3.

4 Problem Analysis

Problem analysis identifies the negative aspects of an existing

situation and establishes the ‘cause and effect’ relationships
between the identified problems. It involves three main steps:
1. Definition of the framework and subject of analysis.
2. Identification of the major problems faced by target groups and
beneficiaries (What is/are the problem/s? Whose problems?); and
3. Visualization of the problems in form of a diagram, called a
“problem tree” or “hierarchy of problems” to help analyse and
clarify cause–effect relationships.
• The analysis is presented in diagrammatic form showing effects of
a problem on top and its causes underneath.
• The analysis is aimed at identifying the real bottlenecks which
stakeholders attach high priority to, and which they wish to
overcome.
• A clear problem analysis thus provides a sound foundation on
which to develop a set of relevant and focused project objectives.
How to Establish a Problem Tree
• Creating a problem tree should ideally be undertaken as a
participatory group event.
• It requires the use of individual pieces of paper or cards on which to
write individual problem statements, which can then be sorted into
cause and effect relationships on a visual display.
Step 1: The aim of the first step is to openly brainstorm problems which
stakeholders consider to be a priority. This first step can either be
completely open (no pre-conceived notions as to what stakeholder’s
priority concerns/problems might be), or more directed, through
specifying a ‘known’ high order problem or objective (e.g. improved
river water quality) based on preliminary analysis of existing
information and initial stakeholder consultations.
Step 2: From the problems identified through the brain
storming exercise, select an individual starter problem.
Step 3: Look for related problems to the starter problem
Step 4: Begin to establish a hierarchy of cause and effects:
• Problems which are directly causing the starter problem are
put below
• Problems which are direct effects of the starter problem are
put above
Step 5: All other problems are then sorted in the same way – the
guiding question being ‘What causes that?’ If there are two or more
causes combining to produce an effect, place them at the same level in
the diagram.
Step 6: Connect the problems with cause-effect arrows – clearly
showing key links.
Step 7: Review the diagram and verify its validity and completeness.
Ask yourself/the group – ‘are there important problems that have not
been mentioned yet?’ If so, specify the problems and include them at
an appropriate place in the diagram.
Step 8: Copy the diagram onto a sheet of paper to keep as a record,
and distribute (as appropriate) for further comment/information.
Example of a problem tree

Problem analysis – river pollution

Catch and income of fishing families

in decline
High incidence of water borne
diseases and illnesses,
particularly among poor
Riverine ecosystem under serious families and under 5s
threat, including declining fish stocks

River water quality is

deteriorating

High levels of solid waste Most households and factories Wastewater treated in plants
dumped into river discharge wastewater directly does not meet environmental
into the river standards

Polluters are   Population more

effectively controlled aware of the
danger of waste
dumping Existing legal regulations are 40% of households
inadequate to prevent direct
discharge of wastewater and 20% of businesses not
connected to sewerage
n e two r k

Environment Protection No public information/education

Agency ineffective and programs available
closely aligned with industry Pollution has been a low Inadequate levels of capital investment and poor
political priority business planning within Local Government
interests
3.5 Analysis of Objectives

Analysis of objectives is a methodological approach employed to:

• Describe the situation in the future once identified problems have
been remedied.
• Verify the hierarchy of objectives; and
• Illustrate the means-ends relationships in a diagram.
The ‘negative situations’ of the problem tree are converted into
solutions, expressed as ‘positive achievements. For example, ‘river
water quality is deteriorating’ is converted into ‘quality of river water is
improved’. These positive achievements are in fact objectives and are
presented in a diagram of objectives showing a means/ends hierarchy.
This diagram aims to provide a clear overview of the desired future
situation.
 The main steps in the process are summarized below:

Once again, the analysis of objectives should be undertaken through

appropriate consultation with key stakeholder groups. Information previously
gained from undertaking stakeholder analysis (including institutional capacity
assessment should also be considered. This should help in terms of:
• Considering priorities.
• Assessing how realistic the achievement of some objectives might be;
and
• Identifying additional means that might be required to achieve desired
ends.
Once complete, the objective tree provides a summary picture of the
desired future situation, including the indicative means by which ends
can be achieved.
As with the problem tree, the objective tree should provide a simplified
but robust summary of reality. It is simply a tool to aid analysis and
presentation of ideas.
Its main strength is that it keeps the analysis of potential project
objectives firmly based on addressing a range of clearly identified
priority problems.
Step 1: Reformulate all negative situations of the problems analysis into positive situations
that are:
•desirable
•realistically achievable
Step 2: Check the means-ends relationships to ensure validity and completeness of the
hierarchy (cause-effect relationships are turned into means-ends linkages)
Step 3: If necessary:
•revise statements
•add new objectives if these seem to be relevant and necessary to achieve the
objective at the next higher level
•delete objectives which do not seem suitable or necessary
Objective Tree

Objective tree – river pollution

Incidence of water
Catch and income of fishing families borne diseases and
is stabilised or increased illnesses is reduced,
particularly among
poor families
Threat to the riverine ecosystem is
reduced, and fish stocks are increased

River water quality is improved

The quantity of solid waste No. of households and factories discharging Wastewater treatment
dumped into the river is wastewater directly into the river is reduced meets environmental
reduced standards

Polluters are Population more

New legal regulations are established
effectively controlled Increased % of households and
which are effective in preventing direct
businesses are connected to
aware of the danger discharge of wastewater
sewerage network

Environment Protection Agency is

effective and more responsive to a Public information/education
of waste
broad range of stakeholder programs
dumping established
Pollution management is given a
interests
  higher political priority Improved business planning within Local
Increased capital Government is established, including cost
investment recovery mechanisms
 3.6 Analysis of Strategies

During the process of stakeholder analysis, problem analysis and the identification of potential
project objectives, views on the potential merits or difficulties associated with addressing
problems in different ways will have been discussed. These issues and options then need to be
more fully analyzed to help determine the likely scope of the project before more detailed design
work is undertaken.
• The type of questions that need to be asked and answered at this stage might include:
• Should all the identified problems and/or objectives be tackled, or a selected few?
• What are the positive opportunities that can be built on (i.e from the SWOT analysis)?
• What is the combination of interventions that are most likely to bring about the desired results and
promote sustainability of benefits?
• How is local ownership of the project best supported, including development of the capacity of local
institutions?
• What are the likely capital and recurrent costs implications of different possible interventions, and what can
realistically be afforded?
• What is the most cost-effective option(s)?
• Which strategy will impact most positively on addressing the needs of the poor and other identified
vulnerable groups?
• How can potential negative environmental impacts best be mitigated or avoided?
• This analytical stage is in some respects the most difficult and
challenging, as it involves synthesising a significant amount of
information then making a complex judgment about the best
implementation strategy (or strategies) to pursue.
• In practice a number of arrangements often have to be made to
balance different stakeholder interests, political demands and
practical constraints such as the likely resource availability.
Nevertheless, the task is made easier if there is an agreed set of criteria against which to
assess the merits of different intervention options. Key criteria for strategy selection could
include:
• Expected contribution to key policy objectives, such as poverty reduction or economic integration
• Benefits to target groups – including women and men, young and old, disabled and able, etc
• Complementarity with other ongoing or planned programmes or projects
• Capital and operating cost implications, and local ability to meet recurrent costs
• Financial and economic cost-benefit
• Contribution to institutional capacity building
• Technical feasibility
• Environmental impact
Using these criteria will help to determine what should/can be included within the scope
of the project, and what should/cannot be included.
The selected strategy will then be used to help formulate the first column of the Logical
Framework, particularly in helping to identify the project Overall Objective, Purpose and
potential Results.