1

Chars Livelihoods Programme Design

Diversity and Livelihoods Assessment

Fieldwork Guide

Draft

15th January 2002

2

Acknowledgements: This field guide was put together by Mary Ann Brocklesby and Action Aid Bangladesh. Mary Hobley, David Barton, Cathy Butcher, Jeremy Holland, Ele Fisher, Sarah James and the Zenid Project Jordan all contributed to the development of the methods and structure of the guide.

3

CONTENTS:

1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................... 4 2.0 What the DVLA Aims to Achieve................................................................... 4 3.0 The Nature of Risk and Vulnerability and People’s Livelihoods .................... 4 4.0 The Social Risk Management Framework .................................................... 5 5.0 What are the Links between SRM and the DVLA? ....................................... 9 6.0 Research Questions and Research Methods.............................................. 10 7.0 Good Practice in Participatory Research .................................................... 15 8.0 Documentation............................................................................................ 17 9.0 Analysis and Reporting ............................................................................... 18 Annexes: Annex one: Glossary of terms used Annex two: Outline of methods used (bound separately) Annex three: Sample Research themes/issues/methods matrix Annex four: Sample checklist for assessment methods Annex five: References

4

1.0 Introduction This guide has been written by and for the DVLA field research team. It is intended to provide a source of guidance on the aims, methods and organisation of the assessment process. The guide is intended as a framework that the teams can apply drawing on their own experience and knowledge, and on the training that has been provided. For this reason, the main focus is on the essential principles that guide all participatory research. It lays out the aims of the DVLA, the concepts behind it, the components and allied research questions and methods, as well as analysis and reporting guidelines. In addition Annexe one and two give the glossary of terms used and the gives objectives and procedures of the key methods being tested under the DVLA respectively.

2.0 What the DVLA Aims to Achieve. The Diversity and Livelihoods Assessment or DVLA, can been defined as a tool for including local people’s views in the analysis of risk, vulnerability and allied livelihood strategies, and in the formulation of interventions to enhance the quality, diversity and sustainability of those strategies. DVLA is part of a process that starts with grass-roots participatory analysis and dialogue, and culminates in a better design and more effective action for social risk management in the riverine Chars. The DVLA aims to achieve two things: 1. To test out the validity of diversity assessment tools to:

• link context-specific social diversity to responses to risk and vulnerability; • identify existing as well as potential social/institutional linkages and • aid the development of demand-led planning processes in complex, diverse and

risk-prone environments. 2. To identify priorities for livelihood diversification and development interventions

(based on natural resources). The DVLA is based on a participatory process in which local people analyse their own realities and share their views and priorities. The DVLA uses the methods of PRA (participatory reflection and action) to facilitate an enquiry in which local people take the lead in developing a better understanding of how they manage risk and vulnerability.

3.0 The Nature of Risk and Vulnerability and People’s Livelihoods The concept of risk is used to refer to situations of uncertainty, in which events may arise that can damage well being. The uncertainty can relate to the timing and/or the magnitude of the event. Insecurity is thus defined as exposure to risk and risk exposure measures the possibility that a certain risk will occur. From this perspective risk is closely allied to vulnerability. When people become insecure through exposure to risk, the subsequent possibility of a decline in well-being means that people are vulnerable to greater risk. Vulnerability is therefore the resulting possibility or outcome of risk. The event triggering increased vulnerability is often referred to as “shock”. Shock is used to denote the event that triggers a decline in well-being. A shock may be unpredictable - for instant harvest failure - or predictable such as monsoon flooding. Lack of predictability may also refer to severity or frequency such as the difference in the levels

5

and severity of flooding on the chars in any given year. Importantly vulnerability is primarily a function of a) the level and range of assets available to individuals, households and local neighbourhoods b) the characteristics of the shocks (severity and frequency and shocks and c) the informal and formal mechanisms in place to deal with them. Closely linked with the concepts of risk and vulnerability is the notion of people’s livelihoods – the means by which individuals make a living. A livelihood is said to be sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses and shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets both now and in the future without undermining the natural resource base (Carney 1998). This is usually thought about in terms of access to and control over five different types of capital assets: human, social, financial, natural and physical capital1. However assets are more that resources for making a living, they give the capacity to engage with and make changes to the world in which an individual lives. These concepts of risk, vulnerability, capital assets and people’s livelihoods have important implications for poverty reduction when considering the specific context of the riverine chars in terms of:

• highlighting the need to understand the specific dimensions of risk and insecurity as key characteristics of the poor and vulnerable char dwellers and

• the critical importance of identifying strategies which prevent shocks or buffer their impact.

Existing char-based strategies are known to be diverse and their robustness dependent on the social networks and institutional linkages built up by individuals and households. An important underlying reason for the livelihood diversity is the need to confront and deal with the complex risk-prone environment in which they live. Char dweller face flooding, drought, erosion and food insecurity on a regular and recurrent basis. Their everyday lives, livelihoods and culture are about living with risk and vulnerability. However institutional responses to the risks often overlook the specific nature of risk, social diversity and vulnerability on the chars. In order to target interventions on the chars which better help char-dwellers deal with the risks they face it is crucial to understand the specific and multi-dimensional nature of those risks. The Social Risk Management framework2 offers the potential for tailoring a Chars Livelihoods programme to address the actual risks and vulnerabilities char dwellers face.

