Building agency through participatory video: insights from the experiences of young women participants in India

References

• Agarwal, B. (1997). “Bargaining” and gender relations: Within and beyond the household. Feminist Economics, 3, 1–51.
   Google Scholar
• Bery, R., & Stuart, S. (1996). Powerful women grassroots communicators: Participatory video in Bangladesh. In D. Allen, R. R. Rush and S. J. Kaufman (Eds.), Women transforming communications: Global intersections (pp. 303–312). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Brickell, K. (2014). Participatory video drama research in trasitional Vietman: Post-production narratives on marriage, parenting and social evils. Gender, Place and Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography, 22, 510–525. doi:10.1080/0966369X.2014.885889
   Google Scholar
• Cooke, B., & Kothari, U. (2001). The case for participation as tyrrany. In B. Cooke & U. Kothari (Eds.), Participation: The new tyranny? (pp. 1–15). London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Desai, S., & Andrist, L. (2010). Gender scripts and age at marriage in India. Demography, 47, 667–687.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Einsiedal, E. F. (1996). Action research: Implications for gender, development, and communications. In D. Allen, R. R. Rush and S. J. Kaufman (Eds), Women transforming communications: Global intersections (pp. 49–58). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Frediani, A. A. (2010). Sen’s capability approach as a framework to the practice of development. Development in Practice, 20, 173–187. doi:10.1080/09614520903564181
   Google Scholar
• Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the oppressed. London: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Gaventa, J. (2004). Towards participatory governance: Assessing the transformative possibilities. In S. Hickey & G. Mohan (Eds.), Participation: From tyranny to transformation? (pp. 25–41). London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Gillard, H., Howcroft, D., Mitev, N., & Richardson, H. (2008). “Missing women”: Gender, ICTs, and the shaping of the global economy. Information Technology for Development, 14, 262–279. doi:10.1002/itdj.20098
   Google Scholar
• Goodsmith, L. (2007). Video Sabou et Nafa: Community voices joined in a common cause. Communication for Development and Social Change, 1, 1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Guijt, I., & Shah, M. K. (1998). Waking up to power conflict and processes. In I. Guijt and M. Kaul Shah (Eds.), The myth of community: Gender issues in participatory development, (pp. 1–23). London: Intermediate Technology Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Hickey, S., & Mohan, G. (2004). Towards participation as transformation: critical themes and challenges. In S. Hickey & G. Mohan (Eds), Participation: From tyranny to tranfromation? (pp. 3–24). London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• High, C., Singh, N., Petheram, L., & Nemes, G. (2012). Defining participatory video from practice. In E. J. Milne, C. Mitchell, & N. De Lange (Eds.), Handbook of participatory video (pp. 35–48). Plymouth, UK: Altamira Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ibrahim, S., & Alkire, S. (2007). Agency and empowerment: A proposal for internationally comparable indicators. Oxford Development Studies, 35, 379–403. doi:10.1080/13600810701701897
   Google Scholar
• Jorgensen, D.L. (1989). Participant observation: A methodology for human studies. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Kabeer, N. (1999). Resources, agency, achievements: Reflections on the measurement of women’s empowerment. Development & Change, 30, 435–464.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kawaja, J. (1994) Process Video: Self-reference and social change. In P. Riano (Ed.), Women in grassroots communication: furthering social change (pp. 131–148). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Keleher, H., & Franklin, L. (2008). Changing gendered norms about women and girls at the level of household and community: A review of the evidence. Global Public Health, 3, 42–57. doi:10.1080/17441690801892307
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Khamis, M., Plush, T., & Sepúlveda Zelaya, C. (2009). Women’s rights in climate change: Using video as a tool for empowerment in Nepal. Gender and Development, 17, 125–135. doi:10.1080/13552070802697001
   Google Scholar
• Kindon, S. (2003). Participatory video in geographic research: A feminist practice of looking? Area, 35, 142–153. doi:10.1111/1475-4762.00236
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipman-Blumen, J. (1995). The existential bases of power relationships: The gender role case. In H. L. Radtke & H. J. Stam, (Eds.), Power/Gender: Social relations in theory and practice (pp. 108–135). London, UK: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Low, B., Rose, C.B., Salvio, P.M., & Palacios, L. (2012). (Re)framing the scholarship on participatory video: From celebration to critical engagement. In E. J. Milne, C. Mitchell, & N. De Lange (Eds.), Handbook of participatory video (pp. 49–66). Plymouth, UK: Altamira Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mahalik, J.R., Morray, E.B., Coonerty-Femiano, A., Ludlow, L.H., Slattery, S.M., & Smiler, A. (2005). Development of the conformity to feminine norms inventory. Sex Roles, 52, 417–435.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milne, E. J. (2016). Critiquing participatory video: experiences from around the world. Area, 48, 401–404. doi:10.1111/area.12271
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molony, T., Konie, Z., & Goodsmith, L. (2007). Through our eyes: participatory video in West Africa. Forced Migration Review, 27, 37–38.
   Google Scholar
• Narayanan, P. (2003). Empowerment through participation: How effective is this approach? Economic and Political Weekly, 38, 2484–2486.
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, M. (2003). Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: Sen and social justice. Feminist Economics, 9, 33–59. doi:10.1080/1354570022000077926
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parfitt, T. (2004). The ambiguity of participation: A qualified defence of participatory development. Third World Quarterly, 25, 537–556. doi:10.1080/0143659042000191429
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pellissery, S., & Bergh, S.I. (2007). Adapting the capability approach to explain the effects of participatory development programs: Case studies from India and Morocco. Journal of Human Development, 8, 283–302. doi:10.1080/14649880701371174
   Google Scholar
• Peter, F. (2003). Gender and the foundations of social choice: the role of situated agency. Feminist Economics, 9, 13–32. doi:10.1080/1354570022000078006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pithouse, K., Mitchell, C., & Weber, S. (2009). Self-study in teaching and teacher development: a call to action. Educational Action Research, 17, 43–62. doi:10.1080/09650790802667444
   Google Scholar
• Protz, M. (1994). Understanding women’s grassroots experiences in producing and manipulating media. In P. Riano (Ed.), Women in grassroots communication: Furthering social change (pp. 102–120). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Protz, M. (1998). Video, gender and participatory development. In I. Guijt & M.K. Shah (Eds), The Myth of community: Gender issues in participatory development (pp. 165–177). London: Intermediate Technology Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Puri, E. (2004). Understanding participation: Theoretical foundations and practical implications. Economic and Political Weekly, 39, 2511–2517.
   Google Scholar
• Qizilbash, M. (2005). Sen on freedom and gender justice. Feminist Economics, 11, 151–166. doi:10.1080/13545700500301551
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez, C. (1994). A process of identity deconstruction: Latin American women producing video stories. In P. Riano (Ed.), Women in grassroots communication: Furthering social change (pp. 149–160). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, J. (2005). Gender and technology in education. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Sapsford, R., & Jupp, V. (1996). Validating evidence. In R. Sapsford & V. Jupp (Eds.), Data collection and analysis (pp. 1–25). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Satheesh, P.V. (1998). An alternative to literacy: Is it possible for community video and radio to play this role. Retrieved from http://www.ddsindia.com/www/video.htm
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1993). The quality of life. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1999). Democracy as a universal value. Journal of Democracy, 10, 3–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (2000). Development as Freedom. New York: Knopf.
   Google Scholar
• Singh, N. (2014). Participation, agency and gender: The impacts of participatory video practices on young women in India (Phd Thesis). The Open University, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Singhal, A., & Devi, K. (2003). Visual voices in participatory communication. Communicator, 38, 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, S., Riecken, T., Scott, T., Tanaka, M., & Riecken, J. (2008). Expanding health literacy: Indigenous youth creating videos. Journal of Health Psychology, 13, 180–189. doi:10.1177/1359105307086709
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Syed, J. (2010). Reconstructing gender empowerment. Women’s Studies International Forum, 33, 283–294. doi:10.1016/j.wsif.2010.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tacchi, Jo, & Kiran, M. S. (Eds.). (2008). Finding a voice: Themes and discussions. New Delhi: UNESCO.
   Google Scholar
• Waite, L., & Conn, C. (2011). Creating a space for young women’s voices: Using ‘participatory video drama’ in Uganda. Gender, Place & Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography, 18, 115–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, B. T. (2006). Girl power in a digital world: Considering the complexity of gender, literacy, and technology. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 50, 300–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, G. (2004). Evaluating participatory development: Tyranny, power and (Re)Politicisation. Third World Quarterly, 25, 557–578. doi:10.1080/0143659042000191438
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar