Research for Action: A Region-wide Participatory Process to Build Participation, Awareness and Advocacy on Trade Policies

"The findings of this research have provided recommendations that are practical and applicable in the Vietnam rural agricultural situation."

—Government official, Vietnam

Published as part of the New Tactics in Human Rights Tactical Notebook Series, this 24-page document explores a participatory research process undertaken by the Southeast Asian Council for Food Security and Fair Trade (SEACON).

As author Chubashini Suntharalingam explains here, SEACON was created in 1996 based on the principle that food security is a universal right that needs to be enshrined in law at all levels. In each of SEACON's member countries, the organisation supports people-centred national strategies, such as food security councils that enable government, private sector, and civil society representatives to meet and dialogue on agriculture and trade issues. Responding to the rise of free trade in the global economy, SEACON set out in 2003 to conduct a participatory research project to investigate the impacts of these macroeconomic changes on small-scale food producers in Southeast Asia.

After providing this background on SEACON's work and her role as Research Manager, Suntharalingam describes the context for, and development of, the strategy being evaluated here. The process, which she outlines in detail, was designed to be participatory, regional in scope, credible, and gender-sensitive. Specifically, interviews with producers (e.g., farmers and fisherfolk) and government officials, observations, focus group discussions (FGDs), price gathering, and case studies were carried out; each of these components is examined within the report. Amongst the many activities the author describes are the hosting of educational workshops and the creation of comic books (pictured above). SEACON's goals in undertaking this research process included: 1) assessing the impacts of [Association of Southeast Asian Nations] ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) at the national level (focusing on trade and investments) and on small-scale producers (capacity to compete in a liberalised market); 2) providing recommendations to address and mitigate its negative impact and enhance its positive impact, especially on rice and priority commodities such as corn, fish, and sugar; and 3) promoting fair trade in the region.

In discussing these research methods that characterise a participatory research process, Suntharalingam highlights some of the challenges of conducting interviews and organising FGDs. She goes on to address the difficulties of working with researchers who are untrained in writing documents and reports, as well as the potential issues that must be considered working with participants at the grassroots level. For example, in SEACON's study, the very people that were struggling economically as a result of the issues that the organisation sought to study were also limited in their capacity to participate in the project as a result of these hardships. Taking the time to conduct an interview would mean losing hours that needed to be spent working. The issue serves to exemplify how, by involving local communities, researchers must also be considerate of their unique needs.

Looking beyond the research process, the notebook also details the potential impacts of participatory research that creates thorough, credible documentation at the grassroots level. According to Suntharalingam, not only can the information be utilised in advocacy and lobbying efforts, but the research process itself can serve to create a network of activists, informing organisations working on issues that impact study participants, and directly benefiting the people themselves. Participatory research "empowers local communities," the author concludes, "connecting victims of human rights violations to the information they need to become active defenders of their right and to develop creative solutions to human rights challenges."