Participatory Rural Appraisal

https://www.pustaka.co.in

Participatory Rural Appraisal

(Methods and Application)

Author:

Dr. N. Narayanasamy

For more books

https://www.pustaka.co.in/home/author/dr-n-narayanasamy

Table of Contents

Foreword

List of Tables

List of Figures

List of Abbreviations

Preface

Acknowledgements

1. Evolution of Participatory Rural Appraisal

2. The Concept and Principles of Participatory Rural Appraisal

3. Participatory Mapping

4. Participatory Modelling

5. Transects

6. Mobility Map

7. Venn Diagram or Chappati Diagram

8. Flow Diagrams

9. Timeline

10. Trend Analysis

11. Seasonal Calendar

12. Daily Schedule

13. Wealth or Well-being Ranking

14. Pair-wise Ranking

15. Matrix Ranking and Scoring

16. Force Field Analysis

17. SWOT Analysis

18. Pie Diagram

19. Body Mapping

21. Members of PRA Team: Roles and Responsibilities

22. Application of PRA Methodology: A Few Illustrations

Glossary

Bibliography

About the Author

Dedication

To my Parents and Wife

Foreword

As we navigate the complexities of rural development, PRA approach emerged during the early 1990s in India as a refreshing departure from traditional top-down methods.  I have had the fortune of closely working with Prof. N Narayanasamy in conducting Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) exercises across diverse socio-economic and geographical contexts. Thus, I am honored to contribute a foreword to one of his seminal works. In the realm of participatory development, where communities are not just recipients but active agents of change, this book stands as a guiding beacon. What sets Professor Narayanasamy's approach apart is not only his profound understanding of PRA methods and tools but also his wealth of experiential knowledge gained through firsthand engagement in a myriad of field settings. This book encapsulates his years of dedication, experience, and insight into empowering rural communities through participatory processes.

This ground breaking work introduces an array of Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) tools and techniques that serve as invaluable resources for understanding rural life and conditions. The tools covered here include: Social Mapping, Transect Walk, Seasonality Analysis, Venn Diagrams, Ranking Exercises, Timeline, Trend change, and many more. What distinguishes Dr. Narayanasamy's approach is his remarkable ability to explain these tools with utmost clarity, making them accessible even to individuals without prior training in PRA methods. By elucidating the basic principles and tenets of PRA, he empowers practitioners to operationalize these tools effectively in field situations. His lucid explanations and practical guidance enable development practitioners to engage meaningfully with communities, fostering collaborative efforts towards the preparation of contextually relevant plans in consultation with the people they serve.

I can vouch for it that Prof. Narayanasamy’s confidence in writing this book stems not just from academic readings on PRA but, more significantly, from his immersive involvement in various fields spanning a wide spectrum of themes. He has traversed through general PRAs, laying the foundation for understanding the functioning of PRA tools. Furthermore, responding to invitations and exigencies, he has applied these tools and methods across diverse themes such as rural credit, food security, rural livelihoods and entrepreneurship, resettlement and rehabilitation, feasibility studies, child labor, and fishermen among others. This breadth of experience has provided him with invaluable insights, allowing him to test, validate, and appreciate the efficacy of each PRA tool elucidated within these pages.

This book is written in text-book style, with a comprehensive coverage, offering readers a holistic understanding of PRA as both an approach and a toolkit. Through clear illustrations and practical examples drawn from real-world applications, the author demystifies the complexities of PRA, making it accessible even to those new to the field. In a landscape where tool-kits on PRA are scarce, this book fills a critical gap, serving as an indispensable guide for development professionals, researchers, and policymakers alike.

Drawing from his extensive background in community development and participatory research, he advocates for a paradigm shift—one that places communities at the forefront of their own development journey. It was, perhaps, a co-incidence that Government of India introduced 73rd Constitutional Amendment during the same time, requiring every Gram Panchayat to prepare ‘peoples plan’ through elected rural local bodies, instead of relying on top-down planning.

At the heart of grassroots level planning – be it Gram Panchayat Development (GPDP) or Village Development Plan (VDP) - lies the concept of Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA), a methodology designed to empower communities to identify their needs, resources, and aspirations. Unlike conventional approaches, PRA recognizes the inherent wisdom and knowledge within communities, fostering a sense of ownership and agency crucial for sustainable development.

