Roadblocks and how to tackle them

Running a participatory research process with young people and city staff as co-researchers offers many opportunities, but it also brings unique challenges. Slow progress and limits to the engagement of your co-researchers can particularly challenge your project, especially if they are not addressed.

Reflecting on our experience with 'Co-Creating Our City' pilots in Charlotte and Düsseldorf, we recognized several recurring challenges. Anticipating these potential roadblocks and planning how you can prevent or respond to them can avoid delays, strengthen engagement, and create a smoother path toward meaningful, jointly produced results.

1. Attendance and scheduling conflicts

Regular attendance at workshops can be a challenge, both for young people who are co-researchers and city employees. Young people can be busy with school and exams during term time, while city staff have to manage their role as co-researchers alongside their job. It can be tempting to rely on evenings and weekends, but this may disincentivize staff and young people who rely on part-time jobs to support their cost of living.

Solution: Identify and communicate key dates, like those of workshops, early, avoiding known peak periods (like summer holidays or upcoming elections). Consider fewer but longer sessions (e.g., on weekends) to reduce scheduling strain and maintain continuity. Keep workshop locations consistent to ease mental load and build familiarity.

2. Maintaining commitment and motivation

Initial enthusiasm does not always translate into continuing engagement among co-researchers. It can be difficult to keep momentum going and make progress with tasks (for example, conducting surveys or interviews) between workshops. Follow-through from co-researchers on tasks they committed to can sometimes be limited, as they are volunteers in the project. As a result, important tasks in the research process, for example in data collection or analysis, can remain unaccomplished, incomplete or inconsistent.

Solution: From the outset, set clear expectations for the type of engagement and anticipated workload. Co-develop research methods and activities that are realistic within your timeframe and include generous extra time in your plans. Consider integrating some hands-on research activities into workshop time to ensure progress even when participants have competing commitments.

3. Creating clear roles for all stakeholders

The roles of city staff who act as co-researchers must be defined clearly. In our pilot cities it was not always clear what their roles were and how much they were expected to contribute versus letting the young people drive the process. This risked missing out on their unique and valued contributions and created power imbalances between co-researchers.

Solution: Discuss roles and mutual benefits openly and early on in the process. Encourage everybody to be actively involved in workshops and tasks, while keeping the process participant-led to preserve the Citizen Science ethos. Address power imbalances proactively, e.g., by briefing and training city staff ahead of the first workshops with young people.

4. Communication and sharing resources

Although digital collaboration tools (for example, Google Drive) can be very useful, they add additional strain on co-researchers, especially those who do not routinely use them or have never used the selected platform. In our pilot cities, few co-researchers made use of online collaboration tools.

Solution: For updates and reminders, try using tools for communication and collaboration that participants already use, like messaging apps. Demonstrate collaboration tools and how they are used to share resources in workshops and integrate them into session tasks, so co-researchers can see how they are used and practice using them together.

5. Bottlenecks during data collection and analysis

Conducting and analyzing many interviews or a large-scale survey can be resource-intensive, requiring more capacity and staff time than you might have available. In our pilot cities, co-researchers had little involvement in data analysis and therefore missed an important stage of the meaning-making of the data.

Solution: Choose research methods and data collection methods (for example, qualitative interviews or online surveys) that are manageable given the resources and staff you have available. Where large-scale surveys are used, secure extra staff or partners to organize outreach and recruitment of participants. Allocate dedicated workshop time to data collection or analysis of data with the whole group, ensuring youth perspectives shape the interpretation of results.

6. Balancing knowledge sharing with getting work done

While workshops need to emphasize the exchange of knowledge between researchers, young co-researchers and city staff, they also need to use time efficiently to train co-researchers, prepare, and get work done. Workshops thus need to provide space for both learning and doing. In our pilot projects, it proved difficult at times to find the right balance.

Solution: Design work packages that can be deployed as modules in workshops and in-person sessions. Adapt your plans for workshops based on the progress of the project and the needs of your co-researchers, ensuring a balance of skills training, discussion, and hands-on research.

7. Building relationships and external opportunities

While it is key to involve co-researchers in the communication and dissemination of research findings, the project does focus on networking and relationship building beyond the team of researchers and co-researchers. In our pilot cities, youth responded positively to external networking opportunities (e.g., speaking at events or to the media) and valued space provided for relationship building.

Solution: Use the initial workshops to focus on building trust between co-researchers and group cohesion. Provide "value-added" opportunities for co-researchers to build networks outside of the core group and workshop time to sustain motivation and broaden learning.