Training report of the initial agro-social survey methodology for the Bean/Cowpea CRSP Malawi Project

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Training report of the initial agro-social survey methodology for the Bean/Cowpea CRSP Malawi Project
Series Title:
Technical report ;
Physical Description:
15, 16 p. : ; 28 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Barnes-McConnell, Pat
Miller, Julia
Edje, Todo
Bean/Cowpea CRSP Malawi Project
Publisher:
Michigan State University
Place of Publication:
East Lansing, Mich
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Beans -- Research -- Malawi   ( lcsh )
Agricultural surveys -- Malawi   ( lcsh )
Household surveys -- Malawi   ( lcsh )
Agricultural extension work -- Malawi   ( lcsh )
Genre:
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
Spatial Coverage:
Malawi

Notes

Statement of Responsibility:
Pat Barnes-McConnell, Julia Miller, Todo Edje.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
oclc - 232115073
ocn232115073
Classification:
lcc - SB327 .B37 1982
System ID:
AA00008156:00001

Full Text





TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 1


TRAINING REPORT OF THE INITIAL AGRO-SOCIAL SURVEY METHODOLOGY
FOR THE BEAN/COWPEA ORSP MALAWI PROJECT

Pat Barnes-McConnell, Ph.D.1
Julia Miller, Ph.D.2
Todo Edje, Ph.D.3

Office of Women in International Development
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan 48824





















Igarnes-McConnell is Deputy Director, Bean/Cowpea CRSP; Director, Office of
Women in International Development; and an Associate Professor at Michigan
State University. She is the principal U.S. social science collaborator.
2Miller is Associate Professor and Chairperson, Department of Human Ecology,
Virginia State University. She is the Project field supervisor.
3Edje is a Lecturer and Head, Crop Production Department, Bunda College of
Agriculture, University of Malawi. He is the principal Host Country
agricultural collaborator.




TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 1


TRAINING REPORT OF THE INITIAL AGRO-SOCIAL SURVEY METHODOLOGY
FOR THE BEAN/COWPEA CRSP MALAWI PROJECT

Pat Barnes-McConnell, Ph.D.1
Julia Miller, Ph.D.2
Todo Edje, Ph.D.3

INTRODUCTION

The training methodology presented here was developed as part of a major

international collaborative research project. The project (Genetic, Agronomic

and Socio-cultural Analysis of Diversity AmJong Bean Land-Races in Malawi) is

one of eighteen which presently make up the Bean/Cowpea Collaborative Research

Support Program (CRSP) funded under Title XII of the U.S. Foreign Assistance

Act through the Agency for International Development (AID). The legislation,

entitled "Famine Prevention and Freedom from Hunger," encourages U.S.

universities to work with AID in support of research carried out jointly with

developing country research institutions. Such efforts address specific

constraints to increased food production and consumption. Beans, when

available, are frequently the major source of protein and some vitamins in the

diets of many persons in the developing world and thus bean

production/consumption research is a significant activity under this

legislation.

The Malawi project concentrates on evolving a methodology which allows

both production agriculture and social science perspectives, firmly anchored

in the Host Country setting, to contribute to an understanding of small farm

family subsistence. Both of these perspectives are developed in the research

18arnes-McConnell is Deputy Director, Bean/Cowpea CRSP; Director, Office of
Women in International Development; and an Associate Professor at Michigan
State University. She is the principal U.S. social'science collaborator.
2Miller is Associate Professor and Chairperson, Department of Human Ecology,
Virginia State University. She is the Project field supervisor.
3Edje is a Lecturer and Head, Crop Production Department, Bunda College of
Agriculture, University of Malawi. He is the principal Host Country agri-
cultural collaborator.











design by the appropriate professionals with specific attention to complemen-
tarity and comparability. The social science component has evolved with par-

ticular attention placed on the farming systems context and the relationship

of beans to the family survival pattern.

In March of 1982 during the harvest season the principal agricultural and

social science researchers spent three weeks in northern Malawi on a site

selection trip. In a Land Rover or-on foot, the team of scientists travelled

through the mountains and across the plains of this area stopping at both

remote and accessible homesteads where beans were seen to be drying, or where

there were other indications that the family likely had beans (i.e.,

appropriate elevation for bean growing, mature bean fields visible in the

area). Samples were taken from each of the bean collections available within

each family. Every collection was assigned a code number, the first one of

which became the dominant label (Code #) by which that family was known. This

code number was written at the designated spot on all documents and forms

related to that family in the subsequent research. The scientists took

extensive field notes, describing each family and farming system, noting grid

references on the topological road maps of the area and recording all other

geographical, and political designations which would help in finding that
family again later. The very helpful extension agents, who were familiar with

the often obscure terrain, frequently travelled with the team and assisted in

making the appropriate notations.

