Research Tools

Qualitative research was used to unearth various business structures, specific business evolutions, individual experiences, knowledge, innovative actions taken, personal or business histories as well as specific policies, actions or resources that have been particularly instrumental in enabling or prohibiting entrepreneurial success. Methods used to collect this information were document analysis, observation, semi-structured interviews, case studies,

key informant interviews and market chain analysis. During the ‘pre-data collection, tool-

testing period’, it was discovered that respondents became visibly anxious when asked if conversations could be recorded and responses were observed to be much less detailed. Given this experience, a recording device was not used during data collection.

Document Analysis relied on the review of reports, sector analyses, market assessments and

policy documents from public sector actors, private investors, technical experts as well as government agencies. A systematic, evidence focused, literature review process was used to ensure the robust identification, review and synthesizing of theories, thoughts and evidence in support of this research and process (Hagen-Zanker and Mallett, 2013). Establishing fundamental baselines for political and economic histories as well as current political environments, initially presented in Chapter 4, enabled appreciation of how operational contexts have and continue to influence action as well as in how to interpret action and opportunity pursuit. Additionally, provided that the entrepreneur and operational context are interdependent and believed to co-evolve, a deep understanding of histories, political and economic influences as well as socio-cultural perceptions were considered critical to more fully understand the entrepreneur and corresponding action within a system. While research was on going, document analysis provided much of the theoretical understanding of entrepreneurship and backgrounds to the respective coffee industries within each country. It was also used in some cases to check or provide context to information obtained from respondents.

Observation was an on-going process, inclusive of indirect observation of the distinct

marketplaces and actors as well as direct observations with respondents in a participatory process. Direct observation not only improved understanding of systems and procedures but also allowed for observation of entrepreneurs within their distinct operational contexts (Silverman, 2011). Additionally, Visual Mapping Techniques were used and found to be especially beneficial during community entry. Visual mapping was used as a means of an additional, unobtrusive, informal data gathering process to provide an improved understanding of specific areas. Visual assessments included:

 Physical infrastructure within and leading to a community (road quality, electricity access)

 Transportation vehicles available (bicycles, motorbikes, cars)

 Dwellings (type/ quality of housing and/ or roofing, construction materials used)

 Number of shops, bars, local banks/ credit offices, street vendors, prevalence of livestock  Presence of markets held

Techniques also considered personal attributes of individual respondents and other individuals within a community such as:

 Clothing

 Shoes (purchased or hand-made, lack of shoes)  Number of children in school uniforms (or not)

While these observations are obviously not a concrete guide, it did provide additional, relative background information and was used to enable better absorption and understanding of information provided.

Semi-Structured Interviews were used with respondents analysed in this research in order to

guide conversations on, but not limited to, business models, market perspectives, market understanding or interpretation of opportunity, future outlooks, influences to business, individual histories, current political realities and business actions. Examples of the semi- structured interview questionnaire can be found in Appendix B.

Key Informant Interviews were conducted with other sector actors operating within

Key informant interviews were used as a means of gaining and building background knowledge, clarifying information gathered and discussing result outcomes and initial findings. Attempts were made to schedule key informant interviews prior to field data collection. However in some cases, additional interviews were scheduled following the completion of field data collection in the attempt to clarify questions raised and ensure adequate and appropriate knowledge or information was gained. Based on specific positions, some key informants were able to provide strategic contacts into targeted research areas or to potential respondents. Examples of the key informant interview questions can be found in Appendix C. Table 3.1 below provides further detail into the number of key informants found for specific groups in Ethiopia and Rwanda.

Table 3.1. Breakdown of Key Informants Interviewed

(Source: Author Construct)

Case Studies were used mainly with entrepreneurs that had demonstrated a unique business model or operational scheme or were involved in multiple business phases of the coffee chain. Case studies were used to provide additional clarifications and highlight some of the most interesting individuals found through this research. Focus Groups were found difficult to achieve and occurred only three times in Rwanda with Smallholder Producers. Ethiopian respondents refused to be seen meeting as a group and thus none occurred in Ethiopia. Multiple case study synopses are presented in Chapters 5, 6 and 7.

Market Chain Assessments were used for each country and marketplace. These were used to

determine product flow, support mechanisms, actor overlap, influences external to the chain, direct and indirect government involvement and sources and destinations of financial movements. This study used the Global Value Chain Analysis (GVCA) technique in support

Key Informant Type Ethiopia Rwanda

Government or Coffee Department Official 4 3

ECX Official (Ethiopia Only) 2

CEPAR Official (Rwanda Only) 3

NGO / Research Group 6 4

Non-National, Private Sector Actor in Coffee Sector 2 3

International Institution 1

Coffee Cooperative Leader 2 1

of assessments of market structures, embedded networks and potential impacts for value distribution. GVCA also was used to support analysis and interpretation of influences from operational structures, chain dynamics, factors impacting income generation and product flow as well as income distribution within and between actors (Kaplinsky, 2000; Gibbon, 2001; Bolwig et al., 2010). Through the use of GVCA in analysing entrepreneurs within the respective coffee sectors, market structures were captured, presenting greater understanding to the skeletal construction of the respective entrepreneurial ecosystems. Within this research, analysis specific market chains were developed to capture direct and indirect government influences, financial flows (or lack thereof) external influences and final product flow capacity. Various depictions of the market chains developed through this research can be found in Sections 4.3.3.1, 4.4.3.1 and 6.4.1.1, 6.4.1.2.