4.0 The Social Risk Management Framework Social risk management (SRM) is a framework for identifying and responding to the ways in which poor and vulnerable people reduce, mitigate and cope with risk in their lives such as flooding, drought or crop failure. It:

• focuses on targeting vulnerability and vulnerable people; • identifies the existing strategies of different social groups;

1 DFID’s SL Guidance notes 1999 explain in greater detail the various aspects of sustainable livelihoods. 2 The framework is closely associated with the World Bank through the WDR 2000/2001 and the Social Protection Strategy Paper World Bank 2001b) . The brief summary of the framework given here draws heavily on Moser C. with Antezana (2001) Social Protection in Bolivia: An assessment in terms of the World Bank’s Social protection Framework and the Bolivian PRSP. ODI/DFID Bolivia working Paper.

6

• assesses actions which can move people away from coping with vulnerability to prevention and mitigation;

• promotes broadening out institutional relationships to include informal and formal arrangements to manage risk and,

• emphasises participation and capacity building. It is therefore useful as a framework for both analysing the specific nature of risk in any given context and identifying potential interventions for managing risk more effectively. The framework has two components: first it classifies sources and types of risk - Risk Analysis - and secondly it provides an instrument for identifying alternative strategies and arrangements for dealing with risks - Risk Management 4.1. Sources of Risk – Risk Analysis The SRM typology of risk classifies risk sources in two ways: in terms of a) who is affected and at what level (micro, meso or macro) and b) the type of shock both natural (e.g. earthquakes, illness) and synthetic (unemployment, war, trade shock). As Table one illustrates personal or idiosyncratic risks affect individuals and households include old age, domestic violence loss of earnings. In contrast co-variant risks can occur at both community national and international levels for example harvest failure, flooding or drought. It is more useful to view the different levels of risk on a continuum from individual or meso level through to macro rather than take them as separate and distinct categories. A continuum helps focus where the links and overlaps are and at the same time aids identification of where external intervention is best placed to make a different to the poor and vulnerable. Table 1: Sources of Risk Micro Meso Macro

(covariant)

Natural Rainfall, flooding, drought, landslides, volcanic eruption

Earthquakes, winds, floods, drought

Health Illness, injury, disability

Epidemic

Lifecycle Birth, old age, death Social Crime, domestic

violence Terrorism, gangs Civil strife, war, social

upheaval Gender Control over

household resources Social acceptance of gender violence

Legal discrimination against women

Economic Business failure Unemployment, resettlement, harvest failure

Balance of payments, financial or currency crisis Technology or trade induced terms of trade shocks

Political Ethnic discrimination Riots Political default on social programs, Coup d’etat

Environmental Pollution Deforestation Nuclear disaster

Source: WDR 2000/2001

7

4.2. Risk Management Arrangements and Strategies The second component of SRM focuses on how risk is contained and managed. There are two aspects of this: the management arrangements and the management strategies for avoiding or alleviating risk

• Types of Risk Management Arrangements SRM identifies three different types of social risk management arrangements (see Table 2):

Public arrangements: These have somewhat limited coverage in developing countries such as Bangladesh for fiscal and other reasons. Much of government support in the form of food for work or disaster relief etc. have developed to help households cope after shocks.

Market-based arrangements: Individual households may also take advantage of

market-based institutions such as money or banks. In Bangladesh where formal market institutions have been reluctant to lend to households without secure earnings, micro finance has been and continues to be an important instrument of social risk management.

Informal arrangements: These have existed for a long time. In the chars in the

absence of consistent and continued government or market institutional presence, individual households, kinship groups and villages respond to risks such as flooding and by protecting themselves through informal or personal arrangements.

Informal and formal strategies are not mutually exclusive. There is a great deal of interdependence and overlap in terms of both the choices available to and the choices made by individuals and households. Government policies as well as the actual provision of formal mechanisms such as relief, heavily influence both the nature of the informal arrangements and how extensively they are used.

• Risk Management Strategies Distinguishing different kinds of risk strategies is a key element of understanding more precisely the range of risk reduction measures potentially at the disposal of households and individuals. Linked in to management arrangements they cut across communities, public and private sector responses. SRM three different types of risk management strategies. Risk reduction strategies. These are activities undertaken before and in anticipation of a shock. These can include collective action for infrastructure such as flood proofing, food storage or preventative health measures at the household level. Risk Mitigation strategies. This involves putting in place mechanisms to cushion the impact of a shock before it happens. This can be, for example, through insurance schemes. These schemes can take three forms: self-insurance; informal insurance via local social networks (the somaj) or through formal public insurance schemes. It can also involve diversifying a households’ asset base through crop and plot diversification or through migration. Risk Coping Strategies. Risk coping aims to relieve the impact of a shock after it occurs. At household level these can range from reduction in consumption level, use of

8

savings and loans and sale of assets through disposal of productive assets such as livestock and land through to destitution such as distress migration to the river embankments and urban slums. 4.3. The Social Risk Management Matrix Relating strategies to management arrangements within the SRM framework provides a useful analytical instrument to identify alternative types of strategies and arrangements for dealing with risks (see Table 2). Not only does the social risk management matrix help in analysing the current situation with regard to social risk management in any given place it can also be an important tool in prioritising the types and comparative importance of different interventions under consideration in the on-going chars livelihoods programme design. Table 2: Mechanisms for managing risk as defined in the World Development Report

