Data collection Instruments

In data collecting, combining several methods and data sources, which some authors called it

“triangulation” (Patton 1990, Babbie, 2001) is crucial as it yields many advantages than single method could have provided. ‘Triangulation’ refers to “asking different questions, seeking different sources and using different methods” (Babbie, 2001:277). In this research both qualitative and quantitative methods and data sources are employed to address the research problem. The data gathering instruments include focus group interviews, individual interviews (key informant interviews), household history/life stories, observation and survey interview.

Focus group interviews and individual interviews¹² were iterative, i.e. in most rounds of the fieldwork the “basic process of data gathering, analyzing it, winnowing it and testing”

(Babbie, 2001) has been repeated to come to clear understanding of issues. In the following, a brief description of the data collection instruments is given.

i. Focus Group Interview: This method has been widely used in generating data. Authors like Patton (1990) suggest it as advantageous for generating data in homogenous groups of participants. Therefore, focus group interview was found appropriate as the subjects of study are homogenous - clan group residing in one district. Clan and sub-clan leaders and individual clan members were interviewed in various villages or clan settlements. They were asked to respond to questions relating to causes of famine/food crisis; risks and constraints to livelihood; coping strategies; traditional early warning systems; local problems, needs and preferences, priorities, etc. Each group interview was guided by structured checklist, of course allowing some flexibility in raising questions. Since I used an interpreter¹³, I conducted as

10Woreda is a local government administration next to Peasant or Pastoral Administration.

11The qualitative data are organised into seven protocols. (pro-1 with 7 pages; pro-2 with 63 pages; pro-3 with 53 pages; pro-4 with 51 pages; pro-5 with 151 pages; pro-6 with 17 pages and pro-7 with 61 pages). Likewise the quantitative data is organized and converted into descriptive statistics (frequency, percentages, averages, etc).

12 Focus group and individual interviews were also conducted in neighbouring non-Afar communities in order to investigate their social, cultural and economic relations and inter-ethnic conflicts. The result of these interviews have been analyzed and incorporated in the relevant chapter (see Chapter 6).

13 The interpreter, Mussa, was involved not only in interpreting but also as research assistant and key informant particularly in investigations of socio-cultural issues.

many as group interviews to triangulate responses of the same questions and to avoid the danger of distortions and misinterpretations. The group interview was found more appropriate, since the clan group exhibit more homogeneity and members tend to reflect their ideas in group.¹⁴ It also allowed group dynamics and some quality control since they hear each other’s responses and stimulate one another. Note taking and tape recording¹⁵ were used during focus group interviews.

ii. Depth Interview of individual Informants: This method was conducted in two settings and in two ways. One is guided by general interview guide (checklist questions) in prearranged locations, and the second is informal conversational interview conducted spontaneously and in informal setting. In the first case checklist questions were used and the topics treated include, individual’s life history, challenges and experiences, inter-household relations, mutual-support networks, trends in livestock population, grazing land, resource management, changes in the environment, disaster history, recurrent drought and consequences. The kinds of informants include elders, religious leaders, clan leaders, widows, youths, animal traders, migrant workers, shop keepers, etc.

Individual informants were also interviewed in informal settings and spontaneously. This method became very easy once I established good rapport and relation with local people and sub-clan leaders in the pastoral settlements. As I repeatedly visited their locality with a native interpreter, they have developed confidence and shown willingness to discuss various issues.

Moreover in the local community, there is a traditional information communication method called Dagu. This practice has helped me to meet individual informants spontaneously in informal settings. While walking to settlements or anywhere in the locality, I was mostly accompanied by my interpreter. According to the traditional information exchange system (Dagu)¹⁶ anyone who comes across with another person on his/her way has to greet and converse about what he/she has observed on his/her way, about his/her community, grazing land, health conditions, local problems, any encounters, etc. This is a common way of exchanging information among the Afar. Therefore, my interpreter as an Afar member has to conduct Dagu whenever we met anyone in our way. This allowed me to conduct informal conversational interviews in many informal settings. Most of the individual interviews were also recorded with tape-recorder and latter transcribed into notes.

