Community-Based Participatory Research
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://knowledgedemocracydspace.com/handle/123456789/1068
Browse
58 results
Search Results
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 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 Global thematic review on training in community-based research, governance and citizenship: Final report(UNESCO Chair, 2016) Santha-Jayanthan, Aparna; Singh, WafaItem Bridging the gap between the researcher and the community: PRIA’s engagements in promoting community based research and social responsibility in higher educational institutions(Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), 2014) Tandon, Rajesh; Singh, Wafa; Srinivasan, SumitraPRIA has engaged with academia in a multitude of interventions, bringing community and practitioner knowledge into the portals of traditional research institutions and processes. By doing this, PRIA has helped Higher Educational Institutions (HEls) realize their social responsibility towards a community's needs and aspirations. This document traces PRIA's work in promoting community engagement within HEls in India and beyond. The experience, garnered over three decades, have been classified into six categories to highlight the different forms PRIA's interventions as a facilitator have taken to build bridges between the world of formal research, the practitioner knowledge of civil society actors and the experiential knowledge of local communities. The experiences discussed in this paper are not intended to be comprehensive; a few specific interventions are described under each category to illustrate the nature of the engagements fostered and the practices promoted.Item Knowledge for change (K4C) Global consortium-Mentor training programme: Face-to-Face learning residency report(UNESCO Chair, 2022) Dzulkifli, SurianiItem Knowledge for change: Mentorship training program(UNESCO Chair, 2019) Hall, Budd L; Tandon, RajeshItem Knowledge for change (K4C): Consortium for training in community-based research(UNESCO Chair, 2018) Tremblay, CrystalItem India launch of the UNESCO Chair in community-based research and social responsibility in higher education(UNESCO Chair, 2012-12) Hall, Budd L; Tandon, RajeshItem Summary of impact: Community-engaged research at the university of victoria(University of Victoria, 2017) Tremblay, CrystalItem OCUE Impact case study(University of Victoria, 2019) University of Victoria