Internalising these tools have the potential to transform local level planning from being just a routine task to a poignant reflection of local wisdom and the dreams of villagers, particularly those who are most vulnerable and often overlooked—the poorest, marginalized, voiceless, and unheard.

Throughout this book, the author shares practical insights, visuals and case studies, illustrating the transformative power of PRA in diverse contexts. From remote villages to urban slums, PRA has proven to be a versatile tool for fostering inclusive and participatory development processes. By bridging the gap between experts and communities, PRA facilitates meaningful dialogue, mutual learning, and collective action.

In today's era of technological advancement, there is a growing penchant among technocrats to rely on remote sensing (!), satellite data, and Geo-informatics tools for rural development planning. While these innovations hold promise for enhancing efficiency and precision, it is essential to critically evaluate their impact on community empowerment. The author reminds us that the hallmark of any development approach should be its capacity to empower rather than disempower communities. PRA enables you to ‘getting closer to the community’ – not ‘remotely sense’. It is one of the tents of PRA that ‘observation always involves a discussion, and observation is NOT watching and assuming’.

I am strongly of the view that collecting data remotely, without engaging directly with the lived experiences and voices of villagers, risks alienating and marginalizing them from the development process. True empowerment necessitates a participatory approach where communities are active participants and decision-makers in the planning and implementation of development initiatives. As they say: ‘what the eyes do not see, the heart does not grieve about’.

As we confront the complex challenges of the 21st century—from climate change to economic inequality—the insights offered in this book is a ray of hope. By fostering collaboration, innovation, and grassroots leadership, PRA enables communities to adapt and thrive in the face of adversity. It embodies the spirit of empowerment, resilience, and solidarity essential for building a more just and sustainable world.

Governments often launch web portals aimed at monitoring sectoral developments and identifying development gaps in rural areas. Initiatives like Mission Antyodaya, e-Gramswaraj, and the Panchayat Development Index (PDI) are illustrative examples. However, the effectiveness of these portals hinges on two crucial factors. Firstly, the data within these portals must remain dynamic. Stale data can undermine the utility of these platforms, rendering them ineffective for informing decision-making processes. To ensure relevance and accuracy, mechanisms for updating and refreshing data must be in place continually. Secondly, there must be a robust mechanism for local validation and verification of the data presented on these portals. Without such mechanisms, there is a risk of basing planning exercises on assumptions rather than concrete realities. Local communities are the true custodians of their development narratives, and their active involvement in verifying data ensures that planning efforts are grounded in the lived experiences and aspirations of the people.

This book, relaunched now, I hope will serve as a conscience keeper for development professionals, reminding us of the promise of reliable data in rural development. It underscores the importance of data dynamism and local validation mechanisms in ensuring that development interventions are responsive, inclusive, and truly reflective of the needs and priorities of rural communities. As we navigate the complexities of rural development, may this book inspire us to uphold these principles and empower communities to shape their own destinies.

Participatory Rural Appraisal: Principles, Methods and Applications by Dr. N. Narayanasamy is a methodology for transformative change in rural areas. It challenges us to rethink our approach to development, placing people at the center of the equation. Whether you are a practitioner, policymaker, or academic, this book will inspire you to embark on a journey of discovery, dialogue, and action. I am fully aware that this book is not merely an academic endeavor but a culmination of years of hands-on experience, reflection, and learning. It is a testament to the power of participatory approaches in fostering inclusive and sustainable development. I am sure this book is an invaluable contribution to principles, methods and approaches to rural development.

They say the best way to appreciate someone is ‘to imitate’. I am one among his many students, who strive to put in efforts to imitate him. His insights inspire us. His unassuming personality provides the mental conditioning required to embrace humility, and adore the pursuit of life-long learning.

