Reflections on methodology, field experiences, and the evolving practice of development research across South Asia.
After 18 years in development research, I've learned that the difference between extractive and empowering research isn't just about methods—it's about fundamentally rethinking who owns knowledge and how research relationships are built.
Read Full Article →When we started our photovoice project in Chittagong's informal settlements, we thought we were studying service access. What we discovered was an intricate ecosystem of community resilience that official maps completely missed.
Working with adolescent girls in rural Jharkhand, we learned that one-size-fits-all ethical protocols can actually undermine both ethics and data quality. Here's how we redesigned consent as conversation.
Our multi-state analysis of NREGA implementation reveals why well-designed policies often fail at the local level—and what this means for researchers studying social protection programs.
Pandemic restrictions forced us to rapidly adapt our data collection methods. Six months later, we've learned that digital-first approaches can actually improve accessibility—when done thoughtfully.
Working in Northeast India taught us that standard ethical protocols often fall short in conflict settings. Community-led research offers a path forward, but requires rethinking fundamental assumptions about expertise.
True mixed methods integration requires more than running surveys and focus groups side by side. Our maternal health study in Assam shows how qualitative and quantitative data can truly inform each other.
Training community members as researchers isn't just about building capacity—it fundamentally changes what we can learn and how we understand development challenges. Lessons from our self-help group study.
Even the best research fails if it doesn't reach policymakers in usable forms. Here's what we've learned about translating complex findings into actionable policy recommendations.