Development
Research as Committed Research
By Edberto M.
Villegas, Ph.D.
International Conference on Research Methodologies
July 31, 1999
PCED Hostel, University of the Philippines, Diliman, Q.C.
�
The main concern of this study is
research in the social sciences with special focus on development
research. At the later section, actual research works I have
supervised with my students at the University of the Philippines,
Manila, will be discussed.
Qualitative and Quantitative
Research
Qualitative methods of research in
the social sciences preceded the use of quantitative methods.
Before the advent of the social science as an intellectual
discipline, the most widely utilized qualitative method to study
societies was participant observation. Travelogues were of this
category and mention can be made of such works as "The
Travels of Marco Polo" depicting the author�s
observations of and direct participation in the Chinese
civilization of the 14h century and Sir Richard Burton�s
travel books and his "Book of Sword", narrating his
observations of life in the Middle Eastern countries of the early
19th century.
With the emergence of the social
sciences, pioneered by sociology and anthropology in the latter
19th century, "ethnographic" studies or
direct participation in communities, particularly what Western
researchers called "primitive communities" became in
vogue. Along these studies were those of Bronislaw Malinowski and
Margaret Mead of Oceania peoples and Ruth Benedict of American
Indians. Meanwhile, statistics as study of chance and probability
was being developed by Laplace and Gauss and later by the
American Charles Sander Pierce. Emile Durkheim, considered by
many as the founder of modern sociology, began adopting the
statistical method in the study of social events, which he calls
"social facts", notably in his research on the trends
of suicide in Northern Europe.
It was the American social
scientists in the 1930s who became enamoured with the use of
statistics as the main foundation of social research. Robert
Merton and his followers consider statistics as the basis for
empirical studies, which can become the final determinant for the
worth of a social research. This obsession of US social
scientists with the quantitative methods of statistics was an
influence of the positivist school of thought which gave rise to
the establishments of so-called behavioral studies in many
American universities. Positivism as an epistemological outlook
originated in the logical atomism of the German Ernst Mach and
the British Bertrand Russell in the early 1900s and which was
later developed by the Vienna circle in the 1930s. Positivism
takes statements about facts, including social events, as a
congerie of observable sense data to be further confirmed or
disconfirmed. Thus when applied to man and society, it would be
the observable behavior of individuals , including their verbal
utterances, that must be given priority in arriving at
conclusions about social phenomena. Statistics that works on
collected data from the behaviors of respondents then becomes the
most reliable instrument to the positivist-minded researcher in
social research. However, the behaviorists during their period of
dominance in American social science (1940s-1970s) encountered
considerable methodological difficulties concerning respondents
who lie, because if all that matter is observable behavior, then
the possibility of lying becomes an irrelevant epistemological
question. Some British philosophers who were initially influenced
by the Vienna circle, when confronted with the problem of other
minds, were the question of lying comes into the fore, later
shifted to Ludwig Wittgenstein�s theory of language as a
game. Wittgenstein himself was an adherent of logical atomism
earlier in his philosophical career.
The limitations on trusting on
statistics (particularly, inferential statistics, e.g. tests of
hypothesis) as providing the most reliable source of knowledge
for social research is that it affords only a piece-meal view of
social reality. This is along the positivist line of thinking
that a social scientist must avoid making any statements about
the whole system of society, and must only analyze parcels or
parts of it. The Vienna school of positivism is anti-systemic and
considers as unscientific making value judgements about reality.
They maintain that all research must be value-neutral, a
perspective which has widely influenced the research stance of
many American social scientists and their followers in the
Philippines, the Filipino behaviorist academicians. With the rise
of systems analysis in US universities in the 1960s, particularly
in the field of political science, the hegemony of the
behaviorist school of research in American social science was
gradually eroded. However, system analysis, like behavior
research, still advocates that the role of social science must be
descriptive in order to be scientific and must assume
value-neutrality regarding social issues.
Starting in the 80s, policy
research has made its presence felt in the US which has also been
slowly grafted into the Philippine academic scene. But policy
research which is more goal oriented and not merely descriptive,
still adopts the piece-meal method of positivist research.
Heavily influenced by pragmatism, which likewise gives emphasis
on observation and the quantitative method of research, policy
research�s main objective is the success of a particular
project, shirking the question of value as in positivism. For
instance, what is considered as a rational approach by a policy
analyst is how to accomplish a goal in the most effective and
efficient way, which must not bring in the issue of whether this
method is morally good or bad. Thus, a rational policy analyst
will determine the best means to eliminate a human population
based on these criteria, using poison gas for example. Other
methods of policy analysis, besides the so-called comprehensive
rational method, are incrementalism and scenario buildings.
In the Philippines, there is still
a vogue for positivist (behavioral research), specially those
commissioned, mostly from the academe, by establishment
institutions like NEDA and political parties, e.g. social and
poll surveys. Policy researches are primarily conducted within
the university classrooms, particularly in UP.
