Participatory Learning and Action (PLA)

Transcription

1 Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) A Training and Reference Manual BY ANNA TONESS, PH.D

2 COMPILED AND WRITTEN BY ANNA TONESS, BASED ON TONESS (2002) Participatory Learning and Action Anna Toness, Ph.D. Sustainable Change th St., NE Washington, DC Phone i

3 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS... 2 INTRODUCTION... 3 WHAT TO EXPECT FROM THIS WORKSHOP... 3 AGENDA-AT-A-GLANCE... 3 BACKGROUND ON PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES... 4 The Importance of Interactive Participation... 4 Rapid/Participatory Rural Appraisal... 6 Participatory Action Research (PAR) PRA in a Participatory Action Research Context Similarities and Differences Between PAR and Constructivist Inquiry Validity/Trustworthiness of PRA Methodology THE WHOLE PRA: PUTTING IT TOGETHER THE RRA/PRA PROCESS Preparation (Pre-Field work) In the Field Analysis (Post Field work) SITE SELECTION THE PRA TEAM STRUCTURING AND CHOOSING THE PRA TOOLS SETTING OBJECTIVES STRUCTURE OF PRA OVER TIME ANALYSIS AND REPORT WRITING Analysis Report Writing PARTICIPATORY METHODS THE PRACTIONER S TOOLBOX Participatory Mapping Transects Calendars Historical Profile Matrices Venn Diagram and Organizational Relationships APPENDIX LOGISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS ATTACHED EXAMPLE PRA TOOLS FROM OTHER SOURCES REFERENCES

4 Introduction What to Expect from this Workshop T his workshop focuses on core participatory concepts and tools, and an experience with their application. This is an intensive two day workshop designed for learning through group interaction and practice in the classroom. Approaches and definitions for Participatory Development (PD), Participatory Learning and Action (PLA), Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA), and Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) will be discussed. This manual is designed to be used as a reference and includes additional background and theoretical underpinnings not covered in the workshop, in additional to examples of PRA tools in practice. This workshop will enhance your awareness, knowledge or skills in the following areas: Increasing participation of different stakeholder groups Learning and applying tools such as mapping, matrix ranking, gender analysis, relationship and institutional mapping, and calendars A discussion of community development skills including facilitation, working with groups, capacity building and conflict resolution A discussion of the use of participatory methods within the context of project design needs assessment, analysis, monitoring, and evaluation. Agenda-at-a-glance Monday, May 30 8:00 9:00 Introduction to Workshop and participants 9:00 9:20 Introduction to participatory methods: history, methodology 9:20 10:00 The PRA process: putting it together 10:00 10:15 Break 10:15 10:30 Organizing and Choosing the Tools 10:30 10:50 Introduction to Mapping 10:50 11:30 Group Practice: Mapping 11:30 12:00 Coming together, Q&A on Mapping and examples 12:00 1:00 Lunch 1:00 1: 20 Introduction to Transects and Historical Profiles 1:20 2:00 Introduction to Venn Diagrams, Calendars, 24 hour clock 2:00 2:40 Group Practice: Diagrams and Calendars 2:40 3:15 Coming together, Q&A on Diagrams and Calendars 3:15 3:30 Break 3:30 3:50 Introduction to Social Mapping and Ranking 3:50 4:10 Matrices Part I: Introduction to Matrices and Complex Ranking 4:10 5:00 Group Practice: Matrices I 5:00 5:30 Coming Together, Q&A on Matrices (homework for tomorrow) 3

5 Monday, May 30 8:00 8:30 Group activity 8:30 9:00 Matrices Part II: Matrices applied in thematic context, prioritization 9:00 9:45 Group Practice: Matrices II 9:45 10:10 Coming together, Q&A on Matrices 10:10 10:25 Break 10:25 11:00 Putting it together 11:00 11:30 PRA Case Study, Paraguay Example 11:30 12:15 Facilitation Skills (Question asking, checklists, team roles), Team Dynamics, Behavior and Attitudes 12:15 12:30 Wrap up Background on Participatory Approaches Sustainable development requires that development and extension professionals be involved in transferring skills and knowledge about diverse technical areas, such as agriculture, natural resource management, and health while recognizing and working within the economic, ecological, and social framework of the region. In particular, the question of sustainability greatly affects agricultural extension because environmental and agricultural problems emerge directly from human use of natural resources. One necessary condition for sustainable development use is that large numbers of farming households must be motivated to work together to improve their communities and to coordinate resource management. The success of sustainable development therefore depends on action taken by communities as a whole, as well as the motivation, skills, and knowledge of individuals (Roling & Pretty, 1997). This makes the development and extensionist professionals task more challenging. An approach that incorporates sustainability as a central principle requires new ways of learning about the world. The Importance of Interactive Participation Changes in both development and extension programs involve a move away from extractive survey questionnaires and toward new methods for participatory appraisal and analysis in which more activities are carried out by local people themselves, and the learning process is shared actively and directly between insiders and outsiders (Chambers, 1994a). Subsequently, agricultural extensionists need to adapt their approach and methods to reflect a paradigm that values diversity and flexibility, that emphasizes process learning and sustainability over quantitative output, and is, above all, participatory (Picciotto, 1995). The term participation, has now become part of the normal language of many development agencies, including NGOs, government departments and banks, but the level of participation varies greatly and this has created many paradoxes (Reij, 1988; Bunch, 1991; Kerr, 1994). The term participation has different meanings for different people. The term 4

6 has been used to build local capacity and self-reliance, on the one hand, but also to justify the extension of state control, on the other. It has also been used for interactive data collection and analysis, as well as to shift power and decision-making away from external agencies. Pretty et al., (1995) have described seven categories of participation (Table 3), from least to most participatory. The best results occur when people are involved in decisionmaking during all stages of the project (Chambers, 1994a; Pretty & Chambers, 1993). It is therefore important to ensure that those using the term define ways of shifting participation from passive toward interactive participation. The critical way of doing this is to utilize interactive and participatory methods, such as PRA (Pretty & Vodouhe, 1997). Typology of Participation 1. Passive participation where locals are told what is going to happen and are involved primarily through being informed of the process. It is a unilateral announcement by a project management without listening to people s responses. The information being shared belongs only to external professionals. 2. Participation in Information Giving where locals answer questions to pre-formulated questionnaires or research questions, surveys, or other instruments, and does not influence the formulation or interpretation of the questions. People do not have the opportunity to influence proceedings, as the findings of the research are neither shared nor checked for accuracy. 3. Consultation where locals are consulted by external agents who define both problems and solutions in light of the responses, but are under no obligation to take on people s views or share in decision making. People participate by being consulted, and external people listen to their views. 4. Material Incentive where locals provide resources, such as labor or land, in return for other material incentives. They do not have a stake in continuing activities once the incentives end. Much on farm research falls in this category, as farmers provide the fields but are not involved in the experimentation or the process of learning. It is very common to see this called participation. 5. Functional participation where locals form groups usually initiated by and dependent on external facilitators to participate in project implementation. People may participate by forming groups to meet predetermined objectives related to projects, which can involve the development or promotion of externally initiated social organization. These groups may become self-dependent and are usually formed after major decisions have been made, rather than during the early stages of a project. Such involvement does not tend to be at early stages of project cycles and planning, but rather after major decisions have been made, though. These groups/institutions tend to be dependent on external initiators and facilitators, but may become selfdependent. 6. Interactive participation where locals participate in joint analysis that leads to action plans and the formation of new local institutions or the strengthening of existing ones. It tends to involve interdisciplinary methodologies that seek multiple perspectives and make use of a systematic and structural learning process. The 5

7 groups take control over local decisions and people have a stake in maintaining structures or practices. 7. Self-Mobilization where locals participate by taking initiative independent of external institutions and may develop contacts with external institutions for resources and technical advice, but retain control over how resources are used. Such self-initiated mobilization and collective action may or may not challenge existing inequitable distributions of wealth and power. Source: (Pretty et al., 1995, p. 61; Pretty & Vodouhe, 1997; Pretty, 1994). Participatory methods share certain assumptions (Roling & Pretty, 1997). They assume cumulative learning by all participants and seek diversity in multiple perspectives, assuming that different individuals and groups make different evaluations of situations. They assume a learning process best revealed through group inquiry, and sharing and flexibility adaptable to site-specific socioeconomic and ecological conditions. The role of the professional in participatory methodologies is best thought of as being a facilitator helping people to carry out their own study. The interaction between professionals and diverse groups of local people creates a learning process that leads to increased consensus on directions for change, thus making the change more sustainable. In short, the sustainability and process-learning paradigm that agricultural extension is moving toward cannot be implemented successfully without all actors being involved in a continuing process of participatory learning (Roling & Pretty, 1997; Pretty & Vodouhe, 1997). Rapid/Participatory Rural Appraisal Among emerging participatory methods, an important part has been played by Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA). The term originally stood for rural application, its approach and methods are also used in urban areas; and practitioners learned that relaxed was better than rapid (Chambers, 2004). RRA was developed and spread in the 1980s, in response to the perceived problems of outsiders miscommunication with local people. RRA is defined as a systematic, semi-structured activity conducted on-site by a multidisciplinary team with the aim of quickly and efficiently acquiring new information and hypotheses about rural life and rural resources (Jiggins & Pollott, 1995). It is a set of informal techniques used by development practitioners in rural areas to collect and analyze data. The strengths of the approach were the new methodologies for gathering data and assessing needs and priorities in communities, involving experts eliciting information from locals, and using a variety of qualitative methods which proved useful and efficient. Its methods typically involve observation and semi-structured interviews. A limitation of RRA is that communication is still elicitive, taking from locals to the experts in a way which is not empowering to locals themselves, where the analysis was done primarily by the experts (Conway & Barbier, 1990; Serageldin et al., 1994). PRA grew out of the RRA, correcting some of its limitations. PRA is described as a growing family of approaches, methods, attitudes and behaviors to enable and empower people to share, analyze and enhance their knowledge of life and conditions, to plan, act, monitor, evaluate and reflect (Chambers, 2004). PRA traces its 6

8 origins primarily to the following five fields (Chambers, 1994a): 1) activist participatory research, 2) agro-ecosystem analysis, 3) applied anthropology, 4) field research on farming systems, and 5) RRA. Each of these fields contributed aspects of what today is considered the family of Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) (Chambers, 1994a). The PRA approach includes RRA methods but emphasizes a different behavioral role for the outsiders. They act as facilitators to locals, creating a process of local empowerment, rather than merely information gathering. A major strength of this approach is that it recognizes the importance of local knowledge, an importance equal to, if not more important than, expert knowledge. It also encourages community empowerment and builds individuals selfesteem. Typically, PRA data-collection methods include mapping, diagramming, comparison, transect walks, group animation, and other exercises all done by local people (Serageldin et al., 1994; Mayers & Kotey, 1996). Recognizing local people s own definition of their interests and felt needs is crucial for securing participation. The assumption is that experts do not automatically have a better perspective on locals problems than they themselves have. Experts fulfill their role as agents of change when they help locals to become more aware of what are the technical options suitable to their own interests and development (Ahmad, 1989). Key tenets of PRA include participation, teamwork, flexibility, and triangulation (Mayers & Kotey, 1996). While PRA originally stood for Participatory Rural Appraisal, its applications are many, including contexts that are urban as well as rural, and is not only used for appraisal purposes but also monitoring, and evaluation, as well as institutional development. Because PRA, as a term, is overly specific, in recent years PLA has been used interchangeably with PRA, and stands for Participatory Learning and Action. RRA and PRA originated due to three historical trends (Chambers, 1994a). The first was a general dissatisfaction with rural development tourism, or brief rural visits by outside development professionals. Problems with these brief field visits are numerous, primarily because they contain four main biases: 1) spatial bias toward better-off people who live near roadways, 2) time/seasonal biases toward seasons when roads are open and people are busy in the field, 3) people biases toward rural leaders and dominant groups, and 4) project biases toward showcase communities or technologies that may be the exception rather than the rule (Pretty & Vodouhe, 1997; Chambers, 1994a). These biases combine to hide the poorer, worst conditions in communities. The second reason for the movement toward RRA was disillusionment with conventional methodologies that relied heavily on questionnaire surveys and their results to gather information. One problem with such questionnaires is that the questions must be formed in advance and those who design them do not know which issues are important to local people nor can they ensure that all relevant issues are covered. Experience has shown over many years that large-scale surveys with long questionnaires tend to be drawn-out, tedious, difficult to process and write up, and most importantly, obtain inaccurate and unreliable data (Chambers, 1994a). The result of quick rural visits and traditional questionnaires gave falsely favorable impressions of the impact of project work, which gives institutions and agricultural professionals less reason for initiating or encouraging change. In response, rural 7

9 development practitioners began to seek alternatives that avoid these problems (Pretty & Vodouhe, 1997; Chambers, 1994a). The third, more positive trend resulting in RRA was the search for more cost effective methods of learning about rural life. It was helped by a growing recognition that rural people themselves are knowledgeable on the conditions that affect their lives. In the 1980s, RRA gained increasing acceptance and was argued to be cost-effective, provide timely information, and elicit a range and quality of information and insights inaccessible through traditional methods. More than any other influence, agroecosystem analysis in Southeast Asia introduced new methods and established credibility, as the University of Khon Kaen in Thailand became the world leader in developing theory and methods and institutionalizing RRA as a part of professional training in the mid-1980s (Chambers, 1994a). Subsequently, much of the spread of PRA has taken place laterally South-South, through the sharing of field experiences and training by international and local organizations, most of them non-governmental (Chambers, 1994a). Only recently has the spread become South- North as northern based universities and institutions are increasingly recognizing the potential of PRA. In recent years, there has been a rapid expansion of new participatory methods and approaches in the context of sustainable development. These have drawn upon many wellestablished traditions that have put participation, action research, and adult education at the forefront of attempts to emancipate disempowered people. The participatory approaches used today have evolved from several sources and traditions. Five of these have been particularly important (Cornwall et al., 1993; Chambers 1994a, 1994b, 1994c): 1. Activist Participatory Research: Inspired by Paulo Freire (1968), this approach uses dialogue and joint research to enhance people s awareness and confidence to empower them to take action. Although its special focus is on the underprivileged and on political action, which has limited its spread, its key contributions to the current approaches are its recognition that poor people are creative and capable and should be empowered, while outsiders have a role as catalysts and facilitators. 2. Agroecoystem Analysis: Developed by Conway and colleagues (Conway & Barbier, 1990; Chambers 1994a, 1994b), this approach draws on system and ecological thinking, combining the analysis of systems (productivity, stability, sustainability, and equity) with pattern analysis of space, time, flows and relationships, relative values, and decisions. Among its major contributions to current approaches are its use of transects, informal mapping and diagramming, and the use of score and ranking to assess innovations. 3. Applied Anthropology: Although conventional social anthropology has been mainly concerned with understanding rather than changing, applied anthropology became more recognized in the 1980s as a legitimate and useful activity, especially in its ability to help development professionals appreciate better the richness and validity of rural people s knowledge. It also emphasized the benefits of unhurried participant observations and conversations and the importance of attitudes, behavior, and rapport. 8

10 4. Field Research on Farming Systems: Two branches of this discipline simultaneously revealed on the one hand the rationality of small and poor farmers and on the other their activities as experimenters. Farmers participation in agricultural research therefore became a focus, especially in the context of complex, diverse, and riskprone farming systems. 5. Rapid Rural Appraisal: Described previously. PRA is now practiced in 130 countries. This diversity and complexity is strength. The table below illustrates the wide use of terms similar to RRA and PRA in many different countries. Despite some differences in the ways that these approaches are applied, they share the following principles: A defined methodology and systematic learning process. The focus is on cumulative learning by all the participants, which includes both outsiders and local people; their use has to be participative and their focus, a system of joint analysis and interaction. Multiple perspectives. A central objective is to seek diversity, rather than simplify complexity. This recognizes that different individuals and groups make different evaluations of situations, which lead to different actions. Everyone s views are heavy with interpretation, bias and prejudice and this implies that there are multiple possible descriptions of any real-world activity. Everyone is different and important. Group learning process. All involve the recognition that the complexity of the world will only be revealed through group analysis and interaction. There are three possible mixes of investigators: those from different disciplines, from different sectors, and both the outsiders (professionals) and insiders (local people). Within each of these there are other types of mix, for example, not all local people in a community are the same. Context specific. The approaches are flexible enough to be adapted to suit each new set of conditions and actors, and so there are multiple variants. This encourages participants to invent new methods, terms, and names, which in turn encourages a greater sense of ownership. Facilitating experts and stakeholders. The methodology is concerned with the transformation of existing activities to try to improve people s situation. The role of the external expert is best thought of as helping people to carry out their own study. Participants are encouraged to think of themselves as facilitators of other people s learning. Leading to change. The participatory process leads to debate about change, and debate changes the perceptions of the actors and their readiness to contemplate action. The process of joint analysis and dialogue helps define changes that would bring about improvement and seeks to motivate people to take action to implement the defined changes. This action includes local institution building and strengthening, so increasing the capacity of people to initiate and take action over their own future. Labels can be a problem in a rapidly changing field like this one. For PRA, appraisal is inappropriate now. Good PRA is a process, not a one-off event. The main publication of RRA Notes (1998 on), was renamed PLA Notes, as a more accurate title for what many pracittioners 9

11 feeld that PRA is doing. However, PRA is still widely in use. In Pakistan, PRA now stands for Participation-Reflection-Action. Some practioners have moved beyond using PRA and talk of and use participatroy methodologies (examples are popular theatre, REFLECT, Planning for Real, Appreciative Inquiry, and Training for Transformation. Terms in Use for Different Applications of PRA Agroecosytem Analysis (AEA) Appreciative Inquiry Beneficiary Assessment Development Education Leadership Teams (DELTA) Diagnosis and Design (D&D) Diagnostico Rural Participativo (DRP, Spanish translation for PRA) Diagnostico Rural Rapido/Sondeo Rápido (Spanish translation for RRA) Evaluación Rural Participativo Farmer Participatory Research Groupe de Recherche et d Appui pour l Auto-promotion-Paysanne (GRAAP) Methode Active de Recherche et de Planifaction Participative (MARP) Participatory Analysis and Learning Methods (PALM) Participatory Action Research (PAR) Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) Participatory Research Methodology (PRM) Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) Participatory Rural Appraisal and Planning (PRAP) Participatory Rural Evaluation (PRE) Participatory Technology Development (PTD) Participatory Urban Appraisal (PUA) Planificación Participativa (PP) Planning for Real Popular theatre Process Documentation Rapid Appraisal (RA) Rapid Assessment of Agricultural Systems Knowledge (RAAKS) Rapid Assessment Procedures (RAP) Rapid Assessment Techniques (RAT) Rapid Catchment Analysis (RCA) Rapid Ethnographic Assessment (REA) Raid Food Security Assessment (RFSA) Rapid Multi-Perspective Appraisal (RMA) Rapid Organizational Assessment (ROA) Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) Regenerated Freiren Literacy through Empowering Community Techniques (REFLECT) Samuhik Brahman (Joint Trek) Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) Theatre for Development Training for Transformation Visualization in Participatory Programs (VIPP) Effective RRA/PRA requires practitioners to follow basic principles. Chambers (1994b) describes the principles shared by both RRA and PRA: A reversal of learning, where professionals learn from local people s physical, technical, and social knowledge, directly, on site, and face to face; Learning rapidly and progressively, with conscious exploration, flexible use of methods, improvisation, cross-checking, and being adaptable in the learning process rather than following a set blueprint; Offsetting biases, by being relaxed, not rushing, listening and not lecturing, probing topics rather than moving to the next, being unimposing instead of important, and seeking out the poorer people and learning diverse concerns and priorities; Optimizing tradeoffs, relating the costs of learning to the usefulness of the information and making tradeoffs between the quantity, relevance, accuracy, and timeliness. This includes the principal of optimal ignorance, knowing what is not worth knowing and not trying to find it out, and of appropriate imprecision, not measuring what is not needed or more accurately than what is needed because it is better to be approximately right than precisely wrong; 10

