This chapter has discussed in detail the attempts to locate and research amongst diverse migrant ethnic minority groups based on the original focus of the research and the requirements of the Environment Agency, and how the eventual research sample was different than expected. The questionnaire surveys indicated that the ethnic diversity in the flood prone communities had changed over time since the 2001 census, and Pakistani migrants represented the largest proportion of respondents in both locations. The female family unit research approach may have also influenced the sample to include more women respondents. This influence continued in the one to one interviews, as the largest migrant group was Pakistani migrants followed by other South Asian migrants possibly due to the ethnicity of the researcher, and there was a majority of female participants. Therefore the research was conducted amongst a cross- section of the South Asian community within the flood prone community in each of the study locations of Perry Barr and Ravensthorpe. The Pakistani migrants mainly included migrants from Mirpur and included established first generation migrants and recently arrived first generation male and female marriage migrants. There were also older and adolescent second generation migrants included in the sample. A separate report was written for the Environment Agency in relation to the original research objectives as discussed in Section 1.3. Although the methodology involved the use of quantitative and qualitative data, the quantitative findings were of greater importance to the Environment Agency, and have less of a focus in this thesis; the questionnaire was important to identify migrant groups for the research and inform the qualitative research. The findings discussed in this thesis are based on the qualitative data, with the quantitative data being used rarely to support these findings when required. The key questionnaire data has been included in this thesis in Appendix G.
It has been explained that this research did not initially focus on gender, but concentrated on migrant groups and intergenerational communication. There were more female participants in the research, but that did not suggest a focus on gender. However, there was an indication of gender issues through the interviewing process, when in certain cases it was found to be
difficult to access women directly and instead permission from the male head of the household had to be sought to speak to the women in the family.
Furthermore, I recognised the significance of gender in terms of more women than men being prepared to talk to me as a female British Asian and that may represent the whole relationship of what they think is important in terms of patriarchal control, gender norms and the expected behaviour of women, who they can and cannot speak to and be seen to interact with.
I believe that there was an element of ‘gendered interviewing’, where gender influences knowledge production; “the sex of the interviewer and of the respondent does make a difference, as the interview takes place within the cultural boundaries of a paternalistic social system in which masculine identities are differentiated from feminine ones” (Fontana & Frey, 2005:710). I did not feel that the men I interviewed were restricted in their conversation or were not forthright with me because I am a woman. Instead I felt that because there was an element of a shared South Asian background, they were open to sharing their views and perceptions of the world which extended to discussing gender norms in the home and issues of patriarchal control, which were seen to influence their relationship with others. I may not have been able to connect with them in the same way that a male researcher could have, but they did fully answer my research questions and were cooperative.
I do feel however, that I received a better response from the women I interviewed, and this may have been because I felt more comfortable interviewing women; I could better understand the issues they faced and thus relate to their views better, possibly encouraging them to express the issues that were relevant to them. The literature has suggested that interviewing is a “masculine paradigm, embedded in a masculine culture and stressing masculine traits, while at the same time excluding from the interviewing traits such as sensitivity, emotionality, and others that are culturally viewed as feminine” (Fontana & Frey, 1994:370). However, it has been recognised that in interviewing there is “no intimacy without reciprocity”, leading to a shift towards a closer relationship between interviewer and respondent” (Fontana & Prokos, 2007:63). The interviewer can express feelings and show their ‘human side’. “This provides a greater spectrum of responses and a greater insight into participants” (Fontana & Prokos, 2007:63).
This was evident in my research as I felt that the female participants were comfortable around me and my sister or my mum based on the rapport that we had built over time, with shared stories and anecdotes and this allowed them to divulge information about wider issues than flooding, especially when we spoke about their involvement and integration in their ethnic and wider community. Women spoke in greater detail than the male participants
had about their family and gendered relationships, how they were controlled and restricted in their actions because they were women, how they were perceived by others around them, how they had to follow traditional norms and how they attempted to challenge the restrictions they faced. I believe that the South Asian women I spoke to revealed these issues to me because I am a South Asian woman and they may have felt that I would understand these issues, and I did. I understood their concerns, and how they attempted to overcome the restrictions they faced because these are issues that are prevalent in the South Asian community and I have grown up being aware of them and how they guide the behaviour of an Asian woman, including me, and yet they allow men to have greater freedom and choice. Although I recognised these gender issues during the interviews, it was only during the process of qualitative data analysis that I realised gender was an important issue in the context of the research. Coding of the data for analysis required me to develop the text into themes. This was based on my interpretations and my decision on what I thought was important. Every effort was made to remain neutral and identify the themes based on the textual data. Yet, ultimately, “a researcher's background and position will affect what they choose to investigate, the angle of investigation, the methods judged most adequate for this purpose, the findings considered most appropriate, and the framing and communication of conclusions" (Malterud, 2001:483).
I realised that both the male and female participants spoke about patriarchal control and gender norms, and what was strongly emerging as a theme was the differences between how first and second generation migrant women as well as older and adolescent women could respond to this control and the extent to which they had a voice. I could understand these findings and relate to them as an Asian woman and that may be why I found them to be so important. Furthermore, I realised that these issues were relevant in the context of the research; they told me about notions of risk and the communication around and response to flood risk. The research findings related to South Asian migrants and intergenerational communication, but the gendered norms that were revealed provided a greater insight into intergenerational communication patterns and how women could and could not respond to flood risk based on the restrictions they faced. Thus risk was inadvertently explored through an intersectional lens focusing on South Asian migrants, generations and gender, and this revealed the complexity in how flood risk and knowledge may be constructed and transmitted, which is the focus of this thesis.
As noted previously, the thesis will use the different theories that have been identified as being important in this research to help understand and frame the research findings. It aims to help build a better understanding of the risk perceptions of South Asian migrants and
more specifically, to apply an intersectional lens to highlight how different issues combine to influence how individuals understand flood risk.