Interviews refer to interactional exchanges between two or more people on a topic of interest to either one of the parties or both (Edwards and Holland, 2013; Gill et al., 2008). However, in research, interviews are considered as “a basic mode of inquiry” with “…an interest in other individuals’ stories because they are of worth” (Seidman, 2012, pp. 8-9). Informed by the interpretivist paradigm, in-depth interviews were conducted to gather information from the selected research participants. While other methods were used, in-depth interviews were the main method for data collection during the fieldwork.
In-depth interviewing involves conducting intensive individual interviews with participants to explore their perspectives on a particular phenomenon (Boyce and Neale, 2006). In-depth interviews enabled government actors and farmers to interpret the processes of agricultural transformation from their subjective perspectives. This approach to data collection allowed the pursuit of in-depth information about personal experiences of agricultural transformation and modernisation across the communities selected for inclusion in this case study.
The interview questions were informed by the broader aim of the research, specific research questions, the political ecology framework and literature on agricultural modernisation and transformation in Ghana. On the basis of earlier discussions with some of the farmers and actors however, it became necessary to revise interview questions to reflect lessons learnt, thereby adopting an iterative approach. The questions were structured to gather substantive issues related
106
to the research. However, the questions themselves were malleable, including re-asking questions where there were unclear responses, thereby pursuing in-depth explanation. Sometimes participants shared many lived experiences that were not consistent with the themes of the interview. However, all responses were captured, which together are necessary to understand the stories of the participants. In addition, an interview guide, which provides a structure to assist an interviewer to stay focused, including by directing questions during interviewing (Mason, 2011), was utilised (see Appendix 1). Using the interview guide enabled me to ask questions relevant to the research focus as well as making on-the-spot decisions about wording a question to solicit more details.
In depth interviews with farmers covered broad themes, including drivers of adoption of improved seed varieties, chemical fertiliser and agrochemicals, impacts of adoption of these inputs on livelihoods and existing farming systems, drivers of cashew production, impacts of cashew production on land access, local food production, and social relations, among others. Thus, in-depth interviews with farmers provided information to analyse drivers of agricultural modernisation and transformation, including their impacts on local level livelihoods.
The majority of farmers were interviewed in their homes, with a few also interviewed near their farms. Commonly interviews began with participants being reluctant to give details, but as I built rapport, including by telling them my childhood experiences of farming, they became very comfortable in sharing their personal experiences related to farming. This was also assisted because I speak the same language as they do. In some cases, participants sought clarification before providing responses.
Moreover, it is important to note that three of the interviews were informed by an oral history approach, with aged and experienced farmers in Wenchi, Amposahkrom and Kintampo. Oral history involves gaining first-hand information or an inside perspective from a person who has lived in a particular historical time (Given, 2008). Reflecting this, selected farmers were asked to narrate the historical trajectories of agricultural practices and emerging changes in the farming systems in their respective communities. This helped identify the structural changes in the farming system based on the experiences of the participants.
107
The second set of in-depth interviews at the local level was conducted with the traditional leaders and assembly members. The traditional institutions led by chiefs/traditional leaders, are the custodians of the customary land. Within the Ghanaian social structure, traditional leaders are key actors in the agricultural sector since they administer about 80% of Ghana’s total land (Adu-Gyamfi, 2012; Tsikata and Yaro, 2011). For this reason, traditional leaders in the research communities were interviewed to gather detailed information on how farmland is accessed, the potential for cropland expansion, emerging commercial pressures on communal land, large-scale land acquisition processes and how all these are transforming agricultural systems in the communities. The information gathered from the farmers and traditional leaders enabled a critical analysis of the implications of land concentration in the hands of local elites and family members upon local livelihoods, labour and social relations. All interviews with the farmers and traditional leaders were conducted in the ‘Akan’ language, which is spoken by about 48% of Ghanaians including those in the research communities (Kutsoati and Morck, 2012). With Akan as my mother tongue, it was easier for me to communicate, and to build trust and rapport with the farmers and traditional leaders.
At the national level, representatives from the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Ministry of Land and Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Biosafety Committee, Crop Research Institute and decentralised institutions such as the Department of Agriculture, Customary Land Secretariat, and Office of Administration of Stool Land, in the case study communities, were interviewed. These institutions were selected because they have been entrusted with the responsibilities of agricultural policy formulation, land management, chemical control and developing new crop varieties, among others. All these responsibilities are aimed at transforming and modernising the agricultural sector to facilitate broader national development. In addition, at the national level, actors from activist groups such as Peasant Farmers Association of Ghana, Food Sovereignty Ghana and No-till Agriculture Centre were interviewed. From these institutions, information ranging from public agricultural policies, improved seed varieties, agrochemicals, administrative management of local land, land acquisition for cash crop plantations and how all these are shaping agrarian transformation and local livelihoods in Ghana was gathered.
108
Finally, actors from development institutions, including the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO), World Bank, Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) agriculture programmes and NGOs such as World Vision International were interviewed. These representatives were all interviewed in their offices, and interviews were conducted in English, which is the official language of Ghana and medium of instruction in formal settings, including offices. Interviews with donors covered themes including their role in the agricultural policy process, their role in support for the Green Revolution in Ghana, their programmes and projects at the local level, as well as their support for market-based agricultural modernisation and transformation in Ghana.
All interviews with participants were audio recorded with permission from the participants, except two who declined to be recorded. In the case of these two, notes were taken. Each interview lasted for at least one hour, and was transcribed word for word into English. Transcription was done in the field, which provided an opportunity to undertake follow up inquiries.