To this end, this Literature review chapter has attempted to articulate the theoretical underpinnings of the study, which was presented in the form of Alison and Zelikow’s (1999) triple model that include the Rational Actor model, Organizational Behaviour model; and Governmental Politics model. The Rational Actor model revealed that foreign policy
42 decisions are results of calculated accounts and goals of a nation. Interestingly this model is based on the assumption that a nation is a unitary actor in decision making who speaks with one voice, pursuing one goal and fulfilling national interest. The Rational Actor model is built on the rationality principle suggesting that people act rationally when they make decisions. This point therefore validates the assumption of the Rational Actor model that when faced with a crisis, a nation selects one choice from a list of alternatives having calculated and weighs the consequences of each alternative. Therefore according to this model if we attempt to explain national events we should analyse the calculations and goals of a nation. Contesting these assumptions is the Organizational Behaviour model which revealed that foreign policy decisions emerge from organisational processes, procedures and culture. In other words this model suggests that in order to understand a nation’s foreign policy decision analysts should pay attention to SOP’s and organisational process. The emphasis is on organisations and not individuals. In contrast, Governmental Politics model puts more emphasis on individual actors than organisations. This model revealed that government action should not be viewed as choice or organisational outputs but as a political result. Players compete to achieve goals which serve their personal interest. The output is a result of bargaining amongst players and the most powerful wins. Linking these to the problem under study which is South Africa’s decision to commit to reduce carbon emissions by 34% in 2020 and 42% in 2025, the three conceptual models suggested that this decision can be explained in three different approaches using the themes offered by these models. The second attempt was the provision of the conceptual framework laid down in this literature review. Different themes ranging from foreign policy to climate change were identified. Firstly, it was revealed that foreign policy is a subfield of international relations and is built on realist assumptions. Foreign policy actors are essential in foreign policy decision making, however the level of influence is not similar to, for example the president and his ministers, are more involved in decision making than the other groups in the outer circles. Secondly, established climate regimes have provided a platform for nations to negotiate and commit themselves to addressing the climate change predicament. However the climate change regime system is surrounded by politics, inequalities and divisions between the South and North countries which have complicated the negotiations.
The following chapter discusses the methods employed to conduct this study. The case study design is explained, the data collection methods are discussed and analysis of data is also explained.
44
CHAPTER 3
Methodology
3.0 Introduction
This chapter discusses the research design adopted as well as the methodological foundations underlying the study. It focuses on the unit of analysis of the research and it describes the methodology of the study. The chapter begins by discussing the philosophical assumptions underpinning this study, it then discusses the unit of analysis and then restatement of the Allison and Zelikow’s models as a method of analysis. It also explores the case study design selected for the study. The researcher’s approach to data collection is also described as well as the selection of interviews and the interview process.
3.1 Philosophical perspective
Wagner et al. (2012) and Merriam’s (2009) discussion of philosophical perspectives have been helpful in determining this study’s qualitative philosophical underpinnings. Based on the philosophical orientation, Merriam (2009: 8) makes distinctions amongst three forms of research which is positivist, critical and interpretive.
A study is considered a positivist research if it is able to prove what it proposes and able to quantify variables. Merriam (2009: 8) further emphasises that ‘knowledge gained through the study of this reality has been labelled scientific and included the establishment of laws’. Ritchie and Lewis (2003) seemingly argue that with positivist research, knowledge is developed through accumulation of observable facts. Examples of studies done from a positivist approach include the Higher Education HIV and AIDS (HEAIDS) study, a survey conducted on 23 public higher education institutions in SA to determine prevalence of HIV and AIDS in higher education institutions (Weberloff, 2014). Ritchie and Lewis (2003:9) criticise positivist research because it limits a researcher from producing detailed explanations. Therefore the nature of this study could not allow for the positivist approach because positivism assumes that reality is visible and measurable and that the only acceptable knowledge is scientifically proven (Merriam, 2009). Besides, the positivism approach is more suitable for quantitative studies.
A study may be categorised critical if its objective is to critique, challenges, empowers and transforms existing systems (Merriam, 2009: 10). Those who undertake critical research seeks to bring about change in the social setup. Critical theory assumes that people can
45 challenge their economic, equity and knowledge conditions. Critical research is emancipatory in nature in that it challenges oppressive social dominion. Wagner et al. (2012: 56) refers to it as “transformative or emancipatory paradigm” suggesting that this term encompasses a category of research design with a common theme of emancipating and transforming communities. Critical research is founded on the epistemological traditions that knowledge is true if it can practically empower and transform the lives of people and also on the ontological traditions that social reality is constantly changing (Wagner et al., 2012). This study is not situated in transformative paradigm or critical theory because it does not intend to challenge any system in the social domain but rather focuses on contributing to knowledge by understanding decision making process.
The study is located in the interpretive tradition due to its qualitative nature. This suggests an epistemological and ontological belief that reality is constructed through social interaction. Merriam (2009) earlier argued that interpretivism in qualitative research means the study views reality not as single reality but as multiple realities implying that there are multiple interpretations to a single event. The study’s approach is to understand the event through the world of others, using interviews to gather information. Wagner et al. (2013) supports this approach and argues that interpretivism is all about understanding the world as others experience it. Wagner et al. (2013: 56) further explains ‘Reality, in this sense, is limited to context, space, time and individual or group in a given situation and cannot be generalised into one common reality’. The approach of the study was also located on the epistemological assumptions that the truth lies with the human experience. Indeed, the assumption is that what people view as the truth is culture bound, context specific and historically dependent.
3.2 Unit of analysis
The study adopts a single case study design containing one single unit of analysis. According to Yin (2003: 22), unit of analysis is related to the way the initial research questions have been defined. Analysis of this case study is centered on explanation of the process of decision making through the application of three conceptual models of foreign policy decision making. The analysis will focus on the South African foreign policy decision on the international environmental obligation to reduce carbon emissions by 34% in 2020 and 42% in 2025. The analysis of this unit provides a context from which a case study can be described and analysed to answer the research question: How does South African government decides its international climate change obligation? A case study approach was used to gain understanding and explain the decision making process that surrounded the event where
46 South Africa decided on a carbon emission target in 2009. Further to this, government officials have been key informants providing the most specific information which has enabled the study to answer the research question. Government officials had details such as actors, decision making processes and international environmental obligations amongst others.