Actividades del segundo semestre de prácticas

The study employed methods of rapid participatory rural appraisal to collect and deliver data and its outcomes within the timeframe given. As emphasized by Kumar (1987), the rapid participatory rural appraisal methods are characterized by quick, low-cost ways of gathering data systematically, which in this case was a strong advantage. This

methodology provided good quality and timely information that included contributions from rural households, the larger community, and stakeholders alike (Chambers, 1981;

Schrimshaw and Hurtado, 1987; Melville, 1993). This helped to produce results that lead to unraveling linkages and impacts of mining activities on rural households and mining communities at large.

The choice for this method was thus mainly grounded in its ability to provide rich data with fewer economic resources and within the shortest period of time. Getting descriptive data on some complex phenomenon is sometimes difficult; this method enabled the study to come out with the relevant descriptive information since it is more able to study complex socio-economic changes and highly interactive social situations (Kumar, 1987).

The use of rapid participatory rural appraisal methods is, however, not without limitations. Like most qualitative studies, there are critics relating to, among other, anecdotalism (Silverman, 2001: 34), credibility (Silverman 2001: 220), reliability (Silverman 2001: 226), validity (Silverman, 2001: 232) and generalizability (Silverman, 2001: 249). Although most of these limitations can be handled with good planning, generalizability is seldom achieved through qualitative studies (Silverman, 2001: 249), although this can be increased through measures like, for instance, theoretical sampling.

The limitations are further grounded in the types of techniques used under the rapid participatory rural appraisal methods. This study applied the techniques of Key and Non-Key Informant Interviews, text-analysis and to some degree observation. Hence the limitations of these techniques are discussed in the sections that follow.

5.3.1 Interviews

Two types of interview techniques were conducted for this study: Key Informant Interview (Kumar, 1993) and Non-Key Informant interview (Informal Survey) (Kumar, 1987). As this research focuses on the inhabitants’ own perceptions it was very helpful to do interviews to obtain that knowledge. With the interviews data we relied upon semi-structured interviews, combining some few standardized questions with multiple choice answers, and using open-ended questions. The advantage here was that questionnaires are mostly standardized and thus easy to tabulate which leads to a higher degree of

comparability and some argue reliability (Silverman, 2001: 89). Comparability can be of interest here since it helps to illustrate some important factors like, for example, the difference in the perceptions between the different households as well as their different assets.

Limitations of interviews in general

The reliability and validity of a research project are usually questioned by different actors. And not without a reason since preserving those two issues is both a delicate and difficult task. A great challenge for the interview method is the possible misinterpretation of language, both verbal and non-verbal, due to cultural differences. In Silverman (2001:

89) it is stated that: “Even more important for reliability than the type of interview

selected, is the need to follow a standardized protocol.” That makes the researchers’ body language and the interviewees’ response and interpretation crucial.

Key Informant Interviews

Key informant interview techniques consist of interviews with approximately 10 to 20 individuals who are selected for the sake of their broad knowledge of their community and the issues raised in the research (Kumar, 1993). Key Informants are individuals who are likely to produce relevant information, ideas and in-depth insights about a topic. This kind of interview involved in our case in-depth discussions with knowledgeable persons, using semi-structured interview guides. Semi-structured interviews allowed us to have some sort of flexibility to follow up with interesting leads that arose, both during the interview and our stay in the field, while it still gave us some sort of structure and a frame

to stay within. In actual fact, out of the nine interviewees, there was only one that had problems staying within the questions asked. Particularly in that case, the structure of the interview was useful as it made it easier for us to guide the interviewee on to the relevant track again. In all cases, we had tailored the interview scheme forehand after the type of occupation or position that the interviewee had, making us save time and knowing what we wanted from the interview.

The interview units were carefully selected from stakeholder groups such as chiefs or their representatives, from various MDAs, assemblymen, youth leaders and

representatives from civil society groups and NGOs. We chose ten interviewees, which we felt were the most essential to our thesis, out of which one of them avoided any attempt made by us to interview the representative. This was sadly and perhaps

surprisingly enough, the main actor Newmont Ghana Gold Limited. We state surprisingly since we expected that the company would have preferred to represent their views on the matter. Many attempts and a lot of time and effort were spent on trying to carry through the interview but sadly enough to no avail. The semi-structured interview guide, made up of a list of topics and questions on issues raised in the study, was used during these interview sessions. Below is a list of the key informants which were to be interviewed;

representatives from

1. Newmont Ghana Gold Limited

2. Asutifi District Agricultural Department 3. District Planning Officer

4. Wassa Association of communities affected by Mining (WACAM) 5. Traditional Council of Kenyasi

6. Traditional Council of Ntrotroso 7. Ntrotroso Youth Association 8. Kenyasi 2 Youth Association 9. Assembly Member of Kenyasi 2 10. Assembly Member of Ntrotroso Limitations

