Tools and Methods for Understanding and Using Informal Regulations

From microLINKS Wiki

IV. Special Topics

A. The Value Chain Approach in Conflict-Affected Contexts

B. Vulnerable Populations and the Value Chain Approach

Experienced practitioners emphasize the importance of taking adequate time to investigate informal rules. Particularly in projects financed and/or implemented by people from outside the community, it is critical to listen and interpret the unwritten rules in place. It takes time, but there are some tools and methods that can be used to facilitate the process.

1 Participant Observation
2 Institutional Ethnography
3 Participatory Approaches
4 Root Cause Analysis
5 Footnotes
6 Navigation

[edit]

Participant Observation

Participant observation is a qualitative method with roots in traditional ethnographic research. It seeks to understand the multiple perspectives within any given community and the interplay among them. Researchers accomplish this through observation alone or by both observing and participating, to varying degrees, in the study community’s daily activities. Participant observation always takes place in community settings, in locations believed to have some relevance to the research questions. The method is distinctive because the researcher approaches participants in their own environment rather than having the participants come to the researcher. Generally speaking, the researcher tries to learn what life is like for an “insider” while remaining, inevitably, an “outsider.” This methodology is described in Qualitative Research Methods: a data collectors field guide published by Family Health International.^[1]

[edit]

Institutional Ethnography

A qualitative method called institutional ethnography^[2] can be used to understand informal regulation in markets. Originally developed for a more formal institutional environment (e.g. European health/education systems), this method follows paper trails to enable analysis of power relations. Institutional ethnography looks at what forms get filled, who fills them, and which forms define decisions. Even in less formal contexts, where the forms are few and far between, this method provides a useful starting point to look at power relations in markets. Example findings from recent research include the following:

Access to government soil analysis services is constrained by lack of literacy, technical knowledge, travel costs.
Access to export markets is influenced by social networks which exclude some market actors (through influence over allocation of export duties and permits).
Information on market prices (that feeds government statistics) is distorted by data collectors' unwillingness to converse directly with market actors.

[edit]

Participatory Approaches

Participatory methods and tools have been used by Practical Action (for example in Nepal) involving all the key actors in a value chain in identifying opportunities and constraints, including informal rules in the business environment.^[3] As facilitators, Practical Action staff encourage market actors identify key issues themselves, rather than impose their own interpretation of what the behaviors they observe mean. Others have pointed out that an essential feature of such a light touch approach are activities to empower socially marginalized actors to participate effectively in the analysis and negotiation.

[edit]

Root Cause Analysis

Even after constraints are defined, it can be difficult for the project staff and stakeholders to think beyond the readily apparent effects of a problem to the deeper issues--such as social norms--that underlie those effects. If a project addresses only the obvious symptoms of a constraint, its impact is likely to be limited. The "Why Exercise" is a relatively simple tool for shifting thinking to the root cause of a problem.

Steps in this exercise are as follows:

Assemble the appropriate group of stakeholders. This may include a subgroup of value chain actors with particular interest in the constraint or representations of all levels of the value chain. Subgroups are advisable if there are serious power differentials in the value chain that may prevent some actors from voicing their opinions.
Ask the participants to discuss the constraint and its immediate causes. Ask them to write each reason on a card and place these below the appropriate constraint headings on a white board or easel in the room. Use pictures to represent causes if some participants are illiterate. Working outwards, participants continue to ask themselves "why" each of the immediate causes occurs. Repeat this step three to five times until root causes are addressed.
Ask the participants to connect the answers with the questions to show the links between causes and effects. Remind them to check their logic by repeating the process of asking "why" at each level.
Rank the root causes in terms of significance and distinguish which issues are immediate (requiring urgent action) and underlying (needing to be addressed over a longer period of time).

The exercise is complete when participants have agreed on an overall analysis of the constraints, identified information gaps, and identified key root causes that need specific attention.

[edit]