Search

This paper aims to explore how the principles of participatory action research (PAR) articulate with questions of climate justice. Drawing on three qualitative case studies in Brazil, Fiji and Kenya, the paper explores university institutional capabilities, asking how the principles of mobilising PAR to support transformative outcomes can further climate justice. The paper argues that for participatory action research to become a pathway to build universities' capabilities, key considerations are needed. PAR needs to: (a) move beyond change in individual behaviour to respond to climate change and affect institutional norms, procedures and practices; (b) recognise and partner with marginalised groups whose voice and experiences are at the periphery of climate debate, enabling reciprocal flows of impact and knowledge between universities and wider societies; and (c) foster "relationships of equivalence" with actors within as well as outside university to influence university governance and wider climate-related policy-making processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The qualitative community embraces transparent dialogue through sharing knowledge to improve rigour and develop new initiatives. In this paper, we recognise there are many complexities within qualitative research, leading to important debates. We explore the benefits and challenges, as well as the practicalities and technicalities, of conducting research that 1) employs multiple methods within the qualitative paradigm, 2) is interdisciplinary, and 3) examines a sensitive research topic 4) with a vulnerable group of participants. Specifically, when research is also 5) cross-cultural and 6) utilises participatory techniques. Through our discussion, we draw upon an existing project and examine the complexity of designing and completing intra-paradigmatic mixed methods research with children from different sociocultural contexts, underpinned by interdisciplinary perspectives, in a complex area like mental health.

Financial inclusion, defined as the adequate access and usage of formal financial services to improve people's lives, is a crucial area for the economic development of a country through its various angles. This paper analyzes the impact of selected FinTech companies on financial inclusion in their respective countries to obtain lessons of their business models and country environments that can help Peruvian financial inclusion. The selected FinTechs are M-PESA in Kenya, Nubank in Brazil, GCASH in the Philippines, and Easypaisa in Pakistan, which revolutionized the financial sector in their respective countries. However, a comparative study of their impact on financial inclusion in their respective country has not been conducted yet; therefore, the lessons obtained are helpful for the Peruvian situation due to their practical implications and because they raise possible areas for further and deeper research. The approach of this study considered a qualitative and quantitative method (to find a Pearson correlation between the percentage of the population of Country (A) that are users of FinTech (a) and the six selected demand-side indicators per country retrieved from the Global Findex Database) analysis to understand the results obtained. The results obtained indicate that M-PESA and GCASH, companies specialized in providing basic mobile money transactions such as remittances and withdrawals, did not impact the provision of other financial services such as savings or credit cards. In Easypaisa's case, this company positively impacts the studied indicators, probably due to its original partnership with a microfinance institution. Regarding Nubank, despite its remarkable growth in the last years, the company does not affect financial inclusion in Brazil yet. Nonetheless, after its recent expansion to provide more financial services, future research could assess the impact of this company on Brazilian financial inclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The dearth of child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) is a global problem. Integrating CAMHS in primary care has been offered as a solution. We sampled integrated care perspectives from colleagues around the world. Our findings include various models of integrated care namely: the stepped care model in Australia; shared care in the United Kingdom (UK) and Spain; school-based collaborative care in Qatar, Singapore and the state of Texas in the US; collaborative care in Canada, Brazil, US, and Uruguay; coordinated care in the US; and, developing collaborative care models in low-resource settings, like Kenya and Micronesia. These findings provide insights into training initiatives necessary to build CAMHS workforce capacity using integrated care models, each with the ultimate goal of improving access to care. Despite variations and progress in implementing integrated care models internationally, common challenges exist: funding within complex healthcare systems, limited training mechanisms, and geopolitical/policy issues. Supportive healthcare policy, robust training initiatives, ongoing quality improvement and measurement of outcomes across programs would provide data-driven support for the expansion of integrated care and ensure its sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]