Participatory video proposals: A tool for empowering farmer groups in rural innovation processes?

Highlights

• Aspects of group empowerment are described with regard to modalities of power-to, power-with, power-within and power-over.

• We put focus on farmers' perspectives of the process of video production and offer critical reflections from the researchers.

• Examples show that this innovative method can be helpful for supporting group capacity building.

• In particular, PV proposals enabled the groups to communicate and represent themselves and their ideas to outside funders.

• PV proposals are a highly promising tool for empowering farmer groups, but there are important limitations and constraints.

Abstract

While efforts are increasingly made to democratize research relationships, empower participants and include marginalised voices in agricultural research for development, it is acknowledged that power imbalances in knowledge creation remain integral to researcher-participant relations. Moreover, published results seldom report on the different dimensions that empowerment can encompass. This paper addresses this gap, presenting an original methodological approach for collaborating with smallholder farmers and developing an analytical framework to critically assess associated modalities of empowerment.

With the intention of developing more democratic processes of knowledge production to support innovation processes, five smallholder farmer groups were invited to apply for action funds to co-develop innovations to enhance livelihoods. Employing participatory video (PV), groups applied for the grants using a ‘video proposal’. Group members collaboratively produced videos representing their problems, aims and innovation plans. Key findings around group empowerment are presented and reflected upon with regard to the different modalities of “power-to”, “power-with”, “power-within” and “power-over”.

The PV proposal process proved to be a good tool for supporting farmer group capacity building and the development of competencies in relation to farmers' rural innovation projects. The process enhanced farmer groups’ “power-to” in terms of planning capacities. This fostered motivation for action and a sense of collective ownership; thus building “power-with” at the group level. The understanding of power mobilised in this paper enabled us to highlight some context-specific limitations to democratising research relationships and creating more inclusive spaces for participatory action research and rural innovation development. These are related to entrenched socio-cultural power dynamics within the groups and to possibilities to sustain the empowerment process beyond the duration of the project. Nevertheless, funding agencies and local rural development organisations could consider the method discussed in this paper as a valuable tool for assisting marginalised groups in accessing innovation funds.

Introduction

Participatory rural innovation processes are characterised by an appreciation of farmer-generated knowledge and a prioritisation of farmers’ perspectives and decisions (Cuéllar-Padilla and Calle-Collado, 2011). While efforts are increasingly made to democratize research relationships, empower participants and include marginalised voices in agricultural research for development (ARD), it is acknowledged that power imbalances in knowledge creation remain integral to researcher-participant relations (Chambers, 1997; Cooke and Kothari, 2001; Hayward et al., 2004). This is perhaps especially the case in ARD in the Global South, which often involves a strong contingent of professional agronomists based or trained at Western universities. Moreover, while the involvement of practitioners (in this case, farmers) is central to participatory ARD, published results report less frequently on the so-called “empowerment” (Brandt et al., 2013) of farmers, or on the different dimensions that empowerment can encompass (Rowlands, 1995; Bartlett, 2008). This paper addresses this gap, presenting an original methodological approach for collaborating with smallholder farmers and developing an analytical framework to critically assess associated modalities of empowerment.

With the intention of developing more democratic processes of knowledge production to support innovation processes, a Participatory Action Research (PAR) approach was designed within the frame of two ARD projects operating in Kenya and Tanzania.² In the ‘discovery’ phase (Restrepo et al., 2014:44) of these projects, five smallholder farmer groups were invited to apply for Action Funds to implement innovations. This served to give farmers decision-making power over the choice of innovation and the way the innovation should be implemented. Through participatory video (PV) activities, groups applied for the grants using a video proposal. A video proposal communicates a project concept in audio-visual format, setting out details such as context, capacities, aims, action plan and budget so that a funder can assess the plan and make a decision on whether or not to fund it. An underlying (optimistic) motive of this approach was to facilitate a process of empowerment, in terms of supporting capacity development and enhancing the effectiveness of farmer groups in relation to their future innovation projects. The PV method, in particular, aimed to support the groups in jointly conceptualising their innovation processes, while at the same time creating ‘spaces of inclusion' (Caretta and Riaño, 2016:261) in which power relations could be renegotiated. Although PV as a methodology has been hailed as an appropriate tool for empowering participants in various ways (White, 2003; Colom, 2011), this paper suggests a more cautionary appraisal.

In the section that follows, we situate our methodological approach in relation to the literature on participatory rural innovation processes. We then define a framework for exploring empowerment and power relations within such processes. The relevant literature on PV is reviewed, with attention placed on arguments relating to PV and empowerment. Significantly, there is very little published on the specific topic of participatory video proposals. The paper thus explains the method and steps involved in the participatory production of video proposals. Having conducted participant observation, interviews and feedback sessions with the farmer groups, key findings around group empowerment are presented and reflected upon with regard to the different modalities of “power-to”, “power-with”, “power-within” and “power-over”. We especially highlight farmers’ perspectives on the participatory process of video production, with regard to its contribution to empowering (or not) the farmer groups across these different modalities, before offering our own critical reflections as researcher-facilitators of the process. In conclusion, we address the question: “to what extent are PV proposals a tool for empowering farmer groups in participatory rural innovation processes?”