# LICCI App Issues

**- Make sure you are on the latest version!**
**- Add a category to your comments**

:::success
**Versions** :arrow_right:
`/appbeta` v0.6.20c (latest)
`/app` v0.6.17
:::

:::info
:pushpin: **category of comments**

- :bug:bug (something is broken. please describe how to get there, so I can replicate it)
- :page_facing_up: protocol / formulation (I follow the protocol, the protocol is weird)
- :page_facing_up: app following prot. (app does not follow the protocol)
- :exclamation: high priority
- :gift: feature wish (would be nice)
- :baby: training (I probably dont know how the app works, added by ramin)
- :rainbow: UI/UX and lables/descriptions
- :sailboat: Coming in the next version (like for opentek)
- :thought_balloon: Needs discussion
- :+1: implemented in the actual version (/appbeta) PLEASE CHECK!
- :question: unclear: needs discussion
:::

## v 0.6.20e/f

- crop diversity and fishery protocol (see below)
- added new crop list

## v 0.6.20d

### Crop diversity

**Crop diversity data:**

- [ ] A: Filling in “farmers varieties” and the “crop characteristics for climatic adaptation” in the “List of crop trends” should not be mandatory :sailboat:

- [ ] A: Not yet consistently using the term "farmers varieties" instead of "varieties/landraces"
V: The one to change is in the variety list, for the title "Origin of the landrace/variety". In the descriptions its not a problem, it can be keeped like that.
R: changed "Origin of the landrace/variety" to "Origin of the farmers varieties" :sailboat:

- [ ] -> survey / Crop trends / Farmers' varieties (for the main staple)
filter out when there is no variety name :sailboat:

- [ ] A: In "list of farmers varieties for the main staple": sometimes there might not be a "main staple" but in plural "main stapIes", like in the case of the Bassari. So I would put it in plural and give the option to add varieties for more than one crop
R: I dont understand: "give the option to add varieties for more than one crop"
R: and do you want "List of farmers' varieties for the main staple" renamed to "List of farmers' varieties for the main staples" :question: :+1:

**Field type / cropping system**

- [ ] "Field type / cropping system" / Main crop cultivated:
V: The main "big" issue I found is for the Village crop diversity data, Field types, Main crop cultivated: the list of crop appear but we cannot select the crop (it is not added to the list of crop in this field type).
R: what is "list of crop in this field type"? :question:
- A: Check also if in "field type / cropping system --> main crop cultivated", the crops that appear on the list is what you want (for me this is OK! but just to be sure that it's linked to the right list according to you)
V: See also the issue I mentioned above (the list of crop appear but we cannot select the crop, it is not added to the list of crop in this field type).Then its OK that people choose from this shortlist of crop. :question:
-> add to description: "Select a crop species from the previous created species list. If you want to add another species, go back to list of species and add it there!" **TODO** :sailboat:

- [ ] A: In "field type / cropping system" in "type", I would give the option to select "other" and freely fill up the name :sailboat:

**Crop diversity survey**

- [ ] V: the main title of the p.1 of the Crop Diversity Survey is "interviewees information", should be changed to "Farm and interviewees description"
R: I changed the title of the page :sailboat:

- [ ] V: the part for the "Cultivated plots" is still not OK ...
1. people should be able to click on "add a plot"
2. then for each plot (to which a number is automatically attributed by the app), the should be able to select:
i. to which field type it belongs, by selecting from the list, but leaving also the opportunity to add 'other' field types they could describe in a free textbox
ii. if it is irrigated
iii. to list the main species in this plot.
**R: mostly :sailboat: but check again, main species not 100% clear. now just selection from the species list.**
-> Cultivated plots, limit the species list to 10 :sailboat:

- [ ] V: P.2 "Crop Trend"

- It is very strange: it propose already a list of trends: "crop trends 1", "Crop trends 2", "Crop trends 3". AND no possibility to add a new trend ...Why ?
**R** it uses the length of the crop trends list of the village :question:
:sailboat:
todo: -> filter out variety empty :sailboat:

- [ ] - Change the description of "crop trends" : replace "changes in landraces or varieties" by "changes in farmers' varieties"
:sailboat:

- in the "Farmers' varieties (for the main staple)" part, it is strange: the list proposed includes the varieties I entered in the Village Data, but also choices (1), (2), (3) ... I don't know what it is.
**R:** I dont know what you mean with (1), (2), (3), send me your json file please :) :question: :sailboat: not an issue if we filter

- Change the description of the "Seed Source" as following: " If this particular crop species or variety is new, what kind of sources farmers used to get planting material?"
:sailboat:

- [ ] V: - P.3 "climate change impacts and adaptation"

- The drivers are missing for: productivity, food quality, Food self-sufficiency, seed self-sufficiency, income. People should be able to add several drivers, Licci or not, for each.

