Search results

This chapter presents a form of both co-participation theory and artful inquiry methodology as useful approaches in carrying out research into the student experience. Participatory Pedagogy is predicated on repositioning participants as co-producers of knowledge by introducing them to important aspects of the research, providing a platform to foster expression and affording opportunities to co-shape the research process. Artful inquiry can take many different forms, but collage in particular has the capacity to bring new meanings to the surface even in well-researched fields, such as the student experience. In supporting a Participatory Pedagogy approach, collage can unpack powerful testimonies of personal experience. A practical application of this pairing is also presented based on research into the student experience. This gives readers an insight into how it can be applied to a study, what its limitations might be and especially how students, particularly those from under-represented backgrounds, can benefit from being involved.

The purpose of this chapter is to document the use of Participatory Action Research methods as an effective approach for community empowerment and strategies for more inclusive public policy.

The methodology draws on a “participatory video” project with recycling cooperatives in São Paulo, Brazil, and documents the process, benefits, and challenges of using action-oriented methods and tools as an approach to build capacity for political and social change. The authors provide a step-by-step process of facilitating a PV project, its application for policy engagement, and some of the major dilemmas in using PV, including representation, power, and vulnerability.

The research findings conclude that the application of Participatory Action Research as a research method in social entrepreneurship, contributes significantly to build transformative capacity in participating members, in addition to creating new spaces for inclusive policy.

The research is unique in that it points to creative and transformative methods of engagement for inclusive governance, embracing multiple forms of personal identity, knowledge and creative expression in moving toward new solutions for equal opportunities and possibilities for change. Participatory video is argued to be an innovative avenue for the inclusion of multiple voices in these arenas, voices of people otherwise left on the margins. Participatory video is an approach that has the potential to transform the way we (local and global) move toward greater social equity, human compassion, and environmental flourishing.

The global call to ‘leave-no-one behind’ cannot be achieved without tacking the intractable social issues faced by the most excluded people. There is increasing interest in using visual methodologies for participatory research in contexts of marginalisation, because they offer the potential to generate knowledge from people’s lived experience, which can reveal subjective, emotional, and contextual aspects missed by other methods; alongside the means for action through showing outputs to external audiences. The challenge is that the perspectives of those in highly inequitable and unaccountable contexts are – by definition – rarely articulated and often neglected. The author thus begins by assuming that there are unavoidable tensions in using visual methods; between perpetuating marginalisation by inaction, which is ethically questionable; and the necessary risks in bringing unheard views to public attention. Many experienced practitioners have called for a situated approach to visual methods ethics (Clark, Prosser, & Wiles, 2010; Gubrium, Hill, & Flicker 2014; Shaw, 2016). What is less clear is what this means for those wanting to apply this practically. In this chapter, the author addresses this gap through the exemplar of participatory video with marginalised groups. Drawing on cases from Kenya, India, Egypt, and South Africa, the author contributes a range of tried-and-tested strategies for navigating the biggest concerns such as informing consent; and the tensions between respecting autonomy and building inclusion, and between anonymity and supporting participant’s expressive agency. Through this, the author provides a resource for researchers, including prompts for critical reflection about how to generate solutions to visual ethical dilemmas in context.

The purpose of this article is to explore the concept of co-governance and its implications on public value, with particular reference to local authorities in the Italian context.

The research aim is pursued by means of a literature review and an empirical research. The empirical research is developed through a questionnaire, sent to the 119 municipalities of the Italian provincial capitals. The overall response rate was 41.18% (49 responses).

In Italian local authorities the process of increasing citizens’ participation and citizens’ involvement as co-producers of public value by means of co-governance and participatory governance tools is still ongoing. More than 50% of the local authorities of the research sample have introduced co-governance or participatory governance tools and activities but they are still facing problems in implementing them.

In general, the level of citizens’ participation seems not to be fully developed.

The empirical part of the research focuses only on the application of co-governance and participatory governance tools in the Italian context, therefore the main limitation lies in the difficulties of extending their application to the international context. In addition, the questionnaire was designed only for medium- to large-sized local authorities. Thus, the research does not consider the possible implications for small municipalities.

This article considers some of the possible difficulties of implementation of co-governance and participatory governance tools.

This article highlights the link between the creation of public value and the adoption of public policies based on citizens’ involvement and consultation.

This article underlines the link between public value creation and co-governance. It also offers a broad empirical survey on the presence of co-governance and participatory governance tools and activities in the Italian context; this topic was not examined in prior studies.