The next stage was the in-depth socio-cultural research of the chosen farm

families in that area which would contribute to an understanding of the

constraints to bean production and consumption and begin to explain the great

bean diversity that exists there. The obvious need for comprehensive











understanding of the Host Country cultures required Host Country nationals to

conduct the primary interviews and record observations. By July of 1982, the

Host Country research collaborators had identified ten young female students

from Bunda College of Agriculture, University of Malawi, to act as research

recorders.* They were all originally from the northern area to be researched

and thus spoke the principal language of the north Chitumbuka, hereafter

referred to as Tumbuka. They also spoke, at varying degrees of proficiency,

Chichewa, the language spoken in the central/southern area of Malawi,

especially around Bunda College where the pilot work had to be done. Finally

all ten were very fluent in English, the language of the school system. The

training was done in English, the pilot in Chichewa, the research in Tumbuka.

Thus, the research and the preparatory training methodologies had to reflect

the unique requirements of the tri-lingual, multi-cultural, agro-social

international research.

This report describes the training methodology used to prepare these young

recorders to carry out the research designed.


MATERIALS AND METHODS



Materials were prepared, the student recorders trained in their use, and

the materials pilot-tested for two weeks. These materials were concurrently

modified as appropriate. Materials included:

*The young women from Malawi participating as recorders in this project were
Wanangwa Banda, Kupingani Gondwe, Lonely Gondwe, Ellen Jenda, Filly Kamanga,
Caroline Mhango, Ndindasi Mkandawire, Estere Moyo, Emmie Nyirenda, Flora
Zulu. Augustine Mwamukamgama, who had accompanied the team in March and was
also a Bunda student, was the interpreter for the field supervisor and the
liaison with local extension agents.










a. A four-sheet (eight page) farm/household questionnaire (Appendix

Al-A8);

b. A twd-sheet farm/household observation form -- one sheet for bean

observations, one sheet for family observations (Appendix 81 and

B2). Several such forms were typically used during an observation

day.

c. A farm/household/health assessment sheet (Appendix C).

d. A recorder diary of events and reactions (Excerpts in Appendix 0).

All forms and documents carried standard places for recording the name of the

farm family, the farm family's code number, the recorder's name and the date.

The farm/household questionnaire was developed from discussions between

the agricultural and social science researchers on this project*, considera-

tion of the survey instruments being used by other projects in this CRSP, and

a review of the social science literature on the topic. The sheets of the

questionnaire, with questions distributed on both sides for ease of recording,

were coded in different colors with the questions divided by category (i.e.,

General, Demographic, Production, Preparation, Consumption, Storage,

Economic). The recorders were discouraged from administering the total

questionnaire (all four sheets) in any one day--a brief glance at a family's

data set showed which parts of the questionnaire were yet to be done. It was

suggested that only one sheet be administered per day with the most sensitive

administered last. The young recorders suggested that for the Malawi farm

women the most sensitive questions would be those concerned with age and cause

*Members of this research team also include M. Wayne Adams, Professor, Crop
and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, who is the U.S. Project Leader
and Senior agricultural collaborator, and David Greenberg, Lecturer, Bunda
College of Agriculture, collaborating agricultural scientist.







-5-


of death of deceased children. The questionnaire was checked by making sure

that each line had been filled in with information appropriate to the question.

Observations of both family activity and activity related to beans were

recorded throughout the day on the half-hour. Appropriate information was

recorded on both observation sheets consecutively within each half-hour period

and the time labelled so that for any given time segment one could tell not

only what was happening to all of the beans belonging to the family but what
each of the family members was doing. Beans were coded as having some state

within one of two conditions: (1) being held in some relatively still or

resting state (i.e., growing, drying, storage) vs. (2) being manipulated

somehow (i.e., planting, cooking, eating). Both amount and method were

indicated within each condition. Bean observation sheets were checked by

adding up the Amount cells for each half hour. The amounts should always have

been the sane unless some were removed from the system (e.g., sold or eaten)
or added to it (e.g., harvested or bought).

Family members on the other hand were coded as displaying some behavior or

activity within six principal categories: (1) agriculture (e.g., animal care,

plowing, harvesting); (2) childcare (e.g., bathing, carrying, feeding); (3)
domestic (e.g., collecting wood, preparing food, repairing), (4) economic

(e.g., selling, wage work, buying); (5) personal (e.g., eating, grooming,
travelling); (6) social (e.g., playing, visiting, at a bar). Family

Observation Sheets were checked by looking across the row for each half-hour.

