IN DEGREE PROJECT THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT,SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS

, STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 2021

Digital Storytelling as A Method for Public Participation in Planning for Climate Adaptiaion

A Case Study of Futute Yetu in Korogocho, Nairobi

ELIN ELFSTRÖM

KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGYSCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

iii

Sammanfattning

Klimatförändringar är ett pågående problem över hela världen och alla människor påverkas, mer eller mindre. Särskilt utsatta för klimatförändringarnas effekter är människor som bor i informella områden. Kunskapen om både klimatförändringar och klimatanpassning måste öka bland invånarna, samtidigt som marginaliserade grupper får höras och vara med och påverka. Beslutsfattare och planerare behöver veta vilka problem som finns och vilka åtgärder som fungera i det specifika området. Deltagandeplanering blir mer och mer vanligt och används med fördel inom klimatanpassning. Klimatförändringarna är ett globalt problem, men effekterna sker lokalt och behöver åtgärdas utifrån den lokala kontextens förutsättningar. Ett problem när det gäller deltagandeplanering har varit att nå marginaliserade grupper, men deltagande metoder som används rätt kan ge dem möjlighet och förmåga att delta i planering och informera dem om vilka åtgärder de själva kan implementera tillsammans, för klimatanpassning och förändra samhället i rätt riktning.

Syftet med den här studien är att undersöka möjligheterna och utmaningarna med digital storytelling som metod för att förstärka samhällets röster och skapa en ömsesidig förståelse för klimatförändringar och klimatanpassning mellan medborgare, planerare och beslutsfattare. Projektet Future Yetu i Korogocho, Nairobi som genomförts av Hope Raisers Initiative används som en fallstudie. Syftet är också att skapa en guide för digital storytelling som ett verktyg för planering av klimatanpassning som kan användas i andra delar av Nairobi eller andra städer och länder.

Intervjuer och en enkätundersökning har genomförts med olika personer som varit delaktiga i projektet Future Yetu. Resultaten visar att det finns många fördelar med att använda digital storytelling, bland annat kan det hjälpa till att balansera ut de inneboende maktstrukturerna i samhället, då alla använder samma språk för att kommunicera inom digital storytelling. Andra fördelar är att det skapar större engagemang bland deltagarna, allmänheten kan lättare relatera och få en ökad förståelse för problemen och det skapar en känsla av gemenskap bland invånarna. I projektet Future Yetu har det även lett till en rad implementeringar och att en dialog med Nairobi City County har påbörjats. Det finns även en del utmaningar med digital storytelling. Tekniken är det som har visat sig vara den vanligaste utmaningen, både tillgång till den och förmågan att använda den, speciellt i utvecklingsländer. Det har även visat sig svårt att integrera digital storytelling i den vanliga planeringsprocessen, främst på grund av personalåtgången. Dock finns det möjligheter för organisationer som till exempel Hope Raisers Initiativ, som redan har utbildad personal och tekniken som krävs att erbjuda processen som en service för att stötta beslutsfattarnas arbete.

iv

Abstract

Climate change is an ongoing problem, and climate adaptation is high on the agenda. Climate adaptation is a global issue with local impacts, and it benefits from participatory planning. Participatory planning has lots of opportunities, but also some challenges, for example, that it requires time and resources. Getting minority groups involved can also be a challenge. This study aims to investigate the opportunities and challenges with digital storytelling as a method to amplify the voices of the community and create a mutual understanding of climate change and climate adaptation between the citizens, planners, and the county government, using the project Future Yetu as a case study. Interviews were conducted with key persons with different roles in the project, and a survey was sent to the digital storytelling workshop participants. The results show that there are many benefits to using digital storytelling; it can help balance out the inherent power structures in society, it creates greater engagement among the participants, the public can more easily relate and gain an increased understanding of the problems, and it creates a sense of togetherness among the residents. In Future Yetu, it has also led to several implementations, and dialogue with Nairobi City County has been started. Challenges with digital storytelling have also been identified. Access to technology and the ability to use it has proven to be the most common challenge, especially in developing countries. It has also been proved to be challenging to integrate digital storytelling into the regular planning process, mainly due to the personnel required. However, there are opportunities for organizations such as the Hope Raisers Initiative, which already has trained facilitators and the technology needed to offer the process as a service to support the work of the county and the policymakers.

Keywords

participatory planning, environmental sustainability , public engagement, mutual understanding, climate change

v

Acknowledgements

This thesis is written at KTH Royal Institute of Technology as the final part of the master’s program Sustainable Urban Planning and Design.

First, I want to thank the organization Hope Raisers Initiative for the collaboration and for introducing me to the project Future Yetu. Especially thanks to Daniel Onyango and Pia Jonsson for the support during my work. I am also incredibly grateful to have had my supervisor Ulrika Gunnarsson-Östling by my side. She has given me a lot of advice and support and made me stay calm during the whole process. Finally, I want to thank my family and my friends for putting up with me, and especially thank Anna and Wille for proofreading my thesis.

Elin Elfström May 2021

vi

Table of contents

1. Introduction 1 1.1 Aim and research questions 2

2. Related literature and theoretical focus 3 2.1 Participatory planning 3

3.1.2 Participatory planning and climate adaptation 5 2.2. Storytelling 6 2.3 Digital storytelling 7

2.3.1 Examples of the use of digital storytelling 8

3. Method 10 3.1 Case study 10

3.1.1 Study settings 11 3.2 Qualitative interviews 11 3.3 Open-ended questionaries 13

4. The case Future Yetu 14 4.1. The Baseline Survey 14 4.2 The Digital Storytelling 15 4.3 The Prototype 16

5. Results 17 5.1 The role of the facilitators 17 5.2 The County’s interaction 18 5.3 Participation and engagement 21 5.4 Power structures 24 5.5 Digital storytelling as a method 25

6. Discussion 30 6.1 Participatory planning 30 6.2 Break down the power structures 32 6.3 Technology 33 6.4 The Facilitators 33 6.5 Expectations 34 6.6 The result of Future Yetu 34

7. Conclusion 36

References 38 Interviews 40

1

1. Introduction

Climate change is an ongoing problem that affects everyone in different ways and to a different extent. For some, it is barely noticeable, but for others, it can be life-threatening. Floods, drought, precipitation variability, rising temperatures, and sea-level rise are only a few effects of climate change that we face all over the world today, so also in Kenya. Flooding, for example, has become more and more frequent in parts of Kenya and is causing significant negative impacts as it destroys homes, reduces the quality of drinking water, and increases the risk for diseases (Nairobi Convention, 2016). The capital Nairobi can also expect an increase in heat during this century (UNFCCC, n.d.).

Urban areas are both the largest contributor and the most vulnerable to climate change due to increasing population, congestion, the sprawl of informal settlements, and lack of proper planning (UN-Habitat, n.d.; Dinga, 2020). According to UN-Habitat (n.d.), hundreds of millions of people in urban areas are likely to be affected by climate change impacts in the coming decades. "The impact if amplified at city level when climate hazards and risks such as flooding and storms, extreme heat and drought occur which calls for communities to be ready to respond in more if not equal measure to guarantee their survival and well-being" (Dinga, 2020).

To be able to respond to climate change and act for climate adaptation, there must be a mutual understanding between the community and the citizens. In some cases, the citizens do not even know what climate change is and how they should act. Some might not even know that it is climate change that has caused the problem they suffer. If the causes are not known, it is also difficult to act for climate adaptation. The county has to understand the problems the citizens are facing and how different measures affect them. The citizen needs to understand how they can reach the county, what help they can get and how they can change their behavior to change in the right direction. A lack of this type of communication has been identified between the communities and the county of Nairobi (Onyango 2021; Otieno, 2020). Therefore, the organization Hope Raisers Initiative has carried out a pilot project called Future Yetu to create this mutual understanding and amplify the citizens' voices. Future Yetu will be used as an example to examine how the participatory method digital storytelling can be used in planning for climate adaptation.

Participatory planning has long been a topic in urban planning, and research shows that it is crucial for climate adaptation (Kithiia & Dowling, 2009; Ingram & Hamilton, 2014). According to several studies, the probability that you follow the community guidelines is also greater if you have been involved in creating and implementing them (Fischer, 2012; Ingram & Hamilton, 2014; Koontz & Newig, 2014). That is one of the reasons why public participation and engagement are essential. There are a lot of different methods for public participation. In planning for climate adaptation a community based approach has often been used, with implementations by non-government organizations (Kithiia & Dowling, 2009; Kirkby et al., 2017; Reid & Huq, 2014) One participatory method that has not yet been discovered as much, a least not in the field of climate change or urban planning at all, is

2

digital storytelling. It is a method that involves people in a different way and can be an effective tool for climate adaptation or other environmental issues that requires engaged citizens. Therefore, this study will examine the potential to use digital storytelling to both inform the decision makers on what the problems really are and to educate and engage the public.

The following section explains the aim and the research question of the study. Chapter 2 presents the theoretical framework, including participatory planning and storytelling, and previous research and examples of digital storytelling. Chapter 3 described the methods used and how the study has been affected by the Covid-19 pandemic. In chapter 4, the results of the study are presented. In, chapter 5 the results are discussed. The conclusion and recommendations are then presented in chapter 6.

1.1 Aim and research questions

The aim of this thesis is to investigate the opportunities and challenges with digital storytelling as a method to amplify the voices of the community and create a mutual understanding of climate change and climate adaptation between the citizens, planners, and the county government, using the project Future Yetu as a case study.

The purpose is to create a guide for digital storytelling as a tool in planning for climate adaptation that can be used in other parts of Nairobi or other cities and countries.

To fulfill this aim/purpose, the following research questions will be used:

- How has digital storytelling been used in Future Yetu and what type of mutual understanding was created between the people in Korogocho and Nairobi City county?

- How can digital storytelling be used as a method for public participation in order to create a mutual understanding of climate change and climate adaptation?

- How can this method fit into the “regular” planning process?

3

2. Related literature and theoretical focus

In this chapter, the theoretical framework of participatory planning and the concepts of incentive gap, capacity gap, and power cap will be presented. Then, participatory planning for climate adaptation will be addressed, followed by the storytelling theory and three practical examples from cases where digital storytelling has been used.

2.1 Participatory planning

Participatory planning and participatory governance are well-known concepts in planning and sustainable development by now. Le Roux and Cilliers (2013) define participatory planning as "a process where the public is involved in decision-making, regarding planning aspects that interests and affects them" (p. 2). The many benefits of participatory planning are the reason behind the emerging of the approach. Despite the time, effort, information, and funding required, participatory planning has many advantages over traditional government policy (Koontz & Newig, 2014). One benefit, that several researchers address, is that the outcome is more efficient and equitable, and plans are easier to implement if carried out by participatory planning (Fischer, 2012; Ingram & Hamilton, 2014; Koontz & Newig, 2014; Osmani, 2007). One reason is that participatory planning also reduces the risk of dissatisfied stakeholders, which can impede the implementation (Innes & Booher, 1999). According to Koontz and Newig (2014), Gray also "argues that implementation is fostered if the stakeholders who participated in crafting the agreement continue to be involved in implementation" (p. 421). However, the outcome depends on the social and economic context (Fischer, 2012). Other benefits are that it brings local knowledge to bear, contributes to self-development, and can lead to a more equitable distribution of political power if given the right circumstances and the ability to develop participatory practices (ibid).

According to Fischer (2012), participatory governance is about transitioning from a professionally dominated top-down approach to a more citizen-based bottom-up approach. However, it is important not to assume that collaboration is only bottom-up, as the degree of top-down/bottom-up can vary in different contexts (Koontz & Newig, 2014). Further, Fischer (2012) argues that participatory governance offers a theory and practice of public engagement through deliberative processes that contribute to the empowerment of citizens, development of communicative skills, and community capacity-building. His questions of citizen competence, empowerment, and capacity‐building related to participatory governance, will be presented here.

The first two questions address competence and empowerment, which are strongly connected to marginalized citizens, who are the ones that probably benefit the most from participatory governance (Fischer, 2012). However, if citizens are not capable or empowered to participate, participatory governance has no meaning (ibid). This can be a challenge, especially when it comes to marginalized groups, even if there are cases that "show that citizens with less formal education can also, under the right conditions, participate with surprisingly high levels of competence" (Fischer, 2012, p. 350).

4

Besides competence, participatory governance requires an investment of time and energy into participatory activities, something that many citizens can be skeptical about (Fischer, 2012). In some cases, there is also a lack of relevance for the citizens to participate (Fischer, 2012). According to Osmani (2007), people are less likely to participate if the possible benefits from it do not outweigh the costs of participation, for example, time and effort, which he calls the incentive gap. Moreover, it is important to make sure that the benefits of participation go beyond the specific project. "Public participation should keep the future vision in mind while addressing current needs" (Le Roux & Cilliers, 2013, p.3).

The third question, related to participatory governance, stated by Fischer (2012), is about capacity-building, which relates to Osmani's (2007) capacity gap, which refers to the skill required to participate in the process of governance. According to Fischer (2012), it is about building a sense of togetherness, social trust, and mutual understanding and develop a community's ability to solve the problem they face together. The goal of building capacity is for many, "to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the provision and management of public services" (Fischer, 2012, p. 351), while for some, it is "to provide citizens with opportunities to critically reflect on the norms and values justifying the equity of the outcomes" (ibid, p. 352).

Osmani (2007) and Fischer (2012) also talk about the power gap, which refers to the inherent asymmetric power in the society, and it is one of the barriers to meaningful participation. Fischer (2012) states that participatory governance can be a solution to that as "it seeks to give a voice to those without power" (p. 354). Further, however, he believes that there is no guarantee it will generate unmanipulated power (ibid).

