# A meaningful performative experience: Using Forum Theatre as an ethical method in sustainability science

María Mancilla García, Lena Bertemes Lalia, Marlino Mubai, Tilman Hertz, Elizabeth Maria Drury O’neill, Caroline Abunge, Salomão Olinda Bandeira, François Bousquet, Christopher Cheupe, Dadivo José Combane, et al.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

## To cite this version:

María Mancilla García, Lena Bertemes Lalia, Marlino Mubai, Tilman Hertz, Elizabeth Maria Drury O’neill, et al.. A meaningful performative experience: Using Forum Theatre as an ethical method in sustainability science. Sustainability Science, 2025, 15 p. 10.1007/s11625-025-01699-3. hal-05246294

HAL Id: hal-05246294

https://hal.science/hal-05246294v1

Submitted on 9 Sep 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of scientific research documents, whether they are published or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

# A meaningful performative experience: using Forum Theatre as an ethical method in sustainability science

María Mancilla García<fnref n="1" />,<fnref n="2" />,□ · Lena Bertemes Lalia<fnref n="2" /> · Marlino Mubai<fnref n="7" />,<fnref n="8" /> · Tilman Hertz<fnref n="1" /> · Elizabeth Maria Drury O’Neill<fnref n="1" /> · Caroline Abunge<fnref n="3" /> · Salomão Olinda Bandeira<fnref n="4" /> · François Bousquet<fnref n="5" /> · Christopher Cheupe<fnref n="3" /> · Dadivo José Combane<fnref n="6" /> · Tim Daw<fnref n="1" /> · Nyawira Muthiga<fnref n="3" /> · Halimu Shauri<fnref n="9" /> · Taís Sonetti González<fnref n="2" />

Received: 1 July 2024 / Accepted: 3 April 2025

© The Author(s) 2025

## Abstract

Sustainability scientists have engaged in extensive discussions on ethical ways of doing research and argued on the importance of co-production approaches to counter knowledge extractivism. The specific issue of research fatigue, often associated with knowledge extractivism, and the possible methods to counter it, have however received less attention. This paper seeks to contribute to discussions on ethical ways of doing research by focusing on our experience of using theatre, specifically, Forum Theatre, to investigate divergent perceptions of environmental change and related tensions among selected coastal communities in Kenya and Mozambique. We argue that Forum Theatre constitutes an ethical method for sustainability scientists for four reasons: (i) it allows to co-produce knowledge with participants; (ii) it facilitates horizontal exchange; (iii) it creates joyful moments; and (iv) it enables the transmission of skills that remain with participants beyond project durations. The paper engages with these four themes, first theoretically and then proposing a reflection based on our project experience. In the last section, we warn against some of the limitations of the approach.

**Keywords** Theatre · Knowledge co-production · Knowledge dissemination · Joy · Ethical research · Research fatigue

## Introduction

The issue of knowledge extractivism has long been discussed (Baldauf and Palacios 2022; Demart 2024; Grosfoguel 2020; Brunger and Wall 2016) including among sustainability

scholars (Backhouse 2021). Knowledge extractivism is an ethical and epistemological problem, where local realities are conceived as containers of data accessed by researchers who turn it into knowledge, a process that, in this view, is exclusive to academics. As an epistemological problem, the issue of knowledge extractivism has opened a discussion on

Handled by Kei Otsuki, Utrecht University, The Netherlands.

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

<footnote>María Mancilla García
maria.mgarcia@su.se</footnote>

<footnote n="1">1. Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Frescativägen 8, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2. Socio-Environmental Dynamics Research Group, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Avenue Franklin Roosevelt 50, CP 130/02, 1050 Brussels, Belgium</footnote>

<footnote n="3">3. Wildlife Conservation Society Kenya, Kibaki Flats, Room N 12, PO Boc 99470, Mombasa 80107, Kenya</footnote>

<footnote n="4">4. Department of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, Eduardo Mondlane University, Av. Julius Nyerere, Nr. 3453 Caixa Postal No. 257, Maputo, Mozambique</footnote>

<footnote n="5">5. CIRAD Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique Pour le Développement, Avenue Agropolis, 34398 Montpellier Cedex 5, France</footnote>

<footnote n="6">6. Drama Department, Communication and Arts School, Eduardo Mondlane University, Av. Julius Nyerere, Nr. 3453 Caixa Postal No. 257, Maputo, Mozambique</footnote>

<footnote n="7">7. History Department, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Eduardo Mondlane University, Av. Julius Nyerere, Nr. 3453 Caixa Postal No. 257, Maputo, Mozambique</footnote>

<footnote n="8">8. Department of Heritage and Cultural Studies, University of Pretoria, Room 13, Level 18, Humanities Building, Private Bag X20, Hatfield 0028, South Africa</footnote>

<footnote n="9">9. Department of Social Sciences, Pwani University, P. O. Box 195-80108, Kilifi, Kenya</footnote>
methods. Extractive methodologies are seen as those that
translate local practices and narratives into predetermined
data categories, which serve only as inputs in the research
process. At best, researchers engaging in such practices
might provide feedback to communities on research
results independent of them. At worst, these practices
raise concerns about potential use of research to support
harmful interventions (Brunger and Wall 2016). Besides
its ethical and epistemological implications, extractivist
research practices are also responsible for producing a
general sentiment of mistrust towards researchers leading to
research fatigue (Ashley 2021; Taylor et al. 2021). Mistrust
hinders the possibility of any research—including ethical
co-production practices (Jacquet et al. 2021).

Different approaches to knowledge co-production have
been put forward to include participants in a meaningful
and ethical way, arguing for the relevance of these perspec-
tives for a fair and sustainable world (Caniglia et al. 2023;
Norström et al. 2020; Schneider et al. 2021; Jankowski et al.
2020). These approaches challenge the hegemonic domina-
tion of an understanding of knowledge that entails a hierar-
chy of “epistemological worth” wherein local knowledge is
at the bottom of the ladder (Walsh et al. 2023). They aim at
having different voices heard and different knowledge sys-
tems included in the process of producing knowledge.

This paper contributes to these discussions by focusing on
the experience of using theatre, and specifically, Forum The-
atre (FT), to investigate divergent perceptions of environ-
mental change and related tensions among selected coastal
communities in Kenya and Mozambique. FT is a type of
community theatre developed by Augusto Boal as part of
his work on the Theatre of the Oppressed, an understanding
of theatre as a tool for personal and collective emancipation
(Boal 1974; Coudray 2016). The Theatre of the Oppressed
is Boal’s counterproposal to classic theatre, of which he was
very critical. In his view, the tragedy system inherited from
ancient Greece aimed at instigating fear in the spectators that
were thus encouraged to purge their flaws. He saw the tra-
ditional conception of theatre as “restraining the individual,
adapting them to what preexists” (Boal 1985), i.e. as a tool
for order and resignation. Instead, inspired by Bretch’s focus
on marginalised people, he conceived of theatre as a tool to
transform society, and his theatrical innovations aimed at
rendering this possible. FT, one of such tools, consists of
the performance of short plays presenting a dilemma, con-
flict or tension the audience is familiar with. After the first
performance, a facilitator, called joker, invites the audience
to take over different roles, substituting the characters to
try and foster empathy, imagine different resolutions for the
given problem—typically by replacing a character that could
bring change into the situation—or provide further argu-
ments for one of the represented positions. In Boal’s first
proposal, oppression comes from the well-defined figure of

the oppressor. Yet, during his time working in Europe and
North America, Boal developed a reflection on cases that
did not fit well the oppressor-oppressed dichotomy (Sajnani
et al. 2020). To address situations of internalised oppres-
sion he invented the concept of “Cops in the Head”, which
conveys psychological forms of oppression such as fear
or guilt (Boal 1995). This process was an integral part of
how Boal conceived of the Theatre of the Oppressed, as an
approach evolving with time and through the experiences
that it triggered.

