an evaluation of participatory rapid appraisal techniques for inventory and

129 Pages·2012·23.04 MB·English

by  Stephanie Wolfgang

LEARNING
FROM
LOCALS:
AN
EVALUATION
OF
PARTICIPATORY
RAPID
APPRAISAL


TECHNIQUES
FOR
INVENTORY
AND
ANALYSIS
IN
THE
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURE
CLASSROOM


by

STEPHANIE
LYNNE
WOLFGANG

(Under
the
Direction
of
Katherine
Melcher)

ABSTRACT


 Participatory
Rapid
Appraisal
(PRA)
has
a
proven
record
as
an
assessment
tool
in
the

international
development
field.

Scholars
in
landscape
architecture,
however,
have
only

recently
begun
to
explore
this
technique.

This
thesis
investigates
whether
PRA
can
provide

landscape
architectural
students
with
a
more
holistic
understanding
of
social
and

environmental
factors
present
at
a
site
than
conventional
techniques.

Both
a
focus
group

interview
and
questionnaires
were
used
to
ascertain
the
opinions
of
landscape
architecture

students
who
had
had
experience
with
both
conventional
and
PRA
approaches
to
site

assessment.

Students
expressed
contradictory
opinions
as
to
the
superiority
of
conventional

versus
PRA
techniques;
however,
they
felt
that
PRA
techniques
are
best
for
assessing
categories

of
inventory
and
analysis
that
are
within
the
social
realm
and
believed
that
PRA
should
be
used

in
combination
with
conventional
assessments.

The
study
concludes
with
suggestions
for

utilization
of
PRA
techniques
in
practice
and
education
and
with
suggestions
for
further
study.


INDEX
WORDS:
 PRA,
Landscape
architectural
education,
Participatory
research
methods,

Design
processes,
Design
methods,
Community
planning
and
design,

Service
learning,
GIS,
McHargian
overlays
LEARNING
FROM
LOCALS:
AN
EVALUATION
OF
PARTICIPATORY
RAPID
APPRAISAL


TECHNIQUES
FOR
INVENTORY
AND
ANALYSIS
IN
THE
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURE
CLASSROOM



by


STEPHANIE
LYNNE
WOLFGANG

B.S.,
University
of
Virginia,
2009


A
Thesis
Submitted
to
the
Graduate
Faculty
of
The
University
of
Georgia
in
Partial
Fulfillment
of

the
Requirements
for
the
Degree


MASTER
OF
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURE


ATHENS,
GEORGIA

2012
©
2012

Stephanie
Lynne
Wolfgang

All
Rights
Reserved
LEARNING
FROM
LOCALS:
AN
EVALUATION
OF
PARTICIPATORY
RAPID
APPRAISAL


TECHNIQUES
FOR
INVENTORY
AND
ANALYSIS
IN
THE
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURE
CLASSROOM



by


STEPHANIE
LYNNE
WOLFGANG



 
 
 
 
 
 Major
Professor:

 Katherine
Melcher


 
 
 
 
 
 Committee:
 
 Douglas
Pardue


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Stephen
Ramos


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Pratt
Cassity


Electronic
Version
Approved:


Maureen
Grasso

Dean
of
the
Graduate
School

The
University
of
Georgia

May
2012
DEDICATION

To
my
family

iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


 A
great
many
individuals
have
contributed
to
the
inception
and
completion
of
this

thesis.

First,
I
would
like
to
thank
my
major
professor,
Katherine
Melcher,
for
her
advice,

insight,
and
immense
patience.

Her
astute
feedback
and
guidance
have
helped
this
thesis

become
what
it
is
today
and
helped
me
to
explore
community‐centric
design
for
which
we

share
an
interest.



I
would
also
like
to
thank
the
members
of
my
reading
committee,
Douglas
Pardue,

Stephen
Ramos,
and
Pratt
Cassity,
for
taking
the
time
to
provide
their
expert
opinions
and

guide
this
document
through
its
final
stages.


 I
also
owe
a
great
deal
of
gratitude
to
the
individuals
who
introduced
me
to
PRA
and

aided
in
my
learning
of
these
methods:
the
students
and
faculty
of
Oxford
Brookes
University

(especially
David
Sanderson)
as
well
as
professionals
from
SEEDS
India
and
RCPDS.



