by Haris Gazdar
The question first arose many years ago when my colleagues and I started to design the qualitative component of a study on access to land. We thought we should use the opportunity provided by that study to develop our own protocols and training manuals for conducting qualitative research. We read a lot of material that was available then on research methodology, and got busy with serious debates while trying to complete various research tasks. What were the relative merits, functions and complementarities of qualitative and quantitative approaches (another blog)? How does a social policy focus allow qualitative research to escape the more narcissistic indulgences of contemporary anthropology (another blog)? Why was it important to insist on the distinctiveness of qualitative social science research from similar-feeling field approaches such as participatory appraisals and action research (another blog)? How the term ‘data’ needed to be constantly rescued from the monopoly of statisticians (another blog)? Why was rigorous qualitative research anything but woolly, and usually much harder work than numbers (definitely another blog)?
Who is interpreting?
From left: Arafat, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, Bhutto, Gaddafi in
Lahore, Feb. 25, 1974. AFP
|
The question first arose many years ago when my colleagues and I started to design the qualitative component of a study on access to land. We thought we should use the opportunity provided by that study to develop our own protocols and training manuals for conducting qualitative research. We read a lot of material that was available then on research methodology, and got busy with serious debates while trying to complete various research tasks. What were the relative merits, functions and complementarities of qualitative and quantitative approaches (another blog)? How does a social policy focus allow qualitative research to escape the more narcissistic indulgences of contemporary anthropology (another blog)? Why was it important to insist on the distinctiveness of qualitative social science research from similar-feeling field approaches such as participatory appraisals and action research (another blog)? How the term ‘data’ needed to be constantly rescued from the monopoly of statisticians (another blog)? Why was rigorous qualitative research anything but woolly, and usually much harder work than numbers (definitely another blog)?