Beyond the Participatory Paradox in Sudan: A Pluriversal Participation Framework for Humanitarian Design

Beyond the Participatory Paradox in Sudan: A Pluriversal Participation Framework for Humanitarian Design | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Beyond the Participatory Paradox in Sudan: A Pluriversal Participation Framework for Humanitarian Design Mohamed Musa This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8749108/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This article reframes the ‘participatory paradox’ in Sudan—where well‑intended participation reproduces exclusion and epistemic injustice—by offering an empirically grounded, decolonial alternative: the Pluriversal Participation Framework (PPF). Using a qualitative, practitioner‑centred design rooted in decolonial feminist epistemology, the study integrates a narrative synthesis, iterative dialogues with seven Sudanese practitioners positioned as co‑theorists, and three sectoral case analyses (WASH in Darfur; nomadic education in Blue Nile; mobile protection committees near Khartoum). Thematic analysis reveals that insecurity, donor logframe rigidity, and colonial knowledge hierarchies render participation simultaneously mandatory and structurally constrained. Practitioners respond through patterned strategies—tactical hybridity (blending analogue/digital tools and formal/informal channels) and subversive intermediation (low‑visibility brokers who leverage social trust). These constitute ‘reparative infrastructures’ that keep humanitarianism alive in the grey zones where formal systems fail. The PPF advances three tenets: valuing embodied epistemologies, embracing tactical hybridity, and leveraging subversive intermediation. It reframes adaptation as political craft and sets out implications for MEL, funding, and ethics (including pluriversal outcome harvesting and risk‑as‑solidarity). The article concludes by situating Sudan within wider fractured‑sovereignty contexts and outlining a research agenda for testing the framework comparatively. participation decolonial humanitarianism epistemic justice Sudan tactical hybridity subversive intermediation pluriverse fractured sovereignty Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 1. Introduction Participation is a core ethical and compliance imperative of humanitarian action. In Sudan, however, repeatedly mandated procedures that look legitimate in donor reports often fail to redistribute power, thereby producing what practitioners describe as a ‘participatory paradox’: participation demanded yet structurally constrained. In a landscape of fractured sovereignty and contested authority, participation determines who is seen, whose knowledge counts, and who is protected. Donor accountability regimes intensify this paradox by privileging what is easily measured over what is locally trusted. This article proposes the Pluriversal Participation Framework (PPF) as a reparative alternative to universalist templates. Treating Sudanese humanitarians as co‑theorists, it synthesises three tenets—embodied epistemologies, tactical hybridity, and subversive intermediation—to orient ethical, context‑led participation under constraint. The article addresses the following questions: (1) What structural and epistemic barriers perpetuate the participatory paradox in Sudan’s conflict‑affected regions? (2) How do Eurocentric models interact with indigenous practices and local power? (3) What roles do intermediaries and practitioners play in navigating, adapting, or subverting limitations to enable meaningful engagement? 2. Background: Fractured sovereignty and contested humanitarian space Sudan’s crises—rooted in colonial extraction, post‑independence marginalisation, and militarised political economy—have produced a landscape where authority is polycentric and negotiated village‑by‑village. In such hybrid political orders, state‑centric participation models premised on benevolent central authority can be ineffective or dangerous. Hyper‑local power brokers, women’s networks, elders, traders, and fixers often act as de facto gatekeepers of humanitarian space. Three illustrative cases anchor this analysis and preview the paradox in practice. (see Table 1). [Insert Table 1 about here] Table 1: Illustrative case studies of participatory challenges & adaptations Case Study Challenge Highlighted Adaptive Measure & Outcome Tension/Limitation UNICEF WASH Programme (Darfur) Conflict between hierarchical clan power structures and externally driven "community-led" water projects. Proxy engagement through female intermediaries improved water access for some. The paradox of formal inclusion: Technocratic models clash with the embodied epistemology of clan authority, inadvertently reinforcing existing power structures while attempting to circumvent them. Local NGO Education Initiative (Blue Nile) Difficulty engaging mobile nomadic pastoralist communities overlooked by conventional PRA. Innovative use of radio hubs and pictorial surveys resulted in a 20% increase in school enrolment. (UNICEF, 2020 ) Persistent pressure from donors favouring standardised digital data collection, creating a tension with the tactical hybridity required on the ground. UNHCR’s Mobile Protection Committees (MPCCs) Mass displacement and siege disrupted conventional aid delivery. Blockchain-based feedback systems and solar-powered radios reached 3,500 households. Tech-centric innovation met with resistance from traditional leaders, highlighting a failure to account for subversive intermediation and existing power structures. (Source: Primary Data) 3. Literature Review and Theoretical Orientation Coloniality of participation. Foundational participation models (e.g., ladders and workshop‑centric tools) embed Eurocentric assumptions about governance, consensus, and public speech. In fractured sovereignty, these assumptions clash with customary authority and informal institutions, risking epistemic violence when indigenous cosmologies (e.g., Judiyya) are displaced by externally validated ‘best practices.’ Adaptive management under constraint. While adaptive management promises iteration and flexibility, in politicised settings its double bind—urgent flexibility vs. rigid donor compliance—can depoliticise participation. In Sudan, quantification imperatives and audit‑led timelines often crowd out the relational work needed to build trust. Gaps and a decolonial alternative. Three gaps recur: the erasure of indirect agency, the invisibility of local intermediaries, and apolitical adaptation myths. The PPF responds by centring embodied epistemologies, embracing tactical hybridity, and supporting subversive intermediation as legitimate mechanisms of agency under constraint. (see Table 2 ). [Insert Table 2 about here] Table 2: Critical gaps and PPF responses Critical Gap Description Pluriversal Framework Response Erasure of Indirect Agency Existing literature often overlooks or devalues forms of indirect participation, dismissing them as "second-best" alternatives. Values embodied epistemologies; highlights subversive intermediation. Invisibility of Local Intermediaries This is not a simple oversight but an active erasure. Scholarship predominantly centres international NGOs, a function of a scholarly gaze that privileges the formal and branded over the informal and politically nimble, rendering crucial grassroots contributions invisible. Central tenet of subversive intermediation, recognising local actors as key infrapolitical actors. Apolitical Adaptation Myths Frames adaptive management as technocratic and politically neutral, obscuring how it can be co-opted and become complicit in reinforcing the very power structures it should challenge. Emphasises tactical hybridity and embodied epistemologies, politicising adaptation. (Source: Primary Data) 4. Methods Design. A qualitative, practitioner‑centred, decolonial design integrated (i) narrative synthesis, (ii) iterative semi‑structured dialogues with Sudanese practitioners (n = 7), and (iii) in‑depth case analysis across WASH, education, and protection. Participants and sampling. Purposive and snowball strategies identified seven practitioners reflecting diverse roles, sectors, and lived experience, prioritising analytical depth over statistical representativeness. Data collection. Dialogues followed a flexible topic guide derived from literature and research questions. Case materials included programme reports and practitioner documentation. Analysis. Manual thematic analysis (six‑phase approach) was used. The PPF tenets functioned as sensitising concepts; coding proceeded inductively to avoid forcing data into preconceived categories. Reflexive memoing and peer debriefing enhanced credibility. Triangulation and validation. Claims were cross‑checked across interviews, documents, and literature using a triangulation matrix. Divergences were interrogated rather than smoothed out. Positionality and reflexivity. The researcher’s dual identity (insider practitioner/academic) was managed through a positionality journal and regular debriefs, shifting interpretations from bureaucratic to political readings where warranted. Ethics. Informed consent (verbal/written, context‑dependent) was obtained; pseudonyms and protective abstraction were used to minimise risk. Data were stored on encrypted devices; culturally adapted consent processes were offered. (see Table 3 ). [Insert Table 3 about