Characteristics
Contenido
La IAP se origina a partir del trabajo pionero de Kurt Lewin (1946) y el Instituto Tavistock en los años 1940, la IAP es una tradición de auto-experimentación colectiva apoyada en el razonamiento evidencial, la determinación de los hechos y el aprendizaje, que está bien documentada. Todas las formulaciones de IAP tienen en común la idea de que la investigación y la acción deben ser hechas 'con' personas y no 'en' o 'para' personas. (Brock and Pettit, 2007; Chevalier and Buckles, 2008, 2013; Heron, 1995; Kindon et al., 2007; Reason, 1995; Reason and Bradbury, 2008; Swantz, 2008; Whyte, 1991). En conjunto ellos constituyen una alternativa robusta a la negación del positivismo de la acción humana, una que promueva el conocimiento a un entendimiento crítico, orientado a la acción de la historia social (como en gran parte de la economía política). La investigación basada en principios de la IAP tiene sentido del mundo a través de esfuerzos colectivos para transformarlo, al contrario de simplemente observar y estudiar el comportamiento humano y opiniones de la población acerca de la realidad, con la esperanza de que cambios significativos eventualmente surgirán.
En el campo del desarrollo, IAP ha obtenido inspiración considerable del trabajo de Paulo Freire (1982), nuevas ideas en la investigación de la educación para adultos (Hall, 1975), el movimiento de los derechos civiles (Horton and Freire, 1990), movimientos sociales en Asia del Sur tales como el Bhoomi Sena (Rahman, 2008, 2011), e iniciativas claves como la Red de Investigación Participativa creada en 1978 con base en Nueva Delhi. "Se ha beneficiado de un desarrollo interdisciplinario extrayendo su fuerza teórica de la educación de adultos, sociología, economía política, psicología comunitaria, desarrollo comunitario, estudios en materia de asuntos feministas, psicología crítica, desarrollo organizativo y más". El sociólogo colombiano Orlando Fals Borda y otros organizaron la primera conferencia explicita de IAP en Cartagena, Colombia en 1977 (Hall, 2005). Basándose en su investigación en grupos campesinos de Boyacá y otros grupos desatendidos, Fals Borda hace un llamado al componente de "la acción comunitaria" para que sea incorporada en los planes de investigación de investigadores tradicionales entrenados. Sus recomendaciones a los investigadores comprometidos a la lucha por la justicia y una mejor democracia en todas las esferas, incluyendo al negocio de la ciencia, son de gran alcance:.
Las estrategias de la IAP para democratizar el conocimiento y fundamentarlo en necesidades reales de la comunidad representa un esfuerzo genuino para sobrellevar la ineficacia y el elitismo de la escolarización convencional y la ciencia, y los efectos negativos de las fuerzas del mercado y la industria en el lugar de trabajo, la vida comunitaria y medios de vida sostenibles. Estos principios y la evolución en desarrollo de la IAP ha tenido un legado duradero en los campos que van desde la resolución de problemas en lugares de trabajo hasta desarrollo comunitario y medios de vida sostenibles, educación, salud pública, investigación en materia de asuntos feminista y compromiso cívico. Es importante notar que estas contribuciones son sujeto de muchas tensiones y debates en problemas clave tales como el rol de "la psicología clínica", "el pensamiento crítico social" y las preocupaciones pragmáticas del "pensamiento organizativo" en la teoría y práctica de la IAP. Las etiquetas utilizadas para definir cada enfoque (IAP, IAP crítica, investigación aplicada, psicosociología, análisis sociotécnico, etc.) reflejan estas tensiones y apuntan a mayores diferencias que pudieran sopesar las similitudes. Mientras que un denominador común, la combinación de "participación", "acción" e investigación refleja la frágil unidad de tradiciones cuya diversidad de contextos ideológicos y organizativos los mantuvo separados y en gran parte ignorantes unos de otros por varias décadas (Brown and Tandon, 1983; Brown, 1993).