Development Research
Development research eschews the
value-neutrality of the positivist and pragmatic perspectives. It
advances that researches both in the social and natural sciences
cannot by the logic of the research undertaking itself be
value-neutral. A scientist, for example, researching on the
making of the atomic bomb, may consider his work as merely a
pursuit of knowledge. Even in this case, the work has already a
subjective value for the researcher. But a research is conducted
within a social milieu and thus has an objective aspect. The
question arises � who will use the output or the result of
the research, a question which has an objective significance.
This is the reason why one of the scientists who was responsible
for the invention of the atomic bomb in 1944, upon realizing that
it was used on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, vowed from then on that he
will never work for any government institutions. The objective
implication of all researchers, most specially in the social
sciences, will bring in the issue for whose welfare will the
research be utilized, and thus, a choice of value will have to be
considered.
Development research primarily
uses the qualitative research methods of participant observation,
interviews and of course, archival research. The participant
observation in Development Research is involved participant
observation, that is, the researcher through his work makes a
choice to assist his target group to understand their conditions
in order to change them to the better. This is to be contrasted
with purely ethnographic qualitative methods of research, which
is uncommitted participant observation and is basically
descriptive in thrust. Ethnographic research takes the
respondents as if they were some exhibits to e studied (an
example of this is Oscar Lewis� Children of Sanchez,
a descriptive study of a poor family in Mexico) without the
researcher manifesting any efforts to help change what he
observed as debilitating conditions of the people he is with.
Ethnography and its offshoot phenomenological social researches
have never lost its appeal to academics in Continental Europe,
particularly in France.
In the Philippines, where poverty
and exploitation of the basic classes, peasants, workers and
fishers, are widespread, the Development Researcher under my
supervision makes a value commitment to side with the poor masses
against all forms of social oppression. Development research as I
conduct them seeks to benefit the target group with the output of
the research. The researcher, while immersing (integrating)
himself/ herself in the community of the poor masses also join in
the activities of his/ her respondents, in their meetings, in
affirmative actions for change like rallies, and in ordinary
social affairs like fiestas. But the researcher must avoid
romanticizing the poor masses which is an inclination in some
methods of research among the oppressed as in Freire�s
"Pedagogy of the Oppressed".
Since the researchers, under my
tutelage, are students, who mostly come from the class of the
petty-bourgeoisie, they are made to become aware before they live
with the masses of the possibility of their class background
affecting the effectivity of their research. A petty bourgeois
intellectual may have the tendency to be didactic among whom he
considers as his less educated subjects. Any such negative
attitudes are to be countered by imbibing on the researcher that
though he/ she can teach the poor masses certain rudiments of
research, he/ she can likewise learn from the latter new insights
and methods of handling social situations. We agree with Mao
Tse-Tung and Freire that the researcher must be both teacher and
student in the midst of the oppressed classes. The researcher
cannot purport to be a leader for social change among those whom
he is researching; his main task is to share his knowledge and
unite in practice with the people in their struggle to change
their oppressive situations.
While the primary methods utilized
by y students in Development Research are qualitative �
involved participant observation and interviews, these could be
buttressed by quantitative methods of research like
non-probability and probability samplings. Though respondents may
be chosen through these sampling methods, their qualitative
components must at all times not be overlooked. Thus, there must
be in-depth interviews of respondents of a random sample chosen
from a larger random sample composed of those who answered
questionnaires (the use of questionnaires is a quantitative
method).
At times my students in order to
strengthen their qualitative conclusions, also utilize
statistical tests of hypothesis like the chi-square test. Tests
of hypothesis come in handy when the differences of opinions of
groups of people may be close. However, such tests can never tell
one whether his/ her respondents are lying or not. Qualitative
research, like immersion with the respondents� community,
can effectively provide the researcher means to identify
situations where a lie is being resorted to by his subjects.
Development Research and
Historical Materialism
Development research which is
change-oriented towards society consequently requires a theory of
social reality. In the social sciences, several schools of
thought offer particular theories towards social change. Among
the most dominant are the dialectical idealist theory of Georg
Wilhelm Hegel, the structuralist-functionalist theory of the
French school with Emile Durkheim and Levi-Strauss as the more
notable proponents, the pragmatist approach, made popular among
policy research practitioners by American political scientists,
and historical materialism. Hegel�s dialectical idealism
which posits an Absolute Mind behind all developments in the
world could be considered a metaphysical presentation of social
change (some say mythical). Its basic premise of "All that
is real is rational, and all that is rational is real"
negates human freedom. If every event, including social change,
is according to the Reason of the Absolute, then freedom is
simply illusory, since all human actions (war, murder, peace,
mayhem) inevitably lead to the realization of the Plan of the
Absolute. One might as well assume an attitude of resignation,
for all events progress towards what is the best for the world.