Objective Informal mechanisms Formal mechanisms

Individual & household

Group based Market Based Publicly provided

Reducing risk Preventive health practices Migration More secure income sources

Collective action for infrastructure, dikes, terraces Common property resource management

Sound macroeconomic policy Environmental policy Education and training policy Public health policy Infrastructure (dams, roads) Active labour market policy

Mitigating risk Diversification Crop and plot

diversification Income source diversification Investment in physical and human capital

Occupational associations Rotating saving and credit associations

Saving accounts in financial institutions Micro finance

Agricultural extension Liberalized trade Protection of property rights

Insurance Marriage and extended family Sharecropper tenancy Buffer crops

Investment in social capital (ritual, reciprocal gift giving)

Old age annuities Accident, disability and other insurance

Pension systems Mandate Insurance for unemployment, Illness, disability and other risks

Coping with shocks

Sale of assets Loans from money-lenders Child labour Reduced food consumption Seasonal or temporary migration

Transfers from networks of mutual support

Sales of financial assets Loans from financial institutions

Social assistance Workfare Subsidies Social funds Cash transfers

Source: World Bank 2001

9

5.0 What are the Links between SRM and the DVLA? The DVLA is fundamental to a) linking char dwellers into the process of identifying and developing risk reduction measures and b) ensuring that an analysis of risks is embedded in an understanding of the accumulation and erosion of the different types of capital assets available to char dwellers. It should also aid an understanding of how different social groups, for example widowers or young unmarried women and men or women heads of households with dependents, shape and are shaped by risk and vulnerability. Moreover distinguishing social diversity and its particular characteristics on the chars will be an important contribution to more rigorously disaggregated risk reduction measures. As such DVLA is critical importance to the development of the chars livelihoods programme design. Data from the DVLA will provide a SRM baseline from which other strands of the design will build. 5.1. The Components of the DVLA? There are three interlinked components of the DVLA all centred on analysing different aspects of risk and vulnerability. These are:

• Managing Risk and Vulnerability: Livelihood Assets and Strategies • Managing Risk and Vulnerability: Social Networks, Rights and Entitlements • Managing Risk and Vulnerability: Livelihood Diversification

We look at each one in turn.

• Component One: Livelihood Assets and Strategies An important stage in the DVLA will be establishing an asset baseline for the key social groups identified on the chars. These assets include:

• Natural capital - land, grasses, water and wild resources; • Physical capital – housings, markets, boats and productive resources; • Human capital - nutrition health education skills and local knowledge; • Social capital - networks and trust-based relationships and, • Financial capital – credit, remittances, stores of wealth e.g. livestock

However, assessing the assets (or lack of such resources) available to a group of people is only the first step in understanding whether or not these come together in an identifiable livelihood strategy at the individual, household or group level. The aim of this component is to establish in broad terms the nature of different social groups’ mechanisms for reducing vulnerability and pursuing livelihoods in the face of risk and insecurity on the chars.

• Component two: Social Networks, Rights and Entitlements Char dweller’s ability to access assets and resources will be related to their rights and entitlements and their capacity to claim these. However a major constraint to poor people’s capacity with regard to social risk management is the deep-rooted structural biases that prevent fair and equitable treatment in all areas of life. It has been noted (Nijera Kori/DFID 2001) that the poor, particularly poor women and religious and ethnic

10

minorities are the most vulnerable to violations of their rights, least likely to participate in processes of decision-making and most likely to be marginalized from the mainstream of society. This also holds true for char land dwellers who face widespread discrimination by virtue of their habitat, lifestyle and livelihood patterns. As such this component addresses both the social networks and institutional relationships which can hinder or assist people’s efforts to build their asset base and also their perception of rights and entitlements to make claims on other individuals and organisations. In this context rights can be understood as claims (of one person or group on another person, group or institutions) that have been legitimised by social structures and norms. By understanding the processes whereby claims are made and legitimised - and the constraints to doing this – researchers can gain a clearer understanding of the processes and relations that enhance or constrain an individual’s access to assets. (Moser et al, 2001:p11). Aspects of rights might include the right to political representation and protection under the law. They might also include entitlements to economic, social and cultural resources such as education and health, employment and the right to freedom of expression. This aspect of DVLA needs to explore how different social groups (such as women, children, men, the most vulnerable) understand what is meant by “rights” currently and have different levels of entitlements. It will also be useful to begin the process of understanding what impacts this has on livelihood strategies and outcomes.

• Component Three: Livelihood Diversification During a scoping study (Ashley 1999) in Kurigram chars information was collected on the different livelihood options available to different wealth strata and men and women in the chars. Much of this information is descriptive and char dwellers, in particular poor men and women, have not been offered the opportunity to express their preferences of new technology, new enterprises and other interventions such as information provision and other services. The available literature suggests (see the Literature synthesis 2001) that livestock is probably a preferred livelihood option for many poor households but does not identify specific species/products for development. There is also little information about how enhanced or improved crop production could benefit poorer households, by increasing the quantities of sharecrop harvests for example, which may lead to, improved household food security, and/or increases in demand for wage labour etc. There is also little documented evidence of the importance of fishing to household food security and income. This component of the DVLA therefore builds on the information gathered under the other two components to explore possible future options for livelihood diversification. The emphasis is on the identification of priorities from the respective communities point of view and opportunities for development. It does not aim to generate a description of current livelihood strategies on the chars.