As mentioned above, one of the benefits of community participation is that, according to several researchers, including Fischer (2012), the efficiency of programs and the effectiveness of projects can be improved. Ojha (cited in Fischer 2012) states that "it is seen to lead to quicker responses to emerging issues and problems, more effective development and design of solutions appropriate to local resources, higher levels of commitment and motivation in program implementation, and greater overall satisfaction with policies and programs" (p. 352). However, it is possible that the causation also is reversed; that is citizens, only participate in projects they know will be efficient (Fischer, 2012). Another benefit is that the community's chances to influence the distribution of resources can be improved, as disadvantaged citizens have improved their chances of expressing their preferences in ways that can make them count (ibid). Although, this is hard to achieve in inequitable social contexts, as equitable outcomes are more related to the distribution of power, motivation levels of the participants, and the presence of groups that can facilitate the process (Fischer, 2012). Another problem is that resource allocations can violate the true preferences of community members, as the participants withhold or distort information (ibid). This is more common in developing countries where community participation is related to donor-founded projects, where the participants advance

5

preferences in line with the donors instead of the local interest to increase their chances of obtaining available resources (Fischer, 2012).

Although many benefits come from participatory governance, some challenges need to be considered (Fischer, 2012). One of them is that the ones who are working in the public sector need to combine knowledge and perspectives from the technical, political, and local domains and create contexts where all these different perspectives can be shared (ibid). Additionally, this information needs to be identified and disseminated, including translated to create mutual understanding and deliberation among the participants (Fischer, 2012). Another challenge is that most professionals are not trained in facilitating participation (ibid). Regarding that, Le Roux and Cilliers (2013) states that "creative approaches are needed to facilitate the involvement of stakeholders and ensure comprehensive public participation" (p 3). Stakeholder identification can also be a challenge as, ideally, all possible participants should be included, but that is not always possible due to time and budget constraints (ibid). Further, Ferguson and Low (cited in Le Roux & Cilliers, 2013) argue that it is important that the stakeholders within the communities know their role and level of involvement not to get disappointed and rebellious if the planners cannot meet their expectations.

3.1.2 Participatory planning and climate adaptation

Integrated municipal-level planning and local stakeholder involvement are important, not least when it comes to climate adaptation (Kithiia & Dowling, 2009). Although climate change is a global issue, the impacts are local. According to The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the local level is essential for climate adaptation for three reasons. (1) "climate change impacts are manifested locally, affecting local livelihood activities." (2) "vulnerability and adaptive capacities are determined by local conditions." (3), "adaptation activities are often observed at the local" (OECD, 2009, p. 21).

"Adaptation is a process through which communities prepare to cope with an uncertain future climate" (Ingram & Hamilton, 2014). It is a way of responding to the effects of climate change and maintain or enhance the resilience of their ecosystems through different actions (Nairobi Convention, 2016). Adaptation does not mean that the negative impacts will be avoided (Ingram & Hamilton, 2014). However, climate adaptation is necessary to ensure that countries and communities will be able to cope with and respond to the current climate change impacts and the predicted impacts in the future (Thornton, 2010; UNFCCC, n.d.). Measures for adaptation vary depending on the specific context of a community, organization, or country, and there is no "one-size-fits-all solution" (UNFCCC, n.d.). However, four areas are essential to include in climate adaptation planning: (1) improving the adaptive capacity, (2) addressing and managing the socio-economic impacts of climate change, (3) Enhancing the opportunity for coordination and cooperation between and amongst climate stakeholders, and (4) mainstreaming climate change adaptation into existing city plans, policies, programs, and planning processes (Ingram & Hamilton, 2014). Climate adaptation plans are necessary everywhere as more adaptive capacity also leads to a more resilient society (ibid). Many

6

countries are already taking measures to build resilience, according to UNFCCC (n.d.). However, they mean that greater actions are needed.

In planning for climate adaptation, community-based adaptation (CBA) has become an increasingly common approach. CBA is "an approach to strengthening the adaptive capacity of local communities vulnerable to climate change" (Kirkby et al., 2017). It can be defined as "a community-led process, based on communities' priorities, needs, knowledge, and capacities, which should empower people to plan for and cope with the impacts of climate change" (Reid et al., 2009). Ayers and Forsyth (2009) argue that adaptation strategies should be generated through local participation. A community-based approach that is place-based and addresses the local vulnerability to climate change and local knowledge is a valuable complement to impact-based scientific inputs (ibid). This is a bottom-up approach applied to identify the problems and responses at the local level (Reid & Huq, 2014). In the beginning, CBA initiatives were mainly implemented by non-government organizations that operated at a local level (ibid).

2.2. Storytelling

A participatory method that can be used to understand the human and urban conditions better and reach mutual recognition is Storytelling (Sandercock, 2003; van Hulst, 2012). According to Flicker and McEntee (2020), is using storytelling for preserving and sharing cultural teachings widespread. “Stories have long been used by cultures around the world to communicate values, teach life lessons, preserve histories and rituals, and entertain” (Flicker & McEntee, 2020, p. 2).

Stories are a form of local knowledge that can be gathered through a public participation process, where the citizens have the opportunity to tell stories about their community (Sandercock, 2003). By offering space for citizens with their lived experiences and emotions to tell their stories, planning can be more inclusive and democratic (van Hulst, 2012). There are different techniques to collect these stories, and the uses of stories also vary, but the main belief is that everyone should have the chance to speak and make themselves heard (ibid). In these types of participatory processes, storytelling needs to be facilitated (van Hulst, 2012). As a planner, it is essential to create opportunities for minority groups to raise their voices by designing meetings that make them comfortable and encouraged to speak for themselves (Sandercock, 2003). Storytelling can be used at the beginning of a planning process to gather opinions and views, but also as a “response to a pre-existing conflict that needs to be addressed before planning can move ahead” (Sandercock, 2003, p. 15).

Stories and storytelling can also work as catalysts for change and shape a new imagination of alternatives (Sandercock, 2003). One way to inspire people to act is to tell meaningful stories of success that give hope (ibid). As van Hulst (2012) mentions, telling and listening to stories creates an understanding of what has been and prepares for the future. Stories in planning processes often include events of the future and the actors’ roles to accomplish them (ibid). The stories tell what is wrong and what needs to be done (ibid).

7

Sandercock (2003) also talks about core story and suggests that everyone has a core story that we create with our lives based on past behavior and others’ comments about us. Further, she mentions that communities also have core stories that give meaning to collective life. Core stories can be used to create a mutual understanding between public agencies and communities. The aim here is to help a community turn the story around by asking them how they think the story can change and let the core story guide how communities respond to a crisis or public intervention (Sandercock, 2003). The planners can then convert the core story to a credible plan which they take back to show the storytellers and ask them if they have understood their story right (ibid). If the community only has one core story, this is a more straightforward process than it would be if there were multiple conflicting stories (Sandercock, 2003).

Many different forms of storytelling can be powerful depending on what issues the community faces, for example, video, music, or other art forms, e.g., graffiti (Sandercock, 2003). This fosters the ability to tell, listen to, and invent stories, as well as the ability to make the space for stories to be heard (ibid).

2.3 Digital storytelling

The form of storytelling that is used in the project in this study is Digital storytelling.

“Digital storytelling describes a simple, creative process through which people with little or no experience in computer film-making gain skills needed to tell a personal story as a two-minute film using predominantly still images and voiceover. These films can then be streamed on the web or broadcast on television” (the University of Brighton, n.d.).

Another definition of digital storytelling is,

“a way to celebrate the individual and the collective, and to lend respect and credence to the lived experiences of individuals through the collective co-creation of individual narratives, and provides participants with the opportunity to work together, tell and share stories, listen to others, and learn.” (Cunsolo Willox et al., 2012, p. 132)

Digital storytelling creates opportunities for people to tell their stories in their own words, in the way they want others to hear it (Cunsolo Willox et al., 2012). By listening to the voices and words and seeing the pictures from the participants, one can connect to people and places and learn about other perspectives and values of people, place, and culture (ibid). The method is a powerful tool to engage historically marginalized and silenced individuals as it contributes to community collaboration and cohesion, build capacity, and incite dialog between stakeholder (Cunsolo Willox et al., 2012).

Research shows that people are more willing to share personal experiences with this method than through interviews and focus groups (Cunsolo Willox et al., 2012). That is why digital storytelling also is used as a complementary research method (ibid). Similar to Sandercock, Flicker, and McEntee (2020) argue that “by offering participants the opportunity to direct their own audio-visual

8

narratives, researchers literally and figuratively get a chance to see the world through their eyes” (p. 5).

Digital storytelling has many benefits but also some challenges. One of them, that many researchers mention, is the technological resources required and the ability to use them, especially in developing countries. According to Cunsolo Willox et al. (2012), another challenge is whether stories can be used against the community or contribute to misunderstandings and if it is justified to leave out such stories consciously. The underlying narrative structure of digital storytelling processes can also be a challenge that needs to be addressed, as it follows a very Western approach to storylines. A 3–5-minute story does not necessarily resonate with non-Western storytelling forms or traditions (Ambala, 2020; Cunsolo Willox et al., 2012).

2.3.1 Examples of the use of digital storytelling

In many developing countries, commonly, NGOs engage in participatory governance, not to speak for the poor or marginalized, but to empower these citizens through creating opportunities to develop their communication skills and own abilities to negotiate with policymakers (Fischer, 2012). In many cases where space for participation has been created, and excluded groups are supported to develop a collective presence where they can speak for themselves, it has shown that citizens have influenced the policies of mainstream institutions (ibid).

Digital storytelling is a participatory method that has been used as a method in several different cases, mainly for health and education purposes, often to amplify the voices of marginalized groups in the community.

One example where digital storytelling was used and adapted to the local context is the study by Ambala (2020) and the case of the Abakuria of Kenya. The aim here was to unite marginalized communities and the marginalized voices within them and give prominence to women in the digital storytelling project. The project's objective was that 50 percent of the participant would be women, who contributed to narratives, themes, and the production, and would position as protagonists in the stories (Ambala, 2020). However, they could not find enough women to participate, and the result was only three women among the 11 participants, "amplifying the extent to which women were marginalised in the community" (ibid, p. 7). This study emphasizes the importance of adapting the digital storytelling process to the local context, in this case, African contexts. The process of adaptation, in this case, needed active and continuous participation for all involved, and the result and decisions such as language, protagonists, and locations developed organically through the process (Ambala, 2020). Adaptation of a non-local method also requires flexibility, inventiveness, and the humility to persuade or be persuaded by other participants (ibid).

Another case, from rural South Africa, is the project Izindaba Yethu, which uses community-based participatory video to raise awareness of social issues like HIV and AIDS and to engage the community

9

in exploring solutions (Mitchell & de Lange, 2011). The process was similar to a digital storytelling process that started with a video-making workshop. The participants chose the focus, created a storyboard, and then filmed the videos after a short camera operation training. The participant then got to review and re-engage in their videos and then reflect on their work. After that, a videographer, together with the research team, compiled a video, Izindaba Yethu (Our Stories), that could be used for reflection, teaching, and engagement beyond the workshop. About a month later, the video was taken back to the participating school for a screening and discussion workshop. Later, it was screened for the comminute to open up opportunities for engagement. The participants felt the video created opportunities to engage with issues seldom talked about and could be used as a tool to inform and encourage further debate. In this case, the challenges were, as in the previous case, the technical concerns, but also ethical issues, mainly because of the sensitive theme. They point out the importance of understanding and consent, the questions of who owns the images and what the participant could do with the videos, and any inherent risks for the participants (Mitchell & de Lange, 2011).

The third example is a study carried out by Cunsolo Willox and colleagues (2012) in a remote community in northern Labrador, Canada. In this case, digital storytelling was used to preserve and promote indigenous oral wisdom, focusing on climate change and health effects. This study emphasizes digital storytelling's ability to alter the power dynamic often inherent in research processes. The researcher becomes the listener instead of the narrative creator, and the creative control is placed in the community (Cunsolo Willox et al., 2012). The study also points out several challenges, for example, the technology required and the ability to use it. In this case, individuals that were already familiar and comfortable with the equipment, like computers, cameras, and software, were more likely to participate. The same case also used a non-profit organization to facilitate the community workshops while simultaneously training the community facilitators, which was essential. However, the researcher realized that training the community members before the workshop would have been more effective. It would also have removed any external influences and underlying values that could have impacted the stories (ibid). Another challenge was to ensure that the participants stay within the main focus of the stories and convey issues within the subject. Although, the facilitators must remain open and respect the need that some participants will have to create stories beyond the workshop topic (Cunsolo Willox et al., 2012).

10

3. Method

In this section, the methodology used, and the study setting are presented. This study is a case study, and qualitative interviews have been used together with a survey and a desktop study.

3.1 Case study

A case study is, according to MacCallum et al. (2019), “a study conducted within a particular setting where issues you are interested in can be observed and researched empirically” (p. 44), and “it is a useful way of gaining in-depth insights into why and how things happen in a particular context” (p. 46). In this study, the setting is the project Future Yetu, carried out by the organization Hope Raisers Initiative in the informal settlement Korogocho in Nairobi, Kenya. A case study is used in research that “concerns the relationship between a phenomenon and its context” (ibid, p. 46). The phenomenon studied in relation to this setting is digital storytelling as a tool for participatory planning for climate adaptation.

