|
|
| français - Español |
|
 |
| idrc.ca HOME >
Publications >
IDRC Books >
All our books >
PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FOR SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: A SOURCEBOOK >
|
ID: 85048Added: 2005-07-18 14:54Modified: 2007-03-25 18:17Refreshed: 2010-03-07 15:11 
|
|
Document(s) 9 of 34
The management of agriculture and natural resources involves interactive roles of diverse social actors. These actors usually include a diversity of stakeholders including small and large farmers, business entrepreneurs, local government authorities, resource-based user groups, community-based organizations and others. Different individuals and groups of individuals are bringing different perspectives, experiences, knowledge and interests to the management of resources, and to any associated research and development initiatives. They have different and often changing access to and control over, decision-making, and specific knowledge about natural resource management processes. These stakeholders are not homogenous or fixed groups, but differentiated by social categories of gender, class, caste, ethnicity and age.
Power relations between these different actors are greatly influenced by gender, class, ethnicity, and often determine who may have access to a forest and its products, who manages the water resources in the community, who decides which crops are planted and where, etc. Groups such as the poor, socially or politically outcast, and ethnic minorities often are the most marginalized having limited access to decision-making power over how ecosystems and resources are managed. In many countries, women are particularly disadvantaged, with limited ownership and access rights to resources. They often derive little or no benefit. However, sometimes, marginalized groups, including women, may be able to 'negotiate' access to resources from those with more powerful access and decision-making positions. Gender issues are especially pertinent. They shape not only the different roles and responsibilities of women and men, but also the relations between women and men, and how these affect access to and control over natural resources. 'Traditional' research and development activities in the natural resource sector (as in other sectors) have been criticized for not reaching or involving the poor, women and other socially-disadvantaged groups. These groups have not been participants in or beneficiaries from the research and development (R&D) process. There has been increasing emphasis, particularly among gender activists, on how to include women's contributions in planning and decision-making in research and development activities. This continues to be a challenge. Participatory research and development (PR&D) should aim to facilitate understanding of the way social and gender roles and relations affect social, economic and ecological processes. Key questions are:
Ultimately, a sound understanding of social differences is needed to answer questions of who participates and how, and who benefits and how, from research and development interventions, projects, programs or policies. How can PR&D Approach Social/Gender Issues in Natural Resource Management?Participatory research and development activities should facilitate understanding and awareness among researchers and community members alike of social and power relations in the community, and of the differences and inequities regarding the access to, control over, and benefits from natural resources. In participatory approaches to research and development, there is often discussion of working with the 'community'. However, it is important also to remember that the 'community' (or communities) are not homogenous (and 'community' itself is not always a clear concept). Communities are made up of these diverse sets of social actors, governed by social and power relations, and various decision-making processes regarding ecosystem management and resource use. This also holds true for the level of the 'household', which is a unit made up of diverse individuals.
Much research in natural resource management on social, and particularly, gender issues focus on the division of labor and roles and responsibilities. Many participatory rural appraisal (PRA) tools, like seasonal calendars and daily activity charts, are used to document and understand the ways in which resources are managed. However, many researchers 'stop' there. It is also important to try to understand the power relations, inequities and decision-making processes between these different groups as integral parts of the complexity of resource management problems and their management. Who makes decisions? When and how? Who benefits, when and how? Participatory research and development, by definition of the term 'participation', should create a space for involvement of all the different stakeholders involved in using and managing the natural resources. These processes can enable the involvement and active engagement of those more disadvantaged groups who are generally left out of decision-making processes. The term 'participation' evokes a sense of inclusion of each of these diverse sets of actors in the research initiative. However, this is not always the case, and participatory research is not automatically socially-equitable or gender-sensitive. Participation is often determined by rules, norms and perceptions of communities and societies, and these factors may disadvantage women or other social groups (Agarwal, 2001). The potential of these disadvantaged groups to alter them depend on the bargaining power and political relations within the household, community and the state. They also depend on the participatory and facilitative nature of the project or initiative, and the commitment of the researchers to consider and address these issues.
