community-based participatory research (CBPR)

In simplest terms, community-based participatory research (CBPR) enlists those who are most affected by a community issue – typically in collaboration or partnership with others who have research skills – to conduct research on and analyze that issue, with the goal of devising strategies to resolve it. In other words, community-based participatory research adds to or replaces academic and other professional research with research done by community members, so that research results both come from and go directly back to the people who need them most and can make the best use of them.

There are several levels of participatory research. At one end of the spectrum is academic or government research that nonetheless gathers information directly from community members. The community members are those most directly affected by the issue at hand, and they may (or may not) be asked for their opinions about what they need and what they think will help, as well as for specific information. In that circumstance, the community members don’t have any role in choosing what information is sought, in collecting data, or in analyzing the information once it’s collected. (At the same time, this type of participatory research is still a long step from research that is done at second or third hand, where all the information about a group of people is gathered from statistics, census data, and the reports of observers or of human service or health professionals.)

At another level, academic or other researchers recruit or hire members of an affected group – often because they are familiar with and known by the community – to collect data. In this case, the collectors may or may not also help to analyze the information that they have gathered.

A third level of participatory research has academic, government, or other professional researchers recruiting members of an affected group as partners in a research project. The community members work with the researchers as colleagues, participating in the conception and design of the project, data collection, and data analysis. They may participate as well in reporting the results of the project or study. At this level, there is usually – though not always – an assumption that the research group is planning to use its research to take action on an issue that needs to be resolved

ON THE PRACTICAL SIDE, COMMUNITY-BASED PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH CAN OFTEN GET YOU THE BEST INFORMATION POSSIBLE ABOUT THE ISSUE, FOR AT LEAST REASONS INCLUDING:

•          People in an affected population are more liable to be willing to talk and give straight answers to researchers whom they know, or whom they know to be in circumstances similar to their own, than to outsiders with whom they have little in common

•          People who have actually experienced the effects of an issue – or an intervention – may have ideas and information about aspects of it that wouldn’t occur to anyone studying it from outside. Thus, action researchers from the community may focus on elements of the issue, or ask questions or follow-ups, that outside researchers wouldn’t, and get crucial information that other researchers might find only by accident, or perhaps not at all

•          People who are deeply affected by an issue, or participants in a program, may know intuitively, or more directly, what’s important when they see or hear it. What seems an offhand comment to an outside researcher might reveal its real importance to someone who is part of the same population as person who made the comment.

•          Action researchers from the community are on the scene all the time. Their contact both with the issue or intervention and with the population affected by it is constant, and, as a result, they may find information even when they’re not officially engaged in research.

•          Findings may receive more community support because community members know that the research was conducted by people in the same circumstances as their own

When you’re conducting an evaluation, these advantages can provide you with a more accurate picture of the intervention or initiative and its effects. When you’re studying a community issue, all these advantages can lead to a true understanding of its nature, its causes, and its effects in the community, and can provide a solid basis for a strategy to resolve it. And that, of course, is the true goal of community research – to identify and resolve an issue or problem, and to improve the quality of life for the community as a whole

In the personal development sphere, CBPR can have profound effects on the development and lives of the community researchers, particularly when those who benefit from an intervention, or who are affected by an issue, are poor or otherwise disadvantaged, lack education or basic skills, and/or feel that the issue is far beyond their influence. By engaging in research, they not only learn new skills, but see themselves in a position of competence, obtain valuable knowledge and information about a subject important to them, and gain the power and the confidence to exercise control over this aspect of their lives.

Some prime examples:

•          The environment. It was a community member who first asked the questions and started the probe that uncovered the fact that the Love Canal neighborhood in Niagara Falls, NY, had been contaminated by the dumping of toxic waste.

•          Medical/health issues. Action research can be helpful in both undeveloped and developed societies in collecting information about health practices, tracking an epidemic, or mapping the occurrence of a particular condition, to name three of numerous possibilities.

•          Political and economic issues. Citizen activists often do their own research to catch corrupt politicians or corporations, trace campaign contributions, etc.

WHY WOULD YOU USE COMMUNITY-BASED PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH?

•          People will speak more freely to peers, especially those they know personally, than to strangers.

•          Researchers who are members of the community know the history and relationships surrounding a program or an issue, and can therefore place it in context.

•          People experiencing an issue or participating in an intervention know what’s important to them about it – what it disrupts, what parts of their lives it touches, how they have changed as a result, etc. That knowledge helps them to formulate interview questions that get to the heart of what they – as researchers – are trying to learn.

IN SUMMARY

Community-based participatory research is a process conducted by and for the people most affected by the issue or intervention being studied or evaluated. It has multiple purposes, including the empowerment of the participants, the gathering of the best and most accurate information possible, garnering community support for the effort, and social change that leads to the betterment of the community for everyone

As with any participatory process, CBPR can take a great deal of time and effort. The participants are often economically and educationally disadvantaged, lacking basic skills and other resources. Thus, training and support – both technical and personal – are crucial elements in any action research process. With proper preparation, however, participatory action research can yield not only excellent research results, but huge benefits for the community over the long run.

Della Roberts worked as a nutritionist at the Harperville Hospital. As an African American, she was concerned about obesity among black children, and about the fact that many of Harperville’s African American neighborhoods didn’t have access to healthy food in stores or restaurants. She felt that the city ought to be doing something to change the situation, but officials didn’t seem to see it as a problem. Della decided to conduct some research to use as a base for advocacy.

Della realized that in order to collect accurate data, she needed to find researchers who would be trusted by people in the neighborhoods she was concerned about. What if she recruited researchers from among the people in those neighborhoods? She contacted two ministers she knew, an African American doctor who practiced in a black neighborhood, and the director of a community center, as well as using her own family connections. Within two weeks, she had gathered a group of neighborhood residents who were willing to act as researchers. They ranged from high school students to grandparents, and from people who could barely read to others who had taken college courses.

The group met several times at the hospital to work out how they were going to collect information from the community. Della conducted workshops in research methods and in such basic skills as how to record interviews and observations. The group discussed the problem of recording for those who had difficulty writing, and came up with other ways of logging information. They decided they would each interview a given number of residents about their food shopping and eating habits, and that they would also observe people’s buying patterns in neighborhood stores and fast food restaurants. They set a deadline for finishing their data gathering, and went off to learn as much as they could about the food shopping and eating behavior of people in their neighborhoods.

As the data came in, it became clear that people in the neighborhoods would be happy to buy more nutritious food, but it was simply too difficult to get it. They either had to travel long distances on the bus, since many didn’t have cars, or find time after a long work day to drive to another, often unfamiliar, part of the city and spend an evening shopping. Many also had the perception that healthy food was much more expensive, and that they couldn’t afford it.

Ultimately, the data that the group of neighborhood residents had gathered went into a report written by Della and other professionals on the hospital staff. The report helped to convince the city to provide incentives to supermarket chains to locate in neighborhoods where healthy food was hard to find.

The group that Della had recruited had become a community-based participatory research team. Working with Della and others at the hospital, they helped to determine what kind of information would be useful, and then learned how to gather it. Because they were part of the community, they were trusted by residents; because they shared other residents’ experience, they knew what questions to ask and fully understood the answers, as well as what they were seeing when they observed.