Dr R Ramesh

Centre for Rural Infrastructure

National Institute of Rural Development & Panchayati Raj

(Ministry of Rural Development, Govt of India)

Hyderabad – 500 030

April, 2024

List of Tables

1.1 Participatory Development vs Participation in Development

1.2 Participation as Means and Ends

1.3 Comparison of RRA and PRA

1.4 RRA and PRA Continuum

2.1 Verbal and Visual: A Comparison

2.2 Sequencing

3.1 Ground vs Paper

5.1 Number of Participants Required for Transects

6.1 Mobility of Fishermen: Kunjaravalasai

7.1 Sample List of Relevant Organisations

9.1 Timeline: Somalingapuram

9.2 Timeline: Women Leadership

9.3 Timeline: Milk Producers’ Cooperative Society

9.4 Timeline of Kovil Oorani: Michael Patinam

9.5 Declining Groundwater - Historical Timeline

9.6 Mudamma’s Life Story

10.1 Trend Analysis: Kathiranampatti

10.2 Trend Analysis of a Problem

10.3 Status of Natural Resources

10.4 Trend Analysis: Assessment of Poverty

10.5 Trend in Awareness Level

11.1 Seasonality: Agriculture in Kasturinaickenpatti

11.2 Seasonal Calendar: Planning of Activities

11.3 Seasonal Health Calendar: Seasonality with Scoring

12.1 Daily Routine of a Woman: During Sowing Season

12.2 Daily Schedule Framework

12.3 Daily Routine of Arumugam - A Boy Working in a Vermicelli Factory

12.4 Daily Routine of Manikandan - A Boy Tending Buffaloes

12.5 Daily Routine of Chinnapappa - A Girl Tending Buffaloes 199

13.1 Well-being Categories and Criteria for Identifying Them

13.2 Wealth Ranking: Category and Criteria

13.3 Record of Information from the Informants’ Piles

13.4 Calculation of Average Score

13.5 Classification of Cards According to Wealth

13.6 Criteria for Wealth Ranking

14.1 Pair-wise Ranking: An Illustration

14.2 Pair-wise Ranking: Sources of Credit

14.3 Pair-wise Matrix Ranking of Teaching Methods: Pupils’ Response

15.1 Matrix Ranking of Rice Varieties

15.2 Matrix Scoring of Cotton Varieties

15.3 Direct Ranking: Problems’ Prioritisation by Scheduled Castes

15.4 Matrix of Problem Classification

15.5 Matrix Scoring and Ranking of Institutions

15.6 Matrix Scoring with Secondary School Girls at Nurudeen Grammar School, Ogbomoso

15.7 Access and Control over Common Resources

15.8 Direct Matrix Ranking of Criteria for Vegetables

16.1 Table of Forces

17.1 SWOT Framework

17.2 SWOT of the SHGs

17.3 SWOT Analysis on Proposed Agro-service Centre

20.1 Structured, Semi-structured, Unstructured Interviews: A Comparison

21.1 Stages of Facilitation

22.1 Participatory Poverty Assessment (PPA)

22.2 Sustainable Livelihood Analysis

22.3 Assessment of Hunger (Absolute and Silent) at the Micro-level

22.4 Vulnerability Analysis

22.5 Rise and Fall of an Institution: An Appraisal

22.6 Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation

List of Figures

1.1 Ladder of Citizen Participation

1.2 Sources of PRA

1.3 Core Phases of Development and Spread of PRA

2.1 Three Pillars of PRA

2.2 Role of Outsiders and Insiders in PRA

2.3 Triangulation

2.4 Building Understanding and Accumulating Knowledge through Sequencing of Methods

3.1 An Example of Symbols Used for Different Types of Households

3.2 Social Map: Kalkottai

3.3 Map of Village Toot Ki Dhani (Balapura) Drawn Up during School Mapping

3.4 Leadership: Kurumpapatty Village

3.5 Literacy Map: Krishna Rakshit Chak

3.6 Village Resource Map: Chellampatti

