Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
687318203
1.3. Qualitative Assessment Methods
Session-at-a-glance
Content
Approximate
Time
(Minutes)
Instructional Activity
Fruit Salad
10
Energizer Exercise
Session Introduction
5
Presentation
In-Depth Look at Qualitative
Assessment Methods
30
Group Work
Qualitative Methods Compared
45
Group Presentations and Plenary
Discussion
Total Time
90 minutes
/ 1hour 30
minutes
Session Objectives
After the session, participants will be able to:

Describe and compare the most common qualitative data collection methods;

Know characteristics of each method of data collection; and,

Demonstrate an understanding of when to use the different qualitative methods.
Session Supplies

Power-point 1.3: Qualitative Assessment Methods

Handout 1.3: Qualitative Methods.doc, copied to all participants

Flipchart and markers for three groups
Key Messages
The main messages that need to be stressed are the following:
Page 1 of 10
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment




687318203
There are three main qualitative collection methods: observations, discussions and
interviews. Each of these methods can be structured in several ways.
o Interviews can be exploratory (unstructured), structured and semistructured.
o Discussions can take the form of community or focus group discussions.
o Observations can be structured or unstructured. They can be participant
observations (usually long) or direct observations.
Each method and its sub-method has its advantages and disadvantages.
The use of more than one method in qualitative assessments gives greater depth to
the information collected and allows for triangulation and verification of
information and data gathered.
A food security assessment team will typically use a mixture of interview and
discussion techniques, combined with direct observation.
Facilitator Guidance and session preparation
This session discusses the methods used in qualitative assessments. Facilitators are
strongly encouraged to review TGS#9 (pages 2-5). The following external references can
be consulted as well.
Journals, Handbooks and Articles
Adler, P. A. and P. Adler (1994). Observational Techniques. Handbook of Qualitative
Research. N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi, Sage: 377-392.
Chataway, J. and A. Joffe (1998). Communicating Results. Finding Out Fast: Investigative
Skills for Policy and Development. A. Thomas, J. Chataway and M. Wuyts. London, Thousand
Oaks, New Delhi, Sage: 221-236.
Denzin, N. K. and Y. S. Lincoln, Eds. (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand
Oaks, London, New Delhi, Sage.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Newbury Park CA, Sage
Publications.
Roche, C. (1999). Impact Assessment for Development Agencies: Learning to Value Change.
Oxford, Oxfam Novib.
Stake, R. E. (1994). Case Studies. Handbook of Qualitative Research. N. K. Denzin and Y. S.
Loncoln. Londo, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi, Sage: 236-247.
Web resources:
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/contents.php
Page 2 of 10
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
687318203
http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1997/nsf97153/chap_3.htm
http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-106470-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html
http://chsd.uow.edu.au/Publications/2007_pubs/care_planning_info_bulletin_1.pdf
The facilitator should give examples from practical experience, particularly when
discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the methods, and when to use the various
methods. Participants should be encouraged to tell anecdotes of their experience to enrich
the discussion.
Room Setup
Same as earlier sessions
Session Activities
Fruit Salad: Energizer Exercise
10 minutes
Start with a short energizer of the many known in the literature. The energizer suggested
here is the Fruit Salad Energizer (Box below), which will assist the facilitator in reshuffling
the groups formed in the morning, while getting people to interact with each other.
Page 3 of 10
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
687318203