Participatory Budgeting was used in the attempt to define actual profitability of coffee

businesses. In Rwanda, budgeting occurred with Smallholder Producers and one Processor. In Ethiopia, only one participatory budgeting session took place with Smallholder Producers. Formal businesses of Commercial Farmers, Processors and Exporters were reluctant to discuss private, proprietary information. Due to the small sample size of respondents participating in this method, results cannot be generalized and are not included within wider analysis. However, outcomes from participatory budgeting sessions and the related costing models can be found in Appendix A.

Quantitative research relied on a Structured Questionnaire to determine degrees of specific individual characteristics: resilience, self-efficacy, innovativeness, risk tolerance, and opportunity recognition and entrepreneurial orientation (OR+EO). This questionnaire was structured using a Likert Scale to measure strength or depth of specific traits, or drivers, in Entrepreneurs, Potential Entrepreneurs as well as Non-Entrepreneurs. Likert scales are the most commonly used method found for testing individual traits (Chen et al., 1998; Zhao et al., 2005; Bullough et al., 2013) and the likert scale method was used specifically to understand the dimensions, or depth of individual characteristics of respondents (Bernard, 2000). Ranking and scoring exercises were also used within the questionnaire, in order to test respondent preference to specific financial packages. Likert scale questionnaires were

translated into Amharic and Kinyarwanda. Examples of the Structured Questionnaire and Likert Scale used can be found in Appendix D.

A sample size of 20 to 30 respondents was targeted for each business segment across the

Entrepreneurial Range, identified previously in Figure 3.7, per country. 63% of Rwandan

privately owned processing businesses and over 85% of Rwandan owned export businesses were interviewed for this research. With more than 400,000 smallholder producers involved in Rwanda’s coffee production nationwide, the 126 Smallholder Producers interviewed for this research remain a marginally representative sample.

It was very difficult to obtain accurate information regarding businesses currently operating in Ethiopia’s coffee sector, and different reports and government agencies provided large variances in business registrations and current stages of operation (licensing fees paid). However, it is estimated that over 70% of Commercial Farmers and at least 50% of privately owned processing businesses located within the southern coffee zones of Yirgacheffee and Sidama were interviewed for this research. To be discussed in Section 4.3.3, only 300 EXC Export Licences are available in Ethiopia, however an undisclosed number of non-licenced ECX Exporters continue to operate. Exporters typically source nationally and thus, cannot be limited to a single production zone. This research interviewed both licensed and non- licenced Exporters and while it is estimated that at least 15% of all Exporters were interviewed, an exact percentage for the business segment is unable to be calculated. Smallholder Producers number more than four million people in Ethiopia, and similar to Rwanda, the 95 Smallholder Producers able to be interviewed for this research remain marginally representative.

Table 3.2 below, details outcomes of data collection, presenting the number of respondents for each research tool used. All respondents partaking in the Likert Scale Questionnaire also took part in a Semi-Structured Interview. Sample size, per business segment is presented for these methods for clarity as they formed the main data collection for quantitative analysis. A more detailed breakdown for the specific business segments and Entrepreneurial Range is detailed in Section 5.3. Method and tool testing periods, prior to actual data collection are

not included in this final count. As can be seen, Ethiopia had an overall lower sample size than Rwanda in nearly all categories. While a greater degree of difficulty in actual respondent sourcing was experienced in Ethiopia, it is also considered as an outcome to the restrictive market and adverse political structure, as well as the closeness of National Elections to data collection occurrence.

Table 3.2. Details of Data Collection, Number of Respondents per Tool

(Source: Author Research Data)

In maintaining respondent anonymity, coding of respondents was used according to the following system identified in Table 3.3 below, depicting business segment, country, interview number within specific business segment and year of interview. Countries were designated as ‘E’ for Ethiopia and ‘R’ for Rwanda. An example code for the first Smallholder Producer respondent in Rwanda interviewed in 2014 would be: (P_R_1, 2014). Key Informant interviews used a similar strategy, coding key informants by country of operation, interview number and year of interview, such as (E_1, 2015) for the first key informant interviewed in Ethiopia. Data gathered from discussion and interviews are referenced accordingly throughout this thesis through direct quotes or case studies. Data and information from respondents not presented as a direct quote has still been referenced, in regards to this structure, throughout the text.

Research Tool, (N) Ethiopia Rwanda

Semi-Structured Interview 95 126

Questionnaire (Liker Scale) 95 126

Decaffeinated Producer (Rwanda only) - 14 Smallholder Producer, Non-Entrepreneur 4 31 Smallholder Producer, Potential Entrepreneur 17 15 Smallholder Producer, Entrepreneur 6 23 Commercial Farmer (Ethiopia only) 22 -

Processor 26 20

Exporter 20 23

Key Informant Interview 17 14

In-Depth Case Study 5 15

Focus Group 0 3

Table 3.3. Coding Classifications

(Source: Author)