Using theatre as a research method has been experi-
mented with for some time (Euzen and Bordet 2008; Fourat
and Jankowski 2023; Sappa and Barabasch 2020; Schechner
1985; McCammon 2007). It has been used as part of a desire
to bring about change in the way researchers *do* research
(Collins and Stockton 2022; Cahill 2006; Grandi 2022) and
lessen communities’ burden caused by repetitive research
demands (Brunger and Wall 2016). There are different forms
of popular theatre, such as community theatre, social theatre
or applied theatre (Conrad 2004). These arts-based meth-
odologies are mobilised in participatory research processes
as participants (literally) represent and give sense to their
own realities (Fourat and Jankowski 2023). In sustainabil-
ity science, FT has been used mainly to create spaces for
marginalised voices (Brown et al. 2017; Walsh et al. 2023;
Olvera-Hernández et al. 2023; Heras et al. 2016), but also
as part of a broader engagement with arts-based methods
to study emotions and non-rational ways of knowing in
human-nature relationships (Heras and Tàbara 2014; Heras
et al. 2021; Galafassi et al. 2018; Morales and Harris 2014;
Sullivan et al. 2008).

Berchon and Bousquet (2021) identify four types of FT, which aim at different purposes, echoing Boal’s openness towards reinterpretation of his methods: the Theatre of the Oppressed, the theatre of relational development, awareness theatre and complexity Forum Theatre. The Theatre of the Oppressed, the closest to Boal’s original idea, mainly aims at denouncing and addressing a situation of oppression; the theatre of relational development seeks to improve personal relationships by working on individual positions; awareness theatre transmits a given message and initiates dialogue over it; and the theatre of complexity questions the multiple roles individuals and systemic structures take in a given problem or issue while exploring possible ways forward. The rules in place for the performances might change from one approach to the other. For example, in the original Theatre of the Oppressed, Boal did not consider the possibility of replacing the oppressor, whereas in other approaches and applications, all—including the oppressor and even the joker—can be replaced.

More recently, Miramonti et al. proposed an adapted ver-
sion of FT, which they call Forum Theatre for Reconcilia-
tion, in a context of socio-environmental conflicts where

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>
the involved actors held similar positions and power endow-
ments (2024). Indeed, they worked with different commu-
nities in Bolivia affected by wildfires. These experiences
exacerbate tensions between them and lead to polarisation
and processes of dehumanising the other. Their approach
seeks to foster (re)humanising empathy and craft complex
and inclusive narratives on the conflicts, to devise collective
responses.

Importantly, these different approaches should not be
taken as boxes with thick boundaries, but as practices that
influence each other.

Our use of FT reflects an understanding close to what Berchon and Bousquet (2021) call the theatre of complexity, while incorporating elements of other approaches, as we will see through the text, sometimes having to navigate tensions between these different conceptions.

We argue here that FT constitutes an ethical method per
se and against research fatigue in particular by bringing
together four elements: firstly, it effectively provides space
for different voices to be heard as they express knowledge
in diverse terms, including, through emotions, respecting
the spirit of knowledge co-production practices. Secondly,
and directly deriving from that, theatre is an effective tool
for communication, facilitating dialogue between differ-
ent participants and researchers. Thirdly, it creates a joyful
moment making the research time worth it by itself. Lastly,
it provides participants with skills that remain with them
beyond project durations.

The core of the paper is divided into four sections that
follow the above themes (see Fig. 1). In each section, we
first present a discussion on the debates in the arts-based
methods literature about the given theme, which we then
complete with a subsection analysing our data and showing
why and how the points raised are particularly relevant for
sustainability science. We decide to structure the paper as

a four-themed conversation between the literature and our
experience hoping to create a dynamic structure, instead of
following the traditional academic paper structure in which
a theoretical framework precedes the results, which are
followed by a discussion where the results confirm, refine
or contradict what the literature has said. We choose to write
our results in this form as an attempt to provide a lighter and
fresher discussion of our experience, where the reader can
engage with each of the themes discussed sequentially, as
dialogue invitations. The last section of the paper cautions
against the limitations of the method.

Methods

This paper draws on the experience of the FOREL project, an action-research project that sought to explore perceptions and understandings of environmental changes in KaNyaka Island in Mozambique (see Fig. 2) and in Msambweni in Kenya (see Fig. 3). As an action-research project, besides answering its research questions, the project sought to support collective action among communities to face the challenges associated with environmental change. The project was conducted by an interdisciplinary team including sustainability scientists, drama scholars, historians, sociologists and marine biologists. Our team members were also of diverse origins. Some scholars were based in Sweden and Belgium, being originally from yet other countries in Europe and one from Latin America. Others were Mozambican scholars based in Mozambique. The team also included Kenyan scholars based in Kenya. Because of these differences in where we were located, we assumed different roles—and even more so, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic which prevented us from travelling from 2020. Local teams contributed to ensuring that our methods were relevant for the communities we were working with and applied them. The scholars in Europe provided outsider perspectives and feedback and led the data analysis in consultation with the local teams.

Our fieldwork was structured through two main phases,
which took place between 2019 and 2022. Data was
collected in Portuguese and Ronga in Mozambique and
in English and Kiswahili in Kenya. The first fieldwork
phase consisted of 100 interviews and 17 focus groups
investigating perceptions of environmental change and
daily practices in the selected sites, conceptualising
environmental change as entangled with other changes,
such as political, social or economic changes. The selection
of interview participants was done through a snowballing
technique, with field researchers requesting interviews first
to the communities' authorities and through contacts made
with specific groups such as fishers, traders or farmers that
were identified locally. The data collected during the first

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 1** The four components of Forum Theatre for addressing research fatigue and knowledge extractivism in scientific practices for sustainability</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 3** Field sites in
Mozambique</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

fieldwork phase was summarised and analysed through
a thematic analysis, which served as a basis to write the
theatre plays. One of our conclusions when analysing that
data was that perceptions of environmental change were
tightly linked to diagnoses on communities' problems.
Specifically, our interviewees often explained environmental
change as a loss of the community's capacity to face changes

collectively and they attributed responsibility for that loss to
different factors, which sometimes were seemingly unrelated
to social-ecological dynamics. As we argue elsewhere
(Mubai et al. 2023), engaging with seemingly 'only'
social problems, entails disentangling the root causes for
communities' tensions and thus allows understanding (and
potentially supporting) their collective action capacity in the

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>
face of environmental challenges, uncovering how social and environmental issues are entangled. Thus, the local teams, in coordination with the rest of us, and in the case of Kenya, in collaboration with a local theatre company, decided to focus the plays on what the interviewers had identified as root causes for tensions in the community, which in turn prevented collective action. As a result, in Kenya, one of the plays (Jekejeke, see Table 1) focuses on social problems ‘only’, apparently leaving the environment aside. Yet, the generational tensions described in the play rested on the belief that the youth were not interested in working the land or at sea.

The second fieldwork phase started with the performances which were occasionally filmed and during which participating researchers took notes. Drama scholars and performers were part of our project team in Mozambique, while in Kenya we worked with a professional theatre troupe. Actors were members of the communities who were recruited as part of the first fieldwork phase, asking those interviewed whether they would be interested in receiving training and taking part in theatre workshops. In Kenya, 15 women and 7 men received training. In Mozambique, 17 people were trained, 8 women and 9 men. No special skills were required to participate, so that a message of accessibility was conveyed. In Mozambique, over 80 people showed up to the plays, which were performed in three communities, Nyakeni, Ribjweni and Inguane. In Kenya, over 200 people attended the performances, organised in four communities in Msambweni and in four schools in the area. We invited all to stay for debriefing focus groups and post-performance interviews. We ran 28 post-performance individual interviews and 2 focus groups in Mozambique and 20 individual interviews and 3 focus groups in Kenya with those who chose to stay.

During the focus groups, a facilitator asked participants whether they could relate to what was represented in the plays and whether they had experienced similar situations

in their communities. The facilitators investigated how people felt about the explanations the plays suggested on environmental changes as well as how such changes affected the communities. As people shared, the facilitator asked them how they dealt with the identified problems in the communities and what they thought of the solutions represented in the plays. Finally, the last section of the debriefing sessions sought to unpack whether participants felt theatre was an appropriate way to discuss these issues and how seeing these issues performed made them feel. The interviews followed the same rationale, putting more emphasis on the personal experiences of those interviewed.

