Document Library

Participatory Methodologies: Drivers for Change

Author: Robert Chambers
Date: 2008
Size: 21 pages

Access full text: via document delivery

Summary

How can the transformative potential of participatory methodologies be realised? This concluding chapter from Revolutions in Development Inquiry argues that participatory methodologies can provide entry points for confronting and changing relationships and power. They are frontiers for enquiry and drivers for personal, institutional, professional and social transformations, but many obstacles impede their recognition, evolution and adoption. Priorities are to: foster methodological diversity; make time for critical reflection, unlearning and innovation; identify and multiply innovators and facilitators; and make small, flexible grants over longer periods.

Participatory methodologies (PMs) have proliferated, providing a wealth of innovations specific to context and purpose. The journey of PMs has been from extractive inquiry to empowerment, from owned and branded methodologies to open access and eclectic pluralism. The development of Rapid Rural Appraisal and Participatory Rural Appraisal has led to the creation of a wide range of PMs. They are easily adapted, and consultants increasingly devise sequences and combinations of methods to fit each case.

There has been a shift from things (such as infrastructure and reports), rules and top-down planning to people, principles and bottom-up participation. At the core of PMs are principles of equity, respect, diversity, human rights and changing power relations, valuing the knowledge and capabilities of local people. In furthering the use of PMs, congruence between increased personal reflexivity and institutional change is important.

The spread of PMs and facilitation faces formidable barriers, however. Many donors, for example, tend only to be familiar with traditional methodologies and do not invest time in changing the approaches of those they fund or in developing and pilot testing PMs. Donors are also likely to withdraw funding from PMs. Other obstacles are that:

• Powerful people, such as economists in global organisations, dictate methodology. They expect traditional and inappropriate ‘scientific’ and medical research designs such as randomised control trials.
• Most training institutes are trapped in top-down, didactic modes of teaching.
• Linear paradigms prevail, and are regarded as the only forms of rigour.
• Top-down categories, language, mindsets and requirements impede innovation and the expression of local diversity and complexity.
• There are few creative and eclectic consultants.
• Many innovations pass unnoticed as consultants are not paid to disseminate their innovations.

Funders do damage by providing too much money for PMs in too short a time, (so that there are too few staff able to dispense funds sensitively, for example), and through conditionality. Clearly defined outputs specified in advance limit participatory creativity. Funders should therefore:

• Recruit and support creative innovators/consultants: innovators, facilitators and disseminators are needed who are sensitive, confident and resilient risk-takers, who try new things and learn from mistakes.
• Make small grants over longer periods; allow enough time for PM development and piloting; provide for writing up and dissemination.
• Find and support organisations and processes that select, socialise and support creators, facilitators and disseminators.
• Allow time for experiential learning, critical reflection and brainstorming.
• Allow time and space for creativity if activities are to fit purpose and context.
• Foster methodological diversity.

Access full text: via document delivery

Source: Chambers R., 2008, 'Participatory Methodologies: Drivers for Change' in Revolutions in Development Inquiry, Earthscan, London, pp 169-190