|
The
Uganda Participatory Poverty Assessment Project The Uganda Participatory Poverty Assessment Project (UPPAP) is an initiative of the Government of Uganda that seeks to bring the perspectives of poor Ugandans, through consultations, into the formulation and the implementation of policies and planning for poverty reduction at both district and national levels. Although the PEAP was formulated as a result of a broad consultative process - involving central and local government, civil society and the private sector - the poor, for whom the Plan was developed, were not consulted. UPPAP was established to provide a mechanism for linking the perspectives of the poor to the policy formulation processes. Rationale The "Project" UPPAP is a partnership, initiated by the MFPED, between the Government of Uganda, selected district authorities, Ugandan NGOs, academic institutions, donors and Oxfam, as the implementing partner. It involves several phases, the first of which is this PPA. The process will continue through interaction with national policy processes, facilitation of district capacity development for par ticipatory planning and monitoring, and a second PPA. Uganda Participatory Poverty
Assessment
From this picture, the UPPA will make inferences concerning Government policies and plans, in terms of formulation, prioritisation, substance and implementation. The Consultation and Reporting Process The consultation process and the reporting were performed in a series of linked stages that purposely built on past international and Ugandan experience,1 and allowed the process to evolve. In each community, the consultations involved facilitation of local people to analyse realities, gaining insight into their situations, and proposin g strategies for coping in the present and the future. These consultations utilised a flexible package of participatory methods, collectively known as Participatory Rural Appraisal during a five-week period. Researchers actively li stened, encouraged interaction and analysis amongst local people, and facilitated discussion. Each stage of the consultation and reporting process is discussed below. The preparatory activities commenced in January 1998 with a visit to Tanzania by 11 members of the technical committee in order to learn from the experience of the Shinyanga PPA, a desk review of previous participatory poverty studies in Uganda to focus the PPA consultations, and the recruitment of project staff. A process of district selection chose nine of Uganda's 45 districts, based on purposive sampling to include some of the diverse socio-economic conditions and various facets of poverty across the country. This process aimed to select the most disadvantaged district in each o f the 7 broad agro-ecological zones in the country as assessed by 10 selection criteria indicative of the multi-dimensional nature of poverty. These criteria included the Human Development Index, natural calamities, civil strife, social and physical isola t ion, population density, land fragmentation, environmental degradation, poor soils and yields, participation-social nets, and access to roads and water. The selected districts included Kalangala, Kisoro, Kabarole, Kumi, Kapchorwa, Kotido, and Moyo. In addition, Kampala was chosen to represent the face of urban poverty; and Bushenyi was chosen as a district of contrast in which quantitative indicators had registered a decline in poverty in recent ye ars. Identification of core research partner organisations - national NGOs and academic institutions - on the basis of involvement in, or a commitment to poverty reduction and experience with participatory methodology or policy research. With partner research organisations and selected districts identified, a planning workshop was held in July 1998 to:
Training took place when a multi-disciplinary research team was assembled from the 9 core partner resea rch organisations and the 9 selected districts. A total of 36 researchers took part in a 3-week intensive residential PPA training, lead by an international and national team of trainers in August 1998. The major aims of the training were to equip rese a rchers with PRA skills, to prepare research teams for field research, to create a shared vision for the project, and to build team spirit. During training, researchers gained theoretical and practical knowledge in participatory methodologies in 3 rural a nd one urban centre in Masindi District. The training also included methods of analysis and report writing. Site selection for the PPA was also undertaken during this time for ratification by relevant district authorities at a later stage. Community selection aimed to represent the greatest diversity across the district, in terms of both positive and negative attributes, as well as to articulate the same characteristics for which the district was selected. Given the time required for in-depth community consultations and the limited time-frame of the PPA, purposive sampling was used to select 3 rural and 1 urban community for research in each of the rural districts - a total of 36 community studies. Teams of 3 core and 3 district researchers undertook field research. They were selected to take into account gender balance, familiarity with local languages and previous PRA experience. Core researchers undertook research in 3 districts in each of the 3 cycles, while district researchers operated in their district of residence only. Fieldwork began in September 1998 and was completed in March 1999. Research proceeded in cycles of 3 districts, with the research teams spending 35 days in each district. In each district, the researchers divided into two sub-teams for community work. Each sub-team consulting 2 communities in conjunction with a community facilitator who was familiar with the participatory consultation method, and/or the community. Technical advisors assisted the research teams in each district in order to guide the planning, oversee the methodologies, assist in sorting out problems, and to heighten the quality of data collection, in general. Mobilisers were utilised as the contact persons for the community. Communities were consulted prior to the commencement of the PPA exercises to explain the purpose and the process, to gain consent for proceeding and to agree on the times suitable for the majority of community members to attend meetings. In addition to community consultations, local government officials, leaders, and government and non-government service providers were interviewed. Lastly, a second round of district consultations was performed following the national synthesis workshop in order to fill the identified gaps in data collection. Attempts were made to consult all community members through discussions as a community group, or in focus groups of men, women, youth, children or representing other attributes, such as livelihood. Case studies of individual community members, local leaders and service providers were also performed. Local councillors actively mobilised the community, such that in general, attendance was reasonable, especially during the initial exercises. Communities also formulated their own priorities for action. Each community interaction culminated in the production of a Community Action Plan (CAP) to address one of their priority problems. These plans have been acted upon by more than one third of the communities at the time of writing this report . Reporting was performed in 4 tiers:
Site reports were presented back to the community before the research teams departed. The district reports were presented to district officials by local researchers and a formal presentation and discussion workshop is planned during phase II of UPPAP. The key findings of the national UPPA have been presented publicly and are being utilised in current policy processes. Following the last research and reporting cycle, a national synthesis workshop was held involving all core researchers, one researcher from each district, technical advisors, partner organisations, donors and government representatives. The aim of this workshop was to commence the massive task of synthesising the district information into one national Uganda Participatory Poverty Assessment (UPPA). During this workshop, the information collected in the district PPAs was sorted into thematic modalities generated by the local people's perspectives. A framework within which to analyse the PPA district reports was developed. Following this national synthesis workshop, teams of core researchers worked with technical advisors to analyse thematic areas across districts, highlighting major issues, commonalities and differences based on location, gender, seasons, time and age as the major dimensions of poverty. Thematic reports formed the basis for further in-depth analysis and synthesis, which culminated in final UPPA document. Validity of findings
Limitations and lessons learnt. UPPAP - the continuing process |