Because of the complexity of real-life phenomena, case studies usually involve several methods for the researcher to compare information from different sources to confirm interpretations by paying attention to sources that agree and what stands out (MacCallum et al., 2019). This is called triangulation and requires careful analysis (ibid). Different types of information are needed to get a complete picture of what is going on. In this study, interviews with people with different roles have been conducted to gather information about the project from different perspectives. In addition to that, a survey and a desk-top study was made to gain a broader understanding of the study settings and the project. The literature related to the project that was studied and analyzed were:

- The project website. The project website and blog connected to it provided general information about the project and reflections on the project from key persons and recordings from online seminars. They were from an introduction before the digital storytelling workshop and a webinar after the stories were screened. In one webinar, the community’s and the county’s perspectives on climate adaptation were discussed with different stakeholders.

- Baseline Report Future Yetu. A compilation of part one of the project was received from the organization. The report provided information about the first step of the project and the community’s understanding of climate adaptation.

The initial plan was to make a site visit and action-based methods like workshops, but due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, that was impossible.

Since the findings in a case study are specific to this case, they cannot be generalized or used to make predictions about other settings. However, the analysis can be extended beyond the specific setting “by informing theory and expectations concerning the phenomenon” (MacCallum et al., p. 47). In this

11

case, the results can indicate how digital storytelling can be used for climate adaptation in other areas. The aim is that the guide that is developed can be adapted and used in other cities.

3.1.1 Study settings

As mentioned above, the setting in this case study is the project Future Yetu in Korogocho, Nairobi, and the initial plan was to go there and do a field study. However, due to the circumstances, the study was conducted remotely from Sweden.

The purpose of the Future Yetu was to amplify the voices of the community through digital storytelling to contribute to sustainable climate adaptation. The project is described in more detail in section 4.1.

Korogocho is the fourth largest informal settlement in Kenya, located in northeastern Nairobi. The settlement is around one and a half square kilometers and has nearly 200 000 inhabitants (Dinga, 2020). The land is primarily government-owned, with smaller pockets of private land (Höök et al., 2012). The area has high density, congestion, and high unemployment, and the majority of the dwellers are victims of evictions in other slums (ibid).

The informal settlement Korogocho in Nairobi has undergone significant development during the past years, mainly through the Korogocho Slum Upgrading Programme (KSUP) that started in 2008 (Syrjänen, 2008). The program aimed to improve the living and working conditions in the area and build capacity, improve community awareness, and foster inclusivity (ibid). The project strongly focused on participatory planning, tools for involvement, and in situ improvement (Höök et al., 2012). That has become increasingly important since the Kenyan government recognized the slums in 2000, and there was a transition from demolition to more focus on a broader context for sustainable development (ibid).

3.2 Qualitative interviews

Interviews have been conducted with the project leaders, facilitators, and representatives from Nairobi City County to gain information about the project, the digital storytelling process in general, and this case. Digital storytelling as a method in planning for climate adaptation is an emerging phenomenon. According to MacCallum et al. (2019), interviews are a useful method when such phenomena are studied if they are designed, executed, and analyzed correctly. Interviews are also common within case studies because of the detailed, in-depth, and personal insights they can provide. “They are particularly useful for obtaining information, opinions and perspectives from people with special knowledge of a phenomenon – experts on a subject, participants in a process, investors in development, members of minority communities” (ibid, p. 149). In this case, the interview has been conducted with selected people from different levels to gather information about the project from different perspectives, to investigate how the use of digital storytelling affects the planning and the people it concerns. Expert sampling (MacCallum, 2019) was therefore used to recruit the interviewees since only these specific persons know about this project, and their views are the ones that are

12

interesting for the study’s research questions. Some of the interviewees were also so-called snowball samples, as other interviewees recommended them.

The persons who were interviewed are:

- Daniel Onyango, project leader, Hope Raisers Initiative

- Dr Antonia Liguori, Lecturer in Applied Storytelling (support in Future Yetu), Loughborough University

- Humphrey Otieno Oduor, Urban Safety Expert (contact with the county), Safer Nairobi Initiative

- Margaret, Kariuki, Environment and Compliance Officer, Nairobi City County Government

- Pia Jonsson, facilitator, Hope Raisers Initiative

- Wambui Njoroge, facilitator, Hope Raisers Initiative

The people interviewed were only people who had been involved in the project, which may have affected the result as they may be biased.

The interviews were semi-structured, with a few overall themes and a set of predetermined questions that guided the interview. Different interview guides where used for different roles, see appendix 1.. This allows the researcher to focus on predetermined information and be flexible (MacCallum et al., 2019). It gives space for the interviewees to talk freely about the topic and for the researcher to ask follow-up questions (Bryman, 2018), to explore new areas that were not expected (MacCallum et al., 2019), and to get a deeper understanding of the interviewees’ experiences regarding climate change, adaptation and the digital storytelling process. Follow-up questions or secondary questions that support the primary questions are also important to keep the interview going (ibid).

The initial plan was to conduct face-to-face interviews during the field study, but the interviews had to be conducted online via Zoom due to the pandemic. The preparation for online synchronous interviews is similar to face-to-face interviews (Bryman, 2018). Although, some factors are good to consider, such as technical issues and lack of good internet connection (ibid), which occurred to be a problem here. Bad quality makes it harder to create a flow in the interview and creates a problem when transcribing (Bryman, 2018). In this study, this resulted in somewhat shorter interviews and some loss of material; however, sufficient material could be collected. It has not been shown that it is more challenging to build trust between the researcher and the interviewee through an online interview in video call programs (Bryman, 2018). There are also benefits, such as flexibility, it saves time and money, and convenience can make people who typically would decline accept to participate (ibid).

13

The interviews were recorded in agreement with the interviewees. After the interviews were conducted, they were transcribed and analyzed by using thematic analysis. To make sense of the data and analyze and interpret it, the data was coded. The themes that were used were (1) The role of the facilitators, (2) The County’s interaction, (3) Participations and engagement, (4) Power structures, and (5) Digital storytelling as a method. The codes are a combination of both deductive and inductive codes, as some were established before the literature review, and some emerged from the data itself (MacCallum et al., 2019). The first two themes were considered essential as they appeared in several of the interviews. The second two were decided based on the theoretical framework, as engagement and power structures are empathized in participatory planning. Words and phrases from the interview transcripts were then linked to these different themes.

3.3 Open-ended questionaries

A survey was used instead of interviews with the participants due to the study being carried out remotely and challenges with access to internet connection. Therefore, many of the questions were based on the interview guide (prepared for the initially planned interviews) and adapted to a survey format, with several open-ended questions, complemented with a few "yes and no-questions", see appendix 2. The survey was sent to all the participants who had access to the internet. A facilitator from the organization on-site in Korogocho helped participants without access to the internet to respond to the survey. The survey was aimed at the 15 participants of the project's digital storytelling workshop. There were 12 respondents, including 10 participants from the community, one facilitator, and one person who provided space and support during the project. The answers to the open-ended survey questions were analyzed in the same way as the interviews with the same themes.

14

4. The case Future Yetu

Future Yetu is a project carried out by the community-based organization Hope Raisers Initiative in collaboration with Landskapslaget (a Swedish urban planning and landscape architect company), Loughborough University, Nairobi City County, and Safer Nairobi Initiative (a collaboration between UN-Habitat and Nairobi City County), and it was funded by Cities Alliance. The purpose of the project was to amplify the voices of the community through digital storytelling to contribute to sustainable climate adaptation.

“Future Yetu seeks to position digital storytelling as a creative methodology for dialogue between community and local government. Together with representatives from Nairobi City County, residents of Korogocho, the fourth biggest informal settlement in Nairobi, will receive skills and knowledge on how to amplify their voices through digital storytelling. The stories will inform effects of climate change in their everyday lives. A team of community members, urban planners and county officials will respond to these stories by developing climate adaptation ideas, interventions and prototypes. These will be implemented and can be up-scaled to policy level. The ideas can be either physical or tap into behaviour change. Through a mobile Matatu-exhibition, the stories will travel around the streets of Korogocho. Residents will have possibility to take part in the discussion and provide new ideas for climate adaptation. The results from these discussions will be developed into a community climate adaptation manifesto. The manifesto will be handed over to the county government, and inspire into a Nairobi Climate Adaptation Plan that not yet exist.” (Hope Raisers Initiative, n.d.)

Future Yetu was divided into three different phases; part one, a baseline survey to understand the context and the knowledge; part 2, the digital storytelling for mutual understanding; and part 3, create the message and prototyping for change (Hope Raisers Initiative, n.d.).

4.1. The Baseline Survey

The first part of Future Yetu, the baseline survey, was conducted to provide a basis for the project by gathering information and gaining an understanding of the community’s perception of climate change and climate adaptation (Onyango et al., 2020). The aim was also to explore the Korogocho’s knowledge and perceptions of climate change, identify what impacts changing weather has on their lives, investigate barriers to respond to climate change, and inform recommendations on methods of communication.

The methods used here were quantitative surveys like face-to-face surveys and online questionnaires, and qualitative interviews with key stakeholders and informants (Onyango et al., 2020). In the quantitative survey, there were 448 respondents, divided into 12 different regions of Korogocho, and there were about as many females as male respondents (ibid). The respondents were between 19 and 65 years, and the average age for the women was about 26 and about 23 for the men (Onyango et al., 2020).

15

All the respondents had heard the term climate change, but only 32 answered they understood what it meant (ibid). When asked about the causes of climate change, 30 percent answered deforestation, 26 percent carbon emissions, and 25 percent burning of fossil fuels (Onyango et al., 2020). Around 56 percent of the respondents stated that they were ‘hopeful’ that something could be done about climate change and 69 percent said they were taking measures (ibid). Two of the recommendations based on the information gained from the respondents were; communication tools for increased access to information and understanding of climate change among the public and “ensure information on climate change and adaptation strategies offer familiar messages and imagery” (Onyango et al., 2020).

The focus groups were performed “to understand the knowledge of climate change and climate adaptation, as well as create a framework for communication language that will be used in the following Digital storytelling sessions” (Onyango et al., 2020, p. 8). The two groups had a 50/50 division of female and male participants and the second group consisted of young people from the community (ibid). In this step of the survey, the four elements, wind, earth, air, and fire, were used to define and talk about these issues in a comprehensive way. “By using pictures to describe the elements where the participants themselves could choose a photo in connection to the element, we also got a bigger understanding of how they react to nature, as well as their emotions attached to it” (Onyango et al., 2020, p. 8). The majority of the participants connected climate change to weather patterns, like drought, flooding, and also issues like pollution. Most of the participants did not connect climate change with their daily life and described it as an issue handled by the policymakers (ibid).

In this step, A Future Yetu Climate Adaptation Committee was also established, with 16 community members that would come to take part help throughout the project.

4.2 The Digital Storytelling

The second part of the project, the digital storytelling, was carried out through a three-day workshop (Hope Raisers Initiative, n.d.). “The workshop brought together about 20 participants, including 15 community leaders that represented different groups of the community, women, youths, teachers, religious institutions, community activists, people with disabilities, and minority groups (Onyango, 2020). The Nairobi metropolitan service environment department also participated (Onyango, 2020).

The process followed the model developed by Joe Lambert and his team at Storycenter (founder of the digital storytelling movement (Storycenter.org, n.d.) and started with a story circle (Liguori, interview, 2021). During the story circle, the facilitators started to prompt ideas and start discussing the theme, in this case, climate change, by asking key questions. Here, the four elements, water, air, fire, and soil, and photos were used to prompt the participants to connect the theme to their lives (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). The second step is scriptwriting, and the participants are asked to write a script of around 250 words (Liguori, interview, 2021). The storytelling model is often

16

adapted to the different contexts, and in this project, storyboarding techniques were also suggested in this step (ibid). The participants were provided a storyboarding templet with four squares to draw in with lines under it so note what is happening in each stage, that can then be developed into a structured story “with a beginning, something that happens that change and resolution with the end of the story” (Liguori, interview, 2021). The third step is to record the audio. If the participants wrote a script, they were reading that while recording the voice-over. If they did the storyboarding, they looked at the storyboard and improvised while recording (ibid). The fourth step is to combine the images, voice-over, and music, edit the video, and then export it. This was done in software provided by Loughborough University and with help from the facilitators trained in digital storytelling before the workshop (Liguori, interview, 2021; Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021; Njoroge, interview, 2021). The final step is screening the videos, and the participants get to reflect on the creative process and discuss it together (Liguori, interview, 2021). In Future Yetu, the stories were also screened in the busses, and through a mobile Matatu exhibition, the stories spread through the streets of Korogocho (Hope Raisers Initiative, n.d.). That created opportunity for the public to give their opinions on the issues and take part in the discussion (ibid). The results from these discussions will be developed into a community climate adaptation manifesto that will be handed over to the county government to inspire the Nairobi Climate Adaptation Plan (Hope Raisers Initiative, n.d.).

4.3 The Prototype

The third part of Future Yetu, the prototype, results from the digital stories, and the discussion forms from the Matatu exhibition that have been compiled and analyzed (Hope Raisers Initiative, n.d.). The most common issue brought up in the stories were air pollution, something that everyone in the area has experienced, mainly caused by the dumping site in the area. This is not directly a climate change issue but is strongly related to the subject environmental sustainability, and the Future Yetu team had an open mind and were prepared for other issues to be brought up (Jonsson & Onyango, 2021). Due to that they all came together as a community, and everyone involved decided that a Carbon Sink Pocket is the prototype that should be done (Njoroge, interview, 2021). The Carbon Sink Pocket is a green space with fast-growing bamboo that will store carbon dioxide that has now been implemented in one of the public schools with help from all the participants Korogocho (Hope Raisers Initiative, n.d.). Project leader Daniel Onyango (interview, 2021) means that the prototype can be seen as a symbol and a visible possibility of what can happen. The participants can see that their stories have actually been translated into something tangible.