here] Table 3: Participant characteristics and roles Pseudonym Role Sector Years of Experience Gender P1 Programme Manager Protection 8 Female P2 Field Coordinator WASH 5 Male P3 M&E Officer Health 6 Male P4 Local NGO Director Education 12 Female P5 Field Officer Food Security 4 Male P6 Community Mobiliser Protection 7 Female P7 Programme Officer Mixed Sectors 9 Male (Source: Primary Data) [Insert Table 4 about here] Table 4: Case‑selection rationale and key adaptive strategies Case Rationale Key Adaptive Strategy Illuminated UNICEF WASH Programme (Darfur) Exposes tensions between externally driven models and existing community structures; highlights proxy engagement. Community-led infrastructure (as intended); Proxy engagement via intermediaries. Local NGO Education Initiative (Blue Nile) Embodies grassroots resistance and adaptation to reach marginalised mobile populations; highlights tactical hybridity. Nomadic-inclusive curricula; Radio hubs and pictorial surveys (tactical hybridity). UNHCR Mobile Protection Committees (MPCCs) Tests scalability and adaptation in conditions of high displacement and siege; highlights subversive intermediation and tactical hybridity. Mobile committees (subversive intermediation); Blockchain feedback + solar radios (tactical hybridity). (Source: Primary Data) [Insert Table 5 about here] Table 5: Illustrative triangulation matrix Finding/Theme Evidence from Semi-structured Interviews Evidence from Programme Reports Evidence from Literature Synthesis Subversive Intermediation via Female Networks "In many communities, women are not allowed to speak directly... so we worked through women's collective leaders... their influence is quiet but powerful." (P6, verbatim) UNICEF ( 2020 ) report on Darfur notes the critical role of "informal distribution networks led by women" in reaching excluded households. Abdelnour & Abu Hashem ( 2022 ) document how women’s informal networks in Zalingei, Darfur navigate checkpoints and patriarchal structures to deliver aid. (Source: Primary Data) 5. Findings Three interlocking themes constitute the participatory paradox in Sudan: (1) persistent operational barriers; (2) epistemic violence and knowledge hierarchies; and (3) gendered and intersectional marginalisation. 5.1 Operational barriers Volatile security (checkpoints, hostilities), rigid donor logframes, quantification imperatives, and administrative cycles collide with fluid frontline realities, producing tokenistic engagement and normalised exclusion. Practitioners described relocating meetings repeatedly for safety and abandoning unsafe, workshop‑based models. 5.2 Epistemic violence and knowledge hierarchies Externally validated “best practices” displaced situated knowledge and oral, relational modes of evidence. Digital tools privileged connected, literate participants, deepening exclusion in low‑connectivity contexts. Skepticism toward indigenous systems (e.g., Judiyya) reflected enduring colonial hierarchies of evidence. 5.3 Intersectional exclusions Gendered norms and clan politics shaped voice and influence; IDPs and minority clans were sidelined. Women’s presence in formal fora often failed to translate into power, while mobility rendered static workshops irrelevant to nomadic groups. 5.4 Case vignettes: the paradox and its navigations Vignette 1 – WASH in Darfur: subversive intermediation Female mobilisers navigated checkpoints under low visibility, relayed needs, and sustained water infrastructure when formal committees were captured by elites. This brokerage leveraged gendered assumptions but entailed personal risk and reproduced some local hierarchies. Vignette 2 – Nomadic education in Blue Nile: tactical hybridity Circuit‑rider mobilisers used solar radios, pictorial surveys, and oral storytelling across dialects to enable mobile participation. Donor demands for GPS/biometrics clashed with zero‑connectivity realities; mobile participation remained invisible to conventional MEL systems. Vignette 3 – Mobile protection near Khartoum: trust, risk, intermediaries When formal meetings were unsafe, midwives and local fixers acted as protection focal points, discreetly reporting incidents and coordinating distributions. Attempts to impose opaque digital tools met resistance where they threatened existing authority. (see Table 6 ). [Insert Table 6 about here] Table 6: Adaptive strategies—tactical hybridity & subversive intermediation (examples) Strategy Type Description Examples Social Hybridity Adaptation to informal social structures for cultural navigation and access. Female intermediaries in WASH programmes (P1, P6); trusted religious leaders for advocacy (P2). Technological Hybridity Adaptation of technology to overcome digital exclusion and security constraints. Solar-powered radios and pictorial surveys for nomadic communities (P2, P7); blockchain with solar radios in MPCCs (P3). Process Hybridity Integration of culturally resonant methods with modern tools. Traditional mapping with digital transcription (P5); traditional drama with mobile messages (P6). Human Relay Utilising trusted community members and informal channels for feedback in challenging areas. Basic mobile phones with community members for feedback via conversations and SMS in siege areas (P7). Subversive Intermediation Local actors operating in "grey zones," leveraging informal power to bridge gaps and circumvent obstacles. Women's collectives, circuit riders, local fixers, market traders, and traditional birth attendants (P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, P7); personal networks for checkpoint releases (P3); market traders negotiating aid passage (P7); and NGO persistence despite donor pressure (P5). (Source: Primary Data) 6. Discussion The findings recast ‘adaptation’ as political craft rather than neutral flexibility. Tactical hybridity forges hybrid forums that bypass state control and audit‑centric surveillance; subversive intermediation converts social trust into humanitarian access and protection. Together, these form reparative infrastructures that mend both social fabric and programmatic failures. The PPF thus directly contests the anti‑politics machine by centring embodied epistemologies and re‑politicising adaptation while acknowledging risks (e.g., exposure of intermediaries, co‑optation of hybridity). 6.1 Implications Theory Provides an actionable route to operationalise decolonial and feminist critiques; positions practitioners and intermediaries as theory‑generating actors. Policy & funding Shift from risk aversion to risk‑as‑solidarity; provide flexible core funding to grassroots collectives; legitimise low‑visibility intermediaries without exposing them; use “Trojan‑horse” framing to negotiate change within incumbent systems. MEL: Replace indicatorism with pluriversal outcome harvesting—co‑define success with communities; use story circles, participatory photography, and narrative change tracking; triangulate across informal channels. (see Table 7 ). [Insert Table 7 about here] Table 7: Policy & funding recommendations as decolonial demands Recommendation Area Specific Action Decolonial Praxis Abolishing Epistemic Violence Mandate community-controlled "Ethical and Design Review Boards" with veto power over projects. Epistemic restitution : Transfers interpretive and design authority to communities (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999 ). Reforming MEL as Liberatory Practice Replace rigid logframes with "Pluriversal Outcome Harvesting," allowing communities to co-define success. Centres indigenous metrics of well-being; shifts accountability from donors to communities (Chilisa, 2019 ). Funding as Reparation Channel direct, flexible, core funding to grassroots collectives (e.g., Darfuri women’s groups). Repairs extractive legacies of aid and abolishes the gatekeeping role of INGOs (Abdelnour & Abu Hashem, 2022 ). Practising Productive Discomfort Mandate critical reflexivity and decolonial praxis training for all international staff. Treats community feedback as institutional learning and a source of political insight, not "beneficiary" data extraction. (Source: Primary Data) 6.2 Operationalising the PPF This article presents a programme‑cycle matrix mapping tenets to design, delivery, and MEL choices. Policy & Practice Box Diagnose the paradox: look for security‑driven exclusions, elite capture, and digital bias. One tactical hybridity move: combine radio feedback with pictorial surveys and women‑only story circles. Safe intermediation: design low‑visibility roles, map risks, and create discreet reporting pathways. MEL shift: light‑touch outcome harvesting with community‑defined indicators of change. [Insert Table 8 about here] Table 8: Operational matrix for the PPF (design–delivery–MEL) Tenet Design Delivery Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) Valuing Embodied Epistemologies Identification and mapping of informal knowledge systems; engagement of local elders, women's collectives, and youth groups in a co-design capacity. Prioritisation of oral, symbolic, and experiential methodologies (e.g., storytelling, participatory drama, ritual); utilisation of local idioms and metaphors to ensure conceptual resonance. Definition of success metrics using locally derived indicators (e.g., reduction in social tension, increased inter-communal trust); employment of qualitative, narrative-based assessment tools. Embracing Tactical Hybridity Early-stage integration