Q&A: How researchers and communities build mutually beneficial work

UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — Community-engaged research often raises questions about who benefits from academic work and how knowledge moves between universities and the people most affected by the issues being studied. In his research and film projects, Kirk French, an assistant professor of anthropology and of film production and media studies at Penn State, works with communities as collaborators rather than subjects, shaping research questions, methods and outcomes alongside local partners.

The film “Land and Water Revisited” was developed with multiple collaborators, including associate producers Alonso Rodríguez and Perla Martínez in Mexico’s Teotihuacan Valley. It offers one example of how French’s approach functions in practice, revealing how environmental change, collective memory and long-term relationships intersect in community-based research. Additionally, French recently published a research article that further explains his process in Visual Anthropology Review.

In this Q&A, French, Rodríguez and Martínez discussed their yearslong collaborative partnership and how it has shaped the Teotihuacan Valley community and each of them professionally and personally.

Q: In practical terms, what do “reciprocal” relationships between researchers and communities look like, and why do they matter?

French: There was a moment when we were filming “Land and Water Revisited” that captures a moment where things really started becoming clearer; that this was a direction I wanted to move. It's a powerful moment when we were interviewing Perla Martínez, who attended a screening of the original 1962 film, “Land and Water.” Her response (at minute marker 25:54) about her great grandfather’s sacrifice made me realize the importance of starting a project by providing something the community is interested in, something impactful. This set the stage for real reciprocal collaboration.

Rodríguez: Typically, once a research project is completed and its objectives are met, researchers leave the community they studied without giving anything back. This is why the project led by Kirk is different: he maintains an ongoing interest in continuing to contribute to the community he studied — that is, the people of Teotihuacan — and he has done so by establishing and supporting collaborations with those of us who live here. Since getting to know Kirk and working with him, I have recognized his interest in staying connected to the communities he encounters. In a way, I think this is his way of giving thanks for the trust people place in him when he carries out his research.

Q: How does community-engaged research fit within traditional academic structures?

French: Time is one of the biggest barriers. Academic timelines — whether for doctoral degrees or promotion and tenure — make this type of work risky. Building trust with a community takes real time, and that process varies depending on the location. Even after trust is established, projects can be disrupted by changes in leadership or political conditions. There isn’t an easy solution, because altering those academic structures would be a major undertaking.

Q: What motivated you to become involved in “Land and Water Revisited,” and why did you feel it was worth sustaining your involvement?

Rodríguez: My main motivation was to help the film reach more people in the Teotihuacan Valley. The original footage from the 1960s shows how people lived and worked the land, and today the valley looks very different. Pollution in the San Juan River and abandoned agricultural fields have become normal. Through the film, we can analyze why these changes happened and how shifts in daily life affect both health and the environment. The project creates space for reflection on how our actions either support or harm environmental conservation.

Q: What kinds of responses have you seen from community members during screenings or discussions of the film?

Martínez: Many people remember a time when springs were abundant, and agriculture was thriving. They often describe those years as better, especially in terms of food and social life. The screenings tend to spark shared reflection. People talk about what has been lost and what is happening now, particularly around water extraction and urban growth.

Q: Several collaborators describe the film as preserving collective memory. Why is that kind of documentation important in places undergoing rapid change?

Rodríguez: During screenings, people sometimes see family members who have since passed away and hear their voices again. That experience highlights how fragile community memory can be. When people die, they take part of a place’s history with them. If it isn’t documented, it may never be told again. “Land and Water Revisited” helps preserve those voices and gives the community a way to reflect on its past and think about its future.

Q: You’ve also seen the film used beyond community screenings. How has it functioned in educational or scientific contexts?

Martínez: In Atlatongo, a town in the Teotihuacan Valley, for example, a biologist from the community has used the film in educational spaces, alongside explanations of endemic plant and animal species. These screenings lead to discussion and analysis of current environmental problems, especially illegal water extraction. The film becomes a starting point for learning and for understanding what is happening to the territory.

Q: Your projects often continue after formal research phases end. How do you stay connected and accountable once a project is “over”?

French: This is one of the best parts of this approach, because you’ve built real relationships. We stay in touch regularly, collaborate on presentations and spend time together outside formal research settings. People visit each other, attend important events and continue conversations. Like any relationship, it takes effort to maintain, but that ongoing connection is what makes the work meaningful.

Q: How have your collaborations with communities shaped the way you think about what counts as knowledge in your research?

French: Working closely with communities has reinforced the reality that knowledge doesn’t come exclusively from academic training or institutions. Community memory, lived experience and local expertise shape research questions and outcomes in ways that wouldn’t be possible otherwise. Those perspectives don’t just inform the work — they often redefine its direction and purpose.

“Land and Water Revisited” can be viewed on the Public Broadcast System’s website as can another film project by French, “A Century after Nanook,” both of which were supported in part by funding from the Institute of Energy and the Environment’s Seed Grant Program. The original film, “Land and Water,” was a documentary made in 1961 by William T. Sanders, a professor of anthropology at Penn State.