**R:** so you wnat the same 2 aspects (lists) that you have for any crop trend like on page 1? Also when there is no change? :question:
-> OK, coming soon :sailboat:

### Fishery systems

**Fishery system**

- [x] S: 1- Before Species list, please add a "Percentage of fishers in this village", and a space for them to write the percentage. :question:
**Ra:** maybe a description?
**S:** description: From the total people living in this village how many engage in fishing or gathering of aquatic organisms regularly?

**Species**
- [x] S: 2- In species list, in abundance, could you change the first option to: "one of the most abundant species", and add another option between "common" and "rare species" --> "somewhat common" :sailboat:

**Fishing ground**

- [x] S: 3- In Fishing grounds- Management regime, could you update the description to: "Please specify the type of jurisdictional area the ground is located in (e.g. customary/government owned, EEZ, international waters, etc.), if there are any rules and regulations in place, what are those rules, how long have they been in place, who implemented them and who is in charge of enforcing them, and anything else that might be relevant here." :sailboat:

- [x] S: 4- In the pebble game title, please add (minimum of 20 participants) :question:
**Ra:** que? you want people to make at least 20 pebble games. We should rather write that in the description and set it as a minmum of the list (so the button will be green as long as it is below 20)
**S:** I think we can leave this out. Was thinking it might be good to remind them to do at least 20 participants for each type of game but it is in the Manual so should be ok.

- [x] S: 5- In the pebble game- participant characteristics: please change "Years living here" for "Years living in this village" :sailboat:

- [x] S: 6- Also in the pebble games section- The catch composition pebble games for current and past are on the same page while the ones on diet composition are in separated pages. Could you do them both in separated pages? Also please put the pebble games for "current" before the "past". :sailboat:

## v 0.6.20c

- fixed a bug of length referenced lists inside other length referenced lists (Ind Survey: Perceived impacts: previously collected direction if change)
- Protocol changes:
- licci: affected speicies description, driver description
- ind survey: page 7, When the person has NOT noticed the change, the reset is not visible
- crop diversity in the making

## v 0.6.20b /appbeta

Site: link to converter added
LICCI: Description in red on the drivers: this is not for the licci!
Adaptations: several fixes in names and descriptions
Obs&LICCI & Adaptations. next to "save & back" there is now a button "Save and new"

**PB:DONE, YOU CAN CHECK NOW AND WE CAN MEET TO CLARIFY IF NEEDED**

### Individual survey issues :exclamation::+1:
-[ ]:page_facing_up::rainbow:André:Individual Survey, page 7 (perceived impacts). When the person has NOT noticed the change, then the further options (direction of change, licci affecting HH, etc) should not be available (currently they are, which is strange because the partner can add info on ´how a given licci affects you´ for a licci that is not even noticed by the interviewee).
:+1: v 0.6.20c

### Driver issue :exclamation: :+1:
- [ ]:rainbow:PB: :Driver description: New proposal: "What drove/caused the observation. Type to search in the field, or press the tree icon to navigate trough the classification tree. **Note that some times the driver can be left blank (i.e., the cause for less rain might be unknown or just "climate change" in general).** :+1:

- [ ]:rainbow:PB:Driver desciprion: The sentece you added "This is not the variable for the actual LICCI that describes the observation." is not very clear to me... Delete or substitute for **"This LICCI tree is not to classify the observation, it's to classify the driver"** In red :+1:

gonna be like:

### Affected species issue :+1:
- [ ]:rainbow:PB: simple solution:change description to **"If the LICCI is related to the biological or human systems (e.g., changes in crop productivity or changes in plant mortality), detail (if possible) which species (e.g., blueberries, salmon, maize) are affected. Only include if the interviewee mentions a specific species affected by that LICCI."**:exclamation::+1:

- [ ]:rainbow: PB: perfect solution: disable the Affected species part if they select a LICCI from climate or physical sytems. In other words, if LICCI=biological or LICC=human then activate Affected species. Maybe not needed if future release comes after most 1st cP data is handed in. :gift:

- [ ]:page_facing_up::rainbow: :thought_balloon: Sara has a proposal that would help with LICCI tree simplification. People would only select wild marine or freshwater species in the tree, and then specify more in affected species:life form. She had given me a list for new choices of life form specific to marine and freshwater systems... Not sure if we should do these changes cause I think they are quite complex no?