of analogue and digital tools (e.g., combining Global Positioning System (GPS) data with community sketch maps); contingency planning for technological deficits. Employment of multi-modal communication channels (e.g., pictorial surveys, solar-powered radios, WhatsApp audio messages); adaptation of formats to accommodate varying mobility and literacy levels. Triangulation of data from formal and informal sources; tracking of informal indicators (e.g., frequency of unsolicited community feedback, observed shifts in local norms). Leveraging Subversive Intermediation Identification of trusted community intermediaries (e.g., midwives, market traders); formalisation of the roles of informal actors within risk and stakeholder analyses. Empowerment of intermediaries with flexible mandates; facilitation of informal negotiation protocols for humanitarian access and protection. Systematic collection of intermediary feedback via audio logs, telecommunication, or observational records; analysis of adaptive workarounds and informal successes as valid programmatic outcomes. (Source: Primary Data) 7. Conclusion The participatory paradox in Sudan is structural, produced by Eurocentric templates, donor accountability regimes, and epistemic hierarchies. Practitioners and communities sustain humanitarianism through reparative infrastructures of tactical hybridity and subversive intermediation. The PPF consolidates these mechanisms as a decolonial orientation for design, shifting from inclusion as procedure to epistemic justice as foundation, and suggesting a comparative research agenda across fractured‑sovereignty settings. Abbreviations APC Article Processing Charge IDP Internally Displaced Person MEL Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning MPCC Mobile Protection Community Committee NGO Non-Governmental Organization PPF Pluriversal Participation Framework UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees UNICEF United Nations Children's Fund UNOCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs WASH Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene WHO World Health Organization Limitations and Future Research Security constraints limited direct and sustained community access, increasing reliance on practitioner narratives and case documentation. This mirrors the same architectures of violence and risk management that restrict humanitarian access. Future work should test the PPF comparatively and longitudinally, tracing how intermediated participation evolves under changing conflict dynamics. Declarations ​Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate This research was approved by the University of York Department of Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee (HSRec). The study was conducted in accordance with the University of York’s Research Code of Practice and Ethics. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their involvement in the study. Ethics approval and consent to participate Not applicable. Consent for publication Not applicable. Clinical trial number Clinical trial number: not applicable. Funding Not applicable. Author Contribution The author conceptualised the study, conducted the literature synthesis and practitioner dialogues, analysed the data, and drafted the manuscript. Acknowledgement With gratitude to Dr. Claudia Milena Adler and to the Sudanese practitioners who contributed their time and expertise under significant risk. Data Availability Due to insecurity and the risk of harm to participants operating in contested humanitarian spaces, qualitative interview data are not publicly available. De‑identified excerpts supporting the conclusions are included within the article. References Abdalla M (2017) Intersectional violence in Khartoum’s IDP camps: Gendered exclusion in humanitarian spaces. J Refugee Stud 30(3):345–362 Abdalla M (2022) Gendered exclusion in Khartoum’s IDP camps revisited. J Refugee Stud 35(2):210–228 Abdelnour S, Abu-Elgasim M (2021) Eurocentric models vs. indigenous praxis: The Judiyya system in Darfur. Third World Q 42(5):876–893 Abdelnour S, Abu Hashem A (2022) In the shadows of the state: Women’s informal networks and aid delivery in Zalingei, Darfur. Rift Valley Institute Abdul-Jalil MA (2008) The Judiyya system: Conflict resolution in Darfur. In: Ahmed AM, ElBattahani AA (eds) Darfur: Dimensions of crisis and challenges of peace. University of Khartoum, pp 123–145 Ahmed I, Green RH (1999) Clan-based aid delivery in Somalia: Adaptation or complicity? J Mod Afr Stud 37(2):207–228 Ali M, Abass A (2023) Sudan’s fractured sovereignty and humanitarian access. J North Afr Stud 28(1):55–75 Arnstein SR (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Inst Planners 35(4):216–224 Autesserre S (2014) Peaceland: Conflict resolution and the everyday politics of international intervention. Cambridge University Press Bayat A (2007) Making Islam democratic: Social movements and the post-Islamist turn. Stanford University Press Berridge WJ (2021) Civil uprising and aid coordination in Sudan’s 2019 revolution (Working Paper No. 45). Sudan Studies Centre Boege V, Brown A, Clements K, Nolan A (2009) Hybrid political orders in fragile states. Int Peacekeeping 16(5):665–683 Bradbury M, Healy S (2010) Whose peace is it anyway? Connecting grassroots and elite peace processes in Somalia. Accord 21:34–39 Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Res Psychol 3(2):77–101 Chambers R (1994) Participatory rural appraisal (PRA): Challenges, potentials and paradigms. World Dev 22(10):1437–1454 Chandler D (2020) The world of the pluriverse. Millennium: J Int Stud 48(3):346–364 Chilisa B (2019) Indigenous research methodologies. SAGE Cooke B, Kothari U (eds) (2001) Participation: The new tyranny? Zed Books Cornwall A, Brock K (2005) What do buzzwords do for development policy? Third World Q 26(7):1043–1060 Crenshaw K (1989) Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex. Univ Chic Legal Forum 1989(1):139–167 de Sousa Santos B (2014) Epistemologies of the South: Justice against epistemicide. Routledge de Waal A (2018) Mass starvation: The history and future of famine. Polity Duffield M (2018) Post-humanitarianism: Governing precarity in the digital age. Polity Echevarria AJII (2016) Operating in the gray zone: An alternative paradigm for U.S. military strategy. U.S. Army War College Elnour E (2018) Double erasure: Nomadic women and participatory exclusion in Sudan. Gend Dev 26(3):421–438 Escobar A (1995) Encountering development: The making and unmaking of the Third World. Princeton University Press Fals Borda O (1987) The application of participatory action-research in Latin America. Int Sociol 2(4):329–347 Ferguson J (1990) The anti-politics machine: ‘Development,’ depoliticization, and bureaucratic power in Lesotho. Cambridge University Press Finlay L (2002) Negotiating the swamp: The opportunity and challenge of reflexivity in research practice. Qualitative Res 2(2):209–230 Fricker M (2007) Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press Haraway D (1988) Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Stud 14(3):575–599 Harding S (2004) Standpoint theory as a site of political, philosophic, and scientific debate. Signs 29(4):973–987 Heleta S (2016) Decolonisation of higher education: Dismantling epistemic violence and Eurocentrism in South Africa. Transformation High Educ 1(1):1–8 Holt PM, Daly MW (1979) The history of the Sudan: From the coming of Islam to the present day. Weidenfeld and Nicolson International Rescue Committee (2024) Sudan humanitarian access and response report. IRC Kothari A, Salleh A, Escobar A, Demaria F, Acosta A (eds) (2019) Pluriverse: A post-development dictionary. Tulika Books Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1):159–174 Lincoln YS, Guba EG (1985) Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Majid H, Harmer A (2020) Navigating the dual state: Humanitarian action in Houthi- and Hadi-controlled Yemen. ODI Mamdani M (2012) Define and rule: Native as political identity. Harvard University Press Maxwell D, Adan G, Majid N (2016) Aid and power in protracted crises: The case of Sudan. Humanitarian Policy Group Report). ODI Menkhaus K (2006) Governance without government in Somalia. Int Secur 31(3):74–106 Mignolo WD (2011) The darker side of Western modernity: Global futures, decolonial options. Duke University Press Ndlovu-Gatsheni SJ (2020) Decolonization, development and knowledge in Africa: Turning over a new leaf. Pluto Paffenholz T (2015) Unpacking the local turn in peacebuilding. Third World Q 36(5):825–850 Pillow W (2003) Confession, catharsis, or cure? Rethinking the uses of reflexivity. Int J Qualitative Stud Educ 16(2):175–196 Ramalingam B, Laric M, Primrose J (2014) From best practice to best fit. Dev Policy Rev 28(3):359–376 Scott JC (1985) Weapons of the weak: Everyday forms of peasant resistance. Yale University Press Smith LT (1999) Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. Zed Books Smith LT (2012) Decolonizing methodologies, 2nd edn. Zed Books Spivak GC (1988) Can the subaltern speak? In: Nelson C, Grossberg L (eds) Marxism and the interpretation of culture. University of Illinois Press, pp 271–313 Suliman M (2021) Colonial legacies in Sudanese humanitarianism (Sudanese Policy Forum Working Paper 12). Sudanese Policy Forum Tobin SA (2010) Militarized governance in Darfur. J Mod Afr Stud 48(4):553–574 UNHCR (2020) Annual protection report: Sudan operations UNHCR (2022) Annual protection report: Sudan operations UNICEF (2020) WASH programme evaluation: Darfur region, Sudan UNOCHA (2023) Sudan humanitarian needs overview 2023 Vlassenroot K, Raeymaekers T (2004) The politics of rebellion and intervention in Ituri. Afr Affairs 103(412):385–412 WHO (2023) Cholera response in Sudan: Situation report. World Health Organization Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8749108","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":586144868,"identity":"b230edbe-fd4c-4ee0-ae5e-0a83883c64a5","order_by":0,"name":"Mohamed Musa","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mohamed","middleName":"","lastName":"Musa","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-01-31 10:53:21","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8749108/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8749108/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":102752340,"identity":"717ab918-b537-4ffd-a68c-f3be3a24f385","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-16 09:30:46","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":266324,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eTimeline of Humanitarian Crises and Participatory Shifts in Sudan.