‘You want to deal with power while riding on power’: global perspectives on power in participatory health research and co-production approaches

Egid, Beatrice, Roura, Maria, Aktar, Bachera, Amegee, Jessica, Chumo, Ivy, Dias, Sonia, Hegel, Guillermo, Jones, Laundette, Karuga, Robinson, Lar, Luret, Lopez, Yaimie, Pandya, Apurva, Norton, Theresa C., Sheikhattari, Payam, Tancred, Tara ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8718-5110, Wallerstein, Nina, Zimmerman, Emily and Ozano, Kim (2021) '‘You want to deal with power while riding on power’: global perspectives on power in participatory health research and co-production approaches'. BMJ Global Health, Vol 6, Issue 11, e006978.

	Text Main Document_clean.pdf - Accepted Version Restricted to Repository staff only Download (490kB)
Preview	Text e006978.full.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial. Download (380kB) | Preview

Abstract

Introduction
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.

Item Type:	Article
Subjects:	W General Medicine. Health Professions > Health Services. Patients and Patient Advocacy > W 84 Health services. Delivery of health care WA Public Health > Health Administration and Organization > WA 525 General works WA Public Health > Health Administration and Organization > WA 530 International health administration
Faculty: Department:	Biological Sciences > Vector Biology Department Clinical Sciences & International Health > International Public Health Department
Digital Object Identifer (DOI):	https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006978
Depositing User:	Rachel Dominguez
Date Deposited:	12 Nov 2021 09:12
Last Modified:	15 Oct 2024 14:07
URI:	https://archive.lstmed.ac.uk/id/eprint/19289

Statistics

View details

Actions (login required)

Edit Item