PRINCIPIOS JURÍDICOS RESPECTO DE LA INSEMINACIÓN ARTIFICIAL

This research project adopted a qualitative analysis of data collected. Silverman (2011:23) argues that there is no “agreed doctrine” of how to conduct qualitative analysis. Instead he notes that qualitative social science research has adopted a number of ‘isms’ through which “particular vocabularies, investigatory styles and ways of writing have emerged’ (ibid). Silverman suggests that researchers should avoid labelling analysis, a practice, he says, that is more about identifying “tags” to appeal to your research discipline than assisting in clarity (p59). This research project has not sought to align itself within a specific discipline and so does not lend itself to a particular dominant vocabulary or form of analysis. Moreover Greckhamer et al (2008: 22) suggest that to enhance interdisciplinary studies researchers should reflect on “their assumed grand narratives of doing, legitimizing, and governing the production of knowledge, universal structures and meaning”, this would suggest avoiding adopting a single ‘idiom’. As a consequence the account of the analysis in this project is offered as a narrative of research steps.

The data was analysed and coded in a two step process. Firstly interview data was analysed using a Framework for Analysis developed from grey and academic literature. These findings were then used to reshape the Framework of Analysis to consider the documentary data. The aim of this approach was to include contextualised systemic knowledge beyond that of the individual researcher and existing literature. There was a dual purpose to this process: firstly, this was an attempt to render the thesis more transdisciplinary in line with the methodological goals and secondly, it was used to fill some of the apparent gap in existing literature on the nature of waste governance in Scotland.

Other studies have used Dean’s (1999) Analytics of Government as the basis for their theoretical framings of governmentality; however, the researcher found that none of these studies (including Dean’s own approach) gave detailed guidance as to how empirical data had been analysed in relation to each component of Dean’s framing. As a

consequence, some time was spent creating a more detailed Framework of Analysis for this study. In line with Dean’s (1999) approach, the framework separated analysis into 6 key elements: Identification of Problematisations; Fields of Visibility; Techniques of Government; Knowledge; Identities; Utopian Ideals. It should be noted that each element was not mutually exclusive and data was often coded under more than one heading.

The initial framework (Framework 1 – See Appendix 3 p260) was created to interpret data from the 30 expert interviews. This was purposefully designed to allow both deductive and inductive analysis within each element to reflect the methodological choices within this thesis. Codes within each of the 6 elements were chosen from existing literature and researcher knowledge of the field. The central ideas behind these codes were noted in a guide (see Appendix 3 p260). This was used as an aide-memoire throughout the analysis process. This analysis was done by hand.

The second framework for analysis (Framework 2 – See Appendix 4 p269) used the information from the 30 interviewees to revisit the coding within the 6 key elements. The purpose of this reshaping of Framework 1 was to reflect the Sustainability Science goals of this thesis in which multiple knowledges are used to construct the research project. A further research guide: was created to assist the researcher in this process (see Appendix 4 p269). This analysis was conducted using a combination of manual and digital coding using NVivo (2014) software.

The decision to use NVivo was initially based on the length of some of the policy documents. NVivo is cited as being “easier and quicker to code text” (Welsh, 2002). In this sense the software was chosen primarily for its ability to “manage data” rather than for interpretative purposes (Bazeley and Jackson, 2013:Chapter 1). The coding was constructed to mirror the Framework 2. This Framework was used to analyse the 3 national policy documents (National Waste Action Plan (2003); Zero Waste Scotland Plan (2010); Safeguarding Scotland’s Resources: Blueprint for a more resource efficient and circular economy (2013)).

At this stage it became apparent that the coding was too detailed and was providing a complicated and inaccessible account of governmentality of ZW in Scotland. It has been

noted that NVivo software can expose over-coding (Bazeley and Jackson, 2013). It was decided that sufficient detail had been obtained to allow a rich picture of ZW governance in Scotland to emerge and the decision was made to take a more constricted approach to coding of the additional documents, using only the 6 elements of Dean’s (1999) Analytics of Government. This coding was done by hand – although NVivo (2014) proved to be a more efficient way of coding, it was felt to offer less opportunity to understand the document as a whole (a recognised weakness of ICT analysis: Bazeley and Jackson, 2013; Roberts and Wilson, 2002). During this coding process attention was paid to any discrepancies with earlier findings. This approach also allowed the researcher to maintain perspective on the purpose and role of the documents, rather than becoming bogged down in the emergent themes found across the data. Silverman (2011) notes that researchers must be aware of specifics of data sources as well as broader themes.

It was found both in the documentary and interview data analysis, that the Frameworks for Analysis sometimes failed to capture key ideas or the broader message contained within individual sources. To ensure that these were not lost, a research diary was kept to document these ideas. This is a recognised approach to encourage reflexivity for both manual and digital coding (Marshall and Rossman, 2006; Bazeley and Jackson, 2013). This data was also used to reflect back on the usefulness of governmentality to understand ZW in Scotland and so contributed to the methodological aim of this thesis. 4.4 Research Aims and Contributions

This chapter has explained how a Sustainability Science approach has been used as the methodology in this thesis. It began by outlining the “philosophical ballasts” (Moses and Knutsen, 2012) that underpin that approach; explaining that Sustainability Science is an example of Methodological Pluralism which balances different ontological perspectives and uses a range of epistemologies. It was suggested that Sustainability Science often links to ideas of transdisciplinarity to balance these methodology considerations.

Transdisciplinarity requires the input of a plurality of perspectives, including non- academic knowledge, in the research design. Although some in Sustainability Science

have suggested that this requires a detailed process of co-production of knowledge between academic and societal actors, this thesis argues that approach is inappropriate for research on national policy. Instead an adapted process which used consulting

transdisciplinarity was used. From this perspective a combination of academic and societal knowledge were used to frame the problem, identify new forms of knowledge and to evaluate the solution.

This thesis maintains that the aim of a Sustainability Science project is ultimately to identify knowledge that will have a contribution to a sustainable transition. As a consequence, the findings of this thesis have also been evaluated within the thesis itself. By considering the credibility, salience and legitimacy issues within this project, insight into the appropriateness of governmentality as a means to make sense of governance of ZW in Scotland will become apparent. It is hoped that this will help contribute to Sustainability Science research by providing a framework which can be used to understand governance of issues through national policy. The final three chapters of this thesis present, explain and evaluate the findings of this thesis.