Cross-country use of participatory research methods in practice to enhance inclusive decision making.
Abstract as pdf
Corresponding Author:
Sneha Krishnan
ETCH Consultancy Services India
sneha.etch@gmail.com
Author(s):
Robert Soden1 , Pradip Kathiwada2 , Bhen Aguinon3 and Rongkun Liu4
1University Of Toronto, Robert.Soden@Gmail.Com, CAN
2Youth Innovation Lab, Pradip@Youthinnovationlab.Org, NPL
3UN Habitat, Bhenaguihon@Gmail.Com, PHL
4Ohio State University, Liu.5811@Buckeyemail.Osu.Edu, CHN
Introduction:
Rethinking participation in disaster research and practice could be facilitated when practitioners are provided with opportunities to pause and reflect deeply on their work outside of the context of their own individual projects and organizational networks. This article draws from an extended collaboration in the form of a solidarity network between researchers from multiple countries and disciplines in a working group, which aimed at exploring ethics, participation, and power in disaster management. Solidarity networks help actors to coordinate tasks to overcome dilemmas through collective action (Smith 2009).
Design: Under Responsible Engineering Science and Technology for Disaster Risk Management, the authors undertook weekly meetings over four months to discuss various facets of adopting participatory methods in their individual projects in Nepal, India, Philippines and USA. This article develops a critical reflection of practice using an auto-ethnographical and poly-vocal approach.
Findings: The voluntary, digital, sustained, unstructured, recurring, and interdisciplinary characteristics of our working group created an opportunity for researchers and practitioners from different fields and different national, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds to come together and collectively issues related to participation, ethics, and power.
Implications: In this paper we do not offer a systematic evaluation of what was a fairly unique process. It offers no evaluation of the working group, or others like it, that focus on questions of replicability, scale, and sustainability. Per our knowledge, this is a unique paper that focuses on situating multidisciplinary practice within disaster risk management and enhancing networks, capacities, and expertise for professional education for engineers, physical, and social scientists who are involved in research and practice. The polyvocal character of the presentation will help readers access the particular experiences of the participants, which reflect the deeply personal character of the subject matter.
Conclusions: The constant cycle of getting funding-needing more funding- applying for funding while juggling teaching, research and services does not leave a second for reflection (Mountz et al., 2015). In addition to systemic changes in disaster risk management practice, individual researchers and practitioners need to develop stronger solidarity networks.
Mountz, A., et al. (2015) For Slow Scholarship:
A Feminist Politics of Resistance through Collective Action in the Neoliberal University ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 2015, 14(4), 1235 - 1259
Smith (2009) 'Solidarity networks: what are they? And why should we care?'
Emerging voices and pathways to inclusive disaster studies