Let's see, was there anything special about 2020?
What a year! In addition to the very extraordinary Covid situation, our team added 3 new members in 2020, started on our very first piece of remote research, and began working with a number of new partners. Overall, we are very grateful that we have been able to continue working and that our team has remained largely healthy :-).
We started working from home in the middle of March and our projects were put on hold soon afterward. Two of these were eventually cancelled, although we were lucky that for one of these we had already done enough of the fieldwork that we were still able to write up some findings for the client. After a few weeks of feeling a bit stuck and unsure, we were able to get moving again with some internal training and then by starting to compile Covid-relevant insights from our previous studies in Indonesia and Uganda.
As we looked to expand on these initial insights in Indonesia by reaching out to previous study families, we discussed possibilities that eventually resulted in a series of learning discussions with the Pulse Lab Jakarta team. We then received support from a client to turn our outreach with families about the impacts of Covid into a full study that would be conducted remotely over a period of over six months (this will be finishing up next month).
It was around this time that we also began developing Covid-19 field safety protocols and standards as we prepared for the possibility of being able to do some fieldwork again. As some of our projects that had gone on hold began to re-start their activities in July, we had our first trial at conducting fieldwork during the pandemic as part of a study in East Lombok. Since that experience, we have continued to conduct some fieldwork while also working on other remote research.
Along with the collaborations with our clients and teams like Pulse Lab, 2020 also brought possibilities with new partners like Quicksand. We appreciate the continued optimism and support from partners like these along with the spirit and energy of everyone in our team including our research associates.
We hope that you and those close to you stay healthy, and we look forward to a 2021 that will hopefully bring back a greater sense of normalcy before too long.
As part of developing COVID-19 related protocols and brainstorming internally for how to adjust and adapt to the current situation, our team also had the opportunity to brainstorm with the Pulse Lab Jakarta (PLJ) team during a series of sharing sessions beginning in June of this year. We have collaborated with PLJ on previous studies including a study on Rural to Urban Migration in Indonesia. One of the things we have always liked about PLJ is that while a lot of their work is cutting-edge, they maintain an emphasis on making data work for people, sharing people’s stories and presenting data and insights in interesting and easily digestible ways.
The initial idea for the sharing sessions was to explore how to approach conducting quality qualitative research remotely, especially for more remote areas and/or with people who might have more limited access to technology or more limited experience in using it. Through these sharing sessions we hoped to develop up-to-date and contextualized approaches for doing research remotely and how to incorporate different tools and technologies in the process.
The sharing sessions were done over an initial four week period, with one session each week facilitated by PLJ. In the first session we discussed some of the possible methods that can be used for remote research that we use as a basis for the upcoming sessions. Based on some of the possible remote work we anticipated doing, we narrowed down the discussion to: Phone Interviews; Photo/Video elicitation; and Diaries.
Next we talked about what aspects we need to consider when using these methods (or any others). This included identifying the participants, the length/duration for the data collection, best practices for approaching participants, ensuring a 'safe space' for participants and other considerations such as ethics.
The next week, we dove into the three methods to try and see what kinds of challenges we may face during the research process, particularly when working with people in more rural areas as we often do for our studies. Some of the challenges we highlighted included:
After identifying these challenges, we discussed possible ways that we can tackle them if we face them during research, and any ways that we could avoid them with better prep or strategies.
The final of the first four sessions we framed around designing a remote study (using the same three methods) looking at Covid-19 impacts and social assistance. For this we spent time identifying some of the possible research questions, discussing what are the insights we are looking for and trying to contextualize the methods. For contextualizing the methods, we discussed technology (what kind of media or platform can be appropriately used, network coverage, etc.); personality (how to ensure participants to feel safe, what kind of communication approach, etc), and time (consent, when is the best time to contact, how to arrange the schedule, etc) considerations. For each item we tried to emphasize putting participants first.
All in all, these sessions were an exciting learning experience. Certainly from our end, our team left the sessions inspired and they helped broaden our understanding of the possibilities and considerations for remote research. And like any research methods, it will be a continuous learning process!
