How to use it?

Process

A properly planned project addressing the real needs of the beneficiaries is necessarily based upon a correct and complete analysis of the existing situation. The existing situation should be interpreted according to the views, needs, interests and activities of parties concerned. It is essential that all those involved accept the plans and are committed to implement them. The Problem Tree Analysis belongs to the family of participatory planning techniques, in which all parties involved identify and analyse the needs together. Participatory methods aim to create ownership and commitment among the involved parties (e.g. beneficiaries, implementing organisations, local governments).

Three stages in the analysis process in the Problem Analysis method will be discussed:

  • the analysis of problems related to the subject (the image of reality);
  • the analysis of objectives (the image of a future, improved situation);
  • the analysis of strategies (the comparison of different chains of objective).

There are several complementary methods to analyse a situation:

  • expert studies giving answers to questions as experts conceive them;
  • interviews with representatives of concerned groups and organisations providing perceptions as existing within that particular group or organisation;
  • a meeting, in which representatives of all parties concerned, including experts, discuss the same questions in a participatory way, often leading to an analysis, which is shared by all (e.g. Participatory Rural Appraisal).

1 Problem analysis

The problem analysis is of major importance with regard to project planning, since it strongly influences the design of a possible intervention(s). It is the basis and the justification for the project design. The problem analysis includes:

  • verification of the subject of analysis;
  • identification of problems related to the subject; make and inventory of all problems perceived by all participants in the workshop;
  • establishment of a cause-effect hierarchy between the problems;
  • visualisation of the cause-effect relations in a diagram.

It is important that all participants get the chance to express the problems they experience. After discussion and clarification by the 'problem owner' all problems should be respected.

It is important to determine whether the different groups of people perceive the problem in the same way; if not the problem should be reformulated or split. For example, if the problem mentioned is 'our family income is not sufficient', for a woman it could mean that she cannot buy vegetables and meat, whereas for the man in the family this could mean that he is not satisfied about the yields.

Do’s and Don’ts in formulation of problems

Don'ts

Do's

No big balloons or big vague concepts, e.g. no infrastructure

Be precise, e.g. there is no paved road from Chittoor to Mahabubnagar

No absent solutions (danger: you block alternatives), e.g. we have a lack of money and thus children don’t go to school

Instead, the problem is: school fees are not affordable

No non- existing problems, e.g. no existence of NGOs (in former dictatorial countries possibly a problem in the past)

The problem now is that there is no knowledge on how to run an NGO

No formulation of interpretations, e.g. the government is lazy

The government does not issue licenses

After a common understanding of all problems is reached, the analysis is presented in the form of a diagram, or a problem tree. A problem is never an isolated negative perceived situation, but relates to other problems. In the problem tree the relations and hierarchy among all identified problems is expressed. Each stated problem is preceded by the problem(s) which cause(s) it, and followed by the problem it causes itself. For example: the rice production in the low lands is decreasing due to the irrigation water not reaching the fields and due to the fact that there is an irregular supply of inputs for rice production. The problem of a decreasing rice production itself contributes to the problem of food shortages.

2 Objectives analysis

After the problem analysis follows the analysis of objectives. This analysis includes:

  • the translation of the negative situations in the problem tree into a realised positive state (the objectives) for example, 'low rice production' is converted into 'improved rice production';
  • verification of the hierarchy of objectives;
  • visualisation of means-end relationships in a diagram.

Also in this step it is of importance that all stakeholders are involved. While transforming problems into objectives and verifying the hierarchy, discussion and feedback on the objectives is done. This helps building consensus amongst the stakeholders. It might also be necessary to reformulate some of the problems.

Next, often the objective tree shows many objectives that cannot all be reached at once. Therefore, choices will have to be made. Certain objectives seem unrealistic, too ambitious or not feasible within the context of a possible intervention, so that other solutions need to be generated for the problem concerned. However at this stage of the planning these choices are not yet made. Still all possible ways (objectives) to achieve the desired future situation are considered.

3 Analysis of strategy (see further 'Strategic Options' tool)

After having formulated the desired future situation the selection of possible interventions starts. To analyse the strategies for implementation the following steps are taken:

  • identification of the different possible groups of objectives contributing to a higher objective (clustering);
  • choice of a strategy for the intervention, choosing the scope of the project (scoping).

In the process of clustering and scoping it is important to realise that the aim is to contribute the maximum possible to an overall objective, keeping in mind the priorities of the beneficiaries, and the limitations and possibilities of the implementing organisation.

In the diagram of objectives, the different objectives sharing the same nature can be considered to be clusters. The clustering should be based on common sense and should be of practical value in the planning stage. The clusters should be neither too broadly nor too narrowly defined. It concerns the identification and selection of potential alternative strategies towards realising all or some of the objectives. Clusters are made based on similarity of possible future activities, region or required expertise.

In the demonstration case these clusters are irrigation system, agricultural inputs, soil fertility and immigration. For each of these clusters a different type of expertise is needed.

Out of the clusters, one (and often more) will be chosen and used as the strategy to achieve a future desired situation: the aims of the intervention. This is called scoping, or choosing a strategy. Based on a number of criteria, the most relevant and feasible strategy is selected. Unrealistic objectives should be excluded and objectives that certainly should be included should be prioritised. The criteria have to be chosen and agreed upon by all stakeholders. Examples of possible criteria:

- priorities of beneficiaries

- donor policy

- expertise and experience of implementing organisation

- fit with mandate of government authorities, sectoral policies

- duration of implementation

- contributions of different stakeholders

- urgency

- available human resources, institutions

- contribution to overall objectives

- available budget

- inter-linkages between clusters

- shift in power relations

- positive/negative side-effects

- gender and social diversity aspects

- sustainability

- likelihood of success

- fit with mandate of implementing organisation

Preparatory phase

  • 1 Define the subject

The first thing to do is to define the subject based on which the exercise will be done. The subject is the framework for the discussion; no more and no less. The relevance of the subject is to be discussed with the stakeholders (social actors that have a relation to the subject). As soon as stakeholders are identified and invited to participate, the subject is checked and a consensus on it should be reached. The subject needs to be understood by all parties. Care should be taken that the formulation as such does not unintentionally exclude certain (target) groups.

  • 2 Stakeholder analysis (see also the 'Stakeholder analysis' tool)

It is important that all stakeholders get a chance to express their experiences and ideas for the (new) project. Ideas from all different perspectives should be respected and used. Not only individuals can be stakeholders, also organisations that have a social relation the subject need to be involved. The active participation of old and young women and men, married people, single headed households, landless, higher class and lower class, etc. means that a representative group out of the beneficiaries is taking part in the process of project development and implementation.

Depending on the setting, the following actors may be involved in the preparatory and analysis phases:

  • local communities, the 'problem owners'
  • donor organisation
  • implementing or grassroot organisations, NGOs
  • local government officials
  • facilitator who will do the moderation of the workshop

Follow up

Planning should continue with:

  • Developing the logical framework
  • Assessing and documenting assumptions and risks
  • Defining targets, benchmarks
  • Operational planning: Budgeting
  • Operational planning: Who does what

Requirements and limitations

All stakeholders should participate in the scoping. This way, their commitment can be obtained and, very important, their understanding for the choices made. Scoping is about assessing with whom you are suited to do what, and what can better be left (to others). This is why you may integrate some institutional and organisational analysis tools at this stage. They give you an overview of current capacities and aspirations, so you consider both your own capacity and those of others in deciding what you will define as within or outside the scope of your project.