Interviews

The final component of the research strategy sought to gain understanding of context and corroboration of the results of the perceptions survey. It was decided that this could best be achieved through interviewing a set of key informants recognised as having experience in designing, implementing and operating within the environmental resource management institution. Their views could be expected to yield information to provide understanding of circumstances surrounding particular events and processes within the institution, which have not always been documented. Additionally, while questionnaires provide a quantifiable dataset of aggregated perceptions, they do not provide context for why respondents have those perceptions. Interviews on the other hand allow researchers to probe for answers, use follow-up questions and also gather information by observation. As well, pre-screening allows selection of participants to match the population profile required for the research. Their disadvantages include their high costs to administer, the need for highly trained interviewers, follow-up is labour intensive and participants may be reluctant

to speak to strangers, and questions may be altered or participants coached by interviewers (Cooper & Schindler, 2006: 253).

Interviews as a research tool provide a series of challenges; around sample population, questionnaire design and data validation. The interview data were intended to supplement the secondary data analysis and questionnaire. Accordingly, the decision was made to limit the size and extent of interviews to selected key informants to keep the research practicable. The key informants had different experiences and expertise. As a result, it was decided that a structured interview format was not appropriate, but that an open question format tailored to each person was the best way to utilise interview time and opportunity. Key informants included two regional council science managers, two regional council policy managers, two senior national government officials, a former united council chief executive, two regional council committee chairs, four senior environmental management consultants and an environmental manager from a large industry. Less formal discussions were also held with several local government policy managers and scientists.

Many of the possibilities for bias in questionnaire design are also applicable in long interviews and may be more at risk of occurring given the interaction between interviewer and interviewee. Bias can arise from the failure of the interviewer to recognise cues from subject to guide whether to lead discussion further, or to halt probing before early termination of the interview, distillation of comments and risk of editorialising, rambling or obfuscation by subject, either intentionally or unintentionally, misallocation or lack of time; subjects have limited time for interview, so that not all questions can be put or answered, and/or follow-up questions to elucidate in-depth responses are not possible, and avoidance. The risk of bias can be reduced by implementing various validation strategies. However, in many instances the ability of the interviewer to reduce bias is compromised by social norms and mores, especially as the researcher is relying on goodwill of the subject. Regardless of validation method, veracity ultimately comes down to interviewer experience and practice. The interviewer in this research has considerable experience in undertaking both structured and unstructured interviews with local, national and international level bureaucrats and politicians.

There was a trade-off between attribution and depth of information provided; most of the key informants hold senior positions in their organisations, which meant that their views have high value, but that they were potentially exposed professionally if their views were attributable. Several key informants were happy to speak on a non-attributable basis and were quite frank in giving their opinions accordingly. Others were quite happy to have their views attributed, but this then meant that the potential exists for identifying anonymous sources by omission, given the reasonably small size of the environmental management profession in New Zealand. Accordingly, the decision was made not to attribute any comments and to ensure the content could not be associated with particular individuals. This meant some information could not be reported, but this loss was considered an acceptable and responsible trade-off, while respecting the informants‘ trust in the research programme.

Data analysis can also be compromised. Interviews can be audio-taped and transcribed and transcriptions and/or written summaries can be sent to the interviewees for confirmation. These validation methods are resource intensive and make extra demands on the subjects. Validation is particularly important where individuals are publicly associated

with comments and where the interviews form a major component of the data gathering and analysis. It was decided in this case that the interviews would not be audio-taped and only summaries were held. This decision was made on the basis that the interviews were providing contextual information, were not ascribed to individuals and did not form a major part of the investigation to warrant the resources needed for more thorough validation. Interviews were undertaken over two years during the phase when empirical work was being undertaken. Questions were open-ended and tailored to the different skills, expertise and experience of the subjects so they were not necessarily being interviewed about the same subject matter. For example, some subjects were scientists with an interest and expertise in technical matters and science policy, others were policy managers and were more concerned with the political implications of their work.

The interview data were intended primarily as corroborating or adding richness to results of the secondary data analysis and survey. The results are accordingly reported in chapter 6 and chapter 8 along with the results of the other research strategies.

6. Summary

This chapter sets out a research design for implementing a case study to assess the public value of regional government. The case study design focused on regional councils‘ environmental management functions. The research aim of determining whether environmental management role of regional councils is appropriate was structured on a public value framework that breaks institutions into three dimensions: authorising agency, operational feasibility and substantive value. The research was undertaken using published data and surveys of environmental resource management practitioners and stakeholders' perceptions. Interviews with key informants were also undertaken to corroborate and provide context for the analysis of existing data and results from the surveys. Table 5-4 shows the relationship between the elements of the research design and the key dimensions of public value.

Table 5-4: Data sources for assessing public value

Dimension Indicator Published

Data Survey

Substantive Value

Policy outcomes National environmental quality X X Regional environmental quality X X Regional water quality and

quantity

X X

Policy outputs National plans and policies X Regional plans and policies X

Operational Feasibility

Organisational Capability

Issue knowledge and expertise X Financial resources X

Leadership X

Community Capability Ability for regional community to finance council activities

X Institutional Structure Hierarchy coordinating

mechanisms

X X

Council functions X

Council budget X

Geographic Span Jurisdictional fit with function X X

Authorising Agency

Representation Council makeup X

Councillor visibility X

Public mobilisation Citizen values X Public participation Voter turnout at elections X

Number of submissions on draft

plans and policies X

Leadership National strategy statements X X Regional strategy statements X X Multi-layer

institutional alignment

National strategies and coordinating mechanisms

X X

Source: Author

The results obtained using these research strategies are provided in the following two chapters. The results from the official data analysis are reported in chapter 6 and the results from the survey of environmental resource users and managers are reported in chapter 7.

Chapter 6: Evidence of public value of regional