GIS for Districtlevel Administration in India Problems and

GIS for District-level Administration in India: Problems and Opportunities (Walsham and Sahay 1999) Conducting Empirical Work Gertrudes Macueve 1

Research Approach: Interpretative case study • Why chosen? – To gain in-depth knowledge of the GIS technology that had been developed in particular; – To gain actor’s thoughts and views concerning the use of GIS; – To gain in-depth knowledge of the changing contexts within which GIS was being implemented. • How was the interpretative case study carried? – By using specific methodologies, theory and methods Gertrudes Macueve 2

Methodology: Contextualism • Why chosen? – The need to study the content, context and process of GIS implementation in India. • How was the Contextualism in the case study carried? – By examining in detail the action and perceptions of human actors and the context within which these actions took place. – Comparing the Indian Site and origin of the technology Gertrudes Macueve 3

Methodology: Longitudinal • Why chosen? – The researchers needed to focus on issues of process, by following up the whole process of implementation of GIS in India. • How was the longitudinal methodology in the case study carried? – Collecting data over a period of 3 years as events were taking place and following the various phases of the GIS projects. – Collecting data for period prior to 1993 trough archival documents and recollections of the past. Gertrudes Macueve 4

Methods _1 • Formal interview – 127 interviews; with 105 personnel of different hierarchical levels in 5 field trips; 1. 5 to 2 hours; taking notes during the interview by both researchers then written up as soon as possible after the interview, often on the same day; tape recording infrequently; – Earlier stages open ended interviewing and later stages were more closely directed toward the emerging concepts and themes. • System demonstrations – Conducted for the researchers benefit at all the project sites • Search for archival data in the form of reports and filed documents • Informal contacts with personnel outside formal interviews – Ex: with the project director at MOEF; throughout the research period; email contact while researchers back to host institutions. • GIS workshop (2) – Initiated by the researchers; wide range of personnel Gertrudes Macueve 5

Methods_2 • Research Access – Negotiated through the GIS project director in the MOEF • Analysis of field data and identification and development of concepts, themes and issues – careful reading and refection on the field notes; frequent discussions between the two researchers; – Documents summarizing the field visits and emerging themes were produced after each project stage – Themes discussed between researchers and the GIS participants at various field sites and in central government agencies – No formal structured methods to identify themes were used by researches. Gertrudes Macueve 6

Methods_3 • Feedback – Through regular contacts and through formal report; • In a longitudinal research participants are often prepared to have researchers opinion on important issues. And because the researchers felt a particular moral imperative to get involved in advising on possible courses of action in a context such as Indian district-level administration. • Role of the researchers – Role from independent observer to action researcher; – Terms of reference for later phase of the MOEF project drew heavily from some material produced by the researchers; – The workshop in Delhi initiated by the researchers concerned with plans for the future actions Gertrudes Macueve 7

Comments • Why observations are not mentioned in the research? • How was data being collected while the researchers were not in the field? • As action researchers, couldn’t you contribute in advising decision makers? – Ex: to choose someone to direct the project after the MOEF’s director left? Gertrudes Macueve 8