The fieldwork was undertaken in four phases; the pre-fieldwork phase, fieldwork phase I, fieldwork phase II, and the post-fieldwork phase. The research questions and the main concepts and relationships of the theoretical framework guided the data collection. The primary and secondary data were gathered during all four stages of fieldwork and at different geographical locations in Colombia. The primary data were mainly collected in fieldwork phases I and II. Interviews and surveys were conducted by the researcher in smallholders’ farms, in the main offices of anchor companies, and in different cities of the
Central zone43 and in Bogotá. The secondary data were collected during intermittent periods of the research, but especially during the pre-fieldwork and post-fieldwork phases.
4.7.1 Pre-fieldwork phase: Selection of nuclei and identification of participants
In the pre-fieldwork phase, secondary sources were examined with the aim of studying background information and identifying key actors that impact technology diffusion in the Colombian oil palm sector, especially during PC epidemics. More importantly, case studies in the Central zone of Colombia were studied and selected during this stage.
4.7.2 Fieldwork phase I: Data collection and preliminary analysis
This phase corresponds to the collection of data for the creation of networks and the assessment of technology adoption. This helped to answer the second and third research questions. To do this, a survey was initially conducted with smallholders and representatives of anchor companies in each nucleus. Based on the information provided by those actors, and following snowballing sampling for networks suggested by Wasserman and Faust (1994), it was possible to identify other actors that would complement the corresponding network.
Questionnaires were standardised in order to gather data that could be compared across the case studies. The main purposes of the questionnaires were: 1) to identify actors and technical relationships; and 2) to gather information about levels of technology adoption.
The main questions asked of respondents were: ‘From whom have you (or your organisation) received technical support in the last three years44 and how important was this to you (or to your organisation)’? ‘Technical support’ included: provision of technical
43 Exact names of cities are not revealed since that would enable readers to identify the real names of the anchor companies; this would violate the confidentiality agreement between the author of this thesis and the anchor companies of this research.
44 This type of question belongs to the sociometric method referenced by Rogers (2010) in which the researcher asks respondents who they sought for information or advice about a particular topic. Similar wording is also used by other authors in the study of networks, such as Ramirez (2014).
knowledge and information (e.g. handbooks, instructions, and flyers), and supervision, training and sharing of technical experiences. To evaluate the importance of the relationships, the researcher followed the ‘Likert scale’ method; this is a multiple indicator that measures the intensity of people’s feelings about the area in question (Bryman, 2015).
By using this method, respondents were asked to rank technical connections from 1-4 in ascending order of importance. The period of three years covered by the survey was chosen on the basis that, according to interviewed technical assistants in the three anchor companies, the activities for technology diffusion were intensified after 2013, when the epidemic of PC disease was officially announced. This research also ensured that data did not correspond to an early stage of processes of diffusion and technology adoption, during which there may have been high variability in the decision-making process of smallholders, and results may not be reliable.
Questions about technology adoption of PC-related practices were also formulated in the survey. Based on the recommendations of Silva and Martinez (2009), Torres et al. (2010) and Arias et al. (2014) about fundamental practices that help in dealing with the epidemics of PC disease in Colombia, eight agricultural practices were assessed and grouped according to their immediacy of reward attributes:
Preventive practices (long-term practices): 1) cultivation of leguminous plants, 2) frond analysis, 3) soil analysis, and 4) maintenance of drain channels.
Shock practices (short-term practices): 1) PC monitoring, 2) PC surgery (removal of diseased tissue), 3) eradication of diseased trees, and 4) application of additional fertilisers to diseased trees.
All questionnaires were conducted in person by the researcher and around 70% were administered face-to-face whilst the rest were collected by phone calls.
4.7.3 Fieldwork phase II: Interviews to key actors
In this phase, representatives of entities were selected, interviewed, and asked to comment on the reliability of the data collected in the previous phase. Following the preliminary network analyses and results of the first phase of fieldwork, semi-structured interviews45 were conducted with other key actors. The semi-structured interview technique was chosen as the data-gathering instrument because it mainly helped to provide answers to the first research question related to characteristics of CFAs and to complete the information required for the rest of the questions. Interviewees also gave additional feedback on the resulting network maps and helped to improve the understanding of those structures. Furthermore, they ensured reliability of the data.
The semi-structured interviews included about 15 open questions that were adapted to three groups of actors (nucleus participants, contributors to technology diffusion of nuclei, and contextual and sectoral actors) and their roles in the technology-diffusion process of the sector in general, and during the PC disease epidemics. For example, the questions addressed to smallholders as receptors of technology were formulated differently from the questions addressed to research and academic institutions as developers of technologies.
The overall objective of these questions was to gather information about:
1. CFAs for crop management and technical assistance focusing on agreements regarding PC management (e.g. what were the technical arrangements and responsibilities of participants in PC management).
2. Technical relationships between actors during the PC disease epidemics and additional features of these relationships and formal rules (e.g. whether values of
45Semi-structured interviews refer to a series of questions that are in the general form of an interview schedule but whose sequence can vary. The interviewers can also ask further questions in response to what they consider to be significant answers (Bryman, 2015: 212)
trust and friendship did or did not influence the technical relationships and commitments between smallholders and other change agents).
3. Technical support in the adoption and implementation of agricultural practices for PC management (e.g. who influenced and participated in the final implementation of practices).
4. Historical and institutional backgrounds of the agricultural epidemic that affected the transfer of agricultural practices for PC management (e.g. how sectoral and institutional actors supported the processes of centralised-technology diffusion).
4.7.4 Post-fieldwork: feedback and data triangulation
On returning from fieldwork, the collected data and information were reviewed and organised following the elements of the theoretical framework of this thesis. In order to determine the accuracy of the qualitative findings, member checking was used where the researcher asked other actors in the sector for accuracy or misrepresentation of results (Creswell, 2013; Stake, 2013; Yin, 2013). Thus, the evidence was completed and outcomes of technology adoption were explained based on specific questions that were formulated to the head of the UG alliance and technical assistants of the three nuclei.