Methodological limitations and assumptions

Many of the assumptions and limitations about individual components of the methodology have been addressed during the discussion and justification for use. There are, though, several broader methodological questions that need addressing. A key dynamic relates to the nature of PhD research. Ph.D.’s come with some practical limitations that constrain the scope of a study, namely: time, resources and research being undertaken by a single researcher. Despite these restrictions, this research was a thorough, rich and in-depth investigation into

the transformation of intergroup relations and the role violence plays in this process. It included two substantial periods of fieldwork and led to a number of new insights with implications for the field of peacebuilding.

3.7.1 Researcher positionality and bias

Bias and assumptions about the researcher's identity, from the researcher themself and their participants, can affect the research process (England, 1994; Holmes, 2014). Here, I take a reflexive look at my identity as a white, British, male, secular PhD student for whom it was the first time to Mozambique and Nepal, and first time conducting research in post-war contexts.

Having no prior connections to either country carried both advantages and disadvantages. Lack of association can be of benefit by increasing objectivity when analysing the data, but as an outsider not in my native culture, I was unaware of the subtleties of socio-political dynamics that may have been affecting the data (Buil, 2012). For example, a lack of localised knowledge may have impacted on participant selection. Research assistants were instrumental in accessing and helping choose interviewees in the villages. Consciously, or

subconsciously, I could have unknowingly been steered toward individuals who represented particular views or vested interests, for example, only interviewing local elites. It is difficult to accurately access the impact of this risk other than to highlight I was conscious of it and took steps to try and guard against bias by working with trusted individuals who understood the aims of the research, and whom I instructed to get a balanced view from within the villages.

A prominent aspect of my identity that could have affected the research was my position as a white westerner. It is reasonable to assume that in both Nepal and Mozambique I was in the position of ‘outsider’. This carries a risk of not being able to elicit reliable and truthful data from subjects who view the researcher as a stranger (Dwyer and Buckle, 2009:54). There were several instances where I was very aware of my ‘otherness'. One example was working through

interpreters, generating an inescapable sense of separation from the participant. Also, there were two instances that stand out where I was interviewing ex-

combatants, both in Mozambique, where I felt suspicion from the participants towards me. In the majority of cases, though, I found myself being welcomed, both from interviewees in the capitals and the villages. In the latter, in particular, most of my stays were with families rather than hotels and I was asked to

participate in village gatherings (even a wedding ceremony), generally being treated as a guest. I was, however, challenged once in Maputo and another time in Kathmandu by informants testing my level of understanding of the countries history and civil war. This was counterbalanced, though, by other participants who would compliment me on my knowledge of post-war dynamics.

My identity as a lone PhD researcher may have aided access to, and openness from, interviewees. Not one participant ever refused to give an answer to a specific question, and often I received candid and sometimes (particularly in Mozambique) contentious views given the sensitive peace talks that were underway at the time. These were times when ‘otherness’ appeared to be an advantage. People were willing to talk, and several times research assistants explained this was in part because I was believed to be a neutral party: not representing a particular group, view or institution linked to the peace process. Indeed, in Mozambique, a number of people actively sought me out offering to be interviewed. As a general observation, I was never actively questioned or

challenged on my religious beliefs, political persuasion or nationality.

These deliberations are my own interpretation of the ways different aspects of my identity may have influenced the research process. To be fully aware of the impact is incredibly problematic because positionality can change with every new person and interaction. In addition, Holmes (2014:7) says that individuals may be unaware of how they and others have constructed their identities. The hope is that by being cognisant, reflective and highlighting these aspects of my position in the research the reader will gain better insight into where I am coming from and how this may potentially shape the research process and its outcomes.

In regard to bias in outcomes, inevitably, findings are shaped by the assumptions and experiences of the researcher. They will influence decisions about what observations and conclusions are used and how. The empirical chapters and argument are constructed around the findings that bore the most relevance to knowledge gaps and that worked in a complementary way to be able to answer the overarching research question. Due to constraints on space, some results could not be included. I consulted supervisors closely, so, through multiple discussions and iterations of the analysis, any assumptions around the choice of findings and their interpretations have been subjected to academic scrutiny and challenge. Where interesting observations and findings emerged but could not be included in the empirical discussions, the key points are picked up in the

concluding chapter under recommendations for further research.

