ABSTRACT

In participatory research the problem to be investigated originates in, and is defined by, the community or workplace. The members of that community or workplace are involved in the research and have control over it, and the research leads to development and improvement of their lives and communities (Brown and Tandon, 2005: 55). Brown and Tandon (p. 60) recognize the challenge (and likely resistance) that these principles might pose for the powerful, specific dominant interest groups, but they argue that this is unavoidable, as the researcher typically mobilizes community groups to action (p. 61). Hence PR has to consider the likely responses of the researchers, the participants and their possible opponents (p. 62); as Giroux (1983) avers, knowledge is not only powerful, but dangerous, and participants may run substantial risks (Brown and Tandon, 2005: 65) in conducting this type of research, for it upsets existing power structures in society and the workplace. As can be seen, participatory research has some affinity to action research (INCITE, 2010), though it is intensely more political than action research. It is not without its critics. For example Brown (2005b) argues that participatory action research is ambiguous about:

a its research objectives (e.g. social change, raising awareness, development work, challenging conventional research paradigms);

b the relationships between the researcher and participants (e.g. overemphasizing similarities and neglecting differences between them);

c the methods and technologies that it uses (e.g. being overcritical of conventional approaches which might serve the interests of participatory research, and the lack of a clear method for data collection); and

d the outcomes of participatory research (e.g. what these are, when these are decided, and who decides).