Participatory diagramming: deploying qualitative methods through an action research epistemology

Abstract

Summary In the context of a pilot study on the role that gender relations play in the transmission of HIV in Zimbabwe, this paper explores participatory diagramming, an exciting qualitative research technique largely under‐utilized by geographers. It argues for a deployment of the technique within an action research epistemology in order that it might facilitate the reflection and action of participants in praxis, not simply the production of nuanced multiple truths in text Such an approach offers geographers embedded in an audit‐oriented academy one means to political engagement while at the same time generating rigorous, ‘publishable outputs’.

Participatory Design Research adopted by public Space Design

“…Our research observes closely the definitions of 'participant' and 'researcher' stated by Kesby (2000):…”

Vulnerability and adaptive capacity of community food systems in the Peruvian Amazon: a case study from Panaillo

“…The focus groups lasted between 1-3 hours and 8-13 individuals participated in each, including men, women, community leaders, and elders. In accordance with local cultural norms, focus groups were carried out with separate groups of men and women in order to overcome the power relations that can form within the group participating in the workshop and to explore and compare the different perspectives that exist in the community (Davis, 2001;Mayoux, 2005;Kesby, 2000). Participatory rural appraisal activities were carried out in each focus group to help guide discussion.…”

Understanding the contribution of wild edible plants to rural social-ecological resilience in semi-arid Kenya

“…Data collected during participatory activities such as seasonal mapping rely on participants to explain the meaning behind diagrams or conversations by answering the researchers' questions about the specifics of their representation or helping compare their views with data collected using other methods (Kesby 2000). We sought input from session actors during followup discussion to help interpret the data collected, and then used the information to create graphs showing relative trends in food security, crop, and cash availability, as well as WEP consumption and abundance (Freudenberger et al 1997, Catley et al 2002, Günther and Vogl 2010.…”