Everyone in the family, that is, everyone's number or letter code, should have

appeared in every half-hour period. Identically set digital watches were.

provided for each recorder to assist in the recording and in the reliability
of evaluations.







-6-


There were several individual assessments to be made for each family.

a. Health assessment: health status was assessed daily on each member

of the family and recorded including all apparent symptoms and

reported difficulties. Location on the body (for such conditions as

sores or swelling) and severity (mild, serious, extreme) were also

indicated.

b. Cooking temperature: every time beans were recorded as cooking,

(every half-hour), the recorders took the temperature of the cooking

medium with a candy thermometer provided them.

c. When units of measure were indicated by the family (a pot, a bowl, a

pan), the recorders, using the metal cup provided, measured the

amount indicated converting all to multiples of this standard.

d. When distance was given (i.e., to water source, to latrine, between

water source and nearest latrine), the recorders paced the distance

using a regular walking gait to get a crude estimate.

e. Recorders obtained a small sample of each collection of beans which

the family had and assigned it a code number, recording this number

and writing it on a label which was inserted into a small seed bag

with the sample.

Finally, recorders were provided separate notebooks to use for diary

keeping. Using standard social science diary keeping procedures, recorders

were encouraged to record the specifics of the day's happenings each evening

before retiring, including their reactions to them.

Each recorder, in order to carry out the assignments above, was outfitted

with a water-resistant case which contained a legal-size clipboard, a supply










of legal-length observation forms, a supply of the regular length, color-coded

questionnaire forms, a digital wristwatch, a candy thermometer, a supply of

pencils, a razor pencil sharpener, several erasable ink pens, small cloth seed

bags and bag labels, a large plastic zip-lock bag, and a small container of

preamistened paper towels. The field supervisor carried an extra supply of

these items for emergencies.

Observing in pairs, the recorders were prepared to work in homes of a

single family for approximately 5 days. It was anticipated that, using this

method-, a total of 25 homes in the northern part of Malawi would be researched

during this stage of the Project.


TRAINING METHOD



Multiple 1-1/2 hour classroom sessions were conducted daily for four

days. At the end of each day student recorders were assigned the

responsibility of committing to memory the material presented that day. Every

evening following the session on diary-keeping, the student recorders were

expected to write up the day's events in their diaries. At the conclusion of

this four-day period, six days of pilot work in the villages around Bunda

College were held, followed by a summary wrap-up session on the eleventh day.

The recorders in the field worked in pairs, each team assigned to one of the

village families for a day. Local extension agents had given each family a

kilo of beans prior to the pilot (this was not a major bean growing area) and

had requested that whatever is normally done with beans be done the day the

recorders were to come.











Lesson plans for the training are presented below.

Day 1 Orientation:

1. Introduction of professional and student participants to one another,

brief orientation to the project.

2. Administration of the farm/household questionnaire to the student

recorders who were instructed to respond from the perspective of their own

home households. All were from. bean-growing families. This exercise

became the teaching tool for the introduction of the student recorders to

the questions. The responses were thus available to compare with later

data generated by each recorder for purposes of assessing recorder bias.

3. Presentation of CRSP overview, its international significance and the role

of beans internationally in subsistence farming and family survival.

4. Presentation of an overview of the Malawi project, its goals and research

design, the significance of the role to be played by the recorders in

project success, its importance to the Government of Malawi, its potential

contribution to their own professional development.

Day 2 Session 1

1. Identification and discussion of problems and issues in bean production

and utilization in Malawi from the perspective of the recorders. This

included discussion of their responses to the farm/household questionnaire.

2. Discussion of personal and professional backgrounds and goals including an

exploration of how the project activity could make a contribution to those

goals. A discussion of the role, goals and aspirations of women in

Malawi, their responsibilities and resources.







-9-


Day 2 Session 2

Presentation of the philosophy of research and the scientific method,

definition of terms, issues and problems, requirements, constraints, rewards,

the importance of commitment and the definition of expected sacrifice, the

meaning and consequences of investigator bias and the confounding of data.

Day 2 Session 3

Presentation of critical issues in the interviewing process, purpose, probing

without biasing, maintaining attention, avoiding judgmental responses,

atmosphere, recording and editing, discussion of verbal and non-verbal

information in cross-cultural settings, recorder prejudice.

