Policy advisor: Whose plan rules?
Context:
A bold plan has landed on your desk: sending students to rural communities for 6–12 months, where they will apply their academic skills for the common good. Inspired by other universities’ success stories, the proposal envisions students co-creating projects with local leaders, focusing on the community’s own priorities.
Dilemma:
A) Support an open, community-led model that fosters adaptability, creativity, and local trust—but is harder to monitor and assess academically.
B) Recommend a more structured, university-designed programme with clear objectives and deliverables.
Story behind the dilemma:
Launched in 1995 by Mexico's Autonomous University (UAM), this program emerged from post-Zapatista movement efforts to refocus rural development work around human rights and grassroots priorities. Structured around four key axes—health/nutrition, technology/environment, cultural learning/human rights, and social policy—it integrates academic training with mandatory "social service" placements, attracting ~100 students yearly to Chiapas.
The program offers tailored degrees, including a two-year MA in Rural Development for mid-career professionals. The MA combines intensive classroom learning (featuring participatory action research training and interdisciplinary dialogue) with cyclical fieldwork (4:1 field/class ratio). Emphasizing bottom-up approaches, it trains students to align projects with community-defined goals while analyzing power dynamics and collective action. Participants earn diplomas (1 year) or MAs (2 years + thesis), with doctoral opportunities for extended research.
A core challenge involves reconciling external academic expertise with local autonomy—ensuring student initiatives serve endogenous priorities rather than imposing external agendas. The program creates spaces for marginalized voices to shape development agendas, blending academic rigor with transformative social practice.