Many Villages, One Survey

It’s the third week of the UN food security and poverty survey. We’re gathering good information, despite some difficult conditions. Families appear happy, even honored, to talk about their food and spending patterns. If they’re skeptical about our explanation that new, better-targeted development programs will result from the data, they haven’t said so.

We think they may be holding back on some answers, however. Farmers who work somebody else’s land without the owner’s knowledge might be leery of telling everything. Or if poppy growing provides the bulk of their income, they may prefer keeping that fact to themselves. Considering the heavy-handedness of Myanmar’s security apparatus over the past several decades, such caution is justified.

The survey teams stress that nobody in the government will ever see individual households’ responses, and that no names will be collected. At the beginning of the interviews, we tell people we’re partnering with the Ministry of Livestock, Fish, and Rural Development. Then, to build trust, we ask about the weather, the children, the football matches.

We also emphasize that we’re not part of the national census, which begins just after we finish. The census, overseen by a sister UN agency, is controversial mostly because it asks about two hot-button issues here, ethnicity and religion.

Though our survey doesn’t ask such questions, we’re certainly seeing the wide diversity in this crazy quilt of cultures that calls itself a “Republic of a Union.” Language has been our biggest challenge. Two or even three translations are routinely needed in the villages to get information from, say, Shan or Chin or Pa’O interviewees to a paper questionnaire that is printed in only three versions: Myanmar, English, and Chinese.

During the seven-day training for the interviewers, we tried to form each team of four so that at least one person could speak one of the 10-15 languages we thought we would encounter. Even with that attempt, we find we sometimes need to enlist translation help from village schoolteachers, who can usually speak something besides the local dialect.

The remarkably varied villages, sometimes just one valley away from each other, were chosen at random using GIS software programmed to exclude towns and cities. All of them grow most everything they eat, but that’s where the similarities stop. Lack of water and transportation mean that many places we’re surveying subsist much the same way they always have. Others are moving away from cultivation into service provision. Irrigation and new crops provide a few villages with more income than ever before. And a handful of places exist largely on remittances from relatives abroad.

It’s generally gorgeous landscape: forested, rippling countryside gouged by rivers and sprinkled with hilltop temples. Surveyors often have to drive or walk four to five hours from the previous night’s stop, then that far again after the half-day’s worth of questioning is finished.

Checking in with other interview teams is tricky in this land of few cellphone towers. We almost never connect on the first call. Usually it takes five or six tries, each separated by an hour or so, to reach somebody who’s moving around the rural areas of Myanmar. The most remote teams will be outside cell range for about 10 days.