This section offers some reflections on the research process, and some lessons learned. The aims and objectives for this research were affected by my
positionality (3.8 above), drawing on the approach of pragmatic action research. I hoped and intended that, through researching allotments and alternative food networks, a contribution could be made, however small, to enhancing social and ecological justice as well as wider sustainability and resilience. The aim was that the findings would substantiate efforts amongst diverse food networks within and around Plymouth towards change in the realms of economy, community, health, learning, and environment, within a frame of social-ecological justice.
138
In the process of carrying out the research, even given relevant training and good supervision, there were many occasions when the feeling was ‘I wish I had known that’. This related to methods and techniques of research, as well as more generic skills issues of recording findings, keeping logs and notebooks. Nevertheless, with the view of the PhD process as being one of research training, besides addressing the objectives, the outcomes have been: application of a theoretical approach to a research topic (3.2); learning-by-doing an in-depth case study (3.3); working with a flexible research design and strategy (3.4); the participatory action research approach (3.5); selecting and using a range of research methods (3.6); synthesis and analysis of research outputs (3.7); and working with an awareness of ethics and positionality (3.8). The process of developing and undertaking this research programme involved much reflection on the many issues discussed above, for example, on concept grouping,
formulating aims and objectives, and on recording and validating research findings. The process has also given some surprises, which are also described below for further consideration in future studies.
Concept grouping is the key stage in developing any research strategy, aim and objectives. Bhaskar (2010) discusses how concepts shift as knowledge grows, leading to the need to adjust terminology, for example in this case from local food networks (LFNs), to alternative food networks (AFNs), having also considered ‘different’ and ‘diverse’ food networks (DFNs). Employing new terminology, as suggested by Skolimowski (1994), is an essential aspect of
139
enlarging understandings in a changing world, but is challenging within the time- limited context of a PhD.
It is hard to imagine what carrying out a PhD without the internet would have been like if I had pursued an original proposal in 1997 rather than being diverted into other lifeways. My current experience appears to be highly preferable, given that much information can be obtained at all scales and so less dependent on the limited time and funds available for personal visits. On the other hand, it has perhaps made it more challenging: slower incremental knowledge balanced against an often-sensed awareness of information overload. As recognised within the Education for Sustainable Development agenda,18 in order to attain
sustainability, the nature of skills required is evolving, and an increasingly key generic transferable skill, given the quantity of data available, is of priority-setting.
Achieving balance of breadth and depth is acknowledged to be a defining feature of PhD research19. In academia, where specialist knowledge is privileged, an
attempt to arrive at a ‘system-level’ holistic understanding is challenging. Rather than satisfying a desire when I started, to study one subject in depth and ‘get to the bottom of it’, the process has opened up avenues of research and thought that would take more than one person’s lifetime to pursue. Nevertheless, the research has given rise to many understandings which will contribute to any
18 ESD; Education for Sustainable Development, the terminology employed by the UN and the UK’s Higher
Education Academy to signify learning in accordance with the sentiments expressed by the Bruntland Commission (1987).
140
future pathways. As a brief synthesis, summary and conclusion to the chapter, the following main points are offered:
The theoretical framework of critical realism provides a helpful
distinction between the ontological layers of real, actual and observed that are useful for research into open systems.
The case study approach can allow for focus on multiple scales and spaces both for context-setting purposes and for probing structures and mechanisms, or the layer of the real.
Participatory action research provides an approach which goes some way to overcoming the positivist/constructivist divide through shared
processes and validation.
Real-world research requires a flexible research strategy and design to allow for changes over time, attributed to Heroclitus as ‘you can’t step into the same river twice’ (Jamison and Wegener 2010).
The mixed-method approach gives greater confidence in findings through triangulation between datasets.
Positionality and ethical considerations are an integral aspect of any research programme.
Reflexivity on the research process enables learning for researcher and, if effectively communicated, potentially for readers.
The next chapter (Chapter 4) goes on to describe and discuss the case study of this research.
141
4 Plymouth and its allotments
4.1 Introduction
This chapter introduces the case study of the research, giving an overview of allotments and AFNs in the city of Plymouth, SW England, to provide the context for discussions in Chapters 5-8. It explores the city’s demographic and socio-economic characteristics (4.2), and outlines patterns of food provisioning and AFNs in the city and surrounding regions (4.3). Consideration of the
historical provision of allotments in Plymouth (4.4) and their present-day extent and management (4.5) is followed by an illustration of allotment tenants who participated in this research. The concluding section (4.6) summarises the key factors which inform this research.