12 Triangulating, meaning the process of cross-checking and progressive learning and approximation through plural investigation, which involves assessing and comparing findings from several, at least three methods, sets of condition, points in a range or distribution, individuals or groups of analysis, places, times, disciplines, investigators and/or a combination of these; and Seeking diversity, meaning looking for and learning from the exception or seeking variability rather than averages (Beebe, 1987, p ) or maximizing the diversity and richness of information (Dunn & McMillan, 1991, p. 5). Of these principles, PRA puts special emphasis on offsetting biases and adds four more: They do it, where facilitating investigation, analysis, presentation, and learning by local people themselves occurs so that they generate and own outcomes. It requires confidence by professionals that they, the people, can do it and often the outside facilitator initiates a process of participatory analysis, then sits back and let locals do it; Self-critical awareness, meaning that outside facilitators continuously and critically examine their own behavior and embracing error as an opportunity to learn, facing failure positively, and correcting dominant behavior; Personal responsibility, PRA practitioners, not rules or manuals, are responsible, and should use your own best judgment at all times (Peters, 1989, p. 378); and Sharing of information and ideas among local people themselves, between locals and outside facilitators, between different practitioners (encouraging photo-copying and non attribution) sharing experiences between different organizations, regions, and countries. The principles shared by RRA and PRA are primarily epistemological, having to do with obtaining information and gaining knowledge, while those specific to PRA are mainly personal, having to do with outsider s behaviors and attitudes. This is because PRA puts an emphasis on how outsiders interact with local people (Chambers, 1994b). The more developed and tested PRA methods include participatory mapping and modeling, showing who lives where and the location of important local resources such as water, forests, schools, and other services; transect walks; institutional diagramming; analytical and flow diagrams to indicate linkages, sequences, causes, effects, problems and solutions; seasonal calendars showing how food availability, workloads, family health, prices, wages and other factors vary during the year; trend and change analysis; and matrix scoring, scored with seeds, pebbles, or other counters, to compare things, such as the merits of different crop varieties or tree species, or how conditions have changed over time (Chambers, 1994a). PRA methods have been applied in the field of agriculture and natural resource management since the late 1980s. The methods are now largely shared between RRA and PRA, but outsiders usually play a larger role in RRA. The primary distinction between RRA and PRA/PLA is that RRAs are about finding out in other works, they are intended for outsiders to learn about how locals live and about their reality; the basic purpose is to gather information from local people s knowledge. Good PRA, in contrast, is intended to enable local people to conduct their own analysis, and to 11

13 plan, and take action. Its basic purpose is empowerment of local people by facilitating their analytical, planning and evaluation abilities. PRA is a process that takes place over time, usually beginning as more- RRA-like and developing along a continuum into a process led primarily by local people. True PRA implies significant personal and institutional change and more often than not, particularly as labeling projects as participatory has become fashionable, institutions will tend to claim PRA approaches when their approach remains largely unchanged and top-down. There are methods which are typically RRA methods (observation, semi-structured interviews, transects) and others which are typically PRA/PLA methods (participatory mapping, diagramming, making comparisons, often is small groups). Participatory Action Research (PAR) The origins of PAR come from several different fields of study that have influenced this emerging research approach simultaneously, as seen in Figure 5. Since the late 1960 s, strands from sociology and psychology, (through Kurt Lewin s study of organizations in the 1950 s), applied anthropology, community development approaches, and popular education movements by Paulo Freire have all influenced PAR. It is not wholly agreed upon in the literature, probably because it emerged from many fields and terms are used differently. Kemmis and McTaggart (2000) described action research as the most encompassing term, with participatory research overlapping to include the rest. Collaborative action research is another term used. 12

14 Sociology/ Psychology Kurt Lewin s organizational studies in the 1950s; Tandon later Popular education Liberalization movement Paulo Freire in late 1960s, 1970s critical thinking, conscientization, and empowerment; Later, John Gaventa Community development movement, Robert Chambers, 1970s Applied Anthropology research traditions s 1980s Participatory Action Research 1990s Action Research in Organizations Action Research in Education Action Research in Community Development Authors include: C. Alderfer, L. David Brown, William Foot Whyte, Davydd Greenwood, Chris Argyris, Robert Putnam, Peter Clark, E. Jaques, E. Thorsrud, F. Friedlander, D. Schon, and B. Gustavsen Authors include: J. Gaventa, Hilda Taba, Richard Winter, Stephen Corey, Abraham Shumsky, Wilfred Carr, Stephen Kemmis, Robin McTaggart Present authors include: Daniel Selener, Rajesh Tandon, Yussuf Kassam, Orlando Fals-Borda, P. Maguire, Keimal Mustafa, Marcelo Gajardo, Francisco Vio Grossi, Budd Hall Subset: Farmer Participatory Research Present authors include: S. Biggs, Robert Chambers, J. Farrington, J. Ashby, R. Rhoades, R. Bunch, C. Lightfoot, J. Pretty, J. Jiggins, B.P. Ghildyl, M. Cernea, N. Uphoff Diagram of the Historical Precedents of Participatory Action Research. 13

15 The major emphasis of PAR is on establishing a liberating dialogue with impoverished and oppressed peoples. A second emphasis is the lived experience of people. In PAR, the knowledge and experience of people, often oppressed groups, is directly honored and valued. PAR investigators claim a triple objective, that of action-praxis, education, and knowledge (research). Reason (1998, p. 269) states that one aim is to produce knowledge and action directly useful to a group of people through research, adult education and sociopolitical action. The second aim is to empower people at a deeper level through the processes of construction and using their own knowledge to see through the ways in which the establishment monopolized the production and use of knowledge for the benefit of its own members. This is the meaning of conscientización, described by Paulo Freire (1968) as a process of self-awareness through collective self-inquiry and reflection, or developing consciousness that has the power to transform reality. Daniel Selener (1995) and Kemmis and McTaggart (2000) described several major distinctions or sub-approaches within PAR, distinctions that are made throughout the literature. These are summarized briefly below. Figure 6, above, also showed the major investigators in each area. 1. Participatory research in community development settings. This approach has its roots in both liberation theology and the neo-marxist approach to community development in Latin America. It is characterized by concepts inspired by Paulo Freire and radical intellectuals of the late 1960s; including concepts of critical thinking, critical consciousness, conscientización, empowerment, and human rights activism. Often called Participatory Research (PR), it is an alternative philosophy of social research (and social life, called vivencia), mostly associated with social transformation in developing countries and oppressed or disenfranchised groups (Selener, 1995; Kemmis & McTaggart, 2000). PR is applied mostly in community-based rural and urban development efforts in developing countries. It is often used as a community organizing and problem-solving tool, where short-term objectives include the solution to practical problems within a community, but the long-term objective is to shift power relations within a community, and ultimately within a society as whole through the utilization of this collaborative process. It tends to uncover social divisions and conflicts, and often is applied by educators, community organizers, and facilitators working with exploited or oppressed groups. Three attributes of this strand are distinguishable: 1) shared ownership of research projects, 2) community-based analysis of social problems, and 3) an orientation toward community action (Kemmis & McTaggart, 2000, p. 568). This is the strand of PAR that was utilized for the study described herein. McTaggart and Kemmis also describe another strand, that of critical action research similarly to PR, with the difference that it most often takes place in educational settings. Because PR s goals involve power shifts and transformation of societies and these may come into direct conflict with existing power structures, PR can put the welfare, livelihoods, and in some cases, the lives of disadvantaged people at risk. Therefore, this approach has an added burden of constant, self-reflective, and self-critical examination. Ethical analyses of actions by researchers and transparent communication are necessary to participate in this strand of research. 14

16 2. Action learning and research in rural/farmer participatory research. This approach was developed gradually by agricultural researchers, extensionists, and rural development specialists since the 1970s, as an alternative to the top down approach to agricultural research and extension and as a critique of such projects. RRA, PRA, and farmer participatory research are all methods and approaches within this field. Practitioners believe that participation and empowerment of people is a key to the success of sustainable development and that past technology transfer has fit poorly the conditions and needs of complex, diverse and riskprone living strategies of the poor. It defines itself as a growing family of approaches and methods to enable local (both rural and urban) people to express, enhance, share, and analyze their knowledge of life and conditions, to plan and to act (Chambers, 1994b, p. 1253). This area of work is closely linked with rural development and community development approaches to action research, enough so that it can be considered a subset (Selener, 1995). 3. Action research in organizations. In 1946, Kurt Lewin proposed learning about social systems by trying to change through action research. Action research in organization is an inquiry process intended to solve practical problems and generate new knowledge through collaborative efforts by researchers and clients. It has been used as a tool for organizational change and development, and is typically consultant driven, with strong advocacies for collaboration between social scientists and members of the organizations. Researchers seek to make social systems and organizations more efficient and effective through a consensus-oriented approach (Selener, 1995). The approach uses language promoting democratization of the workplace and/or of the research act itself. This strand is described today as Industrial Action Research (Kemmis & McTaggart, 2000, p ). 4. Action research in educational settings. The origins of this approach can be traced to B.R. Buckingham s Research for Teachers (1926). Underlying it is a belief that when teachers, principals, supervisors, and administrators undertake action research in educational settings, as practitioners they are more likely to make better decisions and engage in more effective practices if they are active participants in the research activity (Selener, 1995). Primacy is given to the self-understanding and judgements of teachers, and the emphasis is practical (i.e., how to improve their own practices). It is also called Classroom Action Research (Kemmis & McTaggart, 2000, p. 569). PRA in a Participatory Action Research Context There is a small amount of literature on how PRA methods are used to conduct action research. Clearly, the base of PRA is in its philosophy, which resonates with PAR philosophy. The practical application of PRA as a PAR research tool, however, is more varied, has received less attention, and has not been well cited. One example from the literature, however, gives an overview or examples of how PRA would look in practice for action research, describing it in the following ways (Altrichter et al., 1991; Schön, 1984): Data-gathering by participants themselves in relations to their own questions (and possibly with the help of others); Participation (in problem-posing and in answering questions) in decision making; Power sharing and the suspension of hierarchical ways of working; 15

17 Collaboration among members of the group; Self-reflection, self-evaluation and self-management by autonomous and responsible persons and groups; Learning progressively by doing and by making mistakes in a self-reflective spiral of planning, acting, observing, reflecting, replanning, etc., also described as praxis; and Reflection, which supports the idea of the self-reflective practitioner. Praxis is an important methodological concept for PRA, described by Smith (2001b) as acts which shape and change the world. For Aristotle, praxis was guided by a moral disposition to act truly and rightly; a concern to further human well being and the good life (p.1-2). Word and action, action and reflection, theory and practice, are all facets of the same idea (p. 3). Praxis is action that is informed, and linked to certain values, where dialogue is not only about deepening understanding, but also making a difference in the world. Educators are involved with praxis, yet few use the language overtly. Practice is depicted as an act of doing something. Theory is about abstract ideas about a phenomenon. We derive general principles from theory, which are in turn applied to practice. Practical wisdom means an action based on reflection. Praxis takes on this meaning, where one learns progressively in a self-reflective spiral, or double-loop learning, in a search for truth. It is the action of people who are free, who are able to think and act for themselves it is not just acting upon [but] is creative, other-seeking, and dialogic (p. 3). Some would argue that it includes the element of commitment to human wellbeing, the search for truth, and respect for others, and is innately risky because it requires that a person make a wise and prudent practical judgement about how to act in this situation (Smith, 2001b, p. 3). Similarities and Differences Between PAR and Constructivist Inquiry There are many similarities and a few key differences between constructivist inquiry and PAR. Tables 6 and 7 illustrate these. One clear difference between PAR and constructivist inquiry is its ideological focus and aims. In PAR, it is easy to find its ideology and assumptions, but difficult to understand how it s done. PAR methodology is not well-defined and in fact is not meant to be, because it is based on people (subjects) setting the agendas, participating in the data-gathering and analysis, and controlling the use of the outcomes. PAR uses diverse methods for this end (both quantitative and qualitative, many of which are oral), but does not set forth a clear methodology as does constructivism. Constructivist inquiry has a clear methodology, ontology and epistemology, and its focus remains largely with traditional research in that its primary focus is still knowledge generation, even if that knowledge is constructed between the researcher and subjects, rather than on action, empowerment, and conscientization, as PAR s primary focus is (Reason, 1998). 16