3.7 Resource Map: Sources of Irrigation

3.8 Aquifer Map

3.9 Forest Resource Map: Tholthukki Village

3.10 Resource Map of the Mangrove Wetland: Veerankoil Village

3.11 Farm Sketches and Profile

3.12 Resource Map: Problem of Tannery Effluents (Kamatchipuram)

3.13 Resource Map: Problem Identification (Ariyankundru Village)

4.1 Participatory Modelling by Gender and Age

5.1 Transect: Tirumalapuram Village

5.2 Transect-based Resource Map: Uchikulam

5.3 Transect-based Matrix

5.4 Evaluation of Agro-forestry

6.1 Mobility Map: Kasturinaickenpatti

6.2 Mobility Map: Sellampatti

6.3 Mobility Map: Uchikulam

6.4 Resource Location through Mobility Map: Nandimangalam

6.5 Mobility Map of Fishermen Community: Kunjaravalasai

7.1 Venn Diagram: Relations of Size and Distance

7.2 Venn Diagram: Depicting the Relationship

7.3 Venn Diagram: Depicting Coordination between Organisations

7.4 Venn Diagram: Assessing the Effectiveness of the Organisations

7.5 Venn Diagram: Evaluating the Performance of Credit Sources

7.6 Venn Diagram: Effectiveness of Leaders

7.7 Venn Diagram: Biotic Pressure on Forests

8.1 Causal Diagram

8.2 Cause–Impact Diagram

8.3 Problem Tree

8.4 Shrimp Farms: Problem Tree (Ariankunru)

8.5 Flow Diagram for Impact Analysis

8.6 Systems Diagram

8.7 Systems Flow

8.8 Flow Diagram of Rice Production and Marketing

8.9 Child Mortality

8.10 Impact of Project Intervention

8.11 Flow Diagram of Problems Related to Potato Production

10.1 Trend Analysis: An Illustration

10.2 Status of Women in Easanur Village

10.3 Evaluation of Project Intervention

11.1 Rainfall: Kasturinaickenpatti (Ref. Year, 1992 – 1993)

11.2 Employment in Agriculture: Kasturinaickenpatti

11.3 Seasonal Livelihood Activities of Men Belonging to Medium-rich Families

11.4 Seasonal Livelihood Activities of Women Belonging to Medium-rich Families

11.5 Seasonal Livelihood Activities of Men Belonging to Poor Families

11.6 Seasonal Livelihood Activities of Women Belonging to Poor Families

11.7 Seasonal Livelihood Activities of Women Belonging to the Poorest Families

11.8 Food Calendar: Nlaphwane Village, Botswana

12.1 Days Timeline Covering 24 Hours

12.2 Daily Schedule Based on Relative Estimation of Time

12.3 Daily Schedule Based on Matrix of Activities

12.4 A 24-Hour Wheel

12.5 Daily Schedule of a Fisherwoman

12.6 Daily Routine of a Fisherman

12.7 Daily Routine of a Farm Woman during Season and Non-season

13.1 Sample Index Card

13.2 Well-being Category

14.1 Disease Ranking: Better-off Women

14.2 Disease Ranking: Poor Women

16.1 Force Field Analysis

16.2 Force Field Analysis: An Illustration

16.3 Force Field Analysis: Ariankundru Village

16.4 Force Field Analysis: Adidravidar Colony

18.1 A Simple Pie Chart

18.2 Pie Diagram with Pictures

18.3 Income Generation in Amemo

18.4 Pie Chart Showing Distribution of Castes in Dobang Kunda (Old Women)

18.5 Land Use in Ancharo Peasant Association

18.6 Major Soil Types in Amemo

18.7 Crop Choice for Meher Season, 1983

18.8 Presence of Animals in Amemo Peasant Association

18.9 Percentage of People Owning Oxen

18.10 Fuel Sources in Amemo Peasant Association (1983 E.C.)

18.11 Pie Charts of Income and Expenditure: Four Old Men

18.12 Preparation of Expenditure on Inputs for Cotton and Maize

18.13 Farmers’ Perceptions of the Relative Impact of Organisations Concerned with Development in Abela Sipa Peasant Association