17

5. Results

In this section the results of the study will be presented based on the themes the role of the facilitators, the county’s interaction, participations and engagement, and, power structures, followed by a section about the interviewees’ thoughts on digital storytelling a method.

5.1 The role of the facilitators

The facilitators who facilitated Future Yetu's digital storytelling workshop were local, which was important according to digital storytelling expert Liguori (interview, 2021), as the facilitators' roles are key elements of the process. They were from the community and were aware of the issues in the area. They were also able to understand and connect with the participants and their experiences (Onyango, interview, 2021; Njoroge, interview, 2021). Onyango (interview, 2021) means that it can be challenging to get the participants engaged if someone from the outside is coming in and telling them what to do. If there is an outsider, it is crucial that there is an understanding and that that person is acting as a listener that wants to listen and learn (Liguori, interview, 2021). However, Wambui Njoroge (interview, 2021), one of the facilitators, means that there can be a value in having an outsider coming in for diversity and get another aspect. However, she still thinks it is essential that "local people are educating local people."

The facilitators' role is to guide the participants throughout the process without influencing them and their stories. They should create a free space where stories can be shared, even if they disagree with them, which Liguori (interview, 2021) means can be tricky as "our intendancies is to prioritize conversations around themes we believe are important." The facilitators in this project worked with the four elements (fire, air, soil, and water) to evoke the thinking of the participants, then tried to open up the discussion by, for example, letting them pick pictures they could relate to the elements (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). It was essential not to influence the participants to tell their own stories, and the real problems they are facing and how they understand them are emphasized (ibid). According to Liguori (interview, 2021), this went well in this project as they recognized the challenges. One of them was that they were a large group. Liguori usually recommends seven to eight per one facilitator. Therefore, they split the group into two, but then there is a question about who is going in which group (ibid). However, Liguori (interview, 2021) trusted that the facilitators addressed those problems as they were more aware of the dynamics in the group, which is another benefit of having local facilitators. Since the process was carried out during the pandemic, the group was divided into younger and elder due to social distancing (Njoroge, interview, 2021).

Some of the facilitators had digital storytelling experience from past projects, but they were trained again before Future Yetu to refresh their knowledge (Njoroge, interview, 2021). Antonia Liguori, lecturer in storytelling at Loughborough University, had an online training with the facilitators where she went through all the steps of the digital storytelling process (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). They also tried different tools and discussed how to design the actual workshop and potential

18

challenges using the technology (Liguori, interview, 2021). Liguori's key role was "to support young people locally to gain those skills to then be independent in delivering digital storytelling workshops and support their local community members" (Liguori, interview, 2021). Even if some of the facilitators had prior experience, some were new to digital storytelling. Pia Jonsson (interview, 2021), who was one of them, thinks that even more emphasis can be put on the facilitators and training before the workshop because of their important role.

According to Jonsson (interview, 2021), they were quite many facilitators in this process, which can be helpful when the participants are not used to the technology. The different levels of technological experience among the participants can be a challenge and require the facilitators to be flexible (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). Another challenge can be to get the creativity out of the participants, especially if it is the first time for the facilitator and the audience is shy and not very confident (Liguori, interview, 2021). Then it is helpful to frame a question and prompt in a way that does not go through the cognitive aspects of how our brain works but are more linked to the perception that we have (ibid). By using the four elements and pictures connected to them, as in Future Yetu, you can trigger another type of reaction that goes through sentiments rather than getting an intellectual response which is likely if you ask a direct question (Liguori, interview, 2021).

5.2 The County’s interaction

So far, Future Yetu has received positive reactions from Nairobi City County. According to all the interviewees and most survey respondents, they are perceived as open to engaging with the community in these issues. Although, their level of engagement and interaction has been perceived differently, both among facilitators and participants. Seven of the participants, who answered the survey, think that the county has listened to them, while one of them thinks they have listened partly, and one is not sure yet as the county "takes too long to respond". The person providing space and support thinks they have listened but thinks their response is too slow. The majority of the participants have responded that they are happy with the result, but one hopes that the county will participate more, one does not know yet, and one of the respondents is not happy with the result.

Today, it is mandatory to involve the citizens in sustainable projects and programs that affect people's lives, according to constitution article 10 (Otieno, interview, 2021). Nairobi City County has been developing a climate adaptation action plan for a few years now, and according to county officer Margaret Kariuki, they have worked with communities and involved them in public participation. However, many people do not know about this plan, according to Humphrey Otieno (interview, 2021). Therefore, he means that Future Yetu came very timely, just about when it had to come to the citizen's knowledge that the county was working on a plan that eventually would be implemented. One of the purposes of Future Yetu was to make both the county and the community aware of this lack of communication between them (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). Even if people want to reach out to the county, they do not know how to do that. This project aims to emphasize that by bringing these two parts together. Although, there is still a misperception that when the county is invited, they

19

are invited to talk and not listen, which was a challenge going into this project (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). Therefore, the county was invited here to listen and participate, without the participants knowing who they were at first, not to make people afraid to talk (ibid). Representatives from the county participated in the storytelling session and got to see the stories and responded to them, but they did make their own stories (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). However, it was discussed to have the county make their own stories about their view and how they work, but the limited time made that challenging (ibid).

The project intended to bridge the two different systems, the community members and the county, and link what the community perceives with what the policymakers think about what they perceive (Liguori, interview, 2021). The idea is to make policymakers more aware of the implications of their decisions on real people, to make sure that they understand the real problem, and if their decisions can be put in place and how that can affect lives, both financially and mentally, and their heritages (ibid). "Things cannot be decided on a piece of paper, but things can be decided only by understanding how they perceive those problems and also trying to ask them potential solutions" (Liguori, interview, 2021).

As mentioned earlier, the county has responded positively and is perceived to have an open mindset. The county has realized that this is a good method to engage with the public, but if this changes their decision-making and has a more significant impact in the longer term is too soon to say, according to Liguori (interview, 2021). To be able to expand this, Liguori considers that the collaboration between the County Council and local decision-makers needs to be deeper and broader. Further, she argues that a few community leaders and policymakers are not enough to make a change. One suggestion is to have the policymakers onboard already at the proposal stage to discuss and decide together what action can be developed and implemented (ibid). One of the key elements to get the county involved in this project was to have Humphrey Otieno onboard in the project's steering committee (together with project leader Daniel Onyango, facilitator Pia Jonsson, and Antonia Liguori, lecturer in digital storytelling). Otieno has a connection and a large influence on the county and has been the link between the community and the county during this project (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). According to Jonsson (interview, 2021), it has been helpful to have a person who can get into the county and introducing different people, even if he has not been actively involved in the project. Otieno himself means that a person who intermediates can help follow up where things are stuck and make things move at the right time and in the right way. He also had positive reactions to the county's participation in the workshop. Two or three people got invited. They stayed longer than he had expected, and not just to show up but to actually participate and show interest in the implementation (Liguori, interview, 2021). One of the participants from the county was county officer Margaret Kariuki from the environmental sector. She says that the stories have not impacted the county and their work, but they are happy that something like this can happen at a community level where the county may not be able to reach out. When they are called in, they can let the community know that

20

the county is open to working with them for their needs to ensure that they live in a healthy environment (Kariuki, interview, 2021).

Future Yetu was a pilot project tested out in only one community to show the county how they can engage with the people and how the people can reach the county, for more effective implementations (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). However, the aim is to upscale it, and to do so, the highest level of the county, the ones who decide, need to be reached (ibid). That is very difficult because of the complicated power structures, especially now with the new structure within the county with the Nairobi Metropolitan (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021; Otieno, interview, 2021). It is hard to know who will be in charge because it keeps changing (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021).

There is an ongoing conversation with the county, and they are still in the process (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). Otieno (interview, 2021) thinks that the county has embraced and learned from this process and has undertaken many interventions. One of them, as a result of the conversations, is an air quality monitor that the county has committed to install in the community and train the residents in how to monitor the air pollution (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). According to Kariuki, who is in charge of air pollution, a small study including measuring air pollution in five households in the community was also conducted in collaboration with Stockholm Environment Institute, besides implementing the air quality monitor. Njoroge (interview, 2021) thinks that the county has responded well and sees the air quality monitors as an indication of that. The county has also been involved in many activities and has been calling out the community to participate in public participation that the community does typically not even know is happening and only for a few people (Njoroge, interview, 2021). The majority of the survey respondents perceive it as that the county is engaging with the community, and that they have been well represented in various meetings, been giving feedback, and shown tendencies on behavioral change. The air pollution monitor is also mentioned, and it is seen as a sign of engagement. Although not all the respondents agree, one of them is unsure that the county has listened, and two thinks that they have not responded fast enough.

Even if the county has been involved and shown interest, Njoroge thinks that they can do more. For example, address the issue of the dumping site in the area that almost everyone has pointed out. Jonsson (interview, 2021) had also hoped that they would be even more interested and means that they can improve their involvement. However, she emphasizes that they have now started a dialog, and they have to wait and see what happens when the manifesto will be handed over. The manifesto includes the issues that the residents are experiencing and what actions and solutions need to be taken, and Njoroge hopes that they will listen and implement some of the measures. The county has already been working on the climate adaptation plan for a while, and county officer Kariuki (interview, 2021) cannot promise that they will implement the actions suggested in the manifesto. However, they have to wait and see it and then see what they can do. More children through schools that will be a part of a greener and safer future; action of the county government on recommendations and a work

21

plan; development of case studies; and more advocacy and awareness on solid waste management are some actions that the participants think will happen next. Some of them also mention that it will be easier to identify the amount of pollution in the air, and that they will continue planting trees and watching them grow. The majority feel hopeful about the future.

If this will have a more significant impact and be taken to scale, the county needs to be convinced that this is a good process and that digital storytelling is a good tool to use (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). Njoroge is not sure that the county will adopt this method even if she hopes so. However, the county has expressed that they like the method and have encouraged the community leaders to use it to point out and push the issues in the community as a sort of activism (Njoroge, interview, 2021). Otieno (interview, 2021) considers Future Yetu to have succeeded and "had a very positive impact at the community at a grassroots level" in this one area. However, to reach and impact the county level, the project needs to be scaled up to a broader perspective (Otieno, interview, 2021). Hope Raisers Initiative will present their report to the highest political decision-making in the county of Nairobi. Otieno (interview, 2021) is optimistic and feels that the concept will be adopted at the county level. That would make it easy for policymakers, in terms of budgeting and resources, to run a similar process and take it to scale (ibid). He means that the next step is to advocate and lobby to get the County Assembly to adapt if and "cascade it to the county executive for implementation," both for budgeting purposes and to create awareness through mainstream media and mobilize residents. However, county officer Kariuki (interview, 2021) does not think the county itself can run a digital storytelling process like this due to a lack of personnel. However, she is thankful for organizations like Hope Raisers Initiative that can work at such a small scale and assist the county since they have the same objectives and encourage them to continue. Further, she means that there are many things that the county and the residents can work on together, for example, planting trees and removing waste, and there are no issues that the county cannot address unless it is not within their budget. She is keen that residents know that they can come to them with their questions and that the help they may not believe is possible can be possible, and the county is willing to help them.

5.3 Participation and engagement

As mentioned earlier, there were 15 participants from the community, and these are community leaders that represent different groups in Korogocho (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). They represent the population and different parts of Korogocho and work directly with the community (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021; Njoroge, interview, 2021). They were pleased to be requested and involved, and Njoroge thinks that the digital storytelling was enjoyable to them. The participants answered that they were participating because they are community leaders, are affected by the issues, and wanted to engage the community and make a change for the environment. All the twelve respondents to the survey have been involved in planning processes before. The differences they experienced between this process and any regular planning process were that this was more engaging and happened at a local level, the use of technology and digital platforms for passing information, and

22

the identification of the stakeholders. One of them described it as they came tighter as a community to change the narrative. Another described it as a set of unique stages that started with the community members and then continued up to the authorities at a local and county level. The overall reactions to Future Yetu have been positive among the participants. They mention that it covered real issues and brought them closer to home and that the community members could relate to them. Further, they mention that it is a project that cares about the community's environmental health, and that it has been helpful and will improve the living conditions and raise awareness and create understanding about climate adaptation and the environment. One also states that the project was timely and urgent.

Creating climate change adaptation and resilience; having the county engaged with the policymakers; raising awareness and learning more about climate change, adaptation, and digital storytelling; and providing green space and clean air is what the participants have perceived as the project's purpose. According to Liguori (interview, 2021), the project intended to create awareness among the public around the local environmental issues, and that climate change is happening everywhere, and the adaptations that can be done at an individual level to change in the right direction through behavioral change. Because of the informality of the community, they are one of the most affected by climate change, and they are at very high risk (Onyango, interview, 2021). To be able to help them, it is essential to hear their stories on what they are thinking, what they think needs to be improved, and what solutions they think would be impossible to implement. "They are key in identifying, one, the problem, and also providing solutions for the problem" (Onyango, interview, 2021). Policies that have an impact on the people will not be effective because the people are not involved, and their voices are not heard (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). County officer Kariuki (interview, 2021) also states that the community has the solutions and answers to their issues and that there are small things that we can do and change.