Fruit Salad Energizer:
The aim of the fruit salad is to get everyone re-energized after lunch and to divide
participants into three groups for Exercise No. 4.
Create a circle of chairs with chairs facing inwards. You need 1 chair less than the number
of participants. Ask everyone to sit on a chair facing the centre. Participants will realize
that there are not enough chairs. Explain that 1 person is in control of the game and ask
this person to stand in the middle of the circle. Now go around and tell each person that
they are a type of fruit, depending on number of group you want to end with (for the
purposes of the upcoming exercise use three fruits only). So, go around and assign a fruit
to each person, including the person in the middle.
Now whoever is in the middle has control of the game. If he shouts apples, all the apples
have to stand up and switch chairs with another apple. Whilst this is going on, the person
in the middle has to try to get a seat. You will again end up with one person in the middle
again. Continue this using the other fruits e.g. if he shouts bananas all bananas stand up
and again the person in the middle has to try to get a seat. If the person in the middle
shouts fruit salad then everyone has to get up and switch seats. If nobody asked for salad
or cocktail ask for it as a trainer.
Warning: People tend to get quite competitive, a little loud and rough. Therefore check
at the beginning if anyone has any reason why they can't jump around e.g. pregnancy,
foot complaints, etc.
Session Introduction and Overview of Qualitative Methods
5 minutes
Introduce the session objectives (slide 3).
Introduce the three main data collection methods (slide 4), noting that there are other
qualitative methods such as case studies and documentary reviews but that the discussion
will only be limited to the three methods most commonly used.
Ask participants to regroup according to the last group they were in the Fruit Salad
Exercise for a group exercise. Assign one method to each group.
Introduce Exercise 4 (slide 5) .
Participants are expected to familiarize themselves with and discuss the three methods
when answering why the method they are representing is the best method for food
security assessments. Ask participants to take a few minutes to read Handout 1.3 and
review Pages 2-5 of TGS#9 before discussing the exercise.
Page 4 of 10
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
687318203
Instruct the groups to be creative in presenting their method, highlighting that they should
stress the advantage of their method and downplay its disadvantages. Each group will be
given five minutes to deliver its presentation. Five to ten minutes will allocated to discuss
each presentation.
In-Depth Look at Qualitative Assessment Methods: Exercise 4
30 minutes
Move between groups to provide guidance as necessary. If one of the groups has finished
its task early, ask them about their key conclusions and question these conclusions to
prompt them to reconsider what they will present. For example, you can ask them if they
have discussed the implications of the disadvantages they discussed and how to deal with
them, or if they considered when to use the method.
Qualitative Methods Compared
45 minutes
The group tasked with presenting “observation” should deliver its presentation first.
Encourage participants to comment or ask questions. Make sure that the following
questions are discussed in a plenary discussion either by asking them directly or by
probing:
1) What is the difference between participant observation and non-participant
observation? What is the advantage of each?
2) What are other advantages and disadvantages than those mentioned by the group?
3) How can we respond to the limitations of inconsistent observations? Observers
misinterpretations?
4) What are some examples of observations conducted in FSN assessments and what
kind of information can they provide us (link with previous exercise, Exercise 3, if
time permits)?
5) What do the participants think about the value proposition (why is it the best
method) made by the group?
Confirm/correct what was discussed (slide 7 to 9). Highlight the following points as
appropriate:

Slide 8: A distinction is often made between Participant observation, where the
observer shares some of the activities or discussions that are being assessed in order
Page 5 of 10
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
687318203
to get a better understanding of insider views and experiences, and non-participant
direct observation where the observer deliberately does not become involved in the
situation under assessment in order not to influence it. In reality the distinction is
often blurred as any observer is likely to influence events in some way.

Slide 8: Observation occurs in all types of assessment (initial, rapid, comprehensive).
Good interviewers carefully observe the nonverbal signals that a respondent may give
and adapt their questions. They will observe the environment in which an interview is
conducted to see if there are signs that confirm or contradict what the interviewee is
saying. It is possible to make this observation process more systematic and more
reliable by the careful documentation of certain aspects of an interview (for example
body language, how people treat each other, how conflict is handled, the trends in
agreement and disagreement between people being interviewed), and by being
critically reflective on one’s own assumptions and biases. It is very important to crosscheck information from observation to avoid misunderstanding particularly when the
observer is from a different culture. Videos and photographs may be extremely useful
for both aiding memory and as a focus for subsequent questions.

Slide 8: Observation can be combined with both quantitative and participatory
methods. Some of the things observed can be quantified e.g. length of time or
numbers of contributions taken by particular speakers at a meeting, numbers of
houses of particular types which may indicate levels of poverty. Observations can
also be recorded in the form of diagrams.

Slide 9: A simple observation may be extremely useful to confirm what may seem as a
subjective reporting by respondents. For example, if people say that food is not
available in the market, a quick visit to the market can confirm whether food is
available or not. Similarly, if a respondent reports that lands are not cultivated in a
certain area, a visit to that area can confirm or refute this claim.

Slide 9: What makes observations particularly advantageous is that they provide the
assessor with a first-hand feeling of the situation he/she is assessing. Analyzing the
results of an assessment is often strengthened by images and feelings obtained from
direct observations. These bring out the human side of the story a lot more strongly.

Slide 9: Observations may uncover issues that were unknown at the time of the design
of the assessment and that go unreported by informants. For example, in many
communities, sanitation problems have become part of the “usual” daily living
conditions that people may not report anymore.
Call upon the group tasked with presenting “Interviews” to deliver its presentation. Invite
participants to comment or ask questions to the presenting team. Make sure that the
following questions are discussed in a plenary discussion either by asking them directly or
by probing:
Page 6 of 10
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
687318203
1) What is the difference between structured, semi-structured and unstructured
interviews? when can they be used?
2) What are other advantages and disadvantages than those mentioned by the group?
3) How can we respond to the limitations and disadvantages of interviews, particularly
respondent bias?
4) What do the participants think about the value proposition (why is it the best
method) made by the group?
Confirm/correct what was discussed (slide 10-13). Highlight the following points as
appropriate:

Slide 10: The central method in qualitative research is simply talking and listening to
people, interviews are thus one of the most frequently used methods in qualitative
food security assessments. In qualitative assessments every opportunity for
investigation and increasing knowledge is important. The unanticipated may often be
more useful in highlighting what people really think and really do than answers in a
formal survey situation.

Slide 10: Qualitative interviews can take many forms including:
o Qualitative questions added to structured surveys and questionnaires at the
end, or annotated in the margin.
o Semi-structured interviews where the questions are more open and answers
recorded in more detail, and where space is left for unanticipated issues
arising in the course of conversation.
o Open-ended but more probing interviews where the broad issues to be
covered are clear, but the order or ways in which they are asked are decided
in the course of conversation.
o Completely open-ended ad hoc conversations with people as the
opportunity arises and determined by what they are interested in talking
about.

Slide 11: Depending on the focus of the assessment, questions can range from microlevel details of people's daily lives to detailed questions about ways in which
organisations and institutions work, or macro level policies. The distinguishing
feature of qualitative interviews is their continual probing and cross checking of
information and a cumulative building on previous knowledge rather than adherence
to a fixed set of questions and answers. Good interpersonal skills are crucial as is
careful documentation (highlight that both will be covered later).

Slide 11 (when presenting the first point on the slide): Like observations, qualitative
interviews can generate quantitative information. For example types of responses can
be classified together and numbers of people counted. Qualitative interviews can also
be conducted with groups of people. They often involve several members of one
Page 7 of 10
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
687318203
household, or neighbors who come in to hear what is going on or other members of
organizations who happen to be passing by.

Slide 12: qualitative interviews provide an opportunity for exchange, casual
conversation and probing. The environment is more comfortable, hence generates
more in-depth information and understanding. This is not always the case, however,
as some respondents are reticent to openly share their thoughts and feelings (slide
13).

Slide 13: the disadvantages of qualitative interviews are quite similar to the ones of
quantitative (structured, questionnaire-based) interviews. Assessors must always be
aware of the biases of respondents and the sensitivity of some topics. Hence,
assessors must continuously check for inconsistencies and make every effort to probe
respondents and question their answers in a respectful way.
Call upon the group tasked with presenting “Discussions” to deliver its presentation. Invite
participants to comment or ask questions to the presenting team. Make sure that the
following questions are discussed in a plenary discussion either by asking them directly or
by probing:
1) What is the difference in structure between community discussions and focus group
discussions? when can they be used?
2) Can community discussions and focus group discussions be classified as a semistructured group interviews? Why/how?
3) What are other advantages and disadvantages than those mentioned by the group?
4) How can we respond to the limitations and disadvantages of “discussions”,
particularly respondent bias?
5) What do the participants think about the value proposition (why is it the best
method) made by the group?
Confirm/correct what was discussed (slide 14-16). Highlight the following points as
appropriate:

Slide 14: In TGS#9, discussions are classified as a separate method because of the
width of information they provide, i.e. they do not provide in-depth personal
information as interviews do. However, in most qualitative research literature
community and focus group discussions are classified as group interviews.

Slide 14 (when presenting community and focus group discussions): community
discussions are different from focus group discussions in the mix of participants,
issues usually covered (community discussions are held with mixed group of
Page 8 of 10
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
687318203
community representatives to explore a wide range of issues/topics, while focus
group discussions are organized with a group sharing at least one characteristic to
explore an issue or topic in-depth), and –sometimes- timing (focus group discussions
can be held anytime during the assessment, whereas community discussions are
usually organized early in the assessment to gather broad information and/or –in the
cases of participatory assessments- at the end to verify assessment findings).
Discuss the utility of the various methods and the linkages between qualitative and
quantitative methods (slide 17). Ask participants to reflect on the meaning of the arrows
on the slide and to share their experience in this regard. Discuss how quantitative and
qualitative methods inform each other. More specifically, note the following during the
discussion:

The three methods inform each other both during the assessment process itself (for
example, observations can lead to additional investigation during an interview or a
focus group, or a statement in an interview may prompt an observation), and later
during the analysis (when the data from various methods are compared for
establishing trends and confirming findings).

Qualitative assessments are usually informed by secondary data. These are critical
to formulate the objectives of the assessment and design the assessment tools.
Indeed food security assessments generally begin with a review of available
secondary information (documented studies, country office reports and public
records on the country context, economic and poverty conditions and the factors
that affect food security). Time should be allocated for this review at the beginning
of the assessment.

While certain methods can be more appropriate than others in certain conditions
and for specific purposes, the three methods allow the assessors not only to crosscheck/triangulate data, but also to make data collection a dynamic process. For
example, the observation of an assessor can lead to the reformulation of the
interview questions. Similarly, interview results can identify the need to verify
initial findings though unplanned observations or focus group discussions.

The data obtained from qualitative methods can be used to confirm/refute, deepen
the understanding and explain the data obtained through quantitative methods. For
example, an interview can be used to gather data from households on how they cope
despite having very low food expenditures, or to deepen the understanding of
reported households’ coping strategies. Similarly, exploratory interviews and
discussions can be used to identify indicators for a quantitative assessment. The
integration between the methods is key to undertaking an objective assessment, and
this is why assessors should always review their field notes, discuss initial findings,
Page 9 of 10
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
687318203
identify data gaps and inconsistencies, and find ways to reduce these (or at least
explain them).
Note that the use of individual methods is determined by a number of factors, and ask
participants in a plenary to identify these factors. Write down the responses on a flipchart.
Conclude the discussion, noting that the choice of the method is usually determined by
degree to which a method is flexible (the more flexible, the better), meaningful (will the
method provide the information being sought) and manageable with the resources
available (slide 18).
Wrap up with key messages on things to remember about qualitative assessment methods
(slide 19). Stress that while qualitative methods are not as structured as quantitative
methods, a significant amount of planning is needed to formulate the process and the
questions these methods need to answer. This is why the term “semi-structured” or
“unstructured” should never be equated to “unplanned”.
Ask if anyone has any questions and invite all for a 30 minute break. Mention that the last
session of the day will be dedicated to discussing qualitative assessment tools.
Page 10 of 10