Whose knowledge is valid?

[Rituu B. Nanda]

I have been informally involved with Society for Community Research and Action. The group recently had an exciting discussion on definition of CP practice and how it can/is/should change! I watched the video later and found it very useful and want to share with you. Thanks to Nicole Freund, Research Scientist, Managing Editor, Global Journal of Community Psychology Practice for this video. 

Key takeaways from the video

Whose knowledge is considered valid?
The discussion was around how community psychologists can be a bridge between communities and academia and funding agencies. For instance one participant said that academia does  not find the arts based research legitimate. 
Similarly there was conversation around evidence. Do communities have an equal voice in deciding what constitutes evidence or what is considered data. Participants mentioned how collective impact had gained popularity amongst funders but it has its limitations. Read Tom Wolff's article https://charterforcompassion.org/images/menus/communities/pdfs/2302...

Then what is the way forward? All agreed that we have to get the communities on the forefront and the table on issues concerning them. One participant suggested a written agreement between funding agencies and communities on how the project will look like and the evaluation. Others cautioned on the term community engagement. It should not be tokenistic. community workers or psychologists do not want to give their power or privilege Another challenge when we get communities engaged is that power brokers in the community take the forefront. Those working with communities elevate marginalised voices and need to bring them forward in the development paradigm. One powerful example came from Julian on communities pushing funding agency's boundaries. He shared about a tribal community which negotiated with funder as definition of tribal community on health was vastly different from western definition of behaviour health and was able to get significant latitude on operationalising the project. 

Conclusion
Thus, to conclude that community building should aim to re-distribute power. It is about true engagement and sharing of power with communities and discussion on who has the power to define evidence. And getting funding agencies to re-centre communities and think ways of collaborative decision making and not bring big, fancy ideas from outside. Constellation's community life competence process offers a systematic process that communities can systematically chart their way. The SALT approach is the spirit of the process and  helps community workers shift from interventionists to facilitators and use equity lens in their work.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

The original definition of community psychology practice was efforts “to strengthen the capacity of communities to meet the needs of constituents and help them to realize their dreams in order to promote well-being, social justice, economic equity and self-determination through systems, organizational and/or individual change” (Julian, 2006) In the intervening years much has emerged that requires the field to revisit this definition. This includes:

1. The development of the Community Psychology Practices Competencies with books, and journals addressing their use.
2. Increased focus on systems and policy change in CP Practice -including extensive writing on institutional and structural racism (see Gina Langhout on anti-racism, anti-sexism approaches and the need for self examination); inclusion of policy work in CP graduate training (See Ken Maton’s work) and most recently the focus on decolonialization from Pacifica (Nuria Ciofalo and others)
3. New areas of community research that enhance and inform practice. If we are to rely on evidence based – what are we calling evidence? Are the lessons learned by practitioners considered evidence?
4. Community engagement and community power in our CP Practice work with communities – see collaborating for equity and justice (below)
   1. Explicitly address issues of social and economic injustice and structural racism.
   2. Employ a community development approach in which residents have equal power in determining the coalition or collaborative’s agenda and resource allocation.
   3. Employ community organizing as an intentional strategy and as part of the process. Work to build resident leadership and power.
   4. Focus on policy, systems, and structural change.
   5. Build on the extensive community-engaged scholarship and research that show what works, that acknowledge the complexities, and that evaluate appropriately. From Wolff, Minkler, Wolfe, Berkowitz, Bowen, Butterfoss, Christens, Francisco and Lee (2017) Six principles for collaborating for equity and justice (NPQ 2016):

Read more at http://www.scra27.org/what-we-do/practice/practice-council-initativ...