Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
MEANINGFUL YOUTH
PARTICIPATION IN SRH
RESEARCH AND ADVOCACY
Presentation for UGM Brown Bag Seminars 16 September 2020Miranda van Reeuwijk (PhD) – senior researcher @ Rutgers [email protected]
Agenda
•What is Meaningful Youth Participation in research?
•Why do we do it?
•How do we do it?
•Challenges of MYP in research
•Conditions for success
•Q & A
What is MYP in Research?And why do we do it?
Why involve young people in research?
SRH research:
→ sensitive and personal topics! taboo, shy, fear of judgment
→social desirability bias: say what they think you want to hear
But it is key to understand ‘what is really going on and why’
• Anthropology: understand the world from your informant’s perspective
“What is at stake for them” = ‘Emic’ (insider) perspective.
Important to create a safe and enabling environment to speak openly
Miranda’s PhD Research on adolescents (10-16) and sexuality in Tanzania
• “Why do adolescents start withsex and what do sex andrelationships mean to them?”
• Huge power differences me versus informants
• Address through ‘friendlier’ methodologies
• Use of camera: kidsinterviewing kids
• 12 yr old key informantsbecame my co-researchers
https://dare.uva.nl/search?metis.record.id=313676
Why involve young people in research?
Positive effect on Quality of Data
• Role as advisors and facilitators to help break the ice, reduce shyness, create a safe and enabling setting for honestly sharing feelings, thoughts and experiences
• Role as data collectors (triangulation with adult data)
• ‘Insider’ knowledge and shared ‘lived experience’ with participants → rapport, access to study population, quality data; role as interpreters
• Empowering effect on young people themselves• Skills building, experience, networking• Deeper understanding of SRHR issues and root causes
• Step to youth advocacy• Researchers get chance to formulate recommendations; engagement in dissemination with
practitioners and policy makers! • Activism: use of data as ammunition for advocacy (see example YAM Rwanda)• They become the channel for youth voices to be heard
• More effective and responsive programs • Use of data and understanding of realities, needs, likes and wishes of y.p to inform programs
• Entry point for MYP in programs and organisations• Recommendations → actions • NGOs increased commitment to MYP when see is useful → structural engagement in all
phases and levels of decision making = Youth Centered Approach• It is your RIGHT to be involved in matters that effect you! Also children and yp! ‘Active citizenship’
Why involve young people in research? Cont.
MEANINGFUL YOUTH PARTICIPATION AS A WAY TO ACHIEVING SUCCESS DOI: https://doi.org/10.22215/cjcr.v5i1.1301
YAM Rwanda
HOW TO MEANINGFULLY ENGAGE YOUNG PEOPLE IN
RESEARCH?
Examples of MYP research
HOW do we do MYP … in research ?• Can take different forms:
• Youth-led research• Youth co-researchers• Research assistants• Participatory methods
• Rutgers: Over a decade of MYP in research• Monitoring and evaluation• Operational research• In-depth Qualitative Research
• Explore Toolkit: https://www.rutgers.international/our-products/tools/explore
• Photovoice: https://www.rutgers.international/photovoice
Rutgers programs: YP as co-researchers in operational research
117 young people trained and involved in operational research under ASK progr
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28784062/
Youth-centred research to improve adolescent sexual and reproductive health in Indonesia
▪ GEAS
▪ Youth Voices Research
▪ Implementation Research
Explore4Action young co-researchers
http://bit.ly/YVR-penelitimuda
From Researcher to Advocate
• Purpose of working with young co-researchers was to engage them in dissemination of findings and discussions around ‘so what do these data mean’ for making improvements for adolescents and young people SRH
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1h1-BC3bAFWDVTzWLX6GDSrEmNNfwO7ua/view
So great benefits – but not easyCHALLENGES of MYP in Research
Challenges of MYP in research
1. Intergenerational power dynamics
2. Data quality (ability to collect and analyse)
3. Ethical challenges
4. Practical challenges (time, logistics, recruitment, resources, etc)
Intergenerational power dynamics
• Resistance against research: “feeling evaluated”• Resistance against MYP in research: “feeling evaluated by children”
1) First issue is cultural norms for respectful behaviour between youngpeople and adults: ‘talking back is disrespectful’
2) Second issue is adult fear for YP influence and sharing of power: lack of trust that YP make good decisions and fear to loose own control
• So support for MYP in research and uptake of research results only whencarefully facilitating process of addressing those issues, building trust and youth-adult partnerships
Data quality
• Young co-researchers great at creating enabling environment
• But not yet experience with keeping focus in interviews or knowingwhen to dig for details → especially hard when not involved in thedesign of the research and never have done analysis
• Analysis: qualitative analyses are ‘tough job’! • Especially with large amounts of data, on ‘experiences and meanings’ in
relation to ‘fuzzy topics’ like love, relationships, sexuality, gender• Need to ‘feel’ what is relevant and what is less relevant (in light of RQ and
purpose of the research)
➢ Practice practice practice and have good examples to learn from + who give feedback
➢Thorough understanding of purpose of research and well defined andfocussed central research question
Ethical challenges
“Primum non nocere” = first, do no harm
• Harm to young people as co-researchers
• Harm by young co-researchers
• Harm by / to research manager/organisation
Harm to young people as co-researchers
• Non-acceptance and envy by adults and fellow youth in organisation and community • not picked up by driver; mocked at validation meetings; per diems not paid, promises not fulfilled;
sending yp to deal with or interview adult gatekeepers without adult support; not being accepted back as Peer Educator
• Labelling young co-researchers as ‘bad’ because of talking about SRHR • reputation damage; corporal punishment gatekeepers; reduced marital opportunities
• (Sexual) harassment by informants / team members / adults• “Talking about sexuality so you must want some”
• Instrumental use / unfair compensation / no open and honest communication • e.g. on what is done with their work, ‘cheap labour’, senior getting all the credits
• Impact of the research on young people’s well-being, e.g. hearing traumatic stories• Hearing people suffering makes you suffer (secondary harm)• Particularly when working with young people from same group, tapping into ‘shared lived
experiences’ (such as sexual violence stories by young people living with disabilities)
Experiences of being, and working with, young people with disabilities as peer researchers in Senegal: The impact on data quality, analysis, and well-being
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1473325018763515
Harm by young people as co-researchers
• Abuse of power position as researcher, inability or not sensitive to informants’ wellbeing and right to withdraw
• Breach of research ethics: disclosing confidential information • in particular challenge when the researcher and participant are members of
the same social network
• Offering of incorrect or incomplete help/ advice • co-researcher falling back into role of peer educator, but with social position
of researcher
• Cooking up data!
Practical challenges (time, logistics, recruitment, resources, etc)
• Tension between resources, time, capacity development andproject deliverables (donor/scientific requirements)
• Selection / finding good young researchers (what to do withnot so good ones)
• Managing expectations (yp staff donor)
• Turn over of young people, availability (e.g. not during school hours)
• Transparant communication
Creating Conditions for Success1. You need a really good and youth friendly professional research lead
and project officer. They play key role in guiding, supporting, teaching, protecting and facilitating dialogue btw yp & adults
2. Research quality →Work with focussed and well defined RQ and clearpurpose. Constructive feedback from professional researcher and dailydebriefs within the team.
3. Intergenerational power dynamics → Process needs carefulfacilitation; understand and address adult fear; clear communicationabout expectations and mutual benefits
4. Ethical challenges → include ethics in training, develop practical guidelines andprotocols, research lead to support reflection and coping
@Rutgers_INTL
Q & A
