1.1 Research begins with stakeholder needs
Projects should be community driven. Rather than research agendas being set by research institutions and ‘experts’, stakeholders are engaged at the earliest stage of the process to identify priorities from the perspective of those most affected by the research.

1.2 Include all stakeholders
Identify and be inclusive of all those affected, or potentially affected, by the research process and outcomes. Successful research partnerships should clearly recognise communities within the problem domain as units of identity (e.g. communities of place, communities of practice). To recognise communities in this way, it will be necessary to understand the social, economic, political and cultural landscape. This will be time consuming, but the goal is to build on the strengths and resources within the broader community. Identifying key community partners will also be needed. The process of stakeholder identification can be assisted by assessing existing relationships within current projects, holding public meetings and forums, and accessing local sources of information through various media. It may be necessary to consider incentives to enhance inclusiveness.

2.1 Respect all participants
All participants are respected and encouraged to contribute to the process without censure. Each individual is viewed as bringing a unique angle to the research problem. An atmosphere of trust is needed to encourage this open sharing of views. Recognising people’s strengths leads to increased awareness of their existing resources and mobilises them to help themselves (Orford 2008).

2.2 Work within existing cultural protocols
Working within cultural protocols requires knowledge, skill, sensitivity and goodwill. It is always wise to consult with a cultural representative to ensure that research processes and interventions are culturally appropriate.

2.3 Build mutual trust
Building mutual trust is vitally important in interdependent relationships. Distrust can undermine relationships in a way that leads to an entire breakdown of the affiliation, or lead to decreased productivity toward mutual goals, loss of morale, and even commitment of scarce resources to repair damage. Trust is built through integrity and consistency, and through the shared belief that you can rely on each other. Overcoming distrust in relation to commonly held perceptions of institutions, researchers and outsiders generally will take time, consistency and commitment. Understanding the social, economic, political and cultural landscape of specific communities’ will also take time and sensitivity.

3.1 Maximise opportunities for participation
Participatory research is a democratic process that requires equal opportunities for participation. The issue of overcommitted stakeholders may mean that, in many cases, not everybody will need or want to be involved in every issue all of the time. It is likely that people may be partially involved during various phases of the project, but these people should be kept informed. Maximising opportunities for participation will build on the strengths and resources within the community.

3.2 Stakeholders are co-researchers (involve and train)
CBPR is intended to facilitate collaborative, equitable involvement of all partners in all phases of the research, as well as fostering a climate of co-learning. It will be necessary to ensure involvement of stakeholders as co-researchers and provide appropriate training where necessary. Opportunities for instrumental learning (e.g. administrative functions) and communicative learning (e.g. understanding another’s world view) are important as they contribute to incremental and transformative adaptation within social-ecological systems. Data collection methods should be flexible to the circumstances of the project, however they should be understood and agreed.
Some considerations will include
(i) who will collect the data; (ii) training required; (iii) the creation, nature and process of instruments used (e.g. validity and reliability versus tailoring to needs); and (iv) compliance with institutional requirements (e.g. funding agencies).

3.3 Researchers are stakeholders
Researchers are not seen as being outside the research problem assessing objectively, but are rather stakeholders with their own set of subjective biases and viewpoints. The research process should promote personal change both for participants and researchers.

4.1 Maximise access to information
Maximising access to information within the project group will help to keep the process open and transparent, increase participant’s perceptions of inclusiveness, and will capitalize on participant involvement. Agreements should also be reached among the group on the protocols for sharing information beyond the immediate project to get the most out of the learning outcomes and benefits gained.

4.2 Encourage multi-party communication
Encouraging and engaging in a dialogical approach will enhance critical awareness.

5.1 Develop visions and objectives together (develop research questions together)
Community partnerships are established at the earliest phases of the project in such a way that problem definition, research objectives and research questions are designed together. In other words, stakeholders have real input and control over the research process and the design of the research study. Clear missions or visions for the project will be critical. Joint ownership will provide opportunity for participants to have input into how the project will be organised and the directions it will take. The goal is to promote a co-learning and empowering process that attends to social inequalities. It is during this phase that a number of practical considerations will need to be defined. These may include, agreed norms and processes, agreements in relation to in-kind support, the balance between scientific rigour and community acceptability, joint submission of grants, potential risks to the community from the research, establishment of advisory boards or others.