### Livestock species list issue :thought_balloon:

- [ ]:rainbow:PB: The list in "HH Survey:Cultivations and livestock: livestock types and quantities" is linked to the list in "Site card:livestock species" because **the price they give in the site list, will be multiplied by the number of animals they give in the HH survey**.
- Issue: many partners already filled in the site cards with open text ("vaca", "cow", "oskjr" etc.)
- Solution 1: Solve it in data analysis phase
- Solution 2: Bring list from site to HH survey, even if they type it wrong, it can serve as a link ("oskjr" costs 2000, and they have 3 "oskjr" so they have 6000) :exclamation:
- Ideal solution: having some pre-defined options in "site card: livestock species" list (instead of an open text box we have right now), to avoid later having to clean misspelled species. At least in site we should have the fancy pre-selected options instead of "item name" so that they are written correctly and in the same way no. :gift:
- **ra** Misspelling are relatively easy to fix (levenshtein distance on word pairs) **pb** uuu fancyy well I trust you with the best solution to this that will prevent future headake without messing up the whole app

all livestock on the sit (so far)
indeed a bit messy if you just look at cow/cattles
anyway: proposal, leave site open, reference them from the HH so that at least each submission is consistent in itself.

### Crop diversity issues

https://hackmd.io/N70WAPX9SW6x-q7Kh3LNRw

#### General issues

- [ ] :page_facing_up: :exclamation: Crop diversity data from SSI/FGD (now called "Crop diversity system") is at the village level (not site level). This data set has 4 lists: *Species list*, *Variety list*, *Cropping System list* (Field Type), and *Crop Trends list*. The Cropping System (old Field types) could be done once at site and then linked to village (its like that in v.0.6.20b), but the problem is that cropping system is linked to species list. **Solution: Bring all lists to Village - Crop diversity data (before survey, page 6).** Partners will have to repeat some info from Croping system list that is similar in all villages, but its the easiest way to solve the issue and they can just copy-paste the info because its text.

- [ ] :page_facing_up: :exclamation: Following the above, take out the "Crop diversity system" selection feature from Village card (page 1)

- [ ] :rainbow::exclamation: Change wording in whole Crop section (village and HH survey): change "Landraces" by "Farmers' varieties"

- [ ] :rainbow: :gift: Bring all descriptions from most recent output table (Vannesse email 03/06/20)

#### Village - Crop diversity data (species list, farmer variety list, cropping systems list and crop trends list)

- [x] :rainbow::exclamation: General: Title of section "Crop Diversity system" is wrong, it should be "Crop diversity data". Changing it will also help to avoid confusion with "Cropping system"
**ra**: thats sounds and looks a bit strange but ok... :sailboat:

- [x] :rainbow::exclamation: Crop diversity data section: Add description: «Data on crop diversity from SSI and/or FGD at the village level» :sailboat:

- [x] :rainbow::exclamation: Crop diversity data section: remove "System name" and "Notes" :sailboat:

- [x] :rainbow::gift:Species list: Add a description: « What are the different crop species cultivated in the village ? (List them here) » :sailboat:

- [x] :rainbow::exclamation:Landraces or varieties of the main staple: Change the name to "List of farmers' varieties for the main staple" :sailboat:

- [x] :rainbow::gift:List of farmers' varieties for the main staple: add description: « What are the different farmers' varieties of the main staple cultivated in the village ? (List them here) » :sailboat:

- [x] :rainbow::exclamation:Cropping System: Change the name to «Field types / cropping system» :sailboat:

- [x] :rainbow::gift:Field types / cropping system: Add a description: « What are the different types of cropping systems/fields in the village ? (List them here)» :sailboat:

- [x] :rainbow::gift: Field types / cropping system: Change + box lable: from "Add field type" to "Add cropping system/field"? :sailboat:

- [x] :page_facing_up::gift:Field types / cropping system: Other plants: rename to "Non-crop plants" (for consistency with the crop div protocol) :sailboat:

- [x] :page_facing_up::exclamation: Crop trends: LICCI driver: It should be possible to add several drivers for the same crop trend. :sailboat:

