9 participatory methods - oii...

9

PARTICIPATORY METHODS

Participatory methods encompass both a set of diagramming and visual techniques as wellas the underlying principles of grassroots or local participation. Therefore it is both methodand approach. In this chapter, you will learn about how participatory approaches evolvedand the key challenges to conducting empowering and reflective research. You will learnthat visual exercises are important but not the central focus of participatory research andthat at its core is a focus on power, co-production and shared learning. The chapter willdescribe the key methods and techniques that you can use and talk you through how toprepare for the field, use the methods and record the data while keeping the principles ofgrassroots participation at the core. To give you a sense of how these methods are used(and why they are useful) in the field, reflect on Chasca’s experiences of using participatorymethods while studying community environmental management practices in Nigeria andBotswana.

Some years ago, Chasca was working in a rural village in central Nigeria. She wasconducting research on the management and use of tree resources and working with asmall mixed group of men and women ranking different tree species according to theirvalue to the group. The species had been identified previously on village walks with awide range of participants. Local names for the trees were recorded and a sample of thetree (twig and leaves) had been collected. As the research was being conducted duringthe farming season, these longer participatory exercises were carried out in the evening,often by candlelight. On this night the group had started late and Chasca was keen notto keep people away from their homes too late into the evening. She suggested theyconclude the exercise, but the group protested and said that they had not finished goingthrough all the species. It was quickly agreed by the group that they should close as someof the women were keen to return to their houses. However, all agreed to meet at 6amthe next morning to complete the ranking exercise and Chasca was then informed aboutthis plan. Chasca felt this was a really good sign that the people with whom she wasworking were taking ownership of the exercise and wanted to pursue it for their own meansas well as being helpful to the researcher. The group felt the exercise was helpful inreminding them of why certain species were important and provided information theycould potentially share with ‘projects’ and others in the village.

In another research project, Chasca was working in Botswana on community-basednatural resource management. She was working with the local San groups in WesternBotswana and part of the research intended to map the natural resources around the village

Copyrighted material - Taylor & Francis Editiorial use only

181PART IC I PATORY METHODS

and conduct a preliminary ranking exercise to start unfolding how the biodiversity wasvalued by the community. The villages were extremely poor and people had very lowlevels of literacy. Working with two or three participants whom she knew quite well,Chasca started to introduce the idea of a map, with the option of either working withpaper and pens or creating a model on the ground. It was clear quite quickly that theexercise was not going to work.

The participants were not interested in abstracting their spatial environment onto a two-dimensional surface. When discussing different ‘veld products’ around the village,participants kept suggesting that they go there to show Chasca so she would know wherethings were, rather than trying to make a map. The participants could see no point in themap and there was no interest in producing it. Chasca chose not to pursue this exercise orthe ranking, focusing instead on field walks, participant observation and repeat interviews.

These two stories demonstrate the need for flexibility and sensitivity in your approachand in planning the methods for your research. They also show how you need to respectyour participants and their wishes, giving them control and power over knowledge andinformation. These are some of the fundamental principles of participatory research andthe methods and techniques that it comprises. In this chapter, you will learn about howthe idea of participatory research emerged and how it has been, and, indeed, remains, acomplex and contested terrain of methodological enquiry.

Short history of participation

Hickey and Mohan (2004) trace the emergence of participation back to the 1940s andparticipatory approaches have been strongly influenced by the work of Paulo Friere (Long2001). However it was the ‘popular participation’ of the 1970s, particularly the work ofRobert Chambers, that laid the foundation for the lexicon and practice of participation aswe know it today (Chambers 1983). Its initial applications were in the field of appliedresearch and action research that was common among the intersection of agriculturaleconomics and development studies (Chambers 1997). At this time in the 1970s it wasseen as increasingly important to work with the poor and marginalized, especially farmers,and this was the era of farming systems research and a greater focus on extensionactivities.

During the 1980s, these areas of applied research were influenced by anthropologyand the realization that more sophisticated understandings of poverty and the ‘human faceof development’ was needed. By the end of the 1980s a more coherent approach thatcombined the applied nature of research with farmers and diagramming techniquesevolved into a flexible approach called rapid rural appraisal (RRA). Parallel to thesedevelopments in the global south were the emergence of methodologies such as softsystems analysis and cognitive mapping from management consultancy and organizationalresearch and planning in the North (Mayoux 2001).

By the 1990s it was becoming clear that while these ‘rapid’ and formulaic approacheshad some merit, they were also failing to capture the differential views of complexcommunities and key groups such as women, children or the socially excluded weresometimes marginalized from the research process. However, there was renewed interest


182 COLLECT ING AND ANALYZ ING DATA

in the methodologies of participation drawing on earlier traditions of participatory actionresearch that had been long established as an integral part of many grassroots organizationsin the South (Mayoux 2001). These approaches were based on underlying principles ofrights and aimed to use the research process itself as a means of empowerment throughthe use of diagrams and visual techniques as a focus for discussion and activities such asrole play and drawing to stimulate debate (Mayoux 2001).

