Interviews

3.6.3.1 Semi-Structured Interviews

The main source of primary data came from semi-structured interviews carried out with various stakeholders in the niche and the regime. Semi-structured interviews are a type of interview in which the interviewee is asked a set of questions based around a series of topics in order to guide the interview process, but which allows the interviewer to adapt to new threads of information introduced by the interviewee. This approach differs from structured interviews or questionnaires which instead dictate a more precise wording and order to the questions. The semi-structured approach to interviewing provides a greater degree of flexibility and more space for the articulation of stakeholder narratives and the elaboration of salient points of interest as and when they arise. The higher degree of flexibility in the semi-structured approach to interviews is appropriate in that it allows for the interview to adapt to the heterogeneity in the breadth and depth of interviewee knowledge on a given topic.

Furthermore flexibility and adaptability of approach is important in engaging with those stakeholders who are reticent; who try to impose their will on the structure and flow of the interview; or in dealing with the arising of unforeseen time constraints and interruptions to the interview process.

I used semi-structured interviews for interviewing stakeholders in both the regime and the niche. Rather than adopt a random sampling strategy I chose a purposive one since there was only a small population of actors that I could interview, and it was not my intention to make statistically generalisable inferences from this population. Inferences that result from interview data are necessarily context-laden, depending on the conditions that make up the interviewee’s circumstance. Instead I adopted an elite interviewing strategy through which I aimed to interview the key stakeholders who acted as gatekeepers with respect to the flow of knowledge and decision making within their respective projects and organisations. In order to

help identify the key stakeholders I also used a chain-referral sampling strategy whereby I asked stakeholders whether they knew of anyone else who was important within the process or organisation in question they felt I should interview. This strategy was useful for identifying

‘invisible’ stakeholders as well as those whose importance was not readily apparent to me (Tansey, 2007). Using elite stakeholders in interviews has also been cited as a useful means of corroborating and triangulating what has been established from other sources, such as in reports and published literature, as well being of benefit in helping to reconstruct the decisions and actions which lay behind a series of events, such as those which established the PCI niche projects (Ibid.).

Regarding the Indian public plant breeding regime, I employed what turned out to be an overly ambitious interview structure on account of the large amount of information that I was trying to collect on all the different socio-technical dimensions. I decided to interview plant breeders and staff at the State Agricultural Universities (SAUs) listed in Table 8. The names of plant breeders who had worked with GVT on COB projects were provided to me on consultation with Dr. Yadavendra.

Table 8 - SAUs at which COB Plant Breeders were Located

The approach that I adopted to interviewing different plant breeders was to acquire as much information as possible from documents on the socio-technical dimensions which

characterised their plant breeding practices, and solicit their opinions on the potential merits of greater farmer participation in research. The interview was structured so that I could make a cross-sectional attitudinal comparison on the perception of FPR between plant breeders who had been exposed to PCI and those who had not been. A general structure of the plant

breeder interview schedule can be found at Appendix 2.

University Main Campus COB Plant breeder Location of plant breeder

Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya (RVSKVV)

Gwalior, MP Dr. M. Billore Indore Campus

Anand Agricultural University (AAU)

Anand, Gujarat Dr. A.M. Mehta Dr. S.M. Khanorkar

Anand Campus Anand Campus Sardarkrushinagar Dantiwada

Agricultural University (SDAU)

Palanpur, Gujarat Dr. S.B.S. Tikka Sardarkrushinagar Campus

Maharana Pratap University of

A combination of factors led to me being unable to complete this attitudinal comparison among plant breeders, including: underestimating the number of plant breeders at each research station; trouble gaining access to some institutions; the length of time required to carry out the interview; a lack of time resulting from staff having to work on their own

activities and deadlines; staff being absent from the research station or SAU. In spite of these issues, the information collected from the interviews was sufficient to provide insight into a number of important factors which characterise the public plant breeding regime.

Alongside interviewing the plant breeders who had worked with PCI methodologies, and those who had not, there were a number of other organisations and stakeholders that I aimed to interview in order to build a more rounded picture of the Indian NARS. Although I spent time at each of the three major SAUs – AAU, MPUAT and RVSKVV, I also visited a number of peripheral research stations and Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVKs), when opportunities arose. At these centres I interviewed personnel who were involved in both the fields of research and extension to better understand the entire process of crop improvement – from developing, to testing, release, multiplication of seed and eventual distribution to farmers. I also tried to interview staff from the State Department’s of Agriculture (DoA) in Rajasthan, Gujarat and MP, although gaining access to these organisations proved problematic. In turning my attention to the federal system of crop improvement research, I interviewed personnel at the Directorates of Rice Research (DRR), Maize Research (DMR), and Soybean Research (DSR). I also

interviewed the Assistant Director General (ADG) for Seeds at ICAR Headquarters, New Delhi.

Regarding the activities of the Niche, I interviewed the former and current project managers of GVTs western project areas. I also interviewed GVTs crop consultant for the West, Dr.

Yadavendra, and another member of staff who had worked closely with Dr. Witcombe throughout the initial KRIBP and WIRFP projects. I also interviewed staff at the NGO, Action for Social Advancement (ASA) and staff at the MPDPIP and MPRLP, where PVS activities had been carried out by ASA and GVT on several occasions.

A detailed list of interviews carried out is provided in Appendix 3.

3.6.3.2 Unstructured Interviews

In the process of interviewing stakeholders there were occurrences when the interviewee could not or was not willing to answer questions; would only carry out an interview in a group setting; or could not complete the full interview due to another commitment or time

constraints. In these instances I would try to complete the semi-structured interview as best as possible, but would use my discretion with respect to opening up the interview in order to capture the thoughts of the interviewee(s) on topics that they thought merited discussion regarding the interview. In so doing I could at least be assured that the dominant perspectives of the interviewee were recorded since there was no guarantee that I would be able to

reschedule the interview for a later date in light of the logistics and time constraints imposed by travelling to different organisations.

Unstructured interviews were also used to discuss broader topics and narratives such as farmer participation in research; the goals of Indian agricultural research; poverty and rural development; with stakeholders who were not or had not been directly engaged with the case study projects. The views elicited from these persons on these topics helped inform and develop my understanding of these issues, and were useful in the iterative refinement of the questions and probes used in the semi-structured interviews.