Participatory Rural Appraisal - Case Study Example

Critically Appraise a Participatory Method – Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) Table of Contents Introduction 3 Participatory Rural Appraisal 4 Critical Assessment of the Technique 6 Informal Learning 7 Collective Action 8 Organisational Development 9 Case Study 10 Conclusions 11 References 12 Introduction Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) can be defined as a learning process wherein a group of people, specifically belonging from the rural background, are engaged in activities where knowledge and education are praised as well as given huge importance to enhance or broaden up their knowledge base. PRA is a technique adapted by the Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) as well as by the several institutions engaged in the activity of rural appraisal whether national or international with an aim to spread the essence of knowledge in every corner of the rural area (Chambers, 1994). PRA principally defines or segregates facts that the rural society or the community is still to be developed. It is in this context that the PRA method plays a crucial role in raising awareness amid the rural people to focus on education. PRA is an activity where a group of people or community intends to learn about the priorities, which are mainly concerned with universal facts such as - population concern, importance of literacy, and the mode of education implemented in the modern and literate world. The PRA technique is not only concerned or focused with the education of children but also holds a significant applicability among adults and too. It has been owing to its wide applicability, PRA has been into extensive use for enabling the rural community to overcome illiteracy issue, and problems that come in the path of the overall development of rural areas. It is thus expected as helpful to increase their awareness regarding the population issue, to grow up with more appropriate ideas of planning and managing their community well, and thereafter, to make enable them in a manner so that the rural community people can analyse their conditions and develop themselves according to the demanded situation. It is worth mentioning in this context that PRA undergoes a process to develop rural societies with education, knowledge and prosperity (Chambers, 1994). Participatory Rural Appraisal The participatory rural appraisal came into existence in the early 70’s and 80’s with an objective to implement the activity among the rural areas for its overall development. This approach helps the community involved in the activity to analyse as well as to be presentable with numerous perspectives so that the people themselves can take the charge to analyse their issues and possess the ability to solve those simultaneously. In these activities, outsiders were also eligible to get involved in order to provide facilities such as technological information, although the outsiders were strictly restricted to take hold of those activities as it was deemed to obstruct independent development of the residents in rural areas (Chambers, 1994). Moreover this is an activity where various sorts of tools are undertaken to segregate, evaluate and examine data and information as well, in order to make the data more useful for the group of people or community involved. In general, the process of PRA is carried on by accumulating and analysing information brought up by the people of the locality along with the facilities provided by the outsiders with stern provisions to restrict the control within the rural families to perform those activities. The simplified data as well as information thus aimed to motivate people to convey their views and theories with a strong effect on the entire activity in order to gather, organize and analyse information efficiently. PRA activity also undertakes many more activities such as ranking, grouping, mapping the participatory activities, verifying as well as examining the change and trend (Chambers, 1994). PRA activity had come into existence when it was first commenced in Sudan, Kenya, and India. With time and effect, this activity was accepted widely among many other countries including Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Philippines, Vietnam, and Uganda. Numerous Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) who but implemented it by modifying, revising and applying its uses according to the needs (Chambers, 1994). The PRA activity has also been included in the universities among the students as well as among the faculty members in order to explore and to make PRA a serious subject in rural development measures (Chambers, 1994). The experiences of the PRA activity were further shared among countries, organizations, communities and individuals, which was being carried on by the NGOs in order to execute the activity in a well-mannered technique, and potentially to set up and spread the importance of PRA along with the tradition of sharing learning among the neighbouring rural communities. Many camps, such as training and village camps were being organized by the NGOs, which included people not only from their staff members but also belonging from other community as well. The basic objective behind setting the camps was identified to make them familiar with the terms of learning and sharing so as to help the people share their day to day experiences grabbed from the activity learning. There also remain certain vital observations which justify the process of learning regarding PRA and simplifying the issues, which the rural people have to face in their daily life. It is in this context that PRA activity motivates people to participate in group and learn, as to how the members involved in the activity themselves bring the required information and enables them to be used in the activity. The PRA process is therefore illustrated or displayed in large visual criteria, mainly in outdoor places by utilizing signs and pictures or the available objects in the surrounding (Chambers, 1994). The displayed information thus becomes more prosperous through which the participated members can learn, analyse and gain the ability to criticize it. Hence, it can be argued that it enables to examine and to cross-check the accumulated