Just as important as it is to have a key person connected to the county, it is also essential to have a key person in the community because you cannot just come into the community and find anyone to work with (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). The community leaders are the ones who know the community and what is happening there, and their role is to spread information about climate change and adaptation and educate the other community members (Njoroge, interview, 2021). These representatives were chosen for this project, and a committee was formed (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). Thus, the digital storytelling workshop was not open for everyone. However, the stories that the community leaders created were screened to the public at the busses, in the Matatu exhibition. The public then gave their feedback, and most of them could relate to them, agreed with the issues, and said that this is what they have been calling out to be done (Njoroge, interview, 2021).

As mentioned earlier, technology can be a challenge for digital storytelling, especially in developing countries and informal settlements. Nevertheless, Liguori was impressed by how many mobile phones were used in the area. The digital lab was set up with tablets that have very similar technology to mobile phones. Even if some of the elders had some issues initially, they all could manage it with some

23

help from the facilitators and each other (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021; Liguori, interview, 2021). Many of them, who held a smartphone for the first time, was also very excited to see and learn what they could do and create with it (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). Once they understood how they could connect pictures to the script and the voiceover and created the stories, some were really proud of what they had done (ibid). Facilitator Njoroge (interview, 2021) perceived it like the elderly who had never used the technology before learned quickly, which she thought was really interesting. She says it was both amazing and enjoyable to see what they were able to do. Six of the participants who responded to the survey thought it was easy to use the technology, and three thought it was difficult, of which two said it got easier during the process and after some training. All the respondents had a positive experience of the digital storytelling process, and the participants thought it was interesting, fun, captivating, and engaging to create their own stories. One of them also said it was educating, in both technology and storytelling.

The participants have been involved throughout the whole process, from the beginning to get an understanding of how they understand climate change, where the communication gap is, to mobilize and pass information, to now, developing the manifesto that will be handed over to the county (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). Jonsson and Onyango experienced the participants as very engaged during the digital storytelling process itself. Many of them also took their own pictures with them to the second day of the workshop or did some filming (ibid). From the project leader and facilitator's perspective, all the participants were very engaged and excited to a different extent. Most of them were also involved in implementing the prototype, the Carbon Sink Pocket (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). Everything from developing the idea and giving feedback to implement it was to 97 present the participants according to Onyango (interview, 2021) while the facilitators were only guiding them through the process. The participants have been involved in either the design thinking of the prototype and contributing ideas or implementation, and some have shown enormous interest and excitement about it, according to Jonsson & Onyango (interview, 2021). The different community leaders even brought other people from their groups to participate in the implementation (Njoroge, interview, 2021). The participants were also very eager to see the prototype resulting from their stores (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021).

Otieno (interview, 2021) thinks that this process has helped people rethink their lives and see things that are happening both within the community and at the city level that are usually ignored and begin to take responsibility to protect nature and realize that everyone can contribute. Even now, before the county adopts the adaptation action plan, Otieno (interview, 2021) can see many people are already taking initiative and action, especially young people, even when the county is not asking them. The carbon sink pocket is an example of that. He sees many institutions and organizations that want to adapt that, and many people are trying to do something for their neighborhood. All the respondents, except two, answered that the project had affected them in any way. Some say that they have learned more about the climate and the environment and about telling their story. Some have also changed

24

their way of looking at things, and some are more motivated to continue working to transform the community.

Attracting participants has not been a problem in Future Yetu, according to all the interviewees. Onyango (interview, 2021) means that if there is an issue that affects them and their community, they are willing to talk about it and get involved. The residents of Korogocho are also quite flexible with their work hours, and if they are notified in advance, Njoroge (interview, 2021) means that they will be available, and if not, they notify that and can be replaced. In Future Yetu, the participants also got reimbursed for lost workdays (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). Although, people in other areas with full-time employment and a higher income might not be willing to lose workdays for a reimbursement that is less than their salary, and then it can be better to have the workshop on the weekend instead (ibid). However, according to Onyango (interview, 2021), the most important is to remember that you are collecting data from them, and you need to show that you appreciate them taking their time and making them comfortable during the process. Otieno thinks that what is making digital storytelling attractive is not just the opportunity to tell your stories. He also thinks the media and the fact that you can see you and your story somewhere public are contributing factors. That, together with how easy and participatory it is, will attract many people, including children, according to Otieno (interview, 2021). He does not think there will be any problems finding more participants if this were to be done again in another area. Njoroge (interview, 2021), agrees and thinks that the community is ready to learn. Kariuki (interview, 2021), means that the process is attractive for participants because they deal with real-life problems that residents are experiencing, and you are not bringing anything new to them. They just tell their stories that they live. She also thinks that this can create behavioral change and get people even more involved if expanded and done more often.

5.4 Power structures

In formal settings where community members and politicians, and policymakers are in the same rooms, there is almost always a perceived knowledge hierarchy depending on the language that can be uncomfortable and a deterrent for some people (Liguori, interview, 2021). By using storytelling, these knowledge hierarchies can be flattened. “Ones we use storytelling, we all refer to a language that is common, it is the same language… we all think through memories we…we reflect on our sentiments and feelings… so the process facilitates conversations at the same level” (Liguori, interview, 2021). In Future Yetu, it was decided that community leaders, young people, women, and policymakers would all be together in the same room from the beginning of the process that started with a story circle (ibid). As already mentioned, the representatives from the county were anonymous in the beginning to avoid preconception and an intimidating atmosphere for the participants (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021).

Some of the interviewees mention that there is a perception that there are the elites and the ones higher up in the system that decides everything and that policymakers are the ones that are supposed to generate knowledge and solutions. However, according to Otieno (interview, 2021), the ones in the

25

upmarket are often not even aware of the issues. Therefore, he thinks that people need to be brought together because regardless of which level of society you are in, we are all affected by climate change. Onyango (interview, 2021) also thinks that the ones “up there” need to come down and interact with the people instead of the people constantly having to come to them.

Power dynamics within the team can also be an issue that needs to be considered. There can, for example, emerge tension between English people and people from old British colonies (Liguori, interview, 2021). However, Liguori does not think this was a problem in this project. Funding can also be an issue related to power dynamics, and problems can occur when funding comes from the dominant culture (ibid). Nor does she think this was a problem in Future Yetu (ibid). The main reason for that was that Hope Raisers Initiative was applying for the funding themselves and was in charge (Liguori, interview, 2021). The founding came from Cities Alliance, which are targeting community-based organizations and not NGOs and big organizations (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). Jonsson (interview, 2021) means that even a local organization is not enough. It is a community-based organization that is on the ground that should be the implementer, not a larger organization with other interests. Pia Jonsson, one of the facilitators, stayed in the background and did not want to be so visible because she was a foreigner (interview, 2021). She believes that, even if foreigners are coming with great ideas and programs, the implementation organization must be purely Kenyan. International involvement can often be seen as something with many financial means, and there will be many expectations (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). The subject and accurate answers can also be lost as it might be directed to what the international organization wants (ibid).

5.5 Digital storytelling as a method

All the interviewees have positive thoughts about the project Future Yetu and using the method digital storytelling, especially to address questions about climate change and adaptation, even if in this particular project other environmental issues like for example air pollution were brought up. City Adviser Phillip Dinga, who has involved in the project, writes on the Future Yetu blog that storytelling is an innovative approach and that "stories are powerful, personal and impactful and touch at the very core of the realities of our lives and dispositions that we hold" (Dinga, 2020). Similarly, Liguori (interview, 2021) describes digital stories as "all personal, so they are not like things told on behalf of somebody else, they are stories that each individual person has experienced somehow." Dinga (2020) states that it is a fantastic platform for the youth, as it uses a language that they understand. The good thing about the digital storytelling process is that it can be adapted, deepening the context and the skills in the room (Liguori, interview, 2021). There can, for example, be people who are musicians, a painter or an ora storyteller, and it is the facilitator's responsibility to identify this and allow them to incorporate it in the process and create different outputs (ibid). The facilitators can also support participants to work in small groups, and they can act and film themselves instead of going through the whole process (ibid). In Future Yetu, this did not happen because of the theme of the project.

26

Liguori (interview, 2021) means that climate change is not as personal as, for example, memories of your childhood, which would have more space for creativity and adaptation to the local context. Dinga (2020) means that digital storytelling serves as an opportunity to invert the decision-making pyramid and amplify the community's voices to push for support from city governments. The primary purpose of Future Yetu and the digital storytelling workshop was to create connectivity and create a dialog with the county from the bottom up (Onyango, interview, 2021). The aim was to engage and build the capacity of community leaders to express themselves and create awareness and understanding of how they can adapt to climate change (Onyango, interview, 2021; Njoroge, interview, 2021). Moreover, create opportunities for the county to respond to the community's concerns (Onyango, 2020). It was a way to present a method where the county can engage with the community in the best way (Onyango, interview, 2021). "Future Yetu was more to develop a methodology understand how to facilitate those conversations within the community and see the feasibility of connection with policymakers" (Liguori, interview, 2021). It was a small pilot, and the next step would be to apply for larger funding and work appropriately with the policymakers (ibid). Otieno (interview, 2021) also points out that digital storytelling is a method that is currently being embraced. Like all the other interviewees, he cannot yet say that if it has succeeded. However, they all agree that it has had a positive impact in this particular area where it has been tested, and there has been a shift in how people look at climate change and adaptation. The funding for this project was about 2.8 million Kenyan shillings. The project leader Daniel Onyango (interview, 2021), means that it was an essential and needed investment as they believed in the concept and wanted to show that this method can work in these circumstances. Liguori (interview, 2021) thinks that Future Yetu has been very efficient, and the money has been spent effectively. The funding covered costs for personnel, reimbursement for the participants, material, facilitation, and rent of premises for the workshop as they wanted a neutral place (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021), and internet connection as they were using a cloud-based software (Liguori, interview, 2021). Cloud-based software can be good as it can be accessed and edited from everywhere, and you can access stock images (ibid). Liguori (interview, 2021) could also, as the administrator of the platform, see the editing and support from home. However, cloud-based software can also be a barrier as it requires good broadband, which is not always the case (Liguori, interview, 2021). She thinks that infrastructure is something to consider for future larger impact projects. The software used in Future Yetu is an educational software, and the license was provided by Loughborough University (Liguori, interview, 2021), which saved some money (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). Hope Raisers Initiative also already had some tablets, which also saved some money (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021; Njoroge, interview, 2021). However, Liguori (interview, 2021) mentions that they need to use older tablets compatible with their local technology, which can be a bit of a challenge as they are no longer sold in Europe (ibid). Therefore, she means that technology can be a divider if the software only works on a specific type of hardware and a particular type of broadband speed. So,

27

because technology is moving fast now in Kenya, and the number of participants, more tablets had to be bought (ibid). Salary and reimbursement probably accounted for most of the cost, and there are also some unforeseen costs, and the cost for building the park was a bit higher than expected (ibid). However, Jonsson (interview, 2021) means that the digital storytelling process itself and the services around it could have been done for less money. Although, they agree that it was worth spending money on a visible result like the Carbon Sink Pocket, and the outcome would not have been the same if it was done cheaper. Since the project involved people from the county that are busy and have duties to attend, the planning had to begin early with inviting them (Njoroge, interview, 2021). The current situation with the pandemic also affects the planning and the workshops, as they had to separate the groups due to social distancing (ibid). Despite the situation, Liguori (interview, 2021) thinks that they have managed to develop the method in an effective way. Due to the pandemic, she could not go to Nairobi and had to support the team from England, which saved money and allowed them to do more activates locally. Liguori means that most of the budget should go to local capacity building, even if she thinks traveling and knowledge sharing are fantastic. Local capacity building and local people who take the initiative are why she thinks this project succeeded. She also points out that the Hope Raisers Initiative is an organization with many young active people who are super skilled and passionate about what they are doing. They have the capacity and ability to mobilize young people who delivered the project with the designing of the workshops, the exhibition, and the implementation of the prototype. In terms of engagement, Liguori thinks it went very well. Overall, she thinks that the project turned out better than expected, and all the other interviewees also have positive reactions to the project. Otieno (2021) means that it has caused a paradigm shift and has changed the whole perception, and made people change their way of thinking. While they have succeeded in creating linkages between people and starting a conversation, Jonsson and Onyango (interview, 2021) mean that it has also been a learning experience, and that they have learned a lot from this process on how the county works. When performing digital storytelling, the number of stories can be a dilemma. You want to have as many as possible because you want everyone's voice to be heard. However, due to time and facilitation, there has to be a limit. Even if many stories are being made, not all of them might be screened. In Future Yetu, a selection was made (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). Onyango, the selection was based on technical issues and the quality of the recording and no evaluation of the content itself was made. They were still keen that everyone's stories were to be heard, and if some of the stores, even if they are different, address the same issue, the one with the best audio, for example, will be screened (ibid). One issue that almost every story addressed, and all the interviewees mentioned was air pollution. Jonsson means that you do not need digital storytelling to identify that problem because you can see when you are there. However, the interesting thing about digital storytelling is that you get other aspects and understand why it has not been improved and how

28

different measures will affect the people living there (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). It relates to the gap of information mention earlier. The people do not know what is happening at the top, and the policymakers are developing policies that the people cannot see or interpret (ibid). Jonsson means that digital storytelling does not just give information on what should be changed but how you can change it and provide broader and deeper aspects of the issues. This method has successfully been tested out in this one area, and the next step, according to Otieno, is to take it up to scale. He thinks that we now need to make a comparison between the people who have already gone through this process and the people in the upper market or the middle-income areas to see where the disconnection is. Further, he means that these processes are often left to the elites. Therefore, you need to bring people together and make they we are on the same page because "it does not matter in which […] level of society you are, climate change affects all of us equally" (Otieno, interview, 2021). All the other interviewees also think that this should be done in other areas as well. County officer Margaret says that it is crucial to reach out and raise awareness to all the citizens, especially in informal settlements. This method is a good way of doing that, and that there is a lot to learn (Kariuki, interview, 2021). She also thinks that the community that now has done the process can go to other areas with a similar environment and exchange knowledge with other communities. All the interviewees had similar thoughts on why digital storytelling was a suitable method for climate adaptation in this area. They especially emphasize that digital storytelling is about personal experience and current situations. Further, all mention that it involves emotions and creativity, making it easier for people to relate to the subject and the issues. You touch people's lives directly with this method. People can connect to the stories at a different level than a formal presentation with figures and statistics that they do not understand (Otieno, interview, 2021). Njoroge (interview, 2021) also points out that it is important to hear and learn from the older generation as climate change occurs over a long time. According to Otieno, it can also give confidence to the participants, as they get to speak from their mind instead of going to meetings or other situations where they are struggling with words and want to look good. Here they just tell their stories from their heart and know that someone will listen to them (Otieno, interview, 2021). Liguori's experience from working in this community is that they really need to talk and be listen to, and "digital storytelling is a tool to unlock hidden voices and give voice to the ones who are usually not heard" (Liguori, interview, 2021). Or, as Onyango (interview, 2021) puts it, "it gives ordinary people an opportunity to share their experience, and it brings different opinions, different views." Another benefit of digital storytelling is that you get an output, a video that can be shared and expanded (ibid). Jonsson also means that it is good to get a result after doing something for a few days because usually, in Kenya, there is much discussion, and a solution is seldom achieved. However, this process was about telling a story and not discussing, which makes you get much more profound and becomes more powerful (Jonsson & Onyango, interview, 2021). Digital storytelling was also used in Future Yetu to both be able to document the

29

process and give opportunities for people in informal settlements to use technology to tell their stories (Onyango, interview, 2021). Margaret explains the stories as interesting and real-life stories of issues they live with because they are guided to tell their own original story. Through the stories, she also means that the residents can identify what kind of adaptation is needed. This is a way for them to be led and learn how to tackle their problems, and that some actions they can do on their own, for example, handle their waste to reduce the risk of flooding (Kariuki, interview, 2021).

30

6. Discussion

6.1 Participatory planning

In participatory planning, finding participants can often be challenging, especially according to Fischer (2012), when it comes to marginalized groups, as there is often a lack of competence and empowerment to participate. Future Yetu was aimed towards marginalized people to empower them and amplify their voices. By using digital storytelling, you can attract people that usually do not participate. However, some people might be intimated by this new approach, the technology used, and the creative process and talk about your personal experience. Although, according to Cunsolo Willox et al., people are more willing to share personal experiences through digital storytelling than interviews and focus groups. Both Fischer (2012) and Osmani (2007) discuss the skills required to participate in governance processes and the so-called capacity gap. Building capacity within the community is what Future Yetu has been about, not only to create opportunities for the people to tell their stories but also to educate them and raise awareness of how they can interact with the county. Capacity-building is also about building a sense of togetherness, mutual understanding and develop the community’s ability to solve their problems together. According to several respondents in this project, Future Yetu has brought them together as a community. Both the participants and the whole community, as the public, have seen the stories and connected to them.

Fischer and Osmani also talk about the incentive gap and the willingness of people to put time and effort into something they do not know what they get out, which is highly relevant for a digital storytelling process that runs for several days. However, there seems to have been no problem finding participants for this project, and there are no worries that it will be a challenge in similar projects in the future either. One reason is probably that the issues in the area are so significant, and the people are directly affected. Climate change is not as personal and not as taboo subject, as, for example, health issues, as seen in the study by Michell & de Lange (2011), and that can also be a reason why people are willing to participate and share their story. Another reason can be the historical silenced of the marginalized, and when giving such an opportunity to make themselves heard, they take it. Future Yetu’s project leader Daniel Onyango has also emphasized the importance of showing appreciation of the participants and making them comfortable during the process as they are providing you information. Le Roux & Cilliers (2013) also means that the benefit of participating also should go beyond the project while it addresses the current needs. The Carbon Sink Pocket is a perfect example of that. It is something visible that participants can see as a result of their participation and their stories. It is also something that will be there in the future. However, a visible result like that is may not always affordable and feasible. Nevertheless, it is important to have an idea of how the participants’ stories can be translated into something tangible and show them that their stories actually lead to something and, how the work can continue. Otherwise, there is a risk that they do not see the point of participating. Although it is important to plan for this kind of result, it is even more important to involve the participants in the decisions about what is going to be done. If a specific

31

prototype is already planned, it might not be what the participants think is the most needed, and they might not be as engaged to continue work with it if they have not been involved in planning for it.

In Future Yetu, the participants are perceived as hopeful, and all of them have been involved in the implementation. According to Gray (cited in Koontz & Newig, 2014), it fosters implementation if the participants who developed the agreement also continue to be involved in the implementation. Participatory planning, in general, can make the implementation of plans and policies more straightforward and more effective (Fischer, 2012; Koontz & Newig, 2014) and reduce the risk of dissatisfaction (Innes & Booher, 1999). According to Ojha (cited in Fischer, 2012) , the commitment and motivation will also get higher through public participation, and I think that digital storytelling can engage the participants at a whole other level. The digital storytelling’s involvement of emotions and personal experience will probably make the participants even more engaged when the action plan has been adopted. Many of the Future Yetu participants have changed their way of thinking. Some of them have even started to implement ideas in other areas and bring other community members together.

A challenge mentioned by Le Roux and Cilliers is that due to time and resources, the number of participants is often limited in public participation, even if the best would be to have as many as possible. Digital storytelling is no exception; it can even require even more time as facilitation and different levels of support are needed during the workshop. Then all the stories are to be analyzed and screened. If a selection of videos has to be made, there is a risk that a particular type of video is selected, and some get ignored. Therefore, it is crucial that the participants represent different groups in the community, and probably even more important, the stories that are being made are carefully selected, without any value involved, and then made accessible for the public to give feedback. One of the benefits of digital storytelling is that it is easier for the public to connect and relate to the stories and issues than a plan or a diagram. They can give their opinions in another way and tell if they agree or not. It is important to consider their feedback when moving forward, as the stories should represent the whole community and not just a few members. The community will then have a core story, which Sandercock means can be used to create mutual understanding between communities and public agencies. The idea is that planners och policymakers will convert the core story to a plan that they should take back to the community to make sure they have understood their story.

Another challenge in public participation, mentioned by Fischer, is that most professionals are not trained in public participation. That can be an even more significant challenge in digital storytelling, as it both requires skills to facilitate a public participation process and skills in using the technology and making videos. However, organizations like Hope Raisers Initiative often have skills in public participation and can be trained in digital storytelling, even if it requires time and resources. As we have learned both by Future Yetu and the Labrador community in Cunsolo Willox et al. (2012), it will be more effective to train the facilitators before the process. It is essential to emphasize on, because

32

the more comfortable they are in using the technology and software, the less they will influence the participants and their story, which is one of the most important things in digital storytelling.

As mentioned, participatory planning requires much time, effort, information, and funding (Koontz & Newig, 2014). That also applies to digital storytelling. Therefore, if an organization like Hope Raisers Initiative will run the process, funding is needed. Fischer, as well as interviewees Liguori and Jonsson, mention that funding can be a challenge. Therefore, it is crucial that the funding application is well thought out, and that the funding is not coming from a dominant county, which risks that the project is affected and is directed in line with the donors instead of the local interest. A donor that targets community-based organizations instead of big organizations is preferable, as seen in Future Yetu. Further, it is preferable if the implementation organization itself applies for the funding and be fully in charge of that. As Pia mentioned, the implementation organization should be local. Community-based adaptation has increased in the field of climate adaptation, and it is used to strengthen the adaptive capacity and empower the local people. The impacts of climate change are local. The measures for adaptation depend on the different contexts, and local conditions determine adaptive capacities; that is why it is important to hear the community out on these issues. As project leader Onyango also emphasizes, the community knows the issues, and they also have the solutions. The idea is to create a mutual understanding between the county and the community. Through digital storytelling, the county will hopefully get the true stories of the community and become aware of their problems. At the same time, it creates opportunities for the county to spread information. By using this method, the other way around, they can reach out to the community in a better way. Digital storytelling has great potential to spread awareness as it can be screened in public spaces, and it uses a common language that is easy for the public to understand.

Even if the resulting adaptation plan is supposed to be adapted to the local context, it is important to communicate it to the general public. How the result will be communicated understandably and how the county then will communicate the measures to the public can be good to consider in the planning stage of the process.

6.2 Break down the power structures

According to both Osmani (2007) and Fischer (2012), the inherent asymmetric power in society can be a barrier to public participation. At the same time, Fischer means that a participatory method also can be a solution. In formal settings and in front of important people with a lot of power, it can be difficult for regular citizens to express themselves. According to Liguori (2021) and Cunsolo Willox et al. (2021), digital storytelling is a great tool to balance out the structures and alter the power dynamics. First of all, it is about telling your own story from your heart. It is not about diagrams or terminology that can be difficult for the general public to understand. Everyone in the room uses the same type of language, and it does not matter which title you have. In Future Yetu, the county representatives were not even known at the beginning of the digital storytelling workshop. The purpose was to not discourage participants from daring to say what they wanted to say. Although,

33

anonymous representatives from the community may involve ethical issues and can risk loss of trust from the community. However, this does not seem to have been a problem in the case as the interviewees who mentioned it only had positive thoughts on it.

Too much new information and terms can also be uncomfortable, and themes like climate change and climate adaptation can be unfamiliar for the participants. Therefore, it is important to establish an understating of what level of knowledge the participants possess. In Future Yetu, this was done in the baseline survey before the workshop, and that is a smart way to find out how to proceed and what level to start working from.

6.3 Technology

Technology is one of the main challenges and can be a barrier when it comes to digital storytelling. First of all, both hardware and software are needed to produce the videos, which can be challenging, especially in developing countries. Tablets or similar are needed, and they need to be compatible with the software being used, and if the organizations do not already have that, it can be a high cost. As Liguori mentioned, a cloud-based software was used in Future Yetu, which has several benefits but can also be a problem in areas with poor or expensive internet connection. The ability to use the technology can also be a challenge and can be one reason why some people are afraid to participate, especially older. Since only people who participated in Future Yetu were interviewed, the reason why people are not willing to participate in such a process can only be speculated. In the case of the Labrador community by Cunsolo Willox et al., the persons who were more familiar with the technology were more willing to participate. In Future Yetu, the participants had a different level of experience, and it was a little more complicated for the elders initially. However, most participants said it got easier during the process and with some help from the facilitator and other participants. Many of them have learned how to use a tablet and how they can express themselves through digital storytelling, which was one of the purposes of Future Yetu. The ability to use technology to express your thoughts is a valuable benefit that goes beyond this project.

6.4 The Facilitators

The facilitator of a digital storytelling workshop has maybe the most critical role. They are supposed to support the participant without influencing them. One way to reduce the risk of influencing is to have local facilitators. In the Labrador case by Cunsolo Willox et al., they used a non-profit organization to facilitate the workshop while simultaneously training the community facilitators, but training them before the workshop could have been more effective and removed all the external influence and underlying values. In Future Yetu, the facilitators had some training before the workshop, even if some think it could have been more. However, the organization is based in Korogocho and knows the community and is aware of the issues, and the few who were foreigners stayed more in the background. Local facilitators with connections to the community are good, but if they are aware of the issues and are biased, that can also be a problem. An outsider might be impartial

34

and can benefit from that. However, the most important is that the participants feel safe and not intruded on. Therefore, local facilitators connected to the community and know how they work are crucial in digital storytelling. Another important task as a facilitator is to identify any other skills among the participants and allow them to incorporate these in their videos if that makes it more conformable for them. The model of digital storytelling has a very western structure in the way of telling stories. As we see in the case of The Abakuria of Kenya by Ambala (2020), digital storytelling can be adapted to fit that local context, which requires flexibility and inventiveness. Sandercock mentions that there are several different types of storytelling other than videos, like music and graffiti.

6.5 Expectations

According to Le Roux and Cilliers, it can also be good to make the participants and the community aware of their role and how much they can influence to avoid disappointment if the planners cannot meet their expectations. In Future Yetu, the lack of communication between the county and the community on what the county is working on can be one of the reasons why some of the participants and facilitators have different views on the county's interaction in this project. If the people do not know about the county's work, they assume that the county is doing nothing. The different opinions could also be due to different expectations or prior knowledge and experience. Therefore, good communication is necessary. If the participants are more satisfied with the result, they will probably also be more involved in the future; if they get disappointed and not heard, there is a risk that they feel that there is no point. It can be a good idea to decide and be clear about what you expect from the county and how you want them to respond already in the planning stage. That can also put some pressure on them to actually do so. On the other hand, too many demands can make them choose not to be involved. As it has been discuses in this project, to have the county make their own story on their work could be a great idea to raise awareness of what they actually are doing. It can also be a good idea to have them make a digital story afterward, or in any other form respond and present how they have interpreted and understand the community's core story, what they can do about it, and how it can be incorporated into an action plan.

