Selection of farmer interviewees

The aim of selection of farmer interviewees was to ensure sufficient diversity so that the main types of land manager response to the regulations were identified. First a list of potential interviewees was created, based largely on recommendations from key informants. Interviewees were chosen from the list with the aim of achieving both a sufficient sample and maximum variation (Patton, 1980). Thus a purposive (Guest, Bunce, & Johnson, 2006) or quota (Blaikie, 2010) sampling method was used.

Guest, Bunce & Johnson (2006), in a review of the literature concerning sample size in qualitative studies, found that most ethnographic studies used a sample size of between 30 and 60

interviewees. In their own study, these authors looked at the effect each successive interview had on the number and importance of the thematic codes discerned during analysis. They found that, in a relatively homogeneous population, 92% of the important code categories had been identified

after 12 interviews and thus, as Mason (2010) and O’Reilly & Parker (2012) advise, more data does

not necessarily lead to more information. Morse, Barrett, Mayan, Olson, & Spiers (2002) conclude, therefore, that depth of data and full coverage is more important that numbers of interviews. These aspects are realised when saturation has been achieved (Deming & Swaffield, 2011; Sandelowski, 2008) i.e. when similar information is elicited from farmer interviewees located in the same area and operating similar farming systems, or from key informants providing unvaried information.

Federated Farmers (a farmer lobby group) were contacted and asked if any of their members would be interested in being interviewed, and an article about the study was included in the Lake Taupo Care (a lobby group for Taupo farmers) newsletter. This list of potential interviewees was

supplemented by adding the names of farmers selected from the consent data provided by the Waikato Regional Council (WRC), the local government body responsible for the implementation of the cap and trade regulations (see Chapter Five). The WRC spreadsheet did not supply contact

details of farmers so a search of public information31 _{was undertaken to find these. The contact}

details of many of the farmers could not be found through public information sources and therefore no further effort was made to find or to contact them. In addition, interviewees, (both farmers and

key informants) were asked to recommend farmers to be interviewed, as per the ‘snowball’

technique (Deming & Swaffield, 2011).

The Waikato Regional Council calculated that there were 116 farms operating in this area in 201232_.

There were 8333 _{consents to operate a farm in the Catchment in October 2013 from the data}

provided by the Waikato Regional Council. Interviews were conducted with 26 farmers between May and October 2013, covering 27 consented properties in the north, south and western sectors. The table below shows how these interviews were distributed across the Catchment.

Northern Sector Southern Sector Western Sector Eastern Sector Total

Consd Intvd Consd Intvd Consd Intvd Consd Intvd Consd Intvd

46 13 16 7 11 7 10 0 83 27

28% 44% 64% N/A 32%

Table 2: Distribution of interviewed properties across sub-Catchment cases, compared with all farms with consent to farm in October 2013

(Source: Waikato Regional Council consent data). (Key: ‘Consd’ refers to farmers with consent to

farm and ‘Intvd’ is the number that were interviewed).

Overall 32% of consented properties were included in the interview sample. As the table above shows, the highest proportion of properties where the landowner was interviewed are located in the western sector and thus this sector is comparatively overrepresented in the study. Although there are consented properties in the eastern sector, these have been excluded from the study. Most farmland in the eastern sector belongs to a prison farm, and most of the land area is forested (and therefore a permitted land-use). Consequently, this sector was considered to be unrepresentative of the effects of the cap and trade regulations.

Two key factors influenced farmer interviewee selection – geographical spread, and type of farmer.

In addition to selecting interviewees who could enable the construction of a range of landscape biographies (one for each sub-Catchment case) a further aim was to explore the range of ways in

31 _{Search included the White Pages (a listing of land-line telephone numbers), the internet and the Company’s}

Office register

32 _{Jon Palmer, Waikato Regional Council, personal communication}

33 _{In the spreadsheet provided in Oct 2013, there are 81 consents but one consent had been surrendered and}

two farms had formed a partnership and were operating under one consent. These have been counted as separate consented properties. See Appendix B for a list of consents

which landscapes have transitioned. Consequently, emphasis has also been placed on coverage of the different types of farming operations in the Catchment. The consent data, provided by the Waikato Regional Council, enabled the farm types in the three sub-Catchment cases to be

determined and interviewees to be chosen for their contribution to information saturation. The

table below shows the distribution of these interviews across farm size and stock type and show that coverage, and replication within each category, were achieved. The exception to this is the small- farm-size category but since they are less likely to be commercial operations (i.e. the farm size is too small for a stand-alone pastoral farm operation) less effort was made to fully sample this category.

