Qualitative Social Research for Rural Development Studies · “Qualitative Social Research for Rural Development Studies” Alwin Keil Ranking and scoring techniques are often applied

Universität Hohenheim Inst. 490A 1

Qualitative Social Research forRural Development Studies

Focus group discussion

Alwin Keil

2

“Qualitative Social Research for Rural Development Studies” Alwin Keil

Focus group discussion Focus group discussion –– What is it?What is it?

A small group of people discuss an issue of mutual interest.

The discussion is moderated using a list of key questions as a guideline.

The participants usually share a common characteristic, e.g., landlessness, lack of access to services, affectedness by certain types of risk, etc.

Focus group discussions are a standard method in the social sciences; in rural development they are also often applied for identifying development needs, project planning, or evaluating project impacts.

Source: DWC/InWEnt, 2004

3


Focus group discussion Focus group discussion -- ObjectivesObjectives

To share experiences and opinions on a topic of common concern, e.g. related to natural resource management, risk management, credit access, etc.

To identify and discuss potential measures for improving the situation.

To monitor and evaluate the impact of development activities through the eyes of specific interest groups.

Source: Adapted from DWC/InWEnt, 2004

4


Focus group discussion Focus group discussion -- AdvantagesAdvantages

Group interactions can facilitate the participants’ ability to articulate their motivations, feelings, attitudes, and opinions (‘Safe space’). However, depending on the group composition and other circumstances, also the contrary may happen!

A wide range of information can be generated in a short time at comparatively low cost.

The technique helps to assess the degree of consensus/range of opinions and experiences on a given topic.

The flexible format allows to explore related but unanticipated issues as they arise in the discussion.

The group exerts a certain degree of social control over participants, which can dissuade them from giving dishonest answers.

Source: Adapted from Stern and Ricks, 1999

5


Prepare a list of guiding questions, carefully considering the time needed for a comprehensive discussion.Thoroughly train a moderator for the discussion if you cannot do it yourself, e.g., because of language constraints.Establish rapport with the village officials prior to the focus group discussion, ensure that they are well informed about the objectives of the exercise.Make sure not to raise false expectations, e.g., officials may think that the discussion outcome may lead to the initiation of a development project in their village.

Focus group discussion Focus group discussion –– Preparation (1)Preparation (1)

6


Invite not more than 10 people for the discussion who share a particular interest in the topic. Ensure that the environment is conducive to a fruitful discussion (suitable venue, suitable timing, no outside disturbances, provision of snacks, lunch, etc.).Provide materials for an appropriate documentation/visualization of discussion outcomes (e.g., large sheets of paper and board markers).

Focus group discussion Focus group discussion –– Preparation (2)Preparation (2)

7


Thoroughly introduce the objectives of the research and explain the procedure and use of the outcome of the discussion (avoid false expectations, see above!). Moderate the discussion (or have it moderated) along your list of guiding questions.Try your very best not to influence the outcome of the discussion!Encourage silent participants to utter their opinion.Do not overstrain participants, take enough breaks, but be careful not to break the flow of the discussion!

Focus group discussion Focus group discussion –– ImplementationImplementation

8


Your research topic may not be of interest to the participants.Participants may get tired very quickly.A suitable time for a half-day or longer event may be difficult to find, especially during peak labor periods.Selection and training of personnel are critical to the success of the method: controlling dominant personalities in group settings while seeking the participation of silent participants – without imposing one’s own opinion – requires superior communication and social skills!

Focus group discussion Focus group discussion ––Some challenges (1)Some challenges (1)

9


Is a relatively homogeneous or a heterogeneous group preferable? E.g., women only, poor only, or a group consisting of both men and women from different social strata?A heterogeneous group may potentially lead to very insightful results, but the discussion is likely to be dominated by more outspoken and/or powerful participants.The goal is to create a focus group that is homogeneous enough to encourage full participation, but heterogeneous enough to generate a range of opinions and perceptions!

