Contributing to Civic Innovation through Participatory Action Research
Abstract
‘Civic innovation is about focusing on what is positive, creative and imaginative in the face of a world that seems beset by crisis narratives’ (Biekart, Harcourt, Knorringa, 2016: 3). In exploring the term civic innovation, as it is used in Development Studies, ‘we are not looking for a new theory and practice that will lead to a grand transformation of neoliberal capitalism but rather at how to build a mosaic of responses by looking at what is happening on the ground where people are living the contradictions of development. It is argued that we need to question pre-determined ideas of what measures to take and go beyond universal policy solutions, in order to look with openness at the actions on the ground’ (Ibid.). In that sense, civic innovation can be perceived as the ‘political sister’ of social innovation as it directly assesses dominant power relations. The paper explores a different and trans-disciplinary approach to researching change: by descending from the academic ivory tower, respecting and deploying multiple knowledges for civic innovation, as well as approaching change with the ideas and tools of Participatory Action Research. Examples from knowledge dialogues with Central American social movements are used to explore this methodology further, including the downsides and the dilemmas. The paper concludes that carefully planned dialogues, reflexivity of facilitators, and awareness about potential power issues are probably key features of a knowledge generation process that may embody progressive social change.
Key words: Civic Innovation, reflexivity, Participatory Action Research (PAR), knowledge dialogues, transdisciplinarity, Central America.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Adelman, C. (1993) Kurt Lewin and the Origins of Action Research, Educational Action Research, 1:1, 7-24,DOI:10.1080/0965079930010102
Bebbington, A. and Biekart, K. (2007) ‘Northern NGOs and indigenous organisations in Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia: Reflecting on the past to look to the future’, Synthesis study of research project Hivos,Ibis, Oxfam America and SNV.
Bergh, S. and Biekart, K. (2016) ‘Can consultants be civic innovators? Exploring their roles as auditors and allies’, in K. Biekart, W. Harcourt and
P. Knorringa (eds) Exploring Civic Innovation for Social and Economic Transformation. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 67-86.
Biekart, K., Harcourt, W and Knorringa, P. (2016) ‘Introduction: giving meaning to civic innovation’, in K. Biekart, W. Harcourt and P. Knorringa (eds) Exploring Civic Innovation for Social and Economic Transformation. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 1-19.
Biekart, K. and Icaza, R. (2011) Knowledge dialogues with Central American social movements, Synthesis research report. The Hague: International Institute of Social Studies.
Biekart, K. and Fowler, A. (2012) ‘A civic agency perspective on change’, Development 55: 181-189. doi:10.1057/dev.2012.9
Biekart, K. and K.A. Siegmann (2016) ‘Minding the gap between activism and academia – or bridging it? Reflections on how to do civic innovation research, in K. Biekart, W. Harcourt and P. Knorringa (eds) Exploring Civic Innovation for Social and Economic Transformation. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 233-250.
Brock, K. and Petit, J. (2007) Springs of Participation: Creating and Evolving Methods for Participatory Development. Warwickshire: Practical Action Publishing.
Chambers, R. (2008) Revolutions in Development Inquiry. London, Earthscan.
Chevalier, J.M. and Buckles, D.J. (2013) Participatory Action Research: Theory and methods for engaged inquiry. London and New York: Routledge.
Clegg, S.R. and T.S. Pitsis (2012) ‘Pronesis, Projects and Power Research’, in B. Flyvbjerg, T. Landman and S. Schram (2012) Real Social Science: Applied Phronesis, pp. 66-91. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cooke, B. and Kothari, U. (eds.) (2001) Participation: The New Tyranny? London: Zed Books.
Dekker, P. and Evers, A. (2009) ‘Civicness and the Third Sector: Introduction’, Voluntas, 20(3), 217-219.
Escobar, A. (2008) Territories of Difference, place, movement, life, redes. Duke: Duke University Press.
