Participatory rural appraisal

. The approach aims to incorporate the knowledge and opinions of rural people in the planning and management of development projects and programmes.

Origins of participatory rural appraisal

The roots of PRA techniques can be traced to the activist adult education methods of Paulo Freire and the study clubs of the Antigonish Movement. In this view, an actively involved and empowered local population is essential to successful rural community development. Robert Chambers, a key exponent of PRA, argues that the approach owes much to "the Freirian theme, that poor and exploited people can and should be enabled to analyze their own reality." [Robert Chambers. Whose Reality Counts? Putting the First Last Intermediate Technology Publications, London, 1997, p. 106.] .

By the early 1980’s, there was growing dissatisfaction among development experts with both the reductionism of formal surveys, and the biases of typical field visits. In 1983, Robert Chambers, a Fellow at the Institute of Development Studies (UK), used the term "Rapid Rural Appraisal" to describe techniques that could bring about a 'reversal of learning' [Rural Development: Putting the Last First, Robert Chambers, 1983, Longmans] . Two years later, the first international conference to share experiences relating to RRA was held in Thailand [Proceedings of the 1985 International Conference on Rapid Rural Appraisal, Khon Kaen University (Eds.), 1987, Rural Systems Research Project and Farming Systems Research Project, KKU, Thailand] . This was followed by a rapid growth in the development of methods that involved rural people in examining their own problems, setting their own goals, and monitoring their own achievements. By the mid 1990’s, the term RRA had been replaced by a number of other terms including ‘Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)’ and ‘Participatory Learning and Action’ (PLA).

Overview of PRA techniques

Hundreds of participatory techniques and tools have been described in a variety of books and newsletters, or taught at training courses around the world. These techniques can be divided into four categories:
* Group dynamics, e.g. learning contracts, role reversals, feedback sessions
* Sampling, e.g. transect walks, wealth ranking, social mapping
* Interviewing, e.g. focus group discussions, semi-structured interviews, triangulation
* Visualization e.g. venn diagrams, matrix scoring, timelines

To ensure that people are not excluded from participation, these techniques avoid writing wherever possible, relying instead on the tools of oral communication like pictures, symbols, physical objects and group memory. Efforts are made in many projects, however, to build a bridge to formal literacy; for example by teaching people how to sign their names or recognize their signatures.

A 'new professionalism' for development

A key idea that has accompanied the development of PRA techniques is that of a "new professionalism". Robert Chambers has explained this as follows: “The central thrusts of the [new] paradigm … are decentralization and empowerment. Decentralization means that resources and discretion are devolved, turning back the inward and upward flows of resources and people. Empowerment means that people, especially poorer people, are enabled to take more control over their lives, and secure a better livelihood with ownership and control of productive assets as one key element. Decentralization and empowerment enable local people to exploit the diverse complexities of their own conditions, and to adapt to rapid change”. [Challenging the Professions: Frontiers for Rural Development, Robert Chambers, 1993, ITDG London]

To be an external agent of change within this discipline implies two-way learning. Development agents learn to both appreciate and lever the power of oral culture and the transformations that are possible within it. Walter J. Ong has argued that “many of the contrasts often made between ‘western’ and other views seem reducible to contrasts between deeply interiorized literacy and more or less residually oral states of consciousness.” [Walter J. Ong. "Orality and Literacy", p. 29.]

The limits of PRA

There are those who see limits to PRA. This is on a range of grounds - for example that it doesn't work, that it reveals the secrets of rural communities to be managed by development agencies,clarifyme|August 2008 or that it is a tool of cooptation into neo-liberal development agendas. These were summarized in Participation: The New Tyranny? [Participation: The New Tyranny? Bill Cooke and Uma Kothari (eds), 2001, Zed London ]

See also

* Participatory action research
* Participatory technology development
* Participation (decision making)
*
* Farmer Field School
* Community-led total sanitation
* Community-based participatory research (CBPR)
* Asset-Based Community Development (ABCD)
* Praxis intervention
* Orality

References

External links

* [http://www.childsurvival.com/connections/Chambers-AnalysisExperience.doc Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA): Analysis of Experience, an article by Robert Chambers, 1994]
* [http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/sourcebook/sba104.htm Participatory Rural Appraisal, from the World Bank Sourcebook on Participation]
* [http://www.fao.org/docrep/W3241E/w3241e09.htm Rapid Rural Appraisal, from the FAO manual on Market Research and Information Systems]
* [http://www.iied.org/NR/agbioliv/pla_notes/index.html Participatory Learning and Action, journal with many articles available for downloading, maintained by the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED)]
* [http://www.eldis.org/manuals/participation.htm Participation Manuals and Toolkits, an online collection, part of the ELDIS Gateway to Development Information]
* [http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/IISD/ International Institute for Sustainable Development at Colorado State University]
* [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1c/Praxisintervention.pdf Praxis Intervention]