Focus group discussion

A focus group discussion is ‘a carefully planned series of discussions designed to obtain perceptions on a defined area of interest in a permissive, non-threatening environment’ (Krueger & Casey, 2000, p. 5). The focus group discussion has some advantages over individual interviews. For example, it is cost effective, because information can be captured from more participants in a relatively short period of time (Kontio, Bragge, & Lehtola, 2008). The quality of the information is improved because participants tend to act as checks and balances on one another, thus reducing extreme or false opinions (Patton, 2002). It "presents a more natural environment than that of an individual interview because participants are influencing and influenced by others- just as they are in life" (Krueger & Casey, 2009, p. 7). However, focus group discussions require careful preparation (Freitas, Oliveira, Jenkins, & Popjoy, 1998). When organising a focus group, it can be difficult to gather a group of people together at the same time and in the same place (Breen, 2006). Another limitation of focus groups is that some individuals are reluctant to share their experiences and thoughts in a group setting (Krueger & Casey, 2009).

The focus group discussion was useful for this study for a number of reasons. First, there were around 12-30 farmers in each group and it was not possible to interview all of these farmers, given the budget and time. Second, although interviews were conducted with the group members, it was necessary to cross-check the opinions of the rest of the group members. As recommended by Anandajayasekeram et al. (2008), a focus group of six to

99

seven participants was used for this research to ensure the full participation of all members present at the discussion. One of the fundamental considerations in focus group discussion is the composition of the groups (Grudens-Schuck, Allen, & Larson, 2004; Krueger & Casey, 2000) because participants are likely to censor their opinions in front of other influential people (Grudens-Schuck et al., 2004). Thus, this issue was duly considered while selecting who attended a focus group. For example, group executives were not included in the focus group discussion. One focus group comprising only poor women was made. This was because rural women in this culture may not want to openly discuss the behaviour of their male counterparts in their presence. Purposive sampling (Hennink, 2014; Patton, 2002) was applied to select participants of the focus groups based on gender, caste/ethnicity and economic status. Group members who were not involved in interviews (Lewis, 2003) and were willing to participate in discussion, were invited for focus group discussions.

The research assistant determined the time, date and venue for the focus group discussions in consultation with the participants. In this study, four focus group discussions, one in each case farmer group, were carried out. This researcher and a research assistant facilitated the focus group discussions in such a way that encouraged interactions between the participants rather than between the participants and facilitator (Bender & Ewbank, 1994). The focus group discussions were conducted in community settings such as the group meeting hall and local club, which was easily accessible for the participants (Hennink, 2014). A circular seating arrangement was used to conduct focus group discussions (Hennink, 2014; Streicher et al., 2011). It allowed the participants to have eye contact with other participants of the group that which encouraged them to converse with

100

each other and fostered interactions (Hennink, 2014). It also helped the researcher to manage the discussion effectively (Hennink, 2014).

Each focus group discussion began with welcoming the participants and the brief introduction of the researcher, research assistant and participants (Greenwood & Parsons, 2000), followed by a brief presentation on the research, its aims and the purpose of the discussion. The researcher then asked easy, non-threatening questions to build rapport (Kolb, 2008), such as queries relating to their crop situation. Once the rapport was developed, very simple and short questions related to the research subject that could be easily understood by the participants, were asked to create a comfortable and non-threatening environment (Hennink, 2014). Instead of academic language or technical jargon (such as, human capital, social capital, psychological empowerment and political empowerment) colloquial language suitable for the participants were asked, as far as possible (Hennink, 2014). This is because too formal and academic language could create unwanted distance between the participants and researcher (Hennink, Hutter, & Bailey, 2011). A focus group discussion guide (Table 3.8) was developed to direct the group discussion (Bender & Ewbank, 1994; Hennink, 2014; Streicher et al., 2011). Although the discussion guide consisted of questions in a logical order, the actual discussion followed a different order (Hennink, 2014). This was because the researcher proceeded according to the concerns raised spontaneously by participants (Hennink, 2014). A few group members in each group were reluctant to be recorded and thus the researcher and research assistant took hand-written notes (Hennink, 2014; Kolb, 2008). As suggested by Lewis (2003), in this study, focus group discussions were conducted after the completion of semi-structured interviews. This was because the focus group discussion was intended for those group members

101

who were not involved in interviews and that could only be identified after the completion of interviews. Moreover, it provided an opportunity to verify data generated through interviews (Lewis, 2003).

Table 3.8: The focus group discussion guide

1. How and when was your farmer group formed? 2. What are the main objectives of your farmer group? 3. Why did you join a farmer group?

4. What are the main activities of your group?

5. Who supports your farmer group? What kinds of support have you received from them? And how do they support your group? How does this support affect the performance of your farmer group?

6. What benefits do you get from farmer group membership?

7. What are the impacts of farmer group membership on empowerment and the mechanisms of empowerment