Resources

This working paper provides an evaluation and a critique of participatory research, specifically in the field of social sciences and agronomy (Agriculture, Nutrition, Alimentation). Reviewing the relevant literature, it summarises the basic participatory methodologies and investigates the limits of participatory research. The potential participatory research offers to the CRDI is brought forwards, notably as regards project evaluation.

Ce document de groupe de travail fournit une Úvaluation et une critique de la recherche participative, et ce spÚcifiquement dans les sciences sociales et l'agronomie (Agriculture, Nutrition, Alimentation). Passant en revue la littÚrature sur la recherche participative et sur son origine, ce document rÚsume les mÚthodologies participatives fondamentales et souligne leurs limites. Les implications de la recherche participative pour le CRDI sont mises en avant, notamment leurs apport en termes d'Úvaluation de projets.

GTV ensures the participation and increased responsibility of the local population in the management of local resources. This paper discusses the implementation of GTV in Senegal, and addresses key issues regarding the participatory aspects of GTV. It questions the assumption that participatory approaches will be systematically applied at each stage of the implementation process of a GTV.

La GTV permet la participation et la responsabilisation accrue des populations locales dans la gestion des ressources naturelles de leurs terroirs. Ce papier expose la mise en oeuvre de la GTV au SÚnÚgal, et se penche sur les thÞmes clÚs de l'aspect participatif de la GTV. Il conclut que rien n'autorise une application systÚmatique de l'approche participative Ó chacune de Útapes de la mise en oeuvre d'un programme GTV.

This text describes an action-research programme within the Participative Regional Forum (FOREP). It analyses: 1) the objectives, methodologies and activities of FOREP; 2) the stakes and perspectives of the process of institutionalisation of participation in resource management. Ce texte dÚcrit un programme de recherche-action portant sur l'institutionnalisation de la participation dans le domaine de la Gestion de terroir au sein d'un Forum RÚgional Participatif (FOREP). Il est composÚ de deux sections: 1) Une analyse des objectifs, de la mÚthodologie et des activitÚs de FOREP; 2) Une analyse des enjeux et des perspectives du processus d'institutionnalisation de la participation en matiÞre de gestion de terroir.

Debates about genetically modified (GM) corps in India have largely centered on their benefits, as espoused by scientists, transnational corporations and the government, excluding the farmers who grow the crops. This video documents the process by which Karnataka farmers held a citizen's jury over 5 days, to assess potential advantages and disadvantages of GM crops. The jury comprised eight female and six male farmers, and was held in the village of Bommagondakare. The jury questioned witnesses from biotechnology companies, national government, NGOs and farmers' groups. Farmers were open to the advantages but questioned applications of 'expert' scientific knowledge in local contexts. They saw the dangers of less accountability from the private profit-making corporations developing the technology. Farmers stressed their knowledge, and seed saving and breeding techniques. They were concerned that GM seeds would leave them powerless. Women in particular, who have the final say in the choice of seed and how it is sown, may be marginalised. The poorest farmers were concerned that GM crops could threaten food security. As part of the verdict, farmers were asked to vote on the question of whether they would grow GM crops. Nine farmers said 'no', four said 'yes', and one was not sure. Most of the jury wanted a moratorium on GM crops until extensive field trials, which involved farmers, were carried out for 5-10 years. The jury made detailed recommendations about what would be required to increase their confidence in GM seeds. Their main priority was that traditional varieties known to be reliable are conserved. Action Aid, in facilitating the citizen's jury, focused on the need for poor people to have a voice in decision-making on matters that affect their lives. The citizens' jury on GM crops is one such example. Given the right information, farmers can make sophisticated judgements. Their voices should be at the forefront of the GM debate and in the decision-making process on how the technology is taken forward.

The thesis of this paper is that 'our' (professionals', scientists', outsiders') behaviour and attitudes are a key missing link for good agricultural science. Unless they are confronted and transformed, as part of a new definition of professionalism, the agriculture of small farmers will not achieve its potential, and the needs of many of the food-insecure of the world will not be met. The argument, set in the context of agricultural science and scientists, has implications also for other development professions concerned with the diversity and complexity of human lives and livelihoods.

Farmer communities of Sta. Josefa, a fifth class municipality in Agusan del Sur, take center stage in this 25-minute video. It highlights the value of people's participation in the local development planning process in the Philippines, a result of the 1991 Local Government Code, which provided a mandate for democratisation at the village level. The video explores the different participatory tools used to identify, prioritise and analyze problems, and which facilitate the communities in making their own development plans. Also featured is the willingness of local government units to lead communities in making claims through the participatory planning process, as seen in the experience of Toboso, Negros Occidental. This video features the partnership and interplay of the roles of vital community actors, such as non-governmental organisations, people's organisations and local government units, in assisting the communities to achieve socio-economic advancements. Importantly, it highlights the commitment to building empowered and sustainable communities.

A Geographic Information System (GIS) is a tool for enabling mapping and spatial analysis to be performed for a variety of applications, including natural resource management and planning activities. This article explores some of the benefits and concerns of using GIS as a participatory tool. It draws on a case study in Nepal, where participatory GIS was used in the field of community forest management. It argues that although GIS has a somewhat justified poor reputation as a tool for participatory development, this is due to misuse of GIS. The case study shows that GIS can be an important tool for enhancing participatory processes, allowing quantitative and qualitative information to be combined, to provide resource management information that was both relevant to the communities' needs and detailed enough to determine sustainable use. It calls for a refocus of GIS, from the technology, to people.