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8749108/v1/b3322ecf93c9ada80724e7d4.png"},{"id":102752341,"identity":"19122aba-828b-465f-8085-cc29c103f738","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-16 09:30:46","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":194010,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe Pluriversal Participation Framework: A Decolonial Model for Action.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8749108/v1/509f7f35088cc185db495cff.png"},{"id":104397322,"identity":"667e02cd-fe2b-4a7b-ba22-7b105699348f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-03-11 11:46:34","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1421847,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8749108/v1/d14da89c-b0d9-48e0-be95-0787c10bec2d.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Beyond the Participatory Paradox in Sudan: A Pluriversal Participation Framework for Humanitarian Design","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eParticipation is a core ethical and compliance imperative of humanitarian action. In Sudan, however, repeatedly mandated procedures that look legitimate in donor reports often fail to redistribute power, thereby producing what practitioners describe as a \u0026lsquo;participatory paradox\u0026rsquo;: participation demanded yet structurally constrained. In a landscape of fractured sovereignty and contested authority, participation determines who is seen, whose knowledge counts, and who is protected. Donor accountability regimes intensify this paradox by privileging what is easily measured over what is locally trusted.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis article proposes the Pluriversal Participation Framework (PPF) as a reparative alternative to universalist templates. Treating Sudanese humanitarians as co‑theorists, it synthesises three tenets\u0026mdash;embodied epistemologies, tactical hybridity, and subversive intermediation\u0026mdash;to orient ethical, context‑led participation under constraint. The article addresses the following questions: (1) What structural and epistemic barriers perpetuate the participatory paradox in Sudan\u0026rsquo;s conflict‑affected regions? (2) How do Eurocentric models interact with indigenous practices and local power? (3) What roles do intermediaries and practitioners play in navigating, adapting, or subverting limitations to enable meaningful engagement?\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Background: Fractured sovereignty and contested humanitarian space","content":"\u003cp\u003eSudan\u0026rsquo;s crises\u0026mdash;rooted in colonial extraction, post‑independence marginalisation, and militarised political economy\u0026mdash;have produced a landscape where authority is polycentric and negotiated village‑by‑village. In such hybrid political orders, state‑centric participation models premised on benevolent central authority can be ineffective or dangerous. Hyper‑local power brokers, women\u0026rsquo;s networks, elders, traders, and fixers often act as de facto gatekeepers of humanitarian space.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThree illustrative cases anchor this analysis and preview the paradox in practice. (see Table\u0026nbsp;1).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e[Insert Table\u0026nbsp;1 about here]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable 1: Illustrative case studies of participatory challenges \u0026 adaptations\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Taba\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCase Study\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChallenge Highlighted\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdaptive Measure \u0026amp; Outcome\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTension/Limitation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUNICEF WASH Programme (Darfur)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConflict between hierarchical clan power structures and externally driven \"community-led\" water projects.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProxy engagement through female intermediaries improved water access for some.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe paradox of formal inclusion: Technocratic models clash with the embodied epistemology of clan authority, inadvertently reinforcing existing power structures while attempting to circumvent them.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLocal NGO Education Initiative (Blue Nile)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDifficulty engaging mobile nomadic pastoralist communities overlooked by conventional PRA.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInnovative use of radio hubs and pictorial surveys resulted in a 20% increase in school enrolment. (UNICEF, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePersistent pressure from donors favouring standardised digital data collection, creating a tension with the tactical hybridity required on the ground.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUNHCR\u0026rsquo;s Mobile Protection Committees (MPCCs)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMass displacement and siege disrupted conventional aid delivery.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBlockchain-based feedback systems and solar-powered radios reached 3,500 households.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTech-centric innovation met with resistance from traditional leaders, highlighting a failure to account for subversive intermediation and existing power structures.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cem\u003e(Source: Primary Data)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. Literature Review and Theoretical Orientation","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eColoniality of participation.\u003c/b\u003e Foundational participation models (e.g., ladders and workshop‑centric tools) embed Eurocentric assumptions about governance, consensus, and public speech. In fractured sovereignty, these assumptions clash with customary authority and informal institutions, risking epistemic violence when indigenous cosmologies (e.g., Judiyya) are displaced by externally validated \u0026lsquo;best practices.\u0026rsquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eAdaptive management under constraint.\u003c/b\u003e While adaptive management promises iteration and flexibility, in politicised settings its double bind\u0026mdash;urgent flexibility vs. rigid donor compliance\u0026mdash;can depoliticise participation. In Sudan, quantification imperatives and audit‑led timelines often crowd out the relational work needed to build trust.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGaps and a decolonial alternative. Three gaps recur: the erasure of indirect agency, the invisibility of local intermediaries, and apolitical adaptation myths. The PPF responds by centring embodied epistemologies, embracing tactical hybridity, and supporting subversive intermediation as legitimate mechanisms of agency under constraint. (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e[Insert Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e about here]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable 2: Critical gaps and PPF responses\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Tabb\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCritical Gap\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescription\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePluriversal Framework Response\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eErasure of Indirect Agency\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExisting literature often overlooks or devalues forms of indirect participation, dismissing them as \"second-best\" alternatives.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eValues embodied epistemologies; highlights subversive intermediation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInvisibility of Local Intermediaries\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis is not a simple oversight but an active erasure. Scholarship predominantly centres international NGOs, a function of a scholarly gaze that privileges the formal and branded over the informal and politically nimble, rendering crucial grassroots contributions invisible.