an Eldis Resource
Casting the net wide and deep: lessons learned in a mixed-methods study of poverty dynamics in rural Bangladesh
A mixed-methods approach to studying poverty in Bangladesh
Authors:
P. Davis; B. Baulch
Publisher:
Chronic Poverty Research Centre, UK, 2010
This paper reflects on lessons learned in developing a mixed-methods approach to the study of poverty dynamics in rural Bangladesh. The paper argues that a sequential but integrated approach has a number of advantages over single-method approaches or non-integrated studies.
The authors notice that qualitative studies are often criticised for being descriptive while quantitative studies are often criticised for being insufficiently grounded. Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods, however, provides important issues for poverty dynamics research. In particular, the paper believes that mixed-methods research strengthens the ability to make more reliable causal inferences, both in individual life trajectories, and in collective trends.
Accordingly, the paper conducts a mixed method approach, nesting its qualitative life-histories sub-sample within the larger quantitative household panel survey, which brings several advantages:
- by using such a method, the issue of generalisablity can be directly addressed
- the above nesting and the substantial number of conducted interviews makes it easy for the criticism of anecdotalism to be refuted by this study
- the understanding which the interviews provided about the community context as well as individual motivations for taking certain actions provides a substantial grounding for the quantitative research
- this mixed analysing enhances the understanding of poverty dynamics by throwing-up many issues that are often forgotten in quantitative analysis alone
- utilising its mixed method, the paper was able to make probabilistic statements about the poverty consequences of common sequences of events, which matters for the design of anti-poverty interventions and social protection measures.
Yet, the paper emphasises that this kind of working-together requires an openness and a shared commitment to learning from all evidence, and the ability to overcome entrenched disciplinary positions.