Day 2 Session 4

The elements of diary keeping, sharing of diary material, group contribution

to blackboard construction of a sample, the importance of recorder reactions

and the subjective perspective. Notebooks were distributed to be used for the

training period diary. As an exercise, recorders wrote up their activities of

the previous day, sharing these write-ups with one another.

Day 3 Session 1

Question by question review of a blank first questionnaire sheet with

discussion of meaning. The recorders roleplayed the questionnaire

administration with one playing the female in a village family (roleplaying

done totally in Tumbuka) and one of the students taking the recorder's role,

all others recording without intervention. Discussions were held of the

results, question by question.

Day 3 Session 2

Repeat for second questionnaire sheet.







-10-


Day 3 Session 3

Repeat for third questionnaire sheet.

Day 3 Session 4

Repeat for fourth questionnaire sheet.

Day 4 Session 1

Questionnaire test--roleplay in Tumbuka as before but with no discussion.

Answers recorded, compared and scored against a standard derived from a

composite of all recorded answers.

Day 4 Session 2
Presentation of family observation methodology--Adults listed beside a Roman

numeral which thereafter became the designation for each. Likewise each child

listed beside a capital letter (with the capital I omitted so as not to

confuse with the first adult). For each half-hour, each and every adult was

to be listed within all categories which described his/her activities at that

time with a subscript letter showing the specific behavior. The recorders

chose to make all the fathers = I, the mothers = II, other adults = III, etc.

For the designation of children, A was the oldest living child, B the second

oldest, etc. Marking within the appropriate activity category (e.g.,

Personal), the subscript of the specific activity was recorded following the

person designation (i.e., a-praying, b-eating, c-grooming, d-travelling,

e-transporting, f-schooling, g-other personal, h-resting/sleeping, i-riding,

j-drinking, k-alone). Thus, if at 11:30 the mother were carrying child B

asleep on her back while feeding child A (the oldest living child) and

herself, the column under Personal for 11:30 would show IIb, Ab, Bh,i.

Whenever the designation for "other" is used, the explanation is given under








-11-


the last column (0ther/notes). All members of that household (not of that

family, which could live in several closely-situated households), whether

there or away, should show at every half-hour. For practice, the instructors

wrote a narrative out on the board in timed segments. Recorders wrote down

their coded observations on the forms. The results were discussed.

Day 4 Session 3
Presentation of the bean observation sheet. Up to three collections of beans

(homogeneous or mixed) could be monitored and the observations recorded for

each half-hour period (up to six collections if two half-hour rows were

condensed). Collections were to be given a code number beginning with the

code number of the household to which was added a subscript letter for each

collection. Bean observations were recorded in the a cells or b cells of the

forms if the beans were in a resting condition (e.g., a-growing, b-drying,

cooling), or in the c cells or d cells if being manipulated in some way (e.g.,

c-harvesting, d-cooking). Thus, within a given half-hour, a particular

collection could be described in up to four conditions including amount and

specific method. For example, for the collection indicated on the first line,

the a cells might indicate three large sacks were in storage mixed with an

insecticide. The b cells might indicate that there were five cups of this

same collection put aside as leftovers in a pot. The c cells might indicate

that one cup of this collection was being carried around in a saucer by a

child eating them as a snack, while the d cells might indicate that a basket

(perhaps 25 cups) was being sold at the local market. Thus when all the

amount cells were totalled (3 sacks, 31 cups) at the end of each of the

subsequent half-hour periods, the total should be the same (3 sacks, 31 cups)







-12-


minus what was eaten or sold (the latter carried forward in each half hour

until the seller returns and the appropriate adjustment made). Thus all the

collections should be followed over the course of the observation. As before,

a story written out in timed segments :provided practice in bean observation

assessment before the initiation of the pilot.

Day 4 Session 4
Presentation of assessment techniques: using the candy thermometer, bagging

and labelling the bean samples, becoming familiar with the watches, using the

health assessment form. To be recorded on the health forms were symptoms and

reports, not diagnoses. Thus the investigator might write, for example, red

hair and listless but not kwashiorkor. Finally there was an overall

description and practice of the daily research procedure, the most crucial

aspect of which was commenced by establishing the whereabouts of all of the
bean collections in the household and the whereabouts of all the household

members.

Day 5--Day 10 Pilot

Early on Day 5 the recorders and the instructors convened to go to the

villages identified previously by the extension agents. The two-person teams

were introduced to their respective families, who usually cordially set out

chairs, woven mats, or flattened boxes for their guests to sit on. The

recorders, who were encouraged to move around the homestead, generally stayed

in the homes from approximately 8:30 until about 5:00 with 1/2 hour off for

lunch (they were told in the north they should stagger their lunch breaks so

as to cover the whole period). See Appendix C for sample selections from

diaries giving information on this experience.







