Justification for a ‘Case Study’ Research Strategy

The SNM conceptual framework, research questions and context of PCI research necessitates the use of a case study methodology in order to investigate the niche, regime and

niche-regime interactions that may or may not result in some form of institutional translation between them. In Robert Yin’s seminal work (2003:13) he defines the case study as, “...an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between the phenomenon and context are not clearly evident.” The concepts of niche and regime, when overlaid onto a collection of PCI projects (niche) and a national agricultural research and extension system (NARS) (regime), invariably describe complex systems whose interactions are necessarily context dependent.

Yin (2003:9) describes the case study as an advantageous research strategy to use when employed in a scenario in which the research questions are of an explanatory nature (‘how’

and ‘why’ types); which concerns a contemporary event; and which does not require control of behavioural events. Moreover, he states that the case study copes with situations “in which there will be many more variables of interest than data points”; where there will be “multiple sources of evidence with data needing to converge in a triangulating fashion”; and, in which there “has been prior development of theoretical propositions to guide data collection and analysis (Yin, 2003:13)”. All of these situations are applicable to the research context of this thesis.

Case studies, like other research strategies, can be broadly classified as exploratory,

explanatory, or descriptive in their scope (Berg, 2000:229, Yin, 2003:3). Other general types of case study include those which are intrinsic (research undertaken in depth for a particular interest), instrumental (research undertaken to pursue an external generalised interest or inform theory) or collective (research undertaken involving multiple instrumental cases) (Stake, 2005). These classifications are not necessarily mutually exclusive but may overlap so that, for instance, a case study may both be intrinsic and instrumental in nature reflecting the multiple interests of the researcher (Ibid.:445). The number of different types of case studies suggests that this methodological approach can be employed for a number of reasons under differing scenarios. However their design, implementation and analysis will impact upon the reliability and generalisability of inferences made from the collected data.

An important methodological consideration in the design and implementation of a case study is the selection of an appropriate unit of analysis and boundaries to the case study. Within SNM studies there are three units of analysis, the niche, the regime and the interactions that occur across the boundary that divides them (Smith, 2005:132). Niches are considered

‘strategic’ if they meet the following criteria (Kemp et al., 1998:186, Smith, 2005):

 They articulate new ways of using novel technologies.

 They generate lessons about the feasibility of these new configurations.

 They have the potential for further development and improvement.

 They involve a constituency of different actors who support the significant changes articulated by the niche.

In using a case study research strategy with SNM it is important to identify the strategic niche, its context and the case study boundaries. Smith’s definitions of a ‘strategic niche’, implies that these criteria may be applicable to the idea of a PCI niche (Ibid.). As part of the literature review I have considered the evolution of PCI methodologies and some of the research groups that have developed them. The interactions of these researchers at conferences, symposia, through their academic publications and through more informal channels constitute a global PCI niche. Through experimenting with and using PCI methods in different projects and programmes around the world they have iteratively adapted and developed these methodologies. However, when it comes to PCI institutionalisation, these projects and programmes often operate in and across distinct geographical locales and with different organisations.

The case study employed in this thesis concerns the PCI work funded by DFID and carried out by CAZS-NR and its research partners in South Asia (Cf. Conroy (2009a)). I have chosen a case study consisting of a single longitudinal time-bound case covering two phases of a large development project, the Western India Rain-fed Farming Project (WIRFP), and its subsequent alteration and extension under DFID’s Research Into Use (RIU) Programme. Figure 4 illustrates the nesting of the Indian PCI niche within a South Asian and Global PCI niche.

Figure 4 - Selecting the Level of PCI Niche

Source: Author

Key: Different potential bounding of PCI niches according to global, regional and country level grouping of PCI projects.

As explained in the literature review and corroborated by Walker (2008), there have only been two global research groups that have consistently carried out and developed large-scale PPB programmes in particular geographical locales for a sustained period of time – the DFID-CAZS-NR partnership and the ICARDA Barley Programme, although other PCI projects have been carried out by other CGIAR centres such as CIMMYT. The sustained pursuit of these programmes, in terms of their locations and research activities, axiomatically suggests they may be suitable niche candidates for further investigation since they are more likely to have formed linkages with the public plant breeding system/NARS. Moreover, the longevity and scale of those PCI programmes further suggest that they are the best candidates out of all PCI projects for investigating possible niche-regime translations.

I chose to focus on the NR niche, rather than the ICARDA programme, because the CAZS-NR niche consists of a large research network that has carried out PCI independently and as part of larger development projects; it has worked on a larger number of crop species; and operated over a longer period of time. The three main countries in which CAZS-NR has carried

out PCI projects are Bangladesh, India and Nepal, with most of the work having been carried out with project partners in India and Nepal (Figure 4).

Although the unit of analysis is the CAZS-NR niche, the sheer amount of research carried out by this institute and its research partners over 20 years is staggering and must be addressed to select a feasible location to carry out fieldwork. Opting for a single longitudinal case study of a prominent longstanding project within this niche may capture not only how PCI methodologies have been developed and used, but also the socio-technical research practices of the Indian NARS, and the interactions that occurred between this niche and regime.

Yin (2003:39) cites five circumstances under which a single case design may justifiably be used:

if it is a critical case, extreme or unique case, representative or typical case, revelatory case, and/or longitudinal case (Ibid.). The rationale behind choosing the WIRFP as a case study is that it lends itself to a longitudinal (temporal) analysis and that it is both unique and typical depending on the framing. It is rare (unique) because there have not been many long term PCI projects that have operated in a particular area for approximately 20 years; and it is typical because the methodologies that it uses and the ways in which they are applied are generally representative of projects across the global niche¹³. It is of note that although there is some flexibility in how PCI methods can be used; there are constituent features that need to be present in order for the activity to meet the definition of PCI, PPB/COB, and PVS and CAZS-NR satisfies these criteria (Cf. Witcombe and Yadavendra (2006).

The second unit of analysis is the socio-technical regime. PCI is an umbrella term that covers research activities, such as PPB/COB, as well as those which overlap with extension activities, such as PVS. It is therefore important to consider both research and extension activities in the context of analysing a crop improvement technical regime. Many NARS and public plant breeding systems treat research and extension as dichotomous activities that are often carried out by separate departments. Any account of public plant breeding organisations as a socio-technical regime should also consider the relationships between plant breeders and extension staff.

13 A summary of the methods used during WIRFP can be found in Witcombe and Yadavendra (2006).

Each PCI project is unique, however, the WIRFP may have similarities to, and be representative of, other PCI projects that are funded on a project basis by aid or governmental agencies and collaborate with public-sector research organisations. Cf. Weltzien et al. (2003: 125-205) for an inventory of PCI projects that have collaborated with formal crop improvement sector around the world.

As a second unit of analysis the ‘socio-technical regime’ needs to be considered and chosen carefully as it is has the propensity to be context laden. In order for any claims to be made regarding the institutionalisation of PCI, both embedded units of analysis should be

investigated with respect to their representativeness of other types of niche and regime. The Indian NARS is certainly unique; however it shares similarities to other NARS seen in other countries. In his NARS typology, Jain (1989) lists three broad NARS systems managed by different apex-level bodies: agricultural research councils (ARC); national research institutes (NRI); and, ministry of agriculture models. He further elaborates this broad system-level classification by also considering the different types and ways in which research stations are organised (Ibid.). The Indian NARS is headed by the Indian Council for Agricultural Research (ICAR). The Agricultural Research Council model is used by a range of different countries and can be further differentiated into ‘managing’ and ‘coordinating’ councils (Senanayake, 1990).

ICAR is described as the “prototype of the council model” and, as such, is a model that has and continues to influence the NARS of neighbouring south Asian countries and those further afield (Ibid.:12).

Previously India was one of the countries at the centre of the Green Revolution (GR). Today India is a global player influencing future agricultural research trajectories, as well as a

battleground for a number of pivotal debates surrounding diverse issues such as food security, biotechnology, environmental degradation, and farmer democracy movements, among others (Scoones, 2006: passim). There has also been a clarion call within the country for greater investment and a renaissance in agricultural research to address the shortcomings of the original GR, and launch a second GR, which some stakeholders have termed an ‘Evergreen Revolution’ (Scoones, 2006, Swaminathan, 2010). Some neighbouring countries such as Nepal and Bangladesh, as well as those with similar agricultural and socio-economic mores, continue to look to the India for guidance and inspiration on how to structure their own agricultural research systems (Senanayake, 1990). This has resulted in some aspects of the Indian NARS appearing to differing degrees in other countries’ agricultural research and extension systems.

Out of the three South Asian countries that CAZS-NR has predominantly worked with, it seems prudent to focus on India in light of the degree of influence it exerts over its neighbouring countries.

With respect to the question of whether the Indian NARS is representative of other NARS regimes, it is useful to consider the similarity and differences of processes that occur within the regime. Although the consideration of types of NARS structures has some merit as a

classification exercise, an investigation into organisational processes and praxes can go beyond a more general classification of organisational type. The relevance of processes, activities and relationships is that they may appear across different NARS independent of their structural type. Any conclusions that may result from this study will acknowledge the degree to which they are context dependent or have potential to be more generalisable.

The next section will provide a broad overview of the case study area and key projects before elaborating on why this case has been selected and how it is bounded.