Data was collected by doing thematic expert interviews in Helsinki in April and May 2019.
Interviewees were Finnish public servants who worked at different times in Namibia -related positions in public organizations during three decades since the late 1990s. The study observes how these development cooperation experts talk about gender and gender equality within their work and Finnish development policies. The aim is to find out how they perceive gender equality by analyzing themes that arise from their interviews.
The very first, a preliminary informant was found by asking recommendations from another academic whose research topic was related to mine. This person gave contact details of an expert who worked for the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland specializing in development cooperation in Africa but did not know the Namibian case. This person gave some recommendations for interviewees over the phone. Thereby, in spring 2017, I conducted two other preliminary phone calls to collect background knowledge. Each call was about one hour long and later preliminary informants participated in actual interviews.
The knowledge that they shared with me helped to frame the study and therefore find the actual main informants. Also, they were eager to help and suggested new informants. All interviewees were found by asking recommendations of previous informants, this practice is called snowball sampling (Tuomi and Sarajärvi (2018, p.74).
Alastalo and Åkerman (2010, p.313) present that in expert interviews data collection and analysis are intertwined, because the information that each expert has is unique and is used to describe a phenomenon on the focus. Therefore, the analysis started from the very first crumb of information and my knowledge piled up over each discussion. Preliminary data collection started before forming the actual research question. Also, policy papers of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland sustained my understanding of the research topic besides discussions.
Eskola and Suoranta (1998, p.16) suggest, that the data collection method and analysis impact on how the study proceeds. As the study is empirical, fixed and changeless hypothesis is not evident in qualitative research, because the preliminary understanding of the subject matter should not let to constrict and lead too much of the analysis. Therefore, hypotheses will rise from the collected material and offer new perspectives to the subject (Eskola and
Suoranta, 1998, p.16). I combined a theoretical framing from previous literature and theories based on my findings in analysis and those hypothesize that rose from the material.
The approach to the qualitative analysis of this study applies feminist ontologies. It questions ways of speaking about gender and equality and how interviewees signify them.
(Ramazanoglu and Holland, 2002, p.18.) Feminist epistemology of equality as similarity, difference, and diversity of gender frames the analysis from the end of the classification onwards. Overall, in addition to different manners to present gender and equality, previous research on equality in the welfare model, Finland as a pioneering country of gender equality, and heteronormativity in development cooperation are also considered.
3.1. Expert interviews
Material for the analysis is collected by doing expert interviews. In this study experts are Finnish public servants whose work was related to development cooperation and after 2007 to multiple forms of cooperation between Finland and Namibia. All of them are aware of Finnish development policies and lived at least awhile in Namibia for work. The study aims to understand how they perceive gender equality, by analyzing themes that arise from the interviews. Accordingly, it was necessary to collect material through interviews.
It is typical for expert interviews that it can reveal facts or cultural understanding of the research target (Alastalo and Åkerman, 2010, pp.312-315). The focus of this study is merely on cultural understandings rather than researching the historical chain of events. Albeit, in this study cultural understanding, is interpreted from the informant’s way to present historical factual events. Since experts talk about things that happened in the past, in the analysis I had to remember a chance of probable mistakes in facts that informants present.
The focus of interest is in Finnish perceptions. To understand how Finnish development cooperation experts perceive gender equality, it is beneficial to interview people who have experience in international work. Raevaara (2005, pp.44-45) presents that in a cross-national context it is observed that countries' ways to speak of gender vary. Informants who worked abroad would signify interesting examples of gender norms and understandings from a Finnish point of view in the Namibian context. Also, Finns have been in Namibia for over a century (Valjas et al. 2008, p.18). This long history might intertwine two cultures interestingly and even occur in interviews.
Alastalo and Åkerman (2010, pp.312-315) present that in expert interviews new knowledge is produced in the interaction between the informant and interviewer. In the analysis, I have to keep in mind that my perceptions of gender equality were unconsciously present in the interviews. Consequently, I might have questioned interviewees’ comments by reflecting them on different interpretations of equality and ways to speak about gender according to my understanding. Data collection over interviews and its analysis are often linked and intertwined (Alastalo and Åkerman, 2010, p.313). The analysis process already started while the idea of the study was shaping. At that time, I made phone calls with a couple of experts to collect preliminary background information about cooperation between Finland and Namibia, to discover who would be relevant as informants.
Information and understanding that can be reached through the expert interviews, is always affected by the current situation, place, power structures, and interaction between informant and interviewer. That needs to be remembered in analysis to be able to collect and reconstruct the implicit knowledge of the acts and perceptions of the informant. (Alastalo, Åkerman and Vaittinen, 2017, pp.181, 184). It is typical for expert interviews, that the irreplaceable nature of informants affects the way of proceeding in discussion; not everyone can be asked the same questions due to their altering expertise. (Alastalo and Åkerman, 2010, p.313).