After these sharing sessions, each organization was also able to test out many of the things we discussed during our own respective remote research studies. For Empatika, we officially started our Covid-19 Remote Qualitative Insights Gathering study for UNICEF in July and are currently working on the second of three rounds in this longitudinal remote study (learn more below or click here). For PLJ, they spent much of October and early November working on a remote mixed methods study with UN Women and Gojek on ‘Leveraging Digitalization to Cope with COVID-19: An Indonesian case study on women-owned micro and small businesses’ where they worked with small/micro business owners in Jakarta and West Java (see their case study report here).
In mid-November, our teams then came together again for a follow-up session where we were able to share some of our experiences with remote research so far. We talked about what surprised each of us so far with carrying out remote research, what were the biggest challenges we’ve faced, and what were our lessons learned.
PLJ also found that from the client side, it seemed that there was a greater expectation that the research could be conducted much quicker than a regular study since interactions were just done remotely (and our Empatika team would agree that remote interactions does not necessarily equal faster/easier data collection).
From the Empatika side, our team found that carrying out research remotely is much more time consuming and draining (physically and mentally) than most of us anticipated. Some of the more specific challenges included:
In the end, we found that we’ve learned a lot through carrying out remote research and it has shown us that there are even more possibilities for the tools/methods available to us, and that these possibilities could also include mixing both remote and direct interactions with participants. Still, it’s clear that we’re still very much a team that likes to be in the field and interacting with people face-to-face. Hopefully the end of this pandemic will be in sight soon!
In response to the challenge of doing in-depth, face-to-face research during this pandemic, Empatika has been exploring alternative approaches including using remote methods. Based on our team’s initial brainstorming (which also included some sharing sessions with Pulse Lab Jakarta), trials in May, and now with partner support, Empatika has begun work on a two-phase remote qualitative research study. The study will use a flexible mix of explorative and participatory remote research tools in order to gather insights on the COVID-19 situation in Indonesia from people’s perspectives over a six-month period.
Another unique aspect of the study is that participants are families that Empatika researchers have stayed with during previous research studies (dating back to 2015!). This means that researchers are contacting people that they already have relationships with, in most cases through immersion studies where the researchers spent at least four nights living in these families’ homes and experiencing their daily lives alongside them.
Given the constantly changing conditions during this pandemic, insights directly from community members themselves can be pivotal in understanding the shifting needs and challenges during this time, including those that might be struggling the most. The study will provide in-depth stories about people’s experiences and perspectives, along with insights into how and why certain behaviours and changes are occurring. Insights like these can also help to complement or explain findings coming from other assessments (both quantitative and qualitative).
In total the study includes over 40 families across 24 districts of Indonesia (from Aceh to West Papua), mostly from rural areas but also a few living in peri urban or urban communities. For the initial stage of the study, team members contacted most families via phone calls in late May, and then again in August. This first phase was oriented as a listening phase where researchers reconnected with families and explored contextual changes and general impacts of COVID-19 (particularly from May to August), but let family members talk about the particular issues or issues that they were most interested or excited in discussing. At the end of these conversations researchers also asked for families’ consent in sharing insights from the conversations and sought their interest/willingness to participate in the next phase of the study.
Although using remote interactions, we are still keeping in mind many aspects from how we conduct immersions, including active listening, having two-way conservations, respecting people's time, and giving them space to speak and share to the extent that they are comfortable.
A few of the key insights from the first listening phase include:
After this initial phase of phone calls, in Stage Two our team will continue interactions with families over three rounds. These rounds will focus in more on particular topics (one primary topic per round) and include different, flexible sets of participatory activities and tools, such as video/photos diaries, voice diaries, photojournalism, participant-led interviews, and others. We are excited about the flexibility built into this upcoming stage and look forward to experimenting with different remote tools.
It has already been a fruitful experience to be able to get insights from across Indonesia through conversations with families that have been excited about catching up with our researchers and sharing their experiences. We hope that this study we can also show some of the additional benefits of building these types of relationships with study participants. We look forward to sharing more soon!
Along with the temporary closure of our office and a move to working remotely, the Covid-19 pandemic also forced us to pause on-going and new fieldwork, both in Indonesia and in other countries like Bangladesh and Lebanon. Since the initial pause in March, we kept monitoring the situation and of course wondering when we might be able to get back to the field? Like most organisations no doubt, these first few months were challenging, particularly as we enjoy spending time with people in the field.