- [x] :page_facing_up::exclamation:Crop trends: Add a feature after "Species" called "Farmers' varieties" to allow the possibility to enter trends for the varieties (not only for species).You can implement it as it is in the survey part. :question:

- [x] :page_facing_up::gift: Crop trends: Add a new feature "Since when". Description: "Since when has this trend happened?" Select: 0-15 years ago, 15-30 years ago, +30 years ago, I don't know. :sailboat:

- [ ] :page_facing_up::gift:Crop trends and Farmers' varieties: Review the "Species" and "Main staple species" list as some Latin names are not the most frequently used ones.Vanesse will review and send to Ramin

- [ ] Add a description for crop trends: "What are the crop trends observed by farmers since they started getting involved in decision making concerning crop choice in the household ?"

- [ ] Add a description to Farmers' varieties in crop trends : "What is the name of the farmers'varieties that experimented a change ? Enter manually the local name.Pay attention to be consistent in spelling farmers' varieties"
#### Linking village Crop diversity data to household crop survey

- [ ] :page_facing_up::gift: Link species list, farmer varieties list and crop trends list from village (ssi/fgd) to crop trends in household crop survey (page 2).
**ra** only HHsurv.Field types is linked to data!

- [x] Allow "other" option for new species and varieties. :question:
**ra** which aspect?

#### Household crop diversity survey

- [ ]:rainbow::exclamation: Now crop diversity survey comes after individual survey, it looks like its somehow related, when its not. Crop diversity survey protocol is done at household level. Also in the navigation barr (bottom page) of household survey you have to click "indivudal survey" to get to the crop diversity survey, which is confusing. Place **"Crop diversity survey" in page 12, and then in page 13 you can have the individual surveys.**
**ra** sorry not possible atm to have it on its own page. because all pages have the condition: household agreed: yes, and there can only be one condition per page. so, there would be an empty page if the partner did not opt into crop collection. if the condition would be site:participate in crop data collection, that page would be visible if the hh did not agree.
well maybe I add teh functionality that something can 2 conditions... :/ :exclamation:

But who was confused about it. Maybe we can rename the page, but not sure whats a good name, considering that not everyone does these surveys.

- [ ] :page_facing_up::exclamation: Page 4: CC impacts: add drivers to every aspect (LICCI and non-LICCI drivers). Follow UI like crop trends (page 2 of survey) :question:

- [x] :page_facing_up::exclamation: Page 4: CC Impacts: Remove the last question on diversification insurance and the diversification insurance details :sailboat:

- [x] :page_facing_up::rainbow::exclamation: Page 1: Field types: This should be a list of cultivated plots, not a list of cropping systems. Its not fully linked to Village data. Title: Farm’s plots description. Description: List the different fields/plots cultivated by the household and describe them. Aspects are: plot id, field type (from village), irrigation, species list (from village and allow "other"). :question:

- [x] :page_facing_up::rainbow::exclamation:Page 2: Crop trends: Landrace or variety (for the main staple): should be a predefined list based on the village data, but leave the opportunity to add new ones by typing ("other").

- [x] Change the description of Crop diversity survey:
"Interview of one or several household members about the crop diversity and its trends"
- [x] Change the description of "Landrace or variety (for the main staple)" in the trends p.2: "The local name of the landrace experimenting the change - only for the main staple. Pay attention to be consistent when spelling the variety name" (can put in red bold the last part of the sentence)
- [x] Change the name of "Landrace or variety (for the main staple)"in the trends p.2: "Farmers'variety (for the main staple)"
- [x] Change the description of "Landrace or variety (for the main staple)"in the trends p.2: "The local name of the farmer varieties experimenting the change - only for the main staple."
- [x] change the name of "Field types" p.1 to "cultivated plots" and add a description "List the plots cultivated by the household during the last cropping season"

#### Both survey and village data

- [x] :rainbow::exclamation:Village crop trends and survey page 4:Drivers: can be LICCI or non-LICCI. For the Non-LICCI, provide pre-defined categories and the possibility to describe more precisely the driver by typing if needed. Select from: 1: Changes in market and value chain, 2: changes in inputs availability and access, 3: changes in biophysical conditions, 4: Changes in food habits, 5: Societal changes, 6: Other. :question: that is already the case for the crop trends on the crop div data. however there is a condition :sailboat: non-licci drivers is a list now. Same pattern in survey. :exclamation: is the condition "Perceived as climate-related" still ok?