18.14 Most Frequent Types of Treatment for Serious Childhood Diseases

19.1 A Girl’s Childhood

List of Abbreviations

AD - Approach Development

AE - Appreciative Enquiry

AuE - Auto-evaluation

AKRSP - Aga Khan Rural Support Programme

APA - Appreciative Planning and Action

ASSEFA - Association for Sarva Seva Farms

BDO - Block Development Office

BE - Beneficiary Assessment

CAP - Community Action Planning

CBOs - Community-based Organisations

CDP - Community Development Programme

CLF - Cluster-level Federation

CM - Community Monitoring/Citizen Monitoring

CPRs - Common Property Resources

CSI - Civil Society Institution

CWDP - Comprehensive Watershed Development Programme

DANIDA - Danish International Development Agency

DRA - Demand Responsive Approach

DRDA - District Rural Development Agency

FAO - Food and Agriculture Organization

FF - Farmers First

FFA - Force Field Analysis

FGD - Focus Group Discussion

FPR - Farmer Participatory Research

FSD - Farming System Diagnosis

FSR - Farming System Research

FYM - Farmyard Manure

GRI - Gandhigram Rural Institute

ICSSR - Indian Council for Social Sciences Research

IDS - Institute of Development Studies

IFAD - International Funding for Agriculture Development

IIED - International Institute for Environment and Development

IRDP - Integrated Rural Development Programme

KKF - Karl Kubel Foundation

KVK - Krishi Vigyan Kendra

LFA - Logical Framework Analysis

MEP - Minimum Evaluation Procedure

MLA - Member of Legislative Assembly

MP - Member of Parliament

MPA - Methodology for Participatory Assessment

MSSRF - M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation

MYRADA - Mysore Resettlement and Development Agency

NGOs - Non-governmental Organisations

NSL - Now, Soon, Later

PALM - Participatory Learning and Management

PAME - Participatory Assessment, Monitoring and Evaluation

PAR - Participatory Action Research

PARR - Participatory Action Reflection Research

PCM - Project Cycle Management

PE - Participatory Evaluation

PHC - Primary Health Centre

PI - Participatory Inquiry

PIM - Participatory Impact Monitoring

PLA - Participatory Learning and Action

PM - Participatory Monitoring

PM&E - Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation

PPA - Participatory Poverty Assessment

PRA - Participatory Rural Appraisal

PR&D Participatory Research and Development

ProM - Process Monitoring

PTD - Participatory Technology Development

RAP - Rapid Assessment Procedure

RDT - Rural Development Tourist

REA - Rapid Ethnographic Assessment

RRA - Rapid Rural Appraisal

SA - Social Assessment

SARAR - Self-esteem, Associative Strength, Resourcefulness, Action Planning and Responsibility

SC / ST - Schedule Caste / Schedule Tribe

SE - Self-evaluation

SHGs - Self-help Groups

SSI - Semi-structured Interview

SWOT - Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats

TD - Theatre for Development

ToT - Transfer of Technology

TWAD - Tamil Nadu Water and Drainage Board

VAO - Village Administrative Officer

Preface

Community participation has become an indispensable and integral component of development initiatives at the grass roots. It has been conclusively proved that the effectiveness, success and sustainability of development initiatives largely depend on wholehearted participation of the stakeholders, particularly the primary ones. But the question remains about where we should introduce this critical element of participation in the development process. In order to help achieve the desired output and outcome, participation needs to be introduced right from the appraisal to the monitoring and evaluation stage. Participation at different stages of the development process makes the participants realise that they are a part and parcel of the development, which ultimately makes them ‘own’ the output and outcome of the development intervention.

Participation is a socio-psychological process. The urge to participate should come from within; it should not be forced from outside. However, it can be facilitated through indigenous processes, which are stimulated by internal motivation and guided by local organisations. Participatory rural appraisal (PRA), now known as participatory learning and action (PLA), with a repertoire of user-friendly, easy-to-follow methods, and with an emphasis on attitude and behaviour of the facilitators and development professionals, provides enough space and environment for people to actively participate at different stages of the development process. Practised initially by the NGOs in select spheres of activities, PRA has now spread rapidly. Due to the thrust given by the funding partners, it has now become not only a necessity but also a conditionality in many of the development projects. PRA is now practised by a galaxy of change agents, such as NGOs, universities, research institutions, training organisations, donor agencies, international aid agencies and government departments.