Farm size/ Land-use >100 ha 101-500 ha 501-1000 ha >1001 ha Total Sheep Beef 7 (43%) 12 (42%) 4 (25%) 9 (44%) 32 (48%) Trees 1 (0%) 3 (33%) 1 (100%) 2 (50%) 7 (11%) Cattle34 _{4 (0%) 15 (40%) 4 (75%) 2 (100%) 25 (41%)} Subdivision 2 (0%) 2 (0%) 5 (0%) Other 4 (0%) 1 (0%) 4 (0%) Total 18 (17%) 33 (36%) 9 (55%) 13 (54%) 73 (100%)

Table 3: Number of consented properties and percentage where owner was interviewed, by stock type and farm size

(Source: Waikato Regional Council) (Excluding eastern sector)

In Appendix D is a list of all farmer interviewees and a summary is provided below.

Interview number

Interviewee location Occupation

1 Western Bays Farmer

2 Southern sector Farmer

3 Southern sector Trustee

4 Southern sector Trustee

5 Northern sector Farmers (husband and wife)

6 Western Bays Farmer

7 Western Bays Farmers (husband and wife)

8 Northern sector Farmer

9 Northern sector Farmer

10 Western Bays Farmer (husband and wife)

11 Northern sector Farmer

12 Northern sector Farmer

13 Western Bays Farmer

14 Northern sector Farmer

15 Western Bays Farmer (husband and wife)

16 Northern sector Farmer

17 Northern sector Farmer

18 Northern sector General manager/farmer

19 Northern sector Farmer

20 Southern sector Farm manager and Trustee

21 Southern sector Trustee

22 Southern sector Trustee

23 Southern sector Farm managers (husband and wife)

24 Northern sector Corporation farm environment manager

25 Western Bays Investment manager

26 Northern sector Farm manager

Table 4: Farmer interviewees and location of interviewee

Morse, Barrett, Mayan, Olson, & Spiers (2002) suggest that a sample must not only cover people who have a knowledge of the subject but must also include negative cases. Negative cases in this study are of two types: farms that have not gained consent to farm and thus are required to operate at a very extensive level, and farms that have consent to operate commercially but have not traded in nitrogen discharge allowances.

The total population of farmers that chose not to apply for consent to farm is unknown but the data provided by the Waikato Regional Council shows that around 170 farms/farmlets applied to the Council for consideration for a consent (i.e. they were benchmarked as will be explained in Chapter Five) and around 90 of these appear to have not pursued their application. For some this was because they chose to farm at a very low level and therefore did not need a consent to continue farming (see explanation in Chapter Five). If Duhon, Young, & Kerr (2011:6) are correct, there will be

around 1000 land titles35 _{in the Catchment operating at this very extensive level, and three}

interviews with such farmers (in addition to the 25 mentioned above) were undertaken.

The survey aimed to interview traders as well as non-traders of nitrogen. The table below shows the trading undertaken by interviewees.

Trading status All consented

properties Properties where owner was interviewed % Interviewed Sold nitrogen to LTPT 17 9 53%

Sold nitrogen privately 9 4 44%

Purchased nitrogen 3 2 67%

No Trading 44 12 28%

Total 73 27 37%

Table 5: Consented properties that have traded nitrogen by 2013 and showing the number interviewed. (Excluding the eastern sector)

(Source: Waikato Regional Council)

The table above shows that in the Catchment, 26 properties located in the north, west and southern

sectors have sold nitrogen36 _{and that farmers that have traded nitrogen are better represented than}

those who have not traded. However, in both cases, the interviewing indicated that saturation was being achieved.