There is a growing body of literature and cases that illustrate how 'participatory' approaches have actually further led to exclusion rather than inclusion (Agarwal, 2001; Cornwall, 2000) because they have not adequately considered, understood, or addressed the power relations and social differentiation within communities. For example, only local elites or authorities in the communities may be involved in R&D initiatives (which could be in part because they are easier to reach), and more poor or marginalized groups may be absent (who are harder to contact and involve). Or, it may be primarily male community members who meet with researchers to discuss the project and activities, and women, or few women, may be involved. Many projects have made significant attempts to promote women's involvement in NRM projects through participatory approaches. Some may see increasing women's participation as increasing the numbers of women involved in a project, or having a small activity that focuses on women (the 'add women and stir method'). However, this may not actually translate to engaging in meaningful participation. Attempts may be made to 'invite' women to meetings and group discussions and the like and this is considered inclusion. But these may be held at times or places where it is difficult for women to participate for example if they are looking after children, are working in the fields, or they are unable to travel long distances. Or women may be invited to participate in meetings, but are silent, or are given the task of bringing tea and food. Or women may be outspoken, but their contributions are ignored by the male elite, and do not impact on decisions made. Attention must be paid to develop strategies, depending on the local context to integrate and involve women, and other marginalized groups, into the participatory research and development processes in a meaningful way.
Participatory research processes not only facilitate involvement of different social actors, it can also support a process to understand how various interventions and policies may impact various social groups differently. These processes, facilitated through participatory monitoring and evaluation, can help generate knowledge and discussion on how the research process itself may impact on different groups in different ways. Who Participates? How? Who Decides? Who Benefits?Simple questions, perhaps, but also very challenging ones and it is difficult to translate these questions into participatory practice. Researchers work in complex socio-cultural, economic and political contexts, often with deeply embedded social relations. How does one try to support processes of research and development that address inequities? The most critical point is one of awareness. This is really the first step! If researchers, and the communities with whom they are working, are thinking about these questions (who is participating? who 'wins'? who 'loses'?), they are better placed to consider mechanisms and strategies to address this. And, participatory approaches where research and development strategies are designed together with communities enable a more nuanced understanding of these issues, and a transparency that may facilitate change.
Participatory research and development strategies, then, must consider mechanisms to enable meaningful participation by the different stakeholders involved in the research. Given the social, cultural and political diversity in which projects and programs are situated, strategies and approaches will not be a 'blueprint' approach, but rather must be contextualized, developed and adapted by research and development practitioners -- together with the members of the communities in which they are working. Power relations are not fixed or static, but rather are negotiated over space and time, and depend on various factors in the local context (Cornwall, 2000). Participatory approaches, and particularly emphasis on social and gender analysis, can help to identify those spaces, and also to identify strategies for supporting participatory research and development to build on and strengthen the existing 'spaces for maneuvring' that more marginalized groups may have to access and benefit from natural resources. Stakeholders who are targeted in NRM research projects as the prime beneficiaries should be the actors and decision-makers in how the research and development initiatives are carried out, and they should have an 'equal' place in the process along with other more powerful actors in the community. While such an equitable footing may be overly ideal, participatory research can aim to move towards 'leveling the playing field' – both in terms of the research and development process itself, and more broadly on the access to, and management of the natural resources. In this way, participatory research can enable disadvantaged groups to develop or strengthen space and negotiation for access to these resources, and ultimately for better livelihoods. Such an approach can be 'transformative' in addressing social and gender inequities and power relations. Cornwall (2000) adapts Sarah White's (1996) typology of different types of 'participatory approaches' to discuss different 'meanings' of participation for stakeholders, illustrating the potential of a transformative approach (Table 1).
Through meaningful participatory research and development in agriculture and natural resource management, communities, government, donors and the diverse social actors can support a process of transformative approaches where those most marginalized groups are empowered, where they are able to negotiate space to improve their well-being and their livelihoods, while also ensuring the sustainable management of the resource base on which they depend.
