Qualitative Methodology

A qualitative methodology has been selected for this study because of the nature of the research problem, which seeks to understand and explore the local community’s or host residents’ perceptions of success in community-based tourism, compared with the views of NGOs supporting community-based tourism. Therefore, based on information requirements, this study is exploratory-explanatory in nature (Jennings, 2010, pp. 17-19). Exploratory research is used to identify possible categories and concepts suitable for use in further research or in understanding that which prevails in areas related to the study topic, such as social capital (e.g. strong and cohesive community) or institutional capital (e.g. genuine community control). These are factors that would lead to a CBT initiative being successful. Explanatory research aims to explain the ‘how’ and ‘why’ of the social and tourism phenomena under study, such as how a tourism initiative is influencing a livelihood asset and thus considered to be a success (or otherwise) by the people in the locality.

This research is informed by both the interpretive social sciences and critical theory paradigms. The interpretive social sciences paradigm utilises an inductive approach, initiating the study in a real-world setting of social action in an attempt to develop explanations of phenomena, and to generate or modify theoretical constructions as opposed to testing a theory or being hypothetic-deductive (Decrop, 2004, p. 157;

40 Stewart-Withers, Banks, McGregor, & Meo-Sewabu, 2014, p. 59). In seeking to understand these phenomena, the researcher uses an insider’s perspective, or ‘emic perspective’, rather than an outsider’s perspective, which enables the researcher to discover multiple realities since the views of all social actors are considered and are equally valued (Jennings, 2010, pp. 40-41).

Both the interpretive social sciences and critical theory paradigms share the same epistemological basis, in which the research process involves interaction between the researcher and the subject under study, and the interactive, participative and cooperative relationship is a subjectively oriented one rather than objective (Decrop, 2004, p. 157; Jennings, 2010, pp. 40-44; Petty, Thomson, & Stew, 2012a, p. 270). From an axiological standpoint, both paradigms value propositional, transactional knowledge which leads to social change and emancipation of marginalised peoples (Jennings, 2010, pp. 41-45). The researcher strives to find meaning behind the obvious and understand the social setting from the position of a person in the lower socioeconomic group being studied, as opposed to those in powerful positions (Jennings, 2010, p. 46). Tribe (2001, as cited in Tribe, 2004, p. 56) notes that the adoption of interpretive methods in tourism allows meaning to be understood in terms of the people who participate in tourism. The use of critical theory paradigm in this study is to support and identify the interests and needs of the local community and minority groups within the community, and collect data to be interpreted/(re)constructed in order to improve the livelihood outcomes of the community members. According to Habermas’ theory of knowledge-constitutive interests (1978, as cited in Tribe, 2004, pp. 55-56) interpretive methods seek understanding, while critical theory seeks emancipation.

Being informed by both the interpretive social sciences and critical theory paradigms, or collectively described as holistic-inductive paradigms (Jennings, 2010, p. 124), the methodology adopted in this study is a qualitative one. As the nature of this study is development research studying individuals’ subjective experiences and perceptions within tourism, and since tourism is a complex phenomenon based on interrelations and interactions, it is apt to employ a qualitative method of inquiry. Qualitative approaches can help us understand the human dimensions of society,

41 which in tourism include its social and cultural implications (Phillimore & Goodson, 2004, p. 4). Goodson and Phillimore (2004, pp. 39-40) point out that tourism spaces are not physically but socially constructed, and therefore we need to consider how the meanings relating to those spaces are constructed, deconstructed and reconstructed over time.

Therefore it is important to adopt a more person-focused approach. A qualitative mode of inquiry seeks to collect or generate data in natural settings, explaining complex social phenomena from the perspectives of how people understand them (Stewart-Withers, Banks, McGregor, & Meo-Sewabu, 2014, pp. 59-60). The researcher needs to be in the field setting for some time, entering the social milieu and everyday lives of the social actors, so that the researcher understands the phenomena or people being studied and gains acceptance within the community (Creswell, 2013, p. 151; Jennings, 2010, p. 42). The researcher focuses on naturally emerging languages and the meanings people assign to experience. In addition, the researcher is interested in life-worlds including emotions, attitudes, empathy, motivations, aspirations, concerns, behaviours, interpretations, symbols and their meanings, value systems, culture or lifestyle, and other subjective aspects associated with the naturally evolving lives of individuals and groups (Babbie, 2011, p. 315; Berg & Lune, 2012, p. 15; Marshall & Rossman, 2006, as cited in Stewart-Withers et al., 2014, p. 60). Naturalistic inquiry enables the researcher to highlight detailed and in-depth snapshots of the participants under study (Flick, von Kardorff & Steinke, 2004, pp. 6-9; Phillimore & Goodson, 2004, p. 40). A qualitative approach thus facilitates the collection of a greater variety of responses and an in-depth knowledge of the phenomena or experience that is grounded in the empirical field, providing rich and ‘thick descriptions’ for interpretation (Phillimore & Goodson, 2004, p. 40; Stewart-Withers et al., 2014, p. 61). To facilitate this, a qualitative case study approach is employed in this study, as will be described in the following subsection.