6.0 Research Questions and Research Methods This section links the components of DVLA with key research questions to be pursued and suggests a menu of methods that might be employed. This list should be used as a guide only and should not be followed slavishly! Related research questions may emerge during the fieldwork and the methods being suggested may need modifying or adding to

11

in order to ensure the objectives of the assessment are met. This is to be expected – some of the visual methods may not be appropriate for example. We are testing a combination of methods aimed at aiding understanding of a specific and focus aspect of life on the Chars: namely dealing with risk and livelihood diversification. Therefore we have deliberately restricted the number of methods being used. There are two reasons for this:

• We do not need to know everything – just enough to enable the process to continue and be informed with a better poverty and gender focused understanding of how people living on the chars deal with risk and vulnerability.

• This assessment is only part of a much wider design process that is going on. The information we collect and analyse will be fed into follow-up participatory work looking at for example: markets and enterprise development; transport and communication and disaster management.

We have tried to link the methods directly to analysis. It is the analysis that is the most important. We need to ensure analysis is on going and developed as the information comes in. It is only if the method is not helping to develop our understanding should we consider using another. The information on research questions and related methods is presented in figure 1.

12

Figure 1: Methods to implement a Diversity/Livelihoods Assessment

Managing Risk and Vulnerability

Social Networks, Rights & Entitlements

Livelihood Diversification

Livelihood Assets Strategies

What are the most important social networks or institutions? How do they influence you and you influence them? Who is excluded and why? What social networks/institutions help you best deal with risk and vulnerability ? What is a “right” What rights do you have which if claimed reduce your risk and vulnerability ? Are these different for different groups of people? Which instutitions enable or disable you in claiming rights? What do you think about government services in helping you deal with risk and vulnerability?

What assets do people have? Do these change over time? What periods off the year do people have more or less assets? What is a “risk” ? Do different groups of people have different risks? When are the risk points during a year and what are they? Are different groups of people more vulnerable to different risk points? How do you plan and respond to risk?

What livelihood options do you have? Which livelihoods do you prefer and why? What are the barriers to improving the preferred livelihood options? Who has access to productive resources? Is it different for different groups? What opportunities are there for improving livelihoods and are they different for different social groups?

Seasonality Calendar Institutional Mapping Matrix scoring Baseline Asset wheel Rights Matrix semi structured interview

13

Well-being/mobility ranking has been undertaken in all the selected study locations. This has identified on average 6–7 different well being groups in each place. Some locations have much larger populations than other areas. This is particularly the case on the unprotected banks of the mainland where villages comprise over 3000 households. In contrast on newly settled island chars the whole population is less that 400. Not all well-being groups will need to be sampled in every case and fieldworkers will need to use their best judgement depending on the time available, the information obtained and the need to verify and cross-check results. Sampling will therefore be slightly different in each location. In all locations fieldworkers will be expected to target the poorest most vulnerable groups and to hold separate discussions with female and male participants. Therefore in each location there will be between 6 and 14 group discussions for each method. Table three summarises the methods, sample size and target groups for each of the components. Table 3: Summary Of Methods, Sample Size and Location

Component Method Sample size Target groups Livelihood Strategies

Seasonal Calendar Assets wheel

Social networks, rights and entitlements

Institutional mapping Focus group discussion – what is a “right”? Rights matrix

Livelihood Diversification

Matrix scoring Semi –structured interviews

12 – 16 people for each social/well being category. In each location sample at least 60% of the categories Can be as individuals or in groups. Limit group size to between 6 – 8. As component one

Separate groups for men and women. Focus on the poorer and more vulnerable well being categories Where possible, given the time constraints consider separate groups for children.

Annex two lays out the objectives, suggested procedures, materials and timings of each of the methods identified above. 5.1. Locations and Sample size From existing data we established seven distinct location types within the char lands, outlined in table one below. All of these locations were sampled in Gaibandha district. The data collected during the mobility mapping exercise showed that these location types were important and needed to be represented in the design. Table three gives the actual study sites identified during the mobility mapping. It is these study sites that will be followed up for the diversity and livelihood assessment.

14

Table 3: Location Types Char area Location Type Island Chars Land that even in the dry season, can only be reached by crossing a main river channel

Newly settled Char 0 –3 years Established & settled for 3 - 10 Established & settled for over 10

years

Attached Char

Attached Char land is accessible from mainland without crossing a main channel during the dry season

West Bank (right) East Bank (left)

Unprotected Mainland

Subject to flooding and erosion

West Bank (right) East Bank (left)

Table Four: Location Site information from the Mobility Mapping – Gaibandha District

Location Study Sites Char, Union, Upazilla Location type Length of

settlement Households Sample size

??(HH)

Island Chars Karaibari (Kunder para and Karaibari) Kamarjani, Gaibandha Sadar

Newly emerged 2 – 3 years old inhabited

38 HH

Jamira (Purba-Jamira) Fulchari, Fulchari

3-10 years 3 years habitation

113 HH

Paschim Batikamari, Kaharjani, Gaibandha Sadar

10 years ?? 10 HH (sample size)

Attached Chars Gobindi (Modhogovindi)

Shagata, Shaghata

West bank right 10 years old 171 HH

Algarchar (Paschim alga char) Erandabari, Fulchari

East bank left 5 –6 years old 26 HH

15

Unprotected Mainland Ratanpur

Urya Union, Fulchari

Bank side not noted

2 years habitation

56HH

Khana Bari (pachimer-gram/Nadar Ali Bari) Kapasia, Sundarganja

West bank?? ?? 80 HH

Mollar Char (chitulia Dighar/natun para) Mollar Char, Gaibandha sadar

East bank left ?? 28 HH male 30 HH female ??

