Semi-structured in-depth interviews

Conversation through semi-structured in-depth interviews is the key to social research (Crang and Cook, 2007). It is an open-ended, discovery-oriented method (Punch, 1998) with a multiplicity of uses (Fontana and Frey, 2000). Semi-structured interviewing as a means of producing qualitative data is a flexible approach as it offers not only to use predetermined questions and topics, but also allows new topics to be pursued as the interview develops. I performed a total of 14 in-depth interviews with household heads across the study villages (Table 3.4). All interviews were semi-structured, open-ended, one-on-one, and were focused on eliciting participants’ perspectives on the entire dimension of the Monga vulnerability, livelihood strategies, decision-making processes, and the use of social capital, as well as coping and other adaptation options that go with crises. My female assistants carried out all the interviews with women, except for two interviews where the respondent preferred to talk with me. However, I was present and if necessary I assisted them to facilitate the conversion process but at a preferred distance from the interviewees. In all the interview venues I used natural settings, mainly the respondents’ preferred places, to keep them relaxed (Photograph 3.4).

57

Table 3.4: List of household heads for semi-structured interviews.

Village and Union No. of interv iew Household

Head Interviewees characteristics

Khadaimari 3

Male Agriculture and other Wage Labourer

Female Day labour/Maid in a rich household in her village Female Maid in a rich house/beggar

Akaluganj Bazar 3

Male Sharecropper/ Agriculture Wage labourer Male Agriculture wage labour/Fishing/Day labourer Female Day labourer (agriculture works and earth moving)

Aleker Char

3

Male Small farmer

Male Van puller/fishing/wage labourer (no fixed job) Female Housewife/ Maid

Dhamur Char

1 Male Marginal deficit farmer 2 Male Marginal deficit farmer

Female Part time agricultural labour/ Maid

Dakhshin Char 2

Male Agricultural wage labourer/Part-time fishing Female No fixed job (maid/beggar)

During the interviews with the household heads, I maintained privacy and created a congenial

atmosphere, but I was ‘listening with the third ear’ (Berg, 1989: 35 cited in Clock et al., 2004:

158). As I stated earlier, all interviews were digitally recorded, therefore I did not have to make notes; instead I concentrated on understanding the respondent’s points of view and asking appropriate follow-up questions. I found that usually, the respondents began their

58

conversation with a little hesitation, but as the interview went ahead, they answered questions very naturally, and to a greater degree they were really excited to talk. I used simple prompts (for instances, “can you give me any examples?” “can you please tell me more about this” and, etc.) to encourage the respondent to elaborate on their ideas. Sometimes they tried to append some stories related to their answers, but it was also very common that sometimes their stories were not pertinent. At those moments, I strove to keep them on track by changing the topic, very carefully asking questions on general issues. I found that on some sensitive questions (for example, about the role of government officials or the Union Parishad’s member or chairman), some respondents requested me not to disclose their name, but they were nevertheless keen to give details. In this regard, I ensured them the anonymity and confidentiality of disclosing their opinions, feelings, attitudes, and reactions. However, in all the interview sessions I followed two basic steps to assess the validity, authenticity and truthfulness of the information: firstly, I asked the same questions at different points; and secondly asked the same questions to other respondents. I tried to solve any inconsistency I found, asking some additional questions related on that particular issue to get their opinion in this regard. Along with semi-structured interviews with household heads, I also had long, intensive discussions with one or two members of each household (particularly, with wife of male headed households, and elder son or daughter of female headed households), which gave me greater insight into the individual indirect subjective views of the household dynamics.

I also conducted 14 in-depth interviews (Table 3.5) with personnel from community GOs and NGOs (Photograph 3.4). My purpose behind these interviews was to obtain effective detailed information and their critical views on research issues and also to discover the gap between the existing policy and programmes and the grounded realities, ultimately the institutional complexity. All the interviews were at their offices either locally or in Dhaka at their convenience. Visiting their offices also give me additional benefit to observe their ongoing activities, publications (for example, collecting posters and unpublished documents) and to carry out informal discussions with other officials who were engaged in different programmes

designed for Monga eradication, poverty reduction and livelihood enhancement e.g. the Char

livelihoods programmes (CLP) of DFID. However, on many occasions, while conducting these interviews, I also cross-checked gathered information and data to confirm their authenticity.

The contents of in-depth interviews with the household heads (see, Annex II) and GO-NGO personnel (see, Annex III) were helpful for a greater understanding of the vast issues regarding the vulnerabilities to the Monga and chronic food insecurity, households’ interlocking strategies to cope with the Monga, unfolding choices, and different dimensions of GO/NGOs policy and programme information that has been designed to eradicate the Monga and improve

59

the food security situation. However, it is noteworthy to say that it was not possible to formulate a strict guide for every interview, though I had a number of predetermined topics and questions. In this sense, I was not rigid in them; rather, I maintained flexibility and was diplomatic in the way of contacting respondents and negotiating ‘research deals’ (ibid: 102) by introducing new questions and topics if required. Every interview demanded its own preparation. I did not set a time frame for interview length; a few interviews lasted more than an hour and others took even longer.

Table 3.5: List of GO, NGOs and other key informants for in-depth interviews.

Types of Organisation Affiliations

GO

Local

Administration level

The Relief and Rehabilitation officer, Nilphamari

Upazila Agriculture Officer (UAO), Rowmari Upazila, Kurigram

Upazila Food officer (UFO), Sundorganj Upazial, Gaibandha Upazila Agriculture officer (UAO) Department of Agricultural Extension (DAE), Gangachara Upazial, Rangpur

Upazila Agriculture officer (UAO), Department of Agricultural Extension (DAE), Kaliganj Upazila, Lalmonirhat

National Level

Chairman, Bangladesh NGO Foundation, The Peoples Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka, Bangladesh, and Economist

NGO

Local and Regional Level (Working with Donor Agency)

Executive Director, Udayankur Sheba Sangstha (USS) - A local NGO, Nilphamari

Executive Director, Akota- A local NGO, Char Livelihoods Project (CLP), DFID, Sundarganj, Gaibandha

Donor funded Project

Area:

Northern Region

Head of NGO Partner of the Food security and Community Food Bank Project, Rowmari, Kurigram, Funded by DelPHI, UK.

Head of Gaibandha Food Security Project for Ultra Poor Women, An European Union Funded Project, Rangpur Dinajpur Rural Services (RDRS), Gaibandha

Community Organisation

Local Community based

Chairman of Community Dhan bank 1, Laxmichap Union, Nilphamari

Research Institute

Regional Level (attached with NGO)

Research Coordinator, North Bangle Institute (NBI), RDRS, Rangpur

International Organisation

Consultant, USAID (United States Agency for International Development) Seed Project, International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), Dhaka, Bangladesh

Philanthropic, Researcher

Founder of the Concept of Community Dhan Bank for Monga eradication, Laxmichap, Nilphamari, Former Professor of Public University

60