For the analysis of this data, on which the present paper focuses, we used an abductive thematic approach, i.e. an approach inspired both by theory (deductive) and our reading of the data (inductive) (Boyatzis 1998). We engaged in interpretative thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke 2022), in which we acknowledged our active role in shaping the themes identified in the data inductively and in selecting which theoretical aspects were relevant for the analysis. We worked as a team of coders, with three people reading the data and familiarising themselves with it through discussions. Then, based on the literature on theatre in the arts-based methods scholarship and particularly among sustainability scientists, we engaged in coding for references to knowledge co-production (theme 1) and communication and knowledge dissemination (theme 2), which were important themes in the literature and that we also found in our data. We also read our data and watched the videos of the performances to identify moments of enjoyment and fun (theme 3). Finally, the fourth theme of this paper, namely, the skills that the experience of theatre provided communities with, is something that inductively emerged from our interaction with the data. The details of our codes and sub-codes as well as their definitions are detailed in Table 2. Our aim was to provide an overview of the presence and spread of codes and sub-codes as well as to draw qualitative

<table><caption>**Table 1** Short summary of the plays, which can be read on the project's website</caption><thead><tr><td>Theatre play title and location</td><td>Summary</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Jekejeke, Kenya</td><td>Jekejeke focuses on early pregnancies, drug use and alcoholism. This play highlights the ongoing social problems of Msambweni community members</td></tr><tr><td>Ulitima, Kenya</td><td>Ulitima focuses on climate change, degradation of marine and terrestrial ecosystems, declining fishing and farming activities. Illegal fishing techniques such as the use of ring nets and the arrival of foreigners (Pemba) are perceived as significantly contributing to the problems of Msambweni</td></tr><tr><td>Only with small net?, Mozambique</td><td>In this play, the main character contemplates using a mosquito net for fishing, despite his wife's concerns about the health risks associated with malaria, emphasising the multiplicity of challenges faced by the community</td></tr><tr><td>Let's talk to the ancestors, Mozambique</td><td>"Let's Talk to the Ancestors" discusses beliefs about climate change and the role of local traditions, including ancestral rituals. Different characters share differing views on responsibility for climate issues. With the guidance of community leaders and a traditional healer, the characters confront their struggles and seek solutions through rituals to reconnect with their ancestors, highlighting the interplay of culture and environmental challenges</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>**Table 2** Coding scheme</caption><thead><tr><th>Codes</th><th>Sub-codes and explanation</th><th>Examples</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Theme 1: theatre as a tool for knowledge co-production</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Embodied knowledge</td><td>(1) Local experiences of environmental change<br>Experiences of local impacts of environmental change</td><td>"My farms are prejudiced by salinization. Cyclones destroy houses." (Mozambique)<br>"It is now too hot, something that is new here ... It is difficult to differentiate between long and short rain seasons. Low fish and crop production dominates our daily life now, unlike in the past where fish and food crops were harvested in abundance." (Kenya)</td></tr><tr><td>Theme 2: knowledge dissemination and communication towards a horizontal exchange</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Knowledge dissemination</td><td>Dissemination of information or knowledge regardless of the origin (from researchers, other community members) and the direction (to researchers, to other community members)</td><td>"We must preserve our traditions." (Mozambique)<br>"Children are expected to respect their parents and elders and conduct all the duties delegated to them." (Kenya)</td></tr><tr><td>Theme 3: arts-based research methods and joy</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Forum Theatre as celebratory theatre</td><td>(1) Enjoyment of the theatre method<br>Expressing joy in the theatre-viewing experience<br>(2) Enjoyment of having their stories told out loud<br>Expressing joy seeing stories that depict day-to-day realities played out<br>(3) Enjoyment of acting out change on stage<br>Experience of community members changing the outcome of the plays and feeling positive emotions about it</td><td>"In my opinion, it (the play) educates about what is wrong in the community." (Mozambique)<br>"The dialogue can help to create awareness on conservation and make people aware not to use bad fishing gear that is destructive to the marine environment, especially fish breeding grounds." (Kenya)</td></tr><tr><td>Theme 4: theatre as developing skills for change</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Transformative collective changes</td><td>Community members having seen the plays and aiming to change the course of actions on environmental change and communal organisation</td><td>"It is a good incentive to use theatre because it teaches through playing." (Mozambique)<br>"I learn (while) laughing." (Mozambique)<br>"It was very productive because all plays deal with issues that happen in the community." (Mozambique)<br>"Very good, the scenes matched the challenges faced by the community on the ground." (Kenya)<br>"I enjoyed the interventions of all." (Mozambique)<br>"They (interventions) felt good. It was a great opportunity to participate in the play so as to say what we have [to say] about the subject." (Mozambique)<br>"What is important is to continue dialoguing with fishermen so that they use appropriate fishing nets." (Mozambique)<br>"Through lobbying local leadership and advocacy efforts to partners and organisations working in environmental management and marine conservation." (Kenya)</td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>
nuances and examples from the created codes to discuss each of the themes. Since the data was coded in NVivo (a qualitative coding analysis software), we occasionally used some of the software features to illustrate or complement our analysis. Indeed, a Word Frequency Query, accounting for the 100 most listed words with a minimum length of 3 letters and taking all synonyms into account, was run within all sections coded as knowledge dissemination.

We provided all participants with a plain language statement on the project and asked them to sign a consent form that specified how data would be used and the fact that participants could withdraw their participation at any time. Participants were granted anonymity for the interviews, and we applied the Chatham House rule, i.e. that “participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed”, for the focus groups and theatre performances. When theatre performances were recorded, specific consent was sought from participants.

## Cases

We selected coastal sites in Kenya and Mozambique. Both sites lie in the WIO (Western Indian Ocean) region, home to large coastal societies, with cultures based on fishing, maritime trade and marine resources which go back hundreds of years (Maina et al. 2011; Ochieng et al. 2024). A huge fraction of the population, which is mainly low income, is dependent on coastal and marine resources, which currently experience (in)direct pressures from resource exploitation and habitat degradation as well as global climate changes (ibid).

### Msambweni in Kenya

Msambweni is located in Kwale County in the coastal region of Kenya, approximately 55.4 km south of Mombasa (Fig. 2). Msambweni refers to an Indigenous tree called “*Msambwe*”, “*Msambwe-ni’s*” literary meaning ‘where the Msambwe tree is’, or ‘the land of “Sambwe”’—hardy and wild fruits from the tree. Msambweni is mainly dominated by the Muslim Digo community (Save the Children 2010) and had 14,951 people in 2019 according to the census (Kenya National Bureau of Statistics 2019). Fishing is the primary source of income, coupled with small-scale commercial farming of mainly coconut, bixa (a fruit), mangoes and cashew nuts.

The community members also practise subsistence farming, mainly growing cassava, rice and maize, with a few growing peas and cowpeas for domestic use. Because of its serene beaches and coral reefs, the tourism industry is increasingly important with holiday cottages and hotels being built, as well as the nearby presence of facilities, e.g. shopping centres, banks, tour companies and restaurants (our

observations). The area has one of the highest concentrations of tourist resorts in Kenya (Barasa 2010).

Msambweni, like the wider Mombassa area, is endowed with important ecological habitats such as coral reefs, seagrass, mangroves and sacred Kaya forests (holy worship spaces for the ‘Mijikenda’, the nine Bantu speaking ethnic groups of the Kenyan coastal areas—including the Digo) (Barasa 2010; Park 2015). The marine ecosystems of Msambweni are major attractions for visitors: the area sports one of the world's largest unbroken fringing reefs (McClanahan and Young 1996). The Kwale area is home to multiple marine reserves and parks, i.e. Kisite Marine National Park, Mpunguti National Marine Reserve as well as various ecotourism projects dating back to the early 70s (Barasa 2010; Ochieng et al. 2024).

### KaNyaka in Mozambique

KaNyaka—or Inahaca—is an island situated to the south-east of Maputo, in southern Mozambique (Fig. 3). KaNyaka residents—slightly over 5000 people—mainly practise fishing and rain-fed agriculture (Mubai et al. 2023). Both agricultural products and marine invertebrates are key to the local diets, except for sea cucumber which is sold for export (Macia and Hernorth 1995). Migrant remittances, either from elsewhere in Mozambique or from South Africa, also constitute an important source of income in KaNyaka. Finally, the tourism industry, informal trading and construction work employ people typically on a short-term basis. According to the last census 43.5% of residents identify themselves as Christians from the Zion church (Instituto Nacional de Estatística 2017).

