4.5.1. Generalisability
It is a conventional misunderstanding that the single case study can only be a pilot or exploratory first stage towards a larger-scale study and that it would require a number of similar case studies to make a generalisation. It was assumed that the case study was only reliable if it verified or falsified a hypothesis through a large number of cases (cited in Flyvbjerg 2006, p.2).
Ethnographic research on a small community can be generalised if it is carried out in some number. However, the single case study can be ‘multiple’ in the sense that the ideas and evidence are connected and examined on many different angles (Flyvbjerg 2006, p. 2, 19).
The single-case study has been used as a reliable method to test scientific enquiries since Aristotle where a single-case study could falsify or testify a theory. Karl Popper (1999; 2002) famous single case study of a Black Swan to falsify his general proposition that all swans are white is another example of the reliability of the case study in scientific studies (Flyvbjerg 2006, p.8, 11). Validity actually depends on the case and the situation. The choice of the method should be dependent on the problem and the circumstances involved.
A methodology can be positivistic in nature by seeking out a verification from an ‘absolute truth’ or a set of universals, preconceived or predicted theories. The case study should not seek
129 to prove anything but rather contribute in-depth knowledge to existing literature in the subject area. It should add to the experiences and learning within this area. ‘That knowledge cannot be formally generalised does not mean that it cannot enter into the collective process of knowledge accumulation in a given field or in a society’ (Flyvbjerg 2006, p. 7, 10).
Generalising can be a limitation particularly when looking at a new phenomenon which has not been previously researched. It is important to be open to new discoveries which are hindered by systematic and ridged enquiries. Oversimplifying the case study can be misleading and overlook new paths for future research or omit multiple realities in an attempt to generalise the results. In the case of Chamarel, it is in the southern region where other settlements of Afro-Mauritian exist. However, Chamarel is unique as a long established tourist area. Its ecologically sensitive forests and the Community Tourism Project make generalising this to other Creole areas impossible as they do not share the same developments or experiences. This study does not seek to generalise or represent the Creole community but to present multiple truths and realities. Community tourism did not succeed in the Creole village of Chamarel but it cannot be generalised that it would not be successful in other Creole communities. They could have different variables unique to the village, the individuals themselves and the specific period of time. The uniqueness of what was happening in Chamarel in time 1 (phenomenon) and its connection to how tourism has changed through time in Mauritius nationally through to time 2 (context) provides a case which cannot be replicated in other settlements.
This study does not seek to generalise truths about tourism and its impact on the community of Chamarel. It allows the themes to emerge from the data which can lead to the discovery of conflicts, issues and problems within tourism and community development.
The use of alternative methods such as netnography, documented policy, planning and media data collection through to time 2 (2014) provided a greater level of detail on the complexity of community tourism and where this concept lies within the other tourism approaches in Mauritius. The case study allows the reader to delve deeper into the ‘causes behind a given problem and its consequences than to describe the symptoms of the problem and how frequently they occur’ (Flyvbjerg 2006, p.13).
130 4.5.2. The level of bias within the data
Bias within the research data is inherent in all methodologies because they still include the human element and the design and results require human intervention and interpretation.
Within the use of media and netnographic data collection the researcher needs to be aware of possible influences from the social and political situation of the time. For example, at the time of the RPA, the history of slavery in Le Morne and Chamarel was commemorated and this gave attention to the area in the media. There was an acceptance of African heritage in mainstream television. This is a valuable insight into how the national media was starting to promote Chamarel. It provided further material on slavery which had not been readily available previously, and it gave villagers a platform to voice their heritage and cultural expressions.
This allowed a level of density in the case study and as explained by Peattie (2001);
‘The dense case study, according to Peattie is more useful for the practioner and more interesting for social theory than other factual findings or the high-level generalizations theory’ (cited in Flyvbjerg 2006, p.22).
However, within the fieldwork a researcher is faced with a series of responsibilities to ensure integrity of the data collection and presentation in a way which is sensitive to the concerns of the participants (Ryan 2005, p.9, 12). A case study can have its own rigour with the added advantage of being close to the data as the phenomena unfolds (Flyvbjerg 2006, p.19).
A study using a qualitative method is considered ‘subjective’ because researchers attempt to display the viewpoint of those they study, but it can also be objective. This does not mean the absence of bias or a researcher’s perspective or blindly accepting a subject’s reported psychological state of mind. Objectivity simply means taking the intellectual risk of being proven demonstrably wrong (Kirk and Miller 1986:10).
In opposition to the view on objectivity, Feighery (2006) writing on reflexivity and tourism research assumes that the researcher can also become responsible by ‘making oneself the object of one’s own observation’ (Feighery 2006, p.270). The researcher reflects on their own actions, values and empathy as an active participant within the research process (Feighery 2006, p.271).
131 Texts are shaped by researcher’s viewpoint where they must evaluate the tension between the topic and their own position while re-telling narratives. Therefore, transcriptions are a complex challenge to ensure that the researcher's ‘voice’ is not granted privilege over the others in the text. This ethical responsibility is a move towards reflexivity (Hollinshead & Jamal 2001, p.73).