QUALITATIVE INTERVIEWS IN HUMAN DIMENSIONS STUDIES ABOUT NATURE CONSERVATION KVALITATIVNO INTERVJUVANJE NA PODROČJU RAZISKOVANJA DRUŽBOSLOVNIH VIDIKOV NARAVOVARSTVA Gregor TORKAR, Barbara ZIMMERMANN, Tomas WILLEBRAND Pregledni znanstveni članek Prejeto/Received: 17.1.2011 Sprejeto/Accepted:14.6.2011 Key words: research methods, qualitative interview, human dimensions, nature conservation Ključne besede: raziskovalne metode, kvalitativni intervju, družboslovni vidiki, ohranjanje narave ABSTRACT Nature conservation research is increasingly concerned with the human component as with the ecosystem or species in focus. Natural scientists that are loyal to their education tend to favour quantitative methods. These methods are not necessarily the only and most suitable tools in human dimensions studies. The aim of this article is to describe the importance of quantitative and qualitative research methods in human dimensions studies pertaining to nature conservation, particularly interviewing. Differences between structured, semi-structured and unstructured interviews are explained and examples given. Additionally, some guidelines for conducting a qualitative interview are presented. Research scientists working with human dimension studies should be aware that nature conservation is a complex cultural problem and that complexity and creativity should therefore be recognized when addressing research methodologies. IZVLEČEK V naravovarstvenih raziskavah dobiva vse večjo težo človeška komponenta problematike, v primeri z ekosistemsko ali vrstno. Naravoslovci, zvesti svojemu formalnemu izobraževanju, pogosto favorizirajo kvantitativne metode naravovarstvenega raziskovanja, ki pa niso nujno edino in najprimernejše orodje za preučevanje družboslovnih vidikov varstva narave. Namen članka je opisati pomen kvantitativnih in kvalitativnih metod raziskovanja družboslovnih vidikov varstva narave, še posebej pa pomen kvalitativnega intervjuja. Pojasnjene so razlike med strukturiranim, delno strukturiranim in nestrukturiranim intervjujem ter podani primeri njihove uporabe. Poleg tega so podane tudi smernice za opravljanje kvalitativnega intervjuja. Znanstveniki, ki se ukvarjajo z družboslovnimi vidiki varstva narave, se morajo zavedati, da je varstvo narave kompleksen kulturni problem. Pri uporabi raziskovalne metodologije je zato potrebna določena mera ustvarjalnosti in razumevanja kompleksnosti problematike. 1. INTRODUCTION Research scientists studying relationships between humans and wildlife or nature in general are often natural science researchers who realized that they cannot solve practical, usually very complex, conservation problems with the traditional natural science modes of thinking, measuring and reasoning. Researchers who publish papers in respected conservation research journals usually try to make some effort to bridge the gap between disciplines, since nature conservation requires input from several scientific disciplines. These researchers are increasingly aware of the importance social studies play in addressing the problem and finding working solutions. Flyvbjerg (2006) believes that social science is problem driven rather than methodology driven in the sense that it employs those methods that best answer, for a given problem, the research questions at hand. Natural scientists that are loyal to their education tend to favour quantitative methods. These methods are not necessarily the only and most suitable tools in human dimensions (HD) studies. The intent of this article was to make the reader familiar with research methods used in HD studies, primarily with interview techniques in qualitative research. Different research methods in HD studies were described and some examples given. We emphasized particularly the importance of qualitative interviews in studies concerning nature conservation. The term qualitative interview is often used to capture the different types of interview that are employed in qualitative research. Devetak et al. (2010) explained that qualitative empirical research is oriented towards examining individual cases (idiographic approach), and is mostly conducted as a study of one single case or a limited number of cases. Therefore, the techniques for data collection are adjusted to small scale analyses, enabling the researcher to become familiar with the social environment. Qualitative interviews tend to be far less structured than the kind of interviews associated with survey research (quantitative approaches). We presented and discussed different forms of qualitative interviews; unstructured interviews, semi-structured interviews, and focus groups. We also discussed positive and negative aspects of using interviews in qualitative research, and gave practical guidelines for preparing an interview and data analysis. The discussion was supported with examples from empirical research using different interview types in HD studies for wildlife and nature conservation. 