Resources

This video draws on the experience of an Australian funded participatory rural development project in the Philippines, to examine the challenges, risks and benefits of adopting a participatory approach. It takes the form of interviews with project staff, including foreign project consultants, provincial and local project staff, community development workers and agricultural extension workers. A range of issues is discussed, include potential factors causing conflict or distrust, the need for and obstacles to empowering farmers, the need for and resistance to a very slow learning process, transparency and agendas of various stakeholders, and the need to recognise and share constraints and strengths. These issues are discussed from the perspective of bilateral agency staff, NGOs, local government and community partners.

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.

These two CD-ROMs present a review of three yearÆs action research that has been undertaken in ActionAidÆs country programmes in Malawi and Sierra Leone. The aim of the research was to test the idea that poor communities are left outside the loop of negotiations about their own futures, because of barriers presented by language, literacy and access to those in power. The objective of the research has been to facilitate resource-poor communities to analyse and represent their own needs and priorities. Video was used by communities (in Mwakhundi, Malawi, and Freetown and Kambia, Sierra Leone) to form Community Alliances (CAs) around key issues with others like themselves. The CAs took their tapes to negotiate with government and donors. The action research tested a cyclical methodology focussed at representation through video. Each CD presents the research experiences of one of the case study countries. They include the video tapes that the CAs used to represent their needs to government and the responses they received.