Presented by Beth Cullen, Alan Duncan and Katherine Snyder at the IFWF 3rd International Forum on Water and Food, Tshwane, 16 November 2011

1. Participatory Video: capturing community perspectives on
Rain Water Management
Beth Cullen, Alan Duncan & Katherine Snyder
(Derived from PhD work by Beth Cullen)
IFWF 3rd International Forum on Water & Food
Tshwane, 16 November 2011

2. What is Participatory Video (PV)?
Communication tool regardless of formal literacy levels.
Process: empower communities and act as a catalyst for action & change.
Product: community driven film that conveys issues, knowledge & perspectives

3. PV is not new!
 Fogo process, ‘birth of PV’: Don Snowden, 1960s pioneered two-way flow of knowledge between
community members and decision makers
 PV under-documented: focus on doing rather than publishing
Recent developments:
3

4. Why is PV relevant for research & development?
Top-down
Excludes views of those being researched/‘developed’
versus
Collaborative
Communicates grassroots perspectives & knowledge
 PV can potentially be used to involve community members in research processes, ensure
relevance & legitimacy
 Bridge gaps between conventional science and IK by making different types of knowledge
accessible to different audiences.

5. Participants are introduced to video
camera
They acquire basics through active
learning
Learning is equal: students become
teachers
Confidence gained through new skills
Games encourage dialogue & sharing
Additional equipment is introduced
Key issues are identified using PRA
Storyboards develop narratives
Process aims to be fun & engaging

6. Different community views captured
Participants watch & reflect on films
Enables access to inaccessible areas
Participation extended to editing
Ensures control over the final product
Films screened to wider community
Feedback is gathered from range of
community members
Films shown to audiences including
researchers & decision makers
Screenings are documented to show
communities their voice is heard

7. Collaborative rather than extractive
Addresses research fatigue
Represents Indigenous Knowledge
Skills development and empowerment
Peer-to-peer knowledge sharing
Community analysis
Influence decision makers
Catalyst for action & change

8. Challenges
No method is a ‘magic bullet’: must acknowledge
and critically analyse strengths and weaknesses:
Source: InsightShare, 2006
Danger of raising expectations: must consider long term sustainability
Takes time: rushing can result in token efforts at ‘community participation’ which
repeat or reaffirm existing paradigms
Incentives: facilitators should ensure participants get something from the process
Can be hijacked by more powerful actors whilst appearing to represent grassroots
reality: requires awareness of local power dynamics
People may not want to represent their knowledge/reality/point of view to others, for
good reasons!
In certain contexts (i.e. politically restrictive environments) it may do more harm than
good.

9. Potential uses of PV within NBDC
Engage communities and document local perspectives on key issues/challenges
Communicate community perspectives to higher level stakeholders and researchers:
link to Innovation Platforms?
Facilitate collective action: encourage local innovation and take research into
implementation
Monitor and evaluate the process
Encourage cross project and basin learning

10. Questions & Discussion
How do you think PV could be
applied in your own projects?
What are the potential difficulties in
using PV?
How could PV be used to support
innovation processes?
10