Research Method

Qualitative research varies in its methodological approaches and Phase 1 of this study adopts qualitative research with a constructive-interpretive genre, the details of which are explained below.

3.2.1 Qualitative research and constructivist-interpretive paradigm

Qualitative research approaches generally allow for an in-depth inquiry into a social or human problem in its natural setting with the intention of developing a rounded understanding on the basis of rich, contextual and detailed data (Creswell, 1998). It is also common with qualitative research to have a number of methods in the inquiry process that are aimed at interpreting a

problem, situation or behaviour, whilst in its natural setting, based on methods of analysis and explanation building which involve an understanding of complexity, detail and context (Mason, 1996). Most importantly, the methods adopted for data generation are flexible and sensitive to the social context in which the data are produced. Strauss and Corbin (1990) stated that qualitative research can be used to explore phenomena that are not known about. It can also be used to gain new perspectives on phenomena about which much is already known. In this thesis, the conceptual setting is LOC business in the timber projects of PNG’s forest industry and the in-depth inquiry leading to the development of better understanding of those factor that determine their performances will involve a number of different methods.

Any qualitative research is shaped by the researcher’s paradigm (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994). A paradigm is a worldview, a general perspective or a way of breaking down the complexity of the real world (Patton, 1990). A paradigm consists of three fundamental and related constituent components (questions) that together form the basis for assessing the beliefs of the paradigm adopted. They are ontological, epistemological and methodological assumptions that together frame the nature of the research and the role of the researchers in undertaking the scientific enquiry. Ontological assumptions in the conduct of an inquiry within a paradigm are intended to seek answers to questions such as what is the form and nature of reality and therefore, what is there that can be known about (Guba & Lincoln, 1989; Khazanchi & Munkvold, 2003). Epistemology is the theory of knowledge which is linked to ontology (Woodford, 1997) . The epistemological assumptions answer the question: What is the nature of the relationship between the knower or would-be knower and what can be known? (Guba & Lincoln, 1989). Paradigms dictate the way the world should be known, what the researcher’s version of reality and truth is, and how to research and make sense of that reality (Schwandt, 2000). Denzin and Lincoln (1994) noted two main paradigms at the general level and four main paradigms at the specific levels within the two main paradigms. The two main paradigms at the general level are the qualitative and quantitative, and the four paradigms at the specific levels within these two main paradigm levels include positivist and post positivist, constructivist (interpretivist or naturalistic) and critical theoriest. The positivist and post positivist are associated with the quantitative paradigms, while the constructivists and critical theorists paradigms are associated with the qualitative paradigm.

This research adopts a constructivist-interpretive paradigm. The constructivist paradigm is based on the assumption that knowledge is created in the interactions between the investigator and the respondents while the interpretive paradigm considers that the world is constructed and interpreted by human actions and beliefs (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe, & Lowe, 1991). As such,

the paradigm views people as actors in the social system and values the interaction between the researcher and informant that helps explain reality from the point of view of the people who live it in (Schwandt, 2000).

This study views the landowners as the social actors who live in the rural communities that comprise many tribal communities, villages, and households and individuals who have distinctive social systems as defined by their different customs or laws, beliefs, decision-making processes, social relations and languages. Despite these differences, all the different landowners or landowner clans from within the boundary of a timber project are united as a single group to participate in the forest concession agreements through their LOC and also pursue their development interests through their LOC business. My (researcher) interaction with the landowners and other stakeholders was to elicit information directly from them based on their experiences, accounts, perceptions, opinions, feelings, interactions, social relations and knowledge in relation to the phenomenon studied, which in this case centred on the three case study LOCs in the timber projects of PNG’s forest industry. It is through this interaction that the general situation of the LOCs and other key factors affecting them can be socially constructed and interpreted from the perspective of the social actors and in their own context. In this sense, Guba and Lincoln (1994) mentioned that the notions of meaning and reality are to be understood from the perspectives of the social actors, where relationships are defined and enacted, and from the way respondents subjectively as well as objectively view themselves within their own context. In such cases, researchers have to be mindful and open to alternative interpretations. As individuals, we make these interpretations within the framework of mental constructs that reflect the subjective nature of our life experiences and training. In qualitative research, this leads to the acceptability of the constructivist-interpretative paradigm.

The choice of a research method is often driven by the research questions which are framed in terms of ‘what’, ‘why’ and ‘how’ questions. The ‘what’ questions attempt to explore the boundaries of knowledge rather than confirm a hypothesis, and are indicative of descriptive and exploratory research (Patton, 2002; Yin, 2003). The ‘why and ‘how questions are indicative of explanatory research. While case studies are more aligned with quantitative analysis (Yin, 2003), in this study, the approach is from an emic12 _{perspective, such that the explanations, and}

the constructions of realities derived from them are from the lived experience of the landowners. Phase 1 of the study adopts the case study as a research strategy and grounded theory as a research method. Each of these methods is covered below.

12 _{An outsider’s view}