18 Contrasting Constructivist Inquiry and Participatory Action Research. Axioms About: Constructivist PAR Nature of reality ontology Realities are multiple, constructed Realities are multiple, holistic and and holistic partially constructed, vies as virtual reality because they are socially, economically and politically created over time, but can be changed to a new constructed reality through group inquiry Relationship of knower to the Interactive, inseparable Interactive, inseparable, share same known epistemology Possibility of generalization Possibility of causal linkages Role of values in inquiry Only time and context bound working hypotheses are possible, local theory All entities are in a state of mutual simultaneous shaping, so its impossible to distinguish cause from effect Inquiry is value bound by: 1) inquiry has values (politics); 2) Inquiry has a paradigm that guides the investigation; 3) Inquiry has substantive theory that is used for collection and analysis of data; 4) Inquiry has context values; 5) Inquiry is value resonant or value dissonant, and useful research results will be value resonant (share values) Source: (modified from Lincoln and Guba, 1985, p. 37; Masters, 1995, p. 8) goals and values Only time and context bound working hypotheses are possible, local theory All entities are in a state of mutual simultaneous shaping, so its difficult to distinguish cause from effect; however, in general power and powerless structures exist in a cause and effect relationship Inquiry is value bound by: 1) inquiry has explicit values (politics); 2) Inquiry has a paradigm that guides the investigation; 3) Inquiry has context values; 4) Inquiry is usually value resonant The key methodological difference between them is the importance and focus on methods, themselves, that each has. Constructivism has a strong methodological base, with key tenets, a structure for demonstrating credibility, and quality of research. Methodology is of major importance to its practitioners. PAR, on the other hand, may or may not use similar methodology, but it is not of major import to its practitioners. The goals of the research project have overarching importance, and methodology is secondary in importance. This is demonstrated more clearly by the literature, where there is a scarcity of material describing or discussing methodology. Almost all the literature describes PAR, emphasizes its political nature and goals, its criticism of positivism, its ontology and epistemological beliefs, and then often stops short of discussing methodology. There is much more flexibility and leeway in the practice and use of methods in PRA, but not very much flexibility in the goals of the research. For the most part, qualitative methods are most appropriate for PAR, although quantitative methods may be used, which is similar to constructivism. In terms of methodological similarities, they have the following characteristics in common: 1. Research conducted in the natural setting; 2. Researcher as a human instrument; 17

19 3. Utilization of tacit knowledge (intuitive and felt knowledge) in addition to propositional knowledge; 4. Uses qualitative methods; 5. Purposive sampling; 6. Inductive data analysis; 7. Emergent design; 8. Negotiated outcomes; 9. Information often used for action, sometimes case study reporting, not pure research; 10. Interpretation of data in terms of the cases particulars, not generalizations; and 11. Focus-determined boundaries. Validity/Trustworthiness of PRA Methodology Practitioners and researchers using participatory methods are expected to prove the value of the approach. Conventional researchers use four criteria to persuade their audiences that the finding of their research can be trusted (Lincoln & Guba, 1985): 1. How can we be confident about the truth of the findings (internal validity)? 2. Can we apply these findings to other contexts or with other groups of peoples (external validity)? 3. Would the findings be repeated if the same inquiry were replicated wit the same (or similar) subjects in the same or similar context (reliability)? 4. How can we be certain that the findings have been determined by the subjects and context of the inquiry, rather than the biases, motivations, and perspectives of the investigators (objectivity)? Trustworthiness criteria were developed by Guba and Lincoln (1981) to judge whether or not any given inquiry was methodologically sound. Four alternative, but parallel, criteria were developed: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. More recently, authenticity criteria have been suggested to help judge the impact of the process of inquiry on the people involved (Guba & Lincoln, 1989): Have people been changed by the process? [perhaps this could be called empowerment validity?] Have they a heightened sense of their own realities? [perhaps this could be called reflective or praxis validity?] Do they have an increased awareness and appreciation of the construction of other local people? (catalytic validity) To what extent did the investigation prompt action? (tactical validity) If local participants are unsure of how to take action, does the researcher make herself available to teach them how? [the question of accountability] Drawing on these and other goodness criteria, a set of 12 criteria were established for judging trustworthiness of a study. These criteria can be used to judge information, just as statistical analyses provide the grounds for judgment in positivistic or conventional science. Use of participatory methods without, for example, triangulation of sources, methods and 18

20 investigators, and participant checking of the constructed outputs, should be judged as untrustworthy, not reflecting verisimilitude as it is sometimes called. However, note that it will never be possible to be certain about the trustworthiness criteria. We cannot say that x has a trustworthiness score of y points, but we can say that x is trustworthy because certain things happened during the investigation and analysis. Trustworthiness should be used to identify what has been part of the process of gathering information, and whether key elements have been omitted. Knowing this should make it possible for any observer, be they a reader of a report or policy maker using the information to make a decision, to make a judgment on whether they trust the findings. Below is a list of the established framework for judging trustworthiness. Those underlined are the criterion most important in the context of Participatory Action Research using PRA methods: Prolonged and/or intense engagement between the various groups. For building trust and rapport, learning the particulars of the context, and to keep the investigator(s) open to multiple influences; Persistent and parallel observation. For understanding both the phenomenon and its context; Triangulation by multiple sources, methods, and investigators. For cross checking information and increasing the range of different people s realities encountered, including multiple copies of course of information, comparing the results from a range of methods; and having teams with a diversity of personal, professional and disciplinary backgrounds (triangulation with local sources, various methods/tools, diverse team); Expression and analysis of difference. For ensuring that a wide range of different actors are involved in the analysis, and that their perspectives and realities are accurately represented, including the differences according to gender, age, ethnicity, religion and class; Negative case analysis. For sequential revisions of hypotheses as insights grow, until one hypothesis accounts for all known cases without exception; Peer or colleague checking. Periodical review meetings with peers not directly involved in the inquiry process; (triangulation among team members, daily checks). Participant checking. For testing the data, interpretations and conclusions with people with whom the original information was constructed and analyzed. Without participant checks, investigators can make no claims that they are representing participants views; (community feedback during and after PRA) Reports with working hypothesis, contextual descriptions and visualizations. These are thick descriptions of complex reality, with working hypothesis, visualizations, and quotations capturing people s personal perspectives and experiences; Parallel investigations and team communications. If sub-groups of the same team proceed with the investigations in parallel using the same approach, and come up with the same or similar findings, then these findings are trustworthier; Reflexive journals. These are diaries that individuals keep on a daily basis to record a variety of information about themselves as human instruments; 19

21 Inquiry audit. The inquiry team should be able to provide sufficient information for an external person to examine the processes and product in such a way as to confirm that the findings are not a figment of their imaginations; and Impact on stakeholders capacity to know and to act. For demonstrating that the investigation or study has had an impact, for example if participants are more aware of their own realities, as well as those of other people. The report itself could also prompt action on the part of readers who have not been directly involved. The Whole PRA: Putting it Together The RRA/PRA Process THE WHOLE PROCESS PREPARATION: Site selection Team selection Set objectives Review background materials Logistical preparation PROTOCOL INFORMATION GATHERING ACTIVITIES USING PRA TOOLS PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS INFORMATION GATHERING FEEDBACK PROTOCOL ANALYSIS & REPORT WRITING ONE DAY INFORMATION GATHERING USING DIVERSE TOOLS AND DIVERSE SOURCES ACTIVITY SUMMARIES THROUGH TEAM INTERACTION: Share information and reflections Review information Prepare and edit checklists and tools for tomorrow Methodological review for: Bias Triangulation Optimal ignorance/objectives Preparation (Pre-Field work) Team Selection Training and orientation for the team Set Objectives Establish criteria for site selection Identify possible sites and Select final sites 20

22 Set up the time and place in the communities through community groups, etc. Review secondary materials and any key informants about community background Logistical preparations Select PRA tools that will be used, identify key roles for each, and key questions for each In the Field The time it takes to implement an RRA/PRA varies depending on the objectives chosen, the end goal, and the length of time you will be able to work with and follow up later. If this is the first PRA you should plan on a minimum of 3-5 days and a maximum of 3-5 weeks. However, a PRA may be conducted over several months, with short periods of group work each month. The activities in field include: Introductions and Protocol presenting the objectives of the work and the place and time of the whole PRA process Information gathering activities using PRA tools Conducting a daily preliminary analysis of the tools among the PRA team members, making any necessary adjustments for the following day Information gathering using PRA tools Preliminary field level analysis Feedback, presenting information back to the community, validation/feedback from the community, wrap up and thank yous Analysis (Post Field work) Final analysis, by all PRA team members Write the final report Present report back to the community (provide copy to neutral place), and to projects/agencies involved. Site Selection There are a number of key questions to answer sites to conduct an RRA or PRA: 1. What is the universe (for example, an entire watershed, or other geographic area, a project s coverage, a certain demographic found in an area) 2. How diverse is the universe (homogenous, heterogeneous) 3. What is the purpose of the RRA or PRA? a. If it is a study/primarily RRA, is it a case study, an exploratory study or assessment, a study for project or policy recommendation in a given topic? b. If it is primarily empowering/pra, is it a general analysis and assessment, to be used for planning in general or in a given topical area, as a monitoring process or evaluation, etc. 4. How much time and resources are available? 21

23 The answers to the question help you choose: 1. The number of sites 2. The selection criteria for study/rra a. You may choose a mix of Representative sites and do the following: i. Stratify ii. Define list of potential sites iii. Random sample b. Or you may choose sites with particular characteristics that you are seeking and select purposively. The PRA Team Each PRA Team should be made as diverse as possible, and include women and men, diverse professional backgrounds, experiential backgrounds, and people from outside and within the community or project. While conducting a PRA, there are two key roles within any given PRA team: Facilitator and Scribe The Facilitator The role of the Facilitator includes: 1) Explaining the objective of each tool and introducing the activity 2) Organizing participants in groups, when necessary 3) Handing over the stick 4) Assuring the participation of everyone 5) Listening 6) Asking questions interviewing the tool Characteristics of a good facilitator Being a good listener Being a good observer Asking questions (why, who, what, where, when and how) Being organized Being flexible Being aware of group dynamics and attentive to the human drama Being open in attitude and behavior, non-judgmental Enthusiastic but respectful Competent but modest Energetic but not authoritarian T he Scribe The role of the Scribe includes: 1) Writing down key information (date, time, PRA team members, roles, number of participants, gender of participants, time begin and ended) 2) Listening and taking as detailed notes as possible during the process 22