?? denotes information not clear from the mobility report. Will need to be clarified prior to field work. (The approximate population size + number of HHs for each study site needs clarificati

7.0 Good Practice in Participatory Research We do research in order to improve understanding and improve actions. Good research is built on a number of essential elements that are discussed briefly below. 7.1. Distinguishing units of analysis One of the difficulties that typically arises in analysing findings from participatory research is that variations in livelihood experiences are characteristic of groups (“communities”, clan-type groups, age-groups, gender-based groups) as well as of households and individuals. It is important to be highly conscious of this fact in facilitating and reporting the analysis done by local people. Views should be sought from each of the important sub-groups in the population. It should not be assumed that there is a single “community view” on these matters, even if opinions are sometimes expressed in this way. It is also important to understand that the word ‘community’, when taken in terms of sub groups in the community, does not necessarily refer to people who know each other. It is likely however, that these sub groups will have similar interests, face similar problems and have similar perspectives regarding the context in which they live. Lines of questioning in the field should be formulated so that they refer clearly to one “unit of analysis” or another. This is different from the matter of which group is being consulted at a particular moment. In principle, a focus group of women can be asked about the relative well being of the village; village elders can be asked to rank households in the community, and so on. The point is just to be clear what sort of question is being asked in any particular case. 7.2. Dealing with social difference All communities are to some degree divided and unequal. As well as inequalities of economic well-being, social status and power between different households, there are typically large differences between men and women, people of different ages, and distinct groups defined by ethnicity or social origin. Understanding and reflecting these differences are fundamental to the DVLA. Social diversity and what that means to the livelihood choices of different groups in a critical aspect of the overall chars livelihoods programme design. The DVLA will provide a key pieces of the information needed to

16

develop the design. Capturing social diversity then, has major implications for both the issues to be investigated and the way they are investigated. In terms of the sequence of field enquiry, it may well be easiest and most advisable to start off by tackling assessment questions with a mixed group in the larger community setting before targeting specific groups. This will help ally fears that certain people or groups are being excluded or that by targeting certain groups fieldworkers have a hidden agenda. Nevertheless, reflecting social diversity will mean listening separately to the different groups that make up communities in a particular setting. The well being categories offer a good starting point but once in the field other important social differences may emerge and attempts should be made to involve such groups in the assessment. The same questions should be answered, with appropriate adjustments, about each of the sub-groups themselves (women headed households, young men, minority groups, tribal groups etc.). 7.3. Learning reversal DVLA fieldworkers need to begin from a position of respecting local people and their knowledge and capabilities. This is fundamental. They must be able to work in partnership with local communities and provide them with opportunities to apply their knowledge, experience and capabilities in a process of analysing their realities. This implies special skills and training. Fieldworkers must have the skill to facilitate a successful participatory learning process. They must also develop the ability to record people’s testimony and summarise the analysis they make of their reality without substantial loss or distortion, bearing in mind the social context in which the interaction is taking place. Facilitators of group work must facilitate – “handing over the stick” at the earliest opportunity and using their own knowledge and experience in a restrained way, to elicit a rich, well-focused and inclusive discussion of the topic selected for attention. The outputs of the sessions should be recognised as the product of a joint analysis of the problems considered. 7.4. Awareness of power dynamics This means being sensitive to the way inequalities of power and social status influence what is said. Researchers must be aware of how people are socially interacting. A good example may be the differences in opinion which, emerge from a group of women who are talking in public about their views on violence in the household and how their opinions may emerge in private. The fieldwork teams also need to be capable of detecting and correcting any aspects of their conduct that threaten to undermine mutual trust and respect between themselves and community members. They must be aware, too, that joint analysis is influenced by community perceptions of what the outsiders’ motives and interests are. Many of these issues underline the need for triangulation as discussed above. 7.5. Triangulation Triangulation means systematic cross-checking in order to improve the robustness of findings. Different researchers should ask different groups of people the same question. Similarly, the accuracy and completeness of analysis and information generated by one method can be assessed by using another method, and any discrepancies followed up by a third. The relevant sources of analysis and information will normally include direct observation, the evidence of “key informants” and written records as well as different sorts of group exercise. The practice of triangulation helps to remove biases and atypical responses. It can also help to uncover deeper social processes, or additional layers of

17

reality. The bibliography in Annex 5 contains some key references which should provide on-going reference during the field work and can feed into the synthesis report.

