RRA und PRA. Gedanken zur Standortbestimmung und moglichen kuturwissenschaftlichen perspektiven eines partizipative Analyse- Planungs- und Beratungsanxatzes nach 15 Jahren Praxis
To improve results and image of development projects, methods for planning, management and advise are introduced for systematical use. On all levels of governmental and nongovernmental institutions a real boom of participatory methods was initiated. Most famous examples are ZOPP of the GTZ and Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA). However, there are several risks implied in this institutional decreed offensive of methods. The routine use of methods, which are intended to contribute to more flexibility and participatory counselling, may as well result in bureaucratic stiffness. Mechanical application and trasfer of methods by experts fails in using them effectively and realising the participatory integration of the target group.
A certain "weariness concerning participation" has become evident in the development policy discussion. How did this come about? What are the causes? What can be undertaken to counter this development? A two-day workshop organised by the "Network of Development Policy Specialists" tried to get to grips with these questions.
A series of PRAs with indians in Ecuador has only partially yielded the expected results. What has gone wrong? Two members of the facilitation team of the German Development Service (DED) reflect about shortcomings of the PRA method and search for improvements.