A sponsoring or funding agency might well have definite prior ideas about the choice of countries in which it wishes research on adaptive strategies for sustainable livelihoods to be conducted, and of the agencies which it wishes to engage to undertake that work. Alternatively, agencies might wish to use their own networks and methods such as in-country surveys to select project implementing agencies/LPCs.

But, if flexibility is possible, there is much to be said for building into stages 2 and 3 a competitive tendering process for interested NGOs. Thus the sponsoring agency's project outline and background materials would be circulated to potentially interested NGOs, agencies or organizations, together with guidelines or a pro-forma for a country project proposal and an invitation to prepare a country project proposal with budget and time-frame. Within the broad area selected because of its specific characteristics, the choice of sites for actual field work is a matter for local judgment in the light of several key considerations. Selecting a proposed research site is not a trivial exercise and it is possible that two or three different sites in a country, perhaps quite remote, will need to be subjected to a brief reconnaissance survey in order to determine their suitability.

Learning from negative experiences

In-country preparatory work should include the identification and mobilization of key national-level stakeholders and identify preliminary policy issues. Equally importantly, allowing sufficient time and resources to the second stage of the project provides the opportunity for the lessons of any negative learning experiences to be assimilated at an early stage, when corrective action can be taken, rather than later in the project when the consequences would be more serious. Sometimes even highly experienced and intelligent researchers can be taken unawares by the local situation.