Maculate Conceptions: Power, Process, and Creativity in Participatory Research

Abstract

Justifiably concerned about power dynamics between researchers and participants in participatory research, much of the literature proposes guidelines for including participant voices at every step of the research process. We find these guidelines insufficient for dealing with constraints set up by the social organizational structures in which researchers and participants find themselves. We argue that the process of building relationships between scientists and farmers is unavoidably imperfect, but nonetheless necessary and rewarding. We contend that the potential problems of participatory research originate more from the social organizational structures in which it takes place than in failure to follow particular rules. By acknowledging these structures and the resultant interests of participant and researcher we can make room for the messy reality of negotiating participatory relationships. We suggest that transformative engagement can be born of what we term the “maculate conceptions” of dialogic process and the building of mutual trust.

Farming without a recipe: Wisconsin graziers and new directions for agricultural science

“…These interviews were semi-structured, using an interview guide but following up on unplanned topics that arose through conversation. Some of our questions were about farmers' and scientists' motives for working with each other and their constraints to doing sodwhich produced findings we have discussed elsewhere (Lyon et al, 2010). Other questions, which we address here, were about graziers' specific management practices, how they made decisions, and what kind of research they sought from the university.…”

“…To be sure, science does not always accomplish this universality, and some scientific research produces results which are limited to a particular place and time. But the goal is usually to be able to generalize beyond local context, and scientists often find it difficult to find funding for projects that do not share this goal (Lyon et al, 2010). Kloppenburg's and Latour's critique of immutable mobiles resonates with graziers' skepticism about research that fails to notice, or purposefully ignores, the unique variables of places and people.…”

Using Participatory Scenarios to Stimulate Social Learning for Collaborative Sustainable Development

“…The process was structured to provide repeated opportunities for feedback and questions, and participants were also able to communicate in writing with workshop organizers through packets, evaluations, feedback forms, and group email. No doubt issues of power and status among individuals and between participants and researchers influenced interactions (e.g., Lyon et al 2010), but the structure and tone of the MN 2050 workshops were designed to be inclusive and open for all participants. Consequently, individuals actively communicated with each other and workshop organizers expressing differing understandings about the topic of sustainability, responding to the opinions of others, and commenting about the scenario process itself.…”

An Exploratory Qualitative Study of Ethical Beliefs Among Early Childhood Teachers

“…In meeting one, the group established ground rules that espoused trust and sharing (Cranston 2011;Frisby et al 2005;Kidd and Kral 2005;Lyon et al 2010;Servage 2008). During meetings two and three, the group used protocols for discussing professional articles.…”