5.2 Promote cooperative rather than competitive structures
Cooperative structures encourage opportunities to gain from each others efforts, recognise the link to a common fate, be aware of individuals as well as the whole, and to celebrate achievements together. These structures are more likely to: (i) promote improved learning and achievement; (ii) increase participant retention; (iii) enhance participant satisfaction with the research experience; and (iv) improve communication and social processes

6.1 Allow situations to develop organically
CBPR processes are, ideally, cyclical and iterative in nature. Some key qualities in this regard are flexibility within processes and approaches, openness and intuitiveness. It will be necessary to consider issues of time, given that organic development is not usually mindful of funding cycles or other commitments

7.1 Provide access to a wide range of knowledge and decision-making tools
Decisions on how knowledge will be disseminated throughout the research, and beyond, ideally would be discussed when developing visions and objectives together. There are many ways to share knowledge and many useful decision support tools, but they will only be as valuable as the particular needs of the group and their specific context defines. For example, identifying the research problem might make use of tools such as key informant interviews, focus groups, Delphi technique, a nominal group technique, or some other. The ultimate and ideal choice will be reliant on the specific needs of the group, as defined by themselves, and will include an understanding of group dynamics and cultural factors.

7.2 Share information and networks
Findings, knowledge gained and networks should be disseminated to all partners throughout the project.

8.1 Share responsibility
The foundation of CBPR is that all individuals and/or groups have an opportunity for meaningful participation.  Sharing responsibility empowers and engenders commitment to project outcomes. However, caution should be exercised when there is ambiguity about who is responsible for an action, or its results. The consequence can be that no one is truly accountable.

8.2 Ensure community benefits from the process
The processes, integration of knowledge, outcomes and interventions of the project, should be to the mutual benefit of all partners and benefit communities more broadly, building and enhancing assets. The ultimate goal is to transform the social reality of the participants by increasing their degree of control and empowerment.

9.1 Aim for consensus and mutual ownership
CBPR is moving from public involvement that meant informing and educating the public to involvement that means receiving information from, and being educated by, the public and finally mutual agreement and ownership among interested parties. A key question for participatory processes is whether public involvement created by raising and articulating interests can lead to consensus or agreement sufficient for action. In difficult controversies complete consensus may be difficult to achieve, but it is nonetheless the goal.

9.2 Create transparent decision-making processes
Lack of transparency in the decision-making process can cause doubt and uncertainty, leading to loss of faith and trust and ultimately reducing the quality of outcomes. Transparent decision-making can be achieved through inclusiveness, good communication, clear and agreed decision-making criteria based on core purpose and articulated values, supporting agreed rules of engagement, and supporting and doing what is actually said and promised. Community partners should be provided with a real opportunity to influence project direction, and to ensure the goals, mission and methods of the project are adhered to.

9.3 Build mutual understanding and reach consensus on intellectual property

9.4 Build mutual understanding and reach consensus on distribution of benefits

9.5 Disseminate results equitably
Participants should be involved in the analysis and interpretation of data as well as having input into how results are distributed. The objective is to provide opportunity for the community to make their views clear about the interpretation of data prior to final publication, and to ensure results are disseminated in useful terms.

10.1 Be proactive about learning from the process
Proactive learning involves manipulating the learning environment to maximise opportunities to learn, and to apply or transfer that learning to appropriate situations. Various participants will have different ways of how they “learn best” (e.g. visual, ‘hands-on’ etc.), and this should be taken into account in the design stages of the project. Recognising the ideal methods of learning within a specific project or context and then initiating that learning is a proactive approach.

10.2 Monitor and evaluate the collaboration

10.3 Provide feedback on the process

11.1 Apply the results
Rather than stopping or stalemating decision processes and action, as some sectors view the result of public involvement, participatory processes should produce practical knowledge that is useful to people in the everyday conduct of their lives. To foster this outcome, the results of the research need to be applied in a practical and authentic setting. Moving from problem to decision and finally action can take longer with participatory processes however, once it is taken, implementation should be rapid and more solid.

11.2 Build on the achievements
Building on achievements will create momentum, enthusiasm and generally lead to long-term, sustainable processes that are much wider and transformational than the focus of the initial research questions. Productive partnerships should be encouraged to continue beyond the life of the project, making it more likely that research findings will be incorporated into ongoing programs and therefore enhance the benefits to the associated communities. Participants should also be empowered to initiate their own research to address needs they identify themselves.

11.3 Be explicit about exit strategies
While promoting and encouraging ongoing productive partnerships between researchers and communities is a positive and desirable outcome, it is also important to clearly articulate exit strategies from specific research projects. The goal is to empower communities and to encourage self-determination and action, rather than create a co-dependent relationship. The ultimate test of the success, or otherwise, of community-based participatory research is the emergence of self-co-ordinating communities that begin to identify and design their own research projects and initiate social change based on that research. It may be necessary to clearly define a process for transitioning from grant dependency, ideally establishing sources for ongoing funding and infrastructure support early in the project.