Methodological Considerations

This section focuses on the methodological considerations which are in line with the constructionist epistemology and phenomenological theoretical perspective. This involves a discussion of objectivity, positionality, reflexivity, validity and reliability/dependability.

There has been a movement to interdisciplinary approaches in sustainability research and divergent ontological and epistemological perspectives (Khoo, 2013). In this light, these perspectives and different methodological approaches, particularly the qualitative ones which socially construct environmental or sustainability concerns, offer opportunities to expand knowledge. This thesis does just that through its qualitative approach. The methodological approach of this thesis uses an emic perspective of the

139

stakeholder discourses of tourism as a development option. This is to examine the active stakeholders own interpretations and local inside knowledge (Jennings and Weiler 2006). This knowledge is then reflected in their discourses of STD in the WBR. If an etic approach was undertaken, the constructs relating to STD would have been designed by the researcher and would therefore not have been a fit with the research aims and objectives. The purpose of this research is not to predict or generalise, but is to describe, understand and interpret. Reality is therefore socially constructed and has many meanings or interpretations. There is a synergy between the research design and the subject being researched that underpins the qualitative methodology in this study.

5.3.1 Objectivity

Phenomenologists have to examine the various constructions that arise from not only their perspectives, but also of those being researched. This leads to the issues of objectivity when conducting this type of research which involves an opportunity to gather and interpret knowledge about the social world. This allows us to make claims about the world, claims that are much more than opinions, but are evidence based theories which can substantiate or refute not only our own beliefs, but those of wider society (May 2001). This is what Mills (1959) would call the ‘sociological imagination’, that is, a theorising of the social world and it is this theorising that leads us to a better understanding of society, in this case discourses of STD in the WBR. Being objective refers to the removal of the researcher’s persona (emotions, knowledge, experience, values etc.) from the research process (Somekh and Lewin, 2005). As Esterberg (2002) notes, researchers are seldom in a position of neutrality from the research process as their research reflects both their interests and their priorities. This is pertinent to this research for the following reasons: the Waterberg was not chosen by accident, as I have visited the area on numerous occasions; tourism is an area of personal and professional interest and finally; I am a white, Western, English-speaking, male academic investigating development concerns. This then leads into two linked areas, discussed below. The first involves my ‘positionality’ and the second on

140

reflexivity. All of these aspects influence my ability to have a truly objective approach and this is recognised as a potential limitation of the research.

5.3.2 Positionality and Reflexivity

One of the fundamental aspects of qualitative research is that the researcher understands and reflects upon their active role in driving and modelling their study. This active role involves notions of positionality and reflexivity. Positionality refers to the identities of the researcher in relation to the researched and incorporates the idea of situated knowledge (Wolf, 1996). Positionality is dependent on the culture, gender, race and life experiences of the researcher (Berry and Mizelle, 2006), and also ideological leanings, epistemological perspectives and philosophical orientations (Beckman and Adeoti, 2006). Situated knowledge is therefore central to the research process. As Thomas (2009) notes, the researcher is an active not passive agent in acquiring knowledge of the numerous processes, histories, language and events surrounding the research context.

With regard to this research project, how we view not only ourselves, but also others, is crucial as it involves the study of ‘the Other’ (Urry 1990). Ryan (2005) states that the very action of question asking is not a neutral act, it bestows legitimacy on the question as the question forms an agenda to be considered by the respondent. It also requires a response, one that may or not be ‘the truth’, but is certainly a construct. As part of the research process, constant evaluation of bias and subjectivity needs to be considered as do techniques such as reflexivity for limiting or reducing bias.

My own experiences of South Africa are predominantly from a ‘First World’ perspective, either as a privileged tourist or an equally privileged researcher. The initial contacts with people in the Waterberg were with those from the advantaged residents living in relative luxury as opposed to the majority of the disadvantaged. As Visser (2000) notes, Western Academics, when undertaking research in South Africa, need to do so with respect to cultural, economic, social, racial and gender sensibilities. While this is laudable and something which I strive for, it can be problematic in practice and required me

141

to undertake cross-cultural research and an appreciation of a variety of situations and people. As part of the reflexive approach in this project, I understand that I am a well-travelled and predominantly empathetic person who is well versed in cultural nuances. However, as it was important to get ‘good data’, the issue of establishing rapport and trust with the stakeholders arose, some of whom may have been distrustful of a white, academic from the UK. An issue did occur with one group of interviewees, African land claimants, who were initially reluctant to sign the consent form, as they were distrustful of signing any paperwork. This cross-cultural sensitivity involved me being open in answering any questions people had about me, my research and my motivations. Sometimes I had to downplay my professional status with the interviewees, as I wanted to present myself as the learner and that I was attempting to understand something about their opinions and attitudes. Through reflexivity and careful consideration of my own bias and values, my research recognises these considerations at all stages of the research process. How this research project was designed, which questions were asked to whom and why those questions were asked is a reflection of the way in which I understand the social world.