KaNyaka Island hosts subtropical coastal and marine ecosystems, including terrestrial dune forests, creeks and marshes. Mangrove forests, seagrass meadows, coral reefs, sand dunes, rocky shores, sandy and muddy beaches are also characteristic of the island. The pelagic area includes the waters of Maputo Bay and the Indian Ocean. In 1951, the first Marine Biology Research Institute in the Southern Hemisphere was opened on the island. Since then, it has been at the centre of nature conservation policies in the country (Enebrand 2012). In 2000, KaNyaka was integrated into Maputo city municipality. This was followed by its integration into the Marine Partial Reserve of Ponta do Ouro in 2009.

## Theatre as a tool for knowledge co-production

Boal follows the perspective on knowledge put forward by Paulo Freire, an educator and scholar who, like him, was Brazilian. Freire understood knowledge as a process
of co-production and linked education to liberation and social change, as he considered all people were knowledge producers (Souza et al. 2019; Freire 2000; Freire and Freire 1994). Boal calls his approach the Theatre of the Oppressed, in direct reference to Freire’s approach to Education, the Pedagogy of the Oppressed (Freire 2000; Boal 1974). The Theatre of the Oppressed puts forward two intertwined dynamics of knowledge production: the first is individual, through which one gains critical awareness of one’s own situation as oppressed; the second is collective and entails co-constructing techniques for liberation (Coudray 2016).

Knowledge, how we produce knowledge and how dif-
ferent forms of knowledge are perceived are all inherently
political issues (Scott 1998; Latour 2001; Haraway 1988),
where the political is understood as a process of recognition
of power dynamics (Butler 2006): a first step in a potential
process of liberation of the oppressed (Freire 2000; Freire
and Freire 1994). Forum Theatre can provide a platform to
discuss the “sophisticated tools used by “subalterns” [peo-
ple in subordinate positions] to resist, challenge and survive
dominant cultures” (Balfour 2009, 355; McDonnell 2005).

Following Freire, Boal insists on the epistemic value of
local knowledge and narratives and literally gives them a
voice by creating plays that are specific to local realities
and allowing the audience to substitute any of the characters
in a play and complete or change their voices (Boal 1974;
Coudray 2016). For sustainability scientists and environ-
mental scholars, this is particularly interesting because it
opens up possibilities to give a voice to other-than-humans,
by creating characters that represent ecosystem elements,
as it has been done in role plays (Gutierrez et al. 2024), or
more-than-human agencies, which resonates with a Latou-
rian understanding of theatre (Wiame 2023).

Moreover, theatre has the ability to grasp and convey
knowledge about social relationships using “emotions,
gestures and sensory experiences (that) express the multi-
faceted nature of human experiences” (Bleuer et al. 2018,
397). This has been deemed fundamental for sustainability
science, as many have argued that the type of knowledge that
we need to face environmental challenges must go beyond
rational knowledge; it builds on the literature explaining the
importance of situated and embodied knowledge so that our
ability to respond to environmental challenges is embedded
in our experiences (Croog 2016; González-Hidalgo 2017;
Vasileiadou and Botzen 2014; Pile 2010; Sappa and Bara-
basch 2020).

Relatedly, theatre opens up to diverse constituents and
forms of experience that are not necessarily verbal or explicit
and that sometimes get inadvertently omitted from sustain-
ability science knowledge production processes and from
environmental governance more generally (Olvera-Hernán-
dez et al. 2023). Non-verbal messages include bodily expres-
sion, laughter, clothing, the chosen setting, as well as the

inclusion of specific musical forms and dances, fundamental
to popular art forms (Coudray 2016).

The way of knowing that characterises this type of thea-
tre is “spontaneous, intuitive, tacit, experiential, embodied
or affective, rather than simply cognitive” (Conrad 2004,
11). Through all processes described above, theatre allows
engaging in knowledge co-production, since it is not only
participants who know, in a Freirian process of libera-
tion, but also researchers who learn on different types of
knowledge previously disregarded in scientific knowledge
production.

The experience of our project

The themes of knowledge and learning were present in all
the 48 debriefing interviews we ran after the theatre plays.
In our coding, we specifically focused on acknowledging
and valorising local knowledge, as well as understanding
how communities made sense of the environmental changes
they lived, as they experienced, narrated and framed them
according to their knowledge and beliefs.

While participants were well aware of the global dynam-
ics of climate change, the experience of theatre helps them
explore how these dynamics’ translation into their local
realities was influenced by their ability to organise and face
those changes. Moreover, appealing to their ontological
beliefs about the importance of ancestors and community
traditions, the lack of organisation to face environmental
challenges was not only seen as a problem per se, but rather
as a result of a more general erosion of the practices that
maintained traditions in place. Our plays portrayed the links
between environmental changes, experiences and knowl-
edge, which then were further investigated by participants
guided by the joker. During debriefing sessions, the plays
served as a reference for participants to further discuss and
exemplify their real-life experiences, on subjects such as
economic scarcity, destruction and erosion of ecosystems
through floods and drought, and intergenerational conflicts
including respect for elders.

The researcher-artist works “in, for and with” (Pasetto
and Malini 2022, 6) communities, based on their needs,
taking into account their symbolisms, beliefs and values,
their internal power dynamics, struggles and conflicts. An
example of this in our project was the use of metaphors,
which, completed with body language, oriented the process
of meaning production. Researchers’ knowledge of local lan-
guage and customs helped unpack some verbal and bodily
expressions that would not be detected easily by someone
unfamiliar with the local context. For example, in Ronga lan-
guage in our case in Mozambique, *aku-famba masango* liter-
ally means walking on the mats, but figuratively means hav-
ing sex. Beyond the importance of understanding implicit
and explicit meanings in the words used, the playful use

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /></figure>
of double meanings also opens pathways for metaphorical thinking. Also in the case of Mozambique, *Ma-kumba* refers to both ancestors and pigs, which was in the title of one of our plays and the topic of it. The use of metaphors and body language also blurs the frontiers between the social and the ecological in the sense that non-human and/or non-living elements can be represented, something very much called for in sustainability science. For our specific case, the emphasis on the aesthetic dimension through metaphors, dances and singing was key to situate the play in its local context, as in African cultures, performance, encompassing theatre, dance, song, storytelling, and games, has historically served as a vessel for communication (Igweonu 2024). This resonates with the emotional and aesthetic aspects of knowledge highlighted in the first part of this section. The artistic and aesthetic dimensions facilitate knowledge generation employing spoken words, symbols, rituals, social and historical references and more, all intricately linked to the specific contexts where the play is situated (Morrison 1991).

## Knowledge dissemination and communication towards a horizontal exchange

Community-based theatre methods, such as FT, have a long history of being used to “present messages for social change in an entertaining manner to model behaviour and its consequences, positive or negative, to spark intrapersonal reflections and interpersonal and group conversations” (Yoshihama and Tolman 2015, 140). Berchon and Bousquet (2021) call this ‘awareness theatre’, as it seeks to convey a message of particular importance to a given group, accounting for how it translates in their socially and historically situated experiences. This approach to theatre has been used as a research dissemination tool for it can democratise access to knowledge as “theatre has the potential to enhance understanding of complex emotional, interpersonal, psychosocial, and transboundary dynamics that arise” (Strickert and Bradford 2015, 3). This point has also been made within sustainability science and ecology as social-ecological systems and ecosystems are understood as complex adaptive systems, i.e. systems characterised by non-linearity, absence of central control, multiple links and connections, etc. (Heras and Tàbara 2014; Curtis et al. 2012).

This approach to communication and dissemination redefines the relationship between researchers and participants for a more horizontal one. Strickert and Bradford (2015) describe the joint aspiration expressed by researchers and communities alike to move towards a renegotiation of science-society relations: communities seek to connect with researchers hoping that studies will shine light on their realities and researchers aspire to produce useful research that

has real impacts on local communities (Strickert and Bradford 2015). For that purpose, it is key that the audience can recognise the dynamics at play in the theatre performances, and that these illustrate the multiple aspects of participants’ experiences including contextualised, embedded and embodied aspects (Kaptani and Yuval-Davis 2008).

