Semi-structured interviews

The second data collection research technique used in this study was the conducting of semi- structured interviews with key fisheries co-management stakeholders within the project areas who were associated with or active within the activity systems that formed the units of analysis for this study. The research interviews involved gear owners, crew members, government extension officers, local chiefs and BVC members in Lake Malombe and the south-east arm of Lake Malawi. This helped to facilitate the generation of multi-voiced perspectives from the activity systems. Interview results were recorded and transcribed. Video recordings were mainly for analysis and also provided stimuli for reflection (Engeström & Sannino, 2010) and allowed for further insight and understanding. A total of eight fishing community members, three extension officers and four lecturers from the

114

fisheries training college were interviewed. A small sample of co-management stakeholders was identified for more insight and in-depth understanding on what really takes place in fisheries co-management. Interviews lasted an average of twenty-five minutes and this allowed the participants to ask questions or gain clarification from the researcher (see Table 5 below for the details of the interviews. Hammond and Wellington (2013) noted that the value of interview is that it allows the researcher to probe an interviewee’s account of events as well as their thoughts, values, feeling and perspectives more generally. The diversity of interviewees resulted in diverse information on the management of the fisheries resources in the two research sites (Lake Malombe and the south-east arm of Lake Malawi).

Figure 4.2: Semi-structured interviews with fishing communities and government extension officers on co-management

Terre-Blanche and Durrheim (1999) argued that conducting an interview was a more natural form of interacting with people than making them fill out a questionnaire, do a test or perform some experimental tasks, and therefore fits well with an interpretative case study approach to research. Interviews give researchers an opportunity to get to know people quite intimately, so that they can really understand how they think and feel (ibid.). Drever (1995) was of the view that in a semi-structured interview, the interviewer sets up a general structure by deciding in advance what ground is to be covered and what main questions are to be asked. The advantage of this method is that response rates are higher than in any other designs, and the interviewer is also capable of controlling the mode of questioning depending on the circumstances surrounding the respondent (Schutt, 2004, p. 258). As indicated by Drever above, using semi-structured interviews where interview schedules were developed in relation to my research questions provided some in-depth description of the historicity and current approaches to and thinking around learning processes in co-management and also provided insights into the activity systems and their dynamics. Semi-structured interviews are essential for qualitative data collection since they seek in-depth information regarding interviewees’ feelings, experience and perception on the subject (Schutt, 2004, p. 276). In

semi-structured interviews, all questions are asked flexibly, but there is usually specific data required from all respondents (Merriam, 2009). Using a semi-structured face to face interview process opened up dialogue with the co-management research participants because apart from responding to the set questions, the process enabled explanations and debates on contradictions experienced in fisheries resource management in relation to co-management. There was flexibility in the use of face to face semi-structured interviews and the process helped me to gain knowledge and experience of how people in fisheries co-management learn from each other and the reasons behind their continuous interactions.

Confirming the importance of using semi-structured interviews in qualitative research Bloor and Wood (2006) indicated that an in-depth interviewing (semi-structure interviewing) process sacrifices reliability in pursuit of validity, and that such interviews give prominence to fully accessing social meaning at the expense of repeatability. I decided to interview a range of people in the two research sites in order to access a diversity of stakeholders’ perspectives whose voices in most cases are less frequently heard in the fisheries co- management programme. Interviews allow the researcher to see an event or context from the point of view of the people participating in the research (Hammond & Wellington, 2013) and as observed from the study, interviews were more interactive allowing for clarification of questions and identification of new knowledge in fisheries co-management. Table 4.3 below contains the full list of people who were interviewed by gender, designation and experiences in fisheries management.

Table 4.3: List of people interviewed in the two research sites

Interviewee Gender Designation Years of experience Date of interview

Interview 1 Male District Officer 17 years January 2011 Interview 2 Interview 2 b Male Female Extension Officers 31 years 3 years January 2011 January 2011

Interview 3 Male Chief - Mbenji Over 40 years January 2011 Interview 4 Female BVC member 7 years in BVC December 2012 Interview 5 Female MCF - Lecturer 7 years December 2012

116

Interview 6 Female MCF - Lecturer 16 years December 2012

Interview 7 Male MCF - Lecturer 19 years December 2012

Interview 8 Male MCF - Lecturer 23 years December 2012

Interview 9 Male BVC member 10 years in BVC December 2012 Interview 10 Male Chief - Malindi Over 40 years December 2012 Interview 11 Male BVC member 7 years in BVC December 2012 Interview 12 Male BVC member 8 years in BVC December 2012 Interview 13 Male BVC member 4 years in BVC December 2012 Interview 14 Female BVC member 4 years in BVC December 2012 Interview 15 Male BVC member Over 20 years

fishing

December 2012

Interview 16 Male Chief - Malombe Chief – 40 years December 2012

The use of video and audio recording8 _{in the face to face interview process allowed me to} refer back and forth to different parts of the interviews. During the analysis process I was able to listen and verify the captured information with the audio recording, a process that enabled me to check the validity of the information and where it was coming from.