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCentral tenet of subversive intermediation, recognising local actors as key infrapolitical actors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eApolitical Adaptation Myths\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrames adaptive management as technocratic and politically neutral, obscuring how it can be co-opted and become complicit in reinforcing the very power structures it should challenge.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmphasises tactical hybridity and embodied epistemologies, politicising adaptation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cem\u003e(Source: Primary Data)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4. Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eDesign.\u003c/b\u003e A qualitative, practitioner‑centred, decolonial design integrated (i) narrative synthesis, (ii) iterative semi‑structured dialogues with Sudanese practitioners (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7), and (iii) in‑depth case analysis across WASH, education, and protection.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eParticipants and sampling.\u003c/b\u003e Purposive and snowball strategies identified seven practitioners reflecting diverse roles, sectors, and lived experience, prioritising analytical depth over statistical representativeness.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eData collection.\u003c/b\u003e Dialogues followed a flexible topic guide derived from literature and research questions. Case materials included programme reports and practitioner documentation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eAnalysis.\u003c/b\u003e Manual thematic analysis (six‑phase approach) was used. The PPF tenets functioned as sensitising concepts; coding proceeded inductively to avoid forcing data into preconceived categories. Reflexive memoing and peer debriefing enhanced credibility.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eTriangulation and validation.\u003c/b\u003e Claims were cross‑checked across interviews, documents, and literature using a triangulation matrix. Divergences were interrogated rather than smoothed out.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePositionality and reflexivity. The researcher\u0026rsquo;s dual identity (insider practitioner/academic) was managed through a positionality journal and regular debriefs, shifting interpretations from bureaucratic to political readings where warranted.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEthics. Informed consent (verbal/written, context‑dependent) was obtained; pseudonyms and protective abstraction were used to minimise risk. Data were stored on encrypted devices; culturally adapted consent processes were offered. (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e[Insert Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e about here]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable 3: Participant characteristics and roles\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Tabc\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePseudonym\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRole\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSector\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYears of Experience\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProgramme Manager\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProtection\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eField Coordinator\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWASH\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM\u0026amp;E Officer\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHealth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLocal NGO Director\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eField Officer\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFood Security\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity Mobiliser\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProtection\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProgramme Officer\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMixed Sectors\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cem\u003e(Source: Primary Data)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e[Insert Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e about here]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable 4: Case‑selection rationale and key adaptive strategies\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Tabd\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCase\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRationale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKey Adaptive Strategy Illuminated\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUNICEF WASH Programme (Darfur)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExposes tensions between externally driven models and existing community structures; highlights proxy engagement.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity-led infrastructure (as intended); Proxy engagement via intermediaries.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLocal NGO Education Initiative (Blue Nile)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmbodies grassroots resistance and adaptation to reach marginalised mobile populations; highlights tactical hybridity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNomadic-inclusive curricula; Radio hubs and pictorial surveys (tactical hybridity).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUNHCR Mobile Protection Committees (MPCCs)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTests scalability and adaptation in conditions of high displacement and siege; highlights subversive intermediation and tactical hybridity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMobile committees (subversive intermediation); Blockchain feedback\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;solar radios (tactical hybridity).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cem\u003e(Source: Primary Data)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e[Insert Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e about here]\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTable 5: Illustrative triangulation matrix \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Tabe\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinding/Theme\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvidence from Semi-structured Interviews\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvidence from Programme Reports\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvidence from Literature Synthesis\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubversive Intermediation via Female Networks\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\"In many communities, women are not allowed to speak directly... so we worked through women's collective leaders... their influence is quiet but powerful.\" (P6, verbatim)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUNICEF (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) report on Darfur notes the critical role of \"informal distribution networks led by women\" in reaching excluded households.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAbdelnour \u0026amp; Abu Hashem (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) document how women\u0026rsquo;s informal networks in Zalingei, Darfur navigate checkpoints and patriarchal structures to deliver aid.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cem\u003e(Source: Primary Data)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Findings","content":"\u003cp\u003eThree interlocking themes constitute the participatory paradox in Sudan: (1) persistent operational barriers; (2) epistemic violence and knowledge hierarchies; and (3) gendered and intersectional marginalisation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.1 Operational barriers\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eVolatile security (checkpoints, hostilities), rigid donor logframes, quantification imperatives, and administrative cycles collide with fluid frontline realities, producing tokenistic engagement and normalised exclusion. Practitioners described relocating meetings repeatedly for safety and abandoning unsafe, workshop‑based models.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.2 Epistemic violence and knowledge hierarchies\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eExternally validated \u0026ldquo;best practices\u0026rdquo; displaced situated knowledge and oral, relational modes of evidence. Digital tools privileged connected, literate participants, deepening exclusion in low‑connectivity contexts. Skepticism toward indigenous systems (e.g., Judiyya) reflected enduring colonial hierarchies of evidence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.3 Intersectional exclusions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eGendered norms and clan politics shaped voice and influence; IDPs and minority clans were sidelined. Women\u0026rsquo;s presence in formal fora often failed to translate into power, while mobility rendered static workshops irrelevant to nomadic groups.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.4 Case vignettes: the paradox and its navigations\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eVignette 1 \u0026ndash; WASH in Darfur: subversive intermediation\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale mobilisers navigated checkpoints under low visibility, relayed needs, and sustained water infrastructure when formal committees were captured by elites. This brokerage leveraged gendered assumptions but entailed personal risk and reproduced some local hierarchies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eVignette 2 \u0026ndash; Nomadic education in Blue Nile: tactical hybridity\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCircuit‑rider mobilisers used solar radios, pictorial surveys, and oral storytelling across dialects to enable mobile participation. Donor demands for GPS/biometrics clashed with zero‑connectivity realities; mobile participation remained invisible to conventional MEL systems.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eVignette 3 \u0026ndash; Mobile protection near Khartoum: trust, risk, intermediaries\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen formal meetings were unsafe, midwives and local fixers acted as protection focal points, discreetly reporting incidents and coordinating distributions. Attempts to impose opaque digital tools met resistance where they threatened existing authority. (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e[Insert Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e about here]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable 6: Adaptive strategies—tactical hybridity \u0026 subversive intermediation (examples)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Tabf\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrategy Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescription\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExamples\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Hybridity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdaptation to informal social structures for cultural navigation and access.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale intermediaries in WASH programmes (P1, P6); trusted religious leaders for advocacy (P2).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTechnological Hybridity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdaptation of technology to overcome digital exclusion and security constraints.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSolar-powered radios and pictorial surveys for nomadic communities (P2, P7); blockchain with solar radios in MPCCs (P3).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProcess Hybridity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntegration of culturally resonant methods with modern tools.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTraditional mapping with digital transcription (P5); traditional drama with mobile messages (P6).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHuman Relay\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUtilising trusted community members and informal channels for feedback in challenging areas.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBasic mobile phones with community members for feedback via conversations and SMS in siege areas (P7).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubversive Intermediation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLocal actors operating in \"grey zones,\" leveraging informal power to bridge gaps and circumvent obstacles.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWomen's collectives, circuit riders, local fixers, market traders, and traditional birth attendants (P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, P7); personal networks for checkpoint releases (P3); market traders negotiating aid passage (P7); and NGO persistence despite donor pressure (P5).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cem\u003e(Source: Primary Data)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"6. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe findings recast \u0026lsquo;adaptation\u0026rsquo; as political craft rather than neutral flexibility. Tactical hybridity forges hybrid forums that bypass state control and audit‑centric surveillance; subversive intermediation converts social trust into humanitarian access and protection. Together, these form reparative infrastructures that mend both social fabric and programmatic failures. The PPF thus directly contests the anti‑politics machine by centring embodied epistemologies and re‑politicising adaptation while acknowledging risks (e.g., exposure of intermediaries, co‑optation of hybridity).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.1 Implications\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eTheory\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eProvides an actionable route to operationalise decolonial and feminist critiques; positions practitioners and intermediaries as theory‑generating actors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003ePolicy \u0026amp; funding\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eShift from risk aversion to risk‑as‑solidarity; provide flexible core funding to grassroots collectives; legitimise low‑visibility intermediaries without exposing them; use \u0026ldquo;Trojan‑horse\u0026rdquo; framing to negotiate change within incumbent systems.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMEL: Replace indicatorism with pluriversal outcome harvesting\u0026mdash;co‑define success with communities; use story circles, participatory photography, and narrative change tracking; triangulate across informal channels. (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e[Insert Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e about here]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable 7: Policy \u0026 funding recommendations as decolonial demands\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Tabg\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRecommendation Area\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpecific Action\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDecolonial Praxis\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAbolishing Epistemic Violence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMandate community-controlled \"Ethical and Design Review Boards\" with veto power over projects.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eEpistemic restitution\u003c/b\u003e: Transfers interpretive and design authority to communities (Tuhiwai Smith, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReforming MEL as Liberatory Practice\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReplace rigid logframes with \"Pluriversal Outcome Harvesting,\" allowing communities to co-define success.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCentres indigenous metrics of well-being; shifts accountability from donors to communities (Chilisa, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFunding as Reparation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChannel direct, flexible, core funding to grassroots collectives (e.g., Darfuri women\u0026rsquo;s groups).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRepairs extractive legacies of aid and abolishes the gatekeeping role of INGOs (Abdelnour \u0026amp; Abu Hashem, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePractising Productive Discomfort\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMandate critical reflexivity and decolonial praxis training for all international staff.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreats community feedback as institutional learning and a source of political insight, not \"beneficiary\" data extraction.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cem\u003e(Source: Primary Data)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.2 Operationalising the PPF\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis article presents a programme‑cycle matrix mapping tenets to design, delivery, and MEL choices.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePolicy \u0026amp; Practice Box\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiagnose the paradox: look for security‑driven exclusions, elite capture, and digital bias.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne tactical hybridity move: combine radio feedback with pictorial surveys and women‑only story circles.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eSafe intermediation: design low‑visibility roles, map risks, and create discreet reporting pathways.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eMEL shift: light‑touch outcome harvesting with community‑defined indicators of change.