Glossary of Terms
Chapter 4: Methodology
4.6 Interviews
Interviews have been judged as a critical tool in this study in order to collect qualitative and narrative information about the complex interactions between social, cultural and institutional dimensions of the current situation. A combination of unstructured and semi-structured interviews has been employed to collect information and elicit knowledge. Interviews are deemed to be flexible and targeted enough to allow the focus to emerge; but at the same time provide a deep understanding of complex issues. The interviews have been undertaken at different stages of the study (Figure 4-3):
• In discussions with experts during the initial stages of the study;
o To identify key concepts, discourses and themes;
o To test and socially validate ideas and reflections;
• During the first field trip, in order to
o Provide answers to questions raised in the prior reflections;
o Allow stakeholder validation of theories (answers) and frameworks. At this stage a number of conceptual frameworks had been developed;
o Increase individual understanding of local context;
o Get a better understanding of the AtollScape and AtollGame experiences, as this field trip was undertaken with Anne Dray of the Australian National University (Dray et al. 2006a; 2006b; 2007);
• During the second field trip, in order to:
o Provide answers to questions raised in the reflection stage;
o Allow stakeholder evaluation of theories (answers) and frameworks. At this stage a sector review had been undertaken;
o Increase individual understanding of the local context;
130 o Get a better understanding of the IHP Humid Tropics Programme Project and
other experiences, as this field trip was undertaken with a prolific contributor to the understanding of the Tarawa water supply, i.e. Professor Ian White of the Australian National University (White et al. 1999a; 1999b; 2008; 2005a; 2005b;
2003; 1999c; 2006a; 2006b; 2006c);
• During the third field trip, in order to:
o Provide answers to questions raised in the reflection stage;
o Allow social validation of ABM and a preliminary management framework;
o Identify factors and assessments for the BN models;
o Increase individual understanding of the local context.
Table A4.1 gives some of the names of those interviewed at various organisations. Usually, the process for getting interview access was to be introduced, or to introduce myself, to the head of a department or organisation, in order to set up interviews. Hence, there is a limitation both in terms of the number as well as the types of interviews carried out. Access was more straightforward in later trips. The number of interviewees in the various organisations varied from 1 (at the Office of the President) to 8 (at the Public Utility Board). With very few exceptions most of those from local organisations were I-Kiribati. The age range varied from a smaller number of young professionals in their 20s, but considerably more interviewees in their 40s and 50s. All of those from international organisations were not I-Kiribati. Approximately a quarter of those interviewed were female. The range of questions varied greatly and interviews were non-structured or sometimes semi-structured. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with the use of models, diagrams or photos to facilitate discussion and conversation.
The interviews have been a mix of unstructured interviews in the initial stages to allow topics and themes to emerge, followed by semi-structured and more targeted interviews, when issues have become clearer. The interviews have been influenced by some qualitative research tactics in the sense that:
131
• Interviews and discussions have been undertaken in as natural a setting and situation as possible. This also involves basic observation of discussions and note-taking;
• Efforts have been made to understand the local culture and context, and the representations of the system (mental models) that are applied by local stakeholders. This has involved both interactions with local culture, but also via reading autobiographic books about Tarawa such as that by Troost (2004), or the helpful notes on working in Kiribati culture by the Asian Development Bank (2004a);
• Adoption of a philosophy that the research process does not start with an explicit hypothesis, but that knowledge is discovered, as per ethnographer Genzuk (2003), and as such it is not appropriate for the researcher to strongly impose or steer questions, but rather to often use open language so as to let interview outcomes emerge.
It is also acknowledged that field research in this manner is a highly personal experience, in which outcomes depend strongly on the observer/researcher’s individual skill, discipline and perspective. My personal cultural background as a Swedish immigrant in Australia; an academic focus on Mathematics and Physics; a number of years of working in urban water management in Australia; combined with a strong interest for history and geography would be important factors for my interpretation of the information and knowledge elicited in interviews.
The thinking of grounded theory has been adopted in the sense that everything is considered to be data which can be used by the researcher to generate concepts, including emails, lectures, conversations, books etc. Therefore, the word interview is here a somewhat loose terms which also includes observation and reading.
No recording device was used in the study, so as to make interview participants to feel at ease and the reporting of interviews has been done by writing down notes within a day in most cases, but in some cases within three days of an interview. Summaries of these have been put into trip reports (Appendix 4). Generally, no formal structure of interviews has been used, but a number
132 of principles/procedures inspired by the Convergent Interviewing approach (Dick 2002a), as described in the chapter 4, have been followed:
• Interview participants have been chosen to provide maximum diversity;
• A note of agreements and disagreements have been kept which are used to challenge the interpretations made by participants;
• When appropriate, introduce general topic but avoid specific questions, allowing the participant to steer the discussion.
In terms of the pitfalls identified by Myers and Newman (2007), there has been an attempt to avoid ambiguous language, however it is acknowledged that:
• It has sometimes been difficult to gain entry into organisations and identifying the appropriate people;
• Interviews have often been under some time pressure given that many participants are generally busy, and that field study trips have been limited in time. Notably, due to these constraints, there has been no access to the Department of Finance; and
• Related to the lack of time is the issue of trust as this takes considerable time and effort to gain. This is a possible pitfall in this study.
Individuals that have been interviewed range from:
• Consultants/experts with extensive experience in the Pacific Island Countries in general to Tarawa in particular; to
• Representatives of the Government of Kiribati (GoK), the PUB, the OB and the WEU (see Figure 4-5); to
• Representatives of regional organisations and/or funding agencies such as the South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission, and the Australian government aid agency, AusAID; and the World Health Organisation.
133 Figure 4-5: Kiribati water sector organisational and responsibility diagram
Source: Government of Kiribati 2007
The major local stakeholders in the water sector in Kiribati, apart from the community, are described in Figure 4-5 where representatives from the MHMS (i.e. Ministry of Health), MPWU (i.e. Ministry of Works), MELAD (i.e. Ministry of Lands and Environment), MISA (i.e.
Ministry of Social Affairs) and OB (the Office of the President) have been interviewed. It is noted that the key gaps are in MFEP, the Ministry of Finance, as well as the Cabinet and Parliament. This lack of a representative sample is primarily due to limited access to this level, and the limited amount of time available.
The diagram in Figure 4-5 shows the organisational structure relating to the water management in South Tarawa. The diagram comes from a Government of Kiribati report published in 2007.These organisations are further described in chapter 6. The approach when attempting to socially validate any frameworks and models is to confront stakeholders with representations of such models. In the case of frameworks, such representations are flowcharts and diagrams
134 (represented using PowerPoint). In the case of ABMs, such representations are Unified Modelling Language diagrams, i.e. sequence diagrams and class diagrams. In the case of BNs, such representations are influence diagrams and tables of judgments. The process steps followed in interviews are:
1. Present the conceptual model representation using my own language;
2. Discuss how the framework or model would be used or operationalised; and finally 3. Invite comments and criticism; and
4. Take notes, and identify agreements or disagreements to use in further interviews.