 Finally,
I
would
not
have
been
able
to
complete
this
thesis
without
the
unwavering

support
of
Donna
Gabriel,
my
classmates
(especially
those
who
agreed
to
be
interviewed
for

this
study),
my
friends,
and
family.
 



v
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS....................................................................................................................v

LIST
OF
TABLES............................................................................................................................viii

LIST
OF
FIGURES............................................................................................................................ix

CHAPTER


 1
 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................1


 
 
 Context...................................................................................................................1


 
 
 This
Study...............................................................................................................3


 
 
 Delimitations..........................................................................................................5


 2
 STUDY
METHODOLOGY................................................................................................7


 
 
 Participants.............................................................................................................7


 
 
 Study
Design.........................................................................................................13


 
 
 Limitations............................................................................................................16


 3
 CONVENTIONAL
APRROACHES
TO
INVENTORY
AND
ANALYSIS.................................18


 
 
 General
Design
Processes.....................................................................................18


 
 Generational
Processes’
Relationship
to
Conventional
and
Participatory

Approaches...............................................................................................21


 
 
 Null‐
and
First‐Generation
Design
Processes
in
Landscape
Architecture.............21


 
 
 Null‐
and
First‐Generation
Design
Processes
in
Landscape
Education.................31

vi
4
 PARTICIPATORY
APPROACHES
TO
INVENTORY
AND
ANALYSIS..................................34


 
 
 Advantages
of
Participation
in
Design
and
Planning
Processes............................34


 
 
 Second‐
and
Third‐Generation
Design
Processes
in
Landscape
Architecture......37


 
 
 Participatory
Rapid
Appraisal
(PRA) .....................................................................46


 
 
 PRA
in
Landscape
Architecture.............................................................................54


 
 
 Participatory
Design
Processes
in
Landscape
Education......................................55


 5
 STUDY
FINDINGS
AND
ANALYSIS................................................................................60


 
 
 Focus
Group
Interview
Themes............................................................................60


 
 
 Questionnaire
Results...........................................................................................64


 
 
 Analysis
of
Commonalities
and
Discrepancies
in
Findings....................................73


 6
 CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................75


 
 
 Implications
for
Application
of
PRA......................................................................75


 
 
 Implications
for
PRA
in
Landscape
Architectural
Curriculum...............................78


 
 
 Implications
for
Further
Research........................................................................81

REFERENCES
 ..............................................................................................................................85

APPENDICES


 A
 ARCHER’S
SYSTEMATIC
METHOD
FOR
DESIGNERS.....................................................91


 B
 INSTRUMENT
1:
QUESTIONNAIRES............................................................................92


 C
 INSTRUMENT
2:
FOCUS
GROUP
INTERVIEW
GUIDING
QUESTIONS
..........................95


 D
 COMPLETED
QUESTIONNAIRES..................................................................................97


 E
 FOCUS
GROUP
INTERVIEW
TRANSCRIPT..................................................................108

vii
LIST
OF
TABLES

Page

Table
1:
Summary
of
null‐
through
third‐generation
design
processes.......................................40

Table
2:
Chamber’s
rapid
rural
appraisal‐participatory
rural
appraisal
continuum.....................48

Table
3:
Classification
of
PRA
tools
by
type..................................................................................50

Table
4:
Tools
used
and
scored
on
the
questionnaires
as
listed
by
student
participants............65

Table
5:
Experienced
effectiveness
of
conventional
tools
for
landscape
site
inventory
and

analysis.............................................................................................................................68

Table
6:
Experienced
effectiveness
of
PRA
tools
for
landscape
site
inventory
and
analysis........69

Table
7:
Effectiveness
potential
of
conventional
tools
for
landscape
site
inventory
and



 analysis.............................................................................................................................70

Table
8:
Effectiveness
potential
of
PRA
tools
for
landscape
site
inventory
and
analysis.............71

Table
9:
Overlay
of
all
tool
rankings.............................................................................................72

Table
10:
Comparative
evaluation
of
conventional
and
PRA
approaches....................................73


viii
LIST
OF
FIGURES

Page

Figure
1:
Scattering
of
grain
in
the
agricultural
village
of
Gramathu
Medu...................................9

Figure
2:
Beach
with
fishing
boats,
shelters,
and
planted
windbreaks
in
the
fishing
village
of

Vizhuntha
Mavadi...............................................................................................................9

Figure
3:
A
community‐drawn
map..............................................................................................10

Figure
4:
Community
venn
diagramming.....................................................................................11

Figure
5:
Agricultural
maps
showing
post‐tsunami
land
allocation.............................................11

Figure
6:
Null‐generation
design
processes
in
landscape
architecture........................................22

Figure
7:
Greensward
Plan
for
Central
Park
presentation
board.................................................24

Figure
8:
First‐generation
design
processes
in
landscape
architecture.......................................25

Figure
9:
Lynch’s
diagrams
of
site
analysis...................................................................................27

Figure
10:
McHarg’s
overlays
method
for
site
inventory
and
analysis.........................................29

Figure
11:
Goals
of
participation
in
landscape
architectural
design
processes............................36

Figure
12:
Second‐generation
design
processes
in
landscape
architecture.................................37

Figure
13:
One
of
Kroll’s
buildings
for
the
Université
Catholique
de
Louvain,
Belgium...............38

Figure
14:
Third‐generation
design
processes
in
landscape
architecture....................................39

Figure
15:
Arnstein’s
ladder
of
citizen
participation....................................................................42

Figure
16:
Hester’s
12
steps
to
community
development...........................................................44

Figure
17:
Some
sources
and
relatives
of
RRA
and
PRA...............................................................47

ix