The existence of unowned, free-roaming dogs capable of maintaining adequate body condition without direct human oversight has serious implications for disease control and animal welfare, including reducing effective vaccination coverage against rabies through limiting access for vaccination, and absolving humans from the responsibility of providing adequate care for a domesticated species. Mark-recapture methods previously used to estimate the fraction of unowned dogs in free-roaming populations have limitations, particularly when most of the dogs are owned. We used participatory methods, described as Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA), as a novel alternative to mark-recapture methods in two villages in Bali, Indonesia. PRA was implemented at the banjar (or sub-village)-level to obtain consensus on the food sources of the free-roaming dogs. Specific methods included semi-structured discussion, visualisation tools and ranking. The PRA results agreed with the preceding household surveys and direct observations, designed to evaluate the same variables, and confirmed that a population of unowned, free-roaming dogs in sufficiently good condition to be sustained independently of direct human support was unlikely to exist.

With renewed investment of the UK's official development assistance (ODA) commitment into research, there is a need to rethink traditional understandings of 'research impact'. In this article, we argue that impact in ODA-funded research should go beyond translating research findings into practice and policy or implementing research in partnership with research mediators/users. Instead, development agendas of those living and working in the global South, including academics and practitioners, and those working in international non-governmental organisations should influence the research agendas, approaches, and schemes that allocate funding. These stakeholders have profound knowledge of what real-world impact looks like, the types of impact needed, local and national realities, and how complex processes of development impact unfold. Drawing on a programme of research conducted by the Rethinking Research Collaborative, we examine eight principles for 'fair and equitable research partnerships' using insights from our individual experiences to offer new thinking on ODA-funded research impact.

BackgroundIn a participatory approach to health and development interventions, defining and measuring community mobilisation is important, but it is challenging to do this effectively, especially at scale.MethodsA cross-sectional, participatory monitoring tool was administered in 2008–2009 and 2009–2010 across a representative sample of 25 community-based groups (CBGs) formed under the Avahan India AIDS Initiative, to assess their progress in mobilisation, and to inform efforts to strengthen the groups and make them sustainable. The survey used a weighted index to capture both qualitative and quantitative data in numeric form. The index permitted broad, as well as highly detailed, analysis of community mobilisation, relevant at the level of individual groups, as well as state-wide and across the whole programme.ResultsThe survey demonstrated that leadership and programme management were the strongest areas among the CBGs, confirming the programme's investment in these areas. Discussion of the Round 1 results led to efforts to strengthen governance and democratic decision making in the groups, and progress was reflected in the Round 2 survey results. CBG engagement with state authorities to gain rights and entitlements and securing the long-term financial stability of groups remain a challenge.ConclusionThe survey has proven useful for informing the managers of programmes about what is happening on the ground, and it has opened spaces for discussion within community groups about the nature of leadership, decision making and their goals, which is leading to accelerated progress. The tool provided useful data to manage community mobilisation in Avahan.

No abstract

No abstract