ReferencesAgarwal, B. 2001. Participatory Exclusions, Community Forestry and Gender: An Analysis for South Asia and a Conceptual Framework. Cornwall, A. 2000. Making a Difference? Gender and Participatory Development. IDS Discussion Paper 378. Sussex: Institute of Development Studies. European Commission: Employment and Social Affairs. 1998. One Hundred Words for Equality: A Glossary of Terms on Equality Between Women and Men. In: Adamo, A. and A. Horvorka Guidelines for Integrating Gender Analysis into Biodiversity Research. Sustainable Use of Biodiversity Program, IDRC. Lambrou, Y. 2001. A Typology: Participatory Research and Gender Analysis in Natural Resource Management Research. PRGA Working Paper No. 15. CGIAR System Wide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation (PRGA Program). Vernooy, R. and E. Fajber. 2005. Making Gender/Social Analysis Work for Natural Resource Management Research: An Umbrella Program for Building Capacity for Researchers. In: International Institute of Rural Reconstruction and InterAction: Commission on the Advancement of Women (eds.). Innovative Practices of Gender Mainstreaming in Asia. (Forthcoming). White, S. 1996. Depoliticising Development: The Uses and Abuses of Participation. Development in Practice, Vol 6, No. 1: 6-15. Contributed by:
Document(s) 9 of 34
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| guest (Read)(Ottawa) Login | Home|Careers|Copyright and Terms of Use|General Infomation|Contact Us|Low bandwidth |
Developing a better understanding and awareness of the social and power relations that govern access to, use of, and control over natural resources. This involves understanding the differences and the inequities of social actors, and is dependent on the local contexts.
Facilitating the recognition of the social and gendered nature of technologies, policies and interventions. Policies and technologies are value-laden, and how women and men, and different social groups, are involved and impacted differently.
Creating a space for social actors (women and men) to 'maneuvre', and to enhance the bargaining and negotiating power of those marginalized and discriminated groups, leading to empowerment and transformation where they have more access to, control over, and benefits from natural resources.
Knowledge and experience of social science research among NRM researchers is limited. Few NRM researchers with which the programs have partnered have strong conceptual background of social/gender analysis, and even less so of practical tools and methodologies. Many partners may have a basic understanding of concepts but are unsure of how to implement social/gender research and analysis in the field.
Social science components are not well integrated with natural science components in research. For those projects that do contain social/gender analysis, often it is a completely distinct component and there is little discussion or interaction with natural resource scientists. Rather, it is as if there are two (or more) separate projects, and hence results are not well integrated in the development of appropriate interventions.
Partners have different starting points, interest and expertise about social and gender issues. We can not assume that a single approach is the answer to meeting these different needs, but rather aim to provide different mechanisms to provide support and training.
'Gender blindness' or refusal to acknowledge the importance of gender issues is common. Many researchers, community members and policymakers feel threatened by the concept of 'gender.' Gender analysis is mistakenly assumed to represent a radical feminism that these stakeholders do not identify with and so dismiss as being irrelevant or driven by Western interests.
Short-term training has limited impact. While short-term training (one week or even two week) programs on social/gender issues and analysis can be useful to provide an initial overview and methodologies, many researchers return to their projects unsure of how to implement these aspects into the programs, and without much support to do so. There is a need for longer term commitment and support to our partners.
The benefits of networking have been strongly articulated. Researchers have voiced their interest and advantages of learning from practical experiences of other researchers, particularly in the region. There are also benefits of a peer support network of researchers who are interested in integrating social and gender analysis in projects, and together learning how.
Resources on social/gender analysis and NRM in Asia are not widely available. In Asia, most training and methodological materials on social/gender analysis do not have direct application for natural resource management (with some exceptions of course). Rather, emphasis is still on issues of "women and development." Other social/gender analysis and NRM resources are available internationally but may be in very different socio-cultural settings, and the cost of attending them may be prohibitive.