- [ ] :page_facing_up::exclamation:Village crop trends and survey page 4: New features "Seed source" and "seed origin": if people select the trend « adoption/increase in abundance » , then they should be able to select where seeds were sourced.Description and options are in new protocol page 16.
:question:

## v 0.6.20a /appbeta

- moved the fishery system into the village
- going back to parent, scrolls again to the entrylist (actually a bit to far up)

PB:ohh niceee :)

### General

- [ ]:gift: DGA: Would be nice if you could ad a link to the converter because some people can have problems to find the converter tool : https://www1.oanda.com/currency/converter/ :+1:

### Observations and LICCI - Information from SSI

- [ ]:rainbow: DGA: the "Drivers" description says: "What drove/caused the ***LICCI***. Type and search in the field, or....." but it should say: "What drove/cause the OBSERVATION...." because it is not a LICCI yet, needs to be validated. :+1:
-
- [ ]:rainbow: DGA: **Drivers after observation :** I agree with Petra, it can be confusing, but I think mainly for observations from the climatic system.( e.g. Observation: There are less pastures--> Driver: changes in mean rainfall. // Obs: There are less rainy days/ days are hotter--> Driver: Climate change?) can we add an option on the drivers section to select directly climate change? PB: Yes you are right, its mostly for climatic observations. I think this issue we can also solve later with data cleaning (i.e., if we have same driver and LICCI in a set of data we can assume that its the LICCI and the driver is something else?). In any case, I would not give the option "climate change" as driver because they will tend to click on that allways. Maybe this can be solved with the description (see above my proposal).

### Observations and LICCI - Information from FGD

- [ ]:rainbow: DGA: **Affected spp:** To avoid partners will enter affected spp in all the LICCI, I would prefer the solution of changing the description of the label to make it clearer. (Petra´s proposal) "If the LICCI is related to the biological or human systems..."

## v 0.6.20 /appbeta

SEE BELOW FOR the /app VERSION
PB: Really nice Ramin, thanks a lot :)

### GENERAL
- [ ]:rainbow: PB:Take out 1CP setting :+1:

### SITE

#### Calendar
- [ ]:gift::rainbow: PB:To be consistent with timeline, shouldn't there be a "Title" for calendar?
**ra** I also regret now that we didnt put it,... we said it doesnt need one
- OK it was a wish , not so important

#### SSI/FGD
- [ ]:rainbow:**Affected species**: PB: partners are were confused and add species for all LICCIs. Changes in rain has affects on some species, but this is not the aim of this part of the protocol right? Now it says "If the LICCI affects specific species detail them here. Can be multiple." Then, if a partner finds a climatic LICCI like "Changes in precipitation", which obviously affects a lot of species because without water they die, he/she will name them in that LICCI-Affected species section, but in reality they should only name them when the LICCI is bio-related ("changes in plant mortality" in this case), which driver would be "changes in precipitation". **Proposed solution**: change description lable to "If the LICCI is related to the biological or human systems (e.g., changes in crop productivity or changes in plant mortality), detail (if possible) which species (e.g., blueberries, salmon, maize) are affected". **Another solution** would be to automatically disable the Affected species part if they select a LICCI from climate or physical sytems. **Confirm with Xiao/Christoph.**

- [ ]:rainbow: **LICCI tree in driver**: PB: Partners are confused and code LICCI in drivers (e.g. observation:it rains less, driver: "changes in rainfall", its not a driver, its the LICCI itself no?). I think this is because of a UX issue, having the LICCI tree in the second page is confusing, a more logical flow would be: 1. observation (text), 2. LICCI and affected species, 3. Perceived as climate-related and driver, 4. Number of interviewees mentioned and FGD agreement, 5. Notes. However, I see we did it to de-activate LICCI and FGD for those not-climate realted, so maybe it's just a metter of better training the partners... Maybe an alternative **"simple" solution** would be to change lable in driver, instead of "driven by LICCI" I would say "driven by climate change". Or even better if you implement like with crop trends: Perceived as climate-related - If cliamte related: LICCI driver, - if not climate related: other driver

**ra**: ok, ok. easy easy. 1st lets prevent disruptive changes... which means changing an aspect-type. if we do that, I would in some cases need to write a FIX, and implement it into the app, so that it fixes all existing entries. a bit risky. I like the just one page idea, and maybe partners get it easier that a driver is not the licci, when they see the licci below. anyway, when they see the licci below, dont they scratch their head when they already put it as a driver? We should also add it into the description of the driver. we can even mark some part of the description in red now!

