scholarly journals Facilitating Community Participants' Research Engagement: Community Members' Perceptions of Community-based Research

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice M. Tse ◽  
Donna-Marie Palakiko ◽  
Ephrosine Daniggelis ◽  
Emily Makahi
Keyword(s):  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Research Engagement

Community-Based Participatory Research

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tracey Marie Barnett
Keyword(s):  
Action Research ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Community Based Participatory Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Collaborative Action Research ◽  
Participatory Action ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Partnership Approach

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) embraces a partnership approach to research that equitably involves community members, organizational representatives, social workers, and researchers in all aspects of the research process. CBPR begins with a research topic of importance to the community and has the aim of combining knowledge with action and achieving social change. It is community based in the sense that community members become part of the research team and researchers become engaged in the activities of the community. Community–researcher partnerships allow for a blending of values and expertise, promoting co-learning and capacity building among all partners, and integrating and achieving a balance between research and action for the mutual benefit of all partners. Various terms have been used to describe this research, including participatory action research (PAR), action research (AR), community based research (CBR), collaborative action research (CAR), anti-oppressive research, and feminist research.

Grounded in Culture: Reflections on Sitting Outside the Circle in Community-Based Research With Indigenous Men

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (14) ◽  
pp. 2343-2350
Author(s):  
Candice M. Waddell ◽  
Rachel V. Herron ◽  
Jason Gobeil ◽  
Frank Tacan ◽  
Margaret De Jager ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Community Based Participatory Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Power Dynamics ◽  
Indigenous Research ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Research Paradigms ◽  
Reflexive Practice

Research continues to be a dirty word for many Indigenous people. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is a means to disrupt power dynamics by engaging community members within the research process. However, the majority of relationships between researcher and participants within CBPR are structured within Western research paradigms and they often reproduce imbalances of power. The purpose of this article is to reflect on the process of CBPR within a research project focused on Indigenous men’s masculinity and mental health. In doing so, we aim to contribute to reflexive practice in CBPR and flatten research hierarchies to facilitate more equitable knowledge sharing. Our reflections highlight the importance of prioritizing healing, centering cultural protocols, negotiating language, and creating space for Indigenous research partners to lead. These critical lessons challenge Western researchers to ground their practices in Indigenous culture while they “sit outside the circle” to facilitate more equitable and engaged partnerships.

scholarly journals Caught up in power: Exploring discursive frictions in community research

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cindy Hanson ◽  
Adeyemi Ogunade
Keyword(s):  
Research Process ◽  
Community Research ◽  
Power Dynamics ◽  
Power Relationships ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Research Outcomes ◽  
Power Asymmetries ◽  
Research Relationships

This article outlines the debate around the emancipatory claims of community-based research (CBR) and identifies discursive frictions as a pivotal point upon which much of CBR practice revolves. Using a Foucauldian theoretical lens, we suggest that CBR is neither inherently emancipatory nor repressive, but that research outcomes are more often a product of power asymmetries in CBR relationships. To illustrate how power asymmetries in research relationships produce discursive frictions, several studies from our work and the literature are presented. The article provides examples of CBR relationships between the researcher and community members and relationships within the community to illustrate how power asymmetries and discursive frictions in these relationships dynamically influence research outcomes and thus alert researchers to the need to address power asymmetries not just before initiating CBR projects, but during CBR projects as well. We interrogate how power asymmetries and discursive frictions operate and are constructed in CBR in an attempt to highlight how research might be conducted more effectively and ethically. Finally, we indicate that some of the tensions and challenges associated with CBR might be ameliorated by the use of participatory facilitation methodologies, such as photo-voice and story circle discussion groups, that draw attention to power asymmetries and purposefully use more creative participatory tools to restructure power relationships and ultimately address the inequities that exist in the research process. Because CBR is continually caught up in power dynamics, we hope that highlighting some examples might offer an opportunity for increased dialogue and critical reflection on its claims of empowerment and emancipation.Keywords: discursive friction, Foucault, participatory methodologies, power asymmetries, research relationships, emancipatory research  

scholarly journals 2483

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (S1) ◽  
pp. 80-80
Author(s):  
Clara Pelfrey ◽  
Katrice Cain ◽  
Mary Ellen Lawless ◽  
Earl Pike ◽  
Ashwini Sehgal
Keyword(s):  
Evaluation System ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Consult Service ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Knowledge Community ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Research Outcomes ◽  
Study Population

