Meyer, M A; Hendricks, M; Newman, G D; Masterson, J H; Cooper, J T; Sansom, G; Gharaibeh, N; Horney, J; Berke, P; van Zandt, S and Cousins, T (2018) Participatory action research: Tools for disaster resilience education. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 9(4-5), pp. 402-419. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose: Participatory action research can improve scientific knowledge and community capacity to address disaster resilience and environmental justice. Evidence from the literature suggests that resident participation enhances assessment of environmental risks, raises awareness and empowers residents to fight for equitable distribution of hazard and climate risk adaptations. Yet, risk assessment and urban planning processes still frequently operate within expertise-driven groups without significant community engagement. Such fragmentation results in part from a lack of appreciation for community expertise in built environment adaptations and educational tools to support resident involvement in the often technical built environment planning processes. Design/methodology/approach: A participatory research and place-based education project was developed that enhanced co-learning between residents and researchers while collecting and analyzing local data on flood resilience in the built environment. Five research activities constitute the curriculum of resilience education on stormwater infrastructure: establishment of partnership agreement/memorandum of understanding, participatory GIS to identify flooding issues, water quality testing and health survey, stormwater infrastructure assessment and urban/landscape design. Partners included high school and college students, residents and environmental justice organizations. Findings: Outcomes include a stakeholder-approved infrastructure assessment smartphone application, neighborhood maps of drainage issues, a report of water containments and neighborhood-scaled green infrastructure provisions and growth plans. Findings indicate that participatory research positively contributed to resilience knowledge of participants. Originality/value: This paper outlines an interdisciplinary pedagogical strategy for resilience planning that engages residents to assess and monitor the performance of stormwater infrastructure and create resilience plans. The paper also discusses challenges and opportunities for similar participatory projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | climate change; infrastructure; participatory approaches; pedagogy; resilience; social inclusion |
| Index terms: | social inclusion, testing, risk assessment, landscape design, pedagogy, water quality, built environment, partnership, community engagement, green infrastructure, adaptation, planning process, college student, urban planning, drainage, climate change, environmental risk, climate risk, methodology, evidence, infrastructure assessment, stormwater, flooding, disaster resilience, strategy, fragmentation, survey, justice, action research, maps, participatory approach |
| Subjects: | project controls, partnership management, sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, occupational health, environmental engineering, environmental hazards, management, design practice, spatial and geospatial analysis, research methods, teaching methods, infrastructure engineering, financial risk, urban planning, sustainability and resilience, legal systems, professional practice, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, user focus, business, community and social dimensions, climate science |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Time Control, Education, Ethics, Urban Studies, Design Practice, Legal Issues, Governance, Sustainability, Stakeholder Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Cost Management, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here