Volunteer programs, empowerment, and life satisfaction in Jordan: mapping local knowledge and systems change to inform public policy and science diplomacy

Abstract

IntroductionVolunteering in the community is thought to provide unique benefits to people who experience limited engagement in society. In the global South, volunteer programs are often framed as empowering women and benefiting the poor, without empirical evidence or systematic investigation of what this means from a local perspective. For this reason, it is critical to represent stakeholder knowledge, understand how change happens systemically, and reduce cultural bias in scientific inquiry and public policy. As such, efforts to respect diverse narratives and problem-solving approaches are key to science diplomacy – they help us understand cultural relevance, program efficacy, and for whom a program is considered transformative.Methods and resultsThis study shows how Syrian refugee and Jordanian women, living in resource-poor families, articulated (i) concepts of empowerment and life satisfaction and (ii) the benefits of engaging in community-based volunteering programs. Through engaging in a participatory methodology known as Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping, women generated visual representations of these constructs and cause-and-effect reasoning. They identified several dimensions of empowerment (e.g., cultural, financial, and psychological empowerment) and several meanings of life satisfaction (e.g. adaptation, acceptance, and contentment). They also mapped connections between variables, identifying those that might catalyze change. We were specifically interested in evaluating understandings of We Love Reading, a program that trains volunteers to become changemakers in their local community. In simulations, we modelled how employment, education, money, and volunteering would drive system change, with notable results on cultural empowerment.DiscussionThrough visual maps and scenarios of change, the study demonstrates a participatory approach to localizing knowledge and evaluating programs. This is key to improving scientific enquiry and public policy.