2. RESEARCH METHODS IN HUMAN DIMENSIONS (HD) STUDIES ON NATURE CONSERVATION There are many ways to obtain desired information, and research methods are different tools that scientists use to collect relevant information in order to test assumptions and draw conclusions. Many HD aspects of wildlife and nature conservation studies are focused on human attitudes (e.g. Bonneau et al. 2009, Hartter 2009), knowledge (e.g. Bonneau et al. 2009, Prokop et al. 2008, Torkar et al. 2010), values (e.g. Tell et al. 2007, Torkar 2009) and self-reported behaviours (e.g. Moore et al. 2008, Torkar 2009), rather than observations of field behaviours (e.g. Stedman et al. 2004, Lindsay et al. 2007, Marion et al. 2008) or indirect impacts (e.g. Igota et Suzuki 2008). This consequently influences research methods used in HD studies. The decision on which research method to use depends on many factors, such as population of interest, goals, available time and resources, literacy of population, etc. We presented the most common methods of data collection and some examples from HD studies. Interviews, especially structured and semi-structured, were discussed separately. 2.1 A QUESTIONNAIRE Questionnaires are administered and answered without the assistance of an interviewer. They are sent by mail, e-mail, fax or personally delivered. Currently, those most frequently used in HD studies are mail (postal) surveys, where the respondent receives a questionnaire and introductory letter by mail. With questionnaires we collect peoples' beliefs, knowledge, values, attitudes, norms, self-reported behaviours, etc. An example of the instrument used in a Norwegian survey of attitudes toward large carnivores (Kaltenborn et al. 1999) was selected: [important sections are highlighted] In addition to socio-demographic variables (age, gender, education, occupation) we included questions regarding the size of the local community, presence of pets in the household currently and whilst growing up, and whether the family had been involved in livestock production at the time the respondent grew up. Sheep farmers were also asked questions about the number of sheep they had, the proportion of total income from sheep husbandry, and how many sheep they had lost during the last five years. /^/ The respondents were also asked to report their opinions or estimates on the actual number of bears, wolves, lynx, and wolverines in Norway, as well as their opinions about whether the populations of the large carnivore species should be exterminated, reduced, maintained, or increased. Attitudes toward large carnivores were measured by means of 35 statements (items), where five response options existed (from 1: strongly agree to 5: strongly disagree). 2.2 CONTENT ANALYSIS Content analysis or textual analysis is a methodology for studying the content of newspapers, television or radio reports, blogs, letters, leaflets, etc. It is frequently used to assess incidents concerning human-nature conflicts. Selection and analysis of documents depend first and foremost on the research goals. As an example we selected an article where authors analyzed newspaper coverage about human-cormorant conflict (Muter et al. 2009). [important sections are highlighted] In January 2008, we conducted a content analysis of U.S. and Canadian newspaper coverage reporting on cormorants in the Basin. We searched Lexis-Nexis, an online periodical database, for all articles printed between 1978 and 2007 using the key words: "cormorant(s)," "double-crested cormorant(s)," and "Great Lake(s)." Articles did not have to focus primarily on cormorants in order to be included in our population. We included articles that discussed cormorants in a variety of contexts (e.g., angling, bird-watching, avian diseases, pollution) to better understand risk frame evolution. Articles that did not pertain to double-crested cormorants in the Basin were not included in the population. We also excluded congressional testimonies and transcripts that appeared in federal news services. We found 108 articles suitable for analysis. 2.3 EXPERIMENT This is a method in which the researcher actively interferes in the research situation. The researcher deliberately introduces a variable and examines the impact of its actions. This method is not very frequently used in HD studies. We came across an interesting experiment measuring incidence of intentional vehicle-reptile collisions (Ashley et al. 2007). A decoy snake, decoy turtle, Styrofoam cup or grease control line were individually placed on the centre line of the road to determine incidence of intentional vehicle strikes. Responses by drivers to reptiles on the road were categorized as those taken to (a) avoid a collision, (b) intentionally strike an animal that would not be run over in the normal course of travel, (c) rescue the animal or, (d) no change in direction/behaviour. In the experiment, the researchers had to ensure the safety of drivers, and they standardized the experiment by e.g. including only drivers without travel companions. Incidence of intentional vehicle-reptile collisions could instead be measured using a questionnaire or interview and asking people to self-report their behaviour. However, there is a reasonable doubt that the outcome would be the same. We expect that 1) people will not necessarily be honest and 2) intentional 'killers' will have a lower response rate than people who will try to avoid road kills due to conservation or ethical reasons. 