SOBRE EL REGISTRO DE OLLAS COMUNES

The main objective of designing a pilot study was to investigate and collect data from a group of individuals regarding their perception of the risks of flood hazards. The study by Houston et al. (2007) referred to in Section 2.6.3, was first used as a guide to design the pilot questionnaire. For example, the questionnaire focused on the following themes of the study:

 household experience of being flooded

 tangible and intangible impacts of floods

 coping with floods

 knowledge about flood warnings

 support from local and government authorities

103

The initial draft pilot questionnaire was designed to ensure the suitability and clarity of the questions and decide whether the sequences in the questioning were appropriate.

After an initial attempt, additional questions were developed to gather information as efficiently and effectively as possible on aspects covering the recovery phase, which included resilience building activities. The questionnaire for the pilot survey is attached as Appendix 10.

4.8.1 Conduct of the pilot survey

The purpose of the pilot survey is to test the questionnaire using a small sample of individuals living in one of the case study areas. The survey was conducted among 25 inhabitants from the general flood zone of LH. They were chosen among neighbours, friends, social workers, and individuals mostly recommended by NGOs. They may or may not have been affected directly by recent flood events.

At the beginning, the broad context of the survey was explained to each of the participants to put them at ease. Generally, people who receive government and NGO assistance or live on government property or reside in poverty-stricken areas where drug-related activities may be common are wary about political agents, security officers, and the authorities. Thus, it had to be made clear at the outset that the questionnaire was exclusively for research purposes for a university and was designed to obtain anonymously the views of households on flood hazards, so no follow up in the form of assistance or other forms of action were to be expected.

The questionnaire, drafted in English, was subdivided with self-explanatory headings for each section covering a major area of the study. Most of the questions used a Likert-type five-point scale with boxes to be ticked. The wording of the questions was kept simple and straightforward so that they could be easily understood by the respondents.

On a one-to-one basis, the replies were filled in by the interviewer, who was accompanied by a social worker from the area. Throughout, the reactions of the respondents to each of the questions were noted. In particular, the researcher paid attention to the following:

(i) understanding of the questions

(ii) adequacy and appropriateness of the questions

104 (iii) logical sequencing of the questions

(iv) overlapping questions and those that may be missing (v) motivation to answer all the questions

(vi) embarrassment that could be caused by certain questions or the length of the questionnaire.

Each survey lasted between 15 to 30 minutes.

A subjective assessment was made throughout of whether the questions were suitable for the large scale survey in the three localities, whether the instructions were clear, and whether the persons were at ease in providing the information requested. The questions were read out in English for those who understood the language, but in most cases, the questions were asked in Creole (the local language in Mauritius). Every attempt was made to ensure uniformity in translating the words from English, but too detailed paraphrasing was avoided. To this end, prior to the survey, the words to be used in Creole had been rehearsed in order to ensure uniformity. Similarly, throughout the survey, it was ascertained whether the words and terms used were well understood and whether the respondents interpreted the questions in a uniform way. After completion, the overall questionnaire was discussed with the respondents, and their queries and observations were noted.

4.8.2 Design of the main questionnaire using outcomes of pilot study

The information gathered from the pilot survey was entered into an Excel table, and a preliminary analysis was made to extract some useful information about the characteristics of the sample data that could be applied to improve the main questionnaire. A brief description of the major changes and the reasons for these changes in the design of the main questionnaire are given below:

 This section under Respondent’s personal information in the pilot questionnaire was renamed ‘Household characteristics’ to include explicitly ‘membership of household’ and ‘tenure’. Questions on education level and employment were added in the main survey.

105

 The part of the questions dealing with nature of hazards and the action taken prior to a flood event were deleted or were assimilated into other questions as the research question related to actions after the flood. Information on where the households were at the time of flooding and who warned them of the event were not included in the main survey as the responses to these questions were poor, implying that people could not clearly remember. In addition, the study emphasised the recovery phase rather than the preparedness phase.

 The questions related to impact were retained and were largely unchanged, as the respondents found the questions relevant and easy to answer.

 This section on vulnerability was retained as it drew considerable interest from the respondents. Vulnerability encompassed exposure to risk and socio-economic conditions as well. The questions were accessible, and the issue of vulnerability was part of the research questions.

 In the pilot questionnaire, the section on ‘After the Flood’ included ‘Recovery’

and ‘Assistance’ only. In the light of the replies, the section was recast and a separate section on resilience building to include coping and support mechanisms was added. The added focus on resilience building was also required by the research questions.

 The issues of resilience, coping mechanisms, and recovery drew less enthusiastic attention. However, it was found necessary to retain these important issues while rephrasing the questions significantly. The respondents were prepared to express their views, though with caution, on the support offered by the government and by NGOs.

 There was considerable interest in the questions related to awareness-building.

Those on the measures taken were revised and included elsewhere, and a few were developed further, such as whether they aware of living in a flood-risk zone.

 Some questions required rewording to facilitate a better understanding. It was observed that most households had limited fluency in English and were not used to filling in questionnaires. Door-to-door visits and personal interaction with the respondents was planned for the full survey.

106

It was not possible to contact all households in a systematic way as some houses were closed, or the residents were unwilling to open their doors or respond. The survey at household level in all three locations was done from August 2010 to April 2011. It also provided the researcher with an opportunity to become better acquainted with the residents and build a relationship of trust.

Since a large number of households were unable to fill in the questionnaires by themselves, each statement had to be translated in the local Creole language. The exercise took the form of a dialogue between the interviewer and the respondent. The information gathered was then fed back into the questionnaire in English. The approach to attitude measurement based on the Likert-style format was problematic because of the range of attitudes collected. Therefore, every effort was made to note down the responses exactly as they were provided.

Access to households presented other problems. The presence of someone who knew the people located within the affected area was important. Having been introduced in the locality, it became easier for the researcher to contact other households as well since they were on the lookout and expected the visit from the researcher. In the case studies of LH and GB, it was preferable to contact a social worker who was known to the inhabitants.

The pilot questionnaire was also used to test the project design and evaluate whether the questions and the responses were appropriate to gather and analyse the required information. The questionnaire format was revised in the light of the above considerations, but the overall structure was maintained. However, the title of the pilot questionnaire was changed to include explicitly recovery and resilience building. It was decided that where additional information would be required, appropriate questions would be fielded through other activities, such as focus groups, participatory activities, and interviews with agency stakeholders.