La siguiente revisión se centra en tradiciones que incorporan los tres pilares de la IAP. Los enfoques estrechamente relacionados que se superponen pero que no traen los tres componentes juntos se dejan por fuera. La investigación aplicada, por ejemplo, no está comprometida necesariamente a los principios de participación y podrá ser iniciada y controlada en su mayoría por expertos, con la implicación de que "sujetos humanos" no están invitados a desempañar un papel clave en la creación de la ciencia y la elaboración de preguntas de investigación. Como en la ciencia convencional este proceso "considera a las personas como fuentes de información, como teniendo **bits** de conocimientos aislados, pero ni son esperados ni se asume que sean capaces de analizar una realidad social determinada". (Hall, 1975, p. 26) La IAP también difiere de la indagación participativa o la investigación de colaboración, contribuciones al conocimiento que no podrán implicar compromisos directos con la acción transformadora y la historia social. La IAP en contraste, ha evolucionado a partir del trabajo de activistas más interesados con el fortalecimiento de los pueblos marginados que con la generación de conocimientos académicos por su propio bien. (Freire, 1970; Hall, 1981; Tandon, 2002). Por último, dado a su compromiso al proceso de la investigación, la IAP superpone pero no es sinónimo del Aprendizaje Activo, del Aprendizaje de acción y reflexión, desarrollo participativo y desarrollo comunitario - formas reconocidas de resolución de problemas y el aumento de la capacidad que podrían llevarse a cabo sin preocupaciones inmediatas para la investigación y los avances del conocimiento. (Bartunek and Schein, 2011).
Organizational Life
Applied workplace research took its initial inspiration from Lewin's work in organizational development (and from Dewey's emphasis on experiential learning). Lewin's most important contribution involves a flexible and scientific approach to planning change that passes through a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of 'a circle of planning, action and collection of data on the results of action', towards an organizational 'climate' of democratic leadership and responsible participation that promotes critical, self-investigative and collaborative work (Lewin, 1948, pp. 82, 202-6). These steps bring to light Lewin's work with basic capacity training groups, T-Groups where community leaders and group facilitators use feedback, problem solving, role-playing and cognitive support (readings, pamphlets, films) to gain self, other and group insights with a view to 'unfreezing' and changing their mindsets, attitudes and behaviours. Lewin's understanding of action research coincides with key ideas and practices developed at the influential Tavistock Institute (established 1947) at the UK National Training Laboratory (LNT) in the United States. An important offshoot of Tavistock thinking and practice is the socio-technical systems perspective of workplace dynamics, guided by the idea that increased productivity or efficiency does not depend on improvised technology alone. Improvisation in organizational life proposes the interaction and ‘joint optimization’ of the technical and social components of workplace activities. In this sense, the combination between the social and technical factors of organized labor is based on the principles of 'responsible group autonomy' and industrial democracy, in opposition to deskilling and hierarchical bureaucracy guided by scientific management and Taylor's linear chain of command (Ackoff, 1999; Crézé and Liu, 2006; Crozier, 2000; Greenwood et al., 1991; Liu, 1997; Trist and Bamforth, 1951;
The LNT played an important role in the evolution of experiential learning and the application of behavioral science to organizational performance. The consultation process, collegiality, conflict management, and workplace democracy and autonomy were recurring themes in the rich body of literature and practice known as organizational development (OD) (Friedlander and Brown, 1974; Cummings, 2008). . As with 'the science of action' (Argyris et al., 1985; Argyris and Schön, 1989; Argyris, 1993; Dick and Dalmau, 1991), OD is a response to so-called planned changes and 'social rational management' that involves a normative movement in human relations and the approach to balance between life and work in dominant capitalist economies (Dubost, 1987, pp. 84–88). Its primary goal is to improve an organization's performance and work-life experience, with the assistance of a consultant, change agent or catalyst who helps the sponsoring organization define and solve its own problems, introduce new forms of leadership (Torbert and Associates, 2004) and make changes in organizational culture and learning (Cameron and Quinn, 2011; Senge and Scharmer, 2001). Diagnosis and capacity-building activities are informed, to varying degrees, by psychology, the behavioral sciences, organizational studies, or theories of leadership and social innovation (Ospina et al., 2008; Mesnier and Vandernotte, 2012). Appreciative Inquiry (AI), for example, is an offshoot of PAR based on positive psychology (Seligman, 2002). Rigorous data collection or research methods can be used to support internal process and group thinking and planning. On the whole, however, science tends to be an instrument, not an end. Workplace and organizational learning interventions are first and foremost problem-solving, action-oriented, and customer-focused.
Psycho-sociology
Tavistock opened new horizons in other ways too, by meshing general medicine and psychiatry with Freudian and Jungian psychology and social sciences to help the British navy address various manpower problems. This gave rise to a field of academic research and professional intervention known as psycho-sociology, particularly influential in France (CIRFIP). Several schools of ‘social clinical’ thought and practices belong to this tradition, all of them critical to the experimental and expert mindset in social psychology (Dubost, 1987, pp. 287–291). Most formulations of psycho-sociology share with OD a commitment to the relative autonomy and active participation of individuals and support groups with problems of self-actualization and effectiveness in achieving goals within larger organizations and institutions. In addition to this humanistic and democratic agenda, psycho-sociology uses psycho-analytic concepts, inspiration to address interpersonal relationships and the interaction between oneself and the group. It recognizes the role of the unconscious in social behavior and collective representation and the inevitable expression of transference and countertransference—language and behavior that redirect unexpressed feelings and anxieties to other people or material objects by engaging in action research (Chevalier and Buckles, 2013, ch. 1).