Focused on transmitting situated lived experiences to a greater number, a researcher and/or artist has to “implement an emancipatory agenda committed to equality, freedom, social justice and participatory democratic practices” and focus on group empowerment (Denzin 2000, 258). In that sense, communication of research results is entangled with communication on lived realities and, thus, theatre not only serves for researchers to communicate to participants, but for researchers and participants to exchange and communicate horizontally and potentially with others, if the plays are taken to different audiences.

## The experience of our project

The theme of “communication” was a source of creative tension in our project. Some of us, who have a strong commitment to knowledge co-production, were very wary about the idea of “communicating” *to* communities, as if we were the holders of knowledge and communities the receivers. Yet, others among our team were more flexible in this regard and considered that communicating our research results was not imposing a narrative on communities, but rather engaging in a dialogue with them. This group had previous experience using theatre as an information dissemination tool, or awareness theatre, and while engaging with the specificities of our understanding of FT, they did not see it as incompatible with disseminating research results. As the content of the plays was created based on the interviews we had conducted, they were indeed a presentation of research results. Yet, especially because FT allows for clarifications, nuances and corrections, they were also moments in a dialogue in which we exchanged *with* communities on what we had understood from their responses to our questions. As the project moved forward, the plays were performed and the post-production discussions conducted, it became very clear that communication was a very important aspect in the exchange between researchers and communities, as some of us had claimed. The part of the team who was not involved in data collection recognised the importance of hearing the voices of those who were and became more open to redefining communication as horizontal, leaving aside preconceptions on practices of communicating research as imposing a unique narrative on local realities.

We coded 164 excerpts under “knowledge dissemination”, present in all the interviews and focus groups, except for one interview in Mozambique and one Focus Group in Kenya. Participants spoke of knowledge dissemination on
environmental changes in relation to livelihood practices. Importantly, in these coded references, knowledge was not presented as following a linear course, it was not necessarily specific whether it was flowing between community members, from researchers to community members, or from community members to researchers. Indeed, some people talked about researchers conveying “information” on environmental changes, while others recalled what they had themselves shared in previous fieldwork phases. This suggests a perception of knowledge as flowing through multiple streams, which blurs the frontiers between categories (researchers/participants) and contributes to our reflection on how communication can be interpreted in terms of horizontal exchange.

Noteworthy is also the overwhelming positive sentiment attached by participants to knowledge dissemination. The words most frequently employed in the sections coded as “knowledge dissemination” were “educate”, “good”, “community” and “learning”. A positive sentiment was explicitly expressed in 70% of all the excerpts coded under knowledge dissemination. For example, an interviewee from Kenya, reflecting on the play, shared that they thought it was: “Very good way of sharing critical information to the public, which is both entertaining and educational on serious matters on our environment”. Another interviewee from Mozambique, more generally reflecting on the engagement of the project through different phases of fieldwork, including theatre, shared: “From 2019 on, we engaged in this conversation with Professor Marlino. It was a form of communication about climate change. We still need more but we are on the right path”. All other occurrences on knowledge dissemination were expressed neutrally—no negative sentiments were correlated to discussions on knowledge.

In all our interviews in both Kenya and Mozambique, illustrative dynamics, i.e. representations of practices the audience could directly relate to or identify, were explicitly presented as a source of knowledge, through the empathy produced by the recognition of the dynamic depicted. In an interview after the theatre in KaNyaka, a participant shared: “the person watches, identifies himself with (what’s being portrayed) and ends up learning”.

## Arts-based research methods and joy

Within the arts-based methods literature, researchers coordinating creative projects discern a feeling of joy when employing nontraditional methods such as theatre. For Borba et al. (2018), participatory community theatre has to be accessible for all, community-based and above all, celebratory: “A community theatre group provides a space and time for human connection instead of cultural exclusion and marginalisation. (...) The idea is to generate passion

because it can generate fuel for the theatrical production. In this sense, theatre practice in community theatre is designed to be fun and creative, with friends and far from the stereotypical ideas of work” (p. 35). Similarly, Fourat and Jankowski point out theatre’s ability to mobilise participants as the method which involves a “shared pleasure of ‘doing things together’” (2023, 192).

Kandil and Bokkel (2019) also dub Forum Theatre’s celebratory dimension a “response to neoliberalism in the arts”—going against donor agendas. These authors argue that community-based participative and arts-based research methods that fully embrace a decolonised approach generate empowerment, collective identity and joy. The pursuit of celebration was at the core of the workshops done by Kandil and Bokkel working with immigrants and refugees’ experiences in Canada. They “ensured that each story was instilled with hope” (2019, 379) and the positive feedback they received for their FT performances stems back to the focus on celebrating the lives of those who are represented on stage, as previous performances were deemed “too sad” by the public.

The element of fun experienced by participants (community members, researchers, facilitators) of FT groups serves as a common thread throughout several case studies (Morrison 1991; Kaptani and Yuval-Davis 2008; Kandil and Bokkel 2019; Foster 2012; Clisby et al. 2020). Using arts, culture and the creative realm when building local agency dynamics with communities being affected by long-lasting oppressions is indeed presented as a process of decolonial joy. This is “the (active) manner by which people become aware of, reason with, and connect the emotion of joy to a desire for decolonial justice” (Clisby et al. 2020, 188).

In sustainability science, while positive emotions such as hope and attachment are present in the literature investigating the role of the arts, to the extent of the authors’ knowledge, the importance of joy, specifically, has been under investigated, with the exception of a few works within the subdiscipline of education for sustainability (Gurholt 2014; Ruokonen et al. 2014).

## The experience of our project

In regard to joy, we differentiated between *enjoyment of the theatre method*, where we focus on the process of investing time in the activity of performing and debriefing, *enjoyment of having stories told out loud*, which resonates with some of what we discussed through our first theme, namely, valourising participants’ knowledge, experience and stories, and *enjoyment of acting out change on stage*, where the accent is on experimenting with the performance of change.

The first aspect focused on *enjoying the theatre method* which we found in seven interviews in Mozambique and nine in Kenya. It was also discussed in one Focus Group

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>
in Mozambique and three in Kenya. Participants in a focus group in Kenya for example reported that they “have enjoyed watching it”, and in Mozambique they considered it “a good way of learning without thinking a lot of negative things and in a happy way”.

The second aspect we focused on was the sense of corroboration and validation of their daily struggles and realities being portrayed on stage. This was stated by 18 individuals and in one focus group procuring participants a sense of *enjoyment of having their stories told out loud*, as this quote exemplifies: “It was very productive because all plays deal with issues that happen in the community”. This finding is to be linked to the discussion above on the importance of theatre as a method of knowledge co-creation and dissemination as it shows that Forum Theatre operates as a tool to validate the importance of people’s experiences so that they feel heard, and their knowledge is acknowledged as important.

Only 4 (1 in Kenya and 3 in Mozambique) references were made to *enjoyment of acting out change on stage*. Those who did, stated feeling “good, creative and confident” after having changed the course of action of the play. This aspect resonates with FT’s understanding of knowledge as a tool to trigger change and perhaps even transformative change, as people identify ways forward in situations of conflict or oppression.

Interestingly, we noticed that when informally talking about the plays with participants, they were more inclined to share how the play contributed to their acquisition of knowledge or to create a role for them to participate in knowledge production, rather than dwelling on the enjoyable time they just spent. Yet, although the plays were on conflicts, we observed people laughing when characters acted out, exaggerated certain traits, made fun of another character, or used sentences with double meanings. Indeed, despite the serious and heavy aspects linked to the conflicts depicted, the plays thoroughly used humour. For example, in the case of Mozambique’s play ‘Only with Small Net’ the character at the centre of the conflict was the most humorous one. This is also to be understood in a context in which laughter serves to create a distance between what is being told and how one engages with it, especially as sometimes what is being told shows the difficulties and very limited livelihood choices participants face (Mubai et al. 2023). Thus, in our experience, theatre created fun moments, therefore situating it as a method that leads to enjoying the moment shared with researchers, opposing it to other methods that could constitute a burden. We speculate that participants might have chosen not to insist on these aspects as they might have believed researchers to be more interested in knowledge production than enjoyment. That said, separating knowledge production and enjoyment is a difficult task, since, as we discussed above, having one’s experiences represented on stage as worthy is part of contributing to enjoyment and creating

spaces for well-being. Moreover, as argued above, emotions, including joy, are entangled with knowledge, for participants as much as for researchers (Mancilla García et al. 2024).

