MEDIDAS PREVENTIVAS Y DE MITIGACIÓN DE LOS IMPACTOS AMBIENTALES

To analyse the data I employed a version of grounded theory as set out by Anselm Strauss and Juliet Corbin (1990). This method assists in the process of building or adapting theories through providing techniques for sorting and analysing data to reveal patterns and meanings. A key element of the method dictates that data is incrementally collected and simultaneously analysed and that theories are built and tested during the process. This process inevitably began from the questions I generated as the focus for the research, but themes became more participant-led as the data gathering and analytical process progressed:

One does not begin with a theory, and then prove it. Rather, one begins with an area of study and what is relevant to that area is allowed to emerge. (Strauss and Corbin 1990:23)

This further combated the potential to emphasise my own presumptions and personal perspectives on the phenomena during analysis as I relied on the data collected from other participants as the basis of emerging themes.

I inputted all text-based data into the Atlas.ti 5.5 computer

programme. This is a workbench for the qualitative analysis of large bodies of textual and multimedia data. Inputting each piece of data as a Primary Document enabled me to attach descriptive codes to selected quotes. I then worked at code level grouping related codes into families and themes and noting developing trends. The programme provides the flexibility to group related fragments of data and build theoretical models through identified relational ties.

This approach aided the triangulation system (Denzin 1978) as a number of different data sources describing the same phenomenon could be viewed simultaneously, highlighting the depth of occurrence and producing a marker of validity. Issues arose, however, where there were conflicts in the data and the neatness of a supposedly supported assertion did not fit with the contradictions found in real world empirical data. Issues arose through

conflicting opinions being provided by different participants or through contradictory responses in different data forms from the same participant. Atlas.ti aided understanding of this process by drawing links between

complementary and conflicting codes to highlight where these discrepancies occurred to enable either further questioning to take place for clarification, or to ensure the variety of perspectives within one theme were clearly

presented.

While the Atlas.ti programme helped manage the quantity of

information in a systematic way, it also produced analytical barriers. I found it important to conduct discourse analysis as guided by Strauss and Corbin (1990) as language does not reflect reality in a straightforward way.

Quotations chosen for their literal meaning could lead to misunderstandings of their contextual meaning. To avoid this, I cross-referenced quotes with their original data source and wrote memos for potentially controversial material. The quotes utilised to support this thesis were selected after this process had been completed.

To place the data within a wider frame, I recognise the connections between my data analysis from this project and the literature from relevant academic fields. Here my approach differs from Strauss and Corbin‟s as they avoid researching the literature until data analysis is complete. As previously stated, I do not believe that a truth is derived from the data, and rather that what emerges is a result of my interpretation as analyst. I found incorporating ideas from the literature during the analytical process provided useful leaps in theoretical thought.

I should also highlight the Atlas.ti programme‟s reliance on the items of data (interview transcriptions/dairy responses etc.) for evidence and the potential to neglect phenomena recorded in other forms (for example, the literature, researcher‟s memory, images or recordings).11

While I coded my detailed fieldnotes of the recorded events, it was impractical to incorporate every thought (either that I have ever had or during the three years of conducting research) on the phenomenon into the Atlas.ti programme as

11

The programme does facilitate the inclusion of images and recordings within the system of PDs, however, I took the decision that coding these was inefficient for the current study and preferred to cross reference through memos and written notes.

Primary Documents. To ensure this data was incorporated into the theory building process, I produced a series of memos on various themes, providing a space to incorporate my own developing ideas and reflections against the hard evidence from other participants.

This process proved particularly useful to aid the clarity between what I thought and what I had external evidence for, and the constant revision and redrafting of memos in the light of newly gathered data served to aid my thinking about certain phenomena. This provides another link between the two influential methodological approaches of sociology and ethnology for this thesis.

From the field of ethnomusicology, the centrality of field notes as a research tool was established by John Blacking (Discussed by Reily 1998). The process has been extended to include the practice of analysis through writing by Gregory Barz (1997; and republished in edited form in Barz and Cooley 2008) where he introduces the concept of using fieldnotes as process tools to organise thought rather than as fixed records of fact. Following this perspective, I present this thesis as a point in time of the analytical process. This is not the only form in which I will present data from this research

project, nor have I reached the end of my learning. While every effort has been made to develop theories to a useful stage, I do not intend this thesis as the final point on my journey to discovery within the field. As such, I will now address a few points on the presentation of material in this thesis.

As my focus solidified throughout the Grounded Theory process, some data was omitted from detailed analysis for this thesis. On a large scale, this includes diary responses from participants who did not attend any events which were self described as folk during the diary period; on a smaller scale, data unrelated to the final subjects discussed in the thesis were

omitted. This process was affected by two factors: the depth of significance within the collected data (i.e. the number of references to the phenomena uncovered by the Atlas.ti coding technique) and my own editorial decisions based on relevance to my research interests. I have also used my editorial powers in the ways I present findings. Where possible, I have provided quotations from data sources to corroborate my analysis. However, due to

issues of discourse analysis outlined above I have tried to avoid the facade of a „cut and paste‟ technique.

Jonathan Stock (2004) emphasises that, as researchers, we have a responsibility to those we are representing in our outputs. As mediators, we need to take into consideration the impact our publications have on the communities under investigation. On the other hand, he is keen to make it clear that we also have a responsibility to our audiences and to present material in an accurate and representative manner – not to be solely the „mouthpiece of our informants‟ (Stock 2004:30). In developing a model for fieldwork practices Ian Russell (2006) also raises the issue of research

outputs being affected by intimidation by informants. For Russell, this can be in the form of acquiescing to their desires or avoiding presenting material which the researcher feels to be significant, but which may cause personal offence to participants.

To avoid these difficulties I have endeavoured to present my opinions alongside the views of individuals as transparently as possible. Where I have felt it pertinent to discuss potentially problematic issues I have taken the mouthpiece and presented my own opinions on the subject based on the wider data rather than attributing volatile material to other individuals. This has involved a process of reflexivity and an attempt to make my standpoint explicit enabling readers to reach their own conclusions (Kisluik 1997:23-44).

I have also tried not to shun potentially divisive subjects: as an example of this, the nature of the question concerning barriers to

participation constitutes one such area. I have, however, attempted to deal with such subjects sensitively within this thesis and would further consider the implications of presenting these subjects in other forms and to other audiences.

To help remind me that the quotes I utilise come from real people and represent real people‟s opinions I have retained the use of participants‟ real names. This also serves as a reminder that anonymity is not possible in this close-knit context where individual cases are easily identifiable.12 Where

12

direct quotes are presented, participants‟ names are preceded by the

collection method as this may have implications for understanding the data.13 Another language related issue is the decision whether to use

vernacular terms found within the field of study or those employed in academic discourse. Examples here include „performer‟ or „singer‟;

„instrumentalist‟ or „musician‟; „melody‟ or tune‟. I have generally used the terms found within the field, variation being for coherence when referencing cited literature. Related to this is the naming of songs. Where possible, I have used the titles of songs as provided by the singers themselves either during performance or in their diaries. Where the singer has provided no explicit title I have inserted my own.

A final terminology issue is the use of pronouns. As I am an active folk singer and participant within the scene under investigation it would seem appropriate to use „us‟ and „we‟. However, as I was attempting to distance myself from my own assumptions I found it clearer to write in terms of „them‟ and „they‟. Further to this I have found myself writing in different registers depending upon the nature of material being presented (i.e. theoretical argument; personal experience) reflecting the view that the writer‟s identity is not a singular authoritative figure and is capable of shifting depending upon the context of writing.

Within this thesis, I have included a number of figures following different styles of sonic representation. These are intended to illustrate particular musical features and not document the full extent of musical performance. I recognise the limitations of graphic representations of music and so have included an audio CD with featured examples so readers may listen to the various phenomena under discussion.14

As indicated above, the outcomes of this research project are not limited to this thesis alone. While academic papers and journal articles may arise, a further impact I should like to draw attention to is in the ways in which it has impacted upon my activities as a participant within the field. The impacts of research upon the research context have been discussed

13

D=Diary, FG=Focus Group, FN=Field Notes, I=Interview, PC=Personal Communication (predominantly via email). For example (D~Bob) = Method of data collection – Diary; Participant – Bob Butler.

14

(Shelemay 1997), and along with the possible negative implications a more positive approach to „giving back‟ or „knowledge transfer‟ has also been explored (Sheehy 1992; Keil 1998). During the research period I have run a singing group aimed at introducing university students, staff and the general public to group folk singing through a process of taught workshop followed by singing sessions. Along with my partner, I have also recently started a

singers‟ club in our local pub following a format not found within current Sheffield events. While it is too early to tell the impacts of these projects, ideas that have developed through the process of undertaking this research have affected the ways in which I approach both ventures.