Participation and Power: A Transformative Feminist Research Perspective by Joke Schrijvers

This summary was done by a friend of mine, A. Rahman -red

This action research was undertaken among the people (Muslins and Tamils) staying in relief camps in Sri Lanka. These people had been displaced by civil war and ethnic violence in 1990s.The article states that relief and rehabilitation measures are carried out in a top down manner without considering the views of the refugees, especially women and children who may have special needs.

The main points are as follows-

1. Neo-positivist ideology in its bid to be neutral starts treating people as objects. The processes of collecting data, analyzing and writing it are presented as simple and transparent. But this research is not value free and in fact it obfuscates power relationship. First the agenda for research is set up by professional social scientists. Secondly, the researched has no say in it. Third they are objectified during research and lastly the research is merely academic and has no liberating influence. Thus focus of research is now shifting to a view from below in which Feminism has made a significant contribution by adding to the perspective from below the perspective of women.

2. In feminist theory and practice issues of knowledge, power, representation and authority have been dealt with deeply.Ethnic, race, class and age relation crosscuts gender, which makes this study more difficult. Another problem is how to create equitable relations during the research process and support envoicing of participants.

3. The postulate of value free research is to be replaced by conscious partiality. Critical consciousness and exchange are important elements of this research. The researcher takes side of certain group, partially identifies and in a conscious process creates space for critical dialogue and reflection on both sides. It raises new questions and images of reality in a dialectical way. If dialogues form the main communication process, the objects of research become subjects as well. They are conceptualized as social actors who themselves participate in the research and therefore co- determine the outcome. They too are constructing knowledge and interpreting reality. The out come is intersubjective and negotiated and there is no single reality.

Five elements of this dialogical communication can be identified-

1. Dynamic focus on change as opposed to status quo.

2.Exchange- researcher and researched continuously change places as both are subjects and objects, active and passive and their views are open for discussion.

3. The ideal of egalitarian relation- the researcher and the participants are aware of the power inequalities that separate them. By articulating such differences less powerful will feel assured about the efforts of the power full to take a perspective from below.

4. Shared objective- the priorities of the research are decided by all the participants.The researcher or the funding agency have no control over the process of the research or its out come.

5. Shared power to define- participants are empowered to construct concepts and categories, discuss results and determine the course and out come of the research.

There are some problems with this kind of research. For example the ultimate power to define the out come will be with the researcher who is going to write it and there is possibility that some of the perspectives are not correctly reflected as it has not been written jointly. Secondly dialogical communication is meant more for the situations where the other group is powerless. What about sharing the power to define with the more powerful. Envoicing their concern may lead to perpetuation of status quo.

Transformative approach-if the aim of the research is transformation backed by the perspective from below, we call it transformative approach. It aims at bridging the gap between theory and practice and supporting change from bottom up. However this term is complicated as poor it self are a heterogeneous group. As researcher we are intellectual intermediary in this transformation and we have to make choice as to in whose interest, out of the heterogeneous reality, we use our perspectivee.How relevant is the acquired knowledge for their perspective? What are the possibilities of returning the insights gained, back to them?

If transformative research also involves direct action for change it is known as action or partisan research. The researcher takes sides with the people whose situation he wants to change. Thus all actors become engaged in a combined processor of research and action. One of the participants is facilitator. The decision to take side does not mean that the researcher has to accept the interpretation of the other actors. It means all parties create space to articulate their views so that they can exchange and discuss their interpretations