Monday, October 21, 2019

Are “Dynamic Networks” Enough? Using SNA to Evaluate Local Inclusion in Catholic Relief Services’ Development Program Implementation in the Democratic Republic of Congo


Note: I will be taking the second module and working on this analysis in coordination with the Feinstein International Center at Tufts Friedman School of Nutrition.

Background: SNA in the development context

Over the past decade, the concept of community-based development (CBD) has gained traction in the development field, with the goal of “advocat[ing] community participation in decision-making and management.”[1] In parallel, Social Network Analysis (SNA) has begun to be seen and utilized as a tool for monitoring and evaluating capacity building interventions, under the premise that distributed networks can adapt more flexibly than hierarchically organized interventions to emerging opportunities and challenges in their environments and combine talent and resources in new ways to support innovation.[2]

Humanitarian and development organizations have realized the potential of SNA to enhance their program implementation.[3] Oxfam and the International Rescue Committee (IRC), for example, have published handbooks on how to use SNA methodology in development work, such as Oxfam’s NGO Guide to Social Network Analysis and the IRC’s Social Network Analysis Handbook.[4]

Furthermore, SNA is increasingly being used by development organizations in the field. In its “Budikadidi” development program[5] in the Kasai province of the Democratic Republic of Convo, Catholic Relief Services (CRS) employs a strategy of leveraging existing social networks in villages by empowering “dynamic” individuals to form groups which CRS then works through to build skills and deliver resources in its programming.

 

Is leveraging existing social networks enough?

While CRS’s strategy of utilizing existing social networks to enhance delivery of development programs holds much promise, the potential marginalizing effect of such an approach has not been fully considered. When dynamic individuals are empowered by development agencies to lead local-level change and innovation, they can become “gatekeepers,” or determiners of who in the village can or cannot reap the benefits of the project.

Accordingly, CRS should analyze the preexisting and resultant social networks of villages partaking in these projects to determine the characteristics of inclusion versus exclusion from project activities and the corresponding network position of these individuals. A fuller assessment of the gap between “dynamic” and “whole village” networks will expose the challenges and potential consequences of leveraging existing networks, and uncover opportunities to improve inclusion in project activities.


How can SNA help shed light on the program’s impact?

SNA can help answer these questions by helping to visualize and quantify the reach of the CRS’s efforts through its empowerment of “dynamic” individuals. SNA can also help shed light on those excluded from the network and enable the development organization to tweak its approach to better reach the full village.

Methodology

The networks to be analyzed are two villages in the Kasai province of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

The SNA will use data from two surveys conducted by the Feinstein International Center (FIC), part of Tufts University’s Friedman School of Nutrition. The surveys ask about 330 adults from one village and about 230 from another village to name the four people in the village they interact with the most (exact question to be clarified by FIC), and includes attributes for the individuals.

The SNA will examine the existing networks led by “dynamic” individuals empowered by the development program, as well as the whole village network to identify individuals isolated from the “dynamic” networks and therefore excluded from the benefits of the development program.

Oxfam’s and the IRC’s SNA handbooks suggest looking at the following network measures when trying to manage and mitigate risks in international development implementation:

§  Dependency – Is the network highly dependent on a single actor or funding source? This could create bottlenecks and/or sustainability concerns.
§  Dysfunctional / Conflicting Relationships – Are there certain key broken relationships that impede the entire network?
§  Marginalization – Are there attributes that correspond with exclusion or marginalization in the network? Analyzing the structure of the network may help uncover the reasons for marginalization and help overcome it.
§  Like-me Relationships – To what extent is the network homophilous vs. heterophilous? How might this impact the goals of the development program?
§  Structural Challenges – Is the network overly centralized? Is there a structural split in the network? Is the network too diffuse?
§  Critical Relationship Building – Are there actors that are not currently connected that could have a positive and significant influence on the network if connected?
§  Tap into Under-Utilized Support – Are there actors very positive about your mission but who have not been given a key role or have sufficient voice? Consider empowering these actors to have a more central role.
§  Building Networks within the Network – Consider building coalitions to raise the voice and influence of people on board with the development mission.

In looking at the CRS data, we can use SNA to identify which centrality measures are associated with participation in the development organization’s activities. To this end, it will be interesting to compare indegree centrality of the “dynamic individuals” identified by the development agency versus other individuals in the network. Additionally, betweenness and eigenvector can help illuminate the potential bridging individuals in each village who could turn the “dynamic” network into a whole village network.

Looking at whole network measures will help us identify pre-existing patterns of relationships in the village. The E-I indices of different attributes, for example, will show the extent of heterophily vs homophily, or whether individuals tend to gravitate towards “like” individuals.

We can also use SNA to better understand those excluded from the “dynamic” networks by analyzing the common attributes of isolates and how they compare to those of individuals in the “dynamic” network.

Finally, we can use Clique analysis and Newman Girvan to identify pockets of strong connections in the network. This may help identify clusters of resources that could be better spread across the full network, and/or opportunities for the development agency to tailor activities and resources to the attributes and interests of particular groupings.

What’s next?

This SNA will be be incorporated into a series of published articles by the FIC aimed at analyzing and refining CRS’ “social networks” strategy to ultimately improve the reach of their development programs in the DRC.

One potential limitation of this project may be the timing of the surveys. If the surveys were conducted after implementation of the CRS program, it will be difficult to gage the extent to which  networks existed prior to the project or were  formed, morphed, or grew as a result of it.

In the future, looking at the difference between pre-existing and post-project networks could shed light on the impact of the development programs on the nature and strength of village networks, rather than just using networks as a vehicle for program implementation.

Nonetheless, analyzing CRS’ “dynamic networks” strategy will not only help improve and refine CRS’ approach, but will illuminate the vast potential for SNA in the development and program implementation fields.

1 comment:

Christopher Tunnard said...

Wow, Abby, what a great project! There seems to be a good fit between your interests and those of your partners at Feinstein and CRS. Rather than go into detail here, let's talk about this, as I have both some ideas and some questions that may help guide your work. Suffice it to say, this could be a groundbreaking piece of work that all of you will be proud of--but it will indeed take some work. Looks like you're ready for it!