Focus group discussion Focus group discussion ––Some challenges (2)Some challenges (2)

Source: Adapted from Bergeron, 1999, and Stern and Ricks, 1999

10


Visual techniques can act as an ‘equalizer’ between participants from different social strata and catalyseinteraction.Useful application in focus group discussion!Visual techniques include social mapping, resource mapping and modelling, seasonal calendars, Venn diagramming, matrix ranking and scoring of problems, preferences, options, etc.

Complementary visual techniquesComplementary visual techniques

Source: Chambers, 1992

11


Village map (1)Village map (1)

A village or farm map typically shows natural resources (forests, rivers, arable land, pasture etc.) and physical infrastructure (roads, residential houses, public buildings etc.). Objective: To perform a visual inventory of the existing natural resources within a defined area.To identify the areas for agricultural and non-agricultural land use.To assist villagers in land use planning and resource management.

12


Figure 1. Example of a natural resource map (Vietnam).Source: DWC/InWEnt, 2004: 55.

Village map (2)Village map (2)

13


Village transect (1)Village transect (1)

A village transect is a cross-sectional view of the village. Objective: To record the physical and natural characteristics.To characterize and locate the different patterns of land use, e.g., annual crop land, perennial crop land, pasture, etc.To identify the opportunities and limitations for different types of land use, accounting for environmental characteristics, e.g., soil type, problems of soil erosion, waterlogging, drought affectedness, etc.

14


Figure 2. Example of a farm transect (Vietnam).Source: DWC/InWEnt, 2004: 60.

Village transect (2)Village transect (2)

15


Ranking and scoring techniques are often applied to elicit attitudes (= beliefs, perceptions, personal evaluations and likes/dislikes).

Attitudes have three main components:A cognitive component - a person’s awareness and knowledge about the object of concern.An affective component – a person’s feelings about the object, such as “good” or “bad”.A behavioral component – a person’s readiness to respond behaviorally to the object.Attitudes influence social and economic behavior, and are therefore important in most social science research.

Ranking and scoring techniques (1)Ranking and scoring techniques (1)

16


Most common types of ranking/scoring:Problem, preference, or opportunity ranking or scoringPair-wise rankingMatrix ranking or scoringWealth ranking or –groupingUseful tool for initiating a discussion of possibilities in a local setting.It raises people’s awareness of things often not thought of.It is a quick way of getting an overview of the diversity of opinions among participants.


Source: Mikkelsen, 1995

17


Figure 3. Example of matrix scoring of crops grown (The Gambia).Source: Mikkelsen, 1995: 125.


18


TheThe impactimpact of of ENSOENSO--relatedrelateddroughtdrought on on farmfarm householdshouseholds in in

Central Sulawesi, Central Sulawesi, IndonesiaIndonesia

An An applicationapplication of of focusfocus groupgroup discussionsdiscussions

19


Global Global El NiEl Niññoo--related climate variability related climate variability

Figure 4. El Niño precipitation deviation from the average, November 1997 –April 1998.

20


Objectives of the ResearchObjectives of the Research

1. Explore the incidence of El NiEl Niññoo-related drought in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia.

2. Investigate drought response strategies of localfarm households.

3. Measure household drought resilience.

4. Identify influencing factors of drought resilienceand deduce policy recommendations.

21


DefinitionsDefinitions

Drought:Period of insufficient water supply to agricultural crops, given the present land use systems.

Drought Resilience:Capability to withstand a loss in welfare due to a drought.

22


Data CollectionData CollectionTopography of the Palu River watershed leads to a strongrainfall gradient.Random sample of 8 villages, stratified by elevation above sealevel.Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) in each villageFocus group discussions.In this case: use of a qualitative research method as a firststage of data collection.General overview of important issues related to the researchtopic.Use of the knowledge gained for the design of a meaningfulstructured questionnaire.Survey of 228 randomly selected farm households.Combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods.

23


Conceptual FrameworkConceptual Framework

Risk(Drought)

RiskResponse

Ex ante Ex post

Preventionstrategies

Mitigationstrategies

Copingstrategies

→ Not applicableat the HH level

Outcome(Resilience)

Figure 5. The concept of the ‚Risk Chain‘, including household (HH) riskmanagement strategies.Source: Adapted from Siegel and Alwang (1999) and Webb and Hainarayan (1999).

