Media data

Other sources of qualitative data regarding the case study of BRT development projects in Bandung and Surabaya were found in the comments and statements of other key stakeholders in the newspapers, both at national and local levels. Newspaper articles at central (Kompas, the Jakarta Post, and others), provincial and city level government (Pikiran Rakyat, Jawa Pos, and others) were considered for analysis. Newspaper statements enter the public domain, and are considered as general knowledge. Even though the degree of truth of the statements is varied, based on the interpretation of the journalists and the newspapers’ editors, these qualitative data can nevertheless contribute to reporting specific dates of events within the progress of specific BRT projects, as part of the historical context of the case. The newspapers also mentioned names and positions of the policy actors, which is helpful when reconstructing the process of decision-making for BRT projects, especially the crucial moments in the stories of BRT projects’ progress. This enriched my knowledge of the case study under investigation. These sources of data are considered as outside the scope examined in determining ethical conduct as it is freely available to the public. However, the use of the data in this research was highly filtered as to ensure that the quality of the research was not negatively affected. This is aligned with what McLennan and Prinsen (2014) have argued that the collection of archival, textual and virtual data provide qualitative data for my research , but also pose issues of access and ownerships during the fieldwork.

3.5.5.

Fieldwork reflections

Desktop study was conducted in New Zealand prior to undertaking the fieldwork, including a website search of different government organisations. However, the reality in the fieldworks was entirely different and required continuous adjustment and discussion with supervisors over Skype. The first fieldwork shock was the news that the BRT project in Surabaya had been rejected, without knowing of any formal statement. The researcher had thought of changing the case study to Semarang, in Central Java Province, where a BRT project was being implemented. However, after consultation with supervisors, it was decided to keep Surabaya to explore in the list as it seemed that the investigation would become very interesting in terms of the reasons for which the Surabaya government rejected the BRT project. From this experience, the researcher learnt that Internet information in developing countries may not be able to convey the reality on the ground.

Fieldwork helped the researcher to discover the problems of her own country by understanding the context, meaning and interpretation of the problems.

The semi-structured interviews were very useful in undertaking this qualitative research. Problems and opportunities are communicated directly and indirectly by particular actors/stakeholders who involve in the BRT project. From government networks, the researcher has access to participants, both individual and institutional. The snow-balling method was used to gain a wide audience and to target the key stakeholders (Schwandt, 2001). However, not all participants are known to the researcher, which ensured the case study investigation was free from specific values being promoted in this research. Many lessons were learnt in approaching participants, such as doing so through the existing networks and circles of friends, and using the snow-balling methods to gain access to the key policy actors directly involved in the BRT project, who were not known to the researcher before fieldwork began. It was learnt that gaining access to interview participants among higher government officials is made easy through informal communication through a contact person who has influence at the city level, rather than through a formal letter to their offices. In fact, this has suggested the possibility that the formal planning processes for transport decision-making may be influenced by informal practices and networks. In conducting the interviews with officials in very high positions, good language skills are required to formulate the wording of questions to get the right messages across and avoid the negative connotation of the phrase “multi-level policy tensions”. The semi-structured interviews provided a platform for the researcher to experience living in the world of the participants and to see the context of the research from their perspectives.

During the fieldwork, various responses indicated the variability of participants. When the researcher explained the research title, aim, objectives and expected outputs, some participants were enthusiastic, but some others were sensitive during the interviews. The title “multi-level policy tensions” was associated with a negative meaning that would reveal problems within a government agency, which made the officials sensitive. The negative implications of the wording of the research topic provide lessons for other researchers in the social science field: when dealing with participants, avoid any word that has a negative connotation. In this research, one of the key officials at the central government ministry declined to be interviewed by the researcher due to the sensitivity

of this research. Other participants who have dealt directly with this official mentioned about the organisational working styles, which protect the good image of its institution. Therefore, negative association to the performance of this agency is threatening and should be avoided by any means. However, those who were enthusiastic about this research saw the originality of the ideas in examining the causes of multi-level policy tensions in transport and climate change governance. They also expected the academic contribution in the research findings would improve policy development and planning practices for promoting public transport in Indonesian cities. After the five-month fieldwork, the researcher returned to New Zealand for data analysis and writing up.