Study on Participatory Action Research
- January 08, 2023
Introduction:
Participatory action research is a form of action research in which practitioners engage
subject-related people as collaborators in the research process to shape the research
process, methods and theories. Participatory action research (PAR) is different from
action research in several aspects. Action research is not as orientated towards social
change (Stoeker, 1999) and does not necessary engage participants directly in the
research process (Kindon et al., 2007). But PAR projects engaged in collaborative
processes aimed at improving and understanding their worlds in order to change them.
(McIntyre, A. 2007). Therefore, by engaging in the participatory action research process,
both practitioners and participants reflect on and learn from, what they act will feedback
to the design process. Thus figure 1 illustrateds that actions and reflections are a mutual
process for participants in PAR.
Figure1: Participants in PAR （Figure made by the author）
· How PAR works:
One of the theories based on Paulo Freire’s epistemology study is that “human
consciousness brings a reflection on material reality, whereby critical reflection is already
action”(Freire, P. 2020). Freire’s theory is valuable for our understanding of the action and
reflection in PAR. From an academic research perspective, PAR emphasises dialogic
engagement with co-researchers and the development and implementation of
context-appropriate strategies oriented towards empowerment and transformation at a
variety of scales (Kindon et al., 2007). Figure 2 is a new empowerment model, the voice
of each participant is equal, the actions and reflections of the participants play a direct
role in the research process and the process is repeated until it is perfected, in what is
called an iterative reflective cycle.
Figure2: New empowerent model（Figure made by the author）
However, positioning of dominance bias is always a potential concern because, in
such a participatory model, it is difficult to achieve an equitable distribution of rights. As
Málovics et al. (2021) advised, “Cooperation shifts from discussions to actions and
theories-in-use start dominating the process, PAR might become a complex and fuzzy
process, characterized by numerous pragmatic and ethical challenges and
contradictions”.
PAR, Action Research and Participatory Design:
PAR is closely related to Participatory Design (PD) and Action Research (AR) in that they
can be used differently for specific scenarios. Previous research on PAR has not dealt
much with its links to PD and AR, but it is still possible to get a glimpse of PAR through a
case-by-case analysis of PD and AR perspectives.
· Participatory design:
D Schuler and A Namioka write in their book that when people pursue the issues of PD,
they need to make sure that participation involves decision-making (Schuler & Namioka,
1993, p.11). On the contrary, Claus Bossen and two other researchers on previous
studies for PD revealed that formal evaluations of PD are researcher- and not
participant-led (Bossen et al., 2016). For three decades, there has been much debate
among practitioners about whether to activate participants in decision-making. When we
look at PAR through the lens of PD, the principles of behavioural influence are used
simultaneously in PAR, this means re-empowering participants and bringing them into
the evaluation, and decision-making process.
In most cases, Participatory Design is about the direct involvement of people in the
co-design of the technologies they use (Simonsen & Robertson, 2013). Looking at PAR
through this lens of PD reveals that PAR places the same emphasis on participant
selection. Specifically, PAR focuses more on engaging experienced individuals as
co-researchers(Lenette, C. 2022). It is essential to note that the lived experience of the
participants needs to be linked to the design project first and foremost. Because the
participants’ knowledge of the context related to the topic determines their behaviour
and directly affects the iterative reflective cycle of PAR.
· Action research：
PAR, as a form of AR, has a lot in shared with AR and has a lot to offer. Technically, AR is
defined by a constant cycle of taking and giving in the form of planning, acting, observing
and reflecting (Foth, M., & Axup, J. 2006). So that the same circular reflection can be
found when looking at PAR from the perspective of AR. For both, which encompass
behavioural research, the feedback resulting from participant behaviour is crucial in
shaping the design process.
Therefore, as shown in figure 3, it is possible to construct the basic contours of PAR
under the dual perspective of AR and PD.
Figure3: PAR from the perspective of AR and PD（Figure made by the author）
Apply PAR to design innovation:
· Case Study：
This design example is about the redesign of the Mckeldin Library of the University of
Maryland based on value co-creation (Foster, N. F. 2012). As shown in figure 4, In
selecting the participants, they chose library staff and experienced people who use the
library. The research methods used were mainly interviews, stakeholder workshops and
ethnography. In the course of structured library research, participants’ perceptions
improve through the act of practice, and gradually they develop ideas and refine design
solutions in response to information data. Eventually, the participants conducted several
reflective design cycles through informal communication to determine the final solution
for the spatial redevelopment of the Mckeldin Library. PAR also played a big role in
pushing the envelope during the project compared to PD, the case is consistent with it in
terms of participant selection, participant understanding enhancement and reflective
action cycle.
Figure4: Co-creation of Mckedin Library（Figure made by the author）
Conclusion:
Whether you look at PAR as a design methodology from the perspective of AR or the
perspective of PD, you can see one side of it or the other. But PAR is not the product of a
random combination of the two, it is the result of the need for participants to be involved
in the design process and to reflect on their actions to sharpen the process and
decision-making. In this day and age, PAR provides us with a unique application of
participatory reality and the results address the needs of the community of interest in
every way. On the other hand, the more complex constraints and the more lengthy
participatory process have led to a greater investment of time and effort on the part of
the researchers involved in PAR. Another bias is whether equilibrium in decision-making
can be achieved in an affirmative model, which has become a limitation and a drawback,
leading more researchers to turn to alternative approaches.
References:
1. Stoecker, R. (1999). Are academics irrelevant? Roles for scholars in participatory
research. American Behavioral Scientist, 42(5), 840-854.
2. Kindon, S. L., Pain, R., & Kesby, M. (2007). Participatory action research approaches
and methods: connecting people, participation and place. Routledge studies in human
geography, 22. London: Routledge.
3. McIntyre, A. (2007). Participatory action research. Sage Publications.
4. Freire, P. (2020). Pedagogy of the oppressed. In Toward a Sociology of Education (pp.
374-386). Routledge.
5. Kindon, S., Pain, R., & Kesby, M. (2007). Participatory action research approaches
and methods. Connecting people, participation and place. Abingdon: Routledge, 260.
6. Málovics, G., Juhász, J., Méreiné Berki, B., Mihók, B., Szentistványi, I., Pataki, G., … &
Tóth, J. (2021). Confronting espoused theories with theories-in-use: Challenges of
participatory action research with marginalized communities in contributing to social
change and theory building. Action research, 19(2), 255-276.
7. Schuler, D., & Namioka, A. (Eds.). (1993). Participatory design: Principles and
practices. CRC Press.
8. Bossen, C., Dindler, C., & Iversen, O. S. (2016, August). Evaluation in participatory
design: a literature survey. In Proceedings of the 14th Participatory Design Conference:
Full papers-Volume 1 (pp. 151-160).
9. Simonsen, J., & Robertson, T. (Eds.). (2013). Routledge international handbook of
participatory design (Vol. 711). New York: Routledge.
10. Lenette, C. (2022). Participatory Action Research: Ethics and decolonization. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
11. Foth, M., & Axup, J. (2006). Participatory design and action research: Identical twins
or synergetic pair?. In Expanding Boundaries in Design: Proceedings Ninth Participatory
Design Conference 2006 (Vol 2) (pp. 93-96). Computer Professionals for Social
Responsibility.
12. Foster, N. F. (2012). McKeldin Library Reprogramming: Participatory Design Phase.