INVITED ARTICLE: Eliciting Children’s/Young People’s (Group) Engagement with Scenarios as Participatory Research Practice for Exploring and Extending Responses to Climate Change

Year 2020, Volume: 7 Issue: 1, 1 - 1, 19.02.2020

Norma Romm

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.20.0.7.1

Abstract

In this article I provide an account of my use (in a particular context) of a ‘post qualitative inquiry’ approach, with my recognition that ways of approaching issues to be explored with participants, and the method of exploration, carry social and ecological consequences. The research was initiated in a school in South Africa with a sample of ten (Black) Grade 9 children (aged 14–15). Groups of two to three children engaged with a number of scenarios supplied by me (‘business as usual’, ‘small changes’, and ‘sustainable future’) concerning possible responses to climate change. In each group the children worked together towards jointly creating options for unsettling the ‘business as usual’ scenario while exploring the other scenarios as alternatives. The article concentrates on the justification for using scenarios as a basis for inviting the children to discuss together their responses to climate change, with a view to the research inputting into their visioning and their understandings of possibilities for agency (individual and collective). It also concentrates on my intent to strengthen the notion of collaborative visioning, which is in keeping with Indigenous understandings of relational knowing. The research was intended, inter alia, to contribute to the children’s appreciation of this way of learning.

Keywords

climate change research, engagement with scenarios, post qualitative inquiry, research as future forming