Therefore, reading certain policy papers and publications of the Ministry for Foreign Affair of Finland regarding Finnish-Namibian partnership helped in preparations for interviews and further analysis. Also, the semi-structured thematic interview was a convenient choice.
3.2. Conducting interviews
Interview questions were sent to the informants before the actual meeting to make memorizing easier for them, and to give the possibility to familiarize themselves with the research topic. Informants might have problems with memorizing certain facts if they need to speak about something that happened a long time ago. Also, experts might talk on a very general level as representatives of employer organizations. (Alastalo and Åkerman, 2010, pp.312-329). Careful preparations by reading policy papers and making preliminary phone calls gave me a contextual understanding of Finnish – Namibian partnership. Also, I studied for six months at the University of Namibia in 2017. During that sojourn, I had an opportunity to construct my perception of equality of gender, and development cooperation of Namibia and Finland. Reading policy papers and the stay in Namibia helped in discussions with high-level experts. Besides, I aimed to familiarize myself with the interviewees'
background, and the nature of their employing organizations to avoid causing detriment to them (Kohonen, Kuula-Luumi and Spoof, 2019, p.8).
Interviews were semi-structured and contained eight themes. Themes were divided into two main groups: gender equality in relations between Finland and Namibia, and policies guiding the promotion of gender equality. The first group included the following themes: Gender equality at work between Finland and Namibia, empowerment, gender expertise, Finnish know-how in gender equality, and lastly cooperation with other actors. The second group included changes in Finland’s focus on gender objectives in development policy, gender mainstreaming, and actions regarding gender equality after the transitional period of Namibia. Hirsjärvi and Hurme (2015, p.66) state that themes are specific hyponyms of the main concepts. Even if I aimed to let the main theories arise from the material, my preliminary selections of themes framed and directed the study from the very beginning.
I had written some detailed questions related to every eight themes to help in interviews.
With these questions, I was able to open the discussion by posing a one. Also, if someone replied very briefly, it was possible to direct discussion with detailed questions. Some interviewees gave very extensive replies, and with detailed questions, the thread was easy to find again if it was lost at some point during a vivid discussion. Questions helped if I did not know what to say or ask the next, they were written in a simple form so it was rather safe to even quickly look up the list and select one from a theme that was not dealt with yet.
Although interviews progressed well and discussions with the informants were sometimes even casual, transcriptions revealed deficits in interviews. Sometimes replies were rather vague despite the more detailed questions. Interviewees moved from theme to theme quite organically but fast and did not go into fine details without a request to define or clarify some facts. Perhaps the experts stayed on a general level while moving from a theme to a theme because they are used to speak about themes of interest. Another option is that they preferred to keep the discussion simple with a student.
Interviews were conducted with seven informants. The aim was to reach 10 interviewees to have a diverse understanding of their perception of equality, but three people refused to participate due to their tight schedules. The length of interviews varied from 45 minutes to 1 hour and 50 minutes. According to Tuomi and Sarajärvi (2018, p.65), the demand for
congruence varies between studies that apply thematical interviews. A weakness of this type of research is the variation between seven interviews. The first three interviews were more open, because of lacking experience of an interviewer. Towards the last interviews, discussions became more structured, because during the first interviews some questions took bigger importance. In the beginning, there were too many optional sub-questions for a one-hour interview, and less important ones faded out naturally. All interviews were conducted in Finnish since the informants were Finnish native speakers. That eased the discussion and allowed us to use also less formal language especially in the beginning and the end of the sessions when the recorder was not on. With short and casual moments, it was possible to break the ice and make us both feel more relaxed.
Since expert interviews happen in an interaction between informant and interviewer, informants’ expectations towards the encounter with interviewer might affect what they speak in interviews. Especially experts in high positions choose their words regarding interviewer’s expertise; they might either simplify their speech to the general level or use typical jargon to their field and have a strong thematic focus as speaking to another expert.
(Alastalo, Åkerman and Vaittinen, 2017, p.188.) In the interviews that I conducted, regardless of the informants’ field of expertise, they presented themselves as experts who are used to speak of equality, even if they signified that it is not their specialty. My understanding deepened after each interview and each theme during an interview. Therefore, it was possible to pose clarifying and defined questions if responses were on a too general level. Nevertheless, I did it too rarely, due to my lacking experience in conducting interviews. Most of the interviews proceeded quite organically, and the order of the themes followed the initiative of the interviewees; the initial order of themes changed due to the topics that the informants signified in their speeches.