Fals-Borda, O. and Rahman, M. A. (1991) Action and Knowledge: Breaking the Monopoly with Participatory Action Research. Warwickshire: Practical Action Publishing.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2001) Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and how it can Succeed again. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Flyvbjerg, B., T. Landman and S. Schram (2012) Real Social Science: Applied Phronesis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fowler, A. (2013a) Civic Driven Change; Where From, Where Now, Where Next, Valedictory Lecture, (The Hague: Institute of Social Studies). http://www.iss.nl/fileadmin/ASSETS/iss/Documents/Academic_publications/Fowler_-_Valedictory_Final_Oct_2013.pdf
Fowler, A. (2013b) ‘Social Innovation: New Game, New Dawn, or False Promise?’ Hivos Knowledge Programme (October). https://www.hivos.org/social-innovation-new-game-new-dawn-or-false-promise
Fowler, A. and Biekart, K. (2013), Relocating Civil Society in a Politics of Civic-Driven Change. Development Policy Review, 31: 463–483.
Fowler, A. and Biekart, K. (eds) (2008) Civic Driven Change: Citizen’s Imagination in Action. The Hague: Institute of Social Studies.
Harward, D. (ed), (2013) Civic Values, Civic Practices, Washington, D.C: The Civic Series, Bringing Theory to Practice.
Hickey, S. and Mohan, G. (2005) ‘Relocating participation within a radical politics of development’, Development and Change 36(2): 237-62.
Hivos-ISS (2008) Knowledge Programme Civil Society Building: Programme Plan (2008-2010), The Hague, mimeo.
Icaza, R. and Vázquez, R. (2013), Social Struggles as Epistemic Struggles. Development and Change, 44: 683–704. doi:10.1111/dech.12039
Kindon, S., Pain, R. and Kesby, M. (eds.) (2007) Participatory Action Research Approaches and Methods: Connecting People, Participation and Place. London and New York: Routledge.
Lewin, K. (1946) ‘Action research and minority problems’, in G.W. Lewin (ed.) Resolving Social Conflicts. New York: Harper and Row.
Leyva Solano, X. and S. Speed (2008). Hacia la investigación descolonizada: nuestra experiencia de co-labor”. In Leyva Solano and Speed (coord.) Gobernar (en) la diversidad: Experiencias Indigenas desde América Latina. Hacia la Investigación de Co-labor. CIESAS/FLACSO, pp. 65-110.
McTaggart, R. (1989) ’16 tenets of Participatory Action Research (PAR)’. http://www.caledonia.org.uk/par.htm.
Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D. and Hillier, J. (2013) ‘Social Innovation: Intuition, Precept, Concept, Theory and Practice, in Moulaert et al. The International Handbook on Social Innovation: Collective action, Social Learning and Transdisciplinary Research, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 13-24.
Reason, P. and Bradbury, H. (eds) (2008) The SAGE Handbook of Action Research. London, Sage.
Simmons, W.P. (2012) ‘Making the Teaching of Social Justice Matter’, in B. Flyvbjerg, T. Landman and S. Schram (2012) Real Social Science: Applied Phronesis, pp. 246-263. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sinha, S. and L. Back (2014) ‘Making Methods Sociable: Dialogue, Ethics and Authorship in Qualitative Research’, Qualitative Research 14(4): 473–487.
Sirianni, C. and Friedland, L. (2001) Civic Innovation in America: Community Empowerment, Public Policy, and the Movement for Civic Renewal. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Stremmelaar, J. (2009) ‘Knowledge integration for development: The Hivos approach’. Knowledge Management for Development Journal, 5(1), pp. 75-84.
Valverde, J. M. (2008) ‘Programa de conocimientos: Elementos conceptuales y metodológicos’. Mimeo, San José.
Wittmayer, J.M. Schäpke,N., Steenbergen, F. van, and Omann, I. (2014) Making sense of sustainability transitions locally: how action research contributes to addressing societal challenges, Critical Policy Studies, 8:4, 465-485, DOI: 10.1080/19460171.2014.957336
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under Creative Commons 4.0. International. Editorial Sinnergiak