LSE - Small Logo
LSE - Small Logo

Francesca Earp

October 25th, 2024

Does participatory action research need to be feminist?

0 comments | 5 shares

Estimated reading time: 6 minutes

Francesca Earp

October 25th, 2024

Does participatory action research need to be feminist?

0 comments | 5 shares

Estimated reading time: 6 minutes

International development agencies apply theories and methodologies from a largely Western canon. Reflecting on how feminism became a contentious term for groups involved in a participatory action research project in Southeast Asia, Francesca Earp considers how theories shape methodologies, practices and ultimately relations of power between researchers and research participants.


The F word, feminism, is controversial. Regardless of its aim for equity and empowerment, the feminist movement is dominated by Western voices both in academia and advocacy. Despite the repeated calls to decolonise feminism, Western feminist theory still governs gender research. Specifically, in my field of gender development, Western feminist theory dictates most discourse, consciously or not, and consequently the kinds of research and practice we undertake.

I was struck by this reality during a recent trip to Laos as part of my PhD. My research applies Feminist Participatory Action Research (FPAR), a commonly used methodology based on feminist theory that aims to draw attention to the role of power, privilege, and gender in participatory research. During this field trip, I collaborated with The Rural Development Agency, a Lao Civil Society Organisation. In planning meetings, my use of a FPAR approach was met with scepticism. I was told in no unclear terms that feminism didn’t mean the same thing in Laos as it meant to me. My colleagues explained that feminism felt Western, colonial and othering. So, we settled on quietly dropping the F.

We shared stories, sang songs, and played games. We were applying FPAR, but our decisions weren’t driven by Western feminism, rather by kindness and awareness of the needs of our co-researchers.

While my colleagues and I designed a PAR methodology, I couldn’t help but feel like we were applying FPAR. It’s just that our F word wasn’t Feminism it was Friendship. Our research was still focused on empowering the voices of women. Only we choose to do this, not because of Western feminist theories, but because we knew they were the most underrepresented voices. We still chose methods that supported co-researchers with higher rates of illiteracy and time poverty, but that wasn’t due to gendered statistics, it was done to improve the inclusivity of our research. We set up a playpen for children so mothers could participate without distractions. We arrived early morning and waited until the community was ready. We shared stories, sang songs, and played games. We were applying FPAR, but our decisions weren’t driven by Western feminism, rather by kindness and awareness of the needs of our co-researchers.

Photograph of a group of women gathered in a circle as part of the author's FPAR research in collaboration with RDA in a village in Northern Laos.

Doing FPAR in collaboration with RDA in a village in Northern Laos, image courtesy of the author.

Does it matter if the F word in FPAR is Feminism or Friendship? Did it matter if my colleagues thought we were applying PAR while I thought we were applying FPAR? The more I reflect, the more I realise how much the word choice matters. It’s not just semantics, it’s a theoretical standpoint. Just as we discuss the role of faith and how it shapes development programming in religious aid organisations, shouldn’t we question Western feminist beliefs in the same way?

Here, I feel compelled to emphasise that I am not rejecting feminism or the importance of feminist theory. However, I cannot ignore that the more I conduct my research, the more I see the colonial history of feminism and the unacknowledged feminism(s) that sit outside the Western ‘waves’. As a development practitioner and researcher working internationally, I have a responsibility to respect the perspectives of my colleagues and co-researchers. I also cannot avoid my own biases and need to acknowledge the fact that my very presence has a colonialist aspect.

I understand that acknowledging the colonial history of development is not as simple as substituting a letter from an acronym.

I understand that acknowledging the colonial history of development is not as simple as substituting a letter from an acronym. The discipline of development is tied to these histories. In fact, despite feeling uneasy about the application of Western feminist theory in international gender development, I still chose to apply a FPAR methodology to my research. Ironic, I know, but while collaborating with the team in Laos I am beginning to wonder if instead of applying Western feminism there are opportunities of co-creating new theories that can shape our research methods.

In her keynote address at the 2023 Australian Aid Conference, Dr Alice Evans described friendship as a driving force for female empowerment. She noted that the migration of Southeast Asian women to cities during the late 20th century led to new friendships that encouraged women to “critically reflect on inequalities”. She connected friendship with a “rising feminist consciousness”. I partly agree with Evan’s, but I take issue with the use of the word ‘rising’. As if the feminist consciousness wasn’t there because it didn’t look like it did in the West. Instead of suggesting friendship encouraged feminist thinking, perhaps our perception of friendship is the movement. In the same sense, why can’t the friendship that my colleagues used to guide our research serve as the foundational theory to replace feminism in FPAR?

The failure of feminist discourse to acknowledge non-Western feminism(s) feeds a narrative that these countries need salvation. Rather than a rising ‘consciousness’, if female friends were encouraging one another to critically reflect, then they were already engaging in thoughts of equality and gender.

So perhaps there is no need for an F word. If we truly apply participatory research methods, then do we need to add further complexity? Was the addition of Feminism to PAR an unnecessary labelling of a participatory method as a Western feminist tool? Perhaps the team wasn’t being friendly with our co-researchers they were just being inclusive. Perhaps by trying to substitute a new letter to replace feminism, I am still trying to complicate a methodology that the team naturally understood.  Participation looks different to each team, community, and context. In fact, that is precisely the point.

The continuing dominance of Western feminist theory in international gender development perpetuates colonialism and inequality. If we want to truly apply participatory, decolonial practice, we must question and examine the theories that drive our methods. These methodologies are more than just acronyms. They represent power.

Finally, rather than writing this piece as a tell-all, I encourage responses or feedback that can further our understanding of the role of feminist participatory action research in practice. I don’t pretend to be an expert, just an interested pracademic eager to learn more.

 


The content generated on this blog is for information purposes only. This Article gives the views and opinions of the authors and does not reflect the views and opinions of the Impact of Social Science blog (the blog), nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science. Please review our comments policy if you have any concerns on posting a comment below.

Image Credit: The author.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

About the author

Francesca Earp

Francesca Earp is a PhD candidate in the College of Medicine and Dentistry at James Cook University. Her research focuses on the design and delivery of gender-targeted development programs in Lao Peoples Democratic Republic. Francesca utilises her knowledge in Animal Bioscience and Global Development and her experience as an in-country practitioner to promote community-led gender-sensitive approaches to development.

Posted In: Equity Diversity and Inclusion | Featured | Research methods

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *