GO Back

Rapid Rural Appraisal: Implications for

Community Action Programs in Rural Societies

Charles W. Jarrett, Ph. D. David M. Lucas, Ph. D.

Department of Sociology Dept. of Interpersonal Communication
Ohio University Southern Campus Ohio University Southern Campus

Abstract Principles of rural sociology, interpersonal communication, and

international studies were applied during an undergraduate research project in
rural Mexico. Under the supervision of faculty from Ohio University and the
Institute of Technology of Monterrey (ITESM), undergraduates from the United
States and Mexico learned to apply principles of qualitative research in an
international setting. Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA), a qualitative methodology
appropriate for multi-disciplinary research, was applied to determine the
attitudes of rural people regarding social, political, and economic issues.
Data were collected in the summer of 1999 from one hundred seventy-five (175)
families residing in General Cepeda, Coahuila, Mexico. Findings revealed local
residents were concerned with high incidences of unemployment, extreme
conditions of poverty, lack of educational opportunities for youth, and an
increasing problem of alcoholism in the community. Residents expressed a high
degree of fear and suspicion relative to the support of governmental institutions.
Findings suggest rapid rural appraisal may have implications for community
action programs in rural societies.

Introduction

From June 13-24, 1999, Ohio University Southern Campus faculty and

students were part of an international field experience in rural Mexico.

Organized with the cooperation of faculty from the Institute of Technology of

Monterrey (ITESM), Saltillo Campus, undergraduate students from the United

States and Mexico engaged in a qualitative research project near the field site of
General Cepeda, Coahuila, Mexico.

In June of 1999, the state of Coahuila, Mexico, was experiencing

economic prosperity directly related to the previously ratified North American

Free Trade Agreement (Beltran 1999; Reuters 2000; Siller 1998). An expanding

industrial presence had energized the national economy, with corporations like

General Motors, Ford Motor Company, Chrysler, and John Deere establishing

business and manufacturing opportunities in Mexico (Beltran 1999; Reuters

2000; Siller 1998).

Coahuila, Mexico s third largest state, possessed a highly developed

industrial infrastructure and a quality work force (Beltran 1999; Echeverria

2000). Saltillo, a major metropolitan center located in the mountains of

Coahuila, was positively affected by the recent economic trends. Located about

an hour from the financial center of Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Saltillo boasted an

urban population of over six hundred thousand (600,000) people, with an

economy featuring unemployment rates at an all time low of 2.9% (Echeverria

2000; Reuters 1999; Siller 1998).

Located fifty (50) miles from Saltillo in the same state of Coahuila,

Mexico, the village of General Cepeda (pronounced Hen-er-al Say-pay-da)

appeared relatively unaffected by recent economic improvements in the region.

Although two main roads lead to the village and intersect there, General Cepeda

remained a rural, isolated village composed of mostly disenfranchised people

experiencing high rates of unemployment, rates approaching 35% according to

government sources (Beltran 1999; Echeverria 2000; Reuters 1999; Siller 1998).
 The socio-economic inequalities between Saltillo and neighboring

General Cepeda were apparent to observers. Although data existed on the

attitudes and perceptions of people living in urban centers like Saltillo, there

was less research on the attitudes and perceptions of rural people living in the

state of Coahuila, Mexico (Beltran 1999). Faculty from Ohio University and the

Institute of Technology of Monterrey (ITESM), Saltillo Campus, collaborated in

the development of a research project appropriate for teaching undergraduates

principles of qualitative research. Rapid rural appraisal, a qualitative

methodology used in rural settings, was applied to assess the attitudes of people

living in General Cepeda regarding social, political, and economic issues.

Defining Rapid Rural Appraisal

Rapid rural appraisal has become increasingly important for research in

rural regions where more rigorous, quantitative analysis may not be practical

due to the constraints of time and funding (Chambers 1992; Dunn 1994; Khon

Kaen 1985; Kumar 1990). A measure of frustration may exist with structured

questionnaires and quantitative surveys, methods more time consuming,

complicated, and difficult to process in the field. Rapid rural appraisal provides

quick and efficient identification of local issues, and it offers an insightful

framework for supplementing conventional methods of research in rural settings

(Chambers 1992; Dunn 1994; Farrington and Martin 1988; Kumar 1990; Kumar

and Casley 1993).

Rapid rural appraisal (RRA) has no strict set of methodological

procedures; however, several distinctive features have emerged from the

research (Chambers 1992; Conway 1987; Dunn 1994, Ison and Ampt 1992;
Khon Kaen 1985).

1) (RRA) features a commitment to multi-disciplinary research

A multi-disciplinary team of researchers from diverse disciplines

should be recruited to provide a wide range of perspectives and
perceptions through which data can be interpreted and analyzed
(Chambers 1992; Conway 1987; Dunn 1994 ; Ison and Ampt 1992).

2) (RRA) features a commitment to team training

Team training is considered a crucial step for achieving consistent

approaches to data collection, and it may include training team
members in techniques of semi-structured interviewing, active
listening, structured observation, and the formulation of
research objectives (Chambers 1992; Conway 1987; Dunn 1994).

3) (RRA) features a commitment to project protocol

Project protocal specifies a method of introducing team members

to local residents and provides a research design for the systematic
implementation of research objectives ( Chambers 1992; Dunn
1994; Ison and Ampt 1992).

4) (RRA) features a commitment to adapting methodologies

Rapid rural appraisal requires a certain degree of adaptation to

particular resources and local situations that may be unique to the
cultural context of field experiences (Chambers 1992; Dunn 1994).

5) (RRA) features a commitment to qualitative data

Qualitative refers to the descriptive type of data collected and the

quality of observations made by a team of researchers combining
their perceptions of local cultures with rapid surveys of native
attitudes, practices, and concerns (Chambers 1992; Dunn 1994).
 Rapid rural appraisal developed from two entirely different intellectual

traditions, each with differing perspectives on the nature and style of social

research (Kumar 1990; Kumar and Casley 1993). One paradigm, developed by

social phenomenologalists, questions the premise that objective reality can be

determined via scientific inquiry. Its proponents view social phenomena as

constituting not one, but a set of multiple realities requiring subjective methods

of inquiry (Kumar 1990). A second paradigm, developed by logical positivists,

offers the premise that a social phenomenon exists not only in the minds of

individuals, but also as an objective social reality. The fact that a social

phenomenon may be viewed differently by individuals does not negate its

existence, nor the application of scientific principles as a valid means of

investigation (Kumar 1990; Kumar and Casley 1993).

The methods of rapid rural appraisal seem to lie between the two

extremes of phenomenology and logical positivism (Kumar 1990; Kumar and

Casley 1993). Investigators using (RRA) are encouraged to interact with one

another, and local residents, while describing the subjective opinions, concerns,

perspectives, and attitudes of people living in a particular cultural context. At

the same time, investigators using (RRA) must have sufficient grounding in

established methods of formal data collection and training in the rigorous

procedures of scientific inquiry (Kumar 1990; Kumar and Casley 1993).

Criteria for Selecting Rapid Rural Appraisal

Rapid rural arppraisal offered several unique characteristics that set it

apart from other qualitative methodologies. First, (RRA) is an appropriate

heuristic device for teaching undergraduates the principles of qualitative

research in a relatively short period of time. As a pedagogical exercise,

students learned a quick and efficient method of assessing the attitudes,

perceptions, and concerns of residents in a particular locale. Secondly, (RRA)

has been proven a particularly effective method for assessing the attitudes of

residents in rural locales, isolated environments, and developmental regions

(Dunn 1994; Chambers 1992; Farrington and Martin 1988; Khon Kaen 1985).

Third, (RRA) avoids classification as a superficial research effort representing

developmental tourism, or a misdirected foray into the field under the label

of qualitative research. Rapid rural appraisal is a qualitative methodology with

an international reputation for rigorous and systematic principles of data

collection (Dunn 1994; Conway 1987; Chambers 1992; Farrington and Martin

1988). Fourth, (RRA) is known for recognizing the value of local knowledge

and the importance of native perspectives. Learning takes place in the field,

relying on the knowledge expressed by local people, rather than information

extracted through problem solving investigations, or quasi-experimental

models (Conway 1987; Chambers 1992; Dunn 1994; Farrington and Martin

1988; Khon Kaen 1985; Ison and Ampt 1992).

Applying Rapid Rural Appraisal in General Cepeda, Coahulia, Mexico

Chambers (1992), Conway (1987), and Dunn (1994) and Kumar (1990)

argue a multi-disciplinary research team should be recruited to provide a wide

range of perspectives for the interpretation of data. Faculty representing the

disciplines of sociology, interpersonal communication, international studies,

and media instruction worked in a collaborative effort to implement the project.

A multi-disciplinary team of undergraduates representing majors in education,

interpersonal communication, engineering, law, criminal justice, marketing,

business, and human geography were selected for inclusion in the project.

The Ohio University Regional Campus System, through the Office of the

Vice Provost for Rgional Higher Education, provided funding to partially

supplement the costs of student travel. A rigorous set of procedures and

guidelines were established for the selection of students. Prior to their

acceptance, students were required to submit a written essay stating their

reasons for wishing to participate, perceptions of what could be learned, and

how students would contribute to the development of an effective research team.

Student applications were evaluated by faculty members and fourteen (14) Ohio

University students were selected for participation. Saltillo faculty administered

similar guidelines and selected a matching number of fourteen (14) Mexican

students.

A virtual classroom was established to facilitate academic preparations

for students of both cultures. Communications via e-mail correspondence, net

meeting capabilities, and electronic document transactions helped establish

relationships among students prior to departure for Mexico. Students were

required to read articles on qualitative research, techniques of rapid rural

appraisal, observational analysis, content analysis, triangulation of data, semi-

structured interviewing, and principles of interpersonal communication.

Faculty arranged two meetings via compressed video to review research

objectives and plan dates and times for departure.

 Sunday, June 13, 1999

The United States contingency departed for Mexico on Sunday, June 13,

1999, from the airport in Cincinnati, Ohio. Arriving later that day in Monterrey,

Neuva Leon, Mexico, the American contingency was shuttled by bus to Saltillo,

Coahuila, Mexico. The Saltillo Campus is located some fifty (50) miles from the

field site of General Cepeda, Coahuila, Mexico. The Saltillo Campus would

serve as a base of operations for a four day, intensive period of student training.

Principles of qualitative research and techniques of rapid rural appraisal were

reviewed and practiced by students from both cultures. Descriptive information

about General Cepeda was presented to acclimate students to the field site.

June 14 - 17, 1999

On Monday, June 14, 1999, faculty began training students for the field

experience. Power point presentations, overhead projections, video and film

clips of the village, maps of the village, illustrations of landmarks, residential

maps showing the physical proximity of streets, and an historical perspective of

General Cepeda were methods used by faculty to acclimate students with the

field site.

Chambers (1992), Conway (1987), and Dunn (1994) argue team training is

an important feature of rapid rural appraisal, a component crucial for achieving

consistent approaches to data collection and analysis in the field. Research

teams were formed by pairing Mexican students with American students.

Practice runs were conducted so students from both cultures would become

familiar with one another and the plan of research. Mexican students assumed
the role of guides and translators for American students, making the initial

training period an interesting laboratory for cross cultural acclimation.

Friday, June 18, 1999

On Friday, June 18, 1999, faculty and students moved to a hotel in

General Cepeda. Faculty converted the hotel salon into a base of operations

where faculty and undergraduates could interact, an academic laboratory to

assist in the completion of research objectives. Plans for the next morning

included strategy sessions and the deliniation of interview schedules. Using

marker boards, General Cepeda was geographically divided into six (6)

residential sectors, each sector being labeled with an English capital letter.

Students were divided into six (6) research teams, labeled (A) through (F),

and charged with the task of interviewing residents in every home of the

village. Research teams successfully interviewed one hundred seventy-five

(175) residents in five (5) days, with only residents over the age of sixteen (16)

considered eligible for interview.

June 19 - 23, 1999

On Saturday, June 19, 1999, field operations were initiated in accordance

with project protocol. Chambers (1992) and Dunn (1994) insist rapid rural

appraisal is commited to a notion of project protocal, a method of introducing

team members to local residents and a plan for the systematic collection of data.
Under the direction of Mexican sociologist, Senora Rosa Ester Beltran, Mexican

students were assigned to initiate encounters with local residents by asking

permission for an interview. With permission by residents, interviews were

recorded on either audio cassettes, or video tapes. After each interview, team

members were responsible for writing immediate post-appraisal narratives.

Project protocol required conversations to begin with a short statisical

survey designed to obtain demographic data on residents. The statistical

component of investigation was designed to last only a few minutes, and

provided an introduction that was non-threatening, yet meaningful. The role

of information gatherers provided students a legitimate reason for engaging in

the interview process. The use of a survey implied an assembly of insights

rather than a collection of statistics, an inference that data was being gathered

from people in the field and filtered through the perceptions of researchers.

During morning hours, students conducted interviews with residents of

General Cepeda. At 12:00 noon daily, students returned to the academic

laboratory for lunch, followed by debriefing sessions to discuss problems

encountered in the field. Sessions included a faculty assessment of the physical

and emotional well-being of students, discussion of sampling procedures and

consistency of data collection, and an evaluation of the possible need for

methodological adatations in the field.

Chambers (1992), Dunn (1994), and Kumar (1990) suggest rapid rural

appraisal features a commitment to adapting methodologies, a degree of

adaptation reflecting the unique cultural context of the field experience. Kumar

and Casley (1993) suggest at least five (5) different interview techniques may be
adapted for the collection of data:

1) key informant interviews - residents selected on the basis of

specialized knowledge and expertise

2) focus group interviews - residents discuss a specific topic among

themselves in a group context

3) community interviews - residents engage investigators using the

format of a public meeting

4) structured direct observation - investigators gather social/physical data

using well designed observation forms

5) informal surveys - residents answer open-ended questions

that allow for subjective responses

Students used the adaptive methodologies offered by Kumar and Casley

(1993), except for the focus group interview. Students used key informant

interviews to assess the opinions of village leaders and elected public officials.

Structured direct observation was used to assess interaction in public places,

businesses, churches, government buildings, a town square, and several local

ceremonies including a public wedding. Students took advantage of a local town

meeting (for women only) to administer a community interview. Invitations to

join residents during evening dinners and informal social gatherings provided

students a chance for administering informal surveys.

Opportunities of this nature were considered examples of artistic

ethnography, defined in the literature as ritual performances expressing

regular, occurring performances of culture and life that may be transmitted to

researchers by means of verbal and nonverbal communication (Bormann 1983;

Pacanowsky and O Donnell-Trujillo 1982; Phillipsen 1995). Faculty felt these

types of community interactions were worthy of investigation, for they offered

students symbolic meaning to the cultural identity and cultural boundaries of

local residents.

During afternoon hours, students returned to the field for the collection

of qualitative data. Chambers (1992) and Dunn (1994) suggest rapid rural

appraisal is committed to the collection of qualitative data. Students were

taught that the term sampling meant sampling a wide range of experiences

(but not necessarily in a statistical, or representative sense) until patterns of

understanding begin to emerge. Students were taught the term methodology

meant a rigorous process of research adhered to in the field, a refined set of

principles requiring knowledge and skill applied during the collection of data

(Dunn 1994; Chambers 1992; Conway 1986; Khon Kaen 1985).

