Methodological framework

Methodology is important because it “frames the questions being asked, determines the set of instruments and methods to be employed and shapes the analysis” (L. Smith, 1999, p. 143). The methodology chosen for this thesis must be sufficiently robust to capture the multiplicity of viewpoints on SD that exist on Mangaia. Diverse, often antithetical,

perspectives that range from ecocentricism to anthropocentricism, both within and across culture, must be scrutinised and ultimately captured (Veramu, 2010). Viewpoints that are dependent on an eclectic mix of Mangaian traditional livelihood strategies, culture and values and western thinking in the form of both government policy and aid agency

planning and project work. Dialectic tensions that emerge at the interface of these differing worldviews must be resolved by a consideration of the “multiple cultural contexts within which knowledge is produced” (Māhina & Nabobo-Baba, 2004, p. 203). Western

viewpoints of SD, underpinned by globalisation and neoliberalism that may clash with Pacific interpretations of SD based on Pacific culture and values, must be interpreted and resolved (Pene et al., 2002; Sanga & Thaman, 2009).

It is therefore vital the methodology chosen does not favour western over indigenous thinking and any tendency, to compartmentalise and /or romanticise culture, must be rejected. As Smith (1999) reminds, research methods must reject cultural essentialism, instead being open to changing, complex, diverse and opposing ideas found under the

umbrella of an indigenous worldview. The methodology will therefore seek out all viewpoints on SD and ESD across Mangaian and western origins but importantly, also within Mangaian thinking, culture and values, no matter how disparate.

4.2.1 Qualitative methodology

I employed a qualitative methodology, as it allowed me to capture the diversity of SD conceptualisation, across and within Mangaian culture, as well as the diversity of Mangaians’ opinions about the place and role of ESD at Mangaia School. Denzin and Lincoln (2011) define the strength of qualitative research as “a situated activity that locates the observer in the world. It consists of a set of interpretive, material practices that make the world visible” (p. 3).

Qualitative research changes the emphasis from a positivist approach, where grand theories are sought, to a social constructive approach where the research is holistic and process and context are important (Kincheloe & McLaren, 2002). Realities are wholes rather than broken down into discrete variables, meaning it was possible to capture the diversity of thought (Glesne, 2006). Adoption of a qualitative research method makes sense for four best-fit reasons:

x Firstly, qualitative research allowed me to explore Mangaians’ lived experiences in the context of SD and ESD (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000).

x Secondly, qualitative research permitted me to capture the diverse meanings that exist in relation to SD, sustainable livelihoods and ESD. Without any attempt to generalise the findings in a statistical sense (D. C. Phillips & Burbules, 2000). There exist multiple realities and knowledge that originate from often contrasting

Mangaian, Cook Island, Pacific and western worldviews.

x Thirdly, as Sanga (2004) outlines, a qualitative approach allows me to capture ontological truths where “‘reality’ is subjective to the context and people” (p. 44); epistemological truths where “knowledge is relativist and inseparable from the context and social realities of Pacific peoples” (p. 45); and axiological truths where “ the social world and research of that world is value bound” (p. 47). Truths that

exist in relation to SD and ESD on Mangaia and emerged as I engaged with Mangaians in a research partnership.

x Finally, qualitative research has allowed me to capture Mangaian SD thinking as it evolves over time. As Borofsky (1987), in his anthropological study of Pukapuka49_,

reminds, IK changes through time as it retains its “meaningfulness to the living rather than precise accuracy to the past”50 _{(p. 145). The interpretation of a culture,}

even by those people to whom the culture belongs, is not static. The same might be true on Mangaia, as Mangaians grapple with development ideas that originate from multiple knowledge sources, including past and present Mangaian culture.

Qualitative research is best suited to capturing the diversity of opinion on what Mangaian SD and ESD are and ought to be. For key aims of the research, see section 1.3.

4.2.2 Critical approach to research

In adopting a critical approach to my research, I could remain open to all viewpoints, indigenous and western and those that sit within a hopeful post-development framework that is accepting of indigenous development and radical democracies alongside a critical modernism. I was able to reject the entrenched assumptions of modernisation and

neoliberalism as the best, or only viable, development modes. Consequently, I was wary of development thinking that only argues for economic determinism and demands technical rationality. I was cautious of development thinking that became more interested in method and efficiency than the development goals of Mangaians. I also remained mindful of linguistic and discursive powers whilst researching, being aware of the relationship between culture and power (Kincheloe & McLaren, 2002).

My approach was qualitative research that adopts the “empowering values of critical pedagogy”, (Denzin & Lincoln, 2008, p. 5), and is able to remain “localised, grounded in the specific meanings, traditions, customs and community relations that operate in each cultural setting” (ibid, p. 6). With this in mind, I engaged in the Mangaian livelihood

49 _{An island in the Northern Cook Islands}

50 _{Borofsky (1987) points out, “perhaps Pukapukans preserve a past that never was but they preserve it in a}

tradition of uriuri manako51 _{(deep reflective thinking, often as part of a group, to problem}

solve and find a way forward). With uriuri manako central to Mangaia livelihoods and culture, participation in them is a prerequisite to gaining insight into Mangaian conceptions of SD and the role ESD should play in education on Mangaia. Participation in uriuri manako had the added benefit of building better research partnerships.

In summary, in adopting a critical research framework, I have taken the position the researcher must remain open to all viewpoints and worldviews, being careful not to essentialise indigenous thinking or western development practice. The inclusion of a hopeful post-development lens that is open to all development thinking offers this chance.