TY - JOUR
T1 - How development happens
T2 - Safe and sustainable energy, community development projects, and implementation challenges in timor-leste
AU - Niner, Sara Louise
AU - Lay, Jotham
AU - Warren, Narelle Louise
AU - O'Connell, Michael
AU - Edgington-Mitchell, Daniel
PY - 2018/1/1
Y1 - 2018/1/1
N2 - This article describes how seed funding from one major Australian University, designed to encourage interdisciplinary collaborations among academics, led to the implementation of a safe and sustainable energy supply at a community development project in remote Timor-Leste. This article reflects on the process, the results, and insights developed during the project primarily from the point of view of the academics. A participatory process of co-design was virtually impossible to implement due to time and resource constraints that barely allowed genuine collaboration between academics. The consequent nurturing of a social relationship between partners across borders, which would have allowed a genuine process of co-design, was therefore not possible. Misunderstandings around the local context, tensions in understandings of timelines, and competing priorities all provided additional barriers to timely implementation of the development project. The final conclusion is that even with the best of intentions, if resource constraints do not allow the time and space to develop collaborative social relations and prioritize “process over product,” then genuine partnerships and participatory development have little chance of flourishing.
AB - This article describes how seed funding from one major Australian University, designed to encourage interdisciplinary collaborations among academics, led to the implementation of a safe and sustainable energy supply at a community development project in remote Timor-Leste. This article reflects on the process, the results, and insights developed during the project primarily from the point of view of the academics. A participatory process of co-design was virtually impossible to implement due to time and resource constraints that barely allowed genuine collaboration between academics. The consequent nurturing of a social relationship between partners across borders, which would have allowed a genuine process of co-design, was therefore not possible. Misunderstandings around the local context, tensions in understandings of timelines, and competing priorities all provided additional barriers to timely implementation of the development project. The final conclusion is that even with the best of intentions, if resource constraints do not allow the time and space to develop collaborative social relations and prioritize “process over product,” then genuine partnerships and participatory development have little chance of flourishing.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85061205060&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/napa.12121
DO - 10.1111/napa.12121
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85061205060
SN - 2153-9588
VL - 42
SP - 68
EP - 80
JO - Annals of Anthropological Practice
JF - Annals of Anthropological Practice
IS - 2
ER -