data efficiently. The PRA process also enables the opportunity for the participated members and rural communities on the whole to examine as well as verify the data themselves based on their practical know-how of the situation. In this manner, the members of the PRA were expected to learn and gain knowledge about judging the information accumulated and gathered by them as well as learn the ability to judge various problematic issues or situations rationally to come to a solution thereafter. This activity undertakes various facilities such as animations and diagrams among others, emphasising effective sharing, learning and utilizing the information obtained (Chambers, 1994). The study and the learning provided by the PRA reflects it as a technique or a method through which, the common people can obtain knowledge about the lifestyle practices and developmental needs of the rural people, their conditions, their surroundings and moreover, illustrating a technique through which, the rural conditions can be developed by not only learning but simultaneously by analysing, managing and planning the practices. Therefore, it can be argued that the PRA process is not only about learning but it is also a process which covers every aspect beyond learning (Chambers, 1994). Critical Assessment of the Technique From the above context the idea about PRA can be observed apparently. With the intention to further elaborate on the issue, the PRA process can be critically assessed by undertaking certain techniques as discussed below. Informal Learning From the above discussed context, it can be assessed that the PRA activities are connected with the procedure of informal learning often used in the modern approaches. To state it precisely, PRA signifies and elaborates the values of informal learning activities, as it aims to enhance social values, such as extending social capital and learning through practical experiences. The concept of informal learning related with social capital and social learning is based on the importance of knowledge related with rural development with emphasis to learning and education. Through PRA informal learning, in social activities, such as social capital and social learning can be maximized (High & Nemes, n.d.). The development related with rural areas is also likely to be concentrated more apparently so that the society does not only get developed in a self-sufficient manner, but also assuring that the resources within the economy is distributed in a more even order. This concept can be expanded further by applying new and organized projects for the development of rural as well as socio economic boundaries. In subsequence, an initiative is likely to be taken for implementing the schemes, projects and techniques regarding rural development (High & Nemes, n.d.). Contextually, social capital as well as social learning tends to be a part of informal learning, as the society involving the governments and many such organizations support rural areas in order to provide education as well as other required facilities essential to its development as well as for the appraisal of the rural areas overall (High & Nemes, n.d.). The objective or the concern related to informal learning fundamentally deals with poverty and education so that social capital can be multiplied by far and the economy, along with the rural areas and the rural people can be taken farther with the developed strategies. It must be considered in this regard that education along with knowledge is not enough for rural appraisal while many other criteria, techniques as well as practical activities are to be applied in order to achieve the required targets of rural appraisal. Social capital herein involves the procedure of increasing the productivity process by expanding connectivity and networking related with business communities, likely to generate greater labour force at a cheap cost. It also provides fast communication and smooth transactions such as joint venture (High & Nemes, n.d.). Collective Action PRA along with informal learning also adds an extra technique, as a collective action. This action empowers a group of people or a community to work out a specific task provided to them. In this task, the focused matter relies on how the community or the group of people performs on the given task and utilizes the data as well as the given information in a specific manner. The process also counts on how connectivity can be maintained among the members while carrying out a task. It also provides opportunities as well as sets up a design or frame work about how the task is to be performed regarding partnership performances such as group tasks and organizational performances (Castelloe & et. al., 2002). In this technique, the task provided is to be carried out collectively promoting effective sharing of the data gathered and knowledge among themselves, to learn about the participatory appraisal, by which the community can empower itself and carry on the technique in future efficiently. The collective action approach helps in developing as well as supporting man power with an aim to develop the community with the provided projects and schemes for rural development. Here, power signifies the participation of members in the activity related with a specific task (Castelloe & et. al., 2002). Collection actions in the PRA technique principally relates with the fact that such participations include motivation as well as empowerment among the members, so that they are encouraged in performing collective action tasks in future also. Nowadays, popularity regarding the education and knowledge has steeply increased including the factor of knowledge skill so the participatory appraisal is able to connect with the fact that people have gained knowledge from their day to day life experiences, taking benefits of the PRA technique. This experience of people further helps in relating the skills as well as knowledge techniques with their activities related with the task, which they are performing. The participatory appraisal aims on the education of the community through collective action. Hence, from the above context, it can be stated that the technique of collective action relates with the term, ‘power and voice’ (Castelloe & et. al., 2002) Organisational Development The PRA activity, along with the above stated techniques, includes an assessment through organizational development. This procedure apparently relates with the term ‘leadership’. It recommends the technique of how the participatory method can be aligned throughout with organizational development along with enthusiasm of participation among people (Magzan, 2011). Therefore, the leadership techniques relating with participatory activities imply policies of organizational development and ownership including the activity of participation as well. These said factors are the key points emphasizing researches to be made for gathering information either collectively in groups or independently (Magzan, 2011). The tools or the techniques concerning the participatory activity are used specifically by admiring the tasks provided to the performing members. Focusing on the term ‘leadership’, participation of the community members are guided by the leaders observing that the people participating in the activity largely and by guiding them to a progressive direction. The members herein generally prefer to work in conversation based on frameworks, as a part of art. This work of art includes the best framework to be discussed by the members during the course of performance, as a solution to the challenges faced (Magzan, 2011). Case Study In the project titled Cater ham Barracks Village, villagers or the local community people were involved in a PRA project. The project expressed about the development of the community, including more than thousands of people in the project, commencing planning for the rural development, further planning and executing the procedure of visual and demographic improvements. The planning of the project or the survey was carried on by several developers and the leaders of projects. The project related to the development of socio-economic status hence included nearly about 366 families to be undertaken for the purpose of sale and for renting, besides involving different markets, offices and industries among others (John Thompson & Partners, 2007). This project was based with an objective to develop or obtain a better community, which in future will enable the facility to provide employment for the local people in rural areas. The project leaders involved in the activity purchased about 16 hectares of land as sites of the barracks belonging to the Defence Ministry. Maximum area of the site was identified as conservative (John Thompson & Partners, 2007). Besides, another potential section of land was available for the convenience of the project when concerning the development of housing. The local people initially placed an objection regarding the development process there after a council was set up, which included the local community. The council formed was set up with an agenda of conversing about the pattern of the project and to prioritize about the wants of the local people (John Thompson & Partners, 2007). From this case study it can be asserted that the procedure of development in the rural areas is not only a project to be carried out, but rather it is a vital issue, which should be carried out seriously by every governmental or Non-Governmental Institutions (NGOs) in order to support, empower and enhance the proprietary rural activities. Conclusions From the above discussion, the motive as well as the objective about the PRA becomes comprehensive that it not only considers rural people in order to nourish them with knowledge and education but emphasizes the overall development of the rural. It signifies about the essence of the activities related with PRA. This activity motivates the local public in enduring themselves to the morality and importance of the PRA method. This sort of activity also involves outsiders as well to provide facilities to the people involved in the activity, who are yet not allowed to hold a degree of control over the continuing activities. Since this process or activity is carried out by various organizations, the members implementing these programs need to be trained well, so as to provide accurate information required for promoting the activity. Until and unless proper training is taken by the faculty members, it is unlikely that the execution pattern and source of information can be maintained effectively. Thus, it can be concluded from the above discussion that PRA activities should be raised and carried out efficiently to achieve better goals. References Bhandari, B., 2003. Participatory Rural Appraisal. Institute for Global Environment Strategies (IGES). [Online] Available at: http://pub.iges.or.jp/contents/eLearning/waterdemo/bhandari_m4.pdf [Accessed May 19, 2015]. Castelloe, P. & et. al., 2002. Participatory Change: An Integrative Approach to Community Practice. Publication. [Online] Available at: http://cpcwnc.org/sites/default/files/publications/Participatory_Change_Article.pdf [Accessed May 19, 2015]. Chambers, R., 1994. The Origins and Practice of Participatory Rural Appraisal. World Development, Vol. 22, No. 7, pp. 953-969. Cracken, J. & Narayan, D., 1998. Participation and Social Assessment: Tools and Techniques. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data. Cavestro, L., 2003. P.R.A. - Participatory Rural Appraisal Concepts Methodologies and Techniques. P.R.A. - Participatory Rural Appraisal. [Online] Available at: http://www.agraria.unipd.it/agraria/master/02-03/participatory%20rural%20appraisal.pdf [Accessed May 19, 2015]. Holmes, T., 2001. A Participatory Approach in Practice: Understanding Fieldworkers’ Use of Participatory Rural Appraisal in Action Aid the Gambia. IDS Working 123. [Online] Available at: http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/bookshop/wp/wp123.pdf [Accessed May 19, 2015]. Magzan, M., 2011. The Art of Participatory Leadership: A Tool for Social and Organizational Development and Change. Journal of Engineering Management and Competitiveness (JEMC) Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 21-26. Mascarenhas, J., 2001. Participatory Rural Appraisal and Participatory Learning Methods: Recent Experiences from Myrada and South India. Source: RRA Notes, Iss. 13, pp.26–32, Narayanasamy, N., 2009. Participatory Rural Appraisal: Principles, Methods and Application. SAGE Publications Ltd. Read More