12. Data Collection Methodology

In previous sections I have introduced you to the research problem and context, the theoretical, conceptual and methodological approach and the research questions. In this section I will discuss the details of data collection including timelines, material constraints, and methodologies. My methodological tools of matrices allow me to approach my subject from a variety of conceptual angles and I also tried to collect my data using a variety of different methodological angles. The intent of using this kind of triangulation is to capture the characteristics of the governing system and the system-to-be-governed as completely as possible.

My investigation of the certification of the Vietnamese Pangasius system occurred over a period of six months from September 2007 to March 2008. This period included a four month internship with the World Wildlife Fund collecting information for the Pangasius Aquaculture Dialogue process which was almost completely aligned with my thesis research area. During the first two months I spent most of my time doing literature reviews, developing a survey tool and networks and obtaining permissions to carry out fieldwork. Field visits commenced in December, with the first 2 months focused on farm surveys and the following two months focused on interviews. The data collection commenced with inaugural meeting of the Pangasius Aquaculture Dialogue, September 26-27 and ended with the second meeting, March 27-28.

During the six month data collection period I lived on the campus of An Giang University in Long Xuyen City. I worked with two lecturers from the University in the Agriculture Department, Chau Thi Da focused on aquaculture and Nguyen Van Kien on agricultural development. They served as my primary translators for my work, with Da primarily helping me with surveys and Kien with semi-structured interviews. Field work was primarily conducted one day at a time, usually two days a week, sporadically when I was able to get one of my two translators to accompany me. Vinh Thanh Trung was a one hour motorcycle ride away from Long Xuyen and My Hoa Hung about 15 minutes riding and a 10 minute ferry ride. Once we arrived at a research we would typically spend the entire day conducting between 2 and 4 surveys, site visits or interviews.

The primary focus of this research is on farming and as such the majority of data collection focused on farming. The most significant time component of my research was taken up by conducting a survey of farmers. The survey was requested by the World Wildlife Fund in order to quantify the farming practice of grow-out Pangasius smallhold farmers. The first section of the survey was adapted from another research project being carried out by WWF in conjunction with several other NGOs and research centers and was comprised mostly closed questions about farm practice, and economics. I also developed a second section of the survey with more open ended questions intended to capture allow farmers to talk more freely in direct relation to issues that were being discussed in the Pangasius Aquaculture Dialogue certification discussions. The survey questions can be found in Annex 1. Lists of farmer names and farm sizes were obtained from the District Aquaculture Extension Officer for each commune. Farms were categorized geographically by village and then randomly selected from the list and the extension officer would then guide us there and introduce us. If the list was inaccurate and no farm was found, or it was a nursery, then the next nearest Pangasius farm was chosen. The chosen farmer was not contacted in advance so upon arriving at the site we would ask permission to conduct the survey and once granted we would sit with the farmer for the following one and a half to two hours asking the questions, clarifying answers and recording them. The entire survey was conducted in Vietnamese and the translator would record the answers directly as I followed along. Additionally I would take clarifying notes, and occasionally ask questions to expand on issues being discussed in the survey, particularly in the second part of the survey. In total 42 surveys were conducted, 23 in Vinh Thanh Trung and 19 in My Hoa Hung. 19 of the 42 surveys were carried out without me, 10 of them by the aquaculture extension officer in Vinh Thanh Trung and 9 of them carried out by 4 aquaculture students from An Giang University after they had attended at least 3 surveys with me and had received some instruction on how to randomly select farm sites.

While farmers survey comprised a significant percentage of this research, to truly understand the broader system, other actors needed to be included. This was accomplished through semiformal interviews and informal discussion and observation. Through a process of consultation with various stakeholders I developed a list of significant categories of non-farmer participants in the Pangasius industry in An Giang, and then attempted to conduct interviews with at least two individuals in each category, preferably one from Vinh Thanh Trung and one from My Hoa Hung. Sample selection was opportunistic, based on network contacts, appropriateness, availability and time restrictions of the translator. A total of 43 semiformal interviews were conducted a summary of which is presented in Table 1, though it is important to understand that many of the interviewees were involved in multiple aspects of the Pangasius industry, for instance feed sales, drug sales and extension activities all at the same time.

Semiformal interviews were divided into two basic parts, the first part focused on qualifying the roles and activities of the interviewee and the second part using probing questions to seek perceptions of challenges and benefits to and from the Pangasius industry in An Giang. Most interviews were conducted with simultaneous translation over one and half hours, although some were as short as 45 minutes while others lasted several hours. Additionally, based on informant responses I categorized farms as either small, medium, or large and purposively selected a subsection of the surveyed farms and made a return visit to ask more in depth questions about challenges and opportunities. Informal discussions and observation were also recorded opportunistically over the six months, primarily at the two Pangasius Aquaculture Dialogue meetings, but also during a one-day workshop held at An Giang university dealing with a pro-poor Pangasius project and during an environmental assessment workshop held in Ho Chi Minh City by RIA 2 (Vietnam Fisheries Research Institute number 2). All the notes from these different sources were compiled and categorized in relation to material and social realities of the performance of Pangasius farming and the boundary defining activities of certification initiatives in Vietnam.

The final major source of information comes from documentary analysis. During my field research I collected as much documentation as my informants were willing to provide. This documentary evidence included things like feed price lists, technical brochures and farm lists and maps. Also some research findings in excel files. The other kind of documentary data was collected from websites. Most importantly this includes technical standards and certifier guidance documents, but also includes meeting summaries and discussion documents. The documents collected in the field are used to support my discussion about the material and social realities of Pangasius farming , while the standards documents are analysed and categorized in more detail to address the issue of certification boundary setting. Because these documents are the main source of information regarding certification systems, the discussion will necessarily be limited to theoretical ideological perspective rather than a grounded empirical discussion which is much more possible with the data gathered regarding farming practice.

By using these three different sources of information will allow a kind of triangulation of the embedded performance of Pangasius farming and the boundaries defined by certifiers interested in the Pangasius industry. The use of matrices is a good tool to ensure a thorough coverage of the issues, and to allow the reader to follow a clear and simple structure in reading the empirical evidence presented.

I have now completed an introduction to the context, theory and methodology, so now it is time to wade into the complexities of the empirical data. In the section I will introduce you to the governing systems, and try to keep the concept of boundaries at the forefront as I work through my presentation of this data.