Fieldwork in Developing Countries [Paperback]

Stephen Devereux (Author), John Hoddinott (Editor)

Product Details

• Paperback: 229 pages
• Publisher: Lynne Rienner Pub (November 1992)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1555873928
• ISBN-13: 978-1555873929
• Product Dimensions: 8.9 x 6 x 0.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 14.4 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,944,938 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

5.0 out of 5 stars How to Conduct Fieldwork with Integrity and Humanity, May 11, 2007

By 

J. Gresham "Jon, the CivilSociety and MultiSm... (Montgomery, AL usa) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Fieldwork in Developing Countries (Paperback)

Fieldwork as part of local or international development projects is the aspect of solving real problems with real people. There are few useable manuals on how to work with governments and agencies and illness in the midst of cross-cultural misunderstandings. This book, Fieldwork in Developing Countries, must become required reading for researchers or analysts or program developers who might want to introduce change into communities. The power of this book lies in the strategic combination of theoretical explanations with practical case studies.

Some of my favorite quotes from this book are:

--Language impinges on both major components of fieldwork--the research exercise and the social or personal aspect. From both points of view, there can be little doubt that fluency is preferable to total incomprehension....But learning the language is a `data collection exercise' in its own right, and the investment of valuable time and intellectual energy in acquiring this knowledge should should be assessed alongside the imperative to collect other types of data.

--Given the choice between mastering the language or obtaining good (rather than superficial) data, I chose the latter.

--So understanding the structure of communication and colloquial usage is more important than merely `learning the language' - knowledge of vocabulary is not understanding of meaning.

--Employing trained teachers m ay not be the most appropriate way of learning the language' they often teach in a dry, technical way which has little relevance to day-to-day communication. It may be better to learn from the people you will be working with--they will know the relevant vocabulary. If you are studying agriculture and living in an agrarian community, for instance, it seems sensible and logical to learn the names of corps, seasons, farming tools and so on from the farmers themselves. The notion of fluency is one of degree.

Pg88--Because I hoped to get beneath the surface of people's rationalised explanations of their behaviour, I also wanted to be in a position where I could observe and take part in daily life, as well as carry out formal interviews.

The individual is synonymous with the stranger, an alien, you do not in an important sense exist until you reveal your networks and , more importantly, until this network can be verified by your interrogators.

My host's acceptance of me was a sign to others that I was probably not a threat

A rapport between interviewer and informant is absolutely crucial. The researcher has only a general idea, in advance, which processes are likely to have been especially important in any particular life history, he or she must try to make sure that the informant does not feel overly constrained by the researcher's preconceptions. The researcher must also be flexible enough to respond to the unexpected.

Asking other people to tell the story of their lives is a highly artificial undertaking. A `life story' is an intellectual construct whose structure and content reflect the priorities of the researcher and the images the informant projects back into the past, as much as tangible realities. Despite this artificiality, I consider that it is possible to collect reasonably accurate material about certain topics in an interview that is structured around the chronology of an informant's life, provided that it is not done naively. I would not make any grander claim for this research method.

I interviewed different types of woman traders in order to understand why some had managed to accumulate resources, while others were caught in a rut, of low returns and under capitalisation.

The process of selecting informants was largely additive. Also important was informants' varying ability to analyse their own situations and actions in the rather abstract way demanded by any researcher who asks questions that being with the words `Why' and `When' .

--There is a `transparency of representation' (Clifford 1986, p.6.) in the reporting of `facts', whereby the respondent, the fieldworker and the relationship between them are rendered invisible. In contrast to this Gradgrindian approach, my view is that fieldworker-respondent relationships matter.

--In this sense, no theory is independent of observation, and all quantitative data is qualitative data is qualitative. The fieldworker should seek to use these relationships, not deny them.