Glossary of Terms
Chapter 4: Methodology
4.2 Case study selection
115 4.1.4 Context requirements
Using case study information that is already available by drawing on the information reviewed in terms of urban water management in small towns in the Pacific Island Countries, it has been identified that there is a need for a framework that:
• Can deal with situations of a high level of complexity such as those that relate to socio- technical interactions and systems trade-offs;
• Allows a combination of social, economic and ecological perspectives to be embedded in governance;
• Is suitable for situations of high stakes and considerable uncertainty;
• Has the potential to unlock social dilemmas when appropriate;
• Can support the evolution of appropriate institutions and institutional memory;
• Is sensitive to the local context, culture and environment, in particular in relation to new technologies; and
• Is feasible in contexts of modest resources; in terms of skilled staff, finances or facilities.
116 Misunderstanding 1: General, theoretical (context-independent) knowledge is more valuable than concrete, practical (context-dependent) knowledge;
Misunderstanding 2: One cannot generalise on the basis of an individual case; therefore, the case study cannot contribute to scientific development;
Misunderstanding 3: The case study is most useful for generating hypotheses; that is, in the first stage of a total research process, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building;
Misunderstanding 4: The case study contains a bias toward verification, that is, a tendency to confirm the researcher’s preconceived notions; and
Misunderstanding 5: It is often difficult to summarise and develop general propositions and theories on the basis of specific case studies (Flyvbjerg 2006: 221).
Along with Flyvbjerg, these misunderstandings are refuted and, instead the following stance on the use of case study research is taken:
Statement 1: Predictive theories and universals cannot be found in the study of human affairs. Concrete, context-dependent knowledge is, therefore, more valuable than the vain search for predictive theories and universals;
Statement 2: One can often generalise on the basis of a single case, and the case study may be central to scientific development via generalisation as supplement or alternative to other methods. But formal generalisation is overvalued as a source of scientific development, whereas ‘the force of example’ is underestimated;
Statement 3: The case study is useful for both generating and testing of hypotheses but is not limited to these research activities alone;
Statement 4: The case study contains no greater bias toward verification of the researcher’s preconceived notions than other methods of inquiry. On the contrary,
117 experience indicates that the case study contains a greater bias toward falsification of preconceived notions than toward verification;
Statement 5: It is correct that summarising case studies is often difficult, especially as concerns case process. It is less correct as regards case outcomes. The problems in summarising case studies, however, are due more often to the properties of the reality studied than to the case study as a research method. Often it is not desirable to summarise and generalise case studies. Good studies should be read as narratives in their entirety (Flyvbjerg 2006: 224-241).
Therefore, in accordance with principles set up by Flyvbjerg (2006) the principle which has been chosen is to select a case study location in order to maximise the utility of information from a single case study. Choosing to focus on a single but extreme case study helps is thought to reveal more information that can be used to provide explanations to the difficulties of small towns in PICs, because they activate more of the systems (mechanisms, issues and actors) in the studied context (Yin 2004). This is particularly valid in situations, as in this study, where there already exists some kind of “consensus theory” about the issues of small towns, but lacking scientific explanation or evidence for that theory (Yin 2005).
In our case this means to choose a location with a maximum level of difficulty from a management perspective; meaning that a post-normal approach is warranted due to high stakes and uncertainty, and hopefully meaning that stakeholders will be motivated to deal with their problems. Also, choosing a maximum difficulty location should mean that any proposed management framework will be designed for coping with as many difficult conditions and challenges as possible.
Therefore, the criteria for selecting a case study site are:
• The town needs to be in the population range for small towns, i.e. between 10,000 and up to 75,000; but a population below 50,000 is preferable;
118
• There needs to be a considerable need for change; indicated by the level of poverty and environmental vulnerability at the location;
• It needs to have a high degree of socio-cultural complexity;
• There needs to be availability of data, and existing studies; and
• There needs to be opportunities to make connections and meet with key stakeholders.
Criterion number 1 is used to identify contenders, while the following criteria are used to narrow down the list of contenders.
Criterion 1: In terms of towns in the Pacific Islands within the appropriate population range,
there are 8 contenders (see Table 2-7), namely: Nuku Alofa, Tonga; Nadi, Fiji; South Tarawa, Kiribati; Apia, Samoa; Port Vila, Vanuatu; Lautoka, Fiji; Honiara, Solomon Islands; or Guam, Territory of Guam.
Criterion 2: In terms of the limitation on resources, Kiribati has the highest proportion of the
population in poverty (see Table 2-10) with a large number of slum dwellers. There are also reports on conflicts around water, groundwater resource depletion and serious environmental pollution. For information on this see chapter 2.
Criterion 3: In terms of socio-cultural context, South Tarawa in Kiribati has been the topic of a
number of studies all indicating a high level of socio-cultural complexity and conflict. There is also an interesting dichotomy between existing bureaucracies and traditional village practices.
Criteria 4 and 5: Perhaps due to its lack of resources and high levels of complexity, South
Tarawa has also been the subject of a large number of studies; including studies and reports explicitly focusing on the urban water sector.
In terms of opportunities to make connections and meet with key stakeholders, there are opportunities to build on existing and robust links with local stakeholders already established by senior researchers at the Australian National University.
119 Kiribati has been the target of a number of aid projects (in particular the SAPHE and KAP 2 projects), administered by the Asian Development Bank and the Australian government’s aid organisation AusAID among others. Taken all together, there should be considerable opportunity to gain access to stakeholders, data and reports.