The concept of participatory journalism draws attention to the shortcomings of established journalism by emphasising the role of the audience for boosting pluralism, transparency, deliberation and media accountability. Drawing on filed theory, the study attempts to shed light on whether the former audience can disrupt the field of journalism. To do so, it investigates the level and preferred forms of participation and provides evidence on how users perceive of the participatory affordances offered through news media websites. Although users assign public discourse functions to participatory avenues, the study confirms the reluctant audience paradigm, and the popularity of tools enabling low editorial capacity. From a field perspective, it is argued that although users' doxa denotes democratising ideas about participation, their behaviour is ultimately driven by their weak habitus (position) in the field. To use Bourdieu's metaphor, the power in the journalistic game still lies in the hands of professionals; users are not willing or capable of disrupting the norms and practices of mainstream journalism.

One common feature of different variants of participatory and action research is rejection of technocratic, undemocratic elements in science and inquiry, aiming to break the dominance of traditional academic views of science. These variants open up broader participation of people, and emancipate knowledge creation for the production of actionable knowledge with transformative potentials. The purpose of this chapter is to recognize and clarify a striving for knowledge democracy in these explicit or implicit democratizing ambitions and tendencies in the sense of broadening the participation of concerned parties in research and development work on open and equal terms. This recent concept, still in the process of formulation, has been proposed as a global mobilizing and unifying thinking for distributed networks and movements for participatory oriented research. The concept and movement had an initial embedding in the First Global Assembly for Knowledge Democracy in June 2017, Cartagena, Columbia. The purpose of the chapter is to elaborate on the meaning of knowledge democracy as a vision for the participatory and action research community. Particularly I will distinguish between different orientation to knowledge democracy, and the character of the logic of a more, open, democratic and coproductive science that can be a carrier of it.

The chapter aims to reflectively discuss a participatory research project concerning the future of higher education in Hungary. This project can be understood as an ongoing methodological experiment which attempts to engage teachers and students, in order to reveal how key stakeholders think about the future of higher education. In line with this, this methodologically oriented chapter shows how different participatory methodologies can be combined in a so-called backcasting framework. This approach starts by describing the present situation, then moves beyond the present conditions so as to identify the cornerstones of an ideal future state. On the one hand, the chapter gives a detailed introduction to how our participatory research process was set up and what particular methodologies we used during this process. On the other hand, it critically reflects on the methodological and ethical challenges involved.

Change is integral to the concept of development. Research in the development process is therefore implicitly, if not explicitly, directed to achieving change. What is important is how far development researchers see themselves as agents of change. In some cases they are helped by methodologies such as action research and participatory action research (PAR) that have change as integral to the research design. However for qualitative research methods in general there is no necessary connection with change. In fact, for many qualitative methods the aim of the researcher is to have as little impact on the research process and the people being researched as possible. In much ethnographic work, the research scene is to be represented in as “natural” a way as possible. This is very different from the development context where a process of change is assumed to be ongoing, or is encouraged to be so. The role of the researcher in relation to change has become even more marked with the advent of more participatory approaches to development. Research participants are no longer seen as passive objects of research but as active agents in creating their own knowledge and action.

Developing an alternative and more realistic modeling of the firm, the key point of this paper is that workers cooperatives represent a form of corporate governance, which is a subset of the participatory organizational form, that constitutes a competitive alternative to the typical relatively hierarchical and narrowly controlled firms. An important component of the cooperative advantage lies in its capacity to increase the quantity and quality of effort inputs into the ‘production process.’ However, to do so incurs economic costs. Thus, cooperatives can yield competitive outcomes without driving out of the market non-cooperative organizational forms. To some extent, whether cooperative or other participatory solutions are adopted depends upon the preferences of economic agents since cooperatives are shown to be competitive even in an extremely competitive environment. However, dominant or not, the cooperative solution can yield higher social–economic welfare levels to members.

Purpose: We critically examine the idea of neurodiversity, or the uniqueness of all brains, as the foundation for the neurodiversity movement, which began as an autism rights movement. We explore the neurodiversity movement's potential to support cross-disability alliances that can transform cultures.

Methods/Approach: A neurodiverse team reviewed literature about the history of the neurodiversity movement and associated participatory research methodologies and drew from our experiences guiding programs led, to varying degrees, by neurodivergent people. We highlight two programs for autistic university students, one started by and for autistics and one developed in collaboration with autistic and nonautistic students. These programs are contrasted with a national self-help group started by and for stutterers that is inclusive of “neurotypicals.”

Findings: Neurodiversity-aligned practices have emerged in diverse communities. Similar benefits and challenges of alliance building within versus across neurotypes were apparent in communities that had not been in close contact. Neurodiversity provides a framework that people with diverse conditions can use to identify and work together to challenge shared forms of oppression. However, people interpret the neurodiversity movement in diverse ways. By honing in on core aspects of the neurodiversity paradigm, we can foster alliances across diverse perspectives.

Implications/ Values: Becoming aware of power imbalances and working to rectify them is essential for building effective alliances across neurotypes. Sufficient space and time are needed to create healthy alliances. Participatory approaches, and approaches solely led by neurodivergent people, can begin to address concerns about power and representation within the neurodiversity movement while shifting public understanding.