Part of our initial response to the Covid situation was the creation of health and safety guidelines for our staff. Although getting back to the field was very uncertain in the first few months, these guidelines paved the way for creating an expanded set of guidelines that we could use in the case that fieldwork became possible again. And while our specialty may be immersions, with the pandemic we focused our preparations on methods that would be more feasible such as Participatory Focus Group Discussions, Informal Interviews, and Human-Centred Design workshops.
These are just some of the guidelines that researchers and teams must consider before heading to the field, and then after returning:
As travel regulations began to relax starting in July 2020 and some areas of Indonesia continued to have a relatively lower number of confirmed Covid cases, our team had an opportunity to re-start fieldwork. The first experience was a visit to Nusa Tenggara Barat for our study on post-distance cash assistance. For this fieldwork (along with subsequent studies), we introduced some safety protocols that must be observed during the fieldwork. This includes:
Although full of precautions, the fieldwork was still an exciting and enjoyable process. We were also surprised at how well people received us in the communities, despite coming from Jakarta. We’d like to think that some of the precautions we took helped people feel comfortable, and the connections that our team made back when we did the baseline survey in these communities in early March no doubt helped as well.
Following this initial fieldwork experience along with another small study on women entrepreneurship, our team had a reflection together to discuss what went well, what went less well, and about anything we should do differently for upcoming studies. One of the most challenging aspects for us as researchers was using a mask during group discussions. First, we have to talk a lot louder. It can also be hard to hear the participants sometimes, and you miss the cues that you would normally be able to get from people’s facial expressions. To help with hearing people, we found that it helped for the two facilitators to be spread out more, with each closer to one side of the group.
We also discussed how we need to be extra cautious about the activities taking too long as people may start to tire quicker or feel a little suffocated wearing a mask for a long time. The venue selection is also really important: open-air spaces are nice, but finding one without a lot of background noise is also really important and promotes a better process. This means that if possible, our team needs to be able to visit the venue first to check the space.
One of the interesting reflections during our discussion was how in some cases the extra distance between participants actually helped to reduce any unnecessary discussion between participants. We also found that visuals were still really helpful to make the interactions more engaging for participants.
All in all, it has been a very fruitful learning experience for our team and we will continue to update our guidelines as needed as the situation changes. Although many of us still miss being able to live directly with people in the field, we are adjusting and adapting to this 'new' situation and are open to other approaches during this pandemic time. Another study we recently started will be experimenting with remote qualitative research. We look forward to sharing some of the experiences from that process soon!
Want to hear directly from some of our researchers about their first experience doing fieldwork during this pandemic time? Have a look at this short clip from the field.
New Report Published! : People’s Perspectives of Emergency Multi-Purpose Cash Assistance in Central Sulawesi and West Nusa Tenggara
Following the July 2018 earthquake in West Nusa Tenggara and the September 2018 earthquake and tsunami in Central Sulawesi, UNICEF and its partners introduced Multi-purpose Cash Assistance (MPCA) programs as part of their efforts to support recovery in communities. UNICEF commissioned Empatika to understand people's experiences after these disasters, and specifically their perspectives and experiences of the MPC assistance.
For this qualitative assessment our team visited two communities each in Donggala, Palu, and Sigi in Central Sulawesi (May 2019); and two communities in North Lombok in West Nusa Tenggara (July 2019). The insights gathered from the study have helped inform learning for the Cash Working Group and its partners about best practices in MPC assistance during emergencies from the perspectives of beneficiaries.
We used a mix of participatory tools for the study including scoping immersions for context and relationship building; participatory focus group discussions (pFGDs) for exploring the study topics in-depth; and digital storytelling (DST) workshops to help enrich some of the study insights and aid the study partners in promoting continued discussions around the study topics.
During the scoping immersions and pFGDs, our team had in-depth interactions with 216 men and women in these communities, of whom 149 were recipients and 67 were non-recipients of the MPCA. Following this fieldwork, we returned to one community in Sigi and one community in North Lombok in July for conducting DST workshops with a combination of beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries.
