Abstract
Systemic Practice and Action Research (SPAR) denotes a family of approaches
with different theoretical foundations, the constructive encounter between which may
propel the movement forward. A persistent scholarly debate persists between the so-called
emancipatory and pragmatic strands, motivating perceptions of the impossibility to jointly
accomplish both ‘dialogical’ and ‘revolutionary’ commitments of the movement. This
reflects that SPAR is still grappling with how to maintain a normative foundation while
prioritising local change processes, thus reconciling what is universally ‘right’ with the
locally ‘good’ in order to foster an operational view of the nature of reciprocity and
justification. In this paper, I mobilise experiences from five action research projects in the
field of natural resource governance to undertake a methodological introspection to
examine how we as SPAR professionals may negotiate our approach during project
implementation and the encounter of concrete realities and stakeholder interests. The
objective is to offer an alternative view on the relationship between the ‘dialogical’ and the
‘revolutionary’ elements of SPAR; a view which rejects a dichotomisation in favour of a
critical-pragmatic recursive praxis that depends on the capacity of the researcher to
negotiate methodological virtues with co-researchers in the process.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 173-193 |
Journal | Systemic Practice and Action Research |
Volume | 26 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2013 |
Keywords
- critical systems thinking
- management
- science
- emancipation