sub-domains).<sup>27</sup> Where possible, it also identifies sources that can be used for finding related data. Measuring institutions is complicated by the huge gap that exists between the presence of rules and the messy, politicized, and socially constructed reality of the enactment of those rules.<sup>28</sup> Measurement of institutions will therefore require a mixedmethods approach that includes national-level tracking of legislation, regulations, and procedures (existence of rules) and, ideally, local in-depth probing of the operation of informal institutions, or at least the specification of well-informed assumptions about the operation of informal institutions.

# 2.3.2 Degrees of Empowerment

Direct indicators focus on the three degrees of empowerment as discussed in section 1.3. Table 3 in annex 4 provides a list of empowerment indicators that can be used to ascertain a respondent’s degree of empowerment in each domain and at each level of their lives. Data on degrees of empowerment are not available currently through any other survey instrument and therefore have to be collected as primary information.

# 2.3.3 Application at the National Level

All the indicators of assets, institutions, and degrees of empowerment are included in the draft national-level survey module found in annex 5. The survey module is included in this working paper to give more specificity to the variables used for indicators and to encourage interest in piloting all or part of the module.<sup>29</sup> Testing of the module is planned in two countries during FY04. This will appraise and refine indicators and related questions for application to a large sample. Some measures of empowerment will be more difficult to collect than others—such as those concerning sensitive issues within households and communities. While the draft module found in annex 5 is prepared as a questionnaire that can be used directly to measure empowerment or modified to add an empowerment dimension to other questionnaire-based household surveys, under ideal conditions more interactive forms of enquiry such as semi-structured interviews, case studies, participatory appraisal tools and focus groups would be used to deepen understanding of sensitive issues and causal links. The feasibility of using these approaches to data collection on a sub-sample of the national survey sites will be reviewed and, if appropriate, the preparation of field guidelines for such “deep-drill” sites initiated. In addition, options to develop a mixed-methods approach under certain survey conditions—such as where a PPA is undertaken at the same time as an LSMS survey is applied—will be explored.

> 27 Grootaert (2003) also discusses indicators that refer to the institutions that influence empowerment and identifies the data sources from which these can be extracted.

> 28 Formal rules can be enacted through both formal and informal institutional contexts. Kabeer explains that the enactment of formal rules in informal contexts is bound up in the societal norms, beliefs, customs, and values (Kabeer 2002, p. 22).

> 29 The empowerment team of PRMPR is available to assist in developing or piloting part or all of this module.

28