The DST workshop in Sigi included 11 mothers along with one grandfather who is the main caregiver for his twin grandchildren. In the North Lombok community, our team conducted two workshops, one in the more central area of the community (five mothers) where we had conducted the pFGDs along with a separate workshop in one of the remote areas of the community (7 mothers) in order to include some women who face significant access issues and who did not receive the MPC assistance. Insights from the finished DST videos are included in the final report, highlighting some of the personal stories as they relate to different study topics.
View the full report or study briefs here.
Some of the key findings from this study included:
The study team also plans to return to the two communities in North Lombok once it is safer to do so to share some examples of the final study outputs and to discuss the study process from their perspectives.
One of our internal sharing sessions last month was led by our Associate Consultant, Annette Fisher who shared her experience of working with a women’s Adivasi social movement to develop a ‘people’s theory of change’ (ToC) in Gujarat, India. While many of us might already be familiar with theories of change, it is interesting to see and learn how this process can be more grounded, participative and reflective.
Danielle, another one of our lead researchers, started the session by explaining more about theories of change in general, the various types of ToCs, and the different ways they can be applied and used. We also discussed how ToCs are usually developed more by ‘higher’ level programme staff rather than from, for example, local staff or directly by people most affected by the issues. It can be challenging to accommodate both programming agendas and the real situation in the field. Which brings us to Annette’s experience.
Annette’s work was done with ANANDI, a women’s social movement based in Gujarat, India which champions the causes of Adivasi tribal women, a group which has been historically marginalised in Gujarat and elsewhere. Using a participatory action research approach, Annette and her research partners in ANANDI, wanted to explore how to increase the utilisation of community-collected data (in this case related to public health services) for influencing state accountability in more strategic and efficient ways. Through the research process working with ANANDI volunteers, Annette saw that there was an opportunity to expand the process into developing a ToC, collaboratively with the ANANDI team. Using a participatory approach, allowed participants to learn together and was empowering in that it gave the local volunteers a better sense about the potential impacts their community-collected data can have.
Following Annette’s sharing we discussed the possibility of being able to create more People’s Theories of Change, what kinds of projects that might be most appropriate for, and how we can potentially interest more donors or programmes to consider exploring this type of ToC development.
Annette also shared some photos of the process, including some of the initial mapping sketches along with how the team engaged during the activities
For more information on the details of the research and ToC development by Annette & ANANDI, please check out the full report.
Every year the entire Empatika Team in Indonesia (our core team plus current and past research associates) gathers for a small party where we share food, stories and games. Other times we’ve done picnics in parks or last year, a potluck at our new office, but with COVID-19 restrictions this year we decided to hold a virtual party. Our Empatika Zoom Party was held during Ramadan (so more things to celebrate!) with more than 20 of us joining in the call, including researchers and team members who live outside of the Jakarta area, such as Bali, West Sulawesi, and West Papua, and even those now living in Barcelona and Sweden.
Before the break-fasting time, we spent a few hours catching up as well as playing games through Zoom like doing pictionary, guessing famous Indonesian TV advertisements, movie clues, and word games. Although we couldn't interact physically and faced some lagging internet connections, we shared a lot of laughs. As there were prizes involved, some of the games also became quite competitive! While it was a fun time and we are lucky to still be able to catch up with so many from our larger team, we hope that things will get better soon and that we can meet each other again, in person.
We have published our second brief synthesizing insights relevant to the ongoing COVID-19 response, this one based on the two immersion studies conducted by our team in Uganda. Like the Indonesia brief, we have highlighted key relevant findings along with the implications for COVID-19 programming and policies in Uganda.
The studies in Uganda were conducted in 2017 and involved training a team of enthusiastic Ugandan researchers who lived with 50 families across 15 different districts in northern, eastern, and central Uganda.
Some of the insights include, for example, that i) daily chores such as collecting water are time consuming and as women tend to also handle day-to-day education and health matters, they may be under increased pressure and stress with potential impacts on husband-wife relationships; ii) most people prefer to receive cash assistance rather than in-kind assistance; and iii) most families prefer to sell directly to middlemen that come to the village/their farms because of the convenience which may limit their options during the current COVID crisis.
