Collecting evidence from case study research

In this research, two qualitative techniques were used to generate data: focus groups and semi-structured interviews. Both techniques complement each other to generate sufficient and rich data to address research concerns. On one hand, focus group discussions give youth the opportunity to speak for themselves, resulting in themes that seem more relevant for young participants and that have not been addressed in individual interviews (Hennessy and Heary, 2005, p.236). However, semi-structured interviews were more appropriate for exploring issues surrounding the institutional context of spatial planning in Amman, and Jordan in general (Birkmann et al., 2010; Desfor and Jørgensen, 2004). The following discussion demonstrates how the use of both interviews and focus groups made it possible to fully understand the issues surrounding the institutional context in Amman’s urban governance.

Semi-structured interviews

Interviews are verbal interactions that provide people with an opportunity to share their information and experiences about a social phenomenon (Longhurst, 2010; Malhorta and Birks, 2007, p.207; Mack et al., 2005; Robson, 2002). Qualitative interviewing is usually intended to be either structured, semi-structured or unstructured (Malhotra and Birks, 2007, p.227; Johnstone, 2007, p.109). Structured interviews contain a set of predefined questions that are put to different groups, while semi-structured interviews are more flexible and contain a list of themes or main topics derived from an understanding of the main theoretical framework. Unstructured interviews provide interviewees with greater control over the process of the interview in comparison with structured and semi- structured interviews (Corbin and Morse, 2003). Among these, the researcher has chosen semi-structured interviewing for a number of reasons. The first is its advantage in exploring a wide range of issues relevant to the research questions (Saunders et al., 2009, p.358; Chambers, 2008, p.297). The second is the flexible nature of semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured interviews may differ depending on the particular

Interview structure may diverge from the predefined structure, and wording may vary depending on the organisational context and the interviewee profile (Bryman, 2012, p.470). The nature of semi-structured interviews paves the way to achieving more flexible discussions by pursuing unanticipated topics. The flexible characteristics of semi-structured interviews are particularly necessary so that the interviewer can adjust the questions to the immediate situation, thus enhancing rapport (Martin et al., 2007, p.367). Thirdly, the use of semi-structured interviews allows participants to express their views, which is consistent with the epistemological methodology of this study (Saunders et al., 2009, p.358).

The semi-structured interviews were designed to explore the institutional context of local urban governance and planning organisations in Amman, and to what extent the planning system and practices in Amman changed from when Amman 2025 started, in 2006, to the collection of primary data in 2015 (Birkmann et al., 2010; Abu Ghazalah, 2008a; Desfor and Jørgensen, 2004). The author was careful to choose the people who could provide accurate and relevant information (Saunders et al., 2009, p.358). Potential interviewees were identified partly by reviewing recent textual resources on Amman’s urban development planning (i.e., newspaper articles, personal blogs and journal articles) and also by using the snowball sampling technique (Biernacki and Waldorf, 1981).41 _The

snowball sampling technique is a method that has been widely used in qualitative sociological research (Biernacki and Waldorf, 1981), and it is a successful networking strategy that helped the author to identify and interview people who had the most informative and relevant experiences.

The participants were those with significant roles in the planning process in Amman or those who participated in the making of Amman 2025. The planning professionals included planning faculty members from various schools of architecture and urban planning in Jordan; academic researchers in urban planning; housing and real estate developers; senior decision-makers within government bodies including MoMA, MoPIC, the MoI, and the administration of GAM, in addition to other non-government

41 _{Snowballing is a networking technique that “yields a study sample through referrals made among people} who share or know of others who possess some characteristics that are of research interest” (Biernacki

and Waldorf, 1981, p.1). Feild and colleagues (2006) distinguished between two types of sampling techniques that differ in their recruitment strategies: probability sampling (i.e., systematic random; stratified; multi-staged cluster) and non-probability sampling (i.e., snowball sampling). In this manner, snowball sampling was used and recommended by Kundu (2010, p.61) as the most efficient technique in

agencies such as the Center for the Study of the Built Environment (CSBE).42 _Engaging

academics and researchers in the data collection process offered the opportunity to obtain different stances and perspectives on the urban governance context in Amman and to reveal controversial issues relating to the urban development of Amman (see triangulation in section 3.8, below). Input from academics supported the fostering and transfer of scientific knowledge and ideas, especially in a country with a lack of secondary data and limited academic research regarding spatial planning, partnership, governance and youth participation. These three main concepts were deemed vital to deeply understanding the institutional context in Amman regarding spatial planning. This research has overcome this challenge by compiling perspectives from different researchers and stakeholders to enhance research credibility and ensure rigour.