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: This study describes the design, operation, and evaluation of a community-based research (CBR) consult service within the setting of a Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) institution. To our knowledge, there are no published evaluations of a CBR consult service at a CTSA hub. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A CBR consult service was created to support faculty, healthcare providers/research coordinators, trainees, community-based organizations, and community members. A framework was developed to assess the stages of client engagement and to foster clear articulation of client needs and challenges. A developmental evaluation system was integrated with the framework to track progress, store documents, continuously improve the consult service, and assess research outcomes. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: This framework provides information on client numbers, types, services used, and successful outreach methods. Tracking progress reveals reasons that prevent clients from completing projects and facilitates learning outcomes relevant to clients and funding agencies. Clients benefit from the expert knowledge, community connections, and project guidance provided by the consult service team, increasing the likelihood of study completion and achieving research outcomes. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Our evaluation suggests that clients benefit by (1) gaining the collective knowledge of the experts comprising the team, (2) learning the process of doing CBR, including the required steps to reach completion, and (3) gaining a project management mentality promoting translational research outcomes. This study offers a framework by which CTSA institutions can expand their capacity to conduct and evaluate CBR while addressing challenges that inhibit community engagement.

scholarly journals Power and politics in research design and practice: Opening up space for social equity in interdisciplinary, multi-jurisdictional and community-based research

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valoree Gagnon ◽  
Hugh Gorman ◽  
Emma Norman
Keyword(s):  
Good Practice ◽  
Community Research ◽  
Power Dynamics ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Partners ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Research Engagement ◽  
Bay Area ◽  
Fish Consumption Advisories ◽  
Design And Practice

Working collaboratively with communities is commonly considered a cornerstone of good practice in research involving social-ecological concerns. Increasingly, funding agencies also recognise that such collaborations are most productive when community partners have some influence on the design and implementation of the projects that benefit from their participation. However, researchers engaged with this work often struggle to actively engage community members in this way and, in particular, Indigenous peoples. In this article, we argue that useful strategies for facilitating such engagement are to leave space in the research plan for questions of interest to community partners and to encourage equitable interactions between all participants through the use of forums in which power dynamics are intentionally flattened. We demonstrate the use of this technique in an interdisciplinary, multi-jurisdictional research study involving the fate and transport of toxic compounds that lead to fish consumption advisories throughout the world. In this project, the use of participatory forums resulted in community partners in Michigan’s Keweenaw Bay area of Lake Superior shaping a key aspect of the research by raising the simple but significant question: ‘When can we eat the fish?’. Their interest in this question also helped to ensure that they would remain meaningful partners throughout the duration of the project. The conclusion emphasises that further integration of Indigenous and community-based research methods has the potential to significantly enhance the process and value of university-community research engagement in the future.

scholarly journals Maximizing community participation and engagement: lessons learned over 2 decades of field trials in rural Ghana

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sam Newton ◽  
Guus Ten Asbroek ◽  
Zelee Hill ◽  
Charlotte Tawiah Agyemang ◽  
Seyi Soremekun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Community Participation ◽  
Research Team ◽  
Field Trials ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
Community Members ◽  
District Health ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Health Authorities ◽  
Field Workers

Abstract Background Successful implementation of community-based research is dominantly influenced by participation and engagement from the local community without which community members will not want to participate in research and important knowledge and potential health benefits will be missed. Therefore, maximising community participation and engagement is key for the effective conduct of community-based research. In this paper, we present lessons learnt over two decades of conducting research in 7 rural districts in the Brong Ahafo region of Ghana with an estimated population of around 600,000. The trials which were mainly in the area of Maternal, Neonatal and Child Health were conducted by the Kintampo Health Research Centre (KHRC) in collaboration with the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM). Methods The four core strategies which were used were formative research methods, the formation of the Information, Education and Communication (IEC) team to serve as the main link between the research team and the community, recruitment of field workers from the communities within which they lived, and close collaboration with national and regional stakeholders. Results These measures allowed trust to be built between the community members and the research team and ensured that potential misconceptions which came up in the communities were promptly dealt with through the IEC team. The decision to place field workers in the communities from which they came and their knowledge of the local language created trust between the research team and the community. The close working relationship between the District health authorities and the Kintampo Health Research Centre supported the acceptance of the research in the communities as the District Health Authorities were respected and trusted. Conclusion The successes achieved during the past 2 decades of collaboration between LSHTM and KHRC in conducting community-based field trials were based on involving the community in research projects. Community participation and engagement helped not only to identify the pertinent issues, but also enabled the communities and research team to contribute towards efforts to address challenges.

