Lessons learned from the preparation phase were to allocate sufficient time for terms of collaboration and research permits to be processed, and for the location of study sites to be verified. In this case, underestimation resulted for instance in cancelling the planned pre-visit to the study areas. Consequently, more time of the actual fieldwork had to be spent on logistics and basic information.
Other problems encountered included late delivery of technical equipment and unexpected rains. To overcome unforeseen obstacles to severely impact the study, the importance of flexibility is again stressed.
A pre-condition for the study was functional technical equipment. Without a georeferenced digital image it would have been difficult to retrieve the co-ordinates for the study areas. Moreover, without a GPS-receiver it would have been almost impossible to find the co-ordinates in this kind of terrain with few landmarks.
One critical time-consuming task was georeferencing of the image. As it turned out the registration error was about 1200 meters at the first study area. Before being able to locate points in the image by using the GPS, the image registration had to be corrected. This was done manually by reading co-ordinates from the GPS for road crossings that were visible in the satellite image. The lack of good landmarks made this a painstaking process and not always very accurate. For this task, a track log, that is, a large amount of points continuously stored in the GPS-receiver, would have been very useful.
It was not very useful to have the computer connected to the GPS for navigation using the digital satellite image. Probably the most important reason for this was that so good analogue map material and aerial photographs were provided. Another reason was that the technical set-up was not good enough for this rather physically rough environment.
A connection kit between the digital camera and the GPS, for automatic geocoding of the pictures would have been valuable. Instead, the method used was taking notes on paper. This had several drawbacks: Further, the post-processing was time consuming, and there was also a risk of mixing co-ordinates and digital files.
Upon arrival in the village nearest the study area, the field team went directly to the house of the village headman. Introductions were made and the objectives of the mission were explained. Emphasis was given to the fact that the information that people gave was not intended to be used at local level, but that it was rather part of a global programme.
The next step was to make appointments with local guides for the fieldwork and to find other stakeholders to interview. It proved very fruitful to approach the villagers with the aerial photos, especially when photos existed from two points in time. Discussing the study area and locating it on the aerial photograph became a natural entry point for conversations. Special effort was made in each village to meet separately with a group of women. This proved to be fruitful, as they then tended to speak more easily and participated to a higher extent.
Contribution was given to those that helped with transport, fieldplots and when the team was leaving, a symbolic amount was also handed to the headman to thank for the collaboration.
Among the lessons learned was that a pre-visit would have been very useful, for deciding in advance which stakeholders to meet and which questions to prepare and direct. As it turned out, the headman had an influence on the selection of key informants, which might have led to biased result.
