manual for social impact assessment of land-based ... - Forest Trends

Box T2. A Useful Method for Measuring Social Capital
A measure of household welfare that is seldom assessed is the level of security and support that
household members feel they get from the community they live in – a key component of social capital.
When household members don’t trust their neighbors or do not expect to get help from them during a
crisis, it is reasonable to assume that this has an adverse influence on household perceptions of wellbeing.
To obtain a qualitative measure of social cohesion, questions like the following can be asked to
the household heads:
If you left a machete outside your house overnight would it still be there in the morning?
When you leave the village can you leave the door of your house unlocked?
In the village is there someone you could leave your money with to look after?
If one of your children becomes sick is there someone in the village who would lend you money at a
low rate of interest for their medicine?
Other questions with yes/no answers, and that are not leading questions, can be added to these. Such
questions are designed to measure the level of trust, security and mutual support that exist in a
community, and if scored as 1 for Yes and 0 for No, they can be used to create a composite ‘social
cohesion score’ for each household.
Source: TRANSLINKS, 2007
Sequencing, triangulation and validation
The sequence of data collection methods is very important – experience shows that it is better to
use participatory methods in the exploratory research phase, for example, Box T3 presents the
methods proposed in the Social Carbon Methodology (SCM) for the ‘starting conditions’ description.
The understanding gained from the participatory methods can inform and improve the research
methods used in the more targeted or specific analysis, e.g., facilitating the design of short and
focused household surveys.
It is always good practice to 'triangulate' using different data collection methods. A single data
collection or research method used on its own can lead to erroneous results, e.g., due to
unidentified bias in either participatory or survey methods. Two research methods can sometimes
give surprisingly different results, in which case a third research method may be needed.
The feedback of research results to communities and validation is an essential part of any data
collection and analysis process. This provides some degree of ownership or engagement of local or
primary stakeholders, and is important for ground-truthing. Feedback should be an iterative process,
with one or more feedback sessions before the research team leaves the community (e.g., to check
on key assumptions or linkages) followed by further sessions when the data analysis is complete.
Social Impact Assessment of Land-Based Carbon Projects (1.0) – Part II | 37