5.3.3 Validity, Reliability and Dependability

One of the central concerns regarding qualitative inquiry is that of validity, which relates to plausibility, relevance, credibility, completeness, appropriateness, comprehensiveness, conformability, applicability, consistency, and neutrality (Whittemore, Chase and Mandle, 2001). When undertaking research in another culture, Kvale (1983) asserts that validity is problematical due to the differences in the cultures of the researcher and researched. It can however be achieved through crystallisation. For Richardson (1994) there is no fixed reality when researching the social world and therefore in order to enhance the validity of the research, she offers crystallization as a better way (than triangulation) of viewing qualitative research design. “Crystallisation refers to the practice of ‘validation’ of results by using multiple methods of data collection and analysis” (Hodder as cited in Maree and van de Westhuizen, 2009, p35). It is especially relevant in tourism- related research as tourism is a multifaceted and interdisciplinary

142

phenomenon (Decroip, 2004). A variety of data sources were used for this thesis: government reports; interview data; and academic literary sources. A number of methods were also used: both primary and secondary methods. Whittemore, Chase and Mandle (2001) also identify numerous techniques for demonstrating validity. The ones which are relevant to this study include: developing a self-conscious research design sampling decisions (i.e., sampling adequacy); employing crystallisation; articulating data collection decisions; demonstrating prolonged engagement; providing verbatim transcription; exploring rival explanations; performing a literature review; reflexive journaling; providing evidence that support interpretations; acknowledging the researcher perspective; providing thick descriptions. All these aspects have been considered, taken into account and actioned where necessary throughout the whole research process. For example verbatim transcriptions were carried out of all interviews, crystallisation has been employed and engagement with the region and the subject has been investigated over a number of years.

An important question regarding research projects: “How can an inquirer persuade his or her audiences that the research findings of an inquiry are worth paying attention to?" (Lincoln and Guba, 1985, p290). In answering this they state that in qualitative research the whole process must be ‘dependable’ which corresponds to the term ‘reliable’ in the positivist paradigm. Lincoln and Guba (1985, p316) go on to state that "Since there can be no validity without reliability, a demonstration of the former [validity] is sufficient to establish the latter [reliability]". The validity of this research project has been demonstrated above, therefore ipso facto it can also deem to be reliable/dependable.

5.3.4 Generalisability

The discussion of generalisability in phenomenology is similar to that of reliability, that is, the research findings of one case cannot be directly translated into others or generalisations made about whole populations (Wainwright, 1997). This research project has endeavoured to do just that through a rigorous approach to theoretical perspectives, methodological considerations and the methods employed.

143 5.4 Methods

The research objectives listed in 5.1 above state that the central purpose of the research project is to determine whether tourism can be a sustainable development option in the WBR. This was done through a variety of methods, which are techniques or procedures used to collect and analyse data (King and Horrocks, 2010). Primary methods of data collection included semi- structured interviews and the examination of primary documents from a variety of sources. The secondary sources were used to complement the primary data and consisted of an extensive review of secondary literature from journals, books, websites and reports. This section discusses these methods in relation to the aim and objectives.

5.4.1 Case-study approach

A case-study is appropriate when the researcher requires an in-depth understanding of a phenomenon because of its uniqueness. The WBR has been recognised by UNESCO as a unique area (UNESCO, 2002) and is one of the reasons why a case-study is appropriate for this project. Other reasons are given below. Case-studies have certain characteristics which are outlined below, all of which can be applied to this research project (in italics) (Ellinger, Watkins and Marsick, 2005). Case-studies are:

Bounded – the WBR is a specific geographical area.

Embedded in larger systems – Macro: development; tourism systems and micro: South African social, economic, political systems.

Multivariate – numerous variables exist including social, economic, political, legislative, environmental.

Multi-method – primary and secondary methods employed.

Multi-disciplinary – tourism, development studies, sociology, geography, management.

Multi-site – multiple people access numerous sites from numerous locations.

144

Case-studies are carried out within the boundaries of one social system, monitoring a phenomenon over a specific time period (Swanborn, 2010), in this case tourism development in the WBR from 2009 to 2013. This case- study uses what Swanborn calls a holistic approach whereby the behaviour of people and social phenomenon within the boundaries of the WBR system are explored. Case-studies also incorporate the idea that the researcher deals with several stakeholders each with perceptions, interpretations, arguments, explanations and prejudices, (Elinger, Watkins and Marsick, 2005). This relates objective two of this thesis regarding active stakeholder discourses in the WBR and hence the use of a case-study analysis. However, there are criticisms levelled at case-studies, particularly the issues of bias (Yin, 2003). This is related to the notions of rigour and objectivity. The former is addressed through the theoretical and methodological considerations and the latter is specifically addressed through reflexivity mentioned above.

5.4.2 Research Phases

This section charts how the research project was undertaken, when the different approaches to data collection were carried out and why that particular method was chosen. Table 5.1 provides an overview of the research stages, which methods were employed and when.

The Research Process - Phase 1: Literature Review and Scoping Visit This section examines the first phase of the research process which includes secondary research in the form of undertaking a literature review and also primary research which involved a scoping visit to the Waterberg in June and July, 2009. This phase relates mainly to objective one which is to examine the issues surrounding tourism as a sustainable development option.

145

Phase Research focus Methods employed Analysis