AR ESA phase2 participatory-research-design-training Oct2016 - Revision history

PopoolaSamuel001 at 07:14, 11 December 2018

2018-12-11T07:14:03Z

PopoolaSamuel001 at 15:35, 10 December 2018

2018-12-10T15:35:37Z

JonathanOdhong: Imported from Wikispaces

2016-11-09T14:23:12Z

Imported from Wikispaces

New page

==Africa RISING ESA Phase 2==
==Participatory Research Design Approaches Training==
==3 - 4 October, 2016==
==Lilongwe, Malawi==
----
[[File:419A8707.JPG|800x533px]]
* '''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/africa-rising/albums/72157671664042714| More photos from the event]''' (click to view)
* ''''''[[:File:AR_ESA_partresearchtraining-finalparticipantslist.doc| List of Participants ]]''''''(click to download)

* This 2-day training preceded the [[AR_ESA_phase2_inception-review&planning_Oct2016| Africa RISING ESA Phase 2 Inception/Review and Planning Meeting]]

==Agenda==
'''Day 1''' (3 October, 2016)
* [http://www.slideshare.net/africa-rising/the-new-agronomy-and-new-research-methods| Recent thinking in systems research and implications for research designs] – R. Coe (click to download presentation)
* [http://www.slideshare.net/africa-rising/sustainable-intensification-indicator-framework| Africa RISING sustainable intensification framework] – P. Grabowski (click to download presentation)
* Practical session – looking at different data sets that participants submitted to the trainer

'''Day 2''' (4 October, 2016)
* [http://www.slideshare.net/africa-rising/the-new-agronomy-and-new-research-methods| Approaches to analysis and the sort of results that can be generated] - R. Coe (click to download presentation)
* Group work – causal loops in system analysis? (see photos of the sample causal loops developed by groups below)

{|
| [[File:PartRschTraining 1.JPG]] | | [[File:PartRschTraining 2.JPG]]
|-
| [[File:PartRschTraining 3.JPG]] | | [[File:PartRschTraining 4.JPG]]
|-
|}
* Brainstorming in 3 groups on research design issues that are challenging/problematic/confusing

'''Feedback from group B:'''

'''Discussion focus:''' Assessing farmer preferences concerning new practices (how are preferences connected to decisions)
1. What level of experience (length and scale/intensity) is needed for farmers to evaluate a practice?
* From observing a demo to practicing it over many years or
* Working on a 10x10 m plot over 1 ha?
2. When should we aim for overall assessments and when for specific characteristics (affordable, social acceptable, accessible)
* When to elicit from farmers and when to predefine
3. Who is doing the assessing, how are they chosen?
* Random selection?
* What do the choices represent?
4. What is the connection between an expressed preferences and decision making – Irmgard’s FIAT vs Mercedes example
5. When should assessment be relative and when absolute
6. Where do you assess preferences from?
* Under a tree?
* At the site?
7. How do we avoid biasness in the assessment of preferences?
* Farmers may tell what you want to hear.
8. Who is asking questions on preferences…the donor/scientists vs local farmers
9. How are the preferences expressed?
* Ratings and rankings on scale/ advantages and disadvantages?
* Both options may still be bad!
10. When should you assess preferences with groups and individuals ?
* Who decides on this?
* What are the groups?
'''Tools'''
1. Farmers’ participatory research
* Group level
* Individual level
2. Surveys
3. Ranking and ratings
4. Observations

'''Feedback from group C'''
'''Discussion focus:''' Baselines, controls and farmer practice

'''Baseline'''
* Questionnaire- to get overall picture of circumstances
* Pretest with rigor and consistency and (thoroughness) and refine quest
* Build trust with interviewees
* Integrate bio and social/ quantitative and qualitative
* Use baseline info from previous when avail (How can we promote this?)
* Consider sensitive questions
'''Control'''
* Well-tied to objectives
* Depending on objective will impact control used e.g. Microfauna – treatment + status quo. Look at existing level in natural setting- control; Nutrition – village no inputs Vs village with inputs. After time- make observations

'''Farmer Practice'''
* Normal/ average way of doing something.
* Equilibrium (after others have had their impact e.g. NGOs) state without our intervention

