This article addresses criticisms that PRA raises too many expectations, and that communities should not simply be used as guinea-pigs for testing methods. It argues that these criticisms are only valid when planning is inadequate and there is a lack of transparency in groups working with communities. Further, it argues that raising expectations is actually an objective of the PRA process.
This brief discussion note addresses the frequently expressed concerns that communities should not be used simply to test out methods, and that carrying out a PRA raises too many expectations by local communities. It is argued that these criticisms reflect inadequate planning and a lack of transparency when working with communities. Indeed, raising expectations is actually one of the objectives. If the operational confines are made clear from the start, then raising expectations through participatory methods can generate a momentum for the active involvement of communities.
A description of using PRA to get to know Hazara in the North West frontier of Pakistan where ActionAid was doing work. PRA methods are used to establish population levels, lifestyles, ethnic groupings and poverty levels of the people within the area. ActionAid used PRA in this area as a first stage in assisting people to establish their own criteria and needs for development in the area.
It describes the activities of ActionAid in the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan, specifically in an area known as Hazara. An essentially descriptive account, it begins by considering the general characteristics of the region: who live there, how they live, and a brief assessment of the level of development. The emphasis is on agriculture and its impact on the local economy. Finally, a brief account of ActionAid's activities is given. PRA has been at the heart of ActionAid's approach, helping the people of the region to identify their own priorities.