Resources

Participatory training has a range of meanings, from students who are encouraged to ask questions or express opinions at a lecture ('useful ingredients') to 'people coming together as equals to form a learning group, setting their own agenda'. The outcomes of such a radical approach to training (e.g. greater awareness of process, greater understanding of power, conflict and change) could be considered 'subversive' since they undermine less radical approaches. Most participatory training however comes somewhere in between the 'useful ingredient' and the 'radical'. The author's own experience of participatory training at Selly Oak College, Birmingham, is such a compromise : paying attention to process but with the inevitable limitations of working within an institution which does not want to relinquish power and control.

The article describes the experiences of Sri Lanka's North Western Province Dry Zone Participatory Development Project (DZP) in transferring participatory approaches from one institutional culture to another. It summarises some of the difficulties which have been encountered while facilitating participatory planning processes in 40 villages. These included raising the expectations of villagers; difficulties encountered by government officers in sticking to their promises; changing the behaviour and attitudes of government officers; and the temptation to make up results of 'participatory planning exercises'. It argues that to understand the constraints the principal differences between the institutional culture of NGOs and GOs have to be taken into account. The paper concludes that the changes required to realise true participation in large-scale government development projects are so fundamental that due time and resources must be provided if the approach is to succeed.

The article describes the experiences of Sri Lanka's North Western Province Dry Zone Participatory Development Project (DZP) in transferring participatory approaches from one institutional culture to another. It summarises some of the difficulties which have been encountered while facilitating participatory planning processes in 40 villages. These included raising the expectations of villagers; difficulties encountered by government officers in sticking to their promises; changing the behaviour and attitudes of government officers; and the temptation to make up results of 'participatory planning exercises'. It argues that to understand the constraints the principal differences between the institutional culture of NGOs and GOs have to be taken into account. The paper concludes that the changes required to realise true participation in large-scale government development projects are so fundamental that due time and resources must be provided if the approach is to succeed.

Staff of the Nepal Health Development Project have designed a method of examining the relationship between the project's human resource development initiatives and the concrete outputs and outcomes that result. The method ('Process Evaluation') is a participatory method which focuses on the capacity building experience itself. PE allows the researchers to analyse the strengths and weaknesses inherent in a project/activity's design, and to analyse the external constraints and enablers that influence progress towards goals. To the extent that project beneficiaries and implementors design and carry out PE, the methodology is itself a tool for capacity building. The methodology has 4 characteristics: (i) use of a conceptual model around which to examine capacity building; (ii) reliance on participatory strategies; (iii) use of participatory appraisal techniques; (iv) a qualitative approach to indicator development and investigation. PE is described and explained in 4 sections, one devoted to each of the above characteristics. It is recognised that where there is participation, there is potential for conflict. The conceptual model provides a common reference point, and can be used to enhance participation in a diverse group. The evaluation exercise was used to help 'bridge the gap' between a number of distinct components of the organisation's work. The model was applied to each of these components and the results for each are presented. The final section presents lessons regarding the methodology learned through the evaluation process.

This paper examines a participatory procedure of self-assessment of irrigation system performance by farmers in the Philippines. The procedure was aimed at improving system performance through strengthening irrigators associations' (IA) managerial capacity in planning and decision making regarding operation and maintenance, communication and conflict resolution. The assessment was part of a longer intervention to organize farmers in small groups based on water and task distribution. The first phase involved self-assessment by the original groups of the process of organizing smaller groups and catalysing collective action. In one-day workshops, farmers used symbols and maps to assess the situation. The second phase used a self-assessment questionnaire filled out monthly by IA group leaders, to assess their own performance in a range of management tasks. The experiment showed that participatory self-assessment was quite successful in eliciting candid appraisals of the existing situation. Pictorial analysis was a learning experience in which farmers identified unexpected causes of problems. These problems lay within the farmers' ability to resolve them, so the assessment facilitated follow-up actions to address them, which are listed in a table.

The paper argues that a new paradigm for sustainable agriculture has emerged from a recognition of the limitations of dominant scientific methods and advances in other domains. New systems of learning and inquiry are needed. Participation and collaboration are essential to ensure public involvement and representation of multiple perspectives. It is noted that there are many types of participation, some of which threaten rather than support sustainable agriculture. Participatory inquiry is a structured methodology used to bring about changes in problem situations that the people involved view as improvements. Methods have been devised for team dynamics, sampling, interviewing and visualisations. The criteria for validity of findings are discussed. Beyond new methods, however, a change in institutions and the development of a new professionalism in agriculture are urged for.