2.4 METHODS IN CASE STUDY ANALYSIS A multiplicity of data sources and numerous respondents are built into the study design, including interviews, focus groups, records, documents, secondary data, observation and survey data. It implements a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods. The case study is a necessary and sufficient method for certain important research tasks within the social sciences, and it is a method that holds up well when compared to other methods in the gamut of social science research methodology (Flyvbjerg 2006). As an example of how the method was used in HD studies, we selected a study entitled Ecotourism and Conservation: Two Cases from Brazil and Peru (Stronza et Pegas 2008). A quotation is taken from the description of Case Study 2: Ecotourism and rainforests in Peru (p.273). [important sections are highlighted] We have been conducting research in Inflerno since 1996, studying the dynamics of ecotourism activities, economic benefits, community participation, and conservation (Stronza, 1999, 2005, 2007). The goal was to understand how social and economic principles of ecotourism in this site are associated with conservation over time. The first author had lived in the region for 28 months during various periods of fieldwork in 1996-1999, 2002-2003, and 2006. The longitudinal research entailed gathering both qualitative and quantitative data on village life and interactions between the community and the company, and between local residents and tourists. Qualitative data comes from participant observation, field notes, key informant interviews, and focus groups. Quantitative data was compiled from surveys of tourists (n = 80) and semi-structured interviews with heads of households (n = 204, over various periods). Interviews generally lasted 2-3 hours and focused on socioeconomic characteristics of households and ecotourism-related changes in respondents' families, households, and community. Research began two years before the lodge opened, which enabled comparisons of baseline data with post-ecotourism data. The use of case studies as a research methodology has grown in recent years because of the growing need for best practice in addressing human-nature relations. Rather than using samples and following a rigid protocol to examine a limited number of variables, case study methods involve an in-depth, longitudinal examination of a single instance or event: a case. 3. INTERVIEW IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH 3.1 QUALITATIVE VS. QUANTITATIVE INTERVIEWING The use of qualitative and quantitative interviewing depends primarily on research goals/ problems. If we want to find out how frequently hunters see brown bears or hear grey wolves you do not need to conduct a deep, qualitative interview. These are matters that can be easily measured. But if you want to know how hunters feel about bears and wolves or why they became hunters, then qualitative interview is a better approach to start with, because these research questions cannot be answered quickly or briefly and coded easily. Qualitative study helps as describe the problem and it is essential for almost any further quantitative study. In quantitative interviews, the approach is structured to maximize the reliability and validity of measurements of research questions or hypotheses. Exactly the same questions are posed to each individual of the population sample (Rubin et Rubin 2005). A quantitative interview is supposed to generate answers that can be coded and processed quickly, and analysed with parametric statistical methods and, most importantly, it allows generalization of the results to the whole population. In contrast, qualitative interview has its emphasis on a more general formulation of the initial research ideas and on the interviewees' own perspectives. The data in qualitative research are gathered more in a verbal and visual rather than in a numeric form (Devetak et al. 2010). The qualitative interview seeks to describe the central themes in the life world of the subjects and seeks to cover both a factual and a meaning level (Kvale 1996). Rubin et Rubin (2005) describe qualitative interviews as conversations where the researcher gently guides the interviewee through an extended discussion. Each interview is unique and often more than UnBtmcturod Seml-structured Structured (non-direcledj 4- Cdrr«cted> HVKiHvtlXHL pppn-