- [ ]:gift::rainbow: PB: If we get this flow right, I think it could be used for OpenTEK local observation (taking out the last part of # interviewees and FGD agreement)

#### Adaptations
- [ ]:rainbow: PB: Following up with previous issue of LICCI UX, I like better LACCI UI, with all in one page, I know we did it to differentiate those observations that go to FGD but maybe we can find some other solution... Or just do better training, I don't know...

- [ ] :gift: AS: Observation / adaptation entries: For both observation and adaptation entries: At the bottom add a third buttom "Safe and next entry" so that you can switch to the next entry of LICCI / LACCI without going back to the site :+1:
- [ ] :page_facing_up: AS: Adaptation entry: little spelling (actually my fault): Add an 's' to observation (for the plural) in the two sentences:'Observation/perceived impacts that drive adaptation/coping' and 'To which observation/perceived impacts do households adapt to/cope with' :+1: ra: Changed the label (not the 'name', so the data will still have the old name). Also the description
- [ ] :page_facing_up: AS: Adaptation entry: Change 'Other LACCIS' into 'Additional adaptation/coping categories' :+1: ra: Changed the label (not the 'name', so the data will still have the old name)
- [ ] :page_facing_up: AS: Adaptation entry: Change 'If more LACCIs could describe the method list them here' into 'If the adaptation/coping fits into several adaptation/coping categories, add them here'. :+1: ra: but maybe 'add the additional ones here', no se

#### Crop Diversity
- [ ]:page_facing_up: PB: Species list, landrace list and crop trends list should go to Village. But maybe leave cropping systems list. **Confirm with Anna P./Vanesse**

#### Fisheries
- [ ]:page_facing_up: PB: Fisheries lists go in Village. Just leave the setting button in Site :+1:

#### Survey preparation

- [ ]:gift::rainbow:Can we make that if they already selected one LICCI/LACCI for surveys it desapears from the options they can select for the next LICCI/LACCI? They can put in the same LICCI/LACCI twice by mistake now and it wouldn't show as an error.. :+1:
**ra:** surprisingly that was smooth to implement. coming soon

### VILLAGE

- [ ]:page_facing_up: PB: Add fisheries lists (talk to Sara) :+1:

- [ ]:page_facing_up: PB: Add crop lists (talk to Anna P.)

### HOUSHOLD SURVEY

- [ ]:gift::rainbow:Cultivations and livestock: plot size: PB: Plot sizes does not look like a list and this is a bit confusing, why is this? can we have it as collapsing list like the others even if only one aspect needed?
- **ra:** yaeh, when has only one aspect (not a composite), its a simple list without collapsing, in order to make it clearer... :) so it isnt't? ... all values visble. all with once click removable..
- PB: I think it just looks odd because I'm used to the collapsing mode, but its fine, no need to break our heads with this

- [ ]:gift::rainbow:Cultivations and livestock: livestock types and quantities: PB: should we have the same livestock options here than in "site:livestock species list"? Or at least in site we should have the fancy pre-selected options instead of "item name" so that they are written correctly and in the same way no?
- **ra:** you mean you want to reference the livestook from the site? that would be a bit disruptive to the existing data (but not impossible :D ), but its a protocol change, so I dont have any opinion on that :)
- Not so much about referencing, but more about having some pre-defined options in livestock species list in site, to avoid later having to clean misspelled species. These two list will be connected when we analyze teh data, since the prixe they give in the site list, will be multiplied by the number of animals they give in the survey. But that can be done only if we can match them no?If they have the same name.

- [ ]:page_facing_up::rainbow: Crop survey is at houshold level.I would put it in page 12, and then in page 13 you can have the individual surveys **Check with Anna P/Vanesse**
- ra: why?
- PB:Cause now its under individual survey, and it looks like its somehow related, when its not. Also in the navigation of houshold survey you have to click "indivudal siurvey" to get to the crop survey, which is confusing.

### INDIVIDUAL SURVEY

Alle is gut!! Bug is gone :)
**ra:** yippi.

------------

## v 0.6.17 (/app version)
:bug: (entry/mode=edit) when you delete a name of a country you wrote it doesn't delete
*ra* I dont see that
:gift: (domain/licci) the information of site and inside site seem different, we can put different color, or the first one bigger to make understand that the other belongs to the first one
what?
:baby:(domain/licci) make more clear the option of site and article review
- article review is gone