Research
is a very rigorous exercise in critical thinking that requires developing from
the outset plausible arguments for inference, data/information collection and
analysis strategies and actual writing and presenting of research findings.
ACEG’s research seeks to evolve public policies that facilitate achievement
of development and social justice within the framework of democracy. Public
policies are influenced by diverse and often conflicting views, ideologies and
competing interests. This calls for non-partisan and objective data
collection, interpretation and analysis. ACEG is also concerned that sight is
not lost of the larger theoretical issues and social perspectives that any
academically objective endeavor seeks to realize.
There
are six basic steps to be considered when doing an actual policy analysis: (i)
verification, definition and detailing of the problem which helps clarify
objectives and eliminates, ambiguities and possible inconsistencies and
contradictions and lays the foundation for efficient and effective outcomes;
(ii) establishing relevant evaluation criteria (cost, net benefit,
effectiveness, efficiency, equity, administrative ease, legality and political
acceptability) which help to compare, measure and select alternatives; (iii)
identifying alternative policies through brainstorming, scenario writing,
experiments, and concept mapping; (iv) evaluating alternative policies on the
basis of established criteria
using qualitative and quantitative methods and using this information
to revisit steps (i) , (ii) and (iii); (v) evaluating and comparing
alternative policy impacts on economic, social, political, legal and
administrative implications, including options of mixing two or more
alternatives for optimal results; and (vi) monitoring implementation for
expected impact.
There
are multiple knowledge dimensions in any policy research and analysis.
Different disciplines use different techniques of research and analysis and
even for the same discipline, the context, purpose and type of research
questions may define different methodological approaches.
Since only an appropriate method of inquiry can help direct the
development of specific research questions, ACEG is careful that researchers
justify the methodology and validity of outputs that must be credible,
confirmable and dependable and well grounded in the general frameworks of
theory and the social milieu.
There
are six basic steps to be considered when doing an actual policy analysis: (i)
verification, definition and detailing of the problem which helps clarify
objectives and eliminates, ambiguities and possible inconsistencies and
contradictions and lays the foundation for efficient and effective outcomes;
(ii) establishing relevant evaluation
criteria (cost, net benefit, effectiveness, efficiency, equity, administrative
ease, legality and political acceptability) which help to compare, measure and
select alternatives; (iii) identifying alternative policies through
brainstorming, scenario writing, experiments, and concept mapping; (iv)
evaluating alternative policies on the basis of
established criteria using
qualitative and quantitative methods and using this information to revisit
steps (i) , (ii) and (iii); (v) evaluating and comparing alternative policy
impacts on economic, social, political, legal and administrative implications,
including options of mixing two or more alternatives for optimal results; and
(vi) monitoring implementation for expected impact.
There
is a repertoire of approaches and techniques research analysts can use in the
formulation of policies. These can be in the quantitative mode or the
qualitative mode. The main sources of quantitative data are case studies,
geographical information systems including those of remote sensing, censuses,
surveys, and so on. By combining investigatory methods, adequate information
systems that reflect the socio-economic reality of a country can be
constructed. Analyzing data with quantitative strategies calls for
understanding and measurement of the relationships among variables when using
descriptive and inferential statistics. The qualitative mode is better geared
towards a more comprehensive understanding of societies and their evolution
and therefore provides a useful analytical approach that complements the
quantitative one.
There
is a crisis in social science research primarily because the old convictions
about four major areas of inquiry – the nation state, markets, democracy and
political institutions, are undergoing change. The nation state is getting
marginalized through liberalization and globalization processes; markets are
now subject to heavy manipulation like advertising which influences
preferences of consumers and producers; and individual players are losing
their roles in democracy and society to corporate bodies. This represents a
shifting scenario, which also calls for paradigm shifts. African researchers
are heavily influenced by Western paradigms in socio-economic and political
research given the absence of authentic African theoretical innovations to
guide research and hopefully avoid to irrelevant conceptualizations.
In
light of the above comment, those invited to work with ACEG are expected to be
authorities in their subject area and discipline, which should form the basis
for developing the research ideas of significance, using of quantitative raw
data and qualitative information and related constructs (indicators, indices,
profiles and other secondary level statistics) to conduct analysis based on
underlying theory and careful modeling before deriving policies and their
expected effects and impacts on the society. Models that create patterns and
help to interpret events in terms of the perceived pattern can assist in
description, explanation and understanding of reality and are useful for
policy making.
ACEG
is concerned that there be no lags in methodology i.e. that researchers should
not use methodological tools and techniques which lag several decades behind
(especially those which are mostly descriptive rather than inductive or are
qualitative rather than quantitative). When quantification is used, it should
not be of the cruder variety that makes it difficult to evolve sophisticated
research outputs. Basically, methodological lags render the research
defective, thereby occasioning defective results. ACEG will always encourage
collaboration with methodologically sophisticated researchers who also have
substantive knowledge of the underlying theory and the social milieu.
Disciplines such as formal demography, statistics and economics are more in
tune with sophisticated quantitative techniques given the nature of their
respective subject contents.
ACEG
encourages participatory research as it entails an active dialogue with
members of the target groups. Such an approach does away with ‘a priori’
research assumptions and certain research techniques. Similarly, the Rapid
Assessment Research (RAR), which is policy and action oriented, is considered
useful as it produces quick findings without sacrificing validity and
reliability. ACEG also subscribes to research that allows cross-country
comparisons on the basis of comparable data on a number of important issues.
Finally, ACEG subscribes to research that is advanced judging by
international standards in relevant disciplines, believes in strong research
networks, and expects to support large scale research projects that result in
significant publications, debates, and impacts on policy making and
implementation.