Most of the interviewees were contacted in advance via email or phone to request their participation (see appendix 9-1). 55 individuals were invited to participate in the semi- structured interviews, of whom 28 were successfully interviewed. A total of 27 face-to- face interviews and one Skype interview43 _{were conducted with the main actors of the}

three spheres of the state, civil society (including academics) and the market. The average time for each interview was one hour, with the shortest interview taking 40 minutes and the longest lasting over 75 minutes. Most of the interviewees chose to conduct the conversation in Arabic. Although it created an extra burden of translation, this allowed the participants to freely express their opinions without linguistic barriers.

The second source of data in this study was that of the focus groups, as explained in the following section.

Focus groups

Primary data were also collected from young Jordanians living in the city of Amman through the focus group technique. A focus group involves a discussion among a small number of participants (around four to twelve), and groups are either homogenous or heterogeneous (Saunders et al., 2009, p.344; Hennessy and Heary, 2005, p.236).

One of the distinctive features of focus group interviews is their insightful communication and their usefulness in illuminating different perspectives and feelings about a single issue (Malhotra and Birks, 2007, p.82; Mack et al., 2005). Participants are

invited to discuss and respond to a particular topic in order to obtain their views and opinions collectively (Glesne, 2006; Robson, 2002, p.293). Hence, a focus group can generate large volumes of data in a relatively short time span (Krueger and Casey, 2015; Robson, 2002, p.296). Longhurst (2010) found focus groups to offer effective interaction that involves greater variety of communication and helps to identify the social, cultural, political, economic and personal dimensions of a phenomenon.

Four focus groups were conducted in this research. One focus group was arranged with the assistance of Professor N.K. and Dr Wael Al Azhari in the Architectural Engineering Department at the JU. The author gave a short presentation explaining the research aims and objectives to attendees at random lectures. Owing to the sensitivity of the questions asked, the researcher clearly explained that the purpose of the research was purely academic and that participants’ perspectives were essential to the production of knowledge and theory building regarding youth participation in spatial planning in Jordan. Following the presentation, the researcher held an open conversation to answer students’ questions. Those who were interested in participating answered screening questions to formally state their interest (see appendix 9-3).44 _{This step is especially}

significant when the content of the interview risks negative impacts for the interviewee (Prokopy, 2008). Therefore, it was implemented in all four focus groups to safeguard individual interviewees’ interests.

The other three focus groups took place at AJYC45 _{centres, two at the East Amman}

branch and one at the West Amman branch. The author arranged a meeting with the AJYC public relations officer, Mr Amjad Kreemen, who kindly offered the author his assistance. Then the author presented the research and met with interested participants at AJYC venues in Amman. The AJYC helped in introducing the researcher to many young participants, saving time and making it easier for the researcher to approach hard-to- reach groups in Amman, particularly young Jordanian women.

44 _{Focus group participants in the case study research were selected based on explicit criteria (see appendix}

9-3). The questions were in the form of multiple choice, designed to be simple, understandable and easy to answer. The focus of the screening questions was generally on personal information to determine the participant’s age, area of residence and whether s/he was concerned about development in her/his area and, lastly, whether the participant was interested in taking part in a focus group discussion.