## Theatre as developing skills for change

Boal argues that FT works by conceiving of the play as a rehearsal of what could be done in reality. It is the frustration and oppression felt on stage that encourages actual action (1974), which, as we saw above, can come from an oppressor, from internalised oppression or from being entangled in dynamics of horizontal conflicts (Miramonti et al. 2024).

In any case, the performance serves as a platform to facilitate an understanding of how individuals can transform their world (Fourat and Jankowski 2023; Maciel et al. 2021). Collier further develops this point and argues that the value of FT “resides in how the complexities inherent in any situation are revealed and how theatre is able to demonstrate the many ways of approaching or thinking about them” (2015, 39), going beyond linear dynamics of oppression.

This aspect strongly resonates with Freire’s perspective on transformative knowledge as understood by Morrison: “Provided with the proper tools (...), (the participants) can gradually perceive (their) personal and social reality as well as the contradictions in it, become conscious of (their) own perception of that reality, and deal critically with it” (Morrison 1991, 38).

Among those tools, we insist here on the role of laughter and humour, which we mentioned above, as indicators of the successful creation of a distance between what is being told—which might be dramatic—and the way it is told. Such distance is also built by presenting scenes that feel familiar to the audience but that do not represent their own realities in such a way that they do not play themselves but fictional characters. Creating a distance allows detachment from one's own reality which encourages critical, reflective learning (Collier 2015, 40). This has been deemed particularly important in contexts where it is dangerous to express the reasons of one's oppression which might be due to political repression. In these cases, “forum theatre space is a ‘safe’ way for the oppressed people to both critically reflect upon, and envision alternatives to the social conditions creating their marginalisation” (Rossiter et al. 2008, 134).

More generally, it is the task of the facilitator to create a safe space regardless of the context where Forum Theatre occurs to include those groups in the audience that might feel uncomfortable speaking up. By creating safe spaces, FT increases empowerment, inclusion and fosters understanding (Massa et al. 2020) which can be extended beyond mere top-down dynamics of oppression, to include internal oppression and the disempowering dynamics of horizontal conflicts and rivalries, emphasising empathy and reciprocal understanding
as a form of liberation. In contexts where conflicts are deeply
ingrained, Forum Theatre aims at providing a safe space
wherein to explore emotions, such as empathy, that the
conflicts do not leave space for (Miramonti et al. 2024). For
these reasons, the experience of theatre is not only valuable
within the time of a research project, but is a source of skills
that remains with participants.

The experience of our project

While in our cases the reasons for tensions or conflicts were
not due to a lack of freedom of expression, they were ten-
sions difficult to express openly. Indeed, some of the con-
flicts that we identified and worked on for the plays were
intergenerational conflicts, sometimes involving issues that
are taboo or difficult to speak of such as teenage sex, as it
was the case in Kenya. To maintain the safety of the space
we wanted to create with the plays, we performed first in
schools and then with the communities more broadly, so
that the younger generation, which we identified as having
less power since they were still dependent on their parents,
could freely express their views on the issues represented.

During informal discussions sometime after the per-
formances, our interviewees shared that when wanting to
discuss something that had previously been taboo between
them and their teenage children, or conversely, them and
their parents, they could refer to the play and what happened
in it, thus finding a way to indirectly discuss the issue and
enhance inter-generational communication.

Besides improving communication among the involved
actors, the ability of FT to bring about concrete change, to
rehearse for the revolution, was put forth by Boal as what
differentiated FT from traditional forms of theatre. 45% of
our respondents attached a positive sentiment to agency
triggering both individual and collective changes, with all
other references having been expressed in a neutral manner
(with no negative sentiment references having been asso-
ciated with agency to trigger changes). From an explicit
sustainability perspective, participants to our focus groups
discussed adjustments in everyday routines such as banning
small fishing nets that are harmful to the maritime ecosystem
(KaNyaka), repurposing mosquito nets for their intended
use (KaNyaka), engaging in reforesting efforts (Msambweni)
and initiating dialogues with external communities and local
authorities to implement these changes (Msambweni and
KaNyaka).

Almost all our sources (27 out of 28 interviews and 1 out
of 2 focus groups in KaNyaka and all our Kenyan interviews
and 2 out of 3 focus groups) were coded both for knowledge
dissemination and for agency and transformative change. In
38 of those 50 sources, those codes appear in close proxim-
ity, i.e. at a distance of a maximum of eight words, sug-
gesting that exposure to these discussions instilled group

dynamics towards a collective search for change (Wrents-
chur 2008).

Limits of the approach

In this last section, we recognise some of the limitations
of our study. Engaging with situations of oppression and
with horizontal conflicts where there is no clear oppressor,
where multiple sources of tension are entangled, runs the
risk of increasing feelings of injustice or unfairness, and it
is crucial that researchers are fully aware of the effects that
theatrical techniques might have on participants (Fourat and
Jankowski 2023). Indeed, FT is no panacea and must be
carefully thought of when used, as any other method, for it
might end up reinforcing the same power relations it wishes
to break down, or fuelling the long-lasting rivalries it tries
to replace with empathy. Researchers must be mindful of
the power differentials among community members and that
some might try to control the process and outcome (Turn-
hout et al. 2020). As we have argued through the paper, it is
key that Forum Theatre be adapted to the specificities of the
context where it is applied. For example, applying the ini-
tial versions of FT, which insist on the oppressor–oppressed
dynamic in contexts where horizontal conflicts dominate,
might convey a dichotomic or falsely binary understanding
of a situation that it is actually more complex and nuanced
(Miramonti et al. 2024).

Relatedly, FT provides the audience with the possibili-
ties for rich engagement with a given issue by leaving free-
dom to interpret the issue as they wish (Kamlongera 2005).
This can be a double-edged sword, as we experienced in
our own project. Indeed, during one of our performances
in Kenya, the discussions at one point converged towards
participants agreeing on enforcing discipline on the younger
generations, including through corporal punishment. This
shows that arts-based methods require the acquisition of spe-
cific skills, in this case, facilitation skills, that might not be
easy or timely to transmit within research projects. Indeed,
these endeavours are time-consuming, which means that it
is dangerous to use them if time does not allow for a thor-
ough engagement. This example was an important source of
reflection for us, that made us fully realise how crucial it was
that professionals were part of our project and responsible
for training community members, so that theatre methods
can be applied, and the necessary skills disseminated, with
responsibility to avoid producing new or reproducing old
oppressions.

On another note, while some of us would have liked to
explore further the possibilities of theatre by representing
non-humans, the process of creating the plays was jointly
done by a team of diverse researchers and theatre profes-
sionals, based on the results of the interviews' analysis. The

<figure><img src="image_13.png" /></figure>
research team decided to privilege what emerged from the
interviews and did not want to impose choices based on
theoretical interest. Yet, we believe that representing non-
humans is a research venue that needs to be paid more atten-
tion to in sustainability science. It would allow to observe
what happens when—literally—giving voice to non-human
others, including exploring the emotions created in partici-
pants when speaking up for those non-human characters.

Conclusion

Through this paper, we have brought the literature on arts-
based methods into dialogue with the literature on sustain-
ability science to take forward the debates on the promises
such methods constitute for sustainability scientists. We have
illustrated what exactly they brought and how, through our
own project using Forum Theatre among coastal communi-
ties in Kenya and Mozambique. We have argued that FT
constitutes an ethical alternative to avoid research fatigue
by providing a space in which local knowledge is heard
and appreciated and put into dialogue with other types of
knowledge or among different knowledge holders. Further,
we have argued that theatre creates a moment of enjoyment
that is in itself ethical by bringing positive feelings to par-
ticipants in the moment. Finally, we showed how providing
participants with theatrical skills can serve to spread the
methodology beyond the arts and academia so that it is used
as a tool to speak on difficult issues and potentially engage
in processes of change in the sense decided by people in the
field. In both Kenya and Mozambique, local theatre troupes
were constituted to use the method beyond the project dura-
tion and engage with issues they would identify in the future.
In Mozambique, the trained group has been receiving invi-
tations to perform other plays in the communities since the
project ended.