24


Table 1. Examples of guiding questions used for focus group discussions during Rapid Rural Appraisals (RRAs) in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia

RRARRA--Guiding questionsGuiding questions

Issue Objective/Notes Method Groups involved

1.1 Crops grown, their relative area share, and reasons for growing them

Implications on mitigation strategies regarding climate variability (cv) → crop diversification. Important to differentiate between irrigated and non-irrigated crops

Pie charts of crops’ area shares & matrix scoring of reasons for growing these crops (may be different for different groups of farmers (e.g. mainly food crop / mainly cash crop growers)

One group, including: • all wealth strata • men and women • farmers who grow mainly food

crops (irrigated/non-irrig.) and those who grow mainly cash crops (permanent crops)

1.2 Severity of climate variability as compared to other problems households face (include drought AND flooding)

Find out whether cv is a serious problem at all, and how the severity of cv is assessed by different groups of people → which groups are most seriously affected

Collect problems the community/strata face, score problems according to their severity (Matrix scoring)

Separate groups: • Different wealth strata

(poorest, poor, less poor) • farmers who grow mainly food

crops (irrigated/non-irrig.) and those who grow mainly cash crops (permanent crops)

1.3 Severity of drought periods (& floods) experienced in the last 20 years

Find out how many drought events were experienced, and which one(s) can probably be best remembered → design questionnaire accordingly. Is there a correlation between deforestation and the severity of drought/flooding?

Collect drought events the community has faced, score (rank) them according to their severity (Time – Event table, Matrix scoring/ranking)

One group: • People older than 35 who have

lived in the village for at least 20 years

1.4 Effect of droughts on cropping area & cropping patterns

Implications of drought on the area share devoted to different crops. Is rice area reduced in a dry year? (→ there may not be a great effect on rice yield/ha but on rice AREA)

Group discussion, drawing of pie charts of crop area shares in a ‘normal’ year and a dry year

One group of experienced farmers

25


3,0

4,0

4,5

5,0

4,7

2,8

3,8

3,8

4,8

2,7

3,0

4,4

4,6

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Lack of common cropping schedule

Dry season affecting crops

Lack of efficient irrigation management

Fluctuating output prices

Lack of technical irrigation

Temporary lack of water for consumption

Lack of advice from PPL

High informal interest rates

Difficult transportation of produce

Floods affecting crops

Long droughts affecting crops

External inputs expensive

Pests and diseases

Number of villages

1 2 3 4 5Score

Number of villages Score from 1 (=very small problem) to 5 (=very serious problem)

Figure 6. Perceived problems affecting eight RRA villages in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia (incidence and severity).

RRARRA--Results (1): Problem assessmentResults (1): Problem assessment

26


2,0

3,0

3,0

3,0

4,0

3,3

3,2

3,8

4,3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Deepen well for consumption water

Collect sago for consumption and sale

Increase livestock herds

Borrow money from wealthy farmers

Plant maize on river banks

Eat less

Eat lower quality food

Find part-time job outside village

Collect rattan for sale

Number of villages

1 2 3 4 5Score

Number of villages Score from 1 (=of very little importance) to 5 (=very important)

Figure 7. Measures applied to cope with drought conditions in eight RRA villagesin Central Sulawesi, Indonesia (incidence and importance).

RRARRA--Results (2): Coping strategiesResults (2): Coping strategies

27


Figure 8. Transect of Tomado village, Central Sulawesi, indicatingpredominant types of land use and differences in water availability.

RRARRA--Results (3): Village transectResults (3): Village transect

28


Figure 9. Seasonal calendar of Nopu village, Central Sulawesi, displayingscores on amount of rainfall, irrigation water availability, water quality, laborrequirements, and indicating specific seasonal constraints. Scores rangefrom 1 (= very low/little/poor) to 5 (= very high/much/good)

RRARRA--Results (4): Seasonal calendarResults (4): Seasonal calendar

29


0

1

2

3

4

5

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Scor

e

Amount of rainfall (1 = very little,..., 5 = very much)Amount of water available for use (1 = very little,..., 5 = very much)Water quality (1 = very poor,..., 5 = very good)

Figure 10. Perceived annual distribution of rainfall, irrigation water availability, and water quality in Nopu village, Central Sulawesi, during a ‚normal‘ year.

