Participatory action research for rural and regional development

The origins of this special issue of Geographical Research can be traced back to the 21st Colloquium of the Commission on the Sustainability of Rural Systems of the International Geographical Union at Nagoya University, Japan, in 2013. Christopher Bryant discussed the role and challenges of action research in his keynote presentation at the beginning of the Colloquium, and this prompted subsequent discussion on the practical value of much of the research that was presented in the course of the meeting. Given the mounting pressures on rural systems, it is important to consider whether and how research has contributed to making rural systems less vulnerable and more sustainable. Unquestionably, there has been much research undertaken on rural issues, but often it has not focused on the challenges of rural sustainability. Furthermore, research that has dealt with rural sustainability more directly has often been descriptive and even the more analytical research has frequently failed to focus on the real challenges that both change and stagnation can present. Researchers have seldom suggested solutions; and thus, approaches to creating more sustainable rural systems (notably socio-economic systems, communities and the activities of which they are comprised) have been quite rare. One of the most important challenges for understanding processes is the fact that decision-making (by individuals in their families, by networks, businesses, communities and by governments at all levels) characteristically deals with multiple sources of stress. In addition, the various decision-makers frequently have different priorities, so these priorities can vary substantially both between and within rural communities. How can this situation be improved and what are the challenges for advancing research in this direction? One of the most important research approaches involves researchers becoming involved in accompanying decision-makers (that is, individuals in their families, networks, businesses, communities and governments at all levels) and interacting with them to better understand their own personal perspectives and capabilities as well as the perspectives of the rural communities, which the researchers wish to study and for whom the decision-makers and the communities themselves wish to construct more sustainable futures. The range of research approaches that we are referring to is ‘action research’ and, more specifically, ‘participatory action research’ (McIntyre, 2007). In this approach, without imposing her or his own point of view, the researcher works with groups of individuals and businesses, communities and governments (at whatever level(s), this may be appropriate) in coming to terms with the individual and communal stressors (these stressors also include ‘opportunities’ because any change, even when positive, can create stress!). In this way, the researcher can contribute to building or ‘co-constructing’ a vision or a template for a better and more sustainable rural future. The key is that the researcher cannot take over but must accompany the communities and their actors, including citizens, in making their own decisions. In this way, solutions will have been developed by the people in the communities, and thus, it is much easier for the people involved to appropriate solutions, which are their own. Examples of how action research has been put into operation are to be found in urban and periurban agriculture projects, projects dealing with the adaptation of human activities and rural communities to climate change and variability and rural community development projects. Despite the increasing interest in these approaches, there are several significant challenges: (1) from rural peoples' perspectives, because they have to come to terms with dealing with other people with whom they may not have had much in common in the past or even communicated with effectively; (2) from researchers' perspective, because they must put some of their own opinions aside in order to accompany the people and the rural communities and rather, in the context of participatory action research, provide counselling and information when requested and act as facilitator when asked to do so while, at the same time, collecting information necessary to produce scientifically reliable analyses to ensure that experiences can be communicated both to the scientific community and to other rural communities and decision-makers; (3) undertaking such action research therefore requires particular skills on the part of the researcher in dealing with people and a considerable deal of patience and time, which are, apparently, both scarce resources for many researchers! The papers included in this collection are diverse in terms of their settings and foci. Their locations of origin range from the periurban fringes of Montreal and Paris through rural regions in Galicia and Minnesota to remote districts in the Northern Territory and Cameroon. Two of the papers focus on Indigenous issues. Barcus and Smith describe how Geography students from Macalester College and representatives of the Indian Land Tenure Foundation worked with several tribal groups in Minnesota to map land ownership status and to document the loss of Native American land. This project was undertaken using a public participation GIS Framework and led to the transfer of important cartographic data to the Indigenous communities for use in both public education and tribal land reacquisition initiatives. Woodward and McTaggart worked with Ngan'gi speaking Aboriginal communities in the Daly River region of the Northern Territory on a Natural Resource Management project. This work involved ongoing reflection and collaboration between the researchers, a non-Indigenous geographer and a senior Aboriginal knowledge holder, as well as ‘knowledge broking’ exercises with community members. The outcomes included the incorporation of Indigenous ecological and cultural values into local Natural Resource Management processes and the production of a calendar documenting the 13 seasons recognised by the Ngan'gi people, which has generated wide community interest. Tourism is the main concern of the next two contributions. In the West Cameroon Chiefdoms region, tourism is largely underdeveloped. Schmitz and Dieudonne therefore networked between microfinance institutions and small and medium tourism businesses. Through this process and largely by means of workshops and interviews, the participants were able to generate reciprocal knowledge, which could then be used to identify and develop new tourism products and routes. Paul, Trillo-Santamaria and Peres-Cortes worked in a depopulating area of Galicia where tourism planning had characteristically been undertaken as a top-down process. By contrast, they worked with local residents and stakeholders to elucidate the localised meanings that they ascribed to particular sites as a result of their local lives and values, from which potential tourism resources, routes and initiatives could be identified and developed. The final two papers focus on agricultural activities, particularly where these are under threat of transformation or displacement as a result of the expansion of urban land uses and activities. Bryant and Chahine describe how, over a period of years, a group of farmers from Senneville on Montreal Island worked with university researchers and a range of non-farm actors to devise a sustainable future for their activities – notwithstanding their proximity to a large and expanding metropolis. This work has ultimately resulted in the incorporation of Senneville into plans for a ‘green belt’ around Montreal and the inclusion of the farmers in both a multi-stakeholder green coalition and an emerging local food system movement. Finally, Bousbaine and Bryant present their findings on action research initiatives to maintain agriculture in a range of periurban contexts in Quebec, the Paris basin and Wallonia with a focus on the three ‘ps’ of participatory action research, process, patience and participation. In one case, this work involved a project that extended over several decades and two generations of participants. Methodologically, the contributors to this collection have adopted a range of techniques from GIS to the conduct of forums of up to 100 people. In all cases and in a highly diverse collection of contexts and environments, however, their participatory action research methodologies have involved the development of trust between the researchers and their subjects; the sharing of knowledge and the diffusion of this knowledge through wider networks; and a commitment to the achievement of positive and, ideally, sustainable outcomes for the various communities who have involved themselves in these research processes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.