Participatory research in times of COVID-19 and beyond: Adjusting your methodological toolkits

Abstract

Solving grand environmental societal challenges calls for transdisciplinary and participatory methods in social-ecological research. These methods enable co-designing the research, co-producing the results, and co-creating the impacts together with concerned stakeholders. COVID-19 has had serious impacts on the choice of research methods, but reflections on recent experiences of “moving online” are still rare. In this perspective, we focus on the challenge of adjusting different participatory methods to online formats used in five transdisciplinary social-ecological research projects. The key added value of our research is the lessons learned from a comparison of the pros and cons of adjusting a broader set of methods to online formats. We conclude that combining the adjusted online approaches with well-established face-to-face formats into more inclusive hybrid approaches can enrich and diversify the pool of available methods for postpandemic research. Furthermore, a more diverse group of participants can be engaged in the research process.

A participatory approach for building ex ante impact pathways towards a prudent use of antimicrobials in pig and poultry sectors in France

“…Instead, we used online collaborative platforms such as Zoom, Teams and Klaxoon, or hybrid workshops (partly distant and partly on site). Those adaptations could have impacted the participation and facilitation dynamic, resulting in potential lack of equality between participants, and the interpersonal relationships that are necessary to create a shared space for collaboration and trust between participants and with researchers [ 59 , 60 ].…”

An 18‐month follow‐up of the Covid‐19 psychology research consortium study panel: Survey design and fieldwork procedures for Wave 6

“…The draconian restrictions on social interactions also necessitated the shift towards online survey‐based studies, due to the ability of this study design to collect data with greater ease and faster speed when compared to more traditional efforts (Haas et al., 2021 ; Singh & Sagar, 2021 ). The long‐term impact of the pandemic on the future of survey methodology has yet to be fully understood (Becker et al., 2022 ; Sattler et al., 2022 ) and may require novel approaches going forward (Yu et al., 2022 ).…”

A call for citizen science in pandemic preparedness and response: beyond data collection

“…Building on previous work in digital-based participatory systems, digitally enabled citizen science in pandemic preparedness and response has the potential to scale in both breadth and depth to overcome some of the challenges faced by traditional participatory approaches. 46 However, one of the most systemic barriers is digital inequity, particularly, but not reserved to, low-to-middleincome countries. Digital inequities include barriers to access to digital tools, networks and communication channels, as well as conflicting life priorities, particularly among women, girls and vulnerable and marginalised populations.…”

“…Furthermore, COVID-19 has accelerated the development and application of digital technologies and innovation in health. Building on previous work in digital-based participatory systems, digitally enabled citizen science in pandemic preparedness and response has the potential to scale in both breadth and depth to overcome some of the challenges faced by traditional participatory approaches 46. However, one of the most systemic barriers is digital inequity, particularly, but not reserved to, low-to-middle-income countries.…”