The Gandhigram Rural University (GRU) introduced PRA in the early 1990s. A team of staff at the university, well-trained in PRA, drawn from different disciplines, with rich hands-on experience in the field, has been consistently using PRA in its research, outreach and training programmes and development activities. Initially, PRA was used to appraise the socio-economic conditions of the people in the service villages where GRU rendered its services. Later, the team expanded its field of application to include agriculture, irrigation, animal husbandry, fisheries, education, environment, health, sanitation, water supply, livelihood analysis, AIDS / HIV, community-based organisations, tribal development, food and nutrition, micro-plan, micro-finance and monitoring and evaluation. The team thus applied PRA in a multitude of settings. This experience largely helped them organise training sessions among a wide variety of clients using the principle of ‘learning by doing’.

Much of this book is the outcome of collective efforts of the PRA team at GRU. This book is based on the field experience of the author and members of the PRA team at GRU. It has also drawn lessons from the experience of PRA practitioners in the Third World countries.

The book comprises twenty-two chapters. The first two chapters deal with the origin, concept and principles of PRA. Chapters 3 – 20 deal with the methods of PRA. Each method is described in detail, explaining the concept, the procedure to be adopted, the participants to be involved, its application, merits and limitations and the precautions to be taken. In order to quickly grasp the methods, plenty of field-based illustrations are given. These illustrations are drawn from a wide variety of fields in order to make the readers understand and grasp the varied fields of application of PRA. Chapter 21 describes the roles and responsibilities of the PRA team members. This is an important segment in the book, for the effective practice of PRA mostly depends on the attitude and behaviour of the PRA team members. The final chapter dwells upon the application of PRA methodology in select fields of development.

The book should be of immense use to those who believe in the institutionalisation of participation. Students, teachers, researchers, NGO workers, donors and aid agencies in the development field will find this book comprehensive, meaningful and productive. However, the book does not aim to replace field experience, since the latter is always more rewarding. The author welcomes comments and suggestions from the readers.

Acknowledgements

My association and interaction with my colleagues, students, development practitioners, NGOs, government departments, development consultants and villagers have benefited me immensely in writing this book.

I am deeply indebted to Gandhigram Rural Institute (Deemed University), where I served for more than four decadess. The university provides excellent opportunities to teachers and students for undertaking field-based research and outreach activities. This helped me practise and experiment the participatory rural appraisal (PRA) methods among a wide spectrum of audience and settings. I have drawn significantly from this experience to write this book.

I extend my deep sense of gratitude to Sri D.K. Oza (former Vice-Chancellor, GRU), who was responsible for introducing Robert Chambers to the Gandhigram community and for ushering in what can be regarded as an era of PRA at this university. I had the opportunity of interacting with Robert Chambers in a ten-day international workshop on ‘Attitude Behaviour Change for PRA’ in Bangalore and, subsequently, in a couple of workshops at Madurai, which reinforced my conviction in PRA. His thought-provoking articles and books have inspired me a lot. Any book on PRA cannot be written without referring to him. In this book too, I have liberally quoted from his works.

I am also grateful to Dr. N. Markandan (former Vice-Chancellor), who himself is an adept practitioner of PRA. He has provided guidance and support in practising and experimenting PRA methods in a number of service villages of GRU.

I also want to record here my deep sense of gratitude to the Ford Foundation for providing financial support which helped me gain exposure to the world of PRA and enabled me to offer training to a wide variety of audience from villages, community-based organisations (CBOs), colleges, universities, training institutions, research organisations, NGOs, government departments, donor agencies, banks, etc. I am indebted to Dr. Ruth G. Alsop (Programme Officer, Ford Foundation), now with the World Bank (Washington), for her constant support, guidance and help in our PRA related works.

PRA is a team work and team experience. It is a way of life for some of us. I have heavily drawn from the knowledge and experience of the members of the PRA team at GRU. I express my sincere thanks to Dr. M.P. Boraian, Professor in Extension Education, who has been consistently helping and supporting all my PRA endeavours. My sincere thanks are due to the members of the PRA team at GRU who include Dr. B.R. Dwaraki, former Professor of Sociology; Dr. S. Ponnuraj, Dean, Faculty of Rural Health and Sanitation; Dr. T.T. Ranganathan, Professor of Agriculture; Dr. N.D. Mani, Professor of Rural Development; Dr. P. Sumangala, former Professor of Economics; Dr. R. Ramesh, Research Fellow; Dr. S. Manivel, Reader in Cooperation; Dr. K. Manikandan, Lecturer in Economics; Sri B. Baskar, Lecturer in Cooperation; and Dr. E. Perumal, Field Organiser.

