Ethnographic Action Research: Media, Information and Communicative Ecologies for Development Initiatives

Abstract

This chapter introduces ethnographic action research (EAR). EAR is a project developmentmethodology that was designed specifically for media and information and communication Ethnographic action research is a form of participatory action research (PAR). The ethnographic approach combined with action research means that it builds upon notions of immersion, long term engagement, and understanding local contexts holistically. It was initially designed to help project's develop and adapt to local situations, and in this sense it is a form of developmental evaluation (Patton, 2011). It draws on key ethnographic methods such as participant observation and in-depth interviews, and takes a multi-method approach.A foundational concept of EAR is communicative ecologies, which involves paying attention to wider contexts of information and communication flows and channels, formal and informal, technical and social, to understand communication opportunities and barriers. 2It is important to understand where EAR came from, and the central importance of the communicative ecologies concept. EAR and communicative ecologies responded to (at least) two central organizing concepts or categories in the ICT4D field. First, there is the technological determinist and modernizing ideas that underpin development whereby technology is a key to development itself (see Tacchi, forthcoming and Slater, 2013). Second there is the dominance of measurement and impact, what is now widely known as 'results based management' (see Lennie and Tacchi, 2013). EAR and communicative ecologies challenged both by taking the position that, if we start by considering how people communicate around certain themes, or to accomplish certain tasks, we can start to appreciate which channels and flows are used and why, how this relates to other possible uses, and therefore where there are opportunities and barriers to an ICT4D initiative. In other words, there was, and remains, a need to challenge development assumptions about both development and media and communication technologies and to embed our understandings of both within broader social structures and relationships (see Slater, 2013).In this chapter we describe the key characteristics of EAR and communicative ecologies, and how they have been combined and put into practice through a few specific ICT4D projects, with full recognition and indeed the intention that they might be taken up and adapted by others in various other contexts and combinations for a range of different purposes (as they have been). We first explore the background to the development of EAR through two communication research projects, the first in Sri Lanka (the KCRIP study) and the second in sites across South Asia (the ictPR project). We then outline its core components and explain communicative ecologies. We explore EAR's application and further development through a project in South and South East Asia (the Finding a Voice research project). Next we look at the adaptation of EAR from a project development methodology to a participator...

Exploration of Deaf People’s Health Information Sources and Techniques for Information Delivery in Cape Town: A Qualitative Study for the Design and Development of a Mobile Health App

“…Of course our results might not be replicable as they target specific communities with low sample sizes. However, it is also accepted that qualitative methods such as ethnographic action research [50] and community-based codesign [51] can yield results that are transferable, for example, from one community to another. Furthermore, we also designed the responses in this study redundantly to assist in triangulating toward transferable results: the participants give their answers (Table 1: Step 1a and 1b), reflect their reasons (Table 1: Step 2a, 3a, and 2b), and affirm their answers (Table 1: Step 4a, 5a, and 6a).…”

The evolving braid

“…Through interviews, surveys, ethnographic observation and ultimately working together, we developed a deeper understanding of the day-to-day concerns of the Ugandan research subjects. While some of the early investigation mirrored the ethnographic action research approach [22], the 'doing' and 'planning' stages were later de-emphasized in favor of observation and reflection on 'in situ' technologies. Together with the NGO and HSP participants, we encountered the affordances and constraints of mobile, paperbased, Internet, and other communications, as well as the affordances and constraints of the society making use of these technologies.…”

“…As such, it represents an attitude towards information and communications technologies (ICTs): "instead of focusing on individual ICTs and their 'impacts', an ethnographic action research approach will look at the whole structure of communication and information in a people's way of life." [22] In this case, the EAR approach tells us that interventions like Claim Mobile and Bulk SMS do not stand independently of other communications technologies, stakeholder objectives, and other ecological influences. Indeed, this is demonstrated by the interaction between the design of Claim Mobile and stakeholder relationships in the RHVP program [12].…”

Enhancing Learning Through Human Computer Interaction

“…Ethnography, in its literal sense, means "to write or represent a culture" (Tacchi 2004). Ethnography is an approach that may encompass several methods rather than a specific methodology.…”

“…It was first devised in 2002 to explore the use of computers on communities in India (Tacchi 2004). Its principles are that one change rarely impacts on only one individual and changing one aspect, may affect many other aspects of a student's life within their community.…”