8.0 Documentation Documentation is a very important part of the DVLA. Full and accurate documentation provides the link between the fieldwork and the process of design. The principles of fieldwork documentation are few and simple, although they are easy to forget in the difficult conditions in which fieldwork often takes place. Team members with extensive PRA experience may find some of the points elementary. But it is better to state the obvious than to neglect points that have a big influence on the quality and consistency of fieldwork. 8.1. Note-taking Taking notes is important, before, during and after the formal fieldwork activities and interviews. In many local cultures, it is considered rude to write during a conversation. As a general rule, facilitators of PRA activities should take notes only so far as they help themselves to develop their thinking and analysis for further questions. Actual recording should be left to other team members. It is also important to take notes sensitively and with due courtesy. Note-takers must ask permission before beginning documentation. They must explain the need to document accurately the discussion and analysis done by participating local people. It is also important to explain how this documentation will be used. The same may be true for conversations with key informants and other individuals, although in this case it may be more effective to make notes immediately after the meeting. It is good practice to take some time to share information and key points amongst the various teams working in the field, at the end of each day. The assessment supervisor, however, should be aware of the level of tiredness amongst researchers and adapt the research days as appropriate. For example, in some circumstances it may make sense to have one day of field research and one day of synthesis. This also allows the supervisor to check that the researchers are documenting all information in a systematic fashion through activity reports Notes are needed a) to contribute to, and b) to add to, activity reports. To reiterate what has been said in other parts of the Guide, the SLA approach involves drawing on a variety of sources of information, understanding, and analysis. This includes the fieldworker’s own observations, the important things that are said in the course of a group activity that may or may not be reflected in the formal outputs of the activity, pieces of testimony casually provided outside of the formal encounters, members of the group who seem to disagree with general information provided and so on. 8.2. The importance of recording exactly participants’ discussion and analysis Noticing especially eloquent or insightful remarks or analysis by participants, and recording them precisely (in the original language), is an extremely important duty of the DVLA fieldworker. This needs to be done selectively. Not everything can be written down. But a few authentic quotations enhance the impact of a DVLA synthesis report more than anything else. It is disappointing to find that fieldworkers have recorded such testimony and analysis inaccurately, “translating” what was said into the words they themselves would use, or correcting it in some way. Interesting incidents observed also

18

need to be carefully recorded. These may be directly related to the joint analysis done through the use of PRA tools or may be something observed by the fieldworker.

9.0 Analysis and Reporting 9.1. The Synthesis Stage Good practice should apply when synthesising participatory research findings. Teams should work in an inclusive fashion, allowing all team members to contribute to the production of the final report. This helps to prevent distortion or dilution in the interpretation of local people’s analysis. Good practice also dictates initial findings should be fed back to communities for discussion. A further challenge is to apply the triangulation principle in an appropriate way at the synthesis stage. Analysis should draw where possible on secondary data sources. This is partly to ensure that the reports are as rich in findings and action proposals as possible (analytical integration). It is also to enable a two-way process of confirming or challenging findings from different sources (triangulation). To support the on-going analysis it is important that debriefing is conducted regular, if possible at the end of each days work. Data sheets (see Annex three and four) have been prepared to help with on-going analysis. These should be completed and inputted at the end of fieldwork in each of the locations. In addition there will be two full team debriefing workshops: firstly, after field work has been conducted in two different locations in order to assess the utility of the methods and secondly at the end of the fieldwork to synthesis the data in preparation for the written report. 9.2. Reporting Components one and two will be reported together as the diversity assessment. Component three will be reported separately as Assessment of options for Livelihood Diversification. Whilst the actual preparation and submission of the reports will be the responsibility of the field supervisor it is important all team members are aware of what is expected and help develop the synthesis of data throughout the fieldwork and in the debriefing workshops.

• Diversity Assessment The main focus of the diversity assessment report is to assess whether the methods used achieved the objectives. Do they need adapting or strengthened with the use of additional methods to ensure that it can aid the development of demand-led planning processes in complex, diverse and risk-prone environments? This means that the field team will need to provide the evidence that they are confident the assessment has been able to:

• link and identify socially differentiated responses to risk and vulnerability and • identify the actual and potential social and institutional networks in each location

All the calendars, matrices and asset wheels along with accompanying notes should be entered into MSWord to a maximum of two pages per group. The resulting information can then be transferred and entered in to the data synthesis sheets. This will provide the basis for drawing conclusions, identifying gaps and assessing the strengths and

19

weaknesses of the assessment. The conclusions should be summarised briefly and attached to the data synthesis sheets. Together with the outcome of the workshops the field supervisor should have enough evidence to develop a report that records the process and analyses the strengths, weaknesses and appropriateness of the tools for social risk management.

• Assessment of Options for Livelihoods Diversification Once the data has been collected in each location each matrix should be converted to MSWord along with the information gathered from semi-structured interviews on a maximum of 2 pages for each group. This provides the basis for drawing conclusions concerning priorities and development opportunities from the information collected. These conclusions should be summarised briefly (maximum of 4 pages). The report itself will need to provide an analysis that also considers the opportunities and constraints to the sustainable exploitation of the charlands natural resource base by poor chars dwellers and in particular: • Required technology for production intensification (eg, varieties, breeds, irrigation,

fishing gears, etc.) • Marketing of any surplus production including access to markets and opportunities

for expansion (selling more produce/surpluses) • Issues surrounding storage of crops and fodder (especially wet season), and

opportunities for reducing post-harvest losses. • Institutional constraints associated with land tenure (e.g. sharecropping)

which reduce the benefits to cultivators • Other constraints (eg access to credit or transport) which may reduce the

impact of new technology • Agroprocessing opportunities (milk/livestock, crops and fish).