24 3) Making one or more draft pictures of the tool as it is being created by the participants 4) Observing and making notes about group dynamics 5) Making a final copy of the finished tool as closely resembling the original as possible. Tips to Inc rease Participation Choose an accessible and neutral site Plan activities according to the best available time of the participants Plan ahead, with the PRA team, ways to deal with the talkers, leaders who don t let others participate, and the quiet, non participants. o A special activity for a leader to take him/her away with a PRA team o Specific, difficult questions for participants that are domineering the group o Ways to involve and include the quiet and timid participants using indirect or visual exercises Choosing PRA Team Members Size: 3-5 people is ideal Strive for a balance Triangulation: Gender Disciplines/professions Insiders and outsiders Facilitator types and observer types Abilities: Abilities in communication and facilitation Ability with analysis Ability with detailed organization Personalities: Be aware Translators: Translators, when needed, have a key role. Be careful who you choose, their orientation, training, and prepare them appropriately Structuring and Choosing the PRA Tools The following questions need to be answered in order to choose which tools to use and when 1. What is the purpose? 2. What information or analysis is needed? 3. What tool is most effective at getting that information? 4. How will the tool be used (Checklist)? 23

25 Using Checklists: An Example Topic: Agricultural products of a community (Sample Checklist created by the PRA team to be used to interview the tool, i.e. map, diagram, etc.) Principal agricultural products produced/harvested by community members What are the agricultural products harvested? (community harvesting and individual harvests) Who harvests them? When are they harvested? What techniques are used to harvest them? Which are most important and why? What are problems encountered? Uses of agricultural products What are the principal uses of each ag product? Does their use vary by age/gender/economic standing? Have the agricultural product and their use changed over time? Are there periods of time when certain ag products become more important? Marketing of agricultural products Who markets the ag products? Who gets the benefits? Where are they marketed? Which have the greatest commercial value? What problems are encountered in marketing? Rules of Access and Use (focusing in particular on community ag sources - trees, for example) What are the rules? Why are they different for different products? Who makes the rules? Who enforces the rules? Are there seasonal variations? What have the changes to the rules over time? Conflicts What are the most frequent sources of conflict regarding agricultural production? Why are these so problematic? Who is involved? When are conflicts most common? How are the conflicts resolved? 24

26 Matching PRA Tools with their Information Gathering Characteristics (Using Agriculture example) Participatory Map Basic Social Map Farm & Home Map Future Maps Transects Historical Profile Calendar 24 hour clock Time Trends & Ranking Venn Diagram Ranking Matrices Problem Matrix Conflict Matrix Action Plan Matrix Evaluation Matrix General info x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Geographic context x x x x x x x Social context x x x x x x x x x x x & relationships Economic context x x x x x x x x Gender roles and analysis x x x x x Population affected x x x x x x x Nature of ag x x x x x x x x problems Severity & x x x x importance of ag problems Time & trend x x x analysis for problem Causes of problem x x x x x x x x x x x x Community strategies x x x x x x x x x x x Household strategies x x x x Planning x x x Evaluation x x x 25

27 Setting Objectives Objectives create a frame for the study and they should be determined by the whole PRA team. Objectives can be either exploratory (looking at a broad range of issues, with less depth) or thematic (looking at fewer issues in greater depth). Decide what kind of information is most important before setting objectives and avoid trying to do both Objectives should be specific enough to provide useful guidance to the team as they conduct the RRA or PRA but general enough to allow for flexibility. Thematic Exploratory Structure of PRA Over Time Basic RRA P 5-7 days A RRA over time P 3-7 days A P 3-7 days A P 3-7 days A RRA over space p RRA #1 a P p RRA #2 a A p RRA #3 a Custom RRA different combinations over time and space Possible quantitative surveys can be used at the same time 26

28 Analysis and Report Writing Analysis One of the challenges of conducting an RRA or PRA is organizing, analyzing and writing a report of the information. So much information is generated by participatory tools and summarizing this information in the form of a report is a key step in the process. 1. With the entire team, organize the information (by objective) and analyze it (sift according to importance). Tip: Put each objective as a heading at the top of a poster paper. Go through the notes and drawings from each participatory tool and write down key pieces of information learned under the corresponding objective. Do this with each tool until the information has been transferred from a tool-based summary to an objective-based summary. When a piece of information from the tool does not fit under an objective, create a poster heading called general information or miscellaneous and put it under that heading. 2. For each objective, do a second analysis and sifting of importance, organizing the points that are most important. 3. Write an out line of objectives with main summary points first draft of the report 4. Decide who will write what part and divide sections among team members or designate one or two people who will write the report 5. Write the report 6. Edit the report (all team members should review and edit eh report) 7. Provide copies to all partners, participating communities or organizations 8. Present findings and information summaries to the communities involved in a follow up community meeting, in person, to allow for feedback, changes, additional comments from community members as a cross check and final triangulation Report Writing Organize and write your report by Subject, not by RRA/PRA tool Include a methodology section and be sure to put a list of all of your activities (PRA tools), including the tool used, date, and participants (what, when, where, with whom). Integrate the diagrams into the text, where appropriate, with key information Explain each diagram that is presented and note the important points about it. Include a conclusions section. Tip: the conclusion should include only information that was presented earlier in the report and should not include much new information that was not included earlier in the report. Sample Report Outline I. Introduction II. Methodology a. Objectives b. Team Members c. Site Selection d. Program of Activities e. Limits of the study III. General and background information IV. Objective 1 V. Objective 2 VI. Objective 3 VII. Conclusion and Recommendations VIII. Annex with additional tools, other information 27

29 Participatory Methods The Practioner s Toolbox T his workshop will cover a number of tools, among them mapping, historical profiles, transects, matrix ranking, gender analysis, relationship and institutional mapping, and calendars. Participatory Mapping Participatory mapping is a technique that allows a group to share information, in a graphic representation, about a given location. Participatory mapping is a good tool to use early in the RRA or PRA process because it is a tool that helps open up communities, create shared knowledge that everyone enjoys and are usually not overly conflictive. Mapping lowers barriers by focusing attention on what is being drawn. When groups work together to create a map, the result is more than the map it is the discussion and information that occurs in the group work, as well. The idea is to identify special traits, important places and uses for a location, rather than precise geography. It can be used to identify infrastructure, basic services, existing resources, boundaries of a location, characteristics and places of importance to the groups that live there or use the space, areas of risk, problems, or needs, as well as future planning. Making a Participatory Map Choose the area or topic to be mapped (regional map, community map, natural resources map, social map, which might include economic, health, and education descriptions, farm-level map, neighborhood/urban area map). Do the map in a place where everyone can participate like a large open area, where borders can be expanded if the map grows bigger If you are doing the map on the ground collect items that can be used to identify landmarks (sticks, rocks, beans, leaves, etc.), and make sure everyone can draw If you are doing the map on a large paper over a table or on the ground, make sure that there are plenty of markers/crayons for everyone to participate. hand over the stick : ask someone to begin putting down the most important places in the area Tell people not to worry too much about scale, neatness, or perfection Encourage everyone to participate, and keep encouraging seek ways to bring non-active people in Don t begin to ask about what interests you until ALL of the landmarks have been completed and they feel that the map is done then begin asking questions and opening up a discussion. Be sure to mark what they add due to your questions, versus what was important in the original map 28

30 Interview the map (probe more deeply into issues on the checklist or those that came up in the group dialogue) Copy the map into a field notebook as it is being drawn, add comments as they go, and conflict or discussions generated over pieces of it. Transfer the map later to a flipchart or a complete drawing for future use. Making a Household/Farm Map Integrating Gender Roles A household or farm map can be used to identify all that a community map identifies and is particularly useful for identifying home resources (market, sustenance, relations between resources and systems) and the roles of the family, as well as conducting and/or teaching household and farm planning. First repeat all steps described above for a basic participatory map. If the purpose is to learn about typical farms have them work in groups on a typical farm, and draw it as an example. If the objectives if geared toward farm planning and identifying what is actually on a given farm, have each family draw their own homestead/farm map. If participants do not automatically include their home resources (crops, animals, homestead, water sources, waste areas, etc.), ask about them and encourage being specific about kinds of crops, kinds and numbers of animals, etc. When the map is finished and includes all key characteristics, introduce roles. Explain a symbol for each category: women, men, children, perhaps elderly (create your own symbols, if using a pen, or be consistent if using materials - rock, bean, pebble, etc.) Start with what participants identified as the key resources for example a major crop and ask about that crop who plants it, who maintains it, who harvests it, where does it go within the farm how is it used, or where is it taken or used outside the farm, who adds value (example milk to cheese), and if its sold, who sells it where? For each of those categories, put the symbol next to the appropriate resource and draw arrows for where it goes. For example, hay may be used to feed the animals, so an arrow is drawn from hay to the pigs the role of the feeding is done by a woman so the symbol of women is added over the arrow. If it is consumed at home, the arrow goes to the house. If it goes to market, the arrow goes toward the boundaries (off the farm). Repeat this with all the key resources and crops Interview the map (probe more deeply into issues on the checklist or those that came up in the group dialogue) Making a Social Map A social map can be used to identify social characteristics of a community, particularly those that are more sensitive. These can include economic well being, health well-being, living arrangements, education, food and water security issues, and religious/social class characteristics. This is a very sensitive tool with potential for conflict and should be used with care, ethically, with a good facilitator, and have objectives well prepared. Don t ask for more sensitive information if it s not needed. Not every PRA can or should utilize a social map. Make a copy of the community map that was created by the whole community/larger groups and select a smaller group to work on a social map. Choose a quiet, relaxed, comfortable place for people to talk openly. 29