The works of Balint (1954), Jaques (1951) and Bion (1961) are historical moments in the formative years of psycho-sociology. Commonly cited authors in France include Amado (1993), Barus-Michel (1987; et al., 2002), Dubost (1987), Enriquez (1992), Lévy (2001, 2010), Gaujelac (1997) and Giust-Desprairies (1989). The different schools of thought and practice include Mendel's active research needed in the 'socio-psychoanalytic' perspective (Mendel, 1980; Mendel and Prades, 2002) and Dejours' psycho-dynamic work, with emphasis on work-induced suffering and defense mechanisms (Dejours, 1988). The focus of Lapassade and Lourau's 'socioanalytic' interventions is on institutions seen as systems that dismantle and recompose norms and rules of social interaction over time, a perspective that builds on the principles of institutional analysis and psychotherapy (Lapassade and Lourau, 1971; Lourau, 1970, 1996; Tosquelles, 1984, 1992). Anzieu and Martin's (1966) work on group psychoanalysis and the collective 'mental ego' theory is generally considered the most faithful to the Freudian tradition. The key differences between these schools and the methods they use start from the weight they assign to the analyst's experience in understanding the behavior of the group and their impressions and also the social aspects of the group's behavior and what affects them. Another issue is the extent to which the intervention is fundamental to larger institutions and social systems. The use of psychoanalytic concepts and the relative weight of effort dedicated to research, training and action can also vary (Chevalier and Buckles, 2013, ch. 1).
Community development and livelihood
IAP emerged in the post-war years as an important contribution to intervention and self-transformation within groups, organizations and communities. It has left a unique mark in the field of rural and community development, especially in southern countries. The tools and concepts for doing research with people, including "barefoot scientists" and the popular "organic intellectuals" (see Gramsci), are now promoted and implemented by many international development agencies, researchers, consultants, civil society, and local community organizations around the world. This has given rise to countless experiments in impact assessment, scenario planning, (Ogilvy, 2002) and project evaluation in areas ranging from fisheries (IIRR et al., 1998) and mining (Coumans et al., 2009) to forestry (Case, 1990), plant cultivation (Vernooy, 2003), agriculture (Gonsalves et al., 2005), agricultural research and extension systems (Braun and Hocdé, 2000; Brock and Pettit, 2007; Collinson, 2000), watershed management (Hinchcliffe et al., 1999), resource planning (Fox et al., 2005; Kesby, 2007; Kindon et al., 2007), environmental conflict and natural resource management (Chevalier and Buckles, 2013; Means et al., 2002; Park et al., 1993; Pound et al., 2003), possessory rights (Buckles and Khedkar, 2012), appropriate technology (Bentley, 1994; Gupta, 2006), economic and local development (Lewis and Gaventa, 1988; Selener, 1997), 2004; Quarry and Ramírez, 2009), tourism (Blangy, 2010), leadership for sustainability (Marshall et al., 2011), biodiversity (Mazhar et al., 2007; Pimbert, 2011) and climate change (Leal Filho, 2011). This abundant literature includes the many ideas and methodological creativity of Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) and Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) (Chambers, 1983, 1993, 1994; Pretty et al., 1995) and any action oriented to the study of local, indigenous or traditional knowledge (Warren et al., 1995).
Collectively, IAP applications in this field are committed to problem solving and adaptation to nature at the family unit or community level, using friendly methods of scientific thinking and experimentation adapted to support rural participation and sustainable livelihoods.
Literacy, Education and Youth
In education, PAR practitioners inspired by the ideas of critical pedagogy and adult education have been firmly committed to the politics of emancipatory action affirmed by Freire (1970), with a focus on dialogic reflection and action, as a means of overcoming relations of domination and subordination between the oppressors and the oppressed, the colonizers and the colonized. The approach implies that "silence is not only incidental to the investigator's curiosity but is the master of the investigation into the underlying causes of events in his world" (Freire, 1982, p. 30). Although researcher and sociologist Fals Borda also has a deep distrust of academia and reliance on traditional popular knowledge, sentiments that have had a lasting impact on the history of RAP, particularly in the areas of development (Tandon, 2002), literacy (Fals Borda and Rahman, 1991 Quigley, 2000), anti-hegemonic and youth engagement on issues ranging from violence to crime, racial discrimination or education sexual, educational justice, health and the environment (Carr and Kemmis, 1986, Fino and Torre, 2008; Noffke and Somekh, 2009).
