ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846

Lokniti TeamSubscribe to Lokniti Team

National Election Study 2009: A Methodological Note

National election Study 2009: A methodological Note Lokniti Team We give our special thanks to the over 1,800 investigators whose commitment and skills made such a study possible and the thousands of respondents who spared their valuable time for the interview. Most of the scholars involved in this work are affiliated with colleges, universities and research institutes in different parts of the country. These institutions not only allowed the scholars to work on this project but in many cases, also allowed access to infrastructures of the respective institutions. We gratefully acknowledge the financial support received from UGC, ICSSR, The Hindu and CNN-IBN. The authors of these papers deserve thanks for their cooperation and patience with the publication delays. the last decade, provided a forum for the Lokniti network to take its findings to a wider audience. The persistence, patience and the work put in by the editorial team at the EPW is sincerely acknowledged. The Data Unit at CSDS has been very efficient and cooperative during all these weeks of the survey work and data analysis. Finally, Vanita Leah Falcao and Rahul Verma at the Lokniti office in Delhi were of great help in the coordination of this special issue. Special thanks to them.

National Election Study 2004

The essay introduces the National Election Study 2004 to readers of the set of papers published here which draw heavily on the findings of the study. It presents the basic methodological details so that the quality and limitations of the data can be assessed. The paper also traces the evolution of the tradition of the NES in India and discusses some of its current dilemmas, so as to invite a healthy debate on value and limitations of survey research. To this end, after marking the continuities and changes in a four decade-old tradition and noting the distinctive attributes of the NES 2004, the essay presents the sample frame, the sampling technique and the profile of the sample. It concludes by placing NES 2004 in a comparative perspective and raising some larger questions.
Back to Top