Community-Based Participatory Research
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://knowledgedemocracydspace.com/handle/123456789/1068
Browse
45 results
Search Results
Item The next gen project: A global study on training, teaching and learning community-based research (CBR)(The Canadia Association for the Study of Adult Education (CASAE), 2016-07) Lepore, Walter; Tandon, Rajesh; Hall, Budd LWhile policies and practices regarding the creation of structures to facilitate community-university research partnerships are emerging and there is a rich literature on methodology of CBR, little research has been done at a global level on the training opportunities for building capacities in CBR within universities and community organisations. This led the UNESCO Chair in CBR and Social Responsibility in Higher Education to undertake the Next Gen project to analyze the current state-of-the art in pedagogies and strategies for building CBR capacities. This paper synthesizes the main findings of the project and proposes a series of pedagogical principles for the training of CBR.Item Participatory research: Where have we been, where are we going? – A dialogue(UCL IOE Press, 2017-07) Hall, Budd L; Tandon, RajeshRajesh Tandon and Budd Hall, the UNESCO Co-Chairs in Community-Based Research, have worked together on the theory and practice of participatory research since they first met in Caracas, Venezuela in 1978. This article is a conversation between the two of them that took place in New Delhi, India in 2015. It covers the creation of the concept of participatory research, a coming to awareness of the importance and power of local knowledge, the creation of the International Participatory Research Network and their thoughts on some of the challenges facing community and academic partners today. Of note is the fact that the early roots of participatory research were found in the global South, specifically in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Of further interest is the fact that for the first 20 to 25 years, participatory research was a discourse located almost entirely outside formal academic circles but rather in social movement structures and civil society circles.Item Background document for the University of Victoria Task Force on civic engagement(University of Victoria, 2017-09-15) Dragne, CorneliaThe purpose of the report is to identify and review the best strategies used by other universities to coordinate their civic/community engagement practices, as they are reflected in the literature dedicated to the topic. The focus of the report is on North American universities. The report seeks to: 1)present a brief background on university-community engagement 2)identify universities that promote civic/community engagement, case studies of coordinating models in place 3)identify evaluation methodologies 4)identify principles and structures that could serve as a model for UVic, lessons learned and recommendations in the literature.Item Beyond "whose reality counts?" New methods we now need?(1997) Chambers, RobertActivities called PRA, and its equivalents in other languages, have evolved from a confluence, sharing and adaptation of methodologies, methods and participatory traditions. Synergies have generated new things to do and new ways to do them, including visual forms of analysis. A conjunction of conditions has produced an explosion of activities and applications, and spread to many countries and organisations - NGOs, Government departments, and even universities, and raising questions of ethics and of sharing methodologies. Coming from our different traditions, should we seek places of convergence and springboards for action? If so, could the concept of responsible wellbeing, and the question "Whose reality counts?" provide us with common ground? They fit with eclectic pluralism, a celebration of diversity, and democratic reversals of dominance. They raise shared issues of how we teach, learn, and construct realities, of dominant institutions and their cultures, and of personal power. They point towards responsible well-being for "uppers" being sought in empowering and privileging the realities of "lowers". Do we now have a phenomenal opportunity? We have participatory methodologies which are powerful, popular and self-spreading We have new space opened up by government and donor agency policies for participation and poverty reduction. Rapid spread has brought much bad practice. At the same time, PRA and other participatory methodologies have also shown a potential to contribute to changes at levels which are policy-related, institutional and personal To make the most of these opportunities invites sharing methods and experience between different traditions, and inventing new methods. Five methodological challenges now (May 1997) stand out as points of leverage. These are how better to 1. enable the realities and priorities of poor and marginalised people to be expressed and communicated to policy-makers 2. enable trainers to facilitate attitude and behaviour change 3. make normal bureaucracies more participatory 4. build self-improvement into the spread of participatory methodologies 5. enable people with power to find fulfilment in disempowering themselves Could it be that effective repertoires for these could lead to much good change? Could convergences and sharings of experiences and approaches among us contribute to such repertoires? Could we between us seize these opportunities in the new spaces which are opening up?Item Water governance links and resources(2015-12-04) Foulkes, TabithaItem Participatory impact assessment: A pilot programme in South Asia.(Voluntary Agencies Support Scheme (VASS), 2002-03) Quinn, Marion; Clark, KevinThis report documents a South Asian pilot programme on Participatory Impact Assessment and argues that evaluation must move beyond expert-led measurement of outputs toward a continuous and democratic process in which communities themselves analyse change, define priorities, and shape future action. Drawing on experiences from India and Bangladesh, it shows how participatory approaches deepen both the quality and meaning of impact assessment by placing people’s lived realities at the center. Through methods such as group discussions, mapping, interviews, ranking, and reflective exercises, communities were able to examine shifts in confidence, leadership, access to services, household decision making, and collective organisation. The process also brought forward unintended outcomes, local constraints, and concerns that are often overlooked in conventional evaluations. A key contribution of the report is its insistence that impact assessment should happen throughout the project cycle rather than only at the end. When undertaken in a participatory manner, evaluation becomes not just a tool of measurement but a means of learning, accountability, and institutional improvement. It strengthens community capacities, deepens ownership, and helps organisations remain responsive to changing realities. This report is an important resource for understanding how people centered approaches can make development practice more accountable, reflective, and meaningful.Item Participatory impact assessment: Final report on a two-year pilot programme in South Asia and the Pacific(Voluntary Agency Support Scheme (VASS), 2003-06) Clark, Kevin; Quinn, MarionHow can development interventions become more accountable to the communities they engage with? This report presents the findings and lessons from a two-year Participatory Impact Assessment pilot programme carried out across South Asia and the Pacific with New Zealand NGOs, their regional partners, and local communities. Its central argument is that impact assessment must move beyond measuring short term outputs to understanding long term social change through the active participation of primary stakeholders at every stage of the project cycle. Across multiple case studies involving women’s empowerment, livelihoods, peacebuilding, and community facilitation, the report illustrates how communities can identify indicators, analyse change, and shape future directions of programmes themselves. It highlights key themes such as partnership, stakeholder involvement, gender justice, institutional learning, and the use of participatory tools including mapping, ranking, theatre, focus groups, seasonal analysis, and interviews. The report consistently emphasises that evaluation is not merely a technical review but a democratic and empowering process through which ownership is strengthened, unintended impacts are surfaced, and organisational accountability is deepenedItem Report on PRA workshop held at Bidda Village(1994) UNNATI Organization for Development EducationThis 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.Item The village women cooperatives store: A case participatory research in a Korean village(1980) Cheong, Ji WoongThis case study focuses on the role of the women’s club in the development of the rural community of Bangchuk village, South Korea, as part of the Rural Development Laboratory Project of Seoul National University. The village was characterized by low income, lack of infrastructure, poor coordination, and internal conflicts. Although there was an established number of formal and informal community groups, most of them were inactive, and women’s involvement was limited. Through field survey research in 1975, the current study explored how the women’s club was organized and manifested its developmental role. Particular attention was paid to developmental issues such as cooperation activities, economic and educational aspects, family planning, and the mobilization of women’s participation in the club activities to promote the well-being of the community. The case study provides evidence of how the women’s club organization and collective action promoted community development. It also demonstrates the importance of both the researcher’s cooperation with the community and his/her participation in the development mobilization process to harness local human resources for the empowerment of the community. The women’s collective organization in Bangchuk village is considered an effective way to promote community development and improve the quality of life of its residents.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.