Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T11:28:18.208Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Participation and Participatory Action Research (PAR) in Environmental Education Processes: For What Are People Empowered?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2015

Lesley Le Grange*
Affiliation:
Stellenbosch University
*
Faculty of Education, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland 7602, South Africa. Email: [email protected]

Abstract

Participatory action research (PAR) derived from anti-colonial struggles in the third world in the 1960s. Traditionally it has been a method of the margins because of its commitment to linking social justice to research. Because of its counter-hegemonic tendency it has had great appeal among environmental educators advocating a socially critical approach to environmental education. However, with the ascendancy of neoliberal politics in recent years, PAR has become co-opted by international organisations such as the World Bank, IMF, OECD and UNESCO. In this paper I wish to critically examine the notion of participation in PAR, and its changing nature as a consequence of its cooptation into mainstream discourses. I explore “vectors of escape” from its assimilation into mainstream environmental education discourses. In exploring the notion of participation in participatory research processes I draw on South African case studies, which might find resonance in wider contexts.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bhana, A. (1999). Participatory action research: A practical guide for realistic radicals. In Blanche, M. Terre & Durrheim, K. (Eds.), Research in practice: Applied methods for the social sciences. Rondebosch: University of Cape Town.Google Scholar
Colebrook, C. (2002). Understanding Deleuze. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Cooke, B., & Khothari, V. (Eds.). (2001). Participation: The new tyranny? London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
Deever, B. (1996). If not now, when? Radical theory and systemic curriculum reform. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28(2), 171191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. London: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
De Lange, I. (1997). 'n Gevalle studie in omgewingsopvoeding: Die skole waterprojek (SWAP). Unpublished master's thesis, University of Stellenbosch, South Africa.Google Scholar
Dillon, J. (1999). A review of learning for a sustainable environment. Environmental Education Research. 5(2), 223227.Google Scholar
Elliot, J. (1991). Action research and the national curriculum. The art of creativity conformity. CARN Bulletin, 10A, 3850.Google Scholar
Fals Borda, O. (2001). Participatory (action) research in social theory: Origins and challenges. In Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (Eds.), Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Fien, J. (1993). Education for the environment: Critical curriculum theorising and environmental education. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1972). Archaeology of knowledge. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Fraser, N. (1993). Clintonism, welfare, and the antisocial wage: The emergence of a neoliberal political imaginary. Rethinking Marxism, 6(1), 923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Ghai, D., & Vivian, J. (Eds.). (1992). Grassroots environmental action: People's participation in sustainable development. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Guattari, F. (2001). The three ecologies (Pindar, I. & Sutton, P., Trans). London: The Athlone Press.Google Scholar
Henkel, H., & Stirrat, R. (2001). Participation as spiritual duty: Empowerment as secular subjection. In Cooke, B. & Kothari, U. (Eds.), Participation: The new tyranny. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
Irwin, P. (2005). Environmental education research in southern and eastern Africa: A directory (2nd ed.). Grahamstown: Rhodes University.Google Scholar
Jordan, S. (2003). Who stole my methodology? Co-opting PAR. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 1(2), 185200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemmis, S., Cole, P., & Suggett, D. (1983). Orientations to curriculum and transition: Towards the socially-critical school. Melbourne: Victorian Instiutute for Secondary Education.Google Scholar
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory action research: Communicative action and the public sphere. In Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.Google Scholar
Lotz, H. (1996). The development of environmental education resources materials for junior primary education through teacher participation: The case of the We Care primary project. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Stellenbosch, South Africa.Google Scholar
Lotz-Sisitka, H., & O'Donoghue, R. (2008). Participation, situated culture and practical reason. In Reid, A., Jensen, B. Bruun, Nikel, J. & Simovska, V. (Eds.), Participation and learning: Perspectives on education and the environment, health and sustainability. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
McTaggart, R. (1991). Principles for participatory action research. Adult Education Quarterly, 4(3), 168187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naidoo, P. (1992). Collaborative teacher participation in curriculum development: A case study in junior secondary general science. Unpublished MEd thesis, Rhodes University, South Africa.Google Scholar
O'Donoghue, R. (1990). Environmental education, evaluation and curriculum change: The case of the Action Ecology Project (1985-1989). Unpublished MEd thesis, University of Natal, South Africa.Google Scholar
O'Donoghue, R., & Neluvhalani, E. (2002). Indigenous knowledge and the school curriculum: A review of developing methods and methodological perspectives. In van Rensburg, E. Janse, Hattingh, J., Lotz-Sisitka, H. & O'Donoghue, R. (Eds.), EEASA monograph: Environmental education, ethics and action in southern Africa. Pretoria: EEASA/HSRC.Google Scholar
O'Donoghue, R., & Russo, V. (2004). Emerging patterns of abstraction in environmental education: A review of materials, methods and professional development perspectives. Environmental Education Research, 10(3), 331351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, A., Jensen, B. B., Nikkel, J., & Simovska, V. (Eds.). (2008). Participation and learning: Perspectives on education and the environment, health and sustainability. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, A., Jensen, B. B., Nikkel, J., & Simovska, V. (Eds.). (2008). Preface. Participation and learning: Perspectives on education and the environment, health and sustainability. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robottom, I., & Hart, P. (1993). Research in environmental education: Engaging the debate. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University.Google Scholar
Schreuder, D. (1995). Delusions of progress: A case of reconceptualising environmental education. Southern African Journal of Environmental Education, 15, 1825.Google Scholar
Schwandt, T. (1997). Qualitative inquiry: A dictionary of terms. London: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Smith, L. (1999). Decolonising methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
Smith, L. (2005). On tricky ground: Researching the native in the age of uncertainty. In Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.Google Scholar
Wagiet, M. (1996). Teaching the principles of ecology in the urban environment: An investigation into the development of resource materials. Unpublished MEd thesis, Rhodes University, South Africa Google Scholar