The structuralist-functionalist
theory of society advances that the maintenance of the
equilibrium of a social system is the main function (embodied as
roles) of individuals and groups composing this society. Any
disequilibrium in the functions of the social actors (workers
striking against their capitalist employer) calls for an
intervention by policy makers to restore harmony within the
system. What must be changed or reformed are, therefore, the
dysfunctional parts of society not the whole social system itself
in order to once again achieve a healthy equilibrium of the
whole.
The pragmatist outlook, of which
we have already made mention, takes social projects in isolation
from the whole social structure. It is reformist in its theory of
change and considers the success of the project as its overriding
criterion, ignoring all questions of value. Pragmatism rejects
all systemic views of social realities, which, thereby, renders
it in practice to be a preserver of the status quo as we can also
say of the structuralist-functionalist school of thought, the
latter a variant of positivism.
Development research in which I
have been involved aims to liberate the exploited classes through
providing them with a theoretical framework in order to identify
the ultimate roots of their oppressions. Historical materialism
more appropriately offers this theoretical framework because of
its macro/holistic explanations of the exploitation of man by
man. Its theory and method of class analysis through the study of
the social relations of production of a given society more
effectively describes and explains (compared to the other
theories discussed) the diverse conditions of social classes. For
instance, through a study of the history of the emergence of the
social relations of production in a particular peasant community,
my students are able to explain to the peasants why they remain
poor and lack political power. In one case in Jala-jala, Rizal,
the research on the present process of food production among the
small peasants and fishers of the place led to the realization by
the community that though they are the food producers, they had
remained impoverished because of the system of ownership of a
cooperative to which they sell their products. The cooperative
was largely owned and managed by the elite families of the barrio
in conjunction with the government.
Historical materialism in contrast
with the structuralist-functionalist and pragmatist schools is
anti-thetical to any palliative or incremental solution to the
exploitation of the poor masses. Though Historical Materialism
(HM) advocates unity with the oppressed classes in their legal
struggles, it is in the end revolutionary and not reformatory in
direction. In short, HM shows the path towards a comprehensive
transformation of the whole social structure towards the
emancipation of the oppressed classes in its relating local
problems to the national situation. It is only through a
thorough-going analysis of the ills of the social system and the
determinations of the ways to change it, can the poor peasants or
fishers discover their power in society.
The researcher, who has greater
time and opportunity to study historical materialism as a theory
of social change applied to different social conditions,
therefore, has the responsibility to teach his respondents the
analytical skills of class analysis while refining such skills
through learning from the particular conditions of his
respondents. The researcher who is an historical materialist is a
dialectician in practice, teaching and learning simultaneously
among the people.
Development Research with an
historical materialism perspective is never mercenary. Though a
researcher may be paid an allowance or a research fee, these are
secondary to the main rationale of his/her research --- that is
to educate the oppressed classes for affirmative actions. The
outputs of his research are meant above all to be used by his
target groups to guide their actions towards their social
emancipation.
During the research period, our
students integrate with the poor community, either living for a
month or longer in the place. When they are in a community, the
students are asked to bring the barest necessities like clothing
and shoes. They eat the same food as their foster parents (they
may have several foster parents if they move from one house to
another) and must participate in household chores or even
production work. Their stays in the communities are facilitated
by peoples� organizations which work with us and which are
active in the area or near the area under study. The people in
the community assign our students appropriate research tasks
needed by the community. These are usually class analyses of the
roots of the common problems of the poor classes in the area.
Though the students have an initial research framework for class
analysis of a community, this can be revised or even changed,
altogether based on the peculiar conditions of the target area.
The people in the area discuss the framework and monitor the
progress of the research with the students. After his/her work,
the researcher may opt to either be a consultant of the people if
the latter so desire or leave the place. Often in the cases of
our students, they come back to the place occasionally after
their research work.
Conclusion
It has been the thesis of this
paper that the objective value implications of his work cannot be
dismissed by the researcher. All researches have a subjective
and/or objective value, the latter either known or not known by
the researcher. If the objective value of a research is known,
that is, for whose service the research output will be put into
us, the researcher can either commit himself to this value or
simply ignore it. In the latter case, he/she can rationalize to
himself/herself that he/she is engaged in the research for the
money anyway. If the researcher undertakes his work simply for
mercenary reasons, then this is the subjective value of the
research for him/her. However, no human action occurs in a social
vacuum, and if it turns out that the research that a person was
involved in caused the miseries of people, then to shun
responsibility for this outcome is like Pontius Pilate washing
his hands.
We submit that with the current
situation of the world where around 1.5 billion people, according
to the UN, are impoverished and starving, what is urgently needed
are morally aware researchers doing Development Research as we
have discussed in this paper. We submit that it is better to have
contributed to the upliftment of mankind than to part from this
world with nothing to leave behind but your own mere subjective
fulfillment. (end)