Apart from the actual topical exercises, early morning review sessions followed by briefing sessions for the day’s work are held. Evenings are reserved for group presentations. These are the times when most of the villagers are free after the day’s work is done. Presenting this information in the large evening forum has the advantage that it is up for everyone’s scrutiny and is subject to correction. Thus there is a reasonable chance that at the end of the day we have an end product that is accurate and reliable, having been refined several times over from the initial discussions in the sub-groups, to the final presentation. Such gatherings are usually lively with the village folk correcting one another and arriving at a consensus on various issues, events, practices and other information. Thus an important principle of PRA/PALM is met -- that of ‘TRIANGULATION’ of information.  

There are many other aspects and elements that go into the making of a PALM programme. For obvious reasons all these cannot be described here -- many have to be experienced. There are also standard group processes and techniques, which have not been described in detail but are very much part of the methodology which MYRADA follows in its PALM Programmes. Some of these are ice breakers, outsider to villager ratios, group sharing evolution of topical agenda, interviewing techniques, role plays, ‘buzz’ sessions, ‘dummy’ exercises and so on. 

2.5. Some methods and their applications:

3. EXTENSIONS AND HYBRIDS:

Constant and extensive used of PALM in our work in a variety of situations has helped bring about progress in PALM methodology.

Like applying the time line exercise to areas other than just the history of the village. For eg: It is used to record the evolution of health and agricultural practices, education, etc. One interesting recent application was its rise in the profiling of a poor family. (Annexure - 7, Fig.2.)  

Another prominent application has been the use of participatory village mapping to see patterns of caste, asset ownership, family size and to identify households with handicapped persons, persons having chronic ailments, family planning cases etc. (Annexure - 2, Fig.1.)

In one recent exercise while the village was being mapped by women, a discussion on malnutrition was initiated and the symptoms described. After this the women began to point out and mark on the map, the houses which had children suffering from malnutrition.

Such as the evolution of participatory mapping on the ground to participatory modelling on the ground. From this point the method was extended further by making models of what a particular area such as a watershed looked like 50 years ago, what it would like 20 years hence, and so on. (Annexure - 3, Fig.1. & 2.) Treatment plans for land development have also been shown on the maps or models.

For instance in the use of transects for planning development of village lands a new method used was the ‘Sweeping transect’. Here groups of farmers and Outsiders comb different blocks of the area to bring out information about indigenous technology, problems and opportunities. Using this method, site specific plans can be made - even on a plot by plot basis. (Annexure - 4, Fig.1.)

It has been possible to evolve new methods by combining 2 or methods. For instance, participatory village mapping has led to participatory wealth ranking. This was further developed to include participatory resource mapping, with land ownership, land use, soil types and productivity of each plot of land indicated. Later attempts were made to correlate wealth to productivity. The innovations and learning continue. Lately, we have been experimenting with different ways in which the PALM exercise can be conducted. For eg. in several cases we have had the farmers themselves draw the village and resource map and indicate possible interventions. This was done without any Outsiders being present, while the exercise was going on. The results have been extremely encouraging. Similarly, we now have farmers conducting their own exercise, interviewing one another and so on. And we continue to learn. We are learning to ‘embrace’ error and to listen instead of lecturing -- not very easy tasks. We are learning how to handle ‘dominant’ participants -- including some from the village who have vested interests. Sequencing our questions during interactions, sequencing of topics during a PALM exercise and sequencing to follow up activities -- whether to do with the village programme or to do with the development and institutionalisation of PALM -- all these and many more are areas where we are engaged in a continuous process of learning.

There have been several lessons. Enough has been said elsewhere about the qualitative differences between the information generated in the PRA/PALM method and the conventional survey method. The latter are unfamiliar to the people and therefore non participative. What do we do with the villagers who have ideas and perceptions far different from our own, which are also expressed differently and do not fall into any of our existing formats?

We have found, as others have, that the villagers are capable of collecting far more accurate information than outsiders. They can also correct it, order and analyse it and start a process of development if given the opportunity to do so. Alongside this realisation, there is also the growing realisation that people in the rural areas are extremely skillful managers forced to live as they are under extremely marginal and vulnerable conditions. Their decision making has got to be precise. Hence, their perceptions about their situations are absolutely critical inputs in any planning.

There is a need to understand and appreciate traditional management systems, livelihood systems indigenous technologies and the ways and reasons for how people feel, see, think and act in rural areas. PALM offers a way in which both Outsiders and Villagers try to discover the situation through a process of joint observation and interaction and shared analysis. The focus is on relationships rather than on any single event, aspect or activity.

We have found that PALM is a method much enjoyed by both Villagers and Outsiders alike. It not only enhances participation it also enhances the generation of both information and ideas. And we find that the village has begun to ‘grow’ on us.  

Villagers are increasingly emerging as resource persons in our PALM exercises. This includes small and marginal farmers, landless, tribals, women and even children. The latter have often participated actively and have demonstrated their expertise in terms of identifying different types of grasses and trees particularly fruit trees). They also help identify school dropouts, handicapped children, etc.  

The PRA/PALM field is a new unexplored and seemingly open ended frontier. Several possibilities exist -- in methodology development, applications and generation of information -- particularly local knowledge. But there is a danger -- that of lack of quality control and the consequent propagation of wrong methods.

There is an urgent need to rapidly increase the use of good PRA methods and introduce this approach in mainstream organisations and institutions.  

And finally, there is a need to train more and more people in PRA/PALM. But whereare the trainers and how do we go about achieving this?