The ‘P’s of Participation: A Dual-Voiced Perspective on Participatory Numbers in Disaster Risk Reduction

Abstract

The top-down, technocratic approach to community engagement is a common sight in development initiatives across the world. While these approaches are useful in its ability to generate objective, quantifiable information, it can come at the expense of the local voice. Genuine participation in development seeks to include this local voice – the perspectives, priorities, and concerns of the local people – into wider initiatives and projects that affect them. However, participatory approaches in general tend to generate qualitative information. The preference for measurable and scientific information runs deep among development professionals and researchers alike. As such, the (qualitative) insights gained from participatory engagement is often side-lined in lieu of more ‘valid’ and ‘hard’ forms of data. Such scientific information is not as easily accessible to everyone however. This acts as a barrier for a dialogue between development stakeholders. A solution would work to appropriately cater to the requirements of all stakeholders in an initiative, local and external alike. Participatory numbers are one such approach. It is a participatory approach that generates quantifiable indicators. These indicators are produced by the local people. Further, as they are numbers-based information, they carry the weight of scientific validity and objectivity. This thesis explores participatory numbers in the specific sub-field of development known as disaster risk reduction (DRR). It aims to understand the usage and benefits of participatory numbers in DRR through unpacking the three principles of participation: the participants, the process, and the power. Through understanding how these principles work in the participatory numbers process, an insight into its outcomes and benefits can be gained. This thesis further employs a somewhat unique approach to unpacking these three principles. It combines the perspectives of a facilitator of the participatory process with the perspectives of a researcher of the process. This results in a more rounded image of participatory numbers in DRR, as it includes the more objective inquiry (researcher’s perspective) with a more hands-on, involved account (facilitator’s perspective) Ultimately, this combinative approach seeks to discuss the three principles in greater depth and breadth than a singular approach alone. This study took place in La Trinidad, Philippines: a nation with a long and interesting relationship with both DRR and participation. The eventual discussion produced by this research revealed that such a combinative approach can indeed be an insightful way to understand the uses, benefits, and power of participatory numbers in DRR.