-13-


The authors circulated among the groups to identify potential problems and

make suggestions. The last two days of the pilot work, one of the

instructors, the principal researcher, recorded her own independent half-hour

observations simultaneously with each recorder team for a period of one hour

and subsequently calculated the percentage of agreement between each recorder

and herself. The average level of agreement on bean or family observations

reached between the principal researcher and the recorders was .6-.7. The

agreement between the two instructors was .8. Agreement among questionnaires

filled out by the recorders monitoring an interview role played in Tumbuka was

.7-.8, using the standard derived from the composite of all the recorded

answers.

Day 11

This final day extensive discussions of the experience were held and

suggestions for methodology improvement were offered by all. With this

experience, the group went back through the questionnaire, question by

question, and discussed the appropriate Tumbuka words to use to get at the

desired meaning. Phrasing was agreed to by the group. The health assessment

form was reviewed with the recorders contributing ideas of local words which

might be reported by the families to mean particular illnesses. These

illnesses were discussed to suggest their English equivalency. Twenty-one

common terms were shared and discussed.

By the end it was apparent that the group had built up quite an esprit de

corps and pride in their work. A request for a group picture brought requests

that they be allowed to carry their cases and wear their watches for the

picture.








-14-


It should also be reported that the major agricultural professor of these

students, the Host Country Principal Investigator, spoke to the group on two

occasions to reinforce the seriousness of the mission. His professional

contributions, his encouragement of the young recorders and the critical moral

and logistical support provided were critical to the process and minimized

distractions from the training activity.

In retrospect, one of the most difficult problems for the U.S.

collaborators to deal with was the cultural orientation of the recorders

toward authority. Socialized to soft, respectful voices, with dissension

restrained, these students were very different from the typical American

college students with which these instructors were familiar. This was

especially noticeable when the instructors felt required to rebuke several of

them for tardiness. Rather than explanations or even excuses, such as

American students typically give, the Malawian students displayed persistent,

possibly hostile, silence with downcast eyes. The U.S. instructors could get

no audible response even though, as was later discovered for at least one of

them, the reason for the tardiness was legitimate. This situation could have

been most destructive, but patience, humor and repeated encouragement of

candor eventually resulted in greater trust and a feeling of closeness by the

time the training period was over.

The recorders were sharp and alert, a tribute to their screening and

selection by their major professor. Interdisciplinary research, especially

between agricultural and social scientists, demands the highest caliber of

professional training and support. The success of their portion of the Malawi

project undoubtedly depends upon the commitment and skills of these young







-15-


people. This experience has given added support to the potential contribution

of cross-cultural research with cross-cultural participants, as a methodology

in collaborative research with developing country institutions, and, in fact,

may be the most appropriate approach in addressing worldwide of famine

prevention and freedom from hunger.


2236B





1. What is the nearest water source? How far?

2. How frequently does someone go for water?

Who goes?

3. Night source of light?

4. What kinds of animals do you own, how many, and what do they eat? (0mit
dogs and cats and indicate how many of each animal in parenthesis next to
the name.)

Animal

Food

5. What of your work is the hardest for you to do?

Why?

6. What of your work is the easiest for you to do?.

Why?

7. What do you do to purify water?


APPENDIX Al


FARM/HOUSEHOLD INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
BEAN/COWPEA CRSP MALAWI PROJECT
BUNDA COLLEGE MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

CODE #:

Recorder


Family name

Date:


GENERAL


Ob

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.



7.

8.

9.


serve only and record:

Walls: Mud bricks Mud/reed Cement Other

Windows: Number Size

Roof: Th atch Ti n Sod Other

Floor: Mud Cement Other

Ceiling: Under roof Board Mat Other

Cooki ng area: Main room Side room Outside Veranda.

Cooks on: Three rocks Stove What kind?

Garbage disposa-l: paces from front door

Latrine type paces from front door





10. Water source proximity to nearest latrine: paces

Water source uphill downhill from latrine.

11. Household cleanliness: VG G F P

12. Children's general cleanliness: VG G F P

PREPARATION

1. How often do you cook beans?

How often do you eat beans?

2. What other foods do you mix with beans?

3. What are the different ways you cook beans?


the water they were


9. When you cook beans which ones keep the best for more than a day?



10. Which beans do not keep at all?

11. Do some beans take longer to cook than others?

Which ones?

