Community-Based Participatory Research

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://knowledgedemocracydspace.com/handle/123456789/1068

Browse

Filters

Settings

Start date: 2000Subject: search.filters.subject.Community-Based Participatory Research

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 41
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    NZ VASS impact assessment: Pilot programme-Facilitator’s report
    (Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), 2001-07) Dwivedi, Anju
    How 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.
  • Thumbnail Image
    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, Kevin
    This 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.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Social development monitoring: A process to ensure accountability
    (Prashasnika A Journal of Administrative Processes, 2006-12) Dwivedi, Anju
    What 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.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Women and multiple vulnerabilities in an area of unrest: Key issues and challenges of tribal women in dumka and jamtara districts of Jharkhand: Final report
    (Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), 2013-11-12) Jaitli, Namrata; Singh, Shivani; Ahluwalia, Deepa; Nasruddin
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Community-based participatory research with Dr. Rajesh Tandon-Podcast, Episode 1
    (The Action Research Podcast, 2021-09-21) Tandon, Rajesh
    In this episode, the Ar Pod team welcomes Dr. Rajesh Tandon, an internationally acclaimed leader and practitioner of participatory research and development. In 1982 Dr. Tandon founded the Society for Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), a voluntary organisation providing support to grassroots initiatives in South Asia and continues to be its Chief Functionary. He also holds a UNESCO Chair on Community Based Research and Social Responsibility in Higher Education since 2012. He is a prolific writer and scholar and is highly decorated. The conversation opens with an introduction of Dr. Tandon and the story behind PRIA (2:02), followed by a lightening round of questions (8:29), where Joe and Adam ask about the mission and vision of PRIA, a recent project with domestic workers, definitions of community based participatory research and, how is participatory research different from community-based participatory action research. Later in the episode, Adam asks what have been some of the more effective mechanisms or processes that you have used to catalyze participation in the field as it relates to participatory research (19:16). Dr. Tandon responds by placing emphasis on building trust among the stakeholders, facilitating conversation with the community and finding a local trusted organisation. How might a budding scholar identify those local organisations? How can these local organisations be trusted? (26:28). To find out, tune in!
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    International collaboration for changing the culture of research: UN SDGs and knowledge for change consortium
    (2020) Hall, Budd L; Tandon, Rajesh
    Universities are experiencing changes in the culture of research as they have known them. The theory of change being put forward in this article is based on the concept of international networking from and for the deepening of local participatory knowledge creation for social change.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item