14 As I observed many occasions during many rounds of my fieldwork visits, deliberation, debate, consensus and collective action/decision are the common ways of handling cases and issues in the study community. I had one encounter which goes with this idea. “While I was filling the survey questionnaire, a 60 year old man was listening to what I was asking my interviewee through my interpreter. He was one of my individual interviewee in my previous field visit. When I finished interviewing, he asked through my interpreter, if I am willing to hear his suggestion. Then I agreed to hear. He said “You asked me last time and I also saw you many times in our area and in the town (Woreda capital) asking many people. Still you keep on asking many persons. Why are endeavouring so much for which you can not get any different responses. Afar is Afar; his word is one and same.

If you get answers for your questions from one Afar or two Afar, that is enough. If you go from one corner to the other, you will get the same answer. Even it is not our culture for that matter. And yet we are hospitable, feel free and continue until you feel tired through this harsh environment”.

15 Tape-recording was made with full consent of the participants.

16 A detail about Dagu is given in the chapter 6.

iii. In-depth interviews with local officials, sector experts¹⁷ and non-Afar migrants: Local level officials and experts who lived and served longer in the locality, and seasonal migrants (daily labourers) were interviewed in order to generate data on local level development problems, intervention programmes; inter-and intra clan relations; development of settlement, services and physical infrastructures, food crisis, and conflicts, local peoples relation with non-Afars, livestock mobility, businesses, etc. The informants include district administrators, heads of sector offices (e.g. agriculture and livestock, health, education), traders, non-Afar migrants, etc.

iv. Life history narrative: Case histories of selected individuals that are typical and/or representative were recorded. The case study individuals were heads of households which included both men and women. They were given the opportunity to recount their personal histories, experiences, challenges (the ups and downs) that they have encountered in their life particularly during crisis times. They were also asked to narrate about their households, relations with other households, mutual support networks, coping strategies, etc.

v. Observation: The author gathered general information through observation on marketing, settlement patterns, division of labour, cultivation practices, grazing land, water points, natural resources, social and economic services, various occasions and rituals relating to beliefs and traditions (feasts, wedding, funeral ceremonies, reconciliation meetings), and Afar and non-Afar individual encounters, etc.

vi. Structured Questionnaire Interview of Household Heads: As the fieldwork progressed, I became familiar with different pastoral settlements and neighbourhoods in the study community. This also enabled me to probe into some of the questions intended to be incorporated into the structured questionnaire interviews. Then I proceeded to the designing of a structured questionnaire to conduct household heads interviews into two settings: in selected pastoral villages and in the large settlement which is regarded as town¹⁸. I conducted the household survey at the 5^th round of my fieldwork, before I completed the ongoing qualitative data collecting process. It was done with intention for triangulating some the qualitative data to quantitative ones; for standardizing some quantitative questions and for identifying data gapes. Therefore, I was able to fill data gaps during the final round of my fieldwork.

The household survey was conducted in five pastoral villages¹⁹, and in the Nemelifen settlement which is considered as town by the local people. (For the location of sites see appendix 1). In total 60 households were randomly selected and interviewed. Care was taken in selecting settlements to represent the two sub-clans (Megenta Aghini and Bahire-Aghini) residing in the pastoral villages. With regard to Nemelifen settlement, the residents are mix of

17 Local officials and experts from neighbouring non-Afar districts (i.e. Bati, and Dawa Cheffa Woredas) were interviewed in order to understand inter-ethnic cooperation and conflict along the interface zone.

18 Household survey was conducted at the 5^th round of my fieldwork (i.e. before I completed the qualitative data gathering). I did this with intention of triangulating some the qualitative data to quantitative ones before I finished the whole data colleting process.

19 The household survey schedule coincided with the period where the local people faced fodder problem due to inadequate rainfall and began moving their livestock to Cheffa. Thus I had to conduct the survey in neighbourhoods where permanent villages or settlements are available.

the two sub-clans and samples were taken from the total households residing in the town. In both settlements (villages), fresh list was established so that simple random sampling technique was applied to select samples.

Structured questionnaire interview was employed to generate baseline information on the general socio-economic conditions of the study community, assets, trends in resources and food security. The specific topics include household livelihoods/activities; asset (livestock holding and access to land); risks and livelihood constraints; changes in livestock number;

grazing land and herd movement; crop cultivation; human and social capital; informal and formal transfers; current food security and consumption, self assessment of households’ well-being in the past three decades, etc.