12. Why continue to produce "hard-to-cook" beans?

13. List below the units of measurement used b~y this family and indicate the

names of the vessels used and the cups of dry beans per unit


APPENDIX A2`


4. Do you ever soak beans? What do you do with

soaked in?

5. Do you rinse beans? How many times?

6. How many beans do you cook per meal?

7. How do you prepare beans for children

8. In addition to mealtime, how are beans eaten as snacks?








FARM/HOUSEHOLD INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
BEAN/COWPEA CRSP MALAWI PROJECT
BUNDA COLLEGE MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY


Family name CODE #:

Date: Recorder


PRODUCTION



i. How many bean crops do you get in one year?

2. When was your last bean harvest? How much?

3. What problems did you have with that crop?


4. Which bean variety yielded the best at your last harvest

5. What other kinds of beans did you grow at that time?



6. Which beans from that crop are for selling?


7. Which beans from that crop are for eating?


8. Did you get enough eating beans to last your family until your next

harvest? If no, why?

9. Where do you usually get your planting seed?

10. When was the last time you had to eat your planting seed?

II. When you have to eat your planting seed, where do you get the new seed

from?

.12. When will you plant beans next?

13. What varieties of beans wiT1 you plant then?


APPENDIX A3


Which one of these will you plant first?




APPENDIX A4


14. When will you next plant other crops?

15. Among beans and all your other crops, which crop will you plant first?~


Why?
16. Do you plant beans and maize in the sane station? If no, did you

plant beans between the maize stations?

Expl ai n
17. Do you apply fertilizer to any of your crops? If yes, what type of

fertilizer?

To which crops?
18. Would you prefer to plant more beans?

Why?


What is the problem?


19. Who in the family does the production work (Mother, Father, Girls, Boys,

Laborer)?

Clearing land~ Watering

Plowi ng~ Harvesti ng~

Planting__ Selecting planting seed

Weedi ng~ Thrashi ng~

Putti ng, to dry~ Putting into storage~
20. What happens when there is no longer a man in a family and there is men's

production work to be done?








FARM/HOUSEHOLD INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
BEAN/COWPEA CRSP MALAWI PROJECT
BUNDA COLLEGE MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY


Family name CODE #:

Date: Recorder


STORAGE



1. How much of your bean harvest do you lose in the fields?

How?

2. How much of your bean harvest do you lose after harvest?

How?

3. Do you harvest the whole plant or just the pod?

Why?

4. How do you dry them?


5. After harvest how long do they dry before you store them?

6. What do you store them in?

7. What do you mix in them for storage?

8. Which beans in storage are eaten most by insects and rats?


9. Which beans get hard in storage?

10. How long does it take them to get hard?

11. What other things happen to beans in storage?


12. How long are the ones you eat usually stored before they are all eaten?


APPENDIX AS




APPENDIX A6


ECONOMIC


1. When did you last sell beans? Which kinds?

2.- When did you last buy beans?_ Which kinds?

3. How many did you buy? How many did you sell?

4. For what purpose did you buy the beans?

5. What family members have jobs off the farm? (Include names, occupation and

location.)


6. How long is each gone?

7. Do the children help with work?

What do they do?


8. What bean work do children do?

9. Have you used outside labor this year? To do what?

10. Are beans expensive or cheap in the market now?

How much do they cost?

11. What days are market days in your community?

Which days are the most active market days?

12. How often do you go?

13.Do you earn money? How?
14. What things do you buy which you use for bean production, storage and

cooking?





CONSUMPTION


How often does your family eat beans this time of year?

Which beans are your favorite for eating?

Why?

This time of year do you eat them mixed or separated?

What is your:

Favorite bean color?

Why?
Favorite bean size?

Why?


APPENDIX A7


FARM/HOUSEHOLD INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
BEAN/COWPEA CRSP MALAWI PROJECT
BUNDA COLLEGE MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
CODE #:

Recorder


Family name

Date:


DEMOGRAPHICS


Wife Adult 3 Adult 4


Husband


Approximate ages (or age deceased)

Years of schooling

Languages spoken

Religion
# wives of this husband

# alive children of this wife

# deceased children


Ages

Ages at death and cause








What is the most common food your family eats?

At what age do children begin eating this food?

Are boy babies or girl babies weaned first?

Why?
At what age do you start feeding children beans?

When your babies ate beans for the first time what happened?


11. Among children, how and what do boys eat differently from girls?


12. Which beans are the best for children?

Why?


13. Are there any members of your family that don't eat beans?

If yes, who and why?


