Community-Based Participatory Research
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://knowledgedemocracydspace.com/handle/123456789/1068
Browse
19 results
Search Results
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 AsiaThis 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.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 Notes on monitoring-fifth training workshop on participatory development. September 15-19, 1997(Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), 1997-09-19) Satyamurti, V.Monitoring is essential to any planning activity, as it provides a systematic and continuous assessment of the progress of work over time. In these writings, compiled by V. Satyamurthi, monitoring is presented not merely as a technical exercise but as a practical tool for accountability, learning, and improved programme management. These writings explain in detail what should be reviewed during monitoring, what information is useful, and how aims and indicators may be defined clearly. Particular attention is given to process monitoring, including the use of resources, progress of activities, and the manner in which work is carried out. The notes further discuss methods of data collection and analysis, including surveys, case studies, regular records, and participatory approaches that involve communities directly. Equal emphasis is placed on interpreting findings, sharing feedback, and using results to improve planning procedures and institutional learning. Satyamurthi also underlines the importance of making monitoring participatory so that people affected by programmes can have a say in the process. These notes provide a grounded and practical guide to participatory monitoring processes.Item Monitoring and evaluation(0000) Satyamurti, V.In this article, V. Satyamurthi discusses the need for monitoring and evaluation in sustaining the efficiency and long-term relevance of social programmes designed to strengthen citizens’ capacities to participate fully in social, economic, and political life. He traces the growing emphasis on monitoring and evaluation from the early 1950s, and more sharply in the 1970s, when international development assistance expanded and demands for accountability increased. At the same time, the article notes important critiques of conventional approaches that relied excessively on measurement, targets, and narrow indicators, arguing instead for a stronger learning process orientation. The article clearly explains the distinction between monitoring and evaluation, their core components, indicators, and the principles of participatory monitoring and evaluation. Particular attention is given to assessing the progress of community groups toward self reliance over time. In doing so, it demonstrates that participatory evaluation assesses the appropriateness of present goals and of the institutions that define those goals, making it a fundamental part of meaningful social programmes.Item An epidemiological approach to participatory research in evaluation (an ongoing study)(0000) Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA)Item Participatory training on coastal research study, Phase II: At all India catholic union federation hall, Madras, October 11–13, 1992(1992-10) Coastal Poor Development Action Network India (COPDANET); Society for Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA)Item Global foundations of community based research(0000) Tandon, Rajesh; Hall, Budd LThis paper by Dr. Budd Hall and Dr. Rajesh Tandon looks back at the origin of participatory research, tracing its evolution from the late 1970s when a small network of like-minded researchers and activists across Toronto, New Delhi, Dar es Salaam, the Netherlands, and Caracas began to challenge the foundations of conventional social science research. It highlights how this early movement grew into a globally recognized approach to knowledge creation and social change. The paper examines the emergence of international and regional networks, the establishment of Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), and the development of participatory methodologies aimed at social transformation. It also reflects on the challenges participatory research faced in gaining acceptance within academia, where researchers and practitioners often struggled to bridge differences in perspective and practice. Significant developments, including the 1997 Cartagena Congress, the launch of GACER, and the 2012 UNESCO Co-Chairs appointment, marked important steps toward broader recognition. The paper argues that years of participatory research work have slowly changed how knowledge is understood, who gets to produce it, in what settings, and in whose interest. For Hall and Tandon, this shift connects directly to current conversations about knowledge democracy and what higher education institutions owe to the communities around them.Item Challenges in the co-construction of knowledge: A global study on strengthening structures for community university research partnerships(0000) Hall, Budd L; Tandon, Rajesh; Tremblay, Crystal; Singh, WafaWhat does it mean to institutionalise the co-construction of knowledge between universities and communities at a global level? This paper begins from the premise that knowledge democracy requires moving beyond expert driven models towards collaborative processes that recognise the knowledge generating capacities of each human being and of every community. Community university research partnerships are presented as a key pathway for this shift, as they create structures through which research questions, methods, processes and outcomes can be shaped jointly. Drawing on a global survey and national case studies across Europe, Africa, Asia and the Americas, the authors examine the histories, discourses and institutional forms that support or constrain such partnerships. This paper further analyses models such as Science Shops, centers of community-based research and national policy frameworks, while identifying tensions and practical challenges in embedding such work within universities. It highlights the importance of facilitative structures, supportive leadership, transnational networks and sustained institutional commitment. In doing so, it argues that institutionalising community-based research is not only a technical exercise but a political and ideological process that reshapes how universities understand knowledge, partnership and their responsibilities to society.Item Breaking the monopoly of knowledge: research methods, participation and development(1977) Hall, Budd LWhy do we undertake research, and in whose interests does it operate? In this essay, Dr. Budd Hall critically examines the dominant top down traditions of research in adult education and questions their claims to objectivity. He argues that conventional survey based approaches often extract information from communities while offering little in return. They produce knowledge that can be inaccurate, alienating, and detached from tangible social action. Engaging with radical educators and theorists such as Paulo Freire, Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss, Hall outlines the foundations of an alternative participatory research approach. This approach views knowledge as collectively produced and rooted in lived experience rather than imposed by external experts. Research, in this framing, becomes a process of dialogue, reflection, and action directed toward liberation and social transformation. The essay invites readers to reconsider the purpose of research itself and to imagine methodologies that expand human creative potential while challenging entrenched hierarchies of knowledge and power.Item Participation, planning and international cooperation: reflections on the tanzanian experience(1975-05) Hall, Budd LWhat can development look like for a newly independent Third World nation? Emphasising the core principles of socialism and self-reliance, Dr. Budd Hall reflects in this paper on the directions Tanzania chose in making development planning participatory and in shaping its approach to international cooperation. Education is presented as fundamentally tied to national development, with its centrality illustrated through several case studies, including the Adult Education Network, the Man is Health campaign, and the Kwasisi Project. Through discussions of their motivations, processes, effects, and modes of evaluation, the article highlights how education functioned as a key instrument across multiple levels of development planning. Drawing on experience, historical insight, and policy analysis, the paper shows how Tanzania sought to situate its development efforts firmly within its stated principles while placing education at the centre of social transformation.