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e[Insert Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e about here]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable 8: Operational matrix for the PPF (design–delivery–MEL) \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Tabh\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTenet\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDesign\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDelivery\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMonitoring \u0026amp; Evaluation (M\u0026amp;E)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eValuing Embodied Epistemologies\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIdentification and mapping of informal knowledge systems; engagement of local elders, women's collectives, and youth groups in a co-design capacity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrioritisation of oral, symbolic, and experiential methodologies (e.g., storytelling, participatory drama, ritual); utilisation of local idioms and metaphors to ensure conceptual resonance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDefinition of success metrics using locally derived indicators (e.g., reduction in social tension, increased inter-communal trust); employment of qualitative, narrative-based assessment tools.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmbracing Tactical Hybridity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEarly-stage integration of analogue and digital tools (e.g., combining Global Positioning System (GPS) data with community sketch maps); contingency planning for technological deficits.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmployment of multi-modal communication channels (e.g., pictorial surveys, solar-powered radios, WhatsApp audio messages); adaptation of formats to accommodate varying mobility and literacy levels.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTriangulation of data from formal and informal sources; tracking of informal indicators (e.g., frequency of unsolicited community feedback, observed shifts in local norms).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLeveraging Subversive Intermediation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIdentification of trusted community intermediaries (e.g., midwives, market traders); formalisation of the roles of informal actors within risk and stakeholder analyses.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmpowerment of intermediaries with flexible mandates; facilitation of informal negotiation protocols for humanitarian access and protection.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSystematic collection of intermediary feedback via audio logs, telecommunication, or observational records; analysis of adaptive workarounds and informal successes as valid programmatic outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cem\u003e(Source: Primary Data)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"7. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe participatory paradox in Sudan is structural, produced by Eurocentric templates, donor accountability regimes, and epistemic hierarchies. Practitioners and communities sustain humanitarianism through reparative infrastructures of tactical hybridity and subversive intermediation. The PPF consolidates these mechanisms as a decolonial orientation for design, shifting from inclusion as procedure to epistemic justice as foundation, and suggesting a comparative research agenda across fractured‑sovereignty settings.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionList\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eAPC\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eArticle Processing Charge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eIDP\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInternally Displaced Person\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eMEL\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMonitoring, Evaluation and Learning\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eMPCC\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMobile Protection Community Committee\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eNGO\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNon-Governmental Organization\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003ePPF\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePluriversal Participation Framework\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eUNHCR\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnited Nations High Commissioner for Refugees\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eUNICEF\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnited Nations Children's Fund\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eUNOCHA\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnited Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eWASH\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWater, Sanitation, and Hygiene\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eWHO\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWorld Health Organization\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Limitations and Future Research","content":"\u003cp\u003eSecurity constraints limited direct and sustained community access, increasing reliance on practitioner narratives and case documentation. This mirrors the same architectures of violence and risk management that restrict humanitarian access. Future work should test the PPF comparatively and longitudinally, tracing how intermediated participation evolves under changing conflict dynamics.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e​Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate This research was approved by the University of York Department of Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee (HSRec). The study was conducted in accordance with the University of York’s Research Code of Practice and Ethics. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their involvement in the study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eClinical trial number\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eClinical trial number: not applicable.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe author conceptualised the study, conducted the literature synthesis and practitioner dialogues, analysed the data, and drafted the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWith gratitude to Dr. Claudia Milena Adler and to the Sudanese practitioners who contributed their time and expertise under significant risk.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDue to insecurity and the risk of harm to participants operating in contested humanitarian spaces, qualitative interview data are not publicly available. De‑identified excerpts supporting the conclusions are included within the article.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbdalla M (2017) Intersectional violence in Khartoum\u0026rsquo;s IDP camps: Gendered exclusion in humanitarian spaces. J Refugee Stud 30(3):345\u0026ndash;362\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbdalla M (2022) Gendered exclusion in Khartoum\u0026rsquo;s IDP camps revisited. J Refugee Stud 35(2):210\u0026ndash;228\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbdelnour S, Abu-Elgasim M (2021) Eurocentric models vs. indigenous praxis: The Judiyya system in Darfur. Third World Q 42(5):876\u0026ndash;893\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbdelnour S, Abu Hashem A (2022) In the shadows of the state: Women\u0026rsquo;s informal networks and aid delivery in Zalingei, Darfur. Rift Valley Institute\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbdul-Jalil MA (2008) The Judiyya system: Conflict resolution in Darfur. In: Ahmed AM, ElBattahani AA (eds) Darfur: Dimensions of crisis and challenges of peace. University of Khartoum, pp 123\u0026ndash;145\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAhmed I, Green RH (1999) Clan-based aid delivery in Somalia: Adaptation or complicity? J Mod Afr Stud 37(2):207\u0026ndash;228\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAli M, Abass A (2023) Sudan\u0026rsquo;s fractured sovereignty and humanitarian access. J North Afr Stud 28(1):55\u0026ndash;75\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArnstein SR (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Inst Planners 35(4):216\u0026ndash;224\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAutesserre S (2014) Peaceland: Conflict resolution and the everyday politics of international intervention. Cambridge University Press\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBayat A (2007) Making Islam democratic: Social movements and the post-Islamist turn. Stanford University Press\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBerridge WJ (2021) \u003cem\u003eCivil uprising and aid coordination in Sudan\u0026rsquo;s 2019 revolution\u003c/em\u003e (Working Paper No. 45). Sudan Studies Centre\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBoege V, Brown A, Clements K, Nolan A (2009) Hybrid political orders in fragile states. Int Peacekeeping 16(5):665\u0026ndash;683\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBradbury M, Healy S (2010) Whose peace is it anyway? Connecting grassroots and elite peace processes in Somalia. Accord 21:34\u0026ndash;39\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBraun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Res Psychol 3(2):77\u0026ndash;101\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChambers R (1994) Participatory rural appraisal (PRA): Challenges, potentials and paradigms. World Dev 22(10):1437\u0026ndash;1454\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChandler D (2020) The world of the pluriverse. Millennium: J Int Stud 