Community-Based Participatory Research

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

Browse

Filters

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.Participatory Action Research

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 37
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    International participatory research network
    (SAGE Publications, 2014) Hall, Budd L
    The Sage Encyclopedia of Action Research is a two-volume work of entries on action research, compiled by a team of editors and specialists in different areas of the field. Greenwood specializes in general action research, while Coughlan and Dick specialize in organization development. Brydon-Miller, Flicker and Hall work in community-based action research, and Friedman in organizational behaviour. Sankaran specializes in action research as a meta-methodology, Gaya in agency and activism, and Zhao in educational action research. Guhathakurta, Jaitli and Tandon specialize in participatory action research. The editors sought entries from 200 researchers. The topics are extensive and include biographies of well-respected action researchers, concepts, epistemologies, ethics, goals, methods, methodologies, organizations and movements, philosophical underpinnings, settings, skills, spirituality, theories and tools.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    University of Victoria task force on community-based research: Towards a structure for community-based research University of Victoria: Phase II
    (2005) Keller, Peter; Hall, Budd L
    This document was prepared by the University of Victoria Task Force on Community-Based Research, co-led by Peter Keller and Budd L. Hall. It explains the background to Phase II of the work on creating a structure to support community-based research (CBR) at the university, starting with a 2005 forum that drew more than 80 academics. The document uses a three-part definition of CBR as collaborative, as democratising knowledge, and as aimed at social action and social justice. It then sets out the next steps in the consultation, including talking with community partners, reviewing models from elsewhere, recommending a steering committee, identifying networks and funding sources, and exploring UVic’s hosting of the 2007 Community-University Expo.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    "All means All": Social movement learning and the inclusion movement
    (2010) Hall, Budd L; Hall, Richard
    In this paper, Budd L. Hall and Richard Hall reflect on social movement learning through a personal experience. It begins with a phone call in February 2011, when Richard learned that his health coverage in Arizona would end as part of cuts affecting about 230,000 people. The authors recall Budd’s earlier view that learning happens in social movements in three ways: through organised activity, through informal learning by members, and through the learning of people outside the movement. They then turn to the inclusion movement and its principle that “all means all”. Friends in the movement quickly connected the brothers with advocates and lawyers, and both learned fast. Richard reflects on how one person’s experience can grow into collective action.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Despite knowledge democracy and community-based participatory action research: Voices from the global south and excluded north still missing
    (Sage Publications, 2015) Openjuru, George Ladaah; Jaitli, Namrata; Tandon, Rajesh; Hall, Budd L
    The primary purpose for this special issue of Action Research Journal (ARJ) focusing on knowledge democracy, community-based participatory action research (CBPAR) was to draw attention to and raise debate about knowledge exclusion of and alternative forms of knowing in the global South as well as to bring to the fore the perspective of authors from the global South. We understand the global South to include the excluded epistemologies from the global North such as Indigenous Researchers from the First Nations People from Canada. Reflecting on the 12 submissions that were made for this special issue reveals how even within supportive knowledge and research paradigms that are meant to promote marginalized scholarships, the global South and excluded North still remains excluded.
  • Thumbnail Image
    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 L
    While 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.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Background document for the University of Victoria Task Force on civic engagement
    (University of Victoria, 2017-09-15) Dragne, Cornelia
    The 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.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Beyond "whose reality counts?" New methods we now need?
    (1997) Chambers, Robert
    Activities 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?
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Report on PRA workshop held at Bidda Village
    (1994) UNNATI Organization for Development Education
    This 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.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The village women cooperatives store: A case participatory research in a Korean village
    (1980) Cheong, Ji Woong
    This 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.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Re-Visiting participation third course development professional from south asia countries
    (Participatory research in Asia (PRIA), 2000-09-07) Satyamurthi, V
    This paper compiled by V. Satyamurthi examines the concepts, methods, and limitations of monitoring and evaluation in development programmes. The paper traces the evolution of M&E from its origins in the 1950s UN system through the 1970s expansion of international development assistance. It critiques the conventional M&E system, arguing that it fails to capture the complex, qualitative dimensions of social change. The paper then assesses in detail, and distinguishes between monitoring as an internal management activity providing regular feedback on implementation progress, and evaluation as a broader assessment of programme appropriateness, results, and impact. Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation and its key elements are presented as an alternative based on the belief that those most closely involved can analyse their own problems. The paper then outlines six categories of PM&E indicators, from group operation and management, economic performance, technical operation, financial management, group institutionalisation and self-reliance, to other considerations. The paper concludes by distinguishing three kinds of evaluation using Karl Deutsch's feedback loop framework, arguing how only participatory evaluation provides the latter two forms of feedback essential for genuine development.