Algunos aspectos históricos:

The single most important ethical consideration for this research was the confidentiality of information generated from the interviews, documentation and direct observation. This information relates to the business practices of banana plantations which may be proprietary and confidential in nature. For this reason, the participants could withdraw from the research, or remove sensitive transcript data after the data collection. To manage this, participants and the plantation companies were not named and provided with a code. However, the participant under Type 1 was made aware that full confidentiality could not be guaranteed because the plantations he represents are the only

PhilGAP-certified banana plantations in the country. In addition, the Massey University Human Ethics Committee (MUHEC) application requirements were complied with in March 2016 to ensure that the confidentiality of information and the identity of the participants were carefully managed. The background to the research and details of the data collection, analysis and storage processes were also presented. In addition, risk assessments were also performed with a primary focus on informed and

voluntary consent, and the privacy and confidentiality of the participants. A ‘low risk notification’

Chapter 4: Methodology

63

4.6 Summary

To investigate the barriers to, and drivers of, the adoption of the PhilGAP certification programme in the Philippine Cavendish banana plantations, a single case study was completed based on a constructivist-interpretive theoretical paradigm. The case study strategy was found compatible with agricultural systems research due to the nature of agricultural issues as temporal, spatial and complex. Detailed descriptions of the research design were presented in this chapter. The case was selected to provide valuable insights into improving the implementation of the PhilGAP certification programme in the country. Pragmatic considerations in choosing the case were also stated. Based on the varying adoption status of the Cavendish banana plantations three types were identified, namely: (1) banana plantations that have adopted the PhilGAP certification programme and are therefore PhilGAP- certified or Type 1 respondents; (2) banana plantations that have not adopted the PhilGAP

certification programme, but have implemented another form of QMS certification, normally

GlobalGAP or Type 2 respondents; and (3) banana plantations that have not adopted the PhilGAP

certification programme and have not implemented other forms of QMS certification or Type 3 respondents. A purposive sampling procedure was used to select participants for each type, starting with a deviant sampling for Types 1 and 2, then snowballing sampling for Type 3. The reasons for undertaking the chosen sampling strategy were also explained in detail.

The data were collected in August-September 2016 through face-to-face interviews with key informants, documentation and field observations. The interviews followed a semi-structured approach which enabled the re-examination of the existing barriers and drivers as well as the exploration of emerging ones. It provided in-depth perceptions and context-dependent information that was necessary to build theory or strengthen existing theory relevant to the research. The documents and field observations were used for data triangulation.

Interviews were digitally voice recorded, transcribed verbatim and translated into English. The transcripts were sent back to the participants for verification and approval. For ethical considerations,

some transcripts were modified according to the participants’ requests, while other transcripts were

considered approved when comments were not received from the participants after seven days. Approved transcripts were analysed and coded using Nvivo version 11 Pro, a computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software. Themes were created based on the literature review and emerging issues from the transcript. Queries and reports were generated and used for detailed analysis. A description of the case and results of the analysis are presented in the succeeding chapter.

64

Chapter 5: CASE DESCRIPTION

5.1 Introduction

The aim of this research is to investigate the barriers to, and drivers of, the adoption of the PhilGAP

certification programme by Cavendish banana plantations. The study seeks to address the following research questions: (1) Do the same barriers to, and drivers of, the adoption of the PhilGAP

certification programme by Cavendish banana plantations identified by Banzon et al. (2013a) still exist or have new drivers and barriers emerged since the initial study in 2011?; (2) How have these barriers continued to limit the adoption of, or how have these drivers led to the adoption of, the

PhilGAP certification programme by Cavendish banana plantations in the Philippines?; and (3) Why do some Cavendish banana plantations adopt and continue to participate in the PhilGAP certification programme despite these barriers? Prior to answering these questions, this chapter provides a description of the case under investigation to help the reader understand the results presented in the subsequent chapter. The case description chapter is divided in six main sections. Section 5.2 describes the development of the PhilGAP certification programme and Section 5.3 describes the certification process. Section 5.4 describes the participating plantations in this research. Section 5.5 provides a comparison of farm characteristics. Finally, Section 5.6 provides a summary of the chapter.

5.2 Development of the PhilGAP Certification Programme

The PhilGAP certification programme was conceptualised in 2004 as a component project of the quality assurance systems for the ASEAN Fruits project sponsored by the ASEAN-Australia Economic Cooperation (BAFS, 2015). It was formed because of: (1) emerging food safety and quality issues in the agricultural sector; (2) the requirements of some retailers to meet consumers’ expectations and their changing preferences for food products; (3) pressure from the World Trade Organization to observe GAP in international trade; and (4) the emergence of GAP programmes in neighbouring countries in Southeast Asia (Cruz, 2015). As a result, the Philippines’ standard setting agency, BAFS, was tasked to: (1) align the existing local agricultural practices with the project; (2) incorporate the principles of hazard analysis and critical control points for food safety against any microbial, chemical and physical hazards in local practices; and (3) develop a regulatory framework for the programme based on the existing GAP models such as ASEAN GAP and GlobalGAP. As a result of these initiatives, the guidelines on the certification of GAP for fruit and vegetable farming were issued in the Department of Agriculture Administrative Order (DAAO) number 25, series of 2005.

The main objectives of the PhilGAP certification programme are: (1) to facilitate the adoption of GAP to ensure food safety and product quality, while also ensuring environmental protection and the health, safety and welfare of workers; (2) to produce safe and high quality agricultural crops for