Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorEgid, Beatrice R
dc.contributor.authorRoura, María
dc.contributor.authorAktar, Bachera
dc.contributor.authorAmegee Quach, Jessica
dc.contributor.authorChumo, Ivy
dc.contributor.authorDias, Sónia
dc.contributor.authorHegel, Guillermo
dc.contributor.authorJones, Laundette
dc.contributor.authorKaruga, Robinson
dc.contributor.authorLar, Luret
dc.contributor.authorLópez, Yaimie
dc.contributor.authorPandya, Apurvakumar
dc.contributor.authorNorton, Theresa C
dc.contributor.authorSheikhattari, Payam
dc.contributor.authorTancred, Tara
dc.contributor.authorWallerstein, Nina
dc.contributor.authorZimmerman, Emily
dc.contributor.authorOzano, Kim
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-18T16:52:53Z
dc.date.available2021-11-18T16:52:53Z
dc.date.issued2021-11-11
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10713/17146
dc.description.abstractINTRODUCTION: Power relations permeate research partnerships and compromise the ability of participatory research approaches to bring about transformational and sustainable change. This study aimed to explore how participatory health researchers engaged in co-production research perceive and experience 'power', and how it is discussed and addressed within the context of research partnerships. METHODS: Five online workshops were carried out with participatory health researchers working in different global contexts. Transcripts of the workshops were analysed thematically against the 'Social Ecology of Power' framework and mapped at the micro (individual), meso (interpersonal) or macro (structural) level. RESULTS: A total of 59 participants, with participatory experience in 24 different countries, attended the workshops. At the micro level, key findings included the rarity of explicit discussions on the meaning and impact of power, the use of reflexivity for examining assumptions and power differentials, and the perceived importance of strengthening co-researcher capacity to shift power. At the meso level, participants emphasised the need to manage co-researcher expectations, create spaces for trusted dialogue, and consider the potential risks faced by empowered community partners. Participants were divided over whether gatekeeper engagement aided the research process or acted to exclude marginalised groups from participating. At the macro level, colonial and 'traditional' research legacies were acknowledged to have generated and maintained power inequities within research partnerships. CONCLUSIONS: The 'Social Ecology of Power' framework is a useful tool for engaging with power inequities that cut across the social ecology, highlighting how they can operate at the micro, meso and macro level. This study reiterates that power is pervasive, and that while many researchers are intentional about engaging with power, actions and available tools must be used more systematically to identify and address power imbalances in participatory research partnerships, in order to contribute to improved equity and social justice outcomes.en_US
dc.description.urihttps://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006978en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBMJ Publishing Groupen_US
dc.relation.ispartofBMJ Global Healthen_US
dc.rights© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.en_US
dc.subjectsocial ecology of poweren_US
dc.subject.meshCommunity-Based Participatory Researchen_US
dc.subject.meshHealth Policyen_US
dc.subject.meshGlobal Healthen_US
dc.title'You want to deal with power while riding on power': global perspectives on power in participatory health research and co-production approachesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006978
dc.identifier.pmid34764147
dc.source.volume6
dc.source.issue11
dc.source.countryEngland


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record