**Funding** Open access funding provided by Stockholm University. Funding was provided by the Swedish Research Council, Vetenskapsrådet (Grant number: 2018-05792).

Declarations

**Conflict of interest** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

**Open Access** This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

References

Ashley F (2021) Accounting for research fatigue in research ethics. *Bioethics* 35(3):270–276. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12829

Backhouse M (2021) Global inequalities and extractive knowledge production in the bioeconomy. In: Backhouse M, Lehmann R, Lorenzen K, Lühmann M, Puder J, Rodríguez F, Tittor A (eds) Bioeconomy and global inequalities: socio-ecological perspectives on biomass sourcing and production. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68944-5_2

Baldauf A, Palacios M (2022) From extractivism to adjacency. A research manifesto. J Crit Soc Anal 2(1)

Balfour M (2009) The politics of intention: looking for a theatre of little changes. Res Drama Educ J Appl Theatre Perform 14(3):347–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569780903072125

Barasa DW (2010) Tourism, poverty and poverty reduction in Msambweni District, Kenya. University of Bedfordshire

Berchon A, Bousquet F (2021) Théâtre-Forum de La Complexité: EnMouvement, Entre Soi et Le Monde. Chronique Sociale

Bleuer J, Chin M, Sakamoto I (2018) Why theatre-based research works? Psychological theories from behind the curtain. Qual Res Psychol 15(2–3):395–411. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2018.1430734

Boal A (1974) Theatre of the oppressed. Theatre Communications Group, New York

Boal A (1985) How Aristotle's coercive form of tragedy functions. In: Theatre of the oppressed. Theatre Communications Group, New York

Boal A (1995) The rainbow of desire: the Boal method of theatre and therapy. Routledge, London

Borja J, Bonatti M, Sieber S, Müller K (2018) Theatre methods for food security and sovereignty: a Brazilian scenario. J Rural Stud 62(August):29–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.06.006

Boyatzis RE (1998) Transforming qualitative information: thematic analysis and code development. In: Transforming qualitative information: thematic analysis and code development. Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks

Braun V, Clarke V (2022) Conceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis. Qual Psychol 9(1):3–26. https://doi.org/10.1037/qup00010196

Brown K, Eernstman N, Huke AR, Reding N (2017) The drama of resilience: learning, doing, and sharing for sustainability. Ecol Soc 22(2):art8. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09145-220208

Brunger F, Wall D (2016) “What do they really mean by partnerships?” Questioning the unquestionable good in ethics guidelines promoting community engagement in indigenous health research. Qual Health Res 26(13):1862–1877. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316649158

Butler J (2006) Gender trouble: feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge, New York

Cahill H (2006) Research acts: using the drama workshop as a site for conducting participatory action research. NJ 30(2):61–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/14452294.2006.11649500

Caniglia G, Freeth R, Luederitz C, Leventon J, West SP, John B, Peukert D et al (2023) Practical wisdom and virtue ethics for knowledge co-production in sustainability science. Nat Sustain 6(5):493–501. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-022-01040-1
Clisby S, Johnson M, Turner J (2020) Theorising cultures of equality. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, Abingdon

Collier K (ed) (2015) Transforming reflection through a forum theatre learning approach in health education. In: Playing in a house of mirrors: applied theatre as reflective practice. SensePublishers, Rotterdam

Collins CS, Stockton C (2022) The theater of qualitative research: the role of the researcher/actor. Int J Qual Methods 21(January):160940692211031. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221103109

Conrad D (2004) Exploring risky youth experiences: popular theatre as a participatory, performative research method. Int J Qual Methods 3(1):12–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690400300102

Coudray S (2016) Le théâtre de l'opprimé: Quelles perspectives émancipatrices pour un théâtre d'éducation populaire? Rech Éduc 16(October):65–77. https://doi.org/10.4000/rechercheseducations.2516

Croog R (2016) Campus sustainability at the edges: emotions, relations, and bio-cultural connections. Geoforum 74:108–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2016.06.001

Curtis DJ, Reid N, Ballard G (2012) Communicating ecology through art: what scientists think. Ecol Soc 17(2):art3. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-04670-170203

Demart S (2024) Afro-Belgian activist resistances to research procedures: reflections on epistemic extractivism and decolonial interventions in sociological research. Curr Sociol 72(3):581–598. https://doi.org/10.1177/00113921221105914

Denzin NK (2000) Aesthetics and the practices of qualitative inquiry. Qual Inq 6(2):256–265. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004000600208

Enebrand C (2012) Impact on local fishermen on Inhaca Island, Mozambique, due to introduction of a new marine reserve—with focus on fish catches. Göteborgs universitet

Euzen A, Bordet V (2008) Méthode anthropo-sociologique introduisant le théâtre forum comme outil d’analyse d’une recherche scientifique pluridisciplinaire. VertigO. https://doi.org/10.4000/vertigo.5065

Foster V (2012) The pleasure principle: employing arts-based methods in social work research. Eur J Soc Work 15(4):532–545. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2012.702311

Fourat E, Jankowski F (2023) Theatre workshops: accounting for food sensitive experience. In: Studying food and eaters. Éditions Quae. https://doi.org/10.35690/978-2-7592-3664-0.

Freire P (2000) Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum, New York

Freire P, Freire AMA (1994) Pedagogy of hope: reliving pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum, New York

Galafassi D, Kagan S, Milkoreit M, Heras M, Bilodeau C, Bourke SJ, Merrie A, Guerrero L, Pétursdóttir G, Tàbara JD (2018) Raising the temperature: the arts on a warming planet. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 31(April):71–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2017.12.010

González-Hidalgo M (2017) Emotional political ecologies: the role of emotions in the politics of environmental conflicts: two case studies in Chile and Mexico, p 160

Grandi GL (2022) Theatre as method: performance creation through action research. Act Res 20(3):245–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750321993530

Grosfoguel R (2020) Epistemic extractivism: a dialogue with Alberto Acosta, Leanne Betasamosake Simpson and Silvia Rivera Cusicanqui. In: Knowledges born in the struggle: constructing the epistemologies of the Global South. Epistemologies of the South. Routledge, New York

Gurholt KP (2014) Joy of nature, *Fruiluftsliv* education and self: combining narrative and cultural-ecological approaches to environmental sustainability. J Adventure Educ Outdoor Learn 14(3):233–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2014.948802

Gutierrez N, Ballester A, Cabello V (2024) A citizen assembly for transitioning the mar menor? In: The history of environmental degradation in mar menor. Routledge, London

Haraway D (1988) Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Fem Stud 14(3):575. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066

Heras M, Tàbara JD (2014) Let’s play transformations! performative methods for sustainability. Sustain Sci 9(3):379–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-014-0245-9

Heras M, David Tàbara J, Meza A (2016) Performing biospheric futures with younger generations: a case in the MAB Reserve of La Sepultura, Mexico. Ecol Soc 21(2):14. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08317-210214

Heras M, Galafassi D, Oteros-Rozas E, Ravera F, Berraquero-Díaz L, Ruiz-Mallén I (2021) Realising potentials for arts-based sustainability science. Sustain Sci 16(6):1875–1889. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-021-01002-0

Igweonu K (2024) Routledge handbook of African theatre and performance. Routledge, New York

Instituto Nacional de Estatística (2017) IV Recenseamento Geral Da População e Habitação, 2017—Indicadores Sócio-Demográficos Moçambique. Instituto Nacional de Estatística, Maputo

Jacquet JB, Pathak R, Haggerty JH, Theodori GL, Kroepsch AC (2021) Research fatigue in unconventional oil and gas boomtowns: perceptions, strategies and obstacles among social scientists collecting human subjects data. Energy Res Soc Sci 73(March):101918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.101918