From this wave emerged the terms participatory rural appraisal (PRA) and laterparticipatory reflection and action (PRA) and participatory learning and action (PLA).Participatory approaches today are seen as a family of approaches, behaviours andmethods (Chambers 2002). Today, the remit of methods or tools has expanded con -siderably to include photography and video by grassroots groups and the ways in whichpeople can record their own information in diaries, photos and other accounts (Mayoux2001; see also Chapter 8).

Emerging from this work are many attempts to provide typologies of participation.While many relate to ‘development’ more generally, they can be equally applied to theresearch context. Box 9.1 contains a useful framework by Pretty (1995) that is still oneof the most comprehensive typologies around.

Participatory approaches are now viewed as mainstream and even institutionalized(Mikkelsen 2005). However, there is still anxiety about inherent power imbalancesimbued within participatory research. These have been eloquently detailed in Cooke andKothari (2001) and countered in Hickey and Mohan (2004) (see Box 9.2). These authorsraise important debates about power, promise and bias within the development andresearch process.

Participatory approaches can be easily misused and there are things that must be keptin mind when you are planning and doing participatory research. Participation can cometo mean ‘a way to get people to do what we want’ (Chambers 1991: 516) and at its worsea form of ‘development tourism’ that confirms biases, misconceptions and stereotypes(Chambers 1997). At the same time we need to be careful not to compromise academicintegrity, as well as aid the disempowerment of participants (Goebel 1998). Cooke and Kothari (2001) warn that the lexicon of participation should not cover for schemesor approaches that remain top down and extractive where power relations betweenresearchers and participants remain unequal. A participatory approach should seek toreveal and validate local knowledge, destabilize the notion of the outside expert as theonly true ‘knower’ and include communities on an equal footing in planning andimplementation. It should not adopt the language and methods of participation withoutacknowledging the complexity of social realities or properly absorbing or practising theintended notions of ‘participation’ (Goebel 1998).

When using participatory methods you, the researcher, should be a facilitator ofknowledge creation, a self-conscious interpreter of complex and competing ‘stories’, ratherthan an extractor of data (Goebel 1998). As such participatory methods, if used well,emphasize the interaction between researcher and research subjects (Goebel 1998).However, participatory methods can obscure rather than reveal social complexity and canvalidate dominant views that become portrayed as the common view (Goebel 1998). Oneof your key challenges in using participatory methods is to overcome such tendenciesthrough considering who is involved in, and excluded from, your work, and identifying


Box 9.1 A typology of participation (after Pretty 1995)

Passive participation – people participate by being told what is going to happenor what has already happened, with no ability to change it. The information beingshared belongs only to professionals or the researcher.

Participation in information giving – people participate by answering questionsposed by extractive researchers and practitioners. People do not have the opportunityto influence the proceedings as the findings are neither checked nor shared.

Participation by consultation – people participate by being consulted and externalpeople listen to either view. External professionals or researchers define bothproblems and solutions and may modify these in light of people’s responses.

Participation for material incentives – people participate by providing resourcessuch as labour and land, in return for food, cash or other material incentives. Peoplehave no stake in prolonging activities when the incentives end.

Functional participation – people participate by forming groups or committees thatare externally initiated. The groups are seen as a means to achieve predeterminedgoals. The groups tend to be dependent on external initiations and facilitators butmay become independent.

Interactive participation – people participate by being involved in the developmentand analysis of research and projects. Participation is seen as a right and not justa mechanical function. Groups take control over local decisions and so people havea stake in maintaining structures or practices.

Self-mobilization – people participate by taking initiative independent of externalinstitutions although the latter may help with providing an enabling framework.People retain control over how resources are used, or how time is spent. Such actionmay or may not challenge existing inequalities.

and finding ways to work around internal power hierarchies that determine who can speakon what topic and in front of whom. Key issues for you to consider will includecomposition of research sample, composition of specific groups while carrying out certainmethods, finding ways of locating and engaging with marginal groups or individuals withincommunities and adopting and adapting methods (including the logistics of when, whereand with whom methods are used) (see Figure 9.1). This will promote inclusion of differentgroups and ensure that their voices are heard within the activities conducted.

These efforts are vital as knowledge is embedded in power relations. There is no onelocal knowledge; there are simply multiple competing perspectives. Stronger and morepowerful voices can dominate. Participatory activities can work to hide power relationsthrough an emphasis on group work, on consensus in data expression and presentations,and can silence the marginal or dissident views (Goebel 1998). So, while these community



COLLECT ING AND ANALYZ ING DATA184

Box 9.2 The tyranny of participation?

Cooke and Kothari’s book Participation: The New Tyranny came out to greatacclaim in 2001 as it challenged the seemingly universal fashion of participation,which promised empowerment and appropriate development, on the one hand,while, on the other hand, in reality, consultants and participatory activists imposeddevelopment decisions and actions on people in ways that were antithetical to their participatory aims. The book helped bring into sharp focus the pitfalls ofparticipation especially as it shifted from marginal to mainstream practice and asit shifted from small-scale to global policy initiatives.

