participatory video: capturing community perspectives on rain water management
Upload: international-water-management-institute-iwmi-cgiar-water-land-and-ecosystems-program
Post on 16-May-2015
687 views
DESCRIPTION
Presented by Beth Cullen, Alan Duncan and Katherine Snyder at the IFWF 3rd International Forum on Water and Food, Tshwane, 16 November 2011TRANSCRIPT
Beth Cullen, Alan Duncan & Katherine Snyder
(Derived from PhD work by Beth Cullen)
Participatory Video: capturing community perspectives on Rain Water Management
IFWF 3rd International Forum on Water & FoodTshwane, 16 November 2011
What is Participatory Video (PV)?
Communication tool regardless of formal literacy levels.
Process: empower communities and act as a catalyst for action & change.
Product: community driven film that conveys issues, knowledge & perspectives
3
Fogo process, ‘birth of PV’: Don Snowden, 1960s pioneered two-way flow of knowledge between community members and decision makers
PV under-documented: focus on doing rather than publishing
Recent developments:
PV is not new!
Why is PV relevant for research & development?
PV can potentially be used to involve community members in research processes, ensure relevance & legitimacy
Bridge gaps between conventional science and IK by making different types of knowledge accessible to different audiences.
CollaborativeversusTop-down
Excludes views of those being researched/‘developed’ Communicates grassroots perspectives & knowledge
Participants are introduced to video camera
They acquire basics through active learning
Learning is equal: students become teachers
Confidence gained through new skills Games encourage dialogue & sharing Additional equipment is introduced
Key issues are identified using PRA Storyboards develop narratives Process aims to be fun & engaging
Different community views captured Participants watch & reflect on films Enables access to inaccessible areas
Participation extended to editing Ensures control over the final product Films screened to wider community
Feedback is gathered from range of community members
Screenings are documented to show communities their voice is heard
Films shown to audiences including researchers & decision makers
Collaborative rather than extractive
Addresses research fatigue
Influence decision makers
Community analysis
Represents Indigenous Knowledge
Skills development and empowerment
Peer-to-peer knowledge sharing
Catalyst for action & change
Challenges
No method is a ‘magic bullet’: must acknowledge and critically analyse strengths and weaknesses:
Danger of raising expectations: must consider long term sustainability
Takes time: rushing can result in token efforts at ‘community participation’ which repeat or reaffirm existing paradigms
Incentives: facilitators should ensure participants get something from the process
Can be hijacked by more powerful actors whilst appearing to represent grassroots reality: requires awareness of local power dynamics
People may not want to represent their knowledge/reality/point of view to others, for good reasons!
In certain contexts (i.e. politically restrictive environments) it may do more harm than good.
Source: InsightShare, 2006
Engage communities and document local perspectives on key issues/challenges
Communicate community perspectives to higher level stakeholders and researchers: link to Innovation Platforms?
Facilitate collective action: encourage local innovation and take research into implementation
Monitor and evaluate the process
Encourage cross project and basin learning
Potential uses of PV within NBDC
10
Questions & DiscussionHow do you think PV could be applied in your own projects?
What are the potential difficulties in using PV?
How could PV be used to support innovation processes?