Community-Based Participatory Research
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://knowledgedemocracydspace.com/handle/123456789/1068
Browse
19 results
Search Results
Item NZ VASS impact assessment: Pilot programme-Facilitator’s report(Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), 2001-07) Dwivedi, AnjuHow can impact assessment become a process of learning rather than only an exercise in measurement? This facilitator’s report by Anju Dwivedi documents the NZ VASS Participatory Impact Assessment Pilot Programme and reflects on how evaluation can be transformed through sustained participation, capacity building, and institutional commitment. The programme was designed not simply to assess outcomes, but to immerse partner organisations in the philosophical and methodological foundations of participatory impact assessment while learning from experiences of the past. Drawing on pilot initiatives in India, Bangladesh, Fiji, and New Zealand linked organisations, the report shows how facilitators worked with staff, communities, and local groups to identify indicators, plan assessments, collect evidence, and analyse change together. A wide range of participatory tools were used, including mapping, role play, Venn diagrams, interviews, ranking, focus groups, and seasonal analysis. These methods enabled communities to articulate impacts in their own terms and strengthened confidence, ownership, and dialogue. A central lesson of the report is that participatory impact assessment succeeds only when organisations demonstrate a genuine commitment to the process. It requires time, openness, and willingness to learn by doing.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 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 National level orientation programme on strengthening urban governance in india a Participatory research intervention, October 9-11, 2000, Reading material no. 2 and 4(Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), 2000) Gill, Harbans Singh; PrajaItem Transformative environmental adult education: Lessons from global social movements(2004) Hall, Budd LHow does learning emerge, and how can it be strengthened, within environmental social movement contexts? In this chapter, Dr. Budd Hall examines the previously unpublished results of the 1993–1994 Transformative Learning Through Environmental Action project (OISE, 1994), which investigated the learning dimension of six environmental action campaigns across Brazil, Canada, El Salvador, Germany, India, Sudan, and Venezuela, all centered on aspects of food security, preservation, and consumption. Hall re-examines these results, considering the growing interest in the theory and practice of environmental adult education, exploring the principles of transformative learning that were derived, the practices and processes that emerged, and the indicators of success that were identified. The chapter affirms that social movements are, among other things, about creating pedagogical spaces for adults to learn to transform their lives and the structures around them and that attending to the learning dimensions of environmental activism is a critical component in social movement strategy.Item Towards a new architecture of knowledge: The creation of an office of community-based research at the University of Victoria(2007) Hall, Budd L; Lydon, Maeve; Trapero, JoaquinThis report by Dr. Budd Hall examines the development of a proposed Office of Community-Based Research at the University of Victoria through a 14-month participatory consultation involving faculty, community organizations, and Aboriginal community members. The report is grounded in the principles of engaged scholarship, knowledge mobilization, and participatory research. It challenges traditional views of universities as primary producers of knowledge and highlights the importance of co-created knowledge generated through partnerships with communities and civil society. Through surveys, interviews, workshops, and community dialogues, Hall identifies the structural, cultural, and ethical conditions necessary for effective university–community research partnerships. The report concludes that a dedicated community-based research and knowledge mobilization program can strengthen civic engagement, advance social justice, and support more inclusive approaches to knowledge production in higher education.Item Among equals: Strengthening community-based knowledge mobilization through international cooperation(2005) Hall, Budd LThis paper details the formation of a collaboration between the University of Victoria and the Society for Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA). Dr. Budd Hall describes how shared commitments to participatory research, community engagement, and knowledge mobilization brought the two organizations together and what that collaboration looked like in practice, from joint course development and student exchanges to co-organized research conferences. The paper outlines the strengths and priorities of each organization and highlights collaborative initiatives in continuing education, participatory research, community–university partnerships, curriculum development, and international exchanges. The paper also recognizes key principles that have supported the collaboration, including trust, reciprocity, flexibility, and respect for diverse forms of knowledge and experience. The paper provides an example of how institutions from different contexts can work together to build research capacity, strengthen knowledge mobilization, and support socially engaged learning at local and international levels.Item A Canadian approach to higher education, community-engagement and the public good: The future of continuing education(2009) Hall, Budd LWhat is the relationship between society and universities in the 21st century? In this article, Budd L Hall reflects on the future direction of Canadian higher education and its responsibility to the public good. Situating his argument within long-standing debates in continuing education, he examines how universities are increasingly shaped by market pressures, corporatisation, and funding constraints. Instead of framing social justice and economic concerns as oppositional, Hall calls for a more integrated approach that recognises the interdependence of markets, communities, and democratic life. Drawing on decades of work in community-based research and engagement, he argues that universities must move towards institutionalising meaningful partnerships with communities. Community-based research, he suggests, should be embedded within teaching and research practices as a pathway to social action. In conclusion, this article invites readers to reconsider how higher education institutions can remain socially relevant by strengthening their civic role and deepening their accountability to the communities they serve.Item Higher education, community engagement, and the public good: Building the future of continuing education in Canada(Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education, 2009) Hall, Budd LThis article is about the potential for university-community engagement to serve the public good by transforming the health and well-being of our communities. It documents contemporary expressions of and renewed calls for community university engagement. It includes a detailed treatment of community based research, discussed in the overall context of community-university engagement. The article also explores some other important and growing dimensions of community university engagement, including the development of structures for the support of community-based research and community-service learning. It concludes with an argument that university-community engagement, while not the only current trend in higher education that affects our work in continuing education, is nonetheless a very important new development in which continuing education has much to offer and much to gain.Item Revitalizing the teaching of participatory research in social sciences(Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), 2005-03) Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA)