Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Participatory Video and Impact: Analysis of the Living Cultures Indigenous Fellowship

  • Original Article
  • Published:
The European Journal of Development Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The research analyses the Living Cultures Indigenous Fellowship, a participatory video (PV) project by the organisation InsightShare. The aims of this study are to determine how the notion of impact evaluation is conceived, what role the participants play in this process, and the initiative’s results. The study of the project allows us to identify some elements that provide alternatives to overcome some of the limitations described in relation to PV and impact evaluation. These alternatives include the relationship between InsightShare and the participants by creating a network of Indigenous organisations; participation as the axis of the initiative; and a multidimensional notion of impact. As project results, we identified three ways used to achieve the sustainability of the activities and to increase the autonomy of the Indigenous organisations, which are key aspects for fulfilling the social objectives of this type of initiative.

Résumé

La recherche analyse The Living Cultures Indigenous Fellowship, un projet de vidéo participative (en anglais: «Participatory Video», PV) de l'organisation InsightShare. Les objectifs de cette étude sont de déterminer comment la notion d'évaluation d'impact est conçue, quel rôle les participants jouent dans ce processus, et les résultats de l'initiative. L'étude du projet nous permet d'identifier certains éléments qui offrent des alternatives pour surmonter certaines des limitations décrites en relation avec la PV et l'évaluation d'impact. Ces alternatives incluent la relation entre InsightShare et les participants en créant un réseau d'organisations indigènes; la participation comme axe de l'initiative; et une notion multidimensionnelle d'impact. En tant que résultats du projet, nous avons identifié trois moyens utilisés pour assurer la durabilité des activités et pour augmenter l'autonomie des organisations indigènes, qui sont des aspects clés pour atteindre les objectifs sociaux de ce type d'initiative.

Resumen

La investigación analiza The Living Cultures Indigenous Fellowship, un proyecto de vídeo participativo (en inglés: “participatory video”, PV) de la organización InsightShare. Los objetivos de este estudio son determinar cómo se concibe la noción de evaluación de impacto, qué papel desempeñan los participantes en este proceso y los resultados de la iniciativa. El estudio del proyecto nos permite identificar algunos elementos que proporcionan alternativas para superar algunas de las limitaciones descritas en relación con el PV y la evaluación de impacto. Estas alternativas incluyen la relación entre InsightShare y los participantes al crear una red de organizaciones indígenas; la participación como el eje de la iniciativa; y una noción multidimensional de impacto. Como resultados del proyecto, identificamos tres formas de lograr la sostenibilidad de las actividades y aumentar la autonomía de las organizaciones indígenas, que son aspectos clave para cumplir con los objetivos sociales de este tipo de iniciativa.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Apgar, M., and W. Allen. 2021. Section Introduction: Participatory Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning: Taking Stock and Breaking New Ground. In Sage Handbook of Participatory Research and Inquiry, ed. D. Burns, J. Howard, and S. Ospina, 831–845. London, UK: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Asadullah, S., and S. Muñiz. 2015. Participatory Video and the Most Significant Change. A guide for facilitators. Oxford, UK: InsightShare.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berardi, A., J. Mistry, L. Haynes, D. Jafferally, E. Bignante, G. Albert, R. Xavier, R. Benjamin, and G. de Ville. 2017. Using Visual Approaches with Indigenous Communities. In Mapping Environmental Sustainability: Reflecting on Systemic Practices for Participatory Research, ed. S. Oreszczyn and A. Lane, 103–128. Bristol, UK: Policy Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Braden, S., and T.T.T. Huong. 1998. Video for Development. A Casebook from Vietnam. London: Oxfam Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2): 77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, P., S. Makanya, I. Soria-Donlan, and D. Wegrostek. 2019. Taking the Product Seriously: Questions of Voice, Politics and Aesthetics in Participatory Video. In Participatory Arts in International Development, ed. P. Cooke and I. Soria-Donlan, 201–216. London: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dart, J., S. Pinwill, and A. Bishop. 2021. The Most Significant Change Technique (MSC): A Case Study of How MSC Helps Communities Unpack Intangible Outcomes. In Sage Handbook of Participatory Research and Inquiry, ed. D. Burns, J. Howard, and S. Ospina, 861–874. London, UK: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Estrella, M., and J. Gaventa. 1997. Who Counts Reality? Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation: A Literature Review. IDS Working Paper, 70.

  • Fraser, N., and A. Honneth. 2003. Redistribution or Recognition? A Political-Philosophical Exchange. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghadirian, M.Z., G.S. Marquis, N.D. Dodoo, and N. Andersson. 2022. Ghanaian female adolescents perceived changes in nutritional behaviors and social environment after creating participatory videos: A most significant change evaluation. Current Developments in Nutrition. 6 (8): nzac103.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gready, P. 2009. Reasons to be cautious about evidence and evaluation: Rights-based approaches to development and the emerging culture of evaluation. Journal of Human Rights Practice 1 (3): 380–401. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/hup021.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Guijt, I., and C. Roche. 2014. Does impact evaluation in development matter? Well, it depends what it’s for! European Journal of Development Research 26: 46–54. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejdr.2013.40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horton, J., R. Macve, and G. Struyven. 2004. Qualitative Research: Experience in Using Semi-structured Interviews. In The Real Life Guide to Accounting Research, ed. C. Humphrey and B. Lee, 339–359. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • InsightShare. 2021. The Bertha Foundation Progress Report. 2020/21. Oxford: InsightShare.

  • Jacobs, A., C. Barnett, and R. Ponsford. 2010. Three approaches to monitoring: Feedback systems, participatory monitoring and evaluation and logical frameworks. IDS Bulletin 41 (6): 36–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemaire, I., and Lunch, C. (2012) Using Participatory Video in Monitoring and Evaluation. In: E-J. Milne, C. Mitchell and N. De Lange (eds) Handbook of Participatory Video. Plymouth: AltaMira Press, pp. 303–317.

  • Low, B., C. Brushwood Rose, P.M. Salvio, and L. Palacios. 2012. Reframing the Scholarship on Participatory Video from Celebration to Critical Engagement. In Handbook of Participatory Video, ed. E.-J. Milne, C. Mitchell, and N. De Lange, 49–65. Plymouth: AltaMira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marzi, S. 2021. Participatory video from a distance: Co-producing knowledge during the COVID-19 pandemic using smartphones. Qualitative Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941211038171.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Mistry, J., E. Bignante, and A. Berardi. 2016. Why are we doing it? Exploring participant motivations within a participatory video project. Area 48 (4): 412–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mistry, J., and J. Shaw. 2021. Evolving social and political dialogue through participatory video processes. Progress in Development Studies 21 (2): 196–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montero Sánchez, D. 2020. Rethinking participatory video in the times of YoutTube. Media, Culture & Society 43: 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morales, T., S. Muñiz, D. Montero Sánchez, and J.M. Moreno-Domínguez. 2021. Autonomía y sostenibilidad en prácticas de vídeo participativo con comunidades indígenas. El caso de la Marabunta Filmadora [Autonomy and sustainability in participatory video practice with indigenous communities. La Marabunta Filmadora as a case-study]. Andamios 18 (47): 397–422. https://doi.org/10.29092/uacm.v18i47.882.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muñiz, S. 2011. InsightShare global network of community-owned video hubs. Participatory Learning and Action 63: 130–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nash, K., and J. Corner. 2016. Strategic impact documentary: Contexts of production and social intervention. European Journal of Communication 31 (3): 227–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323116635831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pawson, R., and N. Tilley. 1997. Realistic Evaluation. London, UK: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plush, T. 2015. Interrogating practitioner tensions for raising citizen voice with participatory video in international development. Nordicom Review 36: 57–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, M. 2016. Problematising participatory video with youth in Canada: The intersection of therapeutic, deficit and individualising discourses. Area 48 (4): 427–434. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharp, K.M., and M.L. Sanders. 2019. What is a theme? Teaching thematic analysis in qualitative communication research methods. Communication Teacher 33 (2): 117–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, J., and C. Robertson. 1997. Participatory Video. A practical guide to using creatively in group development work. London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, J. 2012. Interrogating the Gap Between the Ideals and Practice Reality of Participatory Video. In Handbook of Participatory Video, ed. E.-J. Milne, C. Mitchell, and N. De Lange, 225–241. Plymouth: AltaMira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, J. 2014. Emergent ethics in participatory video: negotiating the inherent tensions as group processes evolve. Area. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, J. 2017. Making All Voices Count Research Report: Pathways to accountability from the margins: reflections on participatory video practice. Hivos: Institute of Development Studies and Ushahidi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, J. 2020. Navigating the Necessary risks and Emergent Ethics of Using Visual Methods with Marginalised People. In Ethics and Integrity in Visual Research Methods, ed. S. Dodd, 105–130. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, J. 2021. Extended Participatory Video Processes. In Sage Handbook of Participatory Research and Inquiry, ed. D. Burns, J. Howard, and S. Ospina, 813–828. London, UK: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, S. 2014. Critiquing the politics of participatory video and the dangerous romance of liberalism. Area 48 (4): 405–411. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Professor Kate Nash for the insightful feedback during his research stay at the University of Leeds. He also wants to thank the InsightShare organisation and its director, Nick Lunch, as well as all the participants interviewed for their contribution to this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Granada, Campus de Cartuja s/n, Granada, Spain

    Juanjo Balaguer

Authors
  1. Juanjo Balaguer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juanjo Balaguer.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Balaguer, J. Participatory Video and Impact: Analysis of the Living Cultures Indigenous Fellowship. Eur J Dev Res 36, 496–514 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-023-00609-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-023-00609-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation