This week’s guest presentation made me r…
This week’s guest presentation made me realize the immense power that research has and the responsibility we hold as students conducting research. I realized this when our guest lecturer Craig was talking about the changes in housing availability in the Richmond Park and Maywood areas of Burnaby. This presentation was personal to me as Burnaby is where I have been born, raised and live in to this day. Although I have seen these changes housing before, it was not until Craig’s presentation that I realized the true, somewhat negative implications of the changes to the neighbourhood. To be completely honest, I was quite shocked and even frightened after hearing him explain what may come to the place I’ve called home for 20 years. It was a powerful message that was shared and I realize now how researchers must always greatly consider the impact of these messages that produce and share. Whether we use surveys, interviews and focus groups, the information retrieved from the research is much more than data; they are stories about the lives of people and the results of the research can greatly alter how their stories unfold.
theriseofthesun 9:54 pm on March 10, 2016 Permalink |
Hi Marcus,
You made some really good observations about Craig’s presentation regarding the extremely rapid development of high-rise housing in the metropolitan area of Burnaby. I think the relationship between immigration and housing development is a pertinent issue that should definitely be explored further, especially because since it affects all of us, in terms of housing availability, affordability, accessibility and more. As someone who lives and has grown up in Richmond, BC, I have noticed a drastic boom in high-rise complex apartment buildings that have taken over older, single-story house neighborhoods. Recently, there has been a big debate and a study that claims to put data behind the widely held but difficult-to-prove assumption that off-shore money is driving Vancouver’s boiling housing market has concluded that the vast majority of houses on the city’s affluent west side have been bought by new immigrants from China, many of whom earning income outside of Canada.
I’m really interested in hearing what other people’s thoughts are about this?
For more information about the study here’s a link to a Globe and Mail article: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/vancouvers-housing-market-fuelled-by-chinese-buyers-study/article27064577/
Cheng Yee Seah 11:36 pm on March 10, 2016 Permalink |
Hmm yeah! I find it really interesting how research can, and is currently being used to tackle on going issues that are so close to us and evident in Vancouver. For a long time I struggled with gaging how useful conducting research was (I guess being a little skeptical), as so often I see groups just used as a “research topic” and an inability to actually utilize the research work to take action against or work towards solving issues. Craig’s presentation and research work was a prime example of how such research CAN in fact be used in a beneficial way. More importantly, I think he highlighted the process of doing so, and perhaps the struggles with dealing with much larger institutional issues and the pace at which progress can be seen.
Emily Dunn 2:26 am on March 11, 2016 Permalink |
I think the most valuable thing about Craig’s research though is that through his method of triangulation, he manages to approach the issue from all perspectives and sides. His data might show one thing about the area (e.g. the condition of the buildings) but through his interviews and focus groups, he highlights a different perspective – that of the people who live there, which is perhaps the most important in this issue. What I found really interesting was the group of people who weren’t objected to the high rise development and who had actually seen benefits from it – e.g. the community center. I think even the publication of those would be immensely valuable, for both planning officials and future developers in order for them to judge how best to approach the situation and gain support for it. I think that Craig’s research contributed heavily to the socio-economic stance on the issue and should be used to illustrate alternative thinking around the redevelopment in Vancouver.
Melissa Lee 3:11 am on March 12, 2016 Permalink |
Marcus is right, not only is basic quantitative numerical data collected but lots of valuable and useful stories, conversations, and context come out of this research as well. What would you say would be some example plans or approaches to actually use this wealth of information as they have so much potential to suggest the needed changes and inform people about them? I have to agree with you Emily, that the magic with Craig’s mixed triangulation method is that he allows himself to see the issue at multiple dimensions. Publications of several stories and interviews would give great exposure of the insides.
I once did a very part-time job doing door-to-door marketing about a home service when I was much younger and landed in a neighbourhood around South-Marine Vancouver. I quickly found it was not a great place for me to get leads after learning from the short conversations I had at homeowners’ doors that the whole area is being torn down (houses would be knocked down and notices were given out a year ago) so developers could build high-rise apartments. I had many people rant to me about how they felt at their doors and I remember wondering whether or not developers/planners listened to their stories and concerns before fully deciding such decisions (or to come up with compensations or accommodations). I do not remember every detail back then about the situation, but what matters is the fact that I had collected this kind of information from the actual people (homeowners in that neighbourhood) who were being affected. This memory of mine additionally helps me understand how sharing such kinds of data may contribute to creating future impacts if messages are received and actions are taken as a response.
atherias 8:19 pm on March 11, 2016 Permalink |
Cheng Yee, I definitely share some of your former skepticism about the power of research in effecting “real” change. I think this is partly due to the history of exploitative research that has done harm (or at least done little direct good) to the subjects involved and partly because of the recurring feeling that the realm of academia can be very removed from the issue being researched and the resolution of that issue. This is why I think our chance to undertake community research is so important; while we follow the academic protocol, there is direct collaboration that is taking place which may allow for the benefits of the research to reach the participants much faster. In both community and traditional research I still see the ways in which existing institutions have the power to stall needed change (identified by research) if those changes are not in their direct interests. Just as Burnaby lacks regulations to ensure affordable housing, the city of Williams Lake has invested very little in convenient and effective transportation. When those barriers occur and institution does not cooperate, I think it is important to empower communities from the ground up by drawing on their existing strengths. That is sort of the thinking that shapes my own interaction with my group’s project. Last year the students did extensive research on the public transit issues which they presented to the city, yet this has apparently not led to any changes. The work we are doing this year is finding one way in which the community itself can meet its own needs, which could happen faster since the people are motivated by their own experience.
Kianna Zivny 1:05 pm on March 14, 2016 Permalink |
Just to reply about this week’s guest lecture, I also thought it was a very interesting one. I live close to the skytrain line and I thought it was interesting how Craig talked about the densification of that corridor before the skytrain was put in place. I agree with Marcus on how important and powerful research can be, as well as intensive, if it is actually used to do something with. I also think a lot of research can go into a topic and then it doesn’t actually get used for anything tangible. To build off of what Adele said at the end about our group’s project, I think it has the potential to be very useful to the community in a tangible way. The work that last year’s group did on the transit system is something that we can use this year to build off of to help the motivated people in the community meet some of the needs that it addressed.
Also, I just want to add a quick comment about the discussion on gender and the activity we did in class. I thought the activity was interesting because of the way I would think people would choose to categorize the traits as “male or female.” I think if you only have the two choices of male or female, you could go about answering it in different ways. For example, either comparing a trait to yourself or someone you have in mind that displays that trait, could influence why you would categorize it in a certain way.