Due to the nature of the research, the survey design was based on exploratory and descriptive methods as suggested by Ackroyd and Hughes (1981), Bradburn et al. (2004), Maccoby and Maccoby (1976), Malhotra (1999), McCrossan (1984), StatPac (2005), and Walonick (2004). The former employed as the front end of the total research design due to its flexibility and versatility to adapt to the varying conditions of the research issues, and to discover the ideas and insights related to the main problems hindering the development of the tilapia aquaculture industry, with special focus on its production, market and business environment issues. The later, employed pre-planned, structured and semi-structured questionnaires to obtain quantitative and qualitative primary data, addressing the more specific research questions related to the tilapia marketing operators (including producers).
The data collection process and questionnaires had some degree of standardisation so data obtained were consistent and comparable between the different research areas and facilitate its analysis in a uniform and coherent manner. Although the versatility of questionnaires allowed the collection of both subjective and objective data through the use of open or closed format questions (Akcroyd et al., 1981; Bradburn et al., 2004; College of Computing, 2005; Walonick, 2004).
Therefore, the study employed semi-structured interview schedules for the personal interviews, with a multiple cross-sectional design12 as the primary method of collecting data from different groups. The advantages of employing semi-structured interview schedules with both close and open-ended questions as the primary method of collecting
12 In multiple cross-sectional designs, there are two or more samples of respondents, and information from each sample is obtained only once. Often, information from different samples is obtained at different times (Malhotra, 1999; McCrossan, 1984; StatPac, 2005)
data from different groups according to various authors (Duhaime and Grant, 1994; Kelmer and Noy, 1990; Kholo, 1991; Malhotra, 1999; Mintzberg, 1994; Newman, 1994; Snow d Thomas, 1994) are described in Table 2.3.
Personal interviewing however has some limitations, of which researcher and interviewee biases are considered to be the most serious (Duhaime et al., 1994). The technique of standardising interviews across sample groups, as suggested by these authors, was used to minimise the researcher bias in the study. The interviewee bias was at least partially controlled by questions posed as probes during the interview. Cross-check questions were also incorporated in the interview schedule. In many instances, it was necessary to take supplementary notes for responses, to gain better qualitative understanding of the main issues of the research.
Table 2.4 Advantages of employing semi-structured interviews.
Advantages: - Experts' opinions were being sought.
- More structured approaches were less suitable. - Qualitative and quantitative data were required.
- It was inappropriate to use mail or telephone surveys due to practical and cultural constraints.
- Suitable for the use of open-ended questions and visual aids.
- Have the highest response rates and permit the use of long questionnaires. - Face-to-face interviews is more appropriate for research in developing countries.
- Allows the clarification of the interpretation of the terms used.
- Open-ended questions are effective in developing and exploring issues which might not have been apparent in initial stages.
- Open-ended questions give opportunity to triangulate and confirm other views/sources.
2.6.1 Questionnaire design
A study of methods used in previous studies on seafood trade and tilapia farming was conducted before setting the questions on the interview schedule (Ahmed, 2001; Hernandez-Mogica, 2002; Lem et al., 2004). However, some modifications of questions and phrases were carried out after the first phase visit and pre-testing of the interview schedule, normally done in the course of the pilot survey.
The study comprised mainly of two semi-structured interview schedules, one for the producers (i.e. farmers and fishermen) and one for marketing operators (i.e. middlemen, importer, wholesaler, processor, supermarket, fishmongers and restaurants); and unstructured and open-ended interviews for policy makers (i.e. regulatory and development institutions) and businesses related to the industry (i.e. suppliers, consultancy, NGOs and magazines).
The interview schedule for tilapia producers was divided into three sections, which addressed the issues of the business details and production technology employed, processing and trade, support and economical issues (Appendix 4). The first section of the interview schedule was for personal information of the respondents and the business (i.e. name, location, role played within the business and experience) and the technology employed to produce tilapia (i.e. type of system employed, husbandry techniques, technology available, performance, inputs and services). The second section explored detailed information about marketing of tilapia products (i.e. post-harvest handling and processing, market targeted, distribution, marketing strategies, certification and information). While the third section related to economical issues (i.e. support and financing, regulations, economic perception and financial analysis).
The interview schedule for tilapia traders was also divided in three sections, which mainly addressed issues related to supply and sales, support, regulation and economical issues (Appendix 5). The first section focused on supply issues (i.e. source of the product,
distribution, marketing strategies, prices, competition and seasonality). Economic issues like support, financing, regulation, products traded and source of income, were focused in the third.
The other sets of questionnaires for institutions supporting, regulating and financing the tilapia industry, as well as businesses related to the industry were more simple and unstructured (Appendix 6), focusing in only in the respondent’s involvement in the industry, passed activities, future trends and perception for development, with some improvised cross-checking questions when suitable.
All the questionnaires were constructed in English and then translated into Spanish to avoid confusion from the respondent, as suggested by Easterby-Smith et al., (1991), if possible written interviews should be carried out in the same language as the respondent. Closed questions were divided into questions of fact and perception, and were designed to obtain responses easily and quickly. Questions were also designed as cross-references.
2.6.2 Pre-testing of interview schedules
Pilot testing of the interview schedules was carried out by interviewing key farmers, traders, and policy makers related to tilapia, targeting included around 5 individuals for each sector. The aim of the pilot test was to ensure that the questions and issues regarding the subject of the study was included in the schedules and cleared from any ambiguities and that the respondents were able to answer the questions without significant constraint. The sophistication of the respondents, the level of enumerator, and the wording of the questions were matched (Casley et al., 1981). Also, it was sought to get a clearer overview
of tilapia production systems, its human agents, its scale and its key relationships.
2.6.3 General Approach
Initial contact was made (by telephone, mail, or a personal visit if no other means was feasible) with companies and individuals to be interviewed in order to arrange a convenient
meeting time, providing reasonable notice. The background to the study was explained, including comments to the effect that:
The study is being undertaken by DFID, University of Stirling, CONACYT and partners on behalf of the development of the tilapia industry in the country.
The content would focus on the respondent’s views of production, trade, and institutional related issues to farmed tilapia products.
The interview should typically last between 30 minutes and 1 hr.
If requested, a written summary of the background to the study was sent to the interviewee by post/fax/email.
All data provided were going to be used solely for the purpose of the study and commercial confidentiality was re-assured.
Interviews started with a proper introduction and ice-breaking comments (Appendix 7), and the questionnaire used as a basis for discussions, attempting to keep the interviews as open-ended as possible when required, but also with some direct questions. The precise wording and order of the questions varied depending on the content of the preceding part of the interview and the particular interviewee.
Interviewees were encouraged at all times to provide information free of the interviewer’s perceptions, and permitted (within reason) to talk freely without interruption. When interviewees raised any issues, they were expanded through further prompting. Probing was also used to encourage interesting points of discussion. Whenever possible, the interviews were recorded to leave the interviewer free to concentrate on the questions and the direction of the interview (i.e. policy makers, financers and businesses related to the industry).
Where the interviewees had doubts about a particular issue (e.g. policy makers, traders, etc.), information was presented with prompts including:
Photographs showing the production, process, and trade of farmed tilapia.
Photographs showing tilapia products characteristics.
Description of common ways to produce and trade tilapia.
Description of tilapia products and eating characteristics.