In 2004 Hickey and Mohan edited a retort titled Participation: From Tyrannyto Transformation and called for a deepening of some of the debates raised by Cookeand Kothari (2001). They put forward that ‘politics mattered’ and more focus shouldbe given to understanding the ways in which participation related to power suchthat it provided a basis for moving forwards towards a more transformatoryapproach to development. Essentially, they looked to (re)constitute participationas a viable and emancipatory approach, taking on and using the critique providedby Cooke and Kothari (2001).

exercises can enable people to find common ground and consensus, there are downfallsas well (Laws et al. 2013).

In academic research, using participatory approaches means increasing the space forparticipants to express and control the knowledge being created. While academic researchwill essentially remain extractive in nature (that is there is no project or action to follow),the researcher needs to look for ways to promote positive change and empowermentthrough the research process, for example through training and employment for localpeople, by hiring local assistants, providing people with information that is difficult forthem to access, validating and respecting local knowledge and realities and facilitatinglocal dialogue on problems (Goebel 1998). It is worth remembering, however, thatseemingly uncontested data can be implicated in complex ways through participatoryprocesses in broader historical social and cultural dynamics. Information and data in someforms of participatory research are rarely always as transparent as may be desirable andthe sharing of information is never apolitical. As a researcher, you should always becritically aware of your own positionality at all times in the research process (see Chapters3 and 5).

Today, participatory research retains its dual identity of method and approach and thedichotomy of being simultaneously empowering for some and disempowering others. Itis the potential for misuse alongside enlightening creativity that still divides manypractitioners and academics. However, the call today, and for you, is not to underestimatethe pitfalls and to be transparent in the aims of your research such that your researchprocess is honest and open. If you adopt a participatory approach, then you will need tothink carefully about why this suits your research.


Why use participatory methods?

As demonstrated above, participatory methods can be useful on two fronts. First, theycan rebalance the power question associated with more traditional extractive methods,giving more control to participants over how information is collected, recorded, analyzedand kept. Participatory methods can also, through their focus on diagramming and visualtechniques, open up debates and questioning in creative and innovative ways helpingresearchers and participants to view issues from different perspectives, facilitateparticipation of people with low literacy levels and specific disabilities and thus dig deeperinto the findings.

There are two common ways of conducting participatory field research, either withlarge teams conducting intensive studies over a short period (perhaps through a fieldclass),or single researchers working in a more low key fashion usually over a longer period(perhaps for a dissertation). Each has its advantages and disadvantages. The formerapproach can allow greater community control over activities that can be empowering.Materials generated are often tailored for specific community needs such as fundingproposals or management and actions plans. But these large-scale events can be intrusive,time consuming and exclusionary for those within the community. This approach,however, if done well, can be highly rewarding for both the research team and thecommunity. The single researcher approach can be extremely effective and less intrusive.However, this approach is usually conducted over a longer time period and while it can

PART IC I PATORY METHODS 185

Figure 9.1 Some exercises may require allowing space and time for people to work alonebefore talking in a group



Box 9.3 Lorraine van Blerk: Doing participatory researchwith children on the African continent

For the last 15 years I have engaged in participatory research with children whoare living in particularly difficult, and often dangerous, situations; usually on thestreets. My ethical motivations for undertaking this research are based on acommitment to issues of justice, equity and empowerment, framed by a conceptualunderstanding that children are experts on their own lives, albeit constrained bythe adult world in which they live. For me, using a participatory approach istherefore essential, as my conceptual and personal motivation does not always sitwell with many of the more traditional approaches to, and methods used for,conducting social research.

It is vitally important then to work with young people, discover what and why research might be important to them and then invite them to work withresearchers or even lead the research process in ways they see as appropriate for achieving research goals with academic, practical and policy value. A partici-patory process such as this is important to me as I have learned more aboutchildren’s lives from being in their company, listening to them and facilitating themto take part in their own research than I think is ever possible from talking to policymakers and practitioners. To explain this I want to share two different exampleswith you.

Almost 15 years ago I undertook my PhD research in Kampala, Uganda, withstreet children. As part of the process the children used disposable cameras torepresent their lives visually. Despite being advised against giving cameras to streetchildren (‘you’ll never get them back’) all but two were returned (one was stolen,the other broken). Every camera roll contained exceptional images and wasaccompanied by rich verbal insights into life on the streets: a life, in many respects,I would not have had such privileged access to without first gaining the trust of myresearch photographers, gained in part by trusting them. This experience taught methe value of listening to, and trusting, children.

My second, more recent, example is taken from a current project where I workas a research director on the Growing Up On The Streets project with StreetInvest.This research is on a much larger scale than my PhD but equally recognizes theimportance of participatory engagement. In each of three African cities, the projectis facilitating street youth to carry out their own ethnographic research: playing acentral role in enabling others to really understand what it means to grow up onthe streets. However, through a recent conversation with two street workers involvedin the project management, I really began to understand the need to integrateresearch and practice: bringing everyone into participatory conversations. Bystepping back and allowing the young researchers to take the lead, the streetworkers reflected that they had learned the value of participatory research. Whenone girl explained to them that she could not continue to engage in hairdressingeven though she had been trained and given some equipment, because she had


187

be transformative it is often much more subtle in its explicit ambitions. Both approaches,however, have clear potential for community engagement in knowledge production, asevident in Lorraine van Blerk’s discussion (Box 9.3) of her decision-making processeswhen conducting participatory research with children in different parts of Africa.

