Case studies

The chosen methodology of case study, together with its associated methods, allows for an in-depth study of a person or group. Baxter argues that case studies involves the analysis of various aspects of the life and history of the subject in order to seek patterns and causes of behaviour (Baxter et al. 2008). Baxter further argues that case studies can be:

- Explanatory – Used more for causal investigation (Fielding 2000). This approach aids the researcher to find explanations on the reasons and causes of what and how things are (Scheepers 2003). This approach is good but it is

79

insufficient in answering the research question since it only provides explanations on causes but does not sufficiently link possible effects to causes. - Exploratory – This is often used as a prelude for further in-depth research. It is often used to gather data/information before developing hypotheses and research questions. This approach is quite good as it aids the effective collection of data that can help the researcher to link not only the cause(s), but also the (possible) effect(s) of what is being investigated (Lahoual & Frejus 2013). As such, this approach is adopted in this research to address the research question.

- Descriptive – It often starts with a descriptive theory, while data gathered are compared with a pre-existing theory (Harris 1991). The singular use of this approach is not ideal for this research since the aim is not just to gather data in order to test theory, but rather to see how data collected links with the lived experiences of people. However, some elements of description were adopted in this research to provide some background on certain decisions taken in the past.

Zucker (2009) highlights other forms of case studies to include:

- Intrinsic – a case where the researcher has a personal interest in the case. In as much as the researcher has an interest in this research, being intrinsically involved as a participant may bring in some biases that could affect the kinds of data being collected.

- Collective – this involves studying a group of individuals.

- Instrumental – a case where the researcher is allowed by the individuals or group to understand more than what is initially obvious to the observer. Inasmuch as this research does not focus on this approach, some accidental data collected using this approach ends up being quite useful.

80

Aside the aforementioned types of case studies, there are two methods that can be used in case study research:

- Prospective – which is a kind of case study where individuals or group of individuals are observed in order to obtain a desired outcome (Clark 2008). This has an advantage when the focus of the researcher is to obtain a particular desired result. However, this research approach does not help in obtaining information and data on historical everts and actions. As such, this method is inappropriate in answering the research question.

- Retrospective – This is a kind of case study that involves looking at historical information. This method provides the platform to investigate and explore historical events, as well as linking them to the current situation(s) (Weinger et al. 2003). This research approach is ideal for this research as it allows one to explore historical events which aid historical data gathering to sufficiently answer the research question.

There have been some misconceptions about case study research as it evolved over time. Flyvbjerg highlights five major misunderstandings about case study research as exhibited by researchers over time (Flyvbjerg 2006. Pg 3 - 4):

1. Some researchers argue that “theoretical knowledge is more valuable than practical knowledge”. This notion is not quite correct as it is our practical experiences that reinforce our knowledge and appreciation of theories.

2. Some researchers argue that “one cannot generalize from a single case; therefore the single case cannot contribute to scientific development”. This is also another fallacy as many organizations, institutions, and countries have learnt from the experiences of some particular cases in addressing specific issues.

81

3. Some researchers argue that “the case study is most useful for generating hypotheses, while other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building”. This is also erroneous as the study of similar patterns noticed in several individual case studies on the same subject also provides a platform for the testing or building of a theory.

4. Some researchers argue that “the case study contains bias towards verification”. This is erroneous as case studies are not designed to verify the researcher’s preconceived notions, but rather to discover the various aspects of the subject being studied. Flyvbjerg argues that “the case study contains a greater bias towards falsification of preconceived notions than towards verification” (Flyvbjerg 2006. Pg. 21).

5. Some researchers argue that “it is difficult to summarize specific case studies”. This can be correct. However, it is less correct when summarizing case outcomes.

In case study research, information can be obtained through various means such as: direct observation, interviews, documents, archival records, physical artefacts, among others. Widdowson (2011) argues that case study (as a research methodology) facilitates the exploratory study of a phenomenon within its context, using a variety of data sources. It enables the issue being researched upon to be viewed from variety of lenses, which allows for a better understanding and revelation of the various facets and aspects of the phenomenon under study. Case study is used in answering the research question, from a retrospective perspective in order to explore, explain, and describe the historical evolution of energy infrastructure provisions.