This section will guide you on how to ensure your research findings are representative and reliable.

In this section:

• Collect your data
  1. Before launch
  2. Launch
  3. During launch
• Prepare your data for analysis
  1. Clean your data
  2. Code open-ended responses
  3. Remove unecessary data
  4. Make it safe
• Create your topline report
• Analyze your data
  1. Statistical programs
  2. Suggested points for analysis

Collect your data

1. Before launch

• First determine the best way to reach your survey population.
  For example, if you want to focus on indigenous women’s rights organizers, do you know who the key networks are? Do you have contacts there, people who can introduce you to these organizations or ways of reaching them?
• Determine if your key population can be easily reached with an online survey, if you need to focus on paper survey distribution and collection or a mix of both. This decision is very important to ensure accessibility and inclusiveness.
• Be prepared! Prior to advertizing, create a list of online spaces where you can promote your survey.
  If you are distributing paper versions, create a list of events, spaces and methods for distributing and collecting results.
• Plan your timeline in advance, so you can avoid launching your survey during major holidays or long vacation periods.
• Make it easy for your advisors and partners to advertize the survey – offer them pre-written Twitter, Facebook and email messages that they can copy and paste.

2. Launch

• Send the link to the survey via email through your organization’s email databases.
• Advertize on your organization’s social media. Similar to your newsletter, you can regularly advertize the survey while it is open.
• If your organization is hosting events that reach members of your survey population, this is a good space to advertize the survey and distribute paper versions as needed.
• Invite your advisors to promote the survey with their email lists and ask them to copy you so you are aware of their promotional messages. Remember to send them follow-up reminders if they’ve agreed to disseminate.
• Approach funders to share your survey with their grantees. It is in their interest that their constituencies respond to a survey that will improve their own work in the field.

3. During launch

• Keep the survey open for a minimum of four weeks to ensure everyone has time to take it and you have time to widely advertize it.
• Send reminders through your email databases and your partners databases asking people to participate in the survey. To avoid irritating recipients with too many emails, we recommend sending two additional reminder emails: one at  midway point while your survey is open and another a week before your survey closes.
• As part of your outreach, remember to state that you are only collecting one response per organization. This will make cleaning your data much easier when you are preparing it for analysis.
• Save an extra week! Halfway through the open window for survey taking, check your data set. How have you done so far? Run initial numbers to see how many groups have responded, from which locations, etc. If you see gaps, reach out to those specific populations. Also, consider extending your deadline by a week – if you do so, include this extension deadline in one of your reminder emails, informing people know there is more time to complete the survey. Many answers tend to come in during the last week of the survey or after the extended deadline.

If you also plan to collect data from applications sent to grant-making institutions, this is a good time to reach out them.

When collecting this data, consider what type of applications you would like to review. Your research framing will guide you in determining this.

Also, it may be unnecessary to see every application sent to the organization – instead, it will be more useful and efficient to review only eligible applications (regardless of whether they were funded).

You can also ask grant-making institutions to share their data with you.

See a sample letter to send to grant-making institutions

Back to top

Prepare your data for analysis

Your survey has closed and now you have all this information! Now you need to ensure your data is as accurate as possible.

Depending on your sample size and amount of completed surveys, this step can be lengthy. Tapping into a strong pool of detail-oriented staff will speed up the process and ensure greater accuracy at this stage.

Also, along with your surveys, you may have collected data from applications sent to grant-making institutions. Use these same steps to sort that data as well. Do not get discouraged if you cannot compare the two data sets! Funders collect different information from what you collected in the surveys. In your final research report and products, you can analyze and present the datasets (survey versus grant-making institution data) separately.

1. Clean your data

• Resolve and remove duplications: If there is more than one completed survey for one organization, reach out to the organization and determine which one is the most accurate.
• Remove ineligible responses: Go through each completed survey and remove any responses that did not properly answer the question. Replace it with “null”, thus keeping it out of your analysis.
• Consistently format numerical data: For example, you may remove commas, decimals and dollar signs from numerical responses. Financial figures provided in different currencies may need to be converted.

2. Code open-ended responses

There are two styles of open-ended responses that require coding.

Questions with open-ended responses

For these questions, you will need to code responses in order to track trends.

Some challenges you will face with this is:

1. People will not use the exact same words to describe similar responses
2. Surveys with multiple language options will require translation and then coding
3. Staff capacity to review and code each open-ended response.

If using more than one staff member to review and code, you will need to ensure consistency of coding. Thus, this is why we recommend limiting your open-ended questions and as specific as possible for open-ended questions you do ask. 

For example, if you had the open-ended question “What specific challenges did you face in fundraising this year?” and some common responses cite “lack of staff,” or “economic recession,” you will need to code each of those responses so you can analyze how many participants are responding in a similar way.

For closed-end questions

If you provided the participant with the option of elaborating on their response, you will also need to “up-code” these responses.

For several questions in the survey, you may have offered the option of selecting the category “Other” With “Other” options, it is common to offer a field in which the participant can elaborate.

You will need to “up-code” such responses by either:

• Converting open-ended responses to the correct existing categories (this is known as “up-coding”). As a simple example, consider your survey asks participants “what is your favorite color?” and you offer the options “blue,” “green,” and “other.” There may be some participants that choose “other” and in their explanation they write “the color of the sky is my favorite color.” You would then “up-code” answers like these to the correct category, in this case, the category “blue.”
• Creating a new category if there are several “others” that have a common theme. (This is similar to coding the first type of open-ended responses). Consider the previous example question of favorite color. Perhaps many participants chose “other” and then wrote “red” is their favorite. In this case, you would create a new category of “red” to track all responses that answered “red.”
• Removing “others” that do not fit any existing or newly created categories.

3. Remove unecessary data

Analyze the frequency of the results

For each quantitative question, you can decide whether you should remove the top or bottom 5% or 1% to prevent outliers* from skewing your results. You can also address the skewing effect of outliers by using median average rather than the mean average. Calculate the median by sorting responses in order, and selecting the number in the middle. However, keep in mind that you may still find outlier data useful. It will give you an idea of the range and diversity of your survey participants and you may want to do case studies on the outliers.

* An outlier is a data point that is much bigger or much smaller than the majority of data points. For example, imagine you live in a middle-class neighborhood with one billionaire. You decide that you want to learn what the range of income is for middle-class families in your neighborhood. In order to do so, you must remove the billionaire income from your dataset, as it is an outlier. Otherwise, your mean middle-class income will seem much higher than it really is.

Remove the entire survey for participants who do not fit your target population. Generally you can recognize this by the organizations’ names or through their responses to qualitative questions.

4. Make it safe

To ensure confidentiality of the information shared by respondents, at this stage you can replace organization names with a new set of ID numbers and save the coding, matching names with IDs in a separate file.

With your team, determine how the coding file and data should be stored and protected.

For example, will all data be stored on a password-protected computer or server that only the research team can access?

Back to top

Create your topline report

A topline report will list every question that was asked in your survey, with the response percentages listed under each question. This presents the collective results of all individual responses. 

Tips:

• Consistency is important: the same rules should be applied to every outlier when determining if it should stay or be removed from the dataset.
• For all open (“other”) responses that are up-coded, ensure the coding matches. Appoint a dedicated point person to randomly check codes for consistency and reliability and recode if necessary.
• If possible, try to ensure that you can work at least in a team of two, so that there is always someone to check your work.

Back to top

Analyze your data

Now that your data is clean and sorted, what does it all mean? This is the fun part where you begin to analyze for trends.

Are there prominent types of funders (government versus corporate)? Are there regions that receive more funding? Your data will reveal some interesting information.

1. Statistical programs

• Smaller samples (under 150 responses) may be done in-house using an Excel spreadsheet.

• Larger samples (above 150 responses) may be done in-house using Excel if your analysis will be limited to tallying overall responses, simple averages or other simple analysis.

• If you plan to do more advanced analysis, such as multivariate analysis, then we recommend using statistical software such as SPSS, Stata or R.
  NOTE: SPSS and Stata are expensive whereas R is free.
  All three types of software require staff knowledge and are not easy to learn quickly.

Try searching for interns or temporary staff from local universities. Many students must learn statistical analysis as part of their coursework and may have free access to SPSS or Stata software through their university. They may also be knowledgeable in R, which is free to download and use.

2. Suggested points for analysis

• Analysis of collective budget sizes
• Analysis of budget sizes by region or type of organization
• Most common funders
• Total amount of all funding reported
• Total percentages of type of funding (corporate, government, etc)
• Most funded issues/populations
• Changes over time in any of these results.

Back to top

Previous step

3. Design your survey

Next step

5. Conduct interviews

Estimated time:

• 2 - 3 months

People needed:

• 1 or more research person(s)
• Translator(s), if offering survey in multiple languages
• 1 or more person(s) to assist with publicizing survey to target population
• 1 or more data analysis person(s)

Resources needed:

• List of desired advisors: organizations, donors, and activists
• Optional: an incentive prize to persuade people to complete your survey
• Optional: an incentive for your advisors

Resources available:

Survey platforms:

• Survey Monkey
• Survey Gizmo (Converts to SPSS for analysis very easily)

Examples:
• 2011 WITM Global Survey
• Sample of WITM Global Survey
• Sample letter to grantmakers requesting access to databases

Visualising Information for Advocacy:
• Cleaning Data Tools
• Tools to present your data in compelling ways
• Tutorial: Gentle Introduction to Cleaning Data

Previous step

3. Design your survey

Next step

5. Conduct interviews

Ready to Go? Worksheet

Download the toolkit in PDF

Definition

There are varied conceptualizations about the commons notes activist and scholar Soma Kishore Parthasarathy.

Conventionally, they are understood as natural resources intended for use by those who depend on their use. However, the concept of the commons has expanded to include the resources of knowledge, heritage, culture, virtual spaces, and even climate. It pre-dates the individual property regime and provided the basis for organization of society. Definitions given by government entities limit its scope to land and material resources.

The concept of the commons rests on the cultural practice of sharing livelihood spaces and resources as nature’s gift, for the common good, and for the sustainability of the common.

Context

Under increasing threat, nations and market forces continue to colonize, exploit and occupy humanity’s commons.

In some favourable contexts, the ‘commons’ have the potential to enable women, especially economically oppressed women, to have autonomy in how they are able to negotiate their multiple needs and aspirations.

Feminist perspective

Patriarchy is reinforced when women and other oppressed genders are denied access and control of the commons.

Therefore, a feminist economy seeks to restore the legitimate rights of communities to these common resources. This autonomy is enabling them to sustain themselves; while evolving more egalitarian systems of governance and use of such resources. A feminist economy acknowledges women’s roles and provides equal opportunities for decision-making, i.e. women as equal claimants to these resources.

Learn more about this proposition

• Reclaiming the Commons for Gender and Economic Justice: Struggles and Movements in India is an interview to scholar Soma Kishore Parthasarathy on how women in rural India are contesting this reality by proposing a shared management of common resources.
• Feminism And The Politics Of The Commons by Silvia Federici looks at the politics of the commons from a feminist standpoint shaped by the struggle against sexual discrimination and reproductive work, to clarify the conditions under which the principle of the common/s can become the foundation of an anti-capitalist program.

“It’s the indigenous knowledge and the practices that have always supported food sovereignty and this knowhow is in the hands of the women … Ecofeminism for me is the respect for all that we have around us.”

Mariama Sonko
Interview to The Guardian

Our new research paper The Devil is in the Details addresses knowledge gaps around religious fundamentalisms within the development sector, and aims to improve understanding of how they constrain development and women’s rights in particular. It provides recommendations for ways development actors can avoid inadvertently strengthening and instead challenge fundamentalisms. [CTA download link: Read the full paper]

Seven pointers to consider

There has been a growth in the power and influence of religious fundamentalist actors globally.

The Devil is in the Details details the grave human rights violations, and violations of women’s rights in particular, caused by state-sponsored fundamentalism, as well as by fundamentalist non-state actors such as militias, religious community organizations, and individuals. Fundamentalist reinforcement of regressive, patriarchal social norms are leading to the rise of violence against women, girls, and women human rights defenders (WHRDs). The paper highlights these key insights for addressing the problem:

• [icon] Religious fundamentalisms are gaining ground within communities
• [icon] Political systems
• [icon] International arenas with devastating effects for ordinary people, women in particular.

There is an urgent need to act for development actors.

Development actors are in a position to take a strong role in this. The collective capacity of development actors to recognize and collaboratively address religious fundamentalisms is vital for advancing social, economic, and gender justice and the human rights of all people in sustainable development. It is vital to promote intersectional feminist understandings of power and privilege, and to apply these to questions of religion and culture. Women’s organizations already have knowledge and strategies to counter fundamentalisms development actors should build on this, and invest in cross-issue coalitions to help them reach new heights.

AWID spent close to two years working to identify a Forum location in the Asia Pacific region (the Forum location rotates regions).

Building on initial desk research and consultations with allies that led us to rule out many other options in the region, we organized a thorough round of site visits to Nepal, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Indonesia and (later) Taiwan. 

Each site visit included not just scoping the logistical infrastructure but meeting with local feminist groups and activists to better understand the context, and their sense of potential opportunities and risks of an AWID forum in their context.

In our site visits, we found incredibly vibrant, diverse local feminist movements.

They often expressed conflicted feelings about the opportunities and risk that the visibility of an event like the Forum could bring to them. In one, during the first 30 minutes of our meeting we heard unanimously from the activists gathered that an AWID Forum would be subject to huge backlash, that LGBTQ rights were a particular political hot-button and that fundamentalist groups would turn out in full force to interrupt the event. When our response was “ok, then you don’t feel it’s a good idea”, again the unanimous response was “of course it is, we want to change the narrative!”.

It was difficult to hear and see in some of these places how many feminist activists wanted to leverage the opportunity of a visible big event and were prepared to face the local risks; but our considerations as hosts of close to 2,000 people from around the world impose a different calculation of risk and feasibility.

We also grappled with questions of what it means to organize a feminist forum that is aligned to principles around inclusion, reciprocity and self-determination, when state policy and practice is usually directly counter to that (although officials in the ministries of Tourism work very hard to smooth that over).

We weighed considerations of infrastructure, with potential opportunity to tip momentum on some national level feminist agendas, and national political context.

In many of these places, monitoring the context felt like an exercise on a pendulum that could swing from open and safe for feminist debates in one moment to stark repression and xenophobia the next, sacrificing feminist priorities as political bargaining chips to pacify right wing, anti-rights forces.

The process has been a sobering reflection on the incredibly challenging context for women’s rights and gender justice activism globally.

Our challenges in Asia Pacific led us to consider: would it be easier if we moved the Forum to a different region? Yet today, we would not be able to organize an AWID Forum in Istanbul as we did in 2012; nor would we be able to do one in Brazil as we did in 2016.

With all of this complexity, AWID selected Taipei as the Forum location because:

• It offers a moderate degree of stability and safety for the diversity of Forum participants we will convene.
• it also has strong logistical capacities, and is accessible for many travellers (with a facilitated e-visa process for international conferences).
• The local feminist movement is welcoming of the Forum and keen to engage with feminists from across the globe.

In organizing the AWID Forum, we are trying to build and hold space as best we can for the diverse expressions of solidarity, outrage, hope and inspiration that are at the core of feminist movements.

At this moment, we see Taipei as the location in the Asia Pacific region that will best allow us to build that safe and rebelious space for our global feminist community.

The fact is, there is no ideal location in today’s world for a Forum that centers Feminist Realities. Wherever we go, we must build that space together!

Download the Participation Guide

"We know everything is against us and there is very little chance to change that. But we believe in intervention and I do think we have a chance and should use it. That’s why we're doing everything we're doing. We're willing to push for things that are unheard of."

Sopo Japaridze to OpenDemocracy

Photo @სოლიდარობის ქსელი / Solidarity Network

Chapter 3

Anti-rights discourses continue to evolve.  As well as using arguments related to religion, culture, and tradition, anti-rights actors co-opt the language of social justice and human rights to conceal their true agendas and gain legitimacy.

Three decades ago, a US television evangelist and Republican candidate famously said that feminism is an “anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.” Today, this conspirative notion gains unprecedented grasp and legitimacy in the form of “gender ideology” discourse, a catch-all bogey-man created by anti-rights actors for them to oppose. 

Across a range of discourses employed by anti-rights actors - including notions of “cultural imperialism” and “ideological colonization”, appeals to “conscientious objection” and the idea of a “pre-natal genocide” - a key theme is co-optation. Anti-rights actors take legitimate issues, or select parts of them, and twist them in service of their oppressive agenda.

Table of Contents

• Gender Ideology
• Cultural Imperialism and Ideological Colonization
• Abortion: Conscientious Objection
• Abortion: Prenatal Genocide
• Exercise: Let’s Take Back the Narrative
• Movement Resistance Story: The Nairobi Principles: Cross-Movement Commitments on Disability and SRHR 
   

Read Full Chapter >