Community-based participatory research and service learning are more recent attempts to reconnect the academic interests of education and community development (Brulin 1998, Ennals 2004, Harkavy et al, 2000, Kasl and Yorks, 2002, Pine, 2008, Westfall et al, 2006).. The Global Community Research Alliance represents a promising effort, "to use knowledge and alliance strategies." community-university for social change and the democratic and legal environment, particularly in people and places, where the majority is vulnerable.” It requires the active participation of community members and researchers in all phases of the action research process, identifying problems and issues in the design of relevant research and its implementation, the sharing of resources, while recognizing the experience of the community, and that the results are accessible and understandable to community members and the general public. Service learning or education is closely linked to encouraging students to actively apply knowledge and skills to local situations, in response to local needs and with the active participation of community members (Moely et al, 2009; Petes, 2004; Reardon, 1998). Many online guides now show how students and teachers can collaborate on community-based participatory research and consistent academic standards at the same time (Coghlan & Brannick, 2007; Herr & Anderson, 2005; James et al., 2007, 2011; Stringer, 2007); Kemmis & McTaggart, 1982, 2000; McNiff & Whitehead, 2006, 2009, McTaggart, 1997, McNiff 2010, Sherman and Torbert, 2000, Smith et al, 2010.
madness
Collaborative research in education is CBR where pre-university teachers are the scientific community and knowledge is built on top of their own interpretation of teaching experience and reality, with or without immediate commitment to transformative action (Bourassa et al. Desgagné 2007, 2001, Schön, 1983; SEBILLOTTE, 2007, Whitehead, 1993; Whitehead and McNiff, 2006).
Public health
PAR has made significant advances in the field of public health, in areas such as humanitarian aid, community-based rehabilitation, accident prevention, hospital care and drug prevention (Catley et al, 2009; Chevalier and Buckles, 2013, chapter 10 and ch 15, De Koning and Martin, 1996; Eisenberg et al, 2006; Hills et al, 2007; Minkler and Wallerstein, 2008; Todhunter, 2001).
Feminism and gender
Feminist research and women's development theory (Belenky et al., 1986) also contributed to rethinking the role of learning in challenging existing power regimes, using qualitative and interpretive methods that focus on subjectivity and introspection rather than the quantitative approach of traditional science (Brydon-Miller, 2001; Maguire, 1987, McIntyre, 2008; Minkler and Wallerstein, 2008; Tolman and Brydon-Miller, 2001;
Citizen participation and ICT
New approaches to PAR-broaden the public sphere of the research process engaged beyond small-group dynamics. Touraine and others propose a "sociology of action" that involves the creation of artificial spaces for movement activists and non-militants to discuss matters of public interest (Touraine et al, 1980. Dubet 1991 2001). Citizen science is another recent decision that expands the scope of parity to include larger "communities of interest" and citizens dedicated to improving knowledge in specific areas. In this collaborative research approach, it is actively supported by volunteers who form an active public or network of contributing people (Cooper et al, 2007. Gaventa and Barrett, 2010). Efforts to promote public participation in scientific works owe much to the revolution in communication technologies (ICT). Web 2.0 applications support virtual community interactivity and user-driven content development and social media, without restricted access or controlled application. They extend the principles of open source governance to democratic institutions, allowing citizens to actively participate in the wiki-based processes of virtual journalism, public debate and policy development (Rushkoff, 2004). Although few and far between, experiments in open politics can therefore make use of ICT and the mechanics of electronic democracy to facilitate large-scale communication, towards achieving decisions that best serve the public interest.
In the same spirit, deliberative or discursive democracy calls for public debate, transparency and pluralism in policy formulation, legislative and institutional life (Bessette, 1994, Cohen, 1989; Epstein 2012; Forester, 1999). Data and results of science are made accessible to participants and can be the subject of extensive media coverage, scientific review, deliberative surveys, and presentations of contradictory contradictory arguments and predictive claims (Fishkin, 2009). The citizens' jury methodology is interesting in this sense. These are randomly selected from a local or national population who have been given the opportunity to examine "witnesses" and collectively form a "judgment" on the issue at hand (Wakeford et al., 2007).
ICT Policies open a path towards deliberative democracy in new strategies to mobilize governments, scientists, civil society and citizens interested in discussions related to science and technology policy. These trends are an invitation to explore new ways of doing POR scale (Chevalier and Buckles, 2013, chap. 1).