REConnect: Participatory RE for Social Sustainability
This paper introduces REConnect, a human-centered participatory requirements engineering framework derived from 26 community-engaged projects, which prioritizes trust, co-creation, and user empowerment to ensure social sustainability and preserve human agency against the risks of automated and AI-assisted elicitation.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
The Big Problem: Building Houses Without Talking to the People Living in Them
Imagine you are an architect hired to build a new community center. But instead of asking the neighbors what they need, you sit in a high-tech office, look at data charts, and use a super-fast AI robot to design the building. You might build a beautiful structure with perfect blueprints, but when you hand over the keys, the neighbors might find the doors are too heavy, the rooms are too cold, or the layout makes no sense for their daily lives.
This is exactly what happens in Software Engineering when teams rely too much on automation and AI to figure out what people need. The paper argues that while AI is great at crunching numbers and processing huge amounts of data, it often misses the "human heartbeat" of a community. It risks building software that works technically but fails socially because it ignores the trust, culture, and real-life stories of the people it's supposed to help.
The Solution: REConnect (The "Handshake" Framework)
The authors introduce a new framework called REConnect. Think of this not as a set of rigid rules, but as a recipe for a long, warm conversation before you ever start building.
The core idea is simple: You cannot design software for a community without first building a relationship with them. It's like trying to bake a cake for someone you've never met; you might get the ingredients right, but you won't know if they like chocolate or vanilla, or if they have a nut allergy.
The paper identifies three golden rules (Principles) for making this work, derived from studying 26 real-world projects in places like rural Nepal, Canadian cities, and the remote Arctic.
1. Build Trust Like a Garden, Not a Machine
The Analogy: You can't force a flower to bloom by pulling on its petals. You have to water the soil, give it sunlight, and wait.
The Paper's Claim: Trust isn't something you can "download" or assume exists. In many communities (especially those that have been ignored or exploited in the past), people are wary of outsiders.
- What they did: Instead of sending a survey online, the teams went to the communities. They visited hospitals in Nepal, sat in shelters in Canada, and hung out with Indigenous elders in the Arctic. They drank tea, listened to stories, and showed up consistently.
- The Result: Only after trust was built did people share the real problems. For example, in a blood donation project in Nepal, the team learned that people were afraid to donate because of old myths. An AI wouldn't have known this; only a human conversation revealed it.
2. Co-Create: The "Potluck" Approach
The Analogy: Imagine a potluck dinner. If you just tell people what to bring, you might get ten plates of the same dish. But if you ask everyone to bring something they know how to make, and you cook it together, you get a feast that represents everyone.
The Paper's Claim: Don't just ask people for feedback on your finished idea. Invite them into the kitchen while you are cooking.
- What they did: In a project helping women fleeing violence, the team initially thought they needed a mobile app. But after talking to the women, they realized most didn't have phones, and an app could be dangerous if an abuser saw it. The team scrapped their original idea and built a web tool with the shelter staff instead.
- The Result: The final product wasn't just "better"; it was the only thing that would work. The users helped design the solution, so they knew exactly how to use it.
3. Empower Users: From Passengers to Drivers
The Analogy: If you give someone a map and a car, but you keep the keys and tell them where to go, they are just a passenger. If you give them the keys, the map, and the training to drive, they become the driver.
The Paper's Claim: True success isn't just handing over software; it's making sure the community feels they own it and can keep it running after the developers leave.
- What they did: In the blood donation project, the team didn't just train local leaders to use the software; they gave them the authority to manage the whole system. In an Indigenous language project, the youth didn't just play a game; they helped write the stories and design the lessons.
- The Result: The communities didn't just "adopt" the software; they took charge of it. They became the guardians of the system, ensuring it lasted for years.
Where Does AI Fit In? (The "Super-Powered Assistant")
The paper doesn't say "ban AI." Instead, it suggests a new way to use it.
- The Old Way: Let AI do all the thinking and telling humans what to build.
- The REConnect Way: Use AI as a super-powered assistant, but keep a human in the driver's seat.
Think of AI as a very fast librarian. It can read 10,000 books in a second and summarize them. But it doesn't know the feeling of the community, the history of a local leader, or the unspoken rules of a village.
- The Human Role: The humans (the community and the developers) act as the Guardians. They use the librarian (AI) to find patterns, but then they say, "Wait, this summary misses the point about our history," or "This idea won't work because of this local rule."
- The Process:
- Humans build the relationship and understand the context (The "Groundwork").
- AI helps sort through huge amounts of data to find patterns.
- Humans interpret those patterns, correcting the AI if it misses the nuance.
- Humans and AI work together to build prototypes quickly.
- Humans make the final call, ensuring the software respects their values.
The Bottom Line
The paper concludes that software is not just code; it's a relationship.
If you want software to help a community thrive (social sustainability), you can't just automate the process. You have to slow down, shake hands, listen to stories, and let the community drive the car. AI can help you drive faster, but it can't steer the car for you. Without that human connection, you might build a very fast car that goes in the wrong direction.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.