Research Design/ Methods

We collected qualitative data related to: 1. the type and diversity of livelihoods or income generating activities 2. access and services to loans 3. social safety nets 4. factors crucial to livelihoods and business success 5. skills developments 6. reasons for working and not working

We collected these data through: • In-depth interviews with 157 people with disability between age 20- 65+ (116 adults in Kulon Progo and 41 adults in Sleman);

• 4 focus group sessions with women with disability group, male group and deaf only group

The research adopted a collaborative or participatory design, embedded in SIGAB and drawing on a team of researchers with and without disability to engage villagers in both the inquiry and in taking action about research findings.

A team of 12 researchers conducted in-depth interviews with 157 respondents with disability from early December 2017 to late January 2018 in 8 villages. Due to the diverse backgrounds and abilities among the researchers in our team, novice researchers were paired with seasoned researchers in the field to allow opportunities for skills and knowledge transfer between researchers, improved communication and to maintain a positive work ethic.

To meet the communication needs of two deaf researchers and deaf respondents in the villages, local sign language interpreters and real time captioning were used as well. For respondents identified as having intellectual disability with cognitive limitations and/or communication difficulties, the team utilized paired interviewing where individual respondents were interviewed along with someone they interact and communicate with on a daily basis at home or surroundings.

Such approaches are necessary to ensure research information and questions are communicated well and researchers are able to understand information conveyed by respondents.

DISABILITY OR DIFFERENTLY ABLED (DIFFABLE)

The definition of disability has evolved from its original and historical interpretation where the source of barriers or impediments was located in the individual to revised and contemporary interpretations where the source of barriers is located in the wider environment. With the change in interpretation, disability is no longer seen as a damaged body, whether physical, sensory, psycho-social or cognitive that limits an individual’s participation in society. Rather, it is seen as result of interactions between individuals with disability and their environment which in turn affects the quality of their participation in all aspects of life and society. Environmental barriers such as lack of access to public facilities and infrastructure, attitudinal barriers that lead to discrimination by family members and others, and communication barriers are all key factors that can be changed.

The term diffable (differently abled), initiated by Mansour Fakih (INSIST) and Setya Adi Purwanta (Dria Manunggal) in 1998, is the culmination of efforts to dismantle the views of society about disability. The use of diffable reflects the attitude of disability activists and advocacy movements in Yogyakarta and Solo that seek to position people with disability in more active roles and a more positive light. The terms diffable and disability are both used in this study to illustrate the diversity and complexity of the disability experience.

Stages of Collaborative Research

Research process that is both collaborative and participatory engages a range of stakeholders and perspectives (Chambers 1997; Ibid. 2007). It also emphasizes continuous reflection and actions where diverse voices, learning insights and findings from every process and stage inform the design of the next process and next stage. By extension, both collaborative and participatory approach enables disability issues to be mainstreamed throughout research process and allows people with disability to shape the research process and outcomes.

STAGE ONE (mid-October 2017- February 2018)

The recruitment process for researchers started in mid-October and resulted in a team of 12 researchers with diverse backgrounds and abilities. Gender and disability / non-disability composition of the team reflects community demographics with 4 females to 8 males. Four members are disability leaders. We ran briefing and research capacity training sessions from 13 November to 12 December. All members of the team provided input with regards to what types of data to collect and revised the interview instruments prior to actual data collection activities

Santi, Doddy, Pak Sarjiyo and Imam discussed how to map out themes identified from coding exercise.

STAGE TWO (January – March 2018)

Data collected in Stage One were used as study material for collaborative data analysis. Due to the diverse educational backgrounds among team members, ranging from high school diplomas to masters degrees, our learning approach towards data analysis was experiential and conversational. For nearly 8 weeks, the whole team coded every interview transcript, identified and discussed the themes before conducting a concept mapping of the overall findings. The identified themes are further used as guiding questions for focus group discussions to explore issues related to loans, livelihoods maintenance and production and reasons to participate in economic activities.

During the data analysis stage, the research team and SIGAB also coordinated with local theatre activists (Joned Suryatmoko, Budi S. Gemak, Lusia Cahyani, Muhammad Abe) to design training modules in order to facilitate people's theater workshops. The purpose of 5-day theatre workshop session was held in SIGAB’s office to engage twelve research participants in a culturally relevant and accessible method of communicating their experiences to their wider communities, as a mechanism of attitude change and awareness raising. The people’s theatre workshop incorporated the preliminary findings generated from collaborative coding and analysis which enabled the research participants to verify and revise the findings.

What we did not anticipate was the level of support and interest expressed by the general public attending the performance. Some of the audiences were involved in the discussion and provided feedback directly to the performers about the themes enacted. Although our productions were performed in inclement weather, the audiences comprised of community members were greater than expected. Unfortunately, the inclement weather also resulted in a handful of government officers attendance.

Raising disability awareness through performance art and culture has potential to be effective in delivering messages and engaging the general public in dialogues on locally situated issues. Performers shared the communication skills they learned from the 5-day intensive theatre workshop and exercised their courage to stand in front of the audience to voice their lived experiences, thoughts and memories related to making a living, being rejected and/or accepted by others, and their hopes related to self and society.

STAGE THREE (April – mid July 2018)

The research team was halved as some researchers had no interest in report writing and data cataloging. The remaining team members shared tasks including: 1. writing up research manual; 2. infographic design; 3. assisting Ethnoreflika team on video-related documentation of theatre workshop and performance sessions.

Three of the team members returned to the research sites to document participants’ daily lives and economic activities for a film documentary. SIGAB also conducted two workshop sessions with local government to discuss the research findings. Issues and strategies with regards to findings raised by workshop participants are incorporated into Discussion and Recommendation section.