20

Annex 1: Glossary of Terms Translation of key words for the DVLA English

Bangla

Capital Assets . People’s strengths; they can be converted into positive livelihood outcomes. They can be depleted or enhanced and used in different combinations. People may have access to some and not to others. Assets can be seen as the basis of people’s power to engage with and change the world they live in.

Natural capital Natural resource stocks, for example, water, land, air, from which resource flows useful for livelihoods are derived.

Physical capital Infrastructure – such as transport, shelter water, energy and communication systems and also production equipment that helps people to pursue their livelihoods

Financial capital Financial resources which are available to poor people - these could be savings, credit, regular remittances, pensions, livestock, land which is used for financial investment

Human Capital Skills, knowledge, ability to work, health; all of which are important if people are to pursue different livelihood strategies

Social Capital . Social resources upon which people draw in pursuit of their livelihoods - for example social networks, membership of groups, relationships of trust, access to community groups

Livelihood outcomes What a person would like to achieve in their life. People can pursue a range of livelihood outcomes, e.g. good health, education for their children, food security, reduced vulnerability

Livelihood To make a living – a way of making a living Livelihood Strategies The range and combination of activities and choices that people make or undertake to achieve there livelihood goals (including productive activities, investment strategies, reproductive choices etc.)

21

Reduction Strategies The activities a person undertakes to reduce the possibility of a risk occurring. These are preventive measures such flood proofing or preventive health care.

Mitigation Strategies Mitigation strategies are developed before a risk occurs and are undertaken in order to help reduce the impact of a future risk event such as flooding or lack of paid work. For example diversifying livelihood options and broadening a households asset base.

Coping strategies The activities a person undertakes and the assets they use when reacting to an external unexpected event – a ‘shock’ – for example a sudden death of the main income earner in the family or a natural disaster.

Adaptive strategies The activities a person undertakes and the assets they use proactively in relation to an event which is predictable or likely to happen in their life (.e.g. health insurance to cover expected illness). A way of managing risk by reducing or mitigating the impact of shocks and events.

Risk Uncertain events which can damage well-being e.g. the risk to become ill or the risk of flooding

Risk Exposure Measures the possibility that a certain risk will occur

Shock An event that threatens well being or increases vulnerability. It is a sudden event that is difficult to predict. This could include external shocks such as a flood or a sudden rise in prices, or internal shocks such as an illness in the family, an incidence of domestic abuse or the death of a community leader. They often demand an immediate response from individuals, households or communities to deal with them.

Sustainable Livelihoods are sustainable when people can achieve their aims in life and maintain their choices, despite shocks and stresses. Their strategies should also allow long term productivity of natural and common property resources and so not undermine the livelihoods or compromise livelihood options open to others. Sustainability can include environmental sustainability, economic

22

sustainability, social sustainability, institutional sustainability etc. Vulnerable / Vulnerability context Vulnerability relates to people’s ability to maintain their livelihoods in the face of the shocks, stresses and trends of the environment (i.e. the vulnerability context) in which they live. This may affect the use and availability of various types of assets to which they might have access to and thus the choices they can make. Sometimes a person will not be able to access a sufficient amount or combination of assets or will deplete their asset base in order to cope in the short term, with negative impacts on their long-term vulnerability.

Policies These could include for example, legislation on housing or land tenure, health, national land use policies, laws on credit availability etc. They determine access to various types of capital , strategies and decision making bodies. They also define the different terms of exchange between types of capital and returns to any given livelihood strategy

Institutions & Processes These could include for example, local conventions on land allocation, local justice systems, existing ownership rights and power relations, housing or land markets, efficacy of organisations that make and enforce legislation. In the private sector they could include existence of building organisations, material suppliers. They are the instituions which determine access to various types of capital, strategies and decision making bodies and terms of exchange between types of capital and return to any given livelihood strategy

Neglected capital / dead capital This refers to neglected capital; that which is unseen, un-noticed, neglected and cannot be used in transactions as there is no formal entitlement

Trends and cycles A cyclical event might relate, for example, to climatic, political, economic or life (birth, marriage etc) cycles. A trend refers to a longer-term change such as trend in out-migration or a trend in cultural practices. Cycles and trends tend to be more predictable than shocks

23

Annex three: Sample Research themes/ issues /methods Below is an example of a research theme/question matrix. During the fieldwork workshop we will be preparing one for each of the themes that will guide the assessment.

THEMES & ISSUES Research Questions METHODS Comments

1. Assets and livelihood strategies

What assets do people have? Natural capital (including common pool resources) Produced capital (including physical infrastructure and credit) Human capital (nutrition, health, education, local knowledge) Social capital (the benefits of a dense pattern of association nb ask about membership of organisations and institutions) Political capital (power or powerlessness) Which sources of livelihood are preferred? And why? (Are some kinds of livelihoods more prone to shocks?)

