Building Trust in Community-based Collecting

If you work with ethnocultural communities, and you want to explore sensitive topics, it is doable. I have talked about topics that range from what I would consider "comfortable" - such as resilience and healthier aging to "extremely uncomfortable" - such as mental health, violence, and abuse. One of the first and most important steps before you do that is to develop and gain their trust. There is no sustainability in what we do, no matter how important it is, without earning the trust of the people we serve and support. How do you do that? Well, this was my approach when I began my work on older adult mistreatment (elder abuse): 1. Identify and map out the community organisations in your area/city that meet the requirements of your services/support/project. 2. Reach out to community/cultural/spiritual leaders of those communities - ideally with an email and then a face-to-face meeting (introduce yourself and be transparent in what your ask is, but also suggest that you would like to know how you/your organisation can be of benefit to the community). 3. Ask to be invited to community events or gatherings as a gentle entry into the community, and so they can familiarise themselves with you. 4. Remember - it's about the community, their needs, and voices. 5. You may need to do these community event visits several times to earn and develop trust (trustworthiness is also a pillar of trauma-informed care). 6. Once trust is earned, and you have been able to engage the community in conversations around their needs, you can address your ask and adapt it to the community and the concerns they share with you. This sort of community engagement will also bring with it benefits and growth, plus, if you're in the field of social support and community engagement and advocacy, you know how important these steps are. Trust first. Your ask comes later.

When engaging with Indigenous communities, observing cultural protocols is essential for building respectful, trust-based relationships. These practices vary by Nation, but here are foundational principles to guide your approach: Respect Elders and Knowledge Holders: Greet them first, don’t interrupt, and offer a small gift when appropriate, tobacco, tea, or cloth depending on local custom. Understand Local Governance: Learn if the community is guided by hereditary leadership, elected Chief and Council, or traditional councils. Ask before assuming. Wait for Invitation: Never assume access to ceremony, sacred sites, or even meetings. Be invited, and always ask before taking photos or recordings. Use Traditional Names and Languages: Learn the Nation’s name for their land. Practice pronunciation. This shows deep respect and effort. Lead with Humility and Listening: Don’t come to “fix”, come to build relationship. Ask, “What does support look like for you?” Respect Time and Priorities: Expect timelines to shift. Emergencies and community events come first, rightly so. Start with Land and History: Know whose land you’re on. Understand their story. Acknowledge the impacts that shape today’s decisions. Offer Reciprocity, Not Transactions: Relationships matter more than deliverables. Be in it for the long haul. These are not just formalities, they are acts of relational accountability. #CulturalProtocols #IndigenousEngagement #IndigenousLeadership #RespectfulPartnership #ReconciliationInAction #ZacharyKnightEnterprises

They came with clipboards and questions. Told us our voices mattered. Then disappeared. No follow-up. No report. No proof we were ever more than a data point. It’s a familiar pattern. Vommunities giving their time, their stories, their trust… only to be left out of the analysis, the credit, and the change. But research doesn’t have to extract. It can empower. The Participatory Action Research (PAR) Toolkit offers a different approach, one grounded in respect, shared power, and long-term connection. Developed by community researchers with academic partners, this guide doesn’t just tell you what to do,it shows you how to: Build trust before collecting data → Start with relationships, not research agendas. Follow the community’s lead → Let local voices shape the questions that get asked—and the solutions that get prioritised. Use creative, inclusive methods → From story circles to role plays to community mapping, gather data in ways that feel natural and empowering. Co-analyse, co-write, co-present → This isn’t about handing over transcripts. It’s about sharing meaning-making power. If you're a facilitator, researcher, evaluator or community leader tired of extractive models and ready to do research that builds relationships, not resentment, this toolkit is for you. --- 🔥 Follow me for similar content

Building trust is more important than building technology. When we began Commonlands work in rural Uganda, our first instinct was to focus on the tech — the maps, the certificates, the microloan platform. It made sense. Technology could scale solutions faster, streamline processes, and offer transparency. But without trust, even the most advanced tools are useless. Many had seen outsiders arrive with promises before—only for those promises to vanish, leaving communities worse off. Why should they trust us? We had to earn it. That meant showing up—not just once or twice, but consistently. → Sitting under trees and listening to their stories. → Respecting their skepticism and their pace. → Engaging local leaders to vouch for our intentions. Over time, we saw something remarkable. People began opening up. They shared their stories and their challenges. Only then did the technology become meaningful—it became a tool they could see themselves using, not something imposed on them. This is what made us achieve an incredible milestone: ➜ 2,500 plots documented. ➜ 99% loan repayment rate. Then I realized that trust is slow to build but incredibly fragile. And when you’re working with communities, it’s non-negotiable. Technology might be exciting, but relationships are what sustain progress. Today, every certificate we issue and every loan we facilitate is built on a foundation of trust—not just innovation. And that, I’ve learned, is the only way real change happens. Thoughts? Do you believe a lack of trust can impact the success of a project? Follow 👉 Darius and repost! #communitydevelopment #trustbuilding #socialimpact #sustainability #changemaking

There's a common misconception that one can show up or send an email and be welcomed by First Nations communities, receiving all the advice and information needed. This assumption overlooks the depth and complexity of these relationships. Building trust and genuine connections with First Nations communities requires time, respect, and understanding. It’s not just about extracting information; it’s about engaging with the community, honouring their protocols, and recognising your work's impact on them. True collaboration comes from a place of mutual respect and commitment. We must move beyond transactional interactions and towards meaningful partnerships that acknowledge and respect First Nations communities' cultural and social frameworks. #Reconciliation #FirstNations #Respect #CommunityEngagement #CulturalProtocols #Inclusion #Diversity

𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗧𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗮𝘀 𝗘𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗴𝘆 𝗖𝗮𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹: 𝗥𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗖𝗦𝗥 𝗶𝗻 𝗛𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀 Since the enactment of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA), conversations around corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Nigeria’s host communities have taken a necessary turn. What was once an act of goodwill is now a legal and strategic imperative, placing host communities at the center of energy project planning. Some years ago, a multinational oil operator implemented a multi-million-dollar CSR project in a coastal Niger Delta community. Educational facilities were built, potable water systems installed, and vocational training centers launched. On paper, the project was a success. Months later, the boreholes dried up, the centers were abandoned, and community tensions resurfaced. The most valuable resource “𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁"was never extracted. In Akwa Ibom State, Oriental Energy Resources Limited (OERL) is charting a different path. Through its Host Community Development Trust (HCDT), the company is fostering a culture of dialogue, transparency, and inclusion. During a stakeholder session in Uyo, representatives from Mbo and Effiat communities, alongside NUPRC officials, participated as co-creators. Trustee selection, transparency measures, and conflict of interest policies were openly discussed, creating a structure rooted in accountability and mutual respect. Meanwhile, HOSTCOM continues to advocate for an upward review of the 3% PIA allocation, describing it as inadequate for today’s economic reality. They rightly emphasize that without compliance and commitment, even well-meaning policies lose impact. 𝗜𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗻𝗼𝘁𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗴: ✅ When communities are seen and represented, pipelines move more than crude, they also carry goodwill. And goodwill outlasts oil prices. ✅Trust is a key performance indicator, influencing whether operations thrive or face resistance ✅CSR must evolve into community ownership, driven by sustainable frameworks like the HCDT ✅Communities no longer want handouts—they seek 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗻𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽𝘀. 𝗜𝗻 𝘁𝗼𝗱𝗮𝘆’𝘀 𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗴𝘆 𝘀𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿, 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹. 𝗜𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝗹𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗻𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝗼𝗶𝗹 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗴𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗼𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲. As energy professionals, we must shift from “𝗱𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀” to “𝗯𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀. #LocalContentNG #EnergyForNigeria #HostCommunities #CSR #PIA #OilAndGasNigeria #CommunityEngagement #ESG

In "Advocating for a community-centered model for responding to potential information harms," Claire Wardle and David Scales argue for a new approach to addressing the lack of trust and the growing scarcity of high-quality information available to communities (link in comments). A quick AI-aided (but human edited) summary then a few of my own thoughts 👇 Why is "Social Listening" inadequate? 📊 Limited data sources: It relies predominantly on social media data, largely ignoring other crucial sources like traditional media (print, radio, TV), podcasts, peer-to-peer discussions, or offline conversations. 🚨 Lack of harm assessment: It often fails to investigate whether the flagged content is actually leading to real-world harm (online or offline) or to proactively mitigate those harms. 🤝 Insufficient community integration: It is frequently carried out without adequate input or ongoing partnership from the communities they aim to protect. 📈 Focus on reach/engagement over impact: The focus is typically on how widely information spreads ("reach" and "engagement" metrics) rather than its actual impact on behaviors or real-world outcomes (e.g., hate crimes, medication use). Wardle and Scales recommend a Community-Centered Exploration, Engagement, and Evaluation (3E) Model, which is inspired by epidemiological surveillance systems. They advocate for: 🌐 A Holistic Approach: We must view information ecosystems as a whole, moving beyond individual platforms, topics, or types of speech. 🎯 Focus on Impact: The goal shifts from merely discovering content to measuring and understanding the actual impact within a community. ❤️ Prioritizing Community: It places community context and values at its core, ensuring that all aspects of the work are integrated with and driven by the communities affected. This model involves three reinforcing efforts: 💻 Digital Exploration: Understanding online information flows and characteristics (similar to Event-Based Surveillance in epidemiology). 🗣️ Community Engagement: Directly involving community members in identifying information harms and understanding their experiences (analogous to Community-Based Surveillance). 📏 Impact Evaluation: Systematically collecting and analyzing structured data to assess the actual effects of information on attitudes and behaviors (akin to Indicator-Based Surveillance). My take (not AI😄): This approach fills some of the clear gaps in the "monitor and report" efforts that are--rightfully--gaining steam in the information integrity field. In particular: a holistic view of how people get information, and how it impacts their behavior. It provides a critical new model for designing and launching real world efforts and campaigns to inform and engage the public--bound to community needs, values, and culture, while also taking into account global learning and best practices. 🤔All that said--What are the best critiques of this approach?

I used to think creating community health change was as simple as writing a solid policy, presenting strong data, and launching a well-designed program. I was wrong. We have entered communities with research-backed strategies and the best intentions only to be met with silence, resistance, or polite disengagement. We have the evidence and the framework, but we didn’t have their trust, which doesn’t come from statistics. It comes from sitting with people, listening without agenda, and allowing their lived experiences to shape the process. We sometimes show up with answers before even asking the right questions. Next time 
✅ If you want lasting change, start with listening.
✅ Build programs with communities, not just for them.
✅ Trust is built in conversation, not in spreadsheets. People don’t want to be told what’s best for them. They want to be heard, respected, and included. That’s how real public health impact happens, and we move from talk to transformation. Let’s stop designing public health around systems and start designing it around people. What’s one change you wish your community could make to make health services more accessible and inclusive? Are you ready to move from talk to action? Let’s connect. #DrSumayya #thepublichealthmuse #communityfirst #publichealthadvocate #Inclusivehealth