31 Start with definitions of a social characteristic ask what are differences in this community in a given area (for example a range of poor health to good health what would that range look like for this group, specifically; or what is the range of poverty and wealth levels how do they know who is poor or rich write down the explanation and use that definition consistently as you work on a map. After arriving at a definition, ask the participants to describe their community, using the definition they created what areas or homes are at risk for health, disease, education, low resources, etc. and what are considered the high resource areas and opportunities in each of the subjects. Finish one social area before starting a new one. Repeat until objectives are met Ask questions about relationships and meanings, Interview the map (probe more deeply into issues on the checklist or those that came up in the group dialogue) Making a Future Map A future map can be used to help with the planning steps of community development, and to support group bonding and dynamics. A group discusses and creates a vision of their community or homestead together. This is a useful tool when working with different groups and bringing them back together. For example, the men work on a future map, the women work on another, and the youth work on a third. They come together and share their vision of the community. This map is mean to break down barriers and create room for creative solutions and planning in a participatory way. You can start with a blank space or page, or you can make a copy of the community map that was created by the whole community. Ask what their vision of this shared space is, and encourage free thinking, creativity, and expressing dreams of what they would want for their community. Include everything. If visualizing becomes cumbersome, and the group is literate, they can also make lists. Interview the map (probe more deeply into issues on the checklist or those that came up in the group dialogue) 30

32 Women s committee making a map of their community, Piribebuy, Paraguay,

33 Community Map of Fortín Gondra, Drawn by 6 Men, Replica Drawn by PRA Team, 2001, Chaco, Paraguay (copy). 32

34 Notes taken by PRA team from participants discussion during the presentation of the Community Maps, Fortín Gondra, Dept. Presidente Hayes, 2001, 40 Participants (13 Women,10 men, 17 Youth/Children) (PRA Team, 2001): The average land per family is between 40 and hectares/family. The majority have hectares, with between 3-15 hectares in pasture and the majority forested. There are four milk stands in the community, where the milk truck picks up every day at 4 p.m., coming from Campo Aceval. We are all members of the Cooperative of Campo Aceval and milk production is our only source of income. There is a school with 50 children, up to sixth grade. There are two teachers, the morning is for 4 th - 6 th, and the afternoon is preschool through 3 rd grade. There are also four community tajamares (stock tanks/water ponds), but Barrio San Isidro still needs one. Everyone has a tajamar on their land as well, between three to five per family. The community tajamares were built by PRODECHACO, costing 3,000,000 a 5,000,000 Gs. Three of them have water, one doesn t. There is a chapel, The Virgin of Guadelupe and almost everyone is a practicing Catholic. There are a few Evangelicals and they go to Campo Aceval to go to church. Barrio Fatima needs a chapel. We need electricity. Diana Josefina s Ranch is the only source of work outside of here, and Campo Aceval. But that s not much. For fun, there are horse races, volleyball, soccer, but we don t have organized teams or much recreation. We listen to Radio Pa i Puku and at night, Radio Nacional de Paraguay de Asunción. We need to improve communication, ask for a radio VHF for the community. Some families have cell phones. Transportation and communication are done either on foot, on bicycle, the Sulky horse cart, horse cart style Kachape, and there are two cars owned privately in the community. Many people are members of the committee Oñondivepa, and it costs 5,000 Gs/month, but many don t pay. You can get credit for up to 100,000 Gs at the local store if you are a member and a loan of up to 200,000 Gs. But because nobody pays the membership fee, there aren t any funds for this. The classes that we have requested [from different organizations] are: Crochet, sewing, plumbing, hair dress/cutting. Technical assistance we have asked for is with chickens, goats, sheep, and training and education for adults in environmental conservation, how to get and stay organized, how to learn the trees in the area, how to collect seeds for a tree nursery, and for health and nutrition purposes. With regard to milk production, everyone got excited about the maps when they talked about this. The price is very low 400 Gs/liter (about 10 cents per liter) almost all year long. (about 3,800 Gs/1.00 USD at the time). The company Trébol fixes a price trough the Chortizer Cooperative in Lolita and the Cooperative of Campo Aceval, which is a satellite of the Chortizer. Another company, Parmalat came in recently and offered to improve the price (up to Gs/liter - up to 18 cents per liter). There is a lot of insecurity and difference of opinions about the decision that they should take. On the one hand, Trebol offers a lot of security. The Mennonites always send in the milk truck, every day of the year, and they have invested a lot of money on infrastructure and credit to the small milk producers of this area, and they buy the milk, rain or shine, but the price they pay is very low. Parmalat has no security, no contract, and no one knows if they will continue buying always and people are afraid to stop selling to the Mennonites in case they get angry and cause problems for the communities, or people will not be able to go back to selling their milk if it doesn t go bad with Parmalat. [There is a certain level of resentment towards the Mennonites. Someone said that the Mennonites treat the Paraguayans like slaves and that they need to become independent of them. They blame Pedro Toy, the manager of the cooperative, for the low prices and say that they need to remove him.] One said that the cooperative doesn t help the poor people, small farmers, but the small producers (the ones with about 8 milk cows each) are what keep the cooperative alive. They say it s not even worth selling milk with only five or six cows because you have to produce at least liters/day to make it worth the trouble. They don t have much pasture, especially during the winter. The farm maps they drew and discussed showed about 50 hectares per family. With 50 hectares, you can have 10 hectares of pasture, with 3-4 divisions, each one with a stock pond. The pasture/forage they use are Estrella, Grimpani, and Gaston pani. Still, there is mostly trees/brush in Gondra. In the farm map, 30 ha is brush and forested. The trees that are valuable are Palo Santo, Coronilla, Algarrobo, and Palo Blanco. People cut their own wood to build their homes and furniture, for posts, for firewood, and for sale. People make their homes from wood or brick. It is most common to put the houses about meters from the road to have privacy, to keep the small animals from going next door and to get away from the dust when trucks pass in the dry seasons. A family in Gondra has typically 5-6 children. There is a family with only one child, and there is a family with 18 children (15 living). Near the house is a bathroom (latrine), a shower house (wooden slats built to bath inside of, with buckets), and a family garden. Also the majority have one or more tajamares near the house for family use (to drink from and wash clothes) and to water the garden. Many families have a chacra (crop fields), usually about 1/2 ha. They also have chickens; a few families have pigs and the corrals and pens for these are near the house. The animals most families own are cows, horses, sheep, goats, chickens, guinea hens, turkeys, burros, mules, and pigs. The women do the majority of the work in and around the house, and the men do most of the work on the pastures and forests. They both work the fields (chacras) (PRA Team, 2001, p ). 33

35 Youth and children presenting their future map and vision of their community, Fortin Gondra, Paraguay,

36 Making a Participatory Community Map with 14 Participants (2 Women, 12 Men) in Santo Domingo, Yata i Watershed, Alto Paraná, Paraguay, July 5, Notes taken during the making of the map: This community has a large area of hectares, which are divided into 43 parcels on the watershed, and settlement with an additional eight parcels on the other side of the road. The road to Puerto Dolores crosses the community longitudinally, dividing the watershed. The area is limited by the road to Santa Rita and Guembety, on one side, the road to Patricio Coleman, the Arroyo Yata i and the road to Puerto Dolores on the other. All the parcels are contained within these limits. The community has a school, a chapel, and a soccer field, which is located in front of the other two. The three of them are located in the middle of the community, across from Escobar and Portillo s parcels. They are heavily used by the community. Soccer is the main recreational activity. Aside from the field across from the school and chapel, there are two others one in Insfran and the other in Melgarejo. Most of the community grows cotton, soy beans, and, this year, manioc to sell at the market. The cotton grows well when the climate is good. The soil is very sandy and fragile, and there is little protection. There is also a need to unite the neighborhoods with roads, especially Km. 20 with San Antonio, with Barrio Yata i, and Santo Domingo with Barrio Yata i. Two creeks cross the parcels before reaching the Arroyo Yata i, which also has 6 springs. There is a path at the end of these parcels that hasn t been opened. It is important to have a forest, but in a little while there will be no more fire wood. Fire wood is sold. The wells are not going to last much longer. Those who have trees on their land bring in firewood. There is no community work. There is a community starch processing plant in Don Medina. The water for the small shredder comes from the wells, and what s needed for the tractors comes from the springs (Toness, Rivarola, & PRA team, 2000b). 35

37 Community Map of Santo Domingo, Yata i Watershed Made by 14 Participants (2 Women, 12 Men), Alto Paraná, Paraguay,

38 Social map drawn on top of the community map (community map drawn by the whole community, the social map characteristics were added by a small group of eight women), Avalos Sanchez, Paraguay (copy). 37

39 Social Map Drawn by 21 Women, Replica Drawn by PRA Team, 2001, Fortín Falcón, Chaco, Paraguay. 38

40 Results of Economic Descriptions During Social Mapping, with 21 Women, July 1, 2001, Fortín Falcón, Chaco, Paraguay. Economic level Characteristics of each level Number of Families $ (Low level) 0-5 cows, or loaned cows 17 $$ (Normal) 5-20 cows, stable to milk them, and medium quality pasture 5 >20 cows, some Holland variety, homes are made from $$$ (High level) bricks, pasture are fenced off and of higher quality, and 4 transportation. *Those that have Holland variety cows are at a higher economic level because they need more forage, not just pasture, more vaccinations and greater care, but they produce more milk. Source: (Doll et al., p. 7). Farm map with gender roles, Eastern Paraguay, 2000, original,. 39

41 Farm map drawn by 11 women, Avalos Sanchez, Paraguay, Original. 40

42 Farm map drawn six men, Fortin Falcon, Paraguay, 2001 (copy). 41

43 A Summary of the Gender Analysis from the Farm Maps (58 Participants, 16 Women, 42 Men), 2000, Santo Domingo, Watershed Yata i, Alto Paraná, Paraguay. Activity Where does it go/ how is it used? Who participates? (as told by men) Who participates? (as told by women) Manioc and manioc flour Pigs and cows Market Family Family Corn Home Cows, pigs, chickens Market (truck, feria) Home Family Men Family Wheat Market Men Vegetables and garden Home Family. Gardens are not cultivated much for lack of water Women Fruits Home, Market Family Women Cotton Market Family Pasture (Grass, hay) Home, animal Family Pigs Home, Market Family Family Soy Sugarcane Cows for pigs and other animals Café, home Market (truck) Molasses for animal feed Mosto and Home Market Milk cows used for cheese, made at home, and Home Calves and bulls go to Market Family Family Men Women Men Family Men Family Family Beans Market (feria) Home Family Peanuts Market and Home Family Family Banana Home Family Peas Home and Market (feria) Family Watermelon Home and Market (feria and Family truck) Melons Home and Market (feria, truck) Family Butter beans Home and Market (feria) Family Onions Home and Market Family Sweet potato Home and Market (truck and feria) Home and Market (truck) Family Green peppers and Family tomatoes Green manure Fertility (green manuring) and Family (mucuna) seeds for coffee Garlic Home and Market Family Oat grass (Avena) Fertility (green manuring) Family Source: (Toness et al, 2000b, p ) 42

