Various methods were used to analyse qualitative and quantitative data. Among these, this thesis highlights Stakeholder Analysis.
1.5.4.1 Stakeholder Analysis and Participation
Stakeholder Analysis (ODA, 1995; Bryson, 2003; World Bank, 1996) was found particularly useful for identifying, characterizing and engaging with various categories of stakeholders. The methodology helped to develop clearer understandings of stakeholder interests, capacities, resources, roles, responsibilities, relationships, priority, power and influence, issues and modes of ‘participation’ (see Table 2 for typology). Stakeholder Analysis clarified the dynamics around ‘power’ and ‘influence’, which determine decisions around adopted interventions, institutional arrangements and who gets included, excluded and/or adversely included in what benefit stream or decision making platform. Stakeholder Analysis also assisted the researcher to structure and adapt the study on an on-on-going basis, depending
59 on emerging issues, insights, needs and other circumstances.For enhanced rigour, Stakeholder Analysis was closely interwoven with elements of the Capability Approach and Entitlements Analysis framework (Sen, 1981, 1984, 1999; Gasper, 1984; Nussbaum, 2003).
A ‘stakeholder’ was defined as an interested individual, group or institution that may or may not be affected by decisions or actions pertaining to interventions and contractual arrangements within selected smallholder irrigation schemes, and may or may not be part of decision-making about such interventions arrangements. ‘Primary stakeholders’ were those ultimately affected, either positively (i.e. beneficiaries) or negatively (i.e. losers) by decisions or actions pertaining to agricultural commercialization and contractual arrangements. ‘Secondary stakeholders’ were the intermediaries in the project design and implementation processes. ‘Key stakeholders’ were those who could significantly influence, or were important to the success of a project. These definitions included winners and losers, as well as those involved or excluded from decision making processes.
‘Participation’ has been variously defined. For the study, useful definitions included, firstly, Cernea’s (1985) definition that participation is “Empowering people to mobilize their own capacities, be social actors rather than passive subjects, manage resources, make decisions, and control decisions that affect their lives…” A second definition was the World Bank’s (1998) definition that participation is “a process through which stakeholders influence and share control over development initiatives and the decisions and resources which affect them…”A third useful definition was the Southern African Sustainable Use Study Group’s (SASUSG, 1997) definition that participation is “The process whereby all valid stakeholders are able to pursue their interests with a minimum of mutually subtractive influences…” It was noted that while these definitions emanated from varying ideological perspectives and institutional objectives, the rhetoric was broadly resonant.
The diversity of stakeholders required clear understandings of modes of participation with respect both to contract farming arrangements and the study’s research process. For such insights, the study drew from Pimbert & Pretty’s (1994 in IIED, 1994:19) Typology of Participation (Table 3). The typology provides clear definitions of various modes of participation. Combined with Stakeholder Analysis and elements of the Capability Approach,
60 Entitlements Analysis and the Integrated Framework for Governability (Figure 3), the typology strengthened the analysis of observed phenomena as well as the research process.
TABLE 3 TYPOLOGY OF PARTICIPATION
Typology Components of each Type Passive
Participation
People participate by being told what is going to happen or has happened. It is a unilateral announcement by an administration or project management without any listening to peoples' responses. The information being shared belongs only to external professionals.
Participation in information giving
People participate by giving answers to questions posed by extractive researchers and project managers using questionnaire surveys or similar approaches. People do not have the opportunity to influence proceedings, as the findings of the research or project design are neither shared nor checked for accuracy.
Participation by Consultation
People participate by being consulted, and external agents listen to views. These external agents define both problems and solutions, and may modify these in the light of people’s responses. Such a consultative process does not concede any share of decision-making and professionals are under no obligation to take on board people’s views.
Participation for material incentives
People participate by providing resources, for example labour, in return for food, cash, or other material incentives. Much in situ research falls in this category, as rural people provide the fields but are not involved in the experimentation or process of learning. It is very common to see this called participation, yet people have no stake in prolonging activities when the incentives end.
Functional Participation
People participate by forming groups to meet pre-determined objectives related to the project, which can involve the development or promotion of externally initiated social organisation. Such involvement does not tend to be at early stages of project cycles or planning, but rather after major decisions have been made. These institutions tend to be dependent on external structures, but may become independent in time.
Interactive participation
People participate in joint analysis, which leads to action plans and the formation of new local groups or the strengthening of existing ones. It tends to involve interdisciplinary methods that seek multiple perspectives and make use of systematic and structured learning processes. These groups take control over local decisions, so that people have a stake in maintaining structures or practices.
Self-mobilisation/ active participation
People participate by taking initiatives independent of external institutions to change systems. Such self-initiated mobilisation and collective action may or may not challenge existing distributions of power and wealth.
Source: Pimbert and Pretty (1994 in IIED, 1994:19)
1.5.4.2 Gender Analysis
Gender Analysis related to similarities and differences between women and men at the community level in terms of access to decision-making, land rights, benefits and costs deriving from agricultural commercialization and capacity building within joint ventures and strategic partnerships. Gender Analysis went beyond issues of equity by attempting to make explicit the opportunities and constraints that affected the ability of women and men to respond to joint ventures and strategic partnetships. The analysis also examined the ways in
61 which women and men perceived the usefulness of agricultural commercialization initiatives.