The research process was exploratory and qualitative in nature, utilising a combination of inductive (observation to theory), deductive (theory to observation) and abductive (lay description to concept and theory) methods. The details of the thesis topic changed as ideas were refined and developed. In finding the scope and direction of the study, many theoretical and empirical paths have been
23 explored. In this way, the process of delineating the research topic, validation, collecting information and analysing have been highly iterative.
As a complex social phenomenon, BRs were suited to an emergent (abductive / inductive) research design that allowed the research to unfold rather than be constructed. Such scope was difficult to grasp from the outset of the project, and refinement of questions and directions for investigation were continual challenges. The research was open-ended and exploratory, around major themes, particularly at the outset. Some components of the research could be approached using a deductive method (theory to observation).5 At times, the combination of inductive and deductive reasoning processes was necessary where a feedback cycle of theories to observations and observations to theories enabled patterns to be observed in the data, that led to the development of new theories. This process provided the basis for the findings presented in Chapter 10. The theory development is indicated by the refinement of the literature searches conducted, as described in section 2.3.2.
By utilising a variety of empirical methods: case study, personal experience (key informants), interviews, focus groups and text, a wide range of interconnected interpretive practices have been employed (Denzin and Lincoln 2000). The result is a better understanding of the subject matter. Each of these approaches to data collection has provided a specific perspective, for composing and producing a ‘pieced - together set of representations that are fitted to the specifics of a complex situation … an emergent construction, that changes and takes new forms as different tools, methods, and techniques of representation and interpretation are added to the puzzle’ (Weinstein and Weinstein 1991: 4).
The qualitative, elite, snowballing data collection process employed during the research characterises what Gillham (2000) describes as a naturalistic inquiry utilising an emergent design and inductive theorising, with significant concern for process through finding phenomenological meaning. This suite of qualitative research characteristics stands in contrast to the experimental science approach which is ‘ill-suited to the complexity, embedded character and specificity of real life phenomena’ (Gillham 2000: 6). A completely deductive, or predetermined procedure of investigation, was not appropriate as a priori theoretical notions were not a feature that characterised the data in the early research stages. Until immersion in the data and contexts of the cases could be achieved, the appropriate explanations would not become clear.
Empirical evidence formed the basis for data, alongside sparse published material on BRs in Australia, and more plentiful information in Canada. At the outset of the research the informal and voluntary nature of Australian BRs supported this naturalistic approach. Many biologically-oriented studies have been conducted within BRs internationally and published, and these have aided the publicity of BRs and upheld an important function for BRs as stipulated by UNESCO. However, these
5
For example, in the later stages of case study visits, themes had become apparent that were represented at each BR. By this time, a theory was established that the themes would be present at subsequent BRs. By visiting these final BRs, the theory was validated as the themes appeared throughout the data collection process.
24 studies have not been a central concern of this thesis insofar as illuminating the issues of BR social- ecological resilience in Canada and Australia.6 In utilising a naturalistic inquiry method, the research questions were framed around the axioms of that approach as discussed by Lincoln and Guba (Lincoln and Guba 1985). In a description of naturalistic inquiry, they suggest that research of this nature is undertaken according to a number of criteria, discussed below. These criteria were a central consideration in the development of the research approach and contributed to the methodological framework.
First, the research context was important, where research interaction took place in context where possible (on site of BRs) for fullest understanding. All BR case studies were visited and experienced. Second, capturing personal experiences of the key informants of BRs was the instrument for primary data gathering because these individuals were central to understanding BRs. Third, qualitative methods were selected because they were more adaptable due to greater sensitivity and adaptability to the many mutually shaping influences and value patterns that were to be encountered. Fourth, purposive sampling was a characteristic of the research, to access the scope of data required and enable adequate account of local conditions and local values. Fifth, inductive and abductive data analysis was employed to ensure that values could be an explicit part of the analytic structure.
These naturalistic inquiry criteria were utilised in conjunction with a grounded theory approach, defined as:
a general methodology for developing theory that is grounded in data systematically gathered and analysed. Theory evolves during actual research, and it does this through continuous interplay between analysis and data collection (Dick 2002: no page).
According to Dick (2002) what differentiates grounded theory from much other research is that it is explicitly emergent. It does not test a hypothesis, rather it sets out to find theory applicable to the research situation where the aim is to understand the research situation. As Glaser (1978) states, grounded theory aims to discover the theory implicit in the data. This approach was useful for interpreting the BR cases.
During the course of the research process, the opportunities afforded through a naturalistic, grounded theory approach, such as ‘keeping an open mind’ (Gillham 2000: 18) meant that many new insights were continuously gained. As a result, the research questions which essentially drove the direction and scope of the thesis changed in relation to regular discoveries, from both the literature and key informants. However through this emergent design and approach, multiple themes and issues associated with BRs were able to be identified and examined, closely tied to the themes of the literature. New information and key informants were constantly sought and anlaysed. Data collection and analysis often occurred together, in an iterative manner.
6 Research and monitoring are key functions of BRs in Canada and Australia, however their relevance to this research aim is limited. The overall role of research and monitoring programs in BRs is, however, considered important in supporting and demonstrating BR objectives.
25 The research approach recognised that the key informants are engaged in negotiated outcomes regarding data meaning and interpretation, and that they can best understand and interpret the influence of local value patterns through their lived experience. A case study reporting mode was chosen, as it is a method adapted to the description of latent meaning and it provides the basis for both individual ‘naturalistic generalisations’ and transferability to other sites based on similarities of themes. Caution regarding the application of findings to a broad context should be applied, depending on the empirical similarity between case study contexts. For example, Australian and Canadian BRs are comparable on the basis of key indicators such as democracy, economy and environment and are therefore suited to such analysis.