Key informant Interviews could be biased especially when interviewees are not selected carefully. This occurs in particular when the researcher tends to have an elitist

orientation. Then informants are selected on the basis of their social and economic status, instead of their knowledge and experience (Kumar, 1987: 17). This inevitably happened in our sample as the chiefs and their spokesmen are elected because of their social position. However, we felt that the questions asked took that into consideration and that we rather managed to unveil some of the corruption and contradictions arising from the mining.

Kumar (1987: 17) further reports that, findings in this technique are rather susceptible to interviewer biases that may arise from inaccurate or distorted judgments due to

shortcomings in cognitive processing. This happens especially when the interviewer picks up information and ideas that confirm preconceived ideas and notions. In our

interview processes we have tried to be as unbiased as possible, although this is difficult.

The fact that we are two different interviewers with different backgrounds and perceptions definitely is an advantage in that matter. With our awareness of these limitations, we have been fore-warned to as much as possible deal with these biases that arose in the course of the study.

It should be stated though that being unbiased became more and more difficult with the time spent in the field, as we were exposed to several unpleasant facts about the people’s lives after the mining and saw more and more of the tragedy, making us somewhat more and more biased in support of the farmers. Thus, it was helpful that most of the key informant’s interviews were carried out in the beginning of our stay in the field.

Informal Surveys (Non-Key Informant Interviews)

Further data were collected from randomly sampled populations from rural households that have been affected in some way or another by the mining operation. The interviews were conducted using carefully structured questionnaires containing both closed and open-ended questions. Like sample surveys, this informal survey made use of semi-structured questionnaires but administered on a small size sample population (Kumar, 1987). The semi-structured questionnaires were developed to incorporate all the

livelihood variables needed for this study. These variables included data on the livelihood assets available to the households and how these assets have been affected by the

operation of Newmont Ghana Gold Limited.

Also the interviewees were asked about health problems, social problems and their subjective views on the mining operation and its benefits to the community. The use of informal surveys helped us to obtain information from the perspective of rural households who are affected by the mining. It also provided some data which is transferable into more quantitative data to complement the qualitative data illustration, already obtained from key informant interviews and the textual and content analysis of documents and publications.

In actual fact, the non-key informant interviews proved to provide us with much more thorough information than what we had imagined beforehand. First, we had assumed that all households are probably not affected in similar ways; but this was not the case since there were clear similarities, pointing to the possibility of some generalization. Second, the non-key informant interviews provided us with vast amounts of data, identification of common problems and a good supplement to the key informant interviews. Intentionally, the non-key interviews were intended for supplement only to the textual analysis and key informant interviews. However, as stated, the non-key informant interviews rather

became a part of the main focus, providing us with good qualitative data.

Limitations

It is quite difficult to use informal surveys for collecting in-depth information. This is because they do not permit free and extended discussions and questions are mostly

framed to demand answers that can be somewhat quantified (Kumar 1987: 36). It will thus be a challenge to seek the qualitative information that we will need to acquire.

However, as stated above, thanks to the generosity of the population, discussions went easily and the interviewees were willing to offer us rich information.

Moreover, it is prone to sampling biases due to the use of probability sampling

techniques. Thus conclusions may be flawed and the recommendations be unjustified if respondents are not representative of the population under study (Kumar, 1987: 36). This was (tried to be) avoided by choosing randomly the households from various positions in the towns.

5.3.2 Medium of communication in interview

The medium of communication during the interviews was the local language combined with the English language for the key informants, and only the local language (Asante-Twi) for the non-key informants. This is because the key informants are basically selected from the elitist group and with the in-depth knowledge in the subject under study, some concepts and explanations are better understood in English than in the local language.

Non-key informants are characterized by low literacy and will be better able to express themselves in the local language than otherwise. Actually, most of the non-key

informants did not speak English at all. With a background in the local language of the study area, the researchers did not have to use interpreters since fortunately one of the two researchers speaks the local language fluently.