44 Transects Transects are flexible about when they can be done, and can follow up a number of community level PRA tools. Making a Transect Choose the direction(s) to be walked from what looks interesting on the participatory map and from the discussion with your informants If the PRA team is large, divide into smaller groups for the transect, share and compile transect information at the end Each group should have a checklist of topics that they will pursue (these can be the same or different and divided by topics) Ask the community to help identify informants/guides who are particularly knowledgeable about the checklist subjects Focus your questions around what you observe on the walk when you interview the transect (probe more deeply into issues on the checklist or those that came up in the group dialogue) Avoid spatial bias by walking to the limits of the territory if possible. It is usually best to walk rather directly to the end point of the transect and then ask most of the questions on the return When the team returns, compile the information onto a transect diagram, verify and complete with community members Calendars Making a Seasonal Calendars Take time to come to an agreement on units of time that everyone can understand (seasons, months), and begin with the month that the community marks as it s beginning cycle Variables can show either 1) what happens, using a simple block style, or 2) how much happens when using histograms or heights to show variation in amount or frequency Be clear on which type of question you are asking nad how it will be represented on the calendar To show variations in amount use piles of beans, or breaks sticks in different lengths and use that, or draw height on piece of paper Calendars can either be simple, showing only one variable, or composite, showing many variables on one diagram When asking about each variable, ask the question in the most logical way possible, i.e. if asking about crops, ask first about which crop is planted first, then which is planted second. If asking about labor, ask first about the most difficult month for labor, the second most difficult, etc. Interview the calendar (probe more deeply into issues on the checklist or those that came up in the group dialogue) 43

45 Seasonal Composite Calendar, drawn by 12 women in Gondra, Paraguay, (copy). 44

46 Historical Profile Historical profiles are good tools to use early in the RRA or PRA process because they help open up communities, create shared knowledge that everyone enjoys and are usually not overly conflictive. Making an Historical Profile Prepare a checklist to focus the tool on issues of interest Choose historical profile participants with a special interest and knowledge of history (often older adults who have lived in the community for a long time) Don t get hung up on specific dates unless necessary; get a general idea of when things happened (date range) Tip: Note events on cards as you go along and lay out cards in order to facilitate the chronology. Later transfer onto paper. Interview the calendar (probe more deeply into issues on the checklist or those that came up in the group dialogue) History of the Community, Fortín Falcón, with 28 Participants (15 Women, 13 Men), 2001, Department of Presidente Hayes, Chaco, Paraguay. Year Event 1974 Arrival of Father Francisco Bosh, who began the idea of creating a settlement and it took more than twenty years to buy the land and start settling it Arrival of first settler, due to Father Bosh and the Oblatos de Maria Congregation, which bought the land and divided it in 30 family lots. First Cleaning and Measuring 1991 Major flood. More settlements and better access to homes, without roads 1992 More road access 1993 Land for the school established, Arrival of settling families The old school was built with labor from the community, The second road was begun families moved away, PRODECHACO built 4 community tajamares (stock ponds) and started pasture project with four families 1997 Second PRODECHACO project for pasture with seven families 1998 Major flooding, 500 mm, on March 21, Due to the flood, some families moved due to the flooding, the majority of Fortín Falcón was under water for two to three months, the road was closed down for 10 months, and provisions and help came in helicopters At the end of 1998, came a serious drought, and it did not rain for 9 months. The Mennonites truck began to enter the community to pick up milk, up the first houses at the end of The drought continued 2000 More drought PRODECHACO built a community well, The teacher's house was built The organization OISCA's project for the construction of the new school began. Father Sander donated two hectares of titled land for the school Finished building the new school It began to rain The milk trucks began entering most of the way through the community. The project to obtain electricity began. Source: (Doll et al., 2001, p. 5). 45

47 History of the Community, Fortin Gondra, 6 Participants (2 Men, 4 Women), 2001, Chaco, Paraguay. Year Event 1970 The land was private, and filled with trees and brush (monte) 1975 The land was appropriated by Edulto Lezean, an IBR agent. The family Fernandez founded the community The first road/trail in was opened (with machete, shovels and axes), from the principal road leading to Campo Aceval 1985 The first settlers arrived little by little Began to pay their first payments (4,500 Gs/hectare) 1987 First school built The school was built out of adobe and straw The school starts teaching, the first teacher came from Asuncion named Marciana Genes Martínez More settlers arrived The road was built by the community 1991 The Cooperative at Campo Aceval was founded 1993 The chapel was built 1995 Start selling milk at the Chortizer, they would take it out the road up to 20 km. in horse carts 1996 The second school was built, by the military and it was inaugurated, with the chapel, by the President Wasmosy, who visited the historical places and they opened up the road to the place and built a monument nearby to Rafael Franco The price of land is 18,000 Gs/ha now 1998 El Niño brings flooding and rain for two months. They brought food in by helicopter 1999 The third school was built by the Mayor of Villa Hayes, Isidro Rosillón An aljibe was built in the school by the school association of the community (sanitary rain water catchment tank) The transportation milk truck starts picking up milk to the last milk stand (the fourth) The first PRODECHACO tecnicos arrive and build the tajamares (community stock ponds) They also did workshops for chicken production, Beekeeping and organic gardening The first Peace Corps volunteer arrives, Amy months of drought Installation of the windmills by PRODECHACO 2001 The communal galpon (large tin roof) is built and the community store opens in the Benitez family home Assistance and courses from the PRODECHACO project continues on water systems Legal problems (suit) over land Drought PRA workshop Source: (PRA Team, 2001, p. 27). 46

48 Matrices There are three basic types of matrices: 1. Classification matrices that have variables along both the horizontal and vertical axis 2. Historical matrices that have time periods along the horizontal axis 3. Planning matrices (problems, causes, solutions matrix, prioritization matrix, plan of action matrix) All matrices are ranking techniques, used to collect relative rather than absolute data. Ranking techniques are useful because the information can be less sensitive, can be obtained more quickly, the act of ranking requires reflection and analysis, and ranking provokes discussion in groups. When conducting ranking techniques like matrices, bean quantification and wealth ranking or social maps, use a checklist, avoid imposing our categories, and capture the discussion. Using Bean Quantification Bean quantification can be used at any time. Examples include: proportions of people engaging in certain activities like using or not using fertilizers on their fields, or women who participate in community activities or don t, or total population of community divided to show people who migrate seasonally or who market a certain crop. Or, if used in conjunction with a social map, it can show proportions of sources of income for a family and their relative importance, or redoing the piles of beans to show how things have changed over time, or group all piles and redivide to show how money is spent. You can repeat the exercise with families in different wealth categories. A few notes on how to use bean quantification: Always carry a sack of beans, you never know when you ll need them (or stones, etc.) Use whenever quantification (proportions) will help to clarify a question or issue Talk about the piles of beans in the interview (rather than an individual s activities) in order to desensitize certain issues: i.e. why don t the women in this pile participate in committees? Avoid reporting results that are more precise than the technique used to obtain them. Making a Matrix For classification matrices, choose the general variables or question to be asked the group in order to generate variables, with care and make sure that the variables are consistent and easily explained. If a variable is generated by the group that doesn t fit, don t try to put it in. Help re-state it so that it can fit while keeping the original meaning. Decide whether it is more logical to rank vertically or horizontally. For historical matrices, try to limit the time periods to no more than four and choose periods that have relevance to the topic you are exploring and are linked to events that people can easily remember. For all matrices, make sure all the variables are going in the same direction Try to find symbols for the variables, especially if the participants are not literate Begin by giving a general explanation of the matrix and its variables. Then present the matrix step by step, moving systematically box by box through the matrix, either vertically or horizontally, depending on what you decide at the beginning). 47

49 If using numbers, keep them simple (a 1 to 3 scale or at most a 1 to 5 scale). If using beans, encourage people to use a scale from 1 to 20 beans (but allow them to put more if the need arises). Try to avoid starting out by piling on massive numbers of beans, which rapidly gets unwieldy. Ask people why they chose a certain number or a certain quantity of beans each time they put them down, but don t strive for too much detail until the matrix if finished. Review the matrix, interview the matrix, look at trends and try to better understand what is going on. Matrix Ranking Key Activities with Corresponding Needs for a Small Community Jam Factory, ranked by Teko Pyahu Women s Committee, eight women, Yacarey, Piribebuy, Paraguay,

50 Prioritization Matrix Ranking their most urgent problems/needs for a Small Community Jam Factory, ranked by Teko Pyahu Women s Committee, eight women, Yacarey, Piribebuy, Paraguay,

51 Examples of Classification Matrices Market crops and their Benefits Matrix Sale price Consumption Good for soil Require less work Cotton Soybean Tobacco Manioc Cost less to cultivate Total Trees, Plants and Their Perceived Benefits Matrix Shade Firewood Posts/ Lapacho Quebracho Cedro Palo blanco construction Fruit/ consumption Medicinal Total Income sources and their barriers Matrix Poor roads prevent transport Cotton Beekeeping Cheese production Insufficient production Lack of market High intermediate costs Total (highest is worse choice) Viability Matrix Project Productivity Sufficient raw material Stability Sustainability Equity Time to achieve benefits Cost Technical viability Demand Social viability Total priority Communal beekeeping Community tree nursery Key to viability matrix: Productivity sufficient for the demand low not enough productivity Medium High enough productivity Stability (year to year, doesn t vary a lot) Low unstable Medium High stable Sustainability (continue in the long term) Low unsustainable Medium High sustainable Equity (all share equally) Low not equitable Medium High equitable Time to achieve benefits Long time Medium Short time 50

52 Illness and Treatment Health Matrix Natural remedy Pharmacy Doctor Do nothing Total Diarrhea Flu Headache Parasites Malaria Conflict Matrix Trees Land Water Animals Conflict between neighbors/ community members Conflicts between neighboring communities Conflicts with strangers Conflicts with the state or government Historical Matrix Population staying in community year round Population that migrates Size of territory Size of territory under cultivation Density of trees Biodiversity of tree species Quality of soils Number of cattle Number of sheep/goats Availability of potable water Human illnesses Availability of non potable water (for animals) How many months a harvest lasts in a good year How many months a harvest lasts in a bad year Present 51