References

• Arko-Achemfuor, A., Romm, N. R. A., & Serolong, L. (2019). Academic-practitioner collaboration with communities towards social and ecological transformation International Journal of Transformative Research, 6(1):1-9.
• Boström, S. (2012). Children’s participation in research. International Journal of Early Years Education, 20 (3): 257–269.
• Bubar, R., & Martinez, D. E. (2017). Trickster as resistance: Impacts of neoliberalism on indigenous research and indigenous methodologies. In N. K. Denzin & M. D. Giardina (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry in neoliberal times (pp. 136–150). New York, NY: Routledge.
• Campbell, E., Skovdal, M., & Campbell, C. (2013). Ethiopian students' relationship with their environment: Implications for environmental and climate adaptation programmes. Children's Geographies 11 (4): 436–460.
• Chilisa, B. (2012). Indigenous research methodologies. London: Sage.
• Chilisa, B. (2017). Decolonizing transdisciplinary research approaches: An African perspective for enhancing knowledge integration in sustainability science. Sustainability Science, 12 (5): 813–27.
• Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed). London: Routledge.
• Colliver, R., Goff, S., Reedy, R., & Vaartjes, V. (2015). Systemic pedagogy: A design for action researcher collective self-development. Action Learning Action Research Journal, 21 (1): 1–22.
• Dei, G. J. S. (2012). ‘Suahunu,’ the trialectic space. Journal of Black Studies, 43 (8): 823–846.
• Denzin, N. K., & Giardina, M. D. (2007). Introduction: ethical futures in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & M. D. Giardina (Eds.), Ethical Futures in Qualitative Research: Decolonizing The Politics of Knowledge (pp. 9-44). Walnut Creek CA: Left Coast Press.
• Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2008). Introduction: Critical Methodologies and indigenous inquiry. In N. K. Denzin, Y. S. Lincoln, & L. T. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies (pp. 1–20). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Flood, R. L. (2010). The relationship of systems thinking to action research. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 23 (4): 269–284. FF., & XXX Author. (2018). Journal article X
• Gallagher, M. (2008). ‘Power is not an evil’: Rethinking power in participatory methods. Children's Geographies, 6(2): 137-150.
• Gergen, K. J. (2009). Relational being. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Gergen, K. J. (2015). From mirroring to worldmaking: Research as future forming. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 45 (3): 287–310.
• Hill, M. (2006). Children’s voices on ways of having a voice: Children’s and young people’s perspectives on methods used in research and consultation. Childhood, 13 (1): 69–89.
• Jones, O. (2008). True geography [ ] quickly forgotten, giving away to an adult-imagined universe: Approaching the otherness of childhood. Children's Geographies, 6 (2): 195–212.
• Kovach, M. (2009). Indigenous methodologies: Characteristics, conversations, and contexts. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
• Kuntz, A. M. (2015). The responsible methodologist: Inquiry, truth-telling, and social justice. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
• Le Grange, L. (2018). What is (Post)qualitative research? South African Journal of Higher Education, 32 (5): 1‒14.
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2013). The constructivist credo. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
• McIntyre-Mills, J. J. (2014a). Systemic ethics and non-anthropocentric stewardship. New York, NY: Springer.
• McIntyre-Mills, J. J. (2014b). Transformation from wall street to wellbeing. New York, NY: Springer.
• McIntyre-Mills, J. J. (2017). Planetary passport: representation, accountability and re-generation. New York, NY: Springer.
• Mertens, D. M. (2010). Transformative mixed methods research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6): 469–474.
• Mertens, D. M. (2019). Preface: QQQ. In Book edited by QQQ & XXX. Author, xi-xviii. Cham: Springer.
• Midgley, G. (2001). Systems thinking for the 21st century. In G. Ragsdell & J. Wilby (Eds.), Systems thinking for the 21st century: Understanding complexity (pp. 249–256). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
• Msila, V. (2017). Heutagogy, Africanization and Learning. In M. T. Gumbo & V. Msila (Eds.), African voices on indigenization (pp. 45–65). Wandsbeck: Reach Publishers.
• Nicholls, R. (2009). Research and indigenous participation: Critical reflexive methods. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 12 (2): 117-126.
• Nkoana, E. M. (2019). Exploring the mismatch between development cooperation’s climate adaptation tools and climate change management in local communities in the global South. University of Antwerp: Institute of Environmental and Sustainable Development.
• Osuji, P. (2018). Laudato Si’ and traditional African environmental ethics. In G. Magill & J. Potter (Eds.), Integral ecology: Protecting our common home (pp. 184–208). Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
• Rajagopalan, R., & Midgley, G. (2015). Knowing differently in systemic intervention. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 32 (5): 546–561.
• Romm, N. R. A. (2001). Accountability in social research. New York, NY: Springer.
• Romm, N. R. A. (2015). Reviewing the transformative paradigm: A critical systemic and relational (indigenous) lens. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 28: 411-42
• Romm, N.R.A. (2017). Researching Indigenous ways of knowing-and-being”. In P. Ngulube (Ed.), Handbook of research on theoretical perspectives on Indigenous Knowledge Systems in developing countries (pp. 22-48). Pennsylvania: IGI Global publications.
• Romm, N. R. A. (2018). Responsible research practice: Revisiting transformative paradigm in social research. Cham: Springer.
• Romm, N. R. A. (2020). Reflections on a post-qualitative inquiry with children/young people: Exploring and furthering a performative research ethics. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 21(1): Art 6.
• Roth, M-W. (2006). Collective responsibility and solidarity. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 7 (2), Art. 37.
• Rousell, D. & Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, A. (2019). A Systematic review of climate change education: Giving children and young people a ‘voice’ and a ‘hand’ in redressing climate change. Children's Geographies, 1-18 (online first).
• Shannon, P. (2013). Value-Based social work research. Critical Social Work, 14 (1): 101–114.
• Skelton, T. (2008). Research with children and young people: Exploring the tensions between ethics, competence and participation. Children's Geographies, 6 (1): 21-36.
• Somerville, M., & Williams, C. (2015). Sustainability education in early childhood: An updated review of research in the field. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 16 (2): 102–117.
• Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. New York, NY: Zed Books.
• Spyrou, S., Rosen, R., & Cook. D. T. (eds.) (2018). Reimagining childhood studies. London: Bloomsbury.
• St. Pierre, E. A. (2017). Post qualitative inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & M. D. Giardina (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry in neoliberal times (pp. 37–47). New York, NY: Routledge.
• St. Pierre, E. A. (2019). Post qualitative inquiry in an ontology of immanence. Qualitative Inquiry, 25 (1): 3–16.
• Stephens, A., Taket, A., & Gagliano, M. (2019). Ecological justice for nature in critical systems thinking. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 36: 3–19.
• Ulmer, J. B. (2017). Posthumanism as research methodology: Inquiry in the Anthropocene. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30 (9): 832-848.