Using Participatory Instrument Development to Center Lived Experiences of Marginalized Women in India

Background

Extreme poverty remains a critical global threat that undermines the health and wellbeing of individuals and communities. Poverty has been called the single biggest predictor of poor health outcomes in the Global South, and women in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) remain disproportionately burdened by extreme poverty and its consequences. Throughout India, which accounts for nearly 25% of the world’s poor, microfinance interventions have become widely utilized as a strategy to both reduce extreme poverty and empower poor and disenfranchised women. Yet, the vast majority of studies on microfinance over three decades have focused almost entirely on economic outcomes of microfinance participation (e.g., loan repayment rates) and overwhelmingly relied on quantitative data from organizational and archival sources (e.g., financial logs or group membership records). Research examining microfinance’s broader impact on women’s wellbeing and empowerment, studies that center women’s voices in the inquiry, and available instruments are extremely limited. Thus, this study used participatory methods to develop and pilot test a mixed method data collection instrument tailored for women in extreme poverty with low literacy and numeracy to examine empowerment trajectories of microfinance self-help group participants over time.

Methods

This instrument development study was conducted in four phases. In Phase 1, qualitative interviews were conducted with participants from two women’s microfinance self-help groups. Interview questions were formative in nature, essentially asking women what questions they would ask if they wanted to understand another woman’s experience with microfinance. In Phase 2, a preliminary draft instrument was created based on the Life History Calendar (LHC) method, used in life course research to collect pseudo-longitudinal quantitative and qualitative data simultaneously on personal life events. In Phase 3, interviews were conducted with participants of a third women’s microfinance self-help group using the preliminary instrument as a guide. These interviews elicited feedback from participants on instrument structure, prompts, question sequencing, and overall appeal. The Microfinance History Calendar was then refined in Phase 4.

Results

Phase 1 interview participants (n=15) identified six key areas of microfinance impact (Self-perceptions; Household status; Self/family health; Asset accumulation; Entrepreneurship; Economic wellbeing) which became the domains of inquiry in the preliminary “skeleton” version of the instrument. Phase 3 interview participants (n=8) identified favorable instrument components (e.g., color scheme, side-by-side interview format) and problematic or confusing components (e.g., some translations, landmarks, recall time frame). The resulting refined instrument was shared with community partners and made available as an open-access and modifiable tool to support future microfinance research efforts.

Conclusion and Implications

The Microfinance History Calendar generated through this participatory process provides a unique mixed-method data collection tool to investigate dynamic trajectories of change over time reflecting the lived experiences of women participating in microfinance interventions. Preliminary pilot findings suggest that the instrument can help researchers gain a nuanced understanding of microfinance’s potential as a pathway to empowerment for women in extreme poverty. More broadly, the participatory instrumeent development process illustrated in this study offers both an approach to advance research in emerging areas and a strategy to help recenter and democratize knowledge.