Resources

The first section is a daily diary of the second part of the South South exchange held in India, which details the methods by which participation were acheived, the topics discussed and the individuals and organisations met. The second section focuses on the content of the exchange, focussing on specific issues such as credit, community organisation, livestock and watershed planning. Specific cases are discussed and there is an emphasis on "learnings" and "issues". The report winds up with a discussion of the context of PRA - including strengths and dangers - and the identification of a number of key issues. Thes include process, quality control, training, institutional aspects/ networking and policy interventions.

Using PRA techniques to collect information for the purposes of policy analysis, raises different issues from using PRA in an NGO project context. Training exercises for policy-oriented PRA need to be "custom-designed" for government staff who tend to have a more "top-down" approach, work in discrete departments and have restricted time for learning PRA. The article suggests how to plan a training programme in view of these points.

Much PRA has been through NGO, although government organizations are increasingly recognizing the need for participatory approaches. This is a greater challenge, as these organizations have a greater institutional inertia, requiring more time for real change to occur. This is illustrated by a programme in the Dry Zone of Sri Lanka. Several problems commonon to government organizations are discussed. Pressure to acheive unrealistic targets leads to critisism over the slow process of participation which may result in a desire to revert to faster top down approaches. Funding agencies are geared to blueprint planning, not a process approach. Pre-defined packages and resources do not sit easily with participatory management plans - the type of support offered does not co-incide with that demanded. Government staff are less flexible for specific project requirements, may be more entrenched in their ways and have fewer incentives to change the pattern of their behaviour and attitudes. Training is required which is different from standard training, focusing on reversals and facilitation, and which is time consuming. Reorienting staff in a compartmentalised structure is difficult, as is maintaining their interest over time. Despite this, the benefits of PRA are seen to be many, although there is a long way to go before their widespread and wholehearted adoption.

This five day training in PRA for officers on a Government watershed programme in Andhra Pradesh, India, had two main objectives : i) to plan the watershed programme with the communities ii) to build up a team spirit and better communication between members of the watershed teams (made up of different government departments). The report concentrates more on the latter objective and does not give any detail of the fieldwork or findings. The training programme consisted of theoretical sessions (cartoons are included in the report) followed by a three night stay by the 16 teams in 16 villages. Administrative constraints are briefly analysed.

This humorous account describes a field visit with District Officers in India, where the technique of "shoulder tapping" was used to interrupt officers who tried to give advice to the farmers. The actual dialogue shows the way in which the officers' assumptions were challenged by the farmers they met.

Over a fourteen-month period, the author lived in two rural villages in south-central Bali and "tested the application of PRA tools with over 300 women and men (villagers to provincial government officials) to explore their gender roles, gender perceptions, gender relations and their Practical (PGN) and Strategic Gender Needs (SGN)". Government-designed programmes for women were also evaluated. Chapters 1 and 2 show how PRA has more in common with GAD (Gender And Development) than the WID (Women In Development) approach, since "they both focus upon relations of power". GAD and PRA are seen to be complementary approaches: GAD uses "extractive tools, with outsiders conducting interviews and participant observation" whilst PRA "has not addressed questions concerning exactly who within a community participates" and lacks tools to address conflict. Certain PRA tools do not enable women to express their particular perceptions and needs. Chapter 3 describes the research methodology in detail, analysing which PRA tools were successful in the field. Chapter 4 presents findings, showing that women have tended to become "implementers of government development initiatives, rather than participants in their own development". Conclusions (Ch 5) include evaluation of the research approach, listing the strengths and weaknesses of PRA and GAD in detail. Recommendations (Ch 6) suggest how PRA could be integrated into Gender Analysis training programmes.

A review of recent developments in health interview procedures within decentralised health planning emphasising the importance of beneficiaries' perceptions of their health problems in the success or failure of primary health care. The methodology used is that of 'indirect' health interviews channelled through existing administrative systems and self-administered by recipients. The article describes ongoing research designed to test this approach in seven African countries and discusses methodological problems and limitations.