PEER: PARTICIPATORY ETHNOGRAPHIC EVALUATION and RESEARCH

1. PEER:PARTICIPATORY ETHNOGRAPHIC EVALUATION andRESEARCH

2. 2 What is PEER Innovative, rapid approach to programme design, monitoring, evaluation and research Builds dialogue between programmes and communities Gives voice to marginalized groups

3. 3 Development of PEER Developed & field-tested with CARE International in Zambia, re young people’s sexual & reproductive health PEER used with range of population groups in different contexts

4. 4 Application of PEER Currently being used in: Cambodia and Myanmar-commercial sex-workers AIDS prevention Nepal: safe motherhood Brazil: health sector reform

5. 5 Application of PEER Being considered for use in: Cuba: HIV prevention among men who have sex with men Rwanda: young people, commercial sex workers and military Jamaica: public policy reform programme

6. 6 Use of PEER  PEER has been used to gain in-depth understanding of: Social organisation and social networks Decision making processes Livelihood strategies, sexual networking, health seeking behaviour Power dynamics and how power relations are experienced

7. 7 Use of PEER Processes of exclusion – which groups are excluded from accessing resources Barriers to access to services – and whether programmes are reaching poor and marginalized groups Changes required in programme and service delivery approaches

8. 8 Principle of the Method Much programme related research abstracts people’s actions from context Peer based on understanding actions/behaviour as embedded in locally specific institutions and social-cultural and political-economic contexts

9. 9 Principles of the Method Based on the anthropological method. Aims to gain an in-depth understanding of the social realities of people’s everyday lives More rapid than conventional ethnography

10. 10 Principles of the Method Peer Evaluator Researchers: Peer Evaluator Researchers (PERs) are selected from members of the community/ target group PERs identified by the programme in conjunction with target group

11. 11 Principles of the Method Training PERS: PERs receive 3 day participatory training All PERs trained together must be from the same target group Conversational prompts to guide conversational interviews developed by PERs during training PERs field-test interview prompts for 1-2 days

12. 12 Principles of the Method Data Collection Carried out over approx 6 weeks PERs conduct conversational interviews with small sample (3-6) people from their social network A series of interviews are conducted with each interviewee on different themes

13. 13 Principles of the Method Data Collection Interviews are in third person. “What do other people like you say about..”. Tell me a story about someone who … Interviewees not identified by name PERs supervised weekly. PERs write key words / phrases of interviews

14. 14 Principles of Method Data Analysis PERS interviewed by social analyst Interview notes collected by supervisors – secondary data

15. 15 Principles of Method Data Analysis PERs conduct their own analysis through participatory workshop PERs present findings and engage in dialogue with programme

16. 16 Methodological Issues How does PEER differ from other methods? Health behavioural research dominated by three methods: sample (questionnaire) surveys (KAPs) focus group discussions (FGDs) “rapid” participatory methods (PLA, PRA)

17. 17 Methodological Issues KAP Surveys Limited in understanding of complexity of social institutions & relations in which behaviour is contextualised Well-constructed statistical sample can provide important data on trends in behaviour, but cannot inform about context or causality.

18. 18 Methodological Issues Focus Group Discussions: Useful for eliciting discourses on dominant social values, but often produce normative responses. Provide limited information about how, when & why people use norms to legitimise behaviour or use strategies which contradict dominant norms FGD participants reluctant to discuss experiences that deviate from accepted norms & values

19. 19 Methodological Issues How does PEER differ from PRA/PLA: PEER not conducted in a public context Potential to talk about sensitive issues (e.g. sexuality) Less likely to produce normative, consensual responses

20. 20 Methodological Issues PEER shares participatory principles of PRA - can use some PRA approaches PERs can use visual methods to prompt conversations PRA exercises can be used in the training and PER data analysis workshops We have found PRA and PEER generate a different type of data – e.g. Myanmar different categorisations of risk behaviour

21. 21 Methodological Issues Why not use key informant interviews? PEER based on using relationships of trust within peer networks Based on asking what other people say Aimed at gathering peer group narratives, perceptions and discourses Not just an extractive research method – empowerment process – giving voice

22. 22 Methodological Issues Is there a sample bias as PERs select interviewees? Programme works with PERs to stratify the interviewees selected Programme and PERs identify criteria for selection of interviewees

23. 23 Methodological Issues Not trying to seek standards of representativeness in general population Seeking social construction shared among peer group Sample can be randomised by randomly selecting PERs Cannot randomly select interviewees

24. 24 Methodological Issues Can use progressive stratified sampling through PERs PERs may be able to identify key groups to be trained as PERs (e.g. marginalized groups of young people) Can use snow-ball sampling as PEER is used for ongoing monitoring

25. 25 Methodological Issues How does PEER avoid data bias when PER narratives are collected? Power relations between a researcher and interviewee can create bias in data Interviews use open narrative prompts – difficult for the supervisor/social analysts to ask leading questions to manipulate data

26. 26 Methodological Issues Data cross-checked at several levels Supervisors interviews with PERs Social analysts interviews with PERs Social analysts interviews with interviewees and PERs PERs group analysis

27. 27 Methodological Issues Different levels of interpretation Meta- analysis – PERs become social analysts key informants Interpretation of data through analytical framework PERs filter data through their world view – narratives highlight contradictions between PERs normative frameworks and peer accounts of behaviour

28. 28 Case Study Examples Zambia – young people: Categorisation of social groups in compounds Local belief systems Social identity and livelihoods Health seeking behaviour Sexual behaviour Access to services

29. 29 Case Study Examples Sex-workers Myanmar Social organisation of sex-work Power structures Categorisation of client and non-client partners Risk perceptions and patterns of condom use Health and health-seeking behaviour

30. 30 References Price NL and K Hawkins (forthcoming) “The Peer Ethnographic Method in Health Research: Some Theoretical & Methodological Reflections” in Holland, J and J Campbell (eds) Methods in Development Research: Combining Quantitative & Qualitative Approaches. London: Intermediate Technology Group  

31. 31 References Price NL and K Hawkins (2002) “Researching Sexual and Reproductive Behaviour: A Peer Ethnographic Approach”. Social Science and Medicine 55:8, 1327-1338