Research Philosophical Perspectives

Since this study employs qualitative research strategy for data collection, as was pointed out earlier, it encompasses a wide range of