Jankowski F, Louafi S, Kane NA, Diol M, Diao Camara A, Pham J-L, Berthouly-Salazar C, Barnaud A (2020) From texts to enacting practices: defining fair and equitable research principles for plant genetic resources in West Africa. Agric Hum Values 37(4):1083–1094. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-020-10039-3

Kamlongera C (2005) Theatre for development in Africa. In: Media and global change: rethinking communication for development. Nordicom and Clacos, Buenos Aires, pp 435–52

Kandil Y, te Bokkel H (2019) Celebratory theatre: a response to neoliberalism in the arts. Res Drama Educ J Appl Theatre Perform 24(5):376–382

Kaptani E, Yuval-Davis N (2008) Participatory theatre as a research methodology: identity, performance and social action among refugees. Sociol Res Online 13(5):1–12. https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.1789

Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (2019) Kenya population and housing census volume I: population by county and sub-county. Kenya National Bureau of Statistics, Nairobi

Latour B (2001) We have never been modern. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

Macia A, Hernorth L (1995) Maintaining sustainable resources and biodiversity while promoting development: a demanding task for a young nation. Ambio 24(7/8):515–517

Maciel ST, Ramalho CS, Gomide TA, Silva DL, Alcântara GB, Kern C, Andreoli E, Senna L, De Oliveira Evangelista L (2021) Forum theatre as a tool for unveiling gender issues in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) working environments. Geosci Commun 4(1):83–93. https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-4-83-2021

Maina GW, Osuka K, Samoilys M (2011) Opportunities and challenges of community-based marine protected areas in Kenya. CORDIO East Africa

Mancilla García M, Abunge C, Bandeira SO, Cheupe C, Combane DJ, Daw T, O'Neill EMD et al (2024) Exploring a process-relational approach to qualitative research methods for sustainability science. People Nat. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10667

Massa A, DeNigris D, Gillespie-Lynch K (2020) Theatre as a tool to reduce autism stigma? Evaluating ‘beyond spectrums.’ Res
Drama Educ J Appl Theatre Perform 25(4):613-630. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569783.2020.1732810

McCammon LA (2007) Research on drama and theater for social change. In: Bresler L (ed) International handbook of research in arts education. Springer international handbook of research in arts education, vol 16. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 945-64. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-3052-9_65.

McClanahan TR, Young TP (1996) East African ecosystems and their conservation. Oxford University Press, New York

McDonnell B (2005) Viewpoints: towards a theatre of "little changes"—a dialogue about dialogue. Res Drama Educ J Appl Theatre Perform 10(1):67-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569780500053817

Miramonti A, Fontana LB, Johnston C (2024) Forum theatre for reconciliation: a drama-based approach to conflict transformation applied to socio-environmental struggles in Bolivia. Peacebuilding. https://doi.org/10.1080/21647259.2024.2351709

Morales MC, Harris LM (2014) Using subjectivity and emotion to reconsider participatory natural resource management. World Dev 64(December):703-712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.06.032

Morrison (1991) Forum Theater in West Africa: an alternative medium of information exchange. Res Afr Lit 22(3):29-40

Mubai ME, Bandeira SO, Combane DJ, Daw T, Gonzalez T, O'Neill EMD, Garcia MM (2023) The sacred and climate change: local perceptions from KaNyaka Island in Mozambique. Clim Risk Manag 42:100564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2023.100564

Norström AV, Cvitanovic C, Löf MF, West S, Wyborn C, Balvanera P, Bednarek AT et al (2020) Principles for knowledge co-production in sustainability research. Nat Sustain 3(3):182-190. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0448-2

Ochieng CN, Thenya T, Mwaura F, Owuor MA (2024) Awareness and perceptions of coral reef ecosystem use and management in “pseudo community” and government-managed marine protected areas in Kwale County, Kenya. Ocean Coast Manag 248(February):106949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2023.106949

Olvera-Hernández S, Azahara Mesa-Jurado M, Novo P, Martin-Ortega J, Walsh A, Holmes G, Borchi A (2023) Forum Theatre as a mechanism to explore representation of local people's values in environmental governance: a case of study from Chiapas, Mexico. People Nat 5(1):119-133. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10420

Park JK (2015) The use of autothony in popular politics: the story of *Mwambasho* among the Digo of Kenya. J Afr Cult Stud 27(2):191-204. https://doi.org/10.1080/13696815.2015.1004161

Pasetto R, Malini GI (2022) Promoting environmental justice in contaminated areas by combining environmental public health and community theatre practices. Futures 142(September):103011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.103011

Pile S (2010) Emotions and effect in recent human geography. Trans Inst Br Geogr 35(1):5-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2009.00368.x

Rossiter K, Kontos P, Colantonio A, Gilbert J, Gray J, Keightley M (2008) Staging data: theatre as a tool for analysis and knowledge transfer in health research. Soc Sci Med 66(1):130-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.07.021

Ruokonen I, Sepp A, Moilanen V, Autio O, Ruismaki H (2014) The Finnish five-string kantele: sustainably designed for musical joy. J Teach Educ Sustain 16(1):76-88. https://doi.org/10.2478/jtes-2014-0004

Sajnani N, Mayor C, Boal J (2020) Theatre of the oppressed. In: Current approaches in drama therapy. Charles C Thomas Publisher, Illinois

Sappa V, Barabasch A (2020) Forum-Theatre technique to foster creative and active problem solving: a resilience-building intervention among in-service teachers. J Adult Contin Educ 26(1):43-60. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477971419842884

Save the Children (2010) Cultural practices that hinder children's rights among the Digo Community—Msambweni District, Kwale County—Kenya

Schecher R (1985) Between theater and anthropology. University of Pennsylvania Press. https://doi.org/10.9783/9780812200928

Schneider F, Tribaldos T, Adler C, BiggsDe BremondBuser Krug RATC et al (2021) Co-production of knowledge and sustainability transformations: a strategic compass for global research networks. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 49(April):127-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2021.04.007

Scott JC (1998) Seeing like a state: how certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. Yale University Press, New Haven

Souza DT, Wals AEJ, Jacobi PR (2019) Learning-based transformations towards sustainability: a relational approach based on Humberto Maturana and Paulo Freire. Environ Educ Res 25(11):1605-1619. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2019.1641183

Strickert GEH, Bradford LEA (2015) Of research pings and ping-pong balls: the use of forum theater for engaged water security research. Int J Qual Methods 14(5):160940691562140. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406915621409

Sullivan J, Petronella S, Brooks E, Murillo M, Primeau L, Ward J (2008) Theatre of the oppressed and environmental justice communities: a transformational therapy for the body politic. J Health Psychol 13(2):166-179. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105307086710

Taylor S, Walsh KB, Theodori GL, Jacquet J, Kroepsch A, Haggerty JH (2021) Addressing research fatigue in energy communities: new tools to prepare researchers for better community engagement. Soc Nat Resour 34(3):403-408. https://doi.org/10.1080/0894192020.1866724

Turnhout E, Metze T, Wyborn C, Klenk N, Louder E (2020) The politics of co-production: participation, power, and transformation. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 42(February):15-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.11.009

Vasileiadou E, Botzen WJW (2014) Communicating adaptation with emotions: the role of intense experiences in raising concern about extreme weather. Ecol Soc 19(2):36

Walsh A, Silvia Olvera-Hernandez M, Mesa-Jurado A, Borchi A, Novo P, Martin-Ortega J, Holmes G (2023) Valuing trans-disciplinarity: forum theatre in Tabasco and Chiapas, Mexico. Res Drama Educ J Appl Theatre Perform 28(2):311-329. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569783.2022.2083951

Wiamé A (2023) Bruno Latour's earthbound theatre: applying stage-thinking to reclaim the critical zone. Pamiètnik Teatralny 72(4):101-119

Wrentschur M (2008) Forum theatre as a participatory tool for social research and development: a reflection on “nobody is perfect”—a project with homeless people. In: Cox P, Geisen T, Green R (eds) Qualitative research and social change. Palgrave Macmillan UK, London, pp 94–111. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230583962_6

Yoshihama M, Tolman RM (2015) Using interactive theater to create socioculturally relevant community-based intimate partner violence prevention. Am J Community Psychol 55(1-2):136-147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-014-9700-0

**Publisher's Note** Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.