Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This paper explores the cross-cultural production of knowledge within participatory development. Drawing on in-depth interviews, group discussions and participant observation with stakeholders in the first phase of the New Zealand Official Development Assistance (NZODA) participatory impact assessment pilot (PIAP), we explore how stakeholders participated and perceived their participation in the knowledge produced within the PIAP. This case study followed one stream of the stakeholders participating, which incorporated representatives from NZODA and their evaluation consultants, a New Zealand nongovernment organization (NGO) and their Indian partner NGO, the communities with which the Indian NGO works, and a facilitator of this pilot. The information generated illustrates how different frameworks and methodologies of participation enable and constrain the inclusion of culturally different expressions and constructions of power/knowledge, and how participatory development faces ongoing challenges to facilitate the inclusion of ‘alternative’ and ‘indigenous’ knowledges without their simultaneous subordination.

Keywords

New Zealand participatory impact assessment power/knowledge South Asia stakeholder analysis

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Chambers, R. 1997: Whose reality counts? Putting the last first. London: Intermediate Technology Publications .

Clark, K. and Quinn, M. 2000: A review of International experience and outline of a pilot impact assessment programme for VASS. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, New Zealand .

Cooke, B. and Kothari, U. 2001: The case for participation as tyranny. In Cooke, B. and Kothari, U. , editors, Participation: the new tyranny? London: Zed Books , 1-16.

Cracknell , 2000: Evaluating development aid: issues problems and solutions. New Delhi: Sage Publications .

Escobar, A. 1997: The making and unmaking of the Third World through development. In Rahmena, M. , editor, The post development reader. London: Zed Books , 85-93.

Esteva, G. 1992: Development. In Sachs, W. , editor, The development dictionary: a guide to knowledge as power. London: Zed Books , 6-26.

Foucault, M. 1980: Power/knowledge: selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977. Gordon, C. , editor. London: The Harvester Press .

Foucault, M. 1989: Foucault live. New York: Semiotext(e) .

Goebel, A. 1998: Process, perception and power: notes from ‘participatory’ research in a Zimbabwean resettlement area . Development and Change 29, 277-307 .

10.

Guijt, I. 2000: Methodological issues in participatory monitoring and evaluation. In Estrella, M. , with Blauert, J. , Compilan, D. , Gaventa, J. , Gonsalves. J. , Guijt, I. , Johnson, D. and Ricafort, R. , editors, Learning from change: issues and experiences in participatory monitoring and evaluation. editors, London: Intermediate Technology Publications , 201-217.

11.

Guijt, I. and Shah, M. 1998: Waking up to power, conflict and process. In Guijt, I. and Shah, M. , editors, The myth of community: gender issues in participatory development. London: Intermediate Technology Publications , 1-23.

12.

Guyder, H. 1998: Hugh Guyder reflects on impact, asessment in Action Aid. In IA exchanges: highlights from Action Aid’s lmpact assessment & programe learning (IAPL) department February, 1.

13.

Johnson, A and Walker, D. 2000: Science, communication and stakeholder participation for integrated natural resource management . In Australian Journal of Environmental Management 7, 82-90 .

14.

Kindon, S. 1998: Of mothers and men: questioning gender and community myths in Bali. In Guijt, I. and Shah, M. , editors, The myth of community: gender issues in participatory development. London: Intermediate Technology Publications , 152-164.

15.

Kothari, U. 2001: Power. Knowledge and social control in participatory development. In Cooke, B. and Kothari, U. Participation: the new tyranny? London: Zed Books , 139-152.

16.

Lennie, J. 1999: Deconstructing gendered power relations in participatory planning: towards an empowering feminist framework of participation and action . Women’s Studies International Forum 22(1), 97-112 .

17.

Mannion, J. and Brehony, E. 1990: Projects for the people or of the people: a look at villagers’ participation in three projects in two villages in Tanzania . Public Administration and Development 10, 165-179 .

18.

McCaul, O. 1999 Logical framework analysis as a tool for project planning a necessary evil? Occasional Paper, 3, March 1999. Dublin: Development Studies Centre .

19.

McHoul, A. and Grace, W. 1993: A Foucault primer: discourse, power and the subject. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press .

20.

Mosse, D. 1994: Authority, gender and knowledge: theoretical reflections on the practise of participatory rural appraisal . Development and Change 25, 497-527 .

21.

Mosse, D. 1998: Process-orientated approaches to development practice and social research. In Mosse, D. , Farrington, J. and Rew, A. , editors, Development and process: concepts and methods for working with complexity. London: Routledge , 3-31.

22.

Mosse, D. 2001: People’s knowledge, participation and patronage: operations and representations in rural development. In Participation: the new tyranny? London: Zed Books , 16-36.

23.

Munck, R. 1999: Deconstructing development discourse: of impasses, alternatives and politics. In Munck, R. and O’Hearn, D. , editors, Critical development theory: contributions to a new paradigm. London: Zed Books , 196-211.

24.

Rahnema, M. 1996: Towards post-development: searching for signposts a new language and new paradigms. In Rahnema, M. and Bawtree, V. , editors, The Post-development reader. London: Zed Books , 377-403.

25.

Schrijvers, J. 1993: The violence of ‘development’. Amsterdam: International Books .

26.

Thomson, K. 2000: Can poor people influence policy? IA Exchanges: Highlights from Action Aid’s Impact Assessment & Programme Learning (IAPL) Department July, 11-12.

27.

Tucker, V. 1999: The myth of development: a critique of a Eurocentric discourse. In Munck, R. and O’ Hearn, D. , editors, Critical development theory: contributions to a new paradigm. London: Zed Books , 1-27.

Progress in participatory development: opening up the possibility of knowledge through progressive participation

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References