53 Matrix Comparing Problems Identified in 1997, Evaluating Progress, Solutions, and Present Problems, Avalos Sánchez, with 21 Participants (15 Women, 6 Men, 11 Children), 2000, Chaco, Paraguay. Past problems, Solved? How were they solved, or how Why were they not solved? identified in PRA could they be solved? from 1997 Sources of NO Getting organized Lack of organization Income Government crisis Lack of resources Economic situation Machinery Tools and NO Roads A bit, 60% Primary and High School Education Technical Assistance/ Extension Health/ System Medical A little NO A Bit They improved a new access road to Paratodo, as well as back community roads (the Milk committee, two municipal and departmental governments of Presidente Hayes. This was done in , because the community and milk committee pressured the local government. Desks and tables were donated a sanitary rain water collection unit was built (aljibe) and construction material and labor has been given by the MOPC, and Municipalities and government of Presidente Hayes They need to improve their own committees in order to get more interest and participation in social organization from the community itself. There is a nurse here 15 days of each month and Cuban doctors came, but there isn t any medicine Telephone NO ANTELCO never installed them, they gave them money to do it already, but they haven t pressured or done much follow up or monitoring. Electricity NO A proposal/solicitation was never made to ANDE The Organization Chaco Oeste was going to do it, but no one was ever selected to do it. Floods and droughts Lack of economic resources Lack of credit and technical assistance Lack of organization Still needs to be improved, by more pressure and paperwork to the local government. Need to get organized still to get a boarding house system implemented, and to follow up on the activities. Lack of organization Little interest There needs to be a replacement nurse. Lack of getting organized, solicit a proposal, negotiate, and pressure the government. ANTELCO s bureaucracy Haven t elected anyone, to pay the costs of someone to go to pressure them and follow up. Need to organize and designate someone, and assume the personal commitment to do it. It is important to have regular meetings where all the families can share the information and put pressure and select people to do things. Lack of information. Ing. Vargas said that Don Manuel had already gone and pressured them to agree to bring electricity from Paratodo and 52

54 Public Transportation Partially Someone brought in Transportation from A.S. (a local company) Water A little A communal stock pond (tajamar) was built but it is still dirty. There needs to be an artesian well and filter, and a fence around it so the animals don t get in. the teacher asked for water during the drought and the government brought it Non-Agricultural NO There was an alternative. Chaco Education and Oeste got a course on nursing Training (Adult brought to Campo Aceval and Learning courses) there was little participation. Some way it was lack of interest. But there were women who wanted to go, but did not know about it. They announced it one day prior and that s why there weren t very many people. Bland Credit A little They have the agricultural credit from CAH. The Milk committee asked for CAH to come to the community and they did, so that each person could sign up. But CAH is very difficult to get access to. Commission Gondra and nobody knew that. Need to talk to A.S., Get organized to form a committee to be in charge of this. Continue working with the business that is already here, use it, pay for it, so that it comes more frequently Keep the roads maintained We need to bring an expert on water systems, We need to get organized and talk with PRODECHACO and others, lacking participation and interest in getting organized We need to ask for courses and get organized about what to ask for. Lack of economic resources, Lack of information and information with enough time, through the radio -- improve the communication. Lack of better organization, because in numbers we could negotiate for better interest rates and guarantees with CAH. Recreation NO Lack of organization, meetings There isn t any will. Safety NO We realized that we live well with regard to safety. Source: (Toness & Caballero, 2000b). 53

55 Matrix of Farm Production Activities with Their Associated Needs, with 32 Participants (25 men, 7 Women), 2000, Santo Domingo, Yata i Watershed, Alto Paraná, Paraguay. Needs Production activities Money, credit Garden 0/ 3 Planning Electricity Water Technical Assistance, Roads Soil analysis Materials, tools Markets PRIORITY Crops /3 0 1/3 3 0/ 3 3 1/3 3 0/3 0/ /5 1 Pig/chicken raising Cattle Reforestation Food prep, canning Day labor outside Arts and crafts Fruit tree production Bee-keeping Fish production Soil conservation Selling at market Pest Control Forage, Pasture Small industry/home industry Grain conservation Total 25 / / / / /7 39/ 41 9/ 12 44/ Health Security Time Availability Interest & Awareness Source of income Governmental Support Community organization Primary school Soil conservation Use of agrochemical TOTAL/ 57 54

56 Table 13, Cont d. Notes and Key to shading: 0 = not important 1 = somewhat important 2 = important 3 = very important The shading indicates priorities: the lighter the shading, the higher the priority. The PRIORITY name across the top shows the needs that are present in the most number of activities. The TOTAL that goes vertically down the right shows the farm activities with the highest level of need, because it has the most needs. Crops came out as the farm activity with the highest level of need, i.e., all of the problems or needs are present and high for this category. Health was the most important or pervasive need that appeared in all the farm activities. Soil conservation and pest control tied with the second highest. Elementary school was the second most pervasive need, appearing in most activities Small cottage industry out of the home with the third highest level of needs. Greater support from the government was the third most pervasive need. It is interesting to note that after the community level needs that appeared to most pervasive, the highest farm-specific needs were: 1) interest/awareness; 2) technical assistance/extension and education; 3) materials and tools; and 4) use of agrochemicals (Toness et al., 2000b, p. 26) 55

57 Matrix of Soil Conservation Activities with Their Perceived Benefits, with 9 Participants (7 Men, 2 Women), 2000, Santo Domingo, Yata i Watershed, Alto Paraná, Paraguay. Benefits Conservation Activities Prevents soil erosion Prevents fertility loss Maintains humidity Controls weeds More production Protects streams Gives forage Firewood/wood Contour planting/ XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 24 terracing Green manures XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 30 Live barriers X X X X XX X X X XX 10 Composting XX XX XX X X XX X X XX XX X 17 Reforestation XX X XX XX XX XX XX X X XX XX XX X 22 Wind barrier (cortina X X X X X X X X X XX X 12 rompeviento) Conserved roads XX XX X XX XX XX X XX X X XX XX 20 Direct planting XX XX XX X XX XX X XX XX XX XX XX XX X 25 Water X XX X XX XX XX XX 12 purifier/storage Crop rotation XX X XX X XX X X XX XX XX X X 18 Crop association X X XX X X X X XX X X X 13 Dead cover XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX X 25 Natural pesticides XX XX XX XX XX X XX XX XX X 18 No burn XX XX XX XX XX XX X XX XX XX XX XX X 24 Management of X X XX XX XX XX XX X XX XX XX 19 stubble/rastrojo Total Less contamination Costs less Conserves microorganisms Gains time Controls pests Recycles nutrients Returns to our patron, the soil Is a future for the family Covers social requirements Total

58 Table 14, Cont d. Notes and Key to shading: Blank = not important X = important XX = very important The shading indicates priorities: the lighter the shading, the higher the priority. The total across the bottom shows the benefits that are perceived to be present in most or all of the conservation activities. The total that goes vertically down the right shows the conservation activities with the highest level of benefit, or most number of benefits. Areas that perceived benefits are very low or there is misinformation and training/technical assistance is needed Green manuring finished as the conservation practice with the most number of benefits, as perceived by the community; and conservation as it gives a future to our families, preserves the soil for the children, so to speak, was the most pervasive benefit among the conservation activities. Direct planting and using dead cover tied as the conservation practices with the second most number of benefits, Elementary school was the second most pervasive need, appearing in most activities; returning to our patron, the soil was the second most pervasive benefit in all the conservation activities (giving back to Mother Earth would be another way of saying this). Contour planting or terracing, and not burning their fields tied as the conservation practices with the third most number of benefits; conserving micro-organisms and recycling nutrients were tied as the third most pervasive benefit. It is interesting to note that PARN has been expending a great deal of energy, time, and investment promoting contour planting and water purifying storage tanks and had not focused on green manures much prior to the making of this matrix. The community perceives green manures as having great benefits, which implies a greater receptivity to the practice. This is also a practice that requires not burning the fields and sometimes direct planting. Also, in terms of the marketing or promotion of activities, the project uses more conservation based reasons (good for micro-organisms, etc.), while the most important value the people place on conservation is the fact that it gives their children a future as farmers and the concept of owing Mother Earth (Toness, et al., 2000b, p. 31). 57

59 Priority Matrix of Problems at PARN with 20 Staff Participating (3 Women, 17 Men), Ciudad del Este, Paraguay, March 12, PROBLEMS Total No Information center X No Investigation X X spokesperson Database X X X Lack of uniform technical X X X X criteria Inadequate planning system X X X X X Improvisations X X X X X X Lack of participation in X X X X X X X decision making (technical team) Authoritarianism X X X X X X X X Deficient internal X X X X X X X X X communication Inefficient evaluation system X X X X X X X X X X Inopportune and scarce X X X X X X X X X X X resources Low credibility X X X X X X X X X X X X Outside interference X X X X X X X X X X X X X 14 2 Few or late watershed X X X x X X X X X X X X X X 13 management plans written done After voting again on ties, the following were placed in order of highest priority to lowest priority: Lack of watershed management plans Inopportune and lacking resources Authoritarianism Inadequate planning systems Lack of participation among technical staff in decision making Inefficient evaluation systems Lack of uniform technical criteria Lack of database Improvisations (bad planning leading to putting out fires) Deficient communication Lack of information sharing center Low credibility External interference Spokesperson for information 58

60 Venn Diagram and Organizational Relationships Making a Venn Diagram Often easiest to do on paper, using colored paper cut into various shapes and sizes Use a checklist to orient the issues to be addressed in the Venn Start by drawing a large circle to represent the boundary of the community; everything inside the circle is an internal organization/group, everything outside is an external organization or group Begin with committee or groups (formal and informal) inside the community. Ask what groups exist and put the name of each group on a piece of paper (for example circles), and put the paper inside the circle (you can have different sized circles for more complex diagrams the larger the circle the larger the influence they decide). Add all groups, projects, institutions that are internal to the community until finished. Ask participants who has particular or importance significance and/or influence in their lives use triangles for all individuals (same size triangles). After finishing all internal information, begin with external institutions, projects or groups that reside outside the community, but have some influence or relationship (negative or positive) to the community. You may choose squares for agencies outside the community. After the inventory begin asking about relationships this does not have to be done, but if it is useful to the community, it can be very important. Start with an organization outside the community, and ask how this organize relates to the community, and characterize it with a (very good, neutral, or not great i.e. not well). Use three different color markers and tell participants that each marker will represent very good, neutral or not so good. Ask if this agency works directly with the whole community or a particular group inside the community. Draw an arrow with from the outside organization to either a group, the whole community or both, and use a color that describes the relationship. Continue this with all external organizations. Do the same thing for groups internal to the community, asking who they work most closely with (i.e. other community groups) or with the community as a whole, and how would they characterize that relationship. Tip: This part can be sensitive and requires good facilitation skills and often conflict resolution skills. Interview the diagram (probe more deeply into issues on the checklist or those that came up in the group dialogue) 59

61 Venn Diagram, created by 24 community members of Fortin Falcon, Paraguay, (copy). 60

62 Venn Diagram, created by 26 community members of Fortin Gondra, Paraguay, (Copy). 61

63 Venn Diagram created by 22 people in Avalos Sanchez, Paraguay, (Original). 62