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 ==Agenda==
 '''<u>Day 1</u>''' (3 October, 2016)
-* [http://www.slideshare.net/africa-rising/the-new-agronomy-and-new-research-methods| Recent thinking in systems research and implications for research designs] – R. Coe <span style="color: #00b050;">(click to download presentation)</span>
+* [http://www.slideshare.net/africa-rising/the-new-agronomy-and-new-research-methods Recent thinking in systems research and implications for research designs] – R. Coe (click to download presentation)</span>
-* [http://www.slideshare.net/africa-rising/sustainable-intensification-indicator-framework| Africa RISING sustainable intensification framework] – P. Grabowski <span style="color: #00b050;">(click to download presentation)</span>
+* [http://www.slideshare.net/africa-rising/sustainable-intensification-indicator-framework Africa RISING sustainable intensification framework] – P. Grabowski (click to download presentation)</span>
 * Practical session – looking at different data sets that participants submitted to the trainer
 '''<u>Day 2</u>''' (4 October, 2016)
 * [http://www.slideshare.net/africa-rising/the-new-agronomy-and-new-research-methods| Approaches to analysis and the sort of results that can be generated] - R. Coe (click to download presentation)
-* Group work – causal loops in system analysis? <span style="color: #00b050;">(see photos of the sample causal loops developed by groups below)</span>
+* Group work – causal loops in system analysis? (see photos of the sample causal loops developed by groups below)</span>
 {| class="wikitable"
@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 * Brainstorming in 3 groups on research design issues that are challenging/problematic/confusing
-<u>'''Feedback from group B:'''</u>
+<u>'''Feedback from group B:'''</u><br/>
 '''Discussion focus:''' Assessing farmer preferences concerning new practices (how are preferences connected to decisions)
-. What level of experience (length and scale/intensity) is needed for farmers to evaluate a practice?
+<br/>
-* From observing a demo to practicing it over many years or
+'''Discussion focus:'''<br/>
-* Working on a 10x10 m plot over 1 ha?
+Assessing farmer preferences concerning new practices (how are preferences connected to decisions)<br/>
-. When should we aim for overall assessments and when for specific characteristics (affordable, social acceptable, accessible)
+*. What level of experience (length and scale/intensity) is needed for farmers to evaluate a practice?<br/>
-* When to elicit from farmers and when to predefine
+::- From observing a demo to practicing it over many years or
-. Who is doing the assessing, how are they chosen?
+::- Working on a 10x10 m plot over 1 ha?<br/>
-* Random selection?
-* What do the choices represent?
+<br/>
-. What is the connection between an expressed preferences and decision making – Irmgard’s FIAT vs Mercedes example
+*. When should we aim for overall assessments and when for specific characteristics (affordable, social acceptable, accessible)
-. When should assessment be relative and when absolute
+::- When to elicit from farmers and when to predefine<br/>
-. Where do you assess preferences from?
-* Under a tree?
+<br/>
-* At the site?
+*. Who is doing the assessing, how are they chosen?
-. How do we avoid biasness in the assessment of preferences?
+::- Random selection?
-* Farmers may tell what you want to hear.
+::- What do the choices represent?<br/>
-. Who is asking questions on preferences…the donor/scientists vs local farmers
-. How are the preferences expressed?
+<br/>
-* Ratings and rankings on scale/ advantages and disadvantages?
+*. What is the connection between an expressed preferences and decision making – Irmgard’s FIAT vs Mercedes example<br/>
-* Both options may still be bad!
-. When should you assess preferences with groups and individuals ?
+<br/>
-* Who decides on this?
+*. When should assessment be relative and when absolute<br/>
-* What are the groups?
-<u>'''Tools'''</u>
+<br/>
-. Farmers’ participatory research
+*. Where do you assess preferences from?<br/>
 * Group level
 * Individual level
-. Surveys
+. Surveys<br/>
-. Ranking and ratings
+. Ranking and ratings<br/>
-. Observations
+. Observations<br/>
-<u>'''Feedback from group C'''</u>
+<br/>
-'''Discussion focus:''' Baselines, controls and farmer practice
+<u>'''Feedback from group C'''</u><br/>
-'''Baseline'''
+'''Baseline'''<br/>
 * Questionnaire- to get overall picture of circumstances
 * Pretest with rigor and consistency and (thoroughness) and refine quest
@@ Line 71: / Line 93: @@
 * Integrate bio and social/ quantitative and qualitative
 * Use baseline info from previous when avail (How can we promote this?)
-* Consider sensitive questions
+* Consider sensitive questions<br/>
 '''Control'''
 * Well-tied to objectives
 * Depending on objective will impact control used e.g. Microfauna – treatment + status quo. Look at existing level in natural setting- control; Nutrition – village no inputs Vs village with inputs. After time- make observations
-'''Farmer Practice'''
+'''Farmer Practice'''<br/>
 * Normal/ average way of doing something.
 * Equilibrium (after others have had their impact e.g. NGOs) state without our intervention

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-==Africa RISING ESA Phase 2==
+==Africa RISING ESA Phase 2<br/>Participatory Research Design Approaches Training<br/>3 - 4 October, 2016<br/>Lilongwe, Malawi==
-==Participatory Research Design Approaches Training==
 ----
 [[File:419A8707.JPG|800x533px]]
@@ Line 20: / Line 18: @@
 * Group work – causal loops in system analysis? <span style="color: #00b050;">(see photos of the sample causal loops developed by groups below)</span>
-{|
+{| class="wikitable"
-| [[File:PartRschTraining 1.JPG]] | | [[File:PartRschTraining 2.JPG]]
+|+
 |-
-| [[File:PartRschTraining 3.JPG]] | | [[File:PartRschTraining 4.JPG]]
+| [[File:PartRschTraining 1.JPG]]
 |-
 |}
 * Brainstorming in 3 groups on research design issues that are challenging/problematic/confusing