Insights into Participatory Video: A Handbook for the field p 1-16. (intro and Part 1) by Nick and Chris Lunch
Part 1 Notes – Participatory Video in a Nutshell
The definition of Participatory Video (PV) given by the Lunch author-brothers is as follows: “PV is a set of techniques to involve a group or community in shaping and creating their own film.” This paper aims to provide testimony of recent fieldwork done on PV, and seems to claim that the results have been quite successful. PV is successful because it opens up easy and accessible forums in which to bring people together to discuss, and effectively empowers them to play a lead role in solving their own problems.
"Gaining a broader understanding of the issues that face the poor and vulnerable is always helpful to a donor organization focused on poverty alleviation. Using visual media gives a stronger image of the issues of change facing pastoralists. The approach was beneficial to those involved in the film and the message was stronger because it gave voice to those who are easily sidelined by the community. One of its strengths was that it was able to tie together various different messages that arise in any given community and give a clear message that needed to be heard by the Akimat (regional head)."
-Jeremy Horner, Associate Professional Officer, Department for International Development (p. 15)
A brief history of PV is also included. In 1967, Don Snowden undertook the first known PV experiment in the Fogo Islands off Newfoundland. He pioneered the idea of media to enable a people-centered approach. Using video, fishermen on the islands learned that they were dealing with similar issues and came together to make some changes. Politicians living far away also saw the videos. Since Don, their has been no real movement for PV, only isolated works.
Although PV is very widespread, without one clear way to do things, many applications exist and its success depends on many factors outside of project tasking and schedule reasons. In spite of this, the authors offer the following as a possible template for a well-planned PV project:
Participants learn to use video equipment through games and exercise
Short messages of videos directed and filmed by participants.
Footage shown to community at daily screening
(not added in book, but must be?) Final videos shown to community and desired audience elsewhere.
“PV carried out in this way becomes a powerful means of documenting local people's experiences, needs and hopes from their own perspectives. It initiates a process of analysis and change that celebrates local knowledge and practice, whilst stimulating creativity both within and beyond the community. When done well, PV presents the "inside view" in a lively way that is accessible to people at all levels. All community members have equal access to the process. All voices are expressed and heard. The video medium is transportable, easily replicated and easily shared; it thus has a wide "spread effect". PV gives a voice and a face to those who are normally not heard or seen” (p. 12, Lunch)
Participatory video manifests endogenous development, which is development as an outflowing of people's own strategies, resources, and values. Video is transportable and easily replicated and shared by the “wide-spread effect”. PV is good for horizontal and vertical communication. Visuals of PV reach illiterate and young children and cuts across language boundaries. PV Engages, Empowers, clarifies, Amplifies, Catalyses, Equips with skills and optimism, disseminates good practices, and is accessible, inclusive and flexible.
However, the main obstacles to a successful participatory video project include:
-lack of motivation by participants/local community.
-lack of technical equipment or technical issues
-lack of time needed to plan, shoot, or edit
Reflections
Nick and Chris Lunch seem to be the fieldwork Godfathers of participatory video in international communities. Since my work was essentially an extension into a more academic and development research arena, I think the usefulness of this paper will be very useful to my thesis prep and hopefully thesis as well when it is all said and done.
As far as obstacles, we encountered the simple presence of a camera and its know ability to be seen by who knows who makes people very conservative when discussing anything while the red light is on. You might call this “fear of repercussions”.
No comments:
Post a Comment