As one of our studies in Uganda also focused on old people’s experiences with the Uganda Senior Citizen Grants, we have highlighted insights that are particularly relevant for this group as well.
View the full brief here.
Understanding people’s attitudes and behaviour towards hand washing and healthcare is more important than ever before. Check out our full brief about how insights from ethnographic approaches can help.
The COVID-19 pandemic is likely to hit low income countries – and specifically the poorest people within these countries – the hardest. Governments, UN Agencies and development programmes need to react both quickly and effectively to prevent the worst from happening. Global public health programmes have taught us that the best health policies and programmes are those which are evidence-based. This has already proven imperative during this crisis, as people are being asked to dramatically alter their daily lives in order to keep themselves and those around them safe.
At Empatika we know that, for example, government messaging through WhatsApp groups and on Facebook is not sufficient to promote behaviour change, even for practices as simple as washing hands. There is ample evidence from our immersion research that such messages are often ignored and that people’s understanding of health, hygiene and cleanliness is needed to support change.
Why do some health behaviour change programmes work and others do not? Our immersion-based research provides insights into people’s everyday lives and allows us to consider what people say and what they do, within their own reality. By living with families in over 75 rural and urban locations in Indonesia, we have gathered insights that can be used to address public health challenges. These details are essential to tailoring messages and approaches to address the drivers of key health behaviours, like hand washing, breast feeding, or health seeking practices.
Social distancing and travel restrictions limit the options available to collect up-to-date information on how people are responding to the pandemic. However, Empatika’s extensive experiential insights gathered over more than six years may help inform responsive interventions. This includes a network of families across Indonesia with whom we have lived and can communicate with remotely to assess behaviour change and community responses to the crisis. We hope to be able to share these insights and their implications to support policy makers and programmes to design the most effective interventions and forms of support possible to help communities get through the pandemic.
See our page on COVID-related insights for more information along with key insights and implications relevant to COVID-19 responses and policy in Indonesia.
Last year Empatika partnered with Stats4SD to conduct a mixed methods baseline study commissioned by UNICEF Indonesia to support the start of their programme on supporting girls to thrive in West Papua. This programme will aim to achieve three main outcomes that include: i) building a positive school climate to keep girls in school and to prevent violence in schools; ii) providing a quality learning package for primary and lower secondary students to improve their learning outcome and their healthy behaviours; and iii) providing safe and self-empowering opportunities for adolescents to actively learn, discuss and express their views on key issues affecting their lives.
(click on each image to learn more)
This study explored a wide range of issues including literacy, WASH, in-school participation, life skills, bullying and violence. It is intended to help develop an accurate picture of the current situation in targeted schools, support adaptation of programme interventions, strategies and approaches, and provide a baseline for future programme impact assessment.
The quantitative portion of this mixed methods study used a survey conducted with students and teachers at eight schools (4 SMP and 4 SD) in the Sorong district of West Papua. During the survey an Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) was also conducted with grade 2 and 3 students. Following the survey fieldwork our researchers returned to conduct a RCA immersion in three of the survey locations, staying with some of the students to gain deeper insights and learn more from the students, their families, and the surrounding community. School observations were also conducted both during the survey fieldwork and the immersions in order to help complete the picture around these issues.
One of the unique aspects of the study was that most of the researchers that participated in the quantitative portion also went back for the qualitative immersions. This was the first time for many of our researchers to conduct a survey and we were lucky to have Alex from Stats4SD visit in late July to train our team before the survey fieldwork. Our researchers also introduced different icebreaking games as part of the survey process to help students feel comfortable and relaxed (see photo above). With many of the researchers going back for the immersions, this meant that researchers had already developed some relationships with students and others in the community and were already familiar with some of the context and challenges in that area. This also meant that during analysis of the findings when our study leads had follow-up questions or clarifications with our research team, they had multiple points of reference that they could draw upon. The study leads (including the two Empatika leads along with Alex from Stats4SD) also met for a two-day joint analysis session to lead into the report writing process.
Along with our partnership with Stats4SD on this study, we also received support from Dr. Lucia Retno and her team in designing and analysis of the EGRA test.
You can read the whole report here.
Some of the key findings from the study include: