278 Communities and Social Capital
‘villager group’ in official terms, village hereafter) were included in the survey. In
order to overcome standard geographic biases, a ‘barefoot’ strategy (eating and liv-
ing with local people, walking on foot instead of taking vehicles) was adopted by
the survey team, which comprised the first author, two local assistants, and 1–2
farmers. A standard format, ‘village information sheet’ was employed for the pur-
poses of participatory observation and village comparison, which covers the base-
line information of each village, including: geographical location and topographic
features, population and demographic information, distribution and utilization of
land resources, village history and social structure. During the period of on-foot
movement from one village to another, the survey team cross-checked official sta-
tistical data, and developed hypotheses and questions for later village discussions.
On arrival in the village, a group meeting was held to complete the ‘village infor-
mation sheet’, to examine and improve research hypotheses, and to explore key
issues raised by local people. In total, 50 villages within nine administrative villages
were visited and village information sheets completed for each.
Whilst village surveys were concentrated on the environment and resource
management issues, the household questionnaire survey provided a means to col-
lect the information on rural livelihood systems, to measure the inputs and out-
puts of household production systems, and also to quantify the scale and structure
of social networks. Besides the detailed information on household revenues and
expenditure, special attention in the household questionnaire surveys was placed
on understanding links between kinship, relatives and village residents, the close-
ness of households and the relations of trust and the capacity for people to ask for
help without worrying about refusal. It also focused on production and technology
issues, and who households usually consult – with a focus on channels or sources
for households to learn about technology information and who influences family
decisions on adoption. Following a standard process, one in five village households
was selected by a systematic random method.
Mini case studies were also used during or after the period of village surveys to
develop a more detailed picture of farmer innovation and organization practices. As
a result, a total of ten case studies were analysed, covering a range of themes from the
adoption of greenhouses for vegetables, the invention of rainfall collecting system,
reform in rural property system to links with agricultural extension systems.
Local Conditions and Household Innovative Capacity
All 50 sample villages have been allocated to one of three categories (valley, mid-
dle and remote) according to a variety of geographic and resource endowment
characteristics (Table 15.3). This shows that regional divisions based upon
administrative hierarchy underestimates the complexity of rural environments
because the differences between the valley and remote villages is large. Some
administrative villages contain all three types of village (valley, middle and remote),