During evening hours, further debriefing sessions were mandatory for

students of both cultures. At the end of each day, faculty and students would

look forward to sharing their perceptions and observations. Undergraduates

synthesized information using computer technologies in the field. Students from

both cultures used lap top computers to summarize interviews and prepare

written narratives about their perceptions and impressions. Students posted

written comments about field experiences, along with still-shot, video, and

digital camera photos, on a previously designated web-site through the home

page of Ohio University. Family members, faculty colleagues, and interested

parties from both institutions of higher learning followed the daily web-site with

great enthusiasm. Field work was completed Wednesday, June 23, 1999.
 Thursday, June 24, 1999

On Thursday, June 24, 1999, the American contingency departed Mexico

from the airport in Monterrey, Nueva Leon. In the succeeding weeks, Mexican

and American students used technologies including net meeting capabilities,

compressed video meetings, and e-mail correspondence to communicate and

organize research findings under faculty supervision. After completion of

project requirements, students from both cultures were required to evaluate the

experience. Students agreed the experience of being selected for participation

enhanced learning skills with respect to cultural diversity, communication,

interpersonal dynamics, and the application of qualitative research techniques.

Of particular interest, students stated they learned from the curricula, the

culture, and from one another as peers in a multi-disciplinary research project.

Conclusions

This project provided undergraduates a practicum of learning experiences

that may prove extremely helpful in the future, particularly for students

engaging in international research after graduation. The project required

students to vigorously apply a synthesis of academic skills including writing,

oral communication, interviewing techniques, technical expertise, analytical

and critical thinking, and principles of interpersonal communication. American

students unanimously agreed the act of being emersed in a foreign culture was
an enlightening experience. Mexican students and American students agreed the

experience of team building and peer learning contributed greatly to their

satisfaction with the project. The establishment of linkages between Mexican and

American students has continued to persist via e-mail correspondence and

electronic transaction, indicating students from both cultures have formed

lasting relationships as a result of participating in the project.

One important issue raised by this project involves the implications of

applying rapid rural appraisal to assist rural policy makers. The value of rapid

rural appraisal as a method for impacting community action programs remains

problematic. If the primary purpose of an investigation is to make major policy

decisions, or programmatic choices for improving the quality of life in rural

locales, there still exists a need for employing positivistic research methods

yielding precise and scientifically valid information. On the other hand, if the

purpose of an investigation is to make a simple assessment of current programs

(i.e., the perceived successes and failures of community action programs from

the view of local residents), rapid rural appraisal provides an efficient and cost

effective method of assessment. Kumar and Casley (1993) argue rapid rural

appraisal is particularly appropriate when 1) descriptive information seems

sufficient for decision-making; 2) when an understanding of the motivations

and attitudes of target populations become problematic; or 3) when available

quantitative data must be interpretated for resolving inconsistencies and/or

deriving meaningful conclusions.

The findings of this study yield observations that should be of concern

for rural policy advisors in the state of Coahuila, Mexico. The findings suggest
residents were concerned with the socio-economic problems impacting their

daily existence. Residents indicated the lack of educational opportunities,

both public or private institutions, constituted a major problem. Residents

were convinced education would give their children better discipline, a brighter

future, and better opportunities for employment. Increasing unemployment in

the village was perceived by residents as a very serious problem. Residents

expressed concern over a lack of programs to reduce poverty in the region and

indicated unemployment led to other social ills including crime, alcoholism,

and apathy. Finally, residents expressed a general distrust of governmental

institutions at the federal, state, and local levels. Residents expressed the

opinion their lives were marginalized, with little opportunity for changes to

occur through existing community action programs.

Researchers left General Cepeda with the impression that residents

wanted more effective community action programs, especially programs

designed to improve living standards, educate the populace, and increase

employment opportunities in the village. Residents indicated the need for

governmental support to reduce social problems like alcoholism, drug abuse,

and apathy among unemployed villagers.