14. Do any members of your family have stomach problems with beans?

Who and why?

15. What health problems do you have?


16. What health problems do other adults in your family have? (Indicate who)


APPENDIX A8


Why?
10. Other foods children eat:


How often:


17. What health problems do the children havel





DATE


gender and position in family


1.ARCLUE 2. CHILD CARE 3.DMSI .EOUI .PROA .SCAL /.OHR NTS
a-anial Cre >bthin a-cllectin wood a-sellin markete) a-praying a-visiting rindicateher
b-Clearing land b-grooming b-chopping wood b-buying (market) b-eating b-church the specific
c-plowing c-carrying c-hauling water c-wage work C-grooming C-meeting activity re-
d-planting d-teaching (d-boiling water d-fabricating d-traveling d-celebrationl ferred to as
e-weeding e-attending e-preparing food e-other economic e-transport ing e-bar "othe~r." Back
f-fertilizing f-feeding f-washiing dishes f-schooling f-restaurant of sheet may
g-watering g-other child care g-washing clothes g-other persona g-other socia be used,
h-other plant care h-cleaning h-resting/sleep. h-playing first indicb-
i-harvesting i -repa iri ng i-riding tinlg the timek
j-storing I bother domestic j-drinkingy person, cate1-
k-other agriculture k-alone gory and be-
116 kkUN -grading/sortin AIYAIVYDERPTN havior.
AllT
Adults

1 Children


Adults


All
2 Children

Adults

3 Children

Adults

4 Children


FAMILY OBSERVATION SHEET
BEAN/COWPEA CRSP MALAWI PROJECT
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY


Recorder


List CHILDREN by name, age and gender--oldest first CODE r:
4. F.
*.- I G.
*. *
*. *-J
E. K.


List ADULTS by namoe,


IV.


'FamDily NPae





TI AIT/MX# FSIN ~DTO: mut M ho MA PU TI ONITO: Amut Metho o
e. b. a b. a. b. c. d d 3




a. b. a b. a. b. c. d d d




a. b. 5 b. a. b. c. d d d




a. >. a b. a. c. d d j




4c


a.5 ) a c d .1


Sc


Family Naoe


Recorder
Code r: Date


BEAN OBSERVATION SHEET
BEAN/COWPEA CRSP MALAWI PROJECT
MIICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY


RESTING CONDITIONS:


Leftovers
Colinog
Precooked


MANIPULATION: Planting
Watering
Weedirg


Harvesting
Tr GE orting
100in (in)


Selling (out)
Processing


Soaking
Cook ing


Feeding
lain~g


Growi ng
ng~ "
Storage





Family name
Date:


CODE #:
Recorder


1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Children by nane Health condition Bod place Severit*

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.


- serious extreme)


APPENDIX C


HEALTH OBSERVATION SHEET
BEAN/COWPEA CRSP MALAWI PROJECT
BUNDA COLLEGE MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY


Make a note below of all health conditions learned about and health symptoms
you observe. Look especially for nervous behavior, muscle twitches, swelling,
indications of diarrhea, dermatitis, open sores, coated tongue, mouth sores,
coughs, running noses, indications of parasites, abdominal pain, bloated
stomach, red or light hair, general malaise but ambulatory, bedridden but
functioning, bedridden and incapacitated, specific disease reports such as
malaria. Do not make diagnoses yourself but record all symptoms.


Body place


Severity*


Adult by name


Health condition


101

11.

12.

.13.

14,




APPENDIX D


MALAWI PROJECT
SAMPLE SEGMENTS FROM RECORDERS' DIARIES
DURING TRAINING PERIOD


1. Today we were going to farmers in villages at Mkwinda and interview them

and I felt a little frightened in case I would make mistakes there or the
farmer would not welcome us.

Since we were to stay there the whole day, we took our packed

lunch.... First we did the observation sheets then we asked some

questions from the blue form. At first she gave us vague answers but
later during the day she told us true answers.

Then we went to the well, rubbish pit and pit latrine to see how far

it was and while counting the paces (her partner) was chatting with (the

mother) and I did the counting of paces. And it was easier. I think it

will be difficult for only one person to do the chatting and counting.

2. ...(After the day's observations) we then met in Room One (regular

classroom) to go over the problems we encountered at the respective

families we had been assigned to.... The day was very good because it was

my first time to interact with strange families.