45 _{The AJYC is one of the innovative programmes sponsored by the state through the Royal Hashemite}

Participants in this research method were selected according to age (18–24) and whether they had been living in Amman at least five years.46 _{Between six and eight different}

young people attended each of the four focus groups (see appendix 10-2). Youth participating in each focus group were chosen from different backgrounds in terms of education, gender and knowledge and income levels. The researcher was eager to promote equal contributions from all participants. The structure of the focus group contained a flexible question format as a prompt for commencing and probing conversations (Barbour and Schostak, 2011; Malhotra and Birks, 2007, p.67) (see appendix 9-4), and the agenda was flexible to allow discussion of the central themes of the research in relation to Amman’s urban built environment,47 _{governance and}

development while exploring areas of interest as they arose in the discussion. The focus groups were intended to gather data on young people’s ideas regarding urban development planning and how young people can participate in the decision-making process. In addition, the focus groups provided an opportunity for participants to discuss their feelings about Amman’s urban development and how to improve the process, and whether they had any previous experience in participating in public debate in the city. It was beneficial that the focus group discussions were conducted at AJYC venues and at the meeting hall at the Architectural Engineering Department of the JU. The researcher saw that being familiar with the place provided participants with a relaxed atmosphere and encouraged all of them to engage in the discussion. Nevertheless, a number of issues were encountered in discussions undertaking focus groups. One of the issues concerns those young people who did not participate in focus groups. Although the researcher presented research findings clearly and simply in front of a large number of young people, a relatively small number turned up and showed interest in participating. The issue of weak turnout by young participants demonstrates the need for more interactive recruitment techniques for gaining youth interest in the research. Innovative recruitment strategy might include engaging them through visual arts, theatre and youth-led debates where the researcher observes and takes notes (Al Kodmany, 1999). Such interactive

46 _{Determining the length of residence enabled focus group discussions to involve residents who are}

familiar with issues in Amman, thus making focus group discussions richer and more informative. Length of residence and attachment to place have been found to be strongly correlated (Raymond et al., 2010; Hernández et al., 2007; Stedman, 2006), which is important to community participation and planning (Manzo and Perkins, 2006).

approaches, visual or verbal, attract youth, especially in the age range 18–24, in order to obtain their perceptions of the local area. On the other hand, Weber (2007) stated that group dynamics could cause problems and misdirect discussions. Weber (2007) referred to occasions when discussions are ‘derailed’ and irrelevant topics are debated among participants rather than the original theme. In this context, the researcher significantly benefited from a focus group proforma (appendix 9-4), along with maintaining intense concentration during the course of focus group discussion. For this purpose, the researcher found it useful to memorise the questions so that more time was available for note-taking, thus maintaining continuous discussion. However, a copy of the proforma was still within reach to act as an aide-memoire for the researcher.

Documentary evidence

Modes of data collection in case study research also include evidence from documents – in this case, documents published by local government bodies and research institutions in Jordan (e.g., Ai). Documentary information was a helpful source of evidence for this study. The documentary materials used in this research include the following (Yin, 2009, 2003):

 government reports and policy/strategy documents

 newspaper clippings and other articles appearing in official gazettes

 governance plans, legislation (i.e., spatial planning frameworks in Jordan), reports and organisational websites.

Documents played a key role in understanding the context of the case study. Moreover, documents played a significant role in constructing validity by enabling the triangulation of data that were collected by other methods. However, despite the advantages of using documents, it was by no means easy to collect or to systematically organise and analyse them. Complications with this source of data arose in gaining access to the policies and published data from local organisations.

Scott (1990) formulated quality control criteria that are meaningful to ensure document reliability (cited in Gaborone, 2006, p.224). Scott (1990, p.6, cited in Bryman, 2012, p.544) identified four criteria for assessing the quality of documents: authenticity, credibility, representativeness and meaning. Authenticity addresses the originality of document resources. The researcher collected government documents by either downloading them from the official website or requesting them in person by visiting the

relevant institutions. Official sources were accessed in order to make sure that documents were not forged, altered or manipulated. In addition, the researcher confirmed documents’ authenticity by confirming their authorship and place and date of publication. The researcher dismissed any documents with distorted or dishonest content, or incorrect information, to ensure credibility of the resources by examining whether the document is typical of its kind (Gaborone, 2006). The third criterion, the document’s representativeness, is best described as its reliability. The researcher followed Scott’s (2006) advice by questioning all documents gathered to demonstrate their authenticity, credibility and representativeness before drawing on them. Documents were also assessed through initial textual analysis of whether the source was clear and comprehensible in its content. This was to ensure that meaning (the fourth criterion) was achieved. In agreement with this, all documents used in this research match the aforementioned criteria forwarded by Scott (2006) and thus were used in the research analysis.