Difference between revisions of "AR ESA phase2 participatory-research-design-training Oct2016"

From africa-rising-wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Imported from Wikispaces)
 
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==
+
 
==3 - 4 October, 2016==
 
==Lilongwe, Malawi==  
 
 
----
 
----
 
[[File:419A8707.JPG|800x533px]]
 
[[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>
 
* 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]]
 +
| [[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
 
* Brainstorming in 3 groups on research design issues that are challenging/problematic/confusing

Revision as of 11:35, 10 December 2018

Africa RISING ESA Phase 2
Participatory Research Design Approaches Training
3 - 4 October, 2016
Lilongwe, Malawi


419A8707.JPG

Agenda

Day 1 (3 October, 2016)

Day 2 (4 October, 2016)

PartRschTraining 1.JPG PartRschTraining 2.JPG
PartRschTraining 3.JPG 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