Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
O
BJECTIVES AND
H
YPOTHESIS
Agro-ecosystems such as those found in UA are complex systems in which
people have deliberately selected crops and livestock to replace natural flora and
fauna (Mooney et al, 1994; Alkora et al, 2004). Human health is integrally
connected to such systems. The application of an eco-health framework requires
the use of multiple research and action strategies applied to three methodological
pillars: trans-disciplinarily, equity and participation (Lebel, 2003).
The choice to use a participatory approach is rooted in the notion that those
who are affected by issues should be part of the process of defining not only the
problems, but also their solutions. Participation is not only 'fair', but also
provides a more thorough understanding of a situation. Positivist 'scientism', on
the other hand, has a history of less participation by the subjects of research and
makes meaningful participation in discourse and informed decision-making in
everyday life di
cult (Foucault, 1980, cited by Sohng, 1995). In an ideal
world, encouraging investigation, education and action in participatory
research empowers people to gain access to knowledge by co-creating and
using it. Critical examination of participatory processes explores the role of
popular knowledge and conventional science, issues of power, applicability of
different methods and rigour in the participatory research process.
Hence, the overarching hypothesis was that 'a PEAR approach can be
used to confront ecosystem health challenges with success varying with
observable barriers and facilitators'. With this working hypothesis,
the
research sought to meet at least three research objectives:
1 Identify and document existing and perceived risks related to health and the
environment in UA.
2 Identify critical points of intervention on environmental health related to UA
within an eco-health framework.
3 Work with appropriate target groups, communicators, messages and
techniques to bring about change through a PEAR process.
M
ETHODS
PEAR requires the use of interactive and flexible methods, with the researcher
facilitating, engaging in dialogue and stimulating action. Quantitative and
qualitative data collection and various education techniques were used to:
facilitate an iterative process of listening carefully to people; ask questions
using a systematic process in order to ascertain how and why these problems
fit into the context; synthesize key moments of understanding problems which
were presented; and discuss strategies with the group in order to address
problems. Among the key methods used were: meetings,
focus groups,
mapping, observation, questionnaires and workshops.
At the core of the process was a partnership between myself, as the lead
PEAR researcher-educator, and three farmers who belonged to the executive