Lorraine Van Blerk therefore encourages you to think about taking a participatoryapproach and shows how valuable this can be for your research and for those with whomyou are working. The refection highlights clearly that by giving people some control overthe research process, different, innovative and sometimes unexpected but valuable insightscan be gained. So taking a participatory approach allows you and your research participantsto think differently, to think creatively, to engage in different ways and, in many cases,to have fun while doing this.

These creative engagements can also allow insights that break down the researcher/researched assumptions. We know that knowledge is socially constructed, that allinterviews and interactions are forms of performance and information sharing is done inspecific and often deliberate ways (Mosse 1994; see also Chapter 7). Communities andparticipants may therefore construct their answers based on what they understand theresearcher’s interest to be: there is nothing unusual in this. However, sometimes theseconstructs are based around what the participant thinks is relevant or not relevant andthus they may choose to withhold or not mention information they deem to be irrelevantor private.

When Chasca was working in Nigeria some years ago, she was aware of this potentialpublic/private view when working with a focus group of women on the Jos Plateau. They were conducting an exercise about what key problems women faced in the villageand what the potential solutions might be. While Chasca facilitated the exercise, thewomen soon took ownership and control of the matrix diagram that was being drawn.One key issue that emerged was that there were really significant issues that affectedwomen but these were not discussed at community meetings; neither were they discussedat a recent formal community-wide PRA event as they were deemed private issues withsolutions that could only emerge from within the community and not from outsiders. Thewomen discussed why these issues were private and where solutions lay, examining inturn the pros and cons of turning to government, community leaders, household headsetc. for help resolving these problems. The women themselves found this exerciseilluminating and realized that some of the problems they faced alone could be shared inempowering ways.

nowhere to keep the equipment, they realized that they had not really listened towhat young people need.

Participatory ethnographic research, or active listening as our young researcherscall it, can enable ‘the experts’ (academics, practitioners, policy makers) to see thatthe children are the real experts and without them we will never get it right. So, I encourage you to go and find out how to understand the needs of children, orwhoever you are working with, through facilitating participation.

PART IC I PATORY METHODS


Figure 9.2 Participatory mapping can provide detailed data on local understandings oflocation, resources and mobilities

While participatory methods are most commonly used to help those with less powerhave a voice in the research process, there is no need for these approaches to be confinedto certain sections of society. Philips and Johns (2012) say that there is ‘no obvious way’that participatory approaches could be used with elites as you are not trying to empoweryour research subjects. However, we would contest this and suggest that elites arethemselves still working within often strongly hierarchical power structures. Participatorymethods and approaches, used creatively in such circumstances, have the potential to givevery different and unconventional views. These approaches could allow participants toreflect very differently on their roles, actions and behaviours in quite exciting ways.

So, you have chosen to use participatory methods because they fit your approach toresearch and provide a ‘toolkit’ of methods that will help you to achieve your researchaims. You are aware of the potential pitfalls and complex power dynamics in the approachand you now need to work out which participatory exercises will suit your research thebest.

Types of participatory method

The participatory toolkit comprises a diverse set of methods and activities, some of whichare found in more conventional research, others of which may be very new to you as aresearcher (see Figure 9.2). Table 9.1 sets out the different groups of methods and whatsort of information they can elicit.




Preparation for and using participatory methods in the field

When choosing different methods and activities the key thing is to be flexible, experiment,invent and adapt. Having a go with friends and family, even about everyday topics suchas which flavour of ice cream people prefer or mapping the area in which they grew up,is a valuable experience. It is surprising what you can learn about these techniques fromsimple experiments. Experience will help you chose which activities might work well fordifferent types of data. You can gain this experience through reading extensively, askingcolleagues or supervisors and by working with the participants themselves to decide whichactivities might work for different areas of the research. Engaging with these informationsources can provide tremendously useful tacit knowledge about the complex realities andoften unintended experiences of using participatory methods in the field. Some of thesecomplexities are highlighted in Nicola Ansell’s reflections (Box 9.4) on her experiencesof researching the impact of AIDS on young people in Southern Africa.

There are many other concerns beyond those mentioned by Nicola Ansell to considerin your planning of participatory research. Deciding who you will be working with isdifficult. For truly participatory research, this should be openly discussed withcommunities but this is not always feasible and at times not desirable. Bias can creepinto sampling and selection of participants from many quarters and while local peoplecan help ensure inclusion of different voices in the research process, they can alsoexclude and omit mention of some people.