3. ...I think the children had poor growth 'coz of the poor food they usually

eat. I noticed that the mother always gives her child sweet potatoes

(cooked or roasted) instead of giving her some protein foods which can

help her. As a result, the child was very weak. Her hair was pale brown
and she looked miserable. I felt pity for the poor child. I wish I had

enough money to buy some milk or any protein food which I could give her
mother to feed the baby. May the Lord help me so that I can be generous

to the poor souls of His. Let the Devil in me not be proud with my

generosity--instead, let me be thankful to the Lord.







4. I woke up a bit earlier than usual because I was excited to go to

practical. We met Dr. Barnes-McConnell and Dr. Miller in Room One at

College at 8:00 aim. then off to practical. At 1st I thought I couldn't

be able to do the work--was lacking confidence. Fortunately, the (wife of

the) family I was working with was very amicable and easy to talk to. She

was giving me all the information I was looking for and more too.

5. It was early in the morning that I got up from my bed to have a shower. I

had my quiet time. With full of excitement of starting my Bean/Cowpea

CRSP practical I rushed to the cafeteria, had my breakfast and went to

class. When Dr. Barnes-McConnell and Dr. Miller arrived they told us all

to leave for Mkwinda village. While in the vehicle, I thought, I would

not make a good job because things seemed to be tough for me and I was so

much troubled in the heart. When we got off the vehicle and reached

Mkwinda village where I was working still my heart was not at peace.

There was one thing again which scared me most--the assumption that I was

to work alone but to my relief I was given a mate.... The first half hour

was somehow tough because I was not yet used to recording peoples

activities by letters on forms. But as I got along I was used and

everything came up fine by 5:00 p.m.

6. ...I went to Room One where Dr. Edje gave us a piece of advice and

emphasized on the importance of this Research. Perfect submission is very

important in this project because the data collected will be dependent on

us hence we need not to cheat when doing the research.

7. ...We were given medium weather bags in which we put the green sheets,

bean and family observation sheets, wrist watch, file, pencils, pencil

sharpener and thermometer, plastic and cloth bags ready for Fridays








interview at Mkwinda. It was a very beautiful bag and I liked it very

much. I think I'll one day have such a bag in which I'll put my books or

files. We left the bags in Professor Edje's office.

8. ...The day was good though. I was very tired. We knocked off at 5:00

p.m. and then I went straight to the hostel to have a bath because I had

spent the whole day in the sun and dust. After my bath I went for supper

and very much enjoyed my meal because it was much better off prepared.

After supper (a female friend) asked me to remove dandruff from her head.

And still in the process (a male friend) came and asked us to help them

prepare their meal and we agreed. Then we prepared the meal and started

chatting. We were about seven. After chatting (another female friend,

also recorder) crossed me very much that I cried. Anyway I comforted

myself because I knew that we should learn to forgive and forget. I slept

around 12:30 a.m. after my night being spoiled by her. Lord forgive me

for being overcome by the temptation that made me say bad words against

her. The night ended up badly. Bad day!!

9. ...Today the work was a little bit tough. We had many papers to fill in

the blank spaces and the observations of beans and family. But everything

went on very smoothly. The lady with whom we worked was very nice. She

was able to answer the questions. She was also funny and she liked to

chat with us. I liked her cleanliness and her way of answering. I was

sorry to hear that the husband of her daughter is in town working but he

doesn't even take care of his wife who is at home. To say the truth, the

girl (daughter) looked very worried and I think she's no peace in her

heart. The fact that she's pregnant worries me most--because at this








time, I think (even if I'm not yet married) it's good to help each other.

I don't think that the lady will be able to take care of the baby who will

be born soon. Hope the man will think about it and either call his wife

or return home.

10. As usual the work was interesting but I felt very tired to continue asking

questions on the remaining two forms after becoming sick. -All the same

the day was not good for me because of sickness. At something past 4:00

p.m. we started discussing with another woman who was confused about why

we were doing research and why some people were given beans and not

others. We felt very sorry when she told us that many women in the

village are confused about the research and that some women are speaking

bad of others. Anyway we tried to convince her on why we were doing the

research and the reason why only few people were given beans.

11. There was not much activity around this house.... One thing that had

never happened was that when the children saw Or. Miller and Dr. Barnes-

McConnell they came into their large numbers and started laughing and

gazing at them.... On the whole the survey itself is not difficult but it

is just a matter of being very observant so that you can record everything

happening around that household the time you are there.

12. We were assigned to a house where we found that the wife had been adm-itted

to (the hospital) because she was suffering from TB. However the husband

was very cooperative and tried as much as he could to answer us and

interesting enough he didn't show any sensitiveness with some of the

questions which were indeed sensitive.