48(3):346\u0026ndash;364\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChilisa B (2019) Indigenous research methodologies. SAGE\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCooke B, Kothari U (eds) (2001) Participation: The new tyranny? Zed Books\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCornwall A, Brock K (2005) What do buzzwords do for development policy? Third World Q 26(7):1043\u0026ndash;1060\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCrenshaw K (1989) Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex. Univ Chic Legal Forum 1989(1):139\u0026ndash;167\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ede Sousa Santos B (2014) Epistemologies of the South: Justice against epistemicide. Routledge\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ede Waal A (2018) Mass starvation: The history and future of famine. Polity\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDuffield M (2018) Post-humanitarianism: Governing precarity in the digital age. Polity\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEchevarria AJII (2016) Operating in the gray zone: An alternative paradigm for U.S. military strategy. U.S. Army War College\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eElnour E (2018) Double erasure: Nomadic women and participatory exclusion in Sudan. Gend Dev 26(3):421\u0026ndash;438\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEscobar A (1995) Encountering development: The making and unmaking of the Third World. Princeton University Press\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFals Borda O (1987) The application of participatory action-research in Latin America. Int Sociol 2(4):329\u0026ndash;347\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFerguson J (1990) The anti-politics machine: \u0026lsquo;Development,\u0026rsquo; depoliticization, and bureaucratic power in Lesotho. Cambridge University Press\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFinlay L (2002) Negotiating the swamp: The opportunity and challenge of reflexivity in research practice. Qualitative Res 2(2):209\u0026ndash;230\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFricker M (2007) Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHaraway D (1988) Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Stud 14(3):575\u0026ndash;599\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHarding S (2004) Standpoint theory as a site of political, philosophic, and scientific debate. Signs 29(4):973\u0026ndash;987\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHeleta S (2016) Decolonisation of higher education: Dismantling epistemic violence and Eurocentrism in South Africa. Transformation High Educ 1(1):1\u0026ndash;8\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHolt PM, Daly MW (1979) The history of the Sudan: From the coming of Islam to the present day. Weidenfeld and Nicolson\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eInternational Rescue Committee (2024) Sudan humanitarian access and response report. IRC\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKothari A, Salleh A, Escobar A, Demaria F, Acosta A (eds) (2019) Pluriverse: A post-development dictionary. Tulika Books\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLandis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1):159\u0026ndash;174\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLincoln YS, Guba EG (1985) Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMajid H, Harmer A (2020) Navigating the dual state: Humanitarian action in Houthi- and Hadi-controlled Yemen. ODI\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMamdani M (2012) Define and rule: Native as political identity. Harvard University Press\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMaxwell D, Adan G, Majid N (2016) Aid and power in protracted crises: The case of Sudan. Humanitarian Policy Group Report). ODI\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMenkhaus K (2006) Governance without government in Somalia. Int Secur 31(3):74\u0026ndash;106\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMignolo WD (2011) The darker side of Western modernity: Global futures, decolonial options. Duke University Press\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNdlovu-Gatsheni SJ (2020) Decolonization, development and knowledge in Africa: Turning over a new leaf. Pluto\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePaffenholz T (2015) Unpacking the local turn in peacebuilding. Third World Q 36(5):825\u0026ndash;850\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePillow W (2003) Confession, catharsis, or cure? Rethinking the uses of reflexivity. Int J Qualitative Stud Educ 16(2):175\u0026ndash;196\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRamalingam B, Laric M, Primrose J (2014) From best practice to best fit. Dev Policy Rev 28(3):359\u0026ndash;376\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eScott JC (1985) Weapons of the weak: Everyday forms of peasant resistance. Yale University Press\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmith LT (1999) Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. Zed Books\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmith LT (2012) Decolonizing methodologies, 2nd edn. Zed Books\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSpivak GC (1988) Can the subaltern speak? In: Nelson C, Grossberg L (eds) Marxism and the interpretation of culture. University of Illinois Press, pp 271\u0026ndash;313\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSuliman M (2021) \u003cem\u003eColonial legacies in Sudanese humanitarianism\u003c/em\u003e (Sudanese Policy Forum Working Paper 12). Sudanese Policy Forum\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTobin SA (2010) Militarized governance in Darfur. J Mod Afr Stud 48(4):553\u0026ndash;574\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUNHCR (2020) \u003cem\u003eAnnual protection report: Sudan operations\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUNHCR (2022) \u003cem\u003eAnnual protection report: Sudan operations\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUNICEF (2020) \u003cem\u003eWASH programme evaluation: Darfur region, Sudan\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUNOCHA (2023) \u003cem\u003eSudan humanitarian needs overview 2023\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVlassenroot K, Raeymaekers T (2004) The politics of rebellion and intervention in Ituri. Afr Affairs 103(412):385\u0026ndash;412\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWHO (2023) Cholera response in Sudan: Situation report. World Health Organization\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"participation, decolonial humanitarianism, epistemic justice, Sudan, tactical hybridity, subversive intermediation, pluriverse, fractured sovereignty","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8749108/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8749108/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis article reframes the \u0026lsquo;participatory paradox\u0026rsquo; in Sudan\u0026mdash;where well‑intended participation reproduces exclusion and epistemic injustice\u0026mdash;by offering an empirically grounded, decolonial alternative: the Pluriversal Participation Framework (PPF). Using a qualitative, practitioner‑centred design rooted in decolonial feminist epistemology, the study integrates a narrative synthesis, iterative dialogues with seven Sudanese practitioners positioned as co‑theorists, and three sectoral case analyses (WASH in Darfur; nomadic education in Blue Nile; mobile protection committees near Khartoum). Thematic analysis reveals that insecurity, donor logframe rigidity, and colonial knowledge hierarchies render participation simultaneously mandatory and structurally constrained. Practitioners respond through patterned strategies\u0026mdash;tactical hybridity (blending analogue/digital tools and formal/informal channels) and subversive intermediation (low‑visibility brokers who leverage social trust). These constitute \u0026lsquo;reparative infrastructures\u0026rsquo; that keep humanitarianism alive in the grey zones where formal systems fail. The PPF advances three tenets: valuing embodied epistemologies, embracing tactical hybridity, and leveraging subversive intermediation. It reframes adaptation as political craft and sets out implications for MEL, funding, and ethics (including pluriversal outcome harvesting and risk‑as‑solidarity). The article concludes by situating Sudan within wider fractured‑sovereignty contexts and outlining a research agenda for testing the framework comparatively.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Beyond the Participatory Paradox in Sudan: A Pluriversal Participation Framework for Humanitarian Design","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-02-16 08:46:51","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8749108/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"7174f4b8-7c8a-4e2c-8d8e-ceee687e9df9","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 16th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-02-26T08:27:07+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-02-16 08:46:51","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8749108","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8749108","identity":"rs-8749108","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}