RRARRA--Results (5): Water availability and Results (5): Water availability and ––quality assessmentquality assessment

30

“Qualitative Social Research for Rural Development Studies” Alwin KeilPandere (Technical irrigation, upstream location)

0

1

2

3

4

5

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May Jun

Jul

Aug Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Scor

e (1

= v

ery

little

, ...

,5

= ve

ry m

uch)

Irrigation w ater Rainfall

Maranata (Technical irrigation, downstream location)

0

1

2

3

4

5

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May Jun

Jul

Aug Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Scor

e (1

= v

ery

little

, ...

,5

= ve

ry m

uch)

Irrigation water Rainfall

Sidondo II (Simple irrigation)

0

1

2

3

4

5

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May Jun

Jul

Aug Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Scor

e (1

= v

ery

little

, ...

,5

= ve

ry m

uch)

Irrigation water Rainfall

Figure 11. Perceived rainfall distribution and related availability of irrigation water in threevillages in Sigi Biromaru sub-district, Central Sulawesi, during a ‚normal‘ year.

RRARRA--Results (6): Results (6): Implications of type Implications of type of irrigation system of irrigation system and village location and village location on water availabilityon water availability

31


Figure 12. Estimated allocation of agricultural land to different crops in Maranatavillage, Central Sulawesi, during a ‚normal‘, a ‚dry‘, and a ‚wet‘ year.

RRARRA--Results (7): Implications of climate Results (7): Implications of climate variability on cropping activitiesvariability on cropping activities

Wet year

Irrigated rice75%

Cocoa15%

Others(e.g. maize)

10%

Dry year

Irrigated rice50%

Cocoa15%

Peanuts25%

Others(e.g. maize)

10%

Normal year

Irrigated rice60%Cocoa

15%

Vegetables15%

Others(e.g. maize)

10%

32


Vulnerabilitytowardsdrought

Unsustainablecoping measures

Deterioration of theasset base

Poverty

Lack of access to ENSO forecasts

Lack of droughtmitigationmeasures

Increase agricultural income throughimproved crop managementImprove maintenance of irrigationinfrastructureImprove irrigation managementCreate formal financial institutions at the village level

Create formal financialinstitutions at thevillage level

Improve reliability of forecastsImprove information transfer to the village level

Investigate agronomic and marketing potential of droughttolerant crops

Conduct environmentaleducation measuresConduct educationmeasures on adequatenutrition at low cost

Vicious cycle of vulnerability and povertyVicious cycle of vulnerability and poverty

33


Stakeholder dialogueStakeholder dialogue

34


ReferencesReferencesBergeron, G. (1999) Rapid Appraisal methods for the assessment, design, and

evaluation of food security programs. Technical Guide No. 6. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, D.C..

Chambers, R. (1992) Rural Appraisal: Rapid, relaxed and participatory. Brighton, UK., IDS Discussion Paper No. 311. Institute of Development Studies (IDS), University of Sussex, UK.

DWC/InWEnt (2004) Fieldbook for participatory learning and action. The Center forPromoting Development for Women and Children (DWC) and Capacity BuildingInternational (InWEnt), Hanoi, Vietnam, and Feldafing, Germany.

Mikkelsen, B. (1995) Methods for development work and research. A guide forpractitioners. Sage Publications, New Delhi, India.

Siegel, P.B., Alwang, J. (1999) An asset-based approach to social riskmanagement: A conceptual framework. Social Protection Discussion Paper No. 9926. The World Bank, Washington D.C..

Stern, J. and Ricks, D. (1999) Focus groups as a useful approach to agribusinessresearch. Staff Paper No. 99-32. Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University, USA.

Webb, P., Harinarayan, A. (1999) A measure of uncertainty: The nature of vulnerability and its relationship to malnutrition. Disasters 23 (4), 292-305.

Documents

Qualitative Social Research for Rural Development Studies · “Qualitative Social Research for Rural Development Studies” Alwin Keil Ranking and scoring techniques are often applied