Preliminary discussion on Research Methodology for evaluating best practices on Capacity Building fo

1
Preliminary discussion on Research Methodology
for evaluating best practices on Capacity
Building for the Poor

• Governance Knowledge Centre
• CSLG- DARPG(GoI)-DfID COLLABORATION

2
PROJECT PRELIMS

• Project duration TWO YEARS
• Objective Evaluate best practices in poverty
  reduction which can be replicated on a scale of
  sustainability
• Project Institutional Location Centre for the
  Study of Law and Governance,Jawaharlal Nehru
  University

3
SELECTED PROJECTS

• Presently 81 best practices have been given to us
  from the Ministry
• We have prepared a list of around 40 more
• A substantial number has been put together from
  China, Ghana and Brazil the 3 countries showing a
  good achievement graph on poverty reduction
• Focus on international best practices on a
  comparative scale would be considered as the
  project advances

4
METHODOLOGY I

• Two main components of evaluation Meta-policy
  and its micro-components such as ICT,
  entrepreneurship and asset distributional
  framework including legal framework would be
  studied in the light of ethnographic action
  research where communities evolve and consolidate
  their prospects of good governance.
• Study of information to look for sources of
  historical data for cross-cultural survey and
  comparative sociology as a tool for governance
  reform.
• Functionalism studied as a set of dynamic
  processes in which one has to examine the
  contribution which social items make to the
  social and cultural life of human collectivties
  (order, stability and sustainability through
  arrangements within institutions)

5
METHODOLOGY II

• Three main traits for studying functionalism
  within the understanding that it is all about
  beneficial consequences of peoples actions that
  help to maintain the equilibrium of the social
  system
• Distinguishing b/w manifest (intended
  consequences of decision making)and latent
  (unintended consequences)functions.
• Elaborating-Functions/dysfunctions in the light
  of variables of age, class, caste, geography,
  political influence, cultural acceptability,
  respect for law.
• Potential for local entrepreneurship and
  availability of local untapped resources
  throughSocial networks available

6
METHODOLOGY III

• Projects to be divided into 3-categories
• Exclusively Rural-BPL projects ratings to be done
  under fifty cents segregation
• Rural poor b/w 50 cents and one.
• Urban Poor right under one category
• Middle class category in urban areas

7
METHODOLOGY Indicators

• 8-Main indicators selected to bridge the
  assessment subjectivity
• TRANSPARENCY
• PARTICIPATION
• ACCOUNTABILITY
• EASE OF SERVICE DELIVERY
• SOCIAL WELL BEING
• REPLICABILITY
• PARTNERSHIP
• SUSTAINABILITY

8
METHODOLOGY Subindicators

• Each indicator divided into several sub
  indicators which in total were 23 sub-indicators
• participation of local people
• generation of entrepreneurship through self-help
  groups and diversified employment options.
• Speed in service delivery and reduction of red
  tapism.
• Reduction of corruption , graft and rent.
• Equity and fair distribution of public resources.
  
• Women participation and capacity buildup.
• Harmonizing caste/communal relations
• Support from local administration/ District
  collectors office.
• Single Window Access to services.
• Affordability
• Behavioral responsiveness of local administrators
  to deliver to people.

9
METHODOLOGY Subindicators

• Infrastructural support ( space, electricity,
  internet connectivity)
• Reduction of paper work
• Decentralized decision making
• Transparency in public dealings.
• Need for increased vertical and horizontal
  coordination in delivering services.
• Political influence on policy decisions/ services
• Sustainability factor.
• Replicability
• potential for up-scaling
• Accountability mechanisms
• Partnership arrangements, if any
• Other social programmes/messages conveyed through
  the ICT tools

10
METHODOLOGYTools/Techniques

• Starting from secondary data from project
  publications from government and NGO project
  offices
• Primary data the case study methods as it cannot
  be narrowed down to sampling.
• observation for social phenomenon ,
• inter-subjectivity and inter-objectivity of data
  yields to ensure validity of the relationshp b/w
  the manifest and the latent and also to help
  quantification problems
• unstructured interviews with local beneficiaries,
  service providers and fund managers.Including few
  set questionnaires (both closed ended and open
  ended)
• Attitude scales, projective techniques

11
METHODOLOGYQuestionnaires

• Range of services provided-Government or
  non-government?
• Availability and assistance in seeking services
• State of citizens charters and district support
• Frequency of technological usages?
• Change from pre-1992 and later pre-ICT era?
• Attitudinal transformation of people local
  bureaucracy?
• Scale of helplessness

12
ASSESSMENT-BPLMeasurement on a scale of 1 to 10
13
THANKING YOU

• CSLG, USIC,CSCA-SIS,DARPG