McSpirit, Faltraco, and Bailey’s book titled Confronting ecological crisis in Appalachia and the South: University and Community Partnerships (2012) is all about community involvement, social justice, and community development skills from different parts of Appalachia. It challenges the traditional role of universities and introduces ideas that are the basis for Participatory Research. One thing that stuck out to me in the early chapters was that true community change starts with people who care and are involved.
The author, Sherry Cable, says that universities, faculty, and students have a chance to break free from the ivory tower mindset. Getting involved in the community and growing beyond the ivory tower can lead to partnerships on traditional academic research and the development of community-based research practices. But the university has to be willing to do this, and the local community has to be open to having the university there.
There’s a concept mentioned in the text about how universities and community members often disconnect. Universities are seen as distant and out of touch with the regular community, and community members don’t trust or want to work with them. I agree that both perspectives are valid and keep everyone from working together towards common goals.
The author shifts from the topic of universities not understanding the common man to that of big government and business. The author continues to argue that big money decisions are made by outsiders and power brokers who don’t care about the local communities they’re affecting. It’s a depressing picture if you don’t look at it from a different angle. Universities not getting involved in the community or not caring about speaking up for humanity, government being too political and big business being all about making money with no regard for the long-term effects on the economy or the environment.
The main idea throughout the book was Participatory Research. The text says that there’s a growing body of knowledge that supports shared research efforts that work towards solving community problems and issues. Participatory Research believes that both the academic world and important stakeholders can use their strengths, connections, and resources to create projects and processes that can start and develop agents of social justice and change.
I’ve led six Participatory Research projects in North Carolina over the years. One focused on Community Violence (three environmental scans) and the other on alcohol use (two) and another on opioid use. My own experiences mirror those in the research. Although I wasn’t affiliated with a specific university, my projects received federal and state funding, and the heavy lifting was assisted by several research institutes and consultancy groups. Overall, I had a positive experience using a Participatory Research design, and the tools we used were well-researched and could be implemented effectively. However, I can relate to many of the challenges mentioned in the material, such as researchers being accepted and trusted by outside communities, occasional paranoia among stakeholders about how information was to be used or individuals portrayed.
So, there was this one instance near the end of the biggest projects I was involved in. It involved a written feedback mechanism for state authorities. We wanted to share the positive and challenging aspects of working with them. We collected responses from other colleagues in North Carolina who were doing the same kind of Participatory Research. I shared some observations that I thought might not be popular, but they were well-documented and discussed locally. Basically, I noticed that the state governmental office was trying to influence our research and local capacity development efforts in a way that seemed political. I gave specific examples, trying to be as unbiased as possible. But guess what? The feedback I got back wasn’t well-received in Raleigh. I never got another project with the administration (but since has with a new leadership group). But here’s the interesting part: in the final statewide report, the larger independent research group agreed with me that my comments were valid and a concern. The lead project research partner even took the time to chat with me about it. Turns out, the patterns of undue influence I saw were systematic and common throughout the state. While I (and one other researcher) were one of the few who dared to speak up and believe in the project design.
Participatory Research Design offers a deeper connection and more meaningful outcomes for communities. But it also comes with challenges, like developing dual roles and navigating unfamiliar processes. Despite these obstacles, I’m a strong believer in its power. I’ve seen firsthand how these efforts can build skills to address various social justice topics. As the material says, community involvement not only increases the knowledge and confidence of citizens but also broadens their skills beyond the specific topic. My goals aren’t too different from many of the characters and examples in my readings. I genuinely believe that passionate and interested members of our Appalachian Communities are more common than rare. This belief gives me a sense of hope.
McSpirit, S., Faltraco, L., & Bailey, C. (2012). Confronting ecological crisis in Appalachia and the South: University and Community Partnerships. Lexington (Ky.): University Press of Kentucky.