THE THEORY OF CO-MANAGEMENT AND ITS APPLICATION IN SOUTH AFRICA’S PFM POLICY
7.4. DATA COLLECTION
7.4.1. Primary sources
Two phases of interviewing were initially undertaken for the Masters research, namely a pilot study (administering the first interview schedule) and the second phase of interviewing which involved the administration of the second interview schedule. Thereafter a third phase of interviewing was conducted for the PhD. In all cases a purposive sampling technique was applied. This technique enabled the volume of potential interviewees to be reduced and the most appropriate case study area to be selected.
a. Interviews
The interviewing technique used was the administration of a one-on-one semi-structured, open-ended interview schedule. This was applied in all three phases of the interviewing process, namely the pilot and the two succeeding detailed interview phases. Tables 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3 in Section 7.5 on the sampling approach adopted for the study show the respondents that were interviewed for each phase of interviewing. An open-ended question refers to the fact that the interviewee’s responses are “not constrained to categories provided by the interviewer;
actors can give whatever answer they wish” (Kitchin and Tate, 2000:213). The interviews are semi-structured in the sense that although the interviewer has control over the conversation and all interviewees are asked the same basic questions, there is greater flexibility in the questioning. The ordering of questions can differ across interviews and some questions may be left out if they are deemed inappropriate to the interviewee (Robinson, 1998; Kitchin and Tate, 2000). Respondents were thus allowed greater scope for “elaboration and general discussion rather than just being presented with a set of fixed questions or questions demanding only fixed responses” (Robinson, 1998:413). This form of interviewing was adopted for the research because it provided respondents with an opportunity to respond in whatever manner they wished to without feeling that they were being directed to respond in a particular way. This kind of response would enable the researcher to identify the storylines, policy vocabularies and epistemic notions that respondents use and in so doing deconstruct the PFM policy discourse as it applies to the case study area.
In the constructivist paradigm, interviews are not regarded as a means to an end, in other words, the means to obtaining the truth about something, or even facts and feelings. Rather an interview is an “arena in which particular linguistic patterns (typical phrases, metaphors,
arguments, and stories) can come to the fore” (Terre Blanche and Durrheim, 1999:153). The meanings created in an interview are co-constructed between the interviewer and the interviewee and it is acknowledged that the interviewer is involved in the construction of the reality being presented.
Semi-structured, open-ended interviews were conducted in the three phases of interviewing.
Once respondents had been interviewed, the tapes from the interviews were transcribed and notes of comments made prior to and after taping were added. All the files of the interviews were then copied and pasted onto one file in Microsoft Word. This was done to make it easier to conduct key word searches through the material.
The first phase comprised exploratory research, which was aimed at ascertaining the viability and the scope of project, establishing contacts with key people involved in PFM and getting a sense of the issues in the area. Information was gathered through conducting semi-structured open-ended interviews with stakeholders involved in the PFM process in Knysna. These interviews were informal in style and approach and therefore a comprehensive schedule of questions was not compiled. A few general questions were devised instead to direct the flow of the conversation30. This research, conducted in the last week of March 2003, was useful for shaping the direction that the research was to take, and also for developing questions for the second phase of interviewing.
The second phase of interviews was designed to be more probing and in-depth in nature in order to draw out the discourses and elements of the discourses. This was achieved by asking a range of specific questions about the PFM implementation process as it applied to the southern Cape case study, the respondent’s role in PFM and their understanding of the policy31. Some questions were closed-ended in the sense that they required yes/no answers. For example, questions like ‘is there a need for PFM in the Southern Cape?’ or ‘is there an alternative option to PFM?’ but these were followed by requests for explanations or justifications. As the interviews were recorded, the style of the interviews was more formal than the exploratory phase and a schedule of questions was prepared to ensure a smooth flow of questioning. These questions provided the stimulus for respondents to express their views and for discussion to be
30 See Appendix One.
31 See Appendix Two.
generated, and in many cases questions were omitted from and added to the interview depending on the progress of the interview.
This phase was conducted in October 2003 after the exploratory research and an extensive literature review had been conducted. Interviews were recorded, using a tape recorder, to capture discursive elements and typically lasted about 45 minutes.