The authors suggest similar studies should be conducted in rural areas

of Coahuila, Mexico, to establish some measure of longitudinal data for

evaluating local attitudes of community action programs in the state. The

implications of rapid rural appraisal for community action programs may seem

more relevant to policy makers if consistent patterns of concern emerge over

time. Rapid rural appraisal could be a quick and inexpensive method for
evaluating the effectiveness of community action programs in the region.

What implications would rapid rural appraisal have for community action

programs in rural societies? Gillispie and Sinclair (2000) reflect on the future of

qualitative research in rural studies by suggesting good qualitative research

must 1) be sociologically informative; 2) be based on empirical observation;

3) be self-reflexive and detached; and 4) be held to high ethical standards.

The authors concur with this assessment and consider rapid rural appraisal a

research methodology worthy of continued application in rural environments.

This research project represents the first of several cooperative ventures

between Ohio University and the Institute of Technology of Monterrey (ITESM),

Saltillo Campus. During the years 2000 - 2003, the authors plan to conduct

similar studies of the attitudes and perceptions of people living in rural regions

of Coahuila, Mexico. Publication of future studies may provide rural policy

makers with alternative, cost effective, and valuable sources of descriptive

information from a rural populace concerned with the improvement of existing

community action programs.

References

Beltran, Rosa Ester, 1999. Interview in June, 1999, University of Saltillo,

Coahuila, Mexico.

Bormann, E. G., 1983. Symbolic Convergence: Organizational Communication

and Culture, In L. Putnam and M. E. Pacanowsky (Eds.),
Communication and Organization: An Interweave Approach (pp. 99-
122), Sage Publishers, Beverly Hills, California.

Chambers, Robert, 1992. Rural Appraisal: Rapid, Relaxed, and

 Participatory, Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex.

Conway, G., 1986. Agroecosystem analysis for research and development,

Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development, Bangkok.

Cragan, John F., and Shields, Donald C., 1998. Understanding Communication
Theory, Allyn and Bacon, Boston, Massachusetts.

Dunn, Tony, 1994. Rapid Rural Appraisal: A Description of the Methodology

and Its Application in Teaching and Research at Charles Sturt University,
published by The Center For Rural Research, Wagga Wagga, Australia.

Echeverria, Luis, Economic Overview, June, 1999. State of Coahuila, Mexico.

Farrington, J., and Martin, A., 1988. Farmer Participatory Research: A

Review of Concepts and Recent Fieldwork, Agricultural Administration
and Extension 29, Center for Rural Social Research, Wagga Wagga,
Australia.

Gillispie, Jr., Gilbert W., and Sinclair, Martin, 2000. Shelves and Bins:
Varieties of Qualitative Sociology in Rural Studies, Rural Sociology,
Volume 65, Number 2, (June): 180-193, Ann Tickamyer, Editor

Ison, R. and Ampt, P. , 1992. Rapid Rural Appraisal: A Participatory

Problem Formation Method Relevant to Australian Agriculture,
Agricultural Systems 38.

Khon Kaen University, 1985. Rapid Rural Appraisal: proceedings of the 1985
international conference, Khon Kaen University, Thailand.

Kumar, Krishna, 1990. An Overview of Rapid Appraisal Methods in

Developmental Settings, published by The Agency For International
Development, Washington, D. C.

Kumar, Krishna and Casley, Dennis J., 1993. The Collection, Analysis, and
Use of Monitoring and Evaluation Data, published by Johns Hopkins
University Press for the World Bank.

Pacanowsky, M. E., and O Donnell-Trujillo, N., 1982. Communication and

Organizational Cultures, Western Journal of Speech Communication.

Reuters - Notimex - AP, 2000. Unemployment Registry, Coahuila, Mexico.

Siller, Jose Maria Fraustro, 1998. Journal of Investigation, Social Sciences and
Humanities, University of Coahuila, Saltillo, Coahuila, Mexico.