3.7.2 Data difference and outcome generalisability

The threats of renewed fighting, political tensions and peace talks that were ongoing in Mozambique during fieldwork limited sites I could safely access for the village interviews.32 _{This issue has implications for the use of data in the}

empirical chapters. I wanted to travel to villages outside of the south of

Mozambique. Maputo and the southern provinces are historically regarded as a FRELIMO dominated region (Hall and Young, 1997; Manning, 2002; Reis, 2012). In central and northern Mozambique there are many areas where there is greater allegiance to RENAMO, and increasingly the Democratic Movement of Mozambique (MDM) in cities such as Beira. Gorongosa in central Mozambique, for example, is where RENAMO headquarters are outside of Maputo and where RENAMO station the majority of their active forces. Ethnic and linguistic

diversity also mean that socio-political and cultural dynamics are different across the country.

Being unable to travel more widely meant that I could not get a picture of intergroup relations in villages where the balance and dynamics between

32 _{Interviews in the capital Maputo, and in particular, with the various political parties were not restrained}

and so do not raise similar concerns around the picture of the transformation process at the national political level.

members of the previous wartime identity groups would have been very different. A local NGO did offer to take me to the Gorongosa Province to interview in some villages there but the British Government were advising against all travel to this area. Many in-country contacts supported this

assessment, pointing out I was a stranger who did not speak the local languages, or Portuguese, asking emotive and potentially dangerous questions at a very volatile time. For these reasons, it was not feasible to try and access villages in central of northern parts of the country.

Despite visiting three villages in each country, the lack of socio-political diversity in the Mozambican villages, relative to the Nepalese, could raise concerns around representativeness and claims that can be made from the village data. I am mindful that this issue does introduce limitations but it is important to reiterate that direct comparison across cases is not an objective of this research. I took some steps to limit the impact of the difference though, working with research assistants to select villages in the south of Mozambique where there are sizable populations of RENAMO supporters and ex-combatants living alongside

FRELIMO members. Also, questioning those interviewees who have lived, worked or travelled in other parts of the country to gain their experience of intergroup relations outside of the south.

How the differences in access to villages impacts the research also comes down to a question of how I use the data. The empirical chapters are not built on a direct compare and contrast structure but on using the data from across the two cases to support my observations and findings illustratively. I have more diverse and rich data to draw upon for Nepal and as a result, therefore, data from my Nepalese interviews features more prominently. I am mindful that this is not ideal and acknowledge the limitations of the Mozambique data but this is, unfortunately, unavoidable given the situation at the time of fieldwork.

Discussion around case data also raises the issue around the generalisability of outcomes. Maxwell and Mittapalli (2008) maintain that generalisability is a synonym for external validity. External validity is the degree to which limited or

contextually specific examples can be convincingly extrapolated out to broader conclusions (Silverman, 2006:47). At several points in this chapter I have acknowledged how the methodology has been mindful of the limitations of site visits and interview sampling. The study aims to look at post-war violence as an issue of how the groups that were fighting transform away from the violence that characterised their relations during the civil war. It is unrealistic to make claims that findings from a sampling of three villages in Nepal and three villages in Mozambique are representative of a wider national picture of the transformation process. The findings are, however, a good representation of intergroup

relationships within the villages that I interviewed and the findings can be used to reflect on some of the larger debates within the peacebuilding literature. Claims are made with the caveat and awareness of the limits of the data that I was able to gather.

3.8 Summary

In this chapter, I have outlined the methodology used to address the research question. It has detailed data collection, analysis and how the theories were applied to this process. The following two chapters offer the outcomes of this analysis. There are two empirical chapters because, rather than organising the findings around individual themes or concepts, the argument that I make over the course of these chapters builds to answer the research question in a way that was better presented and structured around the sub-research questions. Chapter 5 centres on sub-question one, considering the transformation process unfolding between political parties as they inform, develop and implement the peace process. Chapter 6 turns to sub-question two, focusing on understandings and experience of intergroup conflict among the village interviewees and compares these findings to the political party transformation process in Chapter 5. Sub- question 3 that considers the influence of the political system on the