I have been fortunate enough to get trained by John Devavaram and his dedicated team at Society for People’s Education and Economic Change (SPEECH) who are mostly responsible for spreading the concept of PRA in Tamil Nadu. John Devavaram has also opened up a lot of opportunities for participating in reflection sessions (which he used to organise at periodic intervals).

I am grateful to J. Bernard, Visiting Fellow at the National Institute of Rural Development, Hyderabad, who helped us fine-tune our skills in practising PRA.

I am thankful to Philip Abraham, a development consultant (formerly DANIDA Advisor for the Comprehensive Watershed Development Programme), who provided me with an opportunity to work as a consultant for a project in the field of PRA and CBOs. The experience gained in the project has been incorporated in the book.

This book would not have been possible without the resources and knowledge from thousands of rural people from hundreds of villages spread across the southern states of India. I wholeheartedly thank them for the invaluable time they spent with me in appraisal and analysis.

The Institute of Development Studies (Sussex) and the International Institute for Environment Development (London) have been playing an excellent role in promoting PRA. I get myself updated by constantly reading the publications from these institutions, especially the notes on participatory learning and action. I have liberally used some illustrations from these notes in this book.

I thank Mr. Rohan Savarimuthu (Research Scholar, Faculty of English and Foreign Languages, GRU) for going through the manuscript. I am indeed very grateful to Dr. Rajesh Devadoss, Director, PUSTAKA Digital Media Private  Limited for his unstinted support in publishing this book. I am indeed grateful to R. Saravanan and P. Sellachamy for tirelessly typesetting the manuscript. Finally, I thank my wife Dr. S. Vijayeswari, who is a constant source of inspiration in all my academic, research and outreach pursuits.

N. Narayanasamy

1. Evolution of Participatory Rural Appraisal

INTRODUCTION

Development intervention approaches in India over the past sixty years (until the late 1980s when we started pursuing participatory approach) have been very much a ‘supply-oriented one-way traffic’. The interventionists, by and large, did not care to notice the ‘development process’ and the ‘by-products’. All that they were interested in was ‘the product’ of development intervention at its best; and in merely making the input delivery, at its worst. We have operationalised quite a number of approaches and strategies to bring about development in India. Some of the major approaches adopted include Gandhian approaches, community development approach, sector approach, target approach, area approach, minimum needs approach and integrated approach. These approaches have tended, primarily, to material giving, input supplying, infrastructure development, technology transfer and the like.

The limitations of these approaches include,

* A top-down strategy;

* Being target-oriented;

* The non-involvement of people, leading to problems in selecting the right development strategy;

* Vertically controlled sectoral approach without any horizontal coordination at the micro level;

* The dominant development thinking oriented towards greater inputs (supply) than what people demanded;

* Poor percolation effect due to bureaucratic practices involved at all the stages of implementation;

* The mistaken notion that bank credit per se can do the magic of development;

* Frequent announcements of interest concession and loan waivers by the government that have since spoiled the repayment ethics and choked the recycling of funds;

* The inevitability of leakages and wastages;

* Near-total absence of self-confidence and even self-respect;

* Complete dispossession of much of the community infrastructure;

* Lack of appreciation and promotion of indigenous technical knowledge and resources; and

* The ever-growing recipient attitudes.

All these limitations have today become impediments to the process of development.

THE MAIN CHALLENGE

The main challenge, therefore, before the development facilitators is to dislodge the strong dependency culture in Indian villages; help them regain their self-image and self-respect; create in them a strong sense of public consciousness to care about and to stand as the sentinel on the community infrastructure and common property resources, prepare and transform them to realise the need for community-led initiatives and build in them the confidence and fortitude essential in making decisions and taking actions.

Thus, the basal logic for the success of any intervention in development work depends not merely on the number of schemes and projects pumped in, but also on the confidence built and the power given to people to decide and take community initiatives. Consensus is its key.

The process of building consensus and confidence for collective community action definitely takes a