6.6 The result of Future Yetu

The intention with Future Yetu was to create a dialog and a mutual understanding about climate change and climate adaptation between the residents and the county. However, they entered the project with open minds and prepared for other things to come up. According to Cunsolo Willox et al. (2012) it can be a challenge to make the participants stay within the main focus and the facilitators has to be open and respect that some participants create stories beyond the topic. However, if to many different topics are brought in a project where you do not have the capacity to handle them, it can be a problem. Some of the issues that came up in the stories in Future Yetu were not directly about climate change and adaptation, but were environmental issues related to sustainable development, like waste management and air pollution. These are relevant problems that came up because they are essential to the residents and they are important to consider. Since they had an open mind and were

35

flexible in Future Yetu, it was possible to consider most of the issues that came up, and the most common of them all, the air pollution has begun to be handled. Moreover, the main purpose was to amplify the communities voices, get them involved and reduce the communication gap between them and the county in general. The residents have been informed about climate change and the county’s work, and the county are informed about the real-issues that the residents are facing and how potential implementation would affect them. However, the communication can be better and the involvement of the county could be improved.

36

7. Conclusion

Future Yetu has been a successful project in many ways, in this particular area. The very positive result can of course be due to the fact that the interviewees had all been part of the project and may be biased. However, the evaluation of the project is something that the organization has asked for and would also benefit them in future project, and one can assume that they have been honest in their answers. Anyway, it has led to community engagement, greater understanding of climate change and adaptation, and awareness and started a dialog between the community and the county. The mutual understanding that was create was not only about climate change and adaptation, other important and related issues for the residents were brought up for discussion, and information about the county’s work and how to get involved were also spread among the residents. During the time this thesis was written, the Korogocho Community Climate Adaption Manifesto was handed over to the county, including the community’s climate change vulnerabilities and suggestions of actions. Information about the real-life issues and actions suggested by the community members can lead to more effective implementation, which is a great benefit when planning for climate adaptation.

There are both many opportunities and some challenges with digital storytelling. However, with a well-thought-out design of the process, it can be a fantastic method to use when planning for climate adaptation, or highlighting other environmental issues. The process of Future Yetu has highlighted some of the critical aspects of a digital storytelling process as a participatory method for climate adaptation. These aspects have been developed into a digital storytelling toolkit where the different steps are divided into three stages; planning, the digital storytelling workshop, and the finishing work, see appendix 3. The different steps in the toolkit is based on the results of this study together with experiences the from Future Yetu project and it has been developed in collaboration with Hope Raisers Initiative. It is meant to be used in other areas, to take it up to scale, and to influence and convince the county that this is an effective and inclusive method to use in planning for climate change. Digital storytelling is a method that can be used anywhere, as everyone is affected by climate change, more or less, and everyone has a story to tell. It is an effective tool to create awareness and mainstream information, both about climate change and adaptation, and how you can get involved and together make a change in the community.

To take Future Yetu and this process to a broader perspective and make a more significant impact on a higher level, you have to get the county and the decision-makers on board. To get the county to adopt this method, you first need a person with a connection to the county that gets you involved with the right people, but most importantly, you need to convince them that it is an excellent method to use. The way to go might be to show them how effective it can be, especially when planning for climate adaptation, which requires both actions from the government and behavioral change and a lot of engagement from the citizens. The citizens will be more engaged, and it will be easier to implement plans, as they have been emotionally involved as they get through digital storytelling. As it requires specific skills, much time, and money, it can be challenging to get the county to adopt the method

37

right away and use it in regular planning processes. However, suppose they can be convinced that it is an engaging and efficient method that will actually make things easier for them. In that case, there might be a way to get their support to enable organizations like Hope Raisers Initiative to do this in more areas and, to a greater extent, to support and complement the county’s work by providing them local knowledge about the real-life issues and suggestions on actions that would be effective to implement. They already have the technology and trained facilitators, even if more might be required for larger projects. Thus, digital storytelling can be offered as a service for a lower cost by such organizations.

38

References

Ambala, A.T. (2020). Adapting Digital Storytelling Methods to African Contexts: Insights from the Utaifa Project. African Journalism Studies, 41(4), 22-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/23743670.2020.1840413

Ayers, J. & Forsyth, T. (2009). Community based adaptation to climate change: Strengthening Resilience through Development. Environment Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 51(4), 22-31. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270588919

Bryman, A. (2018). Samhällsvetenskapliga metoder (B. Nilsson, trans.) Malmö: Liber AB.

Cunsolo Willox, A., Harper, S.L., Edge, V. L., ‘My World’: Storytelling and Digital Media Lab, Rigolet Inuit Community government. (2012). Storytelling in a digital age: digital storytelling as an emerging method for preserving and promoting indigenous oral wisdom. Qualitative Research, 13(2), 127-147. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1468794112446105

Dinga, Philip. (2020). “Communities amplifying frontline voices towards climate resilience in Nairobi”, Hope Raisers, [blog], October 25, 2020, https://www.hoperaisersinitiative.com/post/communities-amplifying-frontline-voices-towards-climate-resilience-in-nairobi, retrieved February 24, 2021.

Fischer, F. (2012). Participatory Governance: From Theory to Practice. In: S Fainstein, S. & DeFilippis, J. (eds.) 2016. Readings in Planning Theory. 4th ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 348-362.

Flicker, S. & MacEntee, K. (2020). Digital Storytelling as a Research Method. In: Pauwels, L. & Mannay, D. (eds.) 2020. The SAGE Handbook of Visual Research Methods. 2nd ed. London: SAGE Publications Inc., 267-281. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781526417015

Hope Raisers Initiative. (n.d.). Future Yetu. Available from: https://www.hoperaisersinitiative.com/future-yetu [Retrieved December 18, 2020]

Höök, M., Jonsson, P., Skottke, E. & Thelandersson, M. (2012). Korogocho Streetscapes: Documenting the role and potentials of streets in citywide slum upgrading. Nairobi: UN-HABITAT. Available from: https://unhabitat.org/korogocho-streetscapes-2 [Retrieved November 30, 2020].

Ingram, J. & Hamilton, C. (2014). Planning for climate Change – a strategic, value-based approach for urban planners. Nairobi: UN-Habitat. Available from: https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/download-manager-files/Planning%20for%20Climate%20Change.pdf [Retrieved March 3, 2021]

Innes, J. E. & Booher, D. E. (1999). Consensus Building and Complex Adaptive Systems. Journal of the American Planning Association, 65(4), 412-423. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369908976071

Kirkby, P., Williams, C. & Huq, S. (2017). Community-based adaptation (CBA): adding conceptual clarity to the approach, and establishing its principles and challenges. Climate and Development, 10(7), 577-589. https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2017.1372265

39

Kithiia, J. & Dowling, R. (2010). An integrated city-level planning process to address the impacts of climate change in Kenya: The case of Mombasa. Cities, 27(6), 466-475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2010.08.001

Koontz, T.M. & Newig, J. (2014). From Planning to Implementation: Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches for Collaborative Watershed Management. Policy Studies Journal, 42(3), 416-442. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12067

Le Roux, J-H. & Cilliers. (2014). The Participatory planning paradigm shift: Comparing disciplines and methods. 49th ISOCARP Congress 2013. Brisbane. ResearchGate.

MacCallum, D., Babb, C., & Curtis, C. (2019). Doing Research in Urban and Regional Planning. New York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/978131581889

Mitchell, C. & de Lange, N. (2011). Community-based Participatory Video and Social Action in Rural South Africa. In: Margolis, E. & Pauwels, L. (eds.) 2011. The SAGE Handbook of Visual Research Methods. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 171-185. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446268278

Nairobi Convention. (2016). Climate change strategy for the Nairobi Convention. Nairobi convention. Available from: https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/25676/annex8_climate_strategy.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y [Retrieved November 30, 2020].

OECD. (2009). Integrating Climate Change Adaptation into Development Co-operation: Policy Guidance. Paris: OECD. Available from: http://www.oecd.org/environment/cc/44887764.pdf [Retrieved March 4, 2021]

Onyango, Daniel. (2020). “Enhancing the technical ability of Korogocho community”, Hope Raisers, [blog], October 25, 2020, https://www.hoperaisersinitiative.com/post/enhancing-the-technical-ability-of-korogocho-community, retrieved February 24, 2021.

Onyango, D., Magaya, J., Wamboi, E., Acheing, N. & Jonsson, P. (2020). Baseline report Future Yetu. Nairobi: Hope Raisers Initiative. Available from: https://a0c3e261-166c-4a3c-9915-a7ea19648198.filesusr.com/ugd/348361_32b78c1d795f4ac9b9cee5bd1b675f5c.pdf [Retrieved February 24, 2021]

Osmani, S. R. (2007) Participatory Governance: An overview of the issues and evidence. In Participatory Governance and the Millennium Development Goals. New York: United Nations, 1–48. Available from: https://publicadministration.un.org/publications/content/PDFs/E-Library%20Archives/2008%20Participatory%20Governance%20and%20MDGs.pdf [Retrieved March 3, 2021]

Reid, H. & Huq, S. Mainstreaming community-based adaptation into national and local planning. Climate and Development, 6(4), 291-292 https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2014.973720

Reid, H., Alam, M., Berger, R., Cannon, T., Huq, S., & Milligan, A. (2009) Community-based adaptation to climate change: An overview. Participatory learning and action, 60, 11-38.

Sandercock, L. (2003). Out of the Closet: The Importance of Stories and Storytelling in Planning Practice. Planning Theory & Practice, 4(1), 11-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/1464935032000057209

40

Storycenter. (n.d). What we do. Available from: https://www.storycenter.org/about [Retrieved May 12, 2021]

Syrjänen, J. (2008). UN-HABITAT and the Kenya Slum Upgrading Programme – Strategy Document. UN-HABITAT.

Thornton, N. (2010). Climate change in Kenya: focus on children. UNICEF.

UNFCCC. (2020). What do adaptation to climate change and climate resilience mean?. Available from: https://unfccc.int/topics/adaptation-and-resilience/the-big-picture/what-do-adaptation-to-climate-change-and-climate-resilience-mean#eq-6 [Retrieved December 17, 2020]

UN-HABITAT. (n.d.) Climate Change. Available from https://unhabitat.org/topic/climate-change [Retrieved March 3, 2021]

University of Brighton. (2020). What is digital storytelling?. Available from: https://blogs.brighton.ac.uk/digitalstorytelling/what-is-digital-storytelling/ [Retrieved December 17, 2020].

van Hulst, M. (2012). Storytelling, a model of and a model for planning. Planning Theory, 11(3), 299-318. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1473095212440425

Interviews

Antonia Liguori, lecturer in digital storytelling at Loughborough University (support during Future Yetu). 2021. Interview February 25.

Daniel Onyango, project leader Future Yetu. 2021. Interview March 19.

Humphrey Otieno Oduor, Urban Safety Expert at Safer Nairobi Initiative (contact with the county during Future Yetu). 2021. Interview April 8.

Margaret Kariuki, Environmental and Compliance Officer, Nairobi City County. 2021. Interview April 16.

Pia Jonsson, facilitator Future Yetu. 2021. Interview March 19.

Wambui Njoroge, facilitator Future Yetu. 2021. Interview April 9.

Interview Guide - Project Leaders

Introduction - What is your background?- What was/is your role in this project?- Where in the process are you right now?

The Project - Future Yetu - How did it start?- What was the intention?- What was the expectation?- Why digital storytelling?- Who was the stories for?

The process - What were the roles of the community vs. the outsiders? Facilitators?- How much did the participant know about climate change?- How much prior knowledge did you have about the issue?

Participation & Engagement - Who participated in the project? How did you identified them?- Which groups were represented? Community leaders?- How did you encouraged people to participate?- Did the participation and engagement meet you expectations?- How can you involve even more participants?

Time & Resources - How much time did you put into the project?- What resources was needed? Funding? Did it effect in any way?

Outcome & next steps? - The Prototype? How did you decide on that? How was is developed?- Did it turn out as planned/hoped for?- What happens now?

Appendix 1

Interview Guide - Participants

Introduction - How did you find out about this project? - What was your story? - Are these kind of issues important to you? - How do you feel about being involved?

The experience of the project - What was your overall impression of the project? - How did you feel during the process? - What did you do? Describe the process. - Where you comfortable using the technology? - What was the intention of the project?

Experience of past planning processes - What is your relation to planning and planning processes? - Have you participated in any planning processes before?

- Why/why not?- How was that?

- Has this been different? - How?

Involvement & Engagement - Why did you participate in this project? - Are you happy with the result? - What will/what do you think will happen next? - Have this project affected you in any way? If yes, how?

Interview Guide - Nairobi City County

Introduction - What is your professional role? - What do you work with?

Current planning processes - How does the planning process look today? - Do you plan for climate adaptation?

- How?

Public participation - Do you work with public participation? Differences?

- How? - Do you involve the citizens in any way?

- How?

Inspiration & Influence - Have you seen the stories/videos from the community?- What do you take with you from them? - Have this project affected you and your work in any way?

Outcome & Next steps - Will you use these stories/manifesto? If yes, how?

- How will you incorporate this in you planning for climate adaptation?- What will happen next? - How will you communicate with the citizens and show your understanding? - Do you seen any potential in using digital storytelling in planning for climate adaptation in the

future?

1.

Övrigt:

Participant from the community

Facilitator

Representative from Nairobi County

2.

3.

Future YetuHi! I am Elin, an urban planning student from Sweden, and I am doing my master thesis right now, focusing on digital storytelling and the project Future Yetu as a case study. Your perspective and thoughts would be really interesting and valuable to hear. Your answers will be anonymous.

If you have any questions or thoughts, feel free to contact me. E-mail: elielf@kth.seWhatsApp: +46725325862

What was your role in the project?