When Chasca was working in Eastern Namibia a few years ago she discussed withcommunity representatives the boundaries of the village and their grazing lands. Thecommunity was quite enlightened about its rangeland management demonstrating clearself-motivation and empowerment to manage their natural resource base. However, whileon a drive around the boundary of their area, mapping and classifying rangeland types,Chasca asked about a small group of houses right on the boundary that she was beingshown. It was explained that these people were not part of their community (despite livingon community land for several years) as they were from an ‘inferior’ ethnic group andonly temporary residents. These people were not included in community or committeemeetings and Chasca felt it appropriate to visit them separately to elicit their side of thestory. For further details of this research story, see Twyman et al. (2001).

Another issue to think through is in what order to carry out exercises. Often mappingand transect walks can be useful introductory exercises to start people talking about theircommunity and for getting an overview of issues in villages or areas of cities that peoplefrequent. This worked well when Chasca was working in Nigeria. However, in SouthAfrica, there was more suspicion of researchers coming into rural communities and soChasca and her field assistant decided to conduct semi-structured interviews for quite sometime, gradually getting to know the community, before attempting collective exercisesthat required people to open up to the researcher, and to each other, publicly. This workedwell in South Africa and repeat visits to communities at different times during thefarming year again helped build rapport and trust, making the more formal participatoryexercises highly successful.

When working with people for any research you need to keep in mind people’s timecommitments. As Chasca’s story at the start of the chapter showed, people can be busy


Tabl

e 9.1

Type

s of

par

tici

pato

ry m

etho

d

Key

cat

egor

ies

of m

etho

dAc

tiviti

esC

omm

enta

ry

Rev

iew

of

seco

ndar

y –

Doc

umen

ts,

stat

istic

s,

–W

hile

man

y of

the

se s

ourc

es a

re a

vaila

ble

on t

he in

tern

et,

muc

h hi

stor

ical

mat

eria

l or

sour

ces

repo

rts,

boo

ks,

files

, fil

ms,

le

ss p

ublic

mat

eria

l will

be

logg

ed in

obs

cure

libr

arie

s an

d of

fices

and

are

wel

l wor

th t

he

aeria

l pho

tos,

map

s et

c.tim

e an

d ef

fort

to

seek

out

–Fo

r ex

ampl

e, m

inut

es o

f ke

y m

eetin

gs m

ay b

e m

ade

avai

labl

e to

you

illu

min

atin

g ho

wde

cisi

ons

have

bee

n m

ade

in t

he p

ast

–Th

ese

mat

eria

ls m

ay b

e su

bjec

t to

dis

cour

se a

naly

sis

or p

rovi

de u

sefu

l des

crip

tive

back

grou

ndin

form

atio

n. F

urth

er in

form

atio

n on

his

toric

al s

ourc

es c

an b

e fo

und

in C

hapt

er 1

0

Direc

t ob

serv

atio

n–

Look

ing,

see

ing

and

doin

g–

Akin

to

ethn

ogra

phy,

dire

ct o

bser

vatio

n an

d re

flect

ion

in a

n on

goin

g fie

ld d

iary

can

pro

vide

muc

h ne

eded

con

text

and

und

erst

andi

ng t

o re

sear

ch f

indi

ngs

–Yo

u w

ill e

nd u

p w

ith t

ext

docu

men

ts t

hat

can

be c

oded

and

ana

lyze

d

Sem

i-str

uctu

red

–K

ey in

divi

dual

s–

Det

aile

d di

scus

sion

of

inte

rvie

ws

is c

over

ed in

Cha

pter

7 b

ut in

terv

iew

s ba

sed

on

inte

rvie

ws

–Fo

cus

grou

psw

ritte

n or

mem

oriz

ed c

heck

lists

of

open

-end

ed q

uest

ions

are

oft

en t

he f

ound

atio

n fo

r –

Cha

in o

f in

terv

iew

sre

sear

ch a

ctiv

ities

–Al

tern

ativ

ely,

cha

in in

terv

iew

s re

ally

han

d po

wer

to

com

mun

ities

with

par

ticip

ants

inte

rvie

win

gea

ch o

ther

and

ana

lyzi

ng in

form

atio

n as

it c

omes

in–

You

will

end

up

with

ext

ensi

ve n

otes

or

tran

scrip

tions

fro

m r

ecor

ding

s th

at w

ill n

eed

to b

eco

ded

and

anal

yzed

Ran

king

and

sco

ring

–Pa

irwis

e ra

nkin

g–

Goo

d fo

r el

iciti

ng in

form

atio

n ab

out

differ

ence

and

ineq

ualit

y–

Mat

rix s

corin

g an

d ra

nkin

g–

Peop

le p

lace

som

ethi

ng in

ord

er a

nd m

ay a

ttrib

ute

valu

es t

hrou

gh s

corin

g–

Pref

eren

ce r

anki

ng–

Oft

en t

he d

iscu

ssio

ns w

ithin

the

se e

xerc

ises

are

as

illum

inat

ing

as t

he r

esul

ts t

hem

selv

es.

