Control Interno

The use of qualitative research is ideally suited to examine AFoPS from different points of view and valorise different perspectives, to minimize bias. Taylor and Bogdan (1998) state that “qualitative research methods are ideally suited to examining the world from different points of view. […] All perspectives are valuable in the sense that there is something to be learned from them” (pp. 19–20). Minichiello and Kottler (2010) analyse the contribution that qualitative methods could bring to a research, affirming that “there is no fixed way of thinking about the world and that different people can experience the same events but think about them or interpret them very differently” (p.16). Additionally, “combing qualitative inquiry with quantitative studies [help] to deepen, broaden, or better focus and describe results obtained” (Minichiello & Kottler, 2010, p. 17).

In-depth semi-structured interviews, incorporating “both open-ended and more theoretically driven questions” (Galletta, 2013, p. 45), were chosen as a method of inquiry because these gave the participants the possibility to express their ideas better. In fact, “the questions are open-ended in order to create space for participants to narrate their experiences: however, the focus of the question is very deliberate and carefully tied to

35

[the] research topic” (Galletta, 2013, p. 47). Using this method, the author had the opportunity to use a set of questions to start interviews.

Semi-structured interviews are based on [a] semi-structured interview guide, which is a schematic presentation of questions or topics and need to be explored by the interviewer. To achieve optimum use of interview time, interview guides serve the useful purpose of exploring many respondents more systematically and comprehensively as well as to keep the interview focused on the desired line of action (Jamshed, 2014, p. 87).

All research participants were asked that same initial set of questions to obtain a theoretical saturation of data and avoid the moving target concept introduced by Guest, Bunce and Johnson (2006). With the moving target concept, Guest, Bunce and Johnson (2006) argue that the introduction of new questions produce new answers and only asking the same set of questions to all the participants is possible to achieve the data saturation. The concept of saturation will be explored more in the following section.

The aforementioned initial set of questions covered the following categories:

• Ideas behind AFoPS

• AFoPS’ achievements to date

• AFoPS’ influence in Asia

• AFoPS’ influence in the Antarctic governance community

36 2.1.1 Sample group

Following Merriam (1998), a set of criteria was established to arrive at a sample of candidates for the purpose of this research. All participants were senior employees of Asian national Antarctic programs, with a well-recognised career and knowledge in polar issues. Aiming to understand the role of AFoPS in Antarctica, the sample group included only AFoPS representatives in order to bridge the knowledge gap created by a modest literature on the co-operative activities conducted by Asian countries. Using Glaser and Strauss’s (1967) grounded theory, the information retrieved from interviews achieved a theoretical saturation. They defined saturation as

[t]he criterion for judging when to stop sampling the different groups pertinent to a category in the category’s theoretical saturation. Saturation means that no additional data are being found whereby the sociologist can develop properties of the category. As he sees similar instances over and over again, the researcher becomes empirically confident that a category is saturated (Glaser & Strauss, 1697, pp. 61).

In addition to the theoretical saturation this research also achieved a data saturation. Initially introduced by Guest et al. (2006), Fusch and Ness (2015) affirm that data saturation has been reached when “the ability to obtain additional new information has been attained” (p. 1408). Using the four models of saturation introduced by Saunders et al. (2018), Table 2.1 summaries the two types of saturation that were reached during the qualitative research of this thesis.

37 Table 2. 1 Models of saturation reached during this research

Model Description Focus

Theoretical saturation Relates to the development

of theoretical categories; related to grounded theory methodology.

Sampling

Data saturation Relates to the degree to

which new data repeats what was expressed in previous data.

Data collection

Source: Saunders et al. 2018, p. 1897. 2.1.2 Data analysis

Interviews lasted for roughly 60 minutes and, with the permission of the participants, were recorded using a voice recorder. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and the raw audio data and the transcriptions were securely stored in password protected digital folders and a hard copy in a key locked drawer. Only the author had access to the data.

The analysis of the transcriptions was inductive and data driven. Zhang and Wildemuth (2005) highlight that with inductive analysis “themes and categories emerge from the data through the researcher’s careful examination and constant comparison” (p. 2). While analysing the transcriptions of open-ended questions, the author avoided the use of biases categories but allowed the data to create the categories (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). They emphasise that this type of analysis is suited for open-ended question and it is “usually appropriate when existing theory or research literature on a phenomenon is limited” (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005, p. 1279), as is the case of AFoPS. It has to be mentioned that this type of analysis brings limitations: bias, specificity of the outcomes and difficulty to generalise the data obtained (Hickman, 2015) as often happens in qualitative research.

38 2.1.3 Ethics

My research followed the guidelines set by the Human Ethics Committee of the University of Canterbury and this project was approved under the code HEC 2015/57 accepting the ethical principles of research involving human being have to be followed. In fact, Vanclay, Baines and Taylor (2013) state that “[t]he application of ethics in professional context often takes the form of a written code, document or agreement that stipulates morally acceptable behaviour by individuals within an organization or profession” (p. 244). All the interviews were conducted in person during the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) Open Science Conference held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in August 2016. Research participants had the right to anonymity and privacy (DeWalt & DeWalt, 2011) and were given the choice to maintain anonymity and to disclose their affiliation. A consent form and an information sheet, here presented as Appendix 1 and Appendix 2, were presented to the participants to inform them of their rights and to request the disclosure of their personal details. In addition, the participants were allowed to withdraw from the interview at any time and to not answer questions that they did not feel comfortable answering.