scholarly journals Community Members as Facilitators: Reclaiming Community-Based Research as Inherently of the People

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
José Wellington Sousa
Keyword(s):  
Lived Experience ◽  
Social Space ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Judith Butler ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Groups ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
The University ◽  
University Community

This article aims to rethink the positionality of community in community-based research collaboration and advocate the need for community members to facilitate CBR processes to counter power imbalances in community-university engagement. I reflect on my lived experience as a community-based facilitator through a feminist post-structural lens focused on the interplay between concepts such as subjectivity, margin-centre and performativity. I argue that, despite the community-engaged scholarship egalitarian ideal, university-community engagement still echoes the old researcher-researched binary in which academics remain the hegemonic pole. In addition, as a medium of power/knowledge, the university fabricates the community and its marginality. Thus, a margin-centre relationship is established, in which community groups must claim their marginality to receive a share of the centre (the university), such as research skills and information. In these margin-centre dynamics, university and community can be understood as identities and subject positions to be taken up by individuals. In essence, these positions are expressions of regulatory power that normalises subjectivities, a condition in which individuals exist as subjects in the social space. Insights from the work of Judith Butler lead to the understanding that, in order to conceive community members as CBR facilitators, normalised and stabilised binary identities (university-community) should be unsettled. This entails individuals who are subjected as ‘the community’ to escape subjection by moving towards recognition of a subjectivity that is not prescribed or is still marginalised within the discourse. In escaping subjection, community groups may exercise power in order to establish new power relations in which CBR becomes more community-led, yet still collaborative.

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

Participatory Mapping for Community Health Assessment on the US-Mexico Border

2007 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 34-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben McMahan ◽  
Brian Burke
Keyword(s):  
Health Assessment ◽  
Participatory Mapping ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Data Resource ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Gis Data ◽  
Mexico Border ◽  
Primary Focus ◽  
Ambos Nogales ◽  
The University

In this paper, we present partial results and discussion of a community environmental health project in Nogales to illustrate how participatory mapping was applied to an existing project that had been participatory and community-based since it was initiated over six years ago. The GIS portion of the project was arranged via a partnership with the University of Arizona's Center for Applied Spatial Analysis (CASA) and was initially conceived as a means by which we could assemble a spatial database for Ambos, Nogales that would not only facilitate this project's immediate goals, but would also serve as a long-term GIS-data resource for the ongoing projects operating in and around Nogales associated with the University of Arizona's Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology (BARA). While we are interested in the spatial analytics of the GIS data and the potential for future work in this arena, our primary focus for this paper is on the practice of mapping and the interaction in response to/with these maps that emerged as part of this process. Integrating a mapping component into an existing participatory research project was an opportunity to conceptualize how participatory mapping might be added to (or perhaps already occurring in) a community-based research context, as well as to consider how effective or useful this addition might be in aiding analysis, facilitating project goals, and promoting continued interaction with research participants. But before we can talk about the process and outcomes, first, a bit more information on the context itself.

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.

When the R and the CBP Clash: Research in Schools

2007 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 22-26
Author(s):  
Sara Curtin-Mosher ◽  
Elizabeth Leo
Keyword(s):  
High Schools ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Community Based Participatory Research ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based ◽  
University Of Arizona ◽  
Ambos Nogales ◽  
The University ◽  
The Relationship

This paper speaks to a potential dilemma between the R and the CBP of Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR) within the context of a partnership called the Asociación de Reforestación de Ambos Nogales (ARAN). We focus on the relationship between students and educators from the University of Arizona (UA) and two high schools from Nogales, Sonora, Mexico that constitute part of this organization. ARAN has been influenced by but not restricted to a framework of CBPR where community members and academics engage in all aspects of research.

scholarly journals Knowledge Democracy and Epistemic In/Justice: Reflections on a Conversation

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-45
Author(s):  
Budd L. Hall ◽  
Baptiste Godrie ◽  
Isabel Heck
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Social Responsibility ◽  
Social Movement ◽  
Social Services ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Knowledge Democracy ◽  
The University

The focus of the article is on how knowledge is created, who creates knowledge, how knowledge is co-constructed, whose knowledge is excluded and how knowledge is being used to challenge inequalities and strengthen social movement capacity. This article grew from a fascinating conversation that the three of us had in Montreal in September of 2019. We decided to share our stories about knowledge and justice with a wider audience in part as a way for us to reflect further on the meaning of our initial conversation, but also to invite others into the discussion. Baptiste Godrie works in a research centre (CREMIS) affiliated  with Quebec’s health care and social services system, Isabel Heck works with the anti-poverty organization Parole d’excluEs, both affiliated to universities, and Budd Hall works at the University of Victoria and is the Co-Chair of the UNESCO Chair in Community-Based research and social responsibility in higher education.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document