Asset wheel Seasonality Calendar and analysis

Points to remember Changes in questions after fieldwork in a location Key words to remember

How do you use these assets in combination in a livelihood strategy? What trends (e.g. in income sources, employment) have you observed? What are the main type of shocks that different groups of people face? How did you respond? Sudden shocks; predictable events; Different ways of coping

24

What kind of event can you predict? How do you plan for events that might occur in the future (Mitigation; reduction)? What is the role of communities, government and NGOs in helping households cope with these shocks?

Perception of rights and entitlements

What is the local word for a “right” and to what things is it applied (eg education, health, justice, a job, natural and produced capital)?

Rights matrix

Is it applied in the same way to everyone or in different ways to different groups? (eg do women have the same rights as men?)

What can women do when they feel discriminated against?

Do people have the capacity and resources to claim their rights effectively? Do they have the power to negotiate and influence public decisions and change institutions?

Social networks

What are the most important (formal and informal) institutions in your life (e.g community groups, service providers, extension workers, justice/police, political institutions, religious/cultural organisations, key individuals, financial organisations

institutional mapping

25

Do they influence your lives positively or negatively? How do different groups rate the effectiveness of these institutions?

What do you have to invest in them (e.g. time, resources, money?) Who had more influence in the community? Who has less influence ? Why is this the case? ( power relations, social processes, exclusion)

During a financial crisis (losing a job, family illness, crop failure), what institutions do people turn to? How are they ranked in terms of preference?

Which institutions do people think they have some control or influence over?

Who is excluded from institutions and why?

How have markets, and access to markets, changed? Markets for: labour (local, national and international), land, water, housing, and produce)?

26

What are the perceived government and non-government safety nets for the vulnerable? How are they ranked in terms of preference? What public and private health care facilities are available in the community? What institutions provide credit? How do different groups in the community rank them in order of effectiveness? What other services are provided/not provided in the area (agriculture, livestock, irrigation) Who provides security in the area? And justice? Are the services satisfactory? If not, how can they be improved?

27

Annex four: Sample Checklist The Sample checklist given below is meant as an example only. For each of the methods used in the DVLA a checklist should be developed to help guide discussions with participants. Appropriate issues and questions will be formulated during the pre-fieldwork workshop and should be modified during the process of fieldwork.

Sample Seasonal Calendar Checklist Introduction

• Introduce members of the field team and their roles • The purpose of the session • Describe in general terms what participants will be

encouraged to do and why • Encourage inputs and questions from all participants

Livelihood Assets

Issue Example Questions

1. Natural Rainfall • Which months or seasons of the year is there most rain? 2. Human Health • Which seasons of the year are you most often ill?

• Which seasons of the year do your children most often ill? • Why is this? (Remember prompting & probing questions) • Etc.

3. Natural Livestock • Which seasons is it easiest to feed your animals? • Which season is most difficult? • Why? • Which seasons do your animals most often become ill? • Etc.

4. Human Labour demands

• When are the busiest times of the year? • Why? • Are they different for different people? • Why?

5. Financial Markets • When do sell most of your produce? • What, where, etc? • Etc

6. Financial Money • When is money easiest? • When is money most difficult? • When can you buy jewellery? • When do you have to borrow money? • Why, how, where? • Etc.

7. Social Friends & family

• Which times of the year do you visit your friends and family who live nearby?

• Which times of the year do you travel to visit friends & family?• Which times of the year do your friends & family give you

most help? • How, why, etc? • Etc.

8. Physical Boats • Which times are boats used most often? • Which times are boats used less often? • Why, how, etc? • Etc.

28

9. Natural Fish • When are fish most plentiful? • Why, how, where, etc? • Etc.

Overview & analysis

• Looking at the calendar can we see times when are most difficult?

• Which times are these? • Why? • Does everyone agree? • What are the main risks during the year? • Etc.

Conclusion • Thank the Participants for valuable & informative discussion and for their time in attending

• Sum up the issues • Say again how the results will be used. • Thank the Participants again and tell them where they can

find further information about the project if they want.

29

Annex four: Sample Data Sheets DVLA Data Sheet Location: Name of Fieldworkers: Date: Names and gender of participants: Well-being status: Other relevant information: e.g. all children or all women heads of households or all older people dependent on relatives. Social Group Assets base

Natural Physical Financial Human Capital Important Issues and characteristics: Examples include:

• Seasonal changes in Asset Base

• Trends affecting assets e.g. outmigration

• Life cycle – young, old etc

• Relative importance of different assets

• Identified links

• Noted differences between access to and control over

Active: Dormant:

Active: Dormant:

Active: Dormant:

Active: Dormant:

Active: Dormant:

30

DVLA Data Sheet Location: Name of Fieldworkers: Date: Names and gender of participants: Well-being status: Other relevant information: e.g. all children or all women heads of households or all older people dependent on relatives. Livelihood Strategy Institutional context (Social Networks) Strategy Asset impact positive negative Coping

Give institution and impact Give institution and impact

Mitigation

Reduction

31

Data Synthesis DVLA Data synthesis Sheet Location: Name of Fieldworkers: Date: Number of Participants Male and Female No. of Well-being groups: Other relevant information: e.g. which well being group were sampled in location. Sources of Risk

Micro Individual and household

Indicate which individuals and which households

Meso Community

Macro National (if known)

Natural

Health

Lifecycle

Social

Gender

Economic

Political

Environmental

32

Annex 4: References To be completed