DVA2601 - Projects And Programmes As Instruments Of Development_MAY_JUNE_2020_EXAMINATION.

DVA2601 - Projects And Programmes As Instruments Of Development_MAY_JUNE_2020_EXAMINATION.TABLE OF CONTENTS The significance of indigenous knowledge ………………… 4 Principle of participatory methodologies ............................ 5 Rapid rural appraisal ……………………….………………..… 6 Participatory learning and action ……………………………. 6 4.1 Explain the concept of blueprint planning and Indicate where such planning can and cannot be used. ……..…….…7 4.2 “Local people do not provide valuable inputs to development projects ………………………………………….. 8 3 Identify three conventional data collection techniques suitable for collecting data ……………………………………. 10 Explain what is meant by logical framework analysis and outline its merits and demerits.……………………………….. 12 Which level of project management is best suited for participatory projects? Substantiate the answer ………………. 13 List of Sources …………………………………………….………... 14 4 Question 1 Explain the significance of indigenous knowledge (local knowledge) and then discuss three participatory methods that can be used to support the integration of indigenous knowledge in community development. Senanayake (2006: 87) defined Indigenous knowledge as a unique knowledge confined to a particular culture or society, local knowledge, folk knowledge, people’s knowledge, traditional wisdom or traditional science. Local knowledge is per se local and must be locally gathered, sorted, indexed and interpreted. According to Nkondo (2012) local ways of knowing are informed by lived experiences which are passed down to other generations through mostly oral means (that is, as the spoken word). These have, however, been looked down upon by the West who saw indigenous knowledge systems as non-scientific to the extent of ignoring them as if non-existent. According to Nakashima & Roué, (2002) the Western science is objective and quantitative as opposed to traditional knowledge, which is mainly subjective and qualitative. Western science is based on an academic and literate transmission, while traditional knowledge is often passed on orally from one generation to the next by the elders. Western science isolates its objects of study from their vital context by putting them in simplified and controllable experimental environments which also means that scientists separate themselves from nature, the object of their studies; by contrast, traditional knowledge always depends on its context and particular local conditions. Western science is positivist and materialist in contrast to traditional knowledge, which is spiritual and does not make distinctions between empirical and sacred. The Western ways of knowing have been considered superior to all other knowledge system. It is likely to be called out as evidence in disputes over development or archaeological research in sensitive sites. Among indigenous people in the South Africa, the continuation of traditional practices, such as ritual activities, seasonal hunts and harvests may provoke conflicts with the national management agencies and policies. Conservationists typically privilege romantic visions of deserted wilderness, rather than Indigenous visions of sustainable hunting, fishing, and harvesting. 5 Edward (1989:119.2) mentions that the role and status of the technocrat contributes to the devaluation of indigenous knowledge, which is based on the population’s experience. For example, it is the consequences of the practical engagement in everyday life, and is constantly reinforced by experience and trial and error. The knowledge is associated with formal education and training where knowledge packages are very technical and are conveyed to people without any questioning of their appropriateness to certain situations. Indigenous networks of production, barter and mutual support, which could form the basis for development are at times destroyed by plans for commercial production. The technocrat approach to development ignores the role of people’s feelings in development. Research is undertaken away from the everyday context within which an understanding of these emotions can develop. An understanding of the actual daily problems will not however be attained unless this context is fully understood. The assumption that development springs from the transfer of technical knowledge does not leave room for an organic development process of enrichment, recognition of the power of the people and participation, a long process of experiment innovation through which people may build up their skills, knowledge and self-confidence necessary to shape their environment in ways which foster progress towards goals like economic growth, equity in income distribution and political freedom. Principle of participatory methodologies Pretty, Guijt, Scoones and Thompson (1995:56-57) the participatory process lead to debate about change, and debate changes the perceptions of the actors and their readiness to contemplate action. The Process of joint analysis and dialogue helps to define changes which will bring about improvement and seeks to motivate people to take action or implement the defined changes. The action includes local institution building, and increase the capacity of people to initiate action on their own in the future. A central objective is to seek diversity, rather than simplifying complexity. This recognizes that different individuals and groups make different evaluations, which lead to different actions. People’s views contain a large amount of interpretation, bias 6 and prejudice and this implies that there are multiple possible descriptions of any real world activity. Everyone is different and important. Rapid rural appraisal Kapoor (2002) provides a critique of the participatory rural appraisal methodology, and it is done without an equal acknowledgement of the good participatory rural appraisal has brought to bear with its principle of “the poor, weak, vulnerable and exploited should come first”. It emerged in the late 1970s in response to some of the problems with large-scale, structured questionnaire surveys. It provided an alternative technique for outsiders often scientists carrying out research into agriculture to quickly learn from local people about their realities and challenges. Rapid rural appraisal practitioners worked in multi-disciplinary teams and pioneered the use a suite of visual methods and semi-structured interviews to learn from respondents. While it was largely about data collection, usually analyzed by outsiders. Reflections on rapid rural appraisal led to the development of participatory rural appraisal, which focused more strongly on facilitation, empowerment, behavior change, local knowledge and sustainable action. Participatory learning and action Pretty et al (1995:61) mentioned that participatory learning and action (PLA) is the preferred term for participatory research methodologies, which would include techniques such as rapid rural and participatory rural appraisal. The more conventional research techniques relied on so heavily in the past such as questionnaires and surveys were characterized by the strong extractive character, meaning that people’s inputs were sought, but their participation was limited to answering questions. Participatory learning and action is an approach for learning about and engaging with communities. It is listening to the need of the people, consultation and promotes the active participation of communities in the issues and interventions that shape their lives. The approach might be used, traditionally, with rural communities in the developing world by helping poor rural people to unlock their ideas not only on the nature and causes of the issues that affect them, but also on realistic solutions. It enables local people to share their perceptions and identify, prioritize and appraise issues from 7 their knowledge of local conditions. More traditional, extractive research tends to 'consult' communities and then take away the findings for analysis, with no assurance that they will be acted on. In contrast, PLA tools combine the sharing of insights with analysis and, as such, provide a catalyst for the community themselves to act on what is uncovered.