Methodological mess in development research

Decades of development research in Nepal are plagued by methodological flaws, rendering findings unreliable and leading to misguided policy. Early studies on firewood use produced wildly varying estimates, fueling inaccurate predictions of forest depletion. Similarly, research on women's empowerment often relies on biased 'before-and-after' surveys that yield positive results simply because progress is expected, a phenomenon known as social desirability bias.

“

Planning documents described a Nepal that existed only on paper.

Anthropological research reveals these methods miss crucial nuances. Instead of asking women if they feel empowered, a more effective approach examines household authority over labor and loans. Such investigations show that while women may be targeted for repayment, decision-making power often remains with men, highlighting how research methods dictate findings.

“

The survey finds empowerment because the method is looking for empowerment.

More recent adoption of human-centered design (HCD), originating from Silicon Valley, also faces criticism. While aiming for empathy, HCD can lead to 'design tourism,' where external researchers engage in superficial interviews and develop prototypes without understanding or addressing Nepal's complex structural power dynamics. This approach, even with good intentions, tends to favor outsider solutions over local practices and political action, underscoring the need for critical scrutiny of research methodologies in Nepal.

“

sympathy does not redistribute authority; feeling for a community is not the same as sharing power over what gets built.