What did you perceive as the purpose of the project?

What did you think about the project?

Appendix 2

4.

5.

Övrigt:

Yes

No

6.

Övrigt:

Yes

No

7.

How was it to create the stories?

Was it easy to use the technology and create !lms?

Have you pa"icipated in any planning processes before?

How has this process been di#erent from other planning processes you have experiencewith?

8.

Övrigt:

Yes

No

9.

10.

Övrigt:

Yes

No

11.

Övrigt:

Yes

No

Do you feel that the county has listened?

In what way have the county shown that they listen?

Are you happy with the result?

Did you pa"icipate in the implementation of the prototype, the Carbon Sink Pocket?

12.

13.

14.

15.

Det här innehållet har varken skapats eller godkänts av Google.

What will happen now in the project?

Has the project a#ected you or your life in any way? If yes, how?

Why did you pa"icipate in this project?

Do you have any other thoughts on the project and the digital storytelling process?

Formulär

V

HOPE RAISERS INITIATIVINITIATIV

DIGITALSTORYTELLINGSTORYTELLINGTOOLKITTOOLKIT

Appendix 3

Tttt

Digital Storytelling For Climate Adaptation

This is a tool kit that can be used as a participatory tool for community engagement and public participation process on climate change and climate adaptation. The tool kit highlights the importance of storytelling and digital storytelling in collecting, analyzing and archiving community perspectives on issues that are important such as climate change.Digital storytelling entails the process of documenting life experience, ideas, or feelings through the use of story and digital media. It is an effective tool to create awareness and mainstream information, both about climate change and adaptation, and how you can get involved and together make a change in the community. The methodology helps to create mutual understanding between the policy makers and the citizens in the communities. It also helps to balance out the power structures, the residents’ voices are being heard and the public can easily relate to the issues.

Through digital storytelling, policymakers gain understanding of the issues that the communities face in real-life. They are also provided with suggestions on implementations that would work and be effective in the area.

The participants of the digital storytelling workshop are engaged emotionally and there is a larger chance that they will be involved in the implementation.

Digital storytelling also serves a great opportunity to spread information and raise awareness om climate change and climate adaptation among the citizens. This guide includes the different steps that is necessary to carry out a powerful digital storytelling process. The steps are divided into three different stages:

- Planning- The Digital Storytelling Workshop- Next Steps

Planning checklist

IDENTIFY PARTICIPANTS• Identify a key person or organization with connection to the community• Identify community leaders that represent different groups of the community, that will participate in the

digital storytelling workshop.

UNDERSTANDING THE LANGUAGE• Preform a baseline survey to get an understanding of how the communty members understand

climate change and climate adaptation • Identify a common language that will be used during the process.

RECRUIT FACILITATORS• Identify people who will facilitate the workshop, preferably local peole that understand and can

connect with the community. • Train facilitators in digital sotrytelling prior to the workshop. • The facilitators has a important role in guidning the participants without influencing them.

MAKE A PROJECT PLAN• Use the template on the next page• Identify a time for the workshops that fit the participatns (for example, a weekend if the participants

have full-time job on week days.)• Consider reimbursement if the participants loose workdays. • Identity a location for the workshop. Preferably a neutral place where all participants will be

confortable.

ENSURE NECESSARY EQUIPMENT• Identify what technology and software that is needed for the digital storytelling workshop (for example,

tablets and a video editing program).

CREATE A STRATEGY ON HOW TO APPROACH DECICION MAKERS• Identify what you are expecting from the policy makers. • Idenfity a key person with connection to the county that can be a link between the coumminty and

the policymakers during the project. • Idenfity how you want the county to interact and respond.

Example: Representatives from the county can participate in the workshop and make an own story on their work. Example: The county can make a story afterwards on how they understand the communty’s stories and how they will work on the issues.

project plan

activity when and where

Identify and invite participants

Name of implementing organisation and project leader:

Key Community informant:

Main reason for performing the Digital Storytelling Workshop:

Location in Kenya:

Policy makers important to involve:

Approach policy makers

Preparatory workshop

Digital storytelling workshop

Exhibition

Next steps:

1.

2.

3.

4.

preparatory work shop

THIS IS TO GAIN UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTANDS CLIMATE CHANGE AND CLIMATE ADAPTATION AND TO IDENTIFY AND INFORM THE LANGUAGE AND TERMINOLOGY THE DIGITAL STORYTELLING WILL ENTAIL.

WHAT: A 2 hour workshop to prepare for the Digital Storytelling sessions organized together with the community where the understanding on how the community relates to the concepts is identified. In the workshop, the four elements (fire, air, water, and soil) and photos connected to them, are used to make it easier for the participants to connect to the climate and climate change.

WHY: The workshop is organized to gain knowledge on how the community understand the concept of Climate change and Climate adaptation and guide and inspire how facilitators will discuss. It is also a good way to start the process and create interest among the residents.

WHO: Ca 10-20 community representatives of various age and equal gender division. Minimum of 1 facilitator to guide the session as well as the facilitators that will take part in the story circle later in the process. 1 facilitator that takes notes.

HOW: 1. The facilitator prepares 3 flip charts, each with one of the following: 1) “Climate Change”, 2) “Climate Adaptation”, 3) “Climate Change in my community”.

2.Mind Mapping - The workshop starts by brainstorming around each of the concepts, one by one. The facilitator writes words that the community connects to the concepts on the flip chart.

3. The Four Elements - After the brainstorm, the facilitator brings forward the picture cards and spread them out on the floor. Each participant is asked to pick four pictures that they relate to each of the four elements: Earth, wind, fire, soil.

4. A join discussion is held in connection to the pictures and each participant explain why they picked that card. One facilitator takes notes from the discussion. The pictures are being sorted according to the element it was related to and documented together through pictures.

M A T E R I A L S A N D I N S P I R A T I O N

Materials: Flip charts, filter pens, picture collection representing the 4 elements.

Images to use: https://www.hoperaisersinitiative.com/digital-storytelling-tools

Baseline Report presenation Future Yetu Korogo-cho: https://www.hoperaisersinitiative.com/digi-tal-storytelling-prepatory-ws

V

DIgital storytelling Workshop

The digital storytelling process follow the model developed by Joe Lambert and his team at Storycenter, but can be adapted to the specific context.

See Antionia Liguori, lecturer in digtal storytelling at Loughborough University, explain steps of the digital storytelling process here.

THE FIVE STEPS OF THE DIGITAL STOYTELLING PROCESS:

1. STORY CIRLCE

2. PLOTTING THE STORY

3. VOICE RECORDING

4. VIDEO EDITING

5. SCREENING

Each step will be explanied below, with links to material like images and templets that can be used in the different steps.

Step 1 Storycircle

The digital storytelling process starts with a story circle where the participants sit in a circle and get to discuss the theme and ideas.

WHAT: The Story Circle is the most important part of the process and will guide the participants into the storytelling mode. It is organized in smaller groups and facilitated by the project lead based on the stories and key words identified during the preparatory workshop.

WHY: The Story Circle is one of the most important part of the process as it brainstorms ideas and starts the participants storytelling and creativity. This is where the participants are introduced to the subject and will find the story that they later will create.

WHO: 10-20 community members, minimum 2 facilitators per group, representatives from the county

HOW: 1-1,5 hour session

In the story circle the participants are divided into groups of 5-10 people with a minimum of 2 facilitators. Each group sit in a circle to encourage participation and idea making. The picture cards are spread out on the floor in the middle.

After a presentation round, the facilitator askes the participants to pick 2-3 cards that they find interesting and connect it to an element: Wind, Fire, Air, Soil and tell a story about it. It can be a real story from the past, or an imaginative story of the future.

The participants are asked to present their picture and why they picked it. They can also tell a story around that element or a change in connection to the element that they have experienced or thought of.

If time allows the participants can continue to tell stories around the cards, or around climate change.

Tools: Picture cards, pens, paper etc.

GUIELINES FOR FACILITATORS:

• There are no wrong stories.• Every story should be respected.• The story can be personal, but it does not have to be private.• The facilitators can here use different tools to prompt ideas, for example asking key questions or using photos or key words

inspired by the preparatory workshop. • Keep in mind that the participants should just be guided and not influenced by the facilitators.• Make sure that you come well prepared, refresh the stories, key points and key words that was discussed during the preparatory

session etc.

M A T E R I A L S

Link to the pictures for printing: https://www.hoperaisersinitiative.com/digital-storytelling-tools

Step 2 Plotting the story

WHAT: In this step the participants are asked to write a script of maximum 250 words. This step can be adapted if necessary. For example, a storyboard can be used.

WHY: During the script writing the participants choose the story they want to tell and get help to form and structure it.

WHO: 10-20 community members, representatives from the county

HOW: 1-1,5 hour session. The Scrips writing can be done individually or in groups on 2-3 people. A template can be used to help the participants to structure the story that they want to tell.

1. The Title – The participant writes down the title of the story

2. The context. The participant describes the context: Who is the story about? Where is it taking place? Do the story something that happened in the past or something in the future?

3. The Activity – What is the main character doing in the story or what is the main activity that is taking place?

4. A change/Climax – Descrie the change, or climax in the story. Something that interrupted the activity, or an unexpected change or step?

5. Solution/Conclusion – What happen after? How did the change being solved? What was the conclusion or recommendation of the story?

STORY BOARD A storyboard is a sheet with squares that can be drawn in, with lines under them to write in.

M A T E R I A L S

Storyboard templet: https://www.hoperaisersinitiative.com/digital-storytelling-tools

Step 3 Voice REcording

WHAT: In this step the voiceover is recorded.

WHY: The recording will be the base for the digital story and will later be combined with images or film clips.

WHO: 10-20 community members, representatives from the county

HOW: 1 hour session. Each story group/individual receive a voice recording device where they will read their story. Each story should be around 2 min long. The facilitator will help the participants to record and make sure that the quality is good. A recording room can also be put up where the participants can come and read their story while the facilitator assists with the recording.

Voice recording devices: Mobile phones or tablets with recording applicationsVoice recordersLaptops or computers

Step 4 VIdeo Editing

WHAT: In this step the voiceover will be combined with the images and music, and then edited and exported. This creates the digital story and makes it easy and effective to the viewer.

WHY: To add images and music to the voice over helps to describe the story and the emotions connected to it.

WHO: The participants

HOW: 2-4 hour session, depending on the knowledge of the software and the technical gadgets among the participants.The facilitators need to practice on the device and the software prior to the workshop to have expertise and assist the participants in creating their digital story. It is advisable for the facilitators to spend time with each participant to make them connect a particular picture with the voice recording and inspire them on ways to add digital media to their story. The participants can bring their own pictures and films, use already prepared pictures and films, record or use role play during the sessions etc. It is up to the participant to choose how to showcase the story.

FACILITATORHere, guidance from the facilitators is needed. It is important that the facilitators are flexible depending on the participants technical experience.

SOFTWAREA cloud-based software is advantageous as the videos can be accessed and edited from anywhere and you can use stock images. The administrator can slow see the editing and support from where she/he is.

It is important to keep in mind that a cloud-based software requires good internet connection to work, and another solution may need to be considered.

Step 5 Screening

The final step is the screening of the videos and the participants get to reflect on the creative process and discuss it together.

WHAT: A screening to the participants combined with a join discussion and debate

WHY: This gives all participants a chance to show their story to the group as well as inviting the audience to discuss. Here key issues of disagreement as well as well as agreement is analyzed that puts the story in the bigger picture.

WHO: The participants, maybe invited audience from the County or other stakeholders.

HOW: 1-2 hour session. The stories are screened to the audience followed by a short discussion and reflection. Here the facilitators are able to ask questions in regard to the story as well as finding common ideas and goals that can be used for climate adaptation.

V

Next steps

SCREEN TO THE PUBLIC• Make the stories available to the public by screening them in public places. For example, through an

exhibition on the community halls, community cinema halls, public transport (matatu Nairobi contex)• Let the public give their feedback and opinions on the stories, this can be through simply questionnaires

developed prior and distributed before the screenings.• Can also screened in schools for school going children.

COMPILE • Summarize what the stories tell and the feedback from the public into a report, tangible community call

for actions through advocating for policy change, manifesto or similar that tells of what the community experiences and needs, to make their voices heard.

A VISIBLE RESULT (OPTIONAL) • The results from the stories and the feedback can be translated into something visible (for example, a

small park). • The participants should be involved as much as possible in the decision on what to do, the planning

and the implementation of it. • This can be excluded if there are time and budget limitations. But it can be a good way to show the

participants that their stories can lead to something real.

COMMUNICATE WITH THE COUNTY• Start a dialog with the County.

IMPLEMENTATION • Follow up the implementation and let the residents be as involved as possible. • Spread information about actions that are taken and how the residents can contribute to change their

community in the right direction.

MOVING FORWARD • Exchange knowledge and experience with residents in other communities with similar environment and

issues. • Adopt the method digital storytelling at a larger level. • Encourage continuous engagements with the community and policy makers through created linkages.

This toolkit is developed as part of the Future Yetu, a project that seeks to create dialogue on climate change and climate adaptation between communities in Nairobi and the city policy makers.

The project Future Yetu was implemented as a collaboration between Hope Raisers Initiative (main implementer), Safer Nairobi Initiative through Nairobi Metropolitan Services, Loughborough University, Landskapslaget through support from Cities Alliance.

This toolkit is compiled by Elin Elfström, in collaboration with Pia Jonsson and Daniel Onyango, as part of her final thesis at KTH Royal Institute of Technology.

TRITA TRITA-ABE-MBT-21437

www.kth.se