Worth the Risk? Muddled Relationships in Community-Based Participatory Research

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is a collaborative research approach that has two purposes: (a) to generate knowledge about and (b) to take action to improve the lives of people facing health, social, economic, political, and environmental inequities. The foundation of all CBPR project...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inQualitative health research Vol. 26; no. 1; pp. 69 - 76
Main Authors Mayan, Maria J., Daum, Christine H.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.01.2016
SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is a collaborative research approach that has two purposes: (a) to generate knowledge about and (b) to take action to improve the lives of people facing health, social, economic, political, and environmental inequities. The foundation of all CBPR projects is its partnership—its cooperative relationship between community members, service providers, program planners, policy makers, and academics. It is with people—and through relationships—that partnerships are built and sustained. Although relationships between academics and community members are critical to creating knowledge and change, they are overlooked in the literature. We often hear about CBPR “gone wrong,” when tensions and conflicts arise because relationship boundaries become blurred. Our purpose is to expose the muddled relationships that can be created between academics and community members in CBPR projects. Drawing upon our experiences presented in a series of vignettes, we consider the nature of these relationships. We explore whether we conduct, in CBPR, good research at the expense of muddling relationships. Despite the potential for muddled relationships, we believe that CBPR is the best approach for research aimed at achieving a more equitable and just society.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ObjectType-Review-3
content type line 23
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Feature-1
ISSN:1049-7323
1552-7557
DOI:10.1177/1049732315618660