Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Box 5.4
Sources of information used in defining problems
in the CPWF
•
Information from past research (Merrey and Gebreselassie, 2011);
•
results from scenario modeling and spatial analysis;
•
peer knowledge and monitoring and evaluation;
•
key informant and stakeholder consultation;
•
outputs from innovation platforms and learning alliances (see
Chapter 3);
•
participatory video (Chowdhury et al., 2010) (see Chapter 3); and
•
diagnostic tools developed for community use (Sellamuttu et al.,
2010; DAE, 2012).
the dynamic nature of R4D, each cycle of learning results in improved under-
standing and re-defining the problem.
Nonetheless, the question of “Who defines the problem” is not easily
answered, especially when problems are contentious. Moreover, power
balances influence which key informants and stakeholders are consulted and
who is influential in innovation platforms and learning alliances. It is easy to
introduce biases that confuse important issues related to gender, equity and
ecosystem services. Researchers should be aware of the possibility of bias in
defining problems. They must be sensitive to which social groups will benefit
at the expense of which other groups.
Summary
A scan of the 120 CPWF projects listed in the Appendix shows that nearly all
projects had defining the problem as a major item. The depth of analysis used
by projects to define problems, however, varied a lot.
The broader dynamics of innovation
Some new projects assume that researchers start with a clean slate and that there
is little to learn from antecedent projects. Research managers and funders require
projects to demonstrate impact, driving them to assert that their work will
find important new knowledge. This knowledge will produce widespread
and significant impacts, which will be wholly attributable to the project. The
narrative implies that nothing existed before the project and that future success
will occur only because of the project. Stated in this form, the narrative is flawed.
Literature on innovation in R4D sees things differently. Innovation is a social
process that is risky and unpredictable, where success comes from learning from
Search WWH ::
Custom Search