Community-Based Research

2014 ◽  
pp. 484-517
Author(s):  
Margaret R. Boyd
Keyword(s):  
Research Process ◽  
Research Paradigm ◽  
Research Partnership ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Multiple Stakeholders ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Traditional Research ◽  
Emerging Issues ◽  
Synergistic Relationship

Community-based research challenges the traditional research paradigm by recognizing that complex social problems today must involve multiple stakeholders in the research process—not as subjects but as co-investigators and co-authors. It is an “orientation to inquiry” rather than a methodology and reflects a transdisciplinary paradigm by including academics from many different disciplines, community members, activists, and often students in all stages of the research process. Community-based research is relational research where all partners change and grow in a synergistic relationship as they work together and strategize to solve issues and problems that are defined by and meaningful to them. This chapter is an introduction to the historical roots and subdivisions within community-based research and discusses the core principles and skills useful when designing and working with community members in a collaborative, innovative, and transformative research partnership. The rationale for working within this research paradigm is discussed as well as the challenges researchers and practitioners face when conducting community-based research. As the scholarship and practice of this form of research has increased dramatically over the last twenty years, this chapter looks at both new and emerging issues as well as founding questions that continue to be debated in the contemporary discourse.

scholarly journals Community-based research decision-making: Experiences and factors affecting participation

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vivien Runnels ◽  
Caroline Andrew
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Theoretical Orientation ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Research Decision

From the post World War II period through to the present, scientific research and policy has increasingly reflected acceptance and implementation of a view that public interests are better served through public participation. Built on principles of democratic participation, community-based research (CBR) can produce new knowledge through the integration of knowledge of community members’ lived experience with the scientific and technical knowledge of academics. Although community-based research has experienced considerable recent attention as an approach to knowledge production, a specific focus on the participation of community members in decision-making or governance of CBR is sparse. To assist in understanding governance of CBR in Canada and the nature and extent of public participation, we conducted an interview-based qualitative study with 54 respondents. Arnstein’s (1969) theory of participation was used as the theoretical orientation. Respondents’ experiences showed their participation in governance was generally organised through four groups of factors that modified participation: pre-existing conditions, arrangements of governance, actions of academic actors, and actions of community actors. Although community members’ participation in governance was largely contingent on the arrangements, structures and actions controlled or formulated by academics, and despite their relatively limited access to and engagement with real decision-making power, in general community members’ participation was satisfactory to them. However, the highest level of participation that Arnstein envisaged was rarely attained. Awareness of theory and practice of participation in research decision-making can help research decision-makers put in place the conditions and means for realising democratic goals and knowledge co-production. Keywords: governance, decision-making, community-based research, public participation, Arnstein

Goals and Realities in Community-Based Research

2013 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 28-32
Author(s):  
Nancy Gillis ◽  
Mariela Nuñez-Janes
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Applied Anthropology ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based Interventions ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Conducting Research

Just as an actor spends months to years perfecting a role, applied anthropology graduate students also must practice the various roles they may play in community-based research. It is important for students to practice and gain experience in the field so that they feel prepared to lead their own community-based interventions. In this We believe it is important to expose students to the skills and strategies needed to successfully work with community members so that they can be prepared to navigate the obstacles that arise when conducting research as engaged practicing anthropologists.

scholarly journals Understanding barriers, access, and management of marine mixed-stock fisheries in an era of reconciliation: Indigenous-led salmon monitoring in British Columbia

FACETS ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 592-613
Author(s):  
Jade R. Steel ◽  
William I. Atlas ◽  
Natalie C. Ban ◽  
Kyle Wilson ◽  
Jayda Wilson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Resource Managers ◽  
Salmon Fisheries ◽  
Natural Resource Managers ◽  
Mixed Stock ◽  
Salmon Fishery ◽  
Depth Interviews

Wild salmon are central to food security, cultural identity, and livelihoods of coastal Indigenous communities. Yet ongoing inequities in governance, declining fish populations, and mixed-stock ocean fisheries may pose challenges for equitable access between Indigenous fishers and other non-Indigenous fishers. We sought to understand current perceptions among Haíłzaqv (Heiltsuk) fishers towards salmon fisheries and their management. We conducted dockside surveys with both Haíłzaqv fishers and sport fishers, and in-depth interviews with Haíłzaqv fishers, community members, and natural resource managers. From these surveys and interviews we quantified satisfaction among both food, social, and ceremonial fishers and visiting recreational fishers with the current salmon fishery and associated social-ecological drivers, and characterized perceptions among Haíłzaqv people of salmon fisheries and management. Second, we synthesized community perceptions of the revitalization of terminal, communally run salmon fisheries within Haíłzaqv territory as a tool for their future salmon management. Finally, we elicited information from Haíłzaqv fishers about the barriers people in their community currently face in accessing salmon fisheries. Our findings suggest that low salmon abundance, increased fishing competition, and high costs associated with participation in marine mixed-stock fisheries currently hinder access and equity for Haíłzaqv fishers. This community-based research can help strengthen local, Indigenous-led management of salmon into the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document