The main method of the project was a survey interview from which both qualitative and quantitative data were collected. Field research was undertaken in marginalised rural communities in Zambia (Chiawa) and India (Sarguja district, Chhattisgarh state). Two rounds of fieldwork were undertaken in each place, in Zambia August–November 2010 (Zambia T1) and August–October 2012 (Zambia T2); in India February–May 2011 (India T1) and February–June 2013 (India T2). In both locations, we talked to husbands and wives (separately) and women heading households. In India we surveyed 340 people in 2011 and 368 in 2013. 187 respondents were interviewed in both rounds. 7% of respondents were single women. Qualitative data include 105 survey notes. In Zambia we surveyed 412 people in 2010 and 370 in 2012. These included 52 women heading households. 358 respondents were surveyed both years. Qualitative data include notes from 105 survey interviews. This research aims to identify pathways of wellbeing and poverty within rural communities in Zambia and India. It will demonstrate how poverty affects wellbeing and how different constellations of wellbeing in turn affect people's movements into, within and out of poverty. Drawing on the sociology of development and psychology, it adopts a mixed method, cross-cultural longitudinal approach, with qualitative and quantitative data collection across a two year interval, involving 700 respondents. Statistical tests assess the validity and reliability of our model of wellbeing. In-depth case studies provide a deeper sense of people's own understandings and experience. In particular, the research tests a key hypothesis that social and personal relationships constitute critical drivers of wellbeing in developing countries. The project is rooted in research-policy engagement. It involves partnership with NGOs committed to incorporating wellbeing into their programmes, and generates a broader programme of communications activities at national and global level.

The Wellbeing and Poverty Pathways project developed a multi-dimensional model of wellbeing called “Inner Wellbeing” (IWB) which reflects what people think and feel they are able to be and do. The project explored relationships between people's subjective experiences of wellbeing and the external conditions in which they live their lives. Inner wellbeing comprises seven domains: economic confidence; agency and participation; social connections; close relationships; physical and mental health; competence and self-worth; values and meaning. It was constructed through a combination of theoretical reflection and empirical analysis in two rural communities, one in Zambia and one in India. The main research instrument was a survey which comprised three sections: an opening section on demographics and health; the central IWB section; and a final section on livelihoods and access to state services. Specifically for the central IWB section, the survey has five questions (or items) for each domain, which are designed to reflect different aspects of that domain. For each question respondents are asked to select one of five graduated answers. These are then scored on a scale from strong negative (1) to weak negative (2) to neutral (3) to weak positive (4) to strong positive wellbeing (5). The questions were extensively grounded and piloted to ensure they captured issues that were important to people’s lives locally. The studied population came from two rural areas of the Global South: Chiawa in Zambia and four villages in the Sarguja district of the Chhattisgarh state in India. No sample selection was applied. Instead, everyone in the study areas who would talk to us was interviewed. Chiawa is a Game Management Area (GMA), located in Kafue district, Lusaka province. To the south east it borders Zimbabwe and to the east the Lower Zambezi National Park. The majority population is Goba, a people-group that originated in what is now Zimbabwe. The research in India focused on four villages located in the historically remote hill and forest regions of northern Chhattisgarh. These villages were selected because they presented a range of contrasts. The communities there are extremely poor and people depend on (largely rainfed) farming, daily labour and gathering non-timber forest products to survive. Reflecting the area’s population as a whole, the majority of respondents (84%) are Adivasi, including Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PTG), with smaller numbers of Other Backward Caste (OBC) (15%) and Scheduled Caste (1%) people.