Abstract Catalyzing change and promoting sustainable cities in informal settlements and their residents requires an understanding of unmet needs and resilience among marginalized and vulnerable groups (MVGs). This is because needs identified on behalf of MVGs as “unmet” are sometimes not perceived as unmet, or even “meetable”, and resilience strategies from above are often perceived […]
Background Accountability strategies are expected to enhance access to water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) service delivery in low-and middle-income countries (LMIC). Conventional formal social accountability mechanisms (SAMs) for WASH service delivery have been inadequate to meet the needs of residents in informal settlements in LMICs. This has prompted growing interest in alternative informal SAMs (iSAMs) […]
Introduction A range of community engagement initiatives to advance health and wellbeing are currently taking place in informal settlements in low and middle income countries (LMICs), including community and stakeholder meetings, use of radio, film, TV programs and other information, education and communication materials (IECs) organized by different stakeholders. While these initiatives tend to focus […]
Abstract Social accountability for water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) services is a critical component to realising child rights to WASH services by the urban poor, more so in childcare centres. Despite the existence of discrete social accountability mechanisms (SAMs) in informal settlements, informal SAMs rarely form part of strategic approaches to addressing social accountability challenges […]
Abstract Introduction Despite many institutions gaining access to improved water sanitation and hygiene (WASH) services, childcare centres in informal settlements have low access and poor condition of WASH services. It is imperative to understand how existing actors and social networks operate in the WASH sector in childcare centres in Nairobi’s informal settlements. Objective To empirically […]
Abstract Catalyzing change and promoting sustainable cities in informal settlements and their residents requires an understanding of unmet needs and resilience among marginalized and vulnerable groups (MVGs). This is because needs identified on behalf of MVGs as “unmet” are sometimes not perceived as unmet, or even “meetable”, and resilience strategies from above are often perceived […]
The Ripple Effect Mapping Tool provides a space for research partners to reflect on their achievements and refocus on their aims while also supporting reflexivity processes on positionality, inclusion and equity. As such, grounds the research within the lived realities of communities. The tool also supports communities and researchers to engage in critical learning. It […]
Abstract Children heading households (CHH) in urban informal settlements face specific vulnerabilities shaped by limitations on their opportunities and capabilities within the context of urban inequities, which affect their wellbeing. We implemented photovoice research with CHHs to explore the intersections between their vulnerabilities and the social and environmental context of Nairobi’s informal settlements. We enrolled […]
This brief outlines the work of the ARISE project and is a mini introduction to how we work in Kenya, Bangladesh, Sierra Leone and India as well as providing a snap shot of some of the ways in which we have made a difference. Read the brief if you want to understand the consortium structure […]
The project was implemented in Korogocho and Viwandani informal settlements in Nairobi. The ARISE project aims to catalyse a step change for health and well being, including talking to community members to try and understand what challenges they face in their day-to-day lives. This video looks at water, sanitation and hygiene in Kenya’s informal settlements.
Involving community researchers and the broader community in the development and validation of priorities, study tools, data collection processes, data analysis, interpretation and action planning is important to the quality of the CBPR process. Consistently engaging the community in monitoring the progress of community activities and gaining their reflexive accounts of the actions ensures rigour within the research process.
Capacities (competencies and conditions)
●Awareness of trustworthiness criteria that draw on critical epistemologies
●Ability to assess and develop contextualised code of research ethics including safeguarding
●Capacity to undertake validation exercises with stakeholders and the wider community to ensure the study is relevant, accepted and supported
●Ongoing learning, quality assessment and safeguarding assessment
●Capacity to contextualise research materials that value local ways of knowing and knowledge production
●Knowledge on how to engage in and apply reflexivity, considering positionality with regard to research findings, to strengthen rigour and trustworthiness
●Ability to triangulate different sources of information to determine research priorities, approach and actions
●Rigorous research findings which draw on trustworthiness criteria
●Generalisable research processes that can enhance CBPR techniques
●Community based research that is robust and adds value to communities, policies and practices
●Community members learn research skills, gain access to resources, and find ways to legitimate their knowledge, which have previously been limited by a history of exclusionary research practices
●After the research partnership has undertaken a process of prioritisation, and before conceptualising the research, validate the priorities and incorporate additional context to increase trustworthiness in the process
●Design research analysis and interpretation procedures that involve community researchers and associated stakeholders
●Have an outsider to help increase the rigour and real and perceived validity of the research
●Conduct data interpretation sessions to discuss interpretations, add context to information collected, and facilitate a better understanding of project documentation
●Triangulate data sources and add participant checking
●Undertake co-analysis activities with co-researchers and stakeholders
●Increase the reliability of the study by developing and using a case study protocol and a chain of evidence
●Design survey and interview questions that are culturally aligned enhancing the fit of the research with the implementing context
●Identify relational and situated ethical and safeguarding concepts and approaches that best fit the specific context and the process-oriented nature of CBPR (25)
●Constructive negotiation with gatekeeping bodies such as funders and research ethics committees to increase understanding of appropriate approaches
●Engage co-researchers and community members during the research tool preparation to cover all the essential aspects of the research including safeguarding risks
Utilise quality criteria to evaluate the CBPR process – see Springett, Atkey (26) and Sandoval, Lucero (27
●Documentation on the translation and adaptation of the materials and quality assurance processes through minutes and notes on discussions and engagement within the team and with stakeholders
●Documentation of research validation processes
●Documentation of discussion during triangulation of findings
●Case studies/stories/blogs that show reflexivity processes
●Peer reviewed publications
●Audio or notes from community validation processes
●NVivo or other screenshots showing quality checking processes
●Development and use of a case study protocol and the development of a database and a chain of evidence to improve reliability of the study
*Please note that some statements are adaptations or direct quotes from the papers listed in the reference section