Knowledge Democracy

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://knowledgedemocracydspace.com/handle/123456789/1076

Browse

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

Participatory research: Revisiting the roots
(2002) Tandon, Rajesh; Hall, Budd L; Brown, L. David; Jaitli, Harsh; Kanhere, Vijay; Small, Dele; Gaventa, John; Merrifield, Juliet; Madiath, Anthya; Belamide, Eileen; Bryceson, Deborah; Manicom, Linzi; Kassam, Yusuf; Vio Grossi, Francisco; Hirabai Hiralal, Mohan; Tare, Savita; Batliwala, Srilatha; Patel, Sheela; Khot, Seemantinee
It has been nearly a quarter of a century since the early formulations of participatory research began to be presented hesitatingly and tentatively. Those early proposals were essentially a reaction to the classical methodology of research and inquiry which had alienated the social science research enterprise from the very people about whom research was being carried out. In a simple way, stated then, participatory research challenged the 'monopoly of knowledge' which has been vested in the elites of our society. The production of knowledge, its certification and dissemination have been controlled by intellectual elites in all human societies, since a long period of time. The Brahmanical order justified its hierarchy by making the distinction between intellectual work and physical work. Brahmins were the repositories of knowledge and wisdom, could use the language of God's 'Sanskrit', and interpret the religious scriptures to prescribe the social norms and behaviour for the rest of society. Similar Brahmanical orders have existed in other cultures and other histories. Therefore, the first significant contribution of participatory research has been to challenge the mythical and artificial divide between mental labour and manual labour, intellectual pursuits and physical pursuits. It has questioned the belief that capacity for intellectual work resides in only a few. It argued that popular knowledge, ability to produce and use knowledge, is a universal human phenomenon, and such capacity exists in all human beings, so argued participatory research then.
Seeing like a citizen’ re-claiming citizenship in a neoliberal world. November 28-29,2005
(Institute of Development Studies, 2005-11-29) Gaventa, John
What 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.