In addition to obtaining factual information about PFM and its implementation in Knysna, questions were designed with the intention of drawing out discursive elements. Hajer’s (2003) methodological framework for discourse analysis includes the following discursive elements:
storylines around which coalitions are formed, dominant myths and metaphors, epistemic notions and policy vocabularies which are defined in Section 7.6. It was also hoped that the actors would give an indication of how they position themselves in relation to others and how others position them. It should be noted that although these elements may have been drawn out from the exploratory research, and identified in the interview, it was not the explicit focus of the first phase of interviewing.
Upgrading the research from a Masters to a PhD required additional empirical, primary data to be collected relating to the PFM implementation process at the project level in the southern Cape. A third interview schedule was compiled and the interviews conducted in October 2005 (see Table 7.3). A total of nine people were interviewed in this third phase. The focus of the interviews and fieldwork concerned two case studies of projects that were underway in the southern Cape, namely the harvesting of Seven Weeks Fern and the Millwood mining project in the Farleigh Forest Estate. This phase of data collection was undertaken via interviews with people who are involved in the projects directly, or who have been part of the Farleigh forum.
The purpose of these interviews was to understand how PFM policy is transpiring in reality and to investigate the influence, if any, that PFM discourse has on the intended outcomes of PFM policy initiatives.
The objectives of this third phase of interviewing were threefold; firstly, to ascertain and elicit substantive data about some of the actual issues that actors implementing PFM at the project level have to address.
A second objective was to confirm and support the results obtained through the Masters research. In this respect, this third phase could be conceptualised as a ‘ground truthing’
exercise. ‘Ground truthing’ is a term borrowed from the remote sensing literature. It refers to the act of physically going into the field to collect reference data that will enable the validity of satellite images to be verified and irregularities to be clarified, and therefore aid the analysis and interpretation of (remotely sensed) data (Lillesand and Kiefer, 1994). In the context of this research, ‘ground truthing’ refers to the third phase of interviewing, which sought to verify the preliminary findings from the data analysis that was conducted on the second interview phase data. It was anticipated that the discourses that emerged from the analysis of the data from the first and second interview phases would be reiterated in the interviews and would therefore confirm the research that has already been conducted.
The third objective was to investigate the existence of a relationship between the discourses that are identified and actual project implementation, thereby answering the question ‘does discourse matter?’ in the context of policy implementation. It was of interest to investigate whether some of the terms of environmental discourse already identified at a broader level are identifiable at a project level.
With these aims in mind, two DWAF staff members and two other respondents per project were identified for interviews. The format of the interview schedule for phase three was also open-ended, semi-structured and intensive, being focused at the project level as opposed to the broader PFM policy level. The sample of respondents was, as with the other phases of interviewing, also purposive; however, the focus of the questioning was aimed more specifically at two particular case studies of PFM projects that were reportedly unfolding in the region, namely: the Seven Weeks Fern Harvesting Project and the Millwood Mining Project at Farleigh Forest Estate32.
In order to maintain the confidentiality of the respondents interviewed in the second and third phase of interviewing, their names are excluded from the analysis chapter, and only their actor grouping provided. Where information was gained from individuals outside of an interview setting and where information was contextual or non-PFM related, this has been differentiated by referencing the source as personal communication (pers. comm.).
32 See Appendix Three.
Concerning the interviewing methods used for data collection, Kitchin and Tate (2000) refer to this format as an interview guide approach and have identified some of its shortcomings. They caution that this free form approach may result in certain issues being unintentionally left out.
In addition, data analysis may be more complicated as the variations in the ordering and wording of questions decrease the comparability of the data across interviewees. Despite these shortcomings, this technique was regarded as the most appropriate for the research.
b. Documentary sources
Primary data was also collected and reviewed in order to enhance the understanding of the contextual background within which this study is situated, particularly the social, economic, policy, institutional, forest management and biophysical context. In addition, documentary sources were also analysed in order to identify policy vocabularies. Data sources included census data, maps, newspaper articles, DWAF reports, books and various policy documents.
The researcher assisted with the editing of Lawes et al. (2004), The Use and Socio-Economic Value of Indigenous Forests and Woodland Resources in South Africa, which provided access to valuable information about the forestry context in South Africa. (Lawes et al. is of course a secondary rather than a primary source). The Statistics South Africa 2001 census data hosted on the Demarcation website (http://www.demarcation.org.za) provided a useful starting point for understanding the socio-economic context; this was manipulated into a more coherent and appropriate format for the contextual chapter. Owing to the case study area of the southern Cape straddling two provinces and including a number of local municipalities, the Eden District Municipality (which is a regional municipality) was deemed a suitable administrative boundary to use in order to reflect the contextual information.