other considerations. The paper concludes by distinguishing three kinds of evaluation using Karl Deutsch's feedback loop framework, arguing how only participatory evaluation provides the latter two forms of feedback essential for genuine development.Item Participatory action research chronology: Social history of PAR methodologies(2004)As conventional research was increasingly criticized for being distant from people’s lived realities, participatory action research (PAR) emerged as an approach that linked knowledge creation with social change. This study traces the history and evolution of participatory action research (PAR), situating it within broader social, political, and intellectual movements of the twentieth century. It highlights the influence of early pioneers like Moreno and Kurt Lewin, while also recognizing the contributions of Paulo Freire, Orlando Fals-Borda, Marja-Liisa Swantz, and others who shaped the participatory ethos. The research outlines how PAR emerged as both a methodological innovation and a political commitment, particularly in the struggles of marginalized and Indigenous communities across regions such as Canada, Tanzania, and Latin America. Central to the discussion is how PAR challenged the dominance of positivist traditions by emphasizing collaboration, critical consciousness, and the co-creation of knowledge with communities. The paper also shows how networks of scholars, activists, and local leaders extended PAR across continents, adapting it to diverse contexts from land use and health to education and cultural survival. By weaving together these experiences, the study demonstrates how participatory action research became a bridge between academic inquiry and social transformation, continually evolving through the struggles and aspirations of those it sought to serve.Item From margins to center? The development and purpose of participatory research(The American Sociologist, 1992) Hall, Budd LThis article documents the development of the libratory stream of participa-tory research as experienced through the activities and connections of one of the key figures in the early development and dissemination of these ideas. It traces the developments in Tanzania in the early 1970s, through the establish-ment of the original Participatory Research Network to the elaboration of theoretical and political debates. It highlights the formulation and elaboration of participatory research as a contribution to social change in a variety of settings. It includes discussions of the feminist advance, the question of voice and the relationship of power to knowledge in transformative practice. It contains an extensive and historically valuable bibliography.Item Participatory training for promotion of social development(1996) Acharya, Binoy; Verma, ShaliniHow 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.Item Participatory training and self development(0000) Acharya, Binoy; Verma, ShaliniHow 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.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, KevinThis 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.Item Participatory impact assessment. August 20- 25, 2001(Particiaptory Research in Asia (PRIA), 2001-08-25) Dwivedi, AnjuHow 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.Item Participatory research as a methodology of development(Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), 0000) Tandon, RajeshThis paper questions how development research has usually been done. It points out that classical research keeps a firm line between the researcher and the people being studied, treats the researcher's own values as something to be kept out of the picture, and leaves control of the whole process in the researcher's hands alone. Participatory research is put forward as a way of working that sets these assumptions aside. Here the problem to be studied comes from the community itself, the people affected take an active part in the inquiry, and the researcher works alongside them rather than above them. Three examples from India carry the idea forward. In West Bengal, sharecroppers were registered through village camps under what became known as Operation Barga. In southern Rajasthan, twelve tribal families built a shared irrigation system by reviving an old local practice of water-sharing. In Maharashtra, an organisation called Shramik Sanghatana brought together landless labourers and tribal women around wages, land rights and the effects of alcoholism on their households. Through these cases, the paper highlights some of the more challenging issues that participatory research raises, such as its closeness to political action, the difficulty of applying it in unorganized communities, and the need for a researcher's personal perspective before people are willing to trust the process.Item Training on participatory research methodologies. September 18-22, 2017(2017-09-22) Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA)Item Preparing the next generation of researchers(UNESCO Chair, 2020-06-23) Bhatt, Nandita