–W

ellb

eing

and

wea

lth r

anki

ng–

You

will

end

up

with

dia

gram

s th

at c

an b

e ph

otog

raph

ed s

o yo

u ke

ep a

rec

ord

of t

hem

. –

Ran

king

by

votin

gTh

e re

sults

can

be

inte

rpre

ted

alon

gsid

e ot

her

data

–Yo

u ca

n al

so k

eep

note

s of

the

dis

cuss

ions

whi

le t

he e

xerc

ise

is h

appe

ning

–Th

ese

grou

p ev

ents

usu

ally

do

not

prod

uce

good

aud

io r

ecor

ding

s

Con

stru

ctio

n an

d –

Soc

ial a

nd r

esou

rce

map

s–

Com

mun

ity m

aps

can

quic

kly

prov

ide

over

view

info

rmat

ion

or m

aps

prod

uced

by

differ

ent

anal

ysis

of

map

s,

–To

pic

and

them

e m

aps

grou

ps c

an p

rovi

de in

tere

stin

g co

mpa

rison

s in

ter

ms

of w

hat

is in

clud

ed a

nd e

xclu

ded

mod

els

and

diag

ram

s–

Mob

ility

map

s–

The

inco

rpor

atio

n of

rem

ote

sens

ing

and

GIS

-bas

ed m

aps

furt

her

exte

nds

the

pote

ntia

l –

Cen

sus

map

s an

d m

odel

sfo

r th

ese

activ

ities

. Tr

anse

cts

are

part

icul

arly

use

ful f

or b

uild

ing

up la

yers

of

info

rmat

ion

–G

IS-b

ased

aer

ial m

aps

–Yo

u w

ill e

nd u

p w

ith m

aps

or d

iagr

ams

that

can

be

phot

ogra

phed

so

you

keep

a r

ecor

d of

–

Tran

sect

sth

em.

The

resu

lts c

an b

e in

terp

rete

d al

ongs

ide

othe

r da

ta–

You

can

also

kee

p no

tes

of t

he d

iscu

ssio

n w

hile

the

exe

rcis

e is

hap

peni

ng (

see

Figu

re 9

.2)


Dia

gram

min

g–

Cau

sal,

linka

ge a

nd f

low

–

Thes

e hi

ghly

vis

ual e

xerc

ises

can

be

usef

ul f

or a

naly

zing

as

wel

l as

colle

ctin

g di

agra

ms

info

rmat

ion.

Eac

h ha

s its

ow

n sp

ecifi

c us

es a

nd c

an b

e ad

apte

d fo

r m

any

differ

ent

–Fo

rce

field

ana

lysi

ssi

tuat

ions

–Ti

me

lines

and

tre

nd a

naly

sis

–Ve

nn d

iagr

ams

are

part

icul

arly

use

ful f

or lo

okin

g at

the

rel

atio

ns b

etw

een

differ

ent

–S

easo

nal d

iagr

ams

and

inst

itutio

ns a

nd g

roup

sca

lend

ars

–Th

ese

exer

cise

s ca

n al

so b

e ca

rrie

d ou

t fo

r di

ffer

ent

time

perio

ds e

.g.

hist

oric

al

–Ac

tivity

pro

files

seas

onal

cal

enda

rs t

o pr

ompt

dis

cuss

ion

abou

t ch

ange

. Yo

u w

ill e

nd u

p w

ith d

iagr

ams

–D

aily

rou

tines

that

can

be

phot

ogra

phed

so

you

keep

a r

ecor

d of

the

m.

The

resu

lts c

an b

e in

terp

rete

d –

Venn

dia

gram

sal

ongs

ide

othe

r da

ta–

Pie

char

ts–

You

can

also

kee

p no

tes

of t

he d

iscu

ssio

n w

hile

the

exe

rcis

e is

hap

peni

ng–

Thes

e gr

oup

even

ts u

sual

ly d

o no

t pr

oduc

e go

od a

udio

rec

ordi

ngs

Cas

e st

orie

s–

Life

his

torie

s–

Cas

e st

orie

s pr

ovid

e de

pth

and

expl

anat

ion

to t

he s

omet

imes

bro

ader

bru

sh e

xerc

ises

. –

Nar

rativ

esB

e ca

refu

l of

gene

raliz

ing

from

suc

h ca

ses

–D

iarie

s–

If po

ssib

le,

as w

ith a

ll in

terv

iew

s, a

udio

rec

ordi

ngs

allo

w y

ou t

o pr

oduc

e tr

ansc

ripts

for

co

ding

and

ana

lysi

s. If

peo

ple

keep

dia

ries,

be

awar

e th

at t

hey

may

wan

t to

kee

p th

em,

so t

hink

of

way

s to

rec

ord

thes

e da

ta–

Man

y sm

art

phon

es n

ow h

ave

apps

tha

t co

nver

t pi

ctur

es t

o pd

fs t

hat

can

then

be

emai

led

to y

ou

Dra

ma,

gam

es a

nd

–Pl

ays

–O

ften

use

d by

NG

Os

and

prof

essi

onal

s to

brin

g se

nsiti

ve is

sues

into

the

ope

n fo

r ro

le p

lay

–S

ongs

disc

ussi

on.

If yo

u do

dec

ide

to r

ecor

d th

ese

even

ts m

ake

sure

you

hav

e fu

ll co

nsen

t –

Prov

erbs

from

all

part

ies

befo

re d

oing

so

–G

ames

Pho

togr

aphy

–D

iarie

s–

As V

an B

lerk

sho

wed

in h

is r

efle

ctio

n, h

andi

ng o

ver

the

cam

era

can

give

som

e –

Topi

c ba

sed

surp

risin

g re

sults

. B

ut a

s An

sell

war

ns in

her

ref

lect

ion,

cul

tura

l con

side

ratio

ns s

houl

d al

way

s be

tho

ught

thr

ough

–Ag

ain,

mak

e su

re p

artic

ipan

ts h

ave

the

optio

n to

kee

p so

me

of t

he r

esul

ts.

You

will

ne

ed t

o an

alyz

e th

is v

isua

l mat

eria

l car

eful

ly

Loca

l cat

egor

izat

ion

–S

oil t

ypes

–W

orki

ng w

ith c

omm

uniti

es t

o un

ders

tand

the

ir ow

n cl

assi

ficat

ions

of

soil,

pla

nts,

–

Plan

t ta

xono

mie

sla

ndsc

ape

or w

hate

ver

issu

e ca

n gi

ve d

eep

insi

ghts

into

pra

ctic

es.

The

focu

s is

on

–Lo

cal c

once

pts

loca

l ter

ms

and

way

s of

gro

upin

g, d

ivid

ing

and

desc

ribin

g th

ings

. W

hile

the

se

cate

goriz

atio

ns a

re c

omm

only

use

d in

rel

atio

n to

env

ironm

enta

l or

biol

ogic

al t

erm

s,

they

can

be

succ

essf

ully

use

d to

cat

egor

ize

how

loca

l peo

ple

disc

uss

illne

sses

or

feve

rs w

ithin

chi

ldre

n or

typ

es o

f po

vert

y an

d in

secu

rity

–Yo

u w

ill e

nd u

p w

ith li

sts

and

mat

rixes

tha

t ca

n be

pre

sent

ed a

long

side

the

ana

lysi

s of

you

r no

tes

of t

he d

iscu

ssio

n pr

oduc

ed f

rom

the

se c

ateg

oriz

atio

ns

Sou

rce:

Aft

er T

heis

and

Gra

dy (

1991); M

ikke

lsen

(2005)



Box 9.4 Nicola Ansell: Participatory research with AIDS-affected young people in Lesotho and Malawi

When conducting research about the impacts of AIDS on the lives of young peoplein Southern Africa, I have used participatory methods for three purposes: 1)generating information about young people’s experiences, 2) producing data abouthow young people (and adults) think about the impacts of AIDS and 3) gettingfeedback from participants, practitioners and policy makers on preliminary researchfindings. The methods have varied but in almost all cases, participants havegenerated a product (drawing, diagram, poster, photograph, drama) that has thenformed a focus for discussion.

The wide variety of possible participatory research methods means each newactivity is an experiment. Some methods prove more successful than others.Sometimes the outcomes are unexpected. One important lesson is that participatorygroup methods are seldom very effective as a means of uncovering individualexperience, particularly where the subject is a sensitive one such as illness and deathassociated with AIDS. People are seldom willing to share and reflect on mattersthat are usually private in the presence of their peers (see Ansell et al. 2012). Inmy experience, when asked to do so, children become reluctant to speak, talk ofless-sensitive matters or copy one another’s ideas. In research undertaken withcolleagues in rural Lesotho, we used an ‘emotional storyboard’ exercise to provokediscussion of situations that provoked happiness, sadness, fear and hope. Twochildren drew pictures of snakes: one said their saddest moment had been beingbitten by a snake, the next child said theirs was seeing a snake. Given that bothhad experienced the death of their parents, this suggested they were deliberatelyevading a difficult topic for conversation. By contrast, given the opportunity tospend half an hour drawing a series of pictures representing their ‘migration stories’for one-to-one discussion with a researcher, young people were able to offerdetailed accounts of their personal histories, including the emotions they evoked(see Young and Ansell 2003).

Most participatory research is undertaken in a group setting and involvesparticipants in discussion about a particular issue. While people doubtless draw tosome extent on their own experience, such discussion is deeply embedded in localdiscursive constructions of the issue. This means that we should be somewhatcautious concerning the data produced in such settings and not assume that it reflectsempirical ‘reality’. For example, in collective workshops, participants repeatedlytalked of children whose parents had died being inevitably ‘doomed’, but inindividual interviews most young people insisted that the death of a parent hadrelatively little material impact on their lives. Nonetheless, group participatoryactivities are a very effective way of learning about how people think and talk aboutsensitive issues.

Participatory research not only reflects popular discourse, it is also a way ofconstructing new knowledge. This can be very productive with young people when


at different times of the year and days of the week and some exercises may impingeinappropriately on daily lives. Be aware that in rural areas the timing of your researchmight coincide with migrant workers being home, or away, specific farming activities,children away at boarding school, cultural events, all of which will affect who you cantalk to and how much time they may be able to give you. In urban settings, simply com -municating with your groups may be more complex and require gatekeepers to facilitateaccess to certain organizations and sections of the community. Meeting people in theevenings after work is not always ideal as again, many have family commitments or theremay be safety issues about being out at night.

When using participatory methods in development research, you may be working incultures other than your own and in communities in which you do not speak the locallanguage. In these circumstances, you need to work closely with translators or researchfacilitators. Discussion about working with translators is covered in Chapter 4 but it is worthmentioning here that they can be pivotal in whether your participatory approach works. Atranslator who feels superior to the people with whom you are working will struggle toengage with the empowering nature of the research. Chasca was worried about this withresearch she did in Namibia several years ago and she discussed at length, with her translator,the issue of accepting a chair when visiting different households for interview.

Something as simple as accepting, or not, a chair to sit on for an interview can be atricky thing in very poor communities. Do you allow people to show you respect andborrow their neighbour’s chair for you to save them the embarrassment of having theirvisitors sit on the ground or do you reassure people that you are very comfortable sittingwith them, as they sit, round their fire while you talk. Luckily, Chasca’s translator wasvery well tuned to the sensitivities and complexities of their collective positionality andwhen appropriate they would even discuss these dilemmas with their research participants.It is in these circumstances that your translator is crucial.

193

they are interested in a controversial issue, particularly if a series of repeatdiscussions is possible. I organized repeated group discussions among high schoolstudents in Zimbabwe, who relished the opportunity to exchange ideas on genderrelations (see Ansell 2001). Through the sequence of discussions, they repeatedlyreworked their personal views through debate with one another. Although we beganwith separate groups of girls and boys, both groups asked to come together andchallenge one another’s ideas in a mixed sex setting. The participatory researchprocess undoubtedly encouraged young people to think differently about gender.

Finally, a cautionary tale. Participatory research not only offers opportunities toconstruct new discourse, it can have unanticipated impacts. In Malawi, we loaneda digital camera to young people to photograph significant aspects of their livesand allowed them to keep some of the photographs. One young woman selectedphotographs she had taken of her baby. A year later, when we returned for follow-up research, she told us the baby had died shortly after our first visit. Culturally,some people are suspicious of the power of photography and the young woman’shusband insisted that she destroy these mementos of her child’s life.

PART IC I PATORY METHODS



You may also need to provide some training for your translator especially when usingsome of the diagramming and visual techniques. Explaining that the process is just asvaluable as the final product helps ease the pressure the translators may feel to make surepeople ‘do the right thing’. Again, if you keep the principles of participatory research atthe heart of your planning, then these issues are less likely to arise.

The expanding availability of digital and other technologies are providing new waysof recording data while using participatory methods. However, the role of technology inthe field is not unproblematic: it can be both liberating and highly divisive. Some of thesecomments are common to many different methods, but are worthy of mention in thiscontext. Recording devices such as audio and video are much easier to access today withsmart phones but be careful that they do not become intrusive. As mentioned in Table9.1, apps exist that convert pictures of documents to pdf files that can be emailed to you,or others, providing a quick record of visual outcomes from different exercises. Similarly,photos can be shared more easily with communities with new technologies but be sureto ensure full consent for use of pictures and videos especially if you are planning to postany online at any stage.

When in the midst of planning research, even when taking a participatory approach,it is easy to forget at times that ownership of the research process and the outputs shouldbe embedded within the community and with the participants themselves. While academicresearch, as discussed, will essentially remain extractive in nature, you need to look forways to keep the principles of participatory research embedded within your practice. Thinkcarefully about how the information gathered can be left within communities and thinkthrough and discuss the politics of who you leave it with.

What to take from this chapter

From this chapter, you should have developed a sense of the complexity and potentialcreativity of participatory methods. In this chapter, you have also learned that participatorymethods encompass both a set of diagramming and visual techniques as well as theunderlying principles of grassroots or local participation: it is both method and approach.The complex history of participation still divides academics today, but the potential ofparticipatory research can be transformative and done well is worth pursuing. You havelearned that visual exercises are important but are not the central focus of participatoryresearch and that at its core is a focus on power, co-production and shared learning. Wehave outlined the key methods and techniques that you can use and raised issues for youto think through how you might prepare for the field, use the methods, and record thedata while keeping the principles of grassroots participation at the core. The challenge isto remember that research and learning are intertwined (Laws et al. 2013) and trulyparticipatory research will manage expectations, co-produce learning, foster knowledgeexchange and keep people themselves at the heart of the research.



If you want to explore the ideas covered in this chapter in more detail, you may findthese further readings useful:

Mayoux, L. and Chambers, R. (2005), ‘Reversing the paradigm: quantification,participatory methods and pro-poor impact assessment’, Journal of InternationalDevelopment, 17: 271–98.

Narayanasamy, N. (2009) Participatory Rural Appraisal: Principles, Methods andApplication. London: Sage.

Theis, J. and Grady, H. (1991) Participatory Rapid Appraisal for CommunityDevelopment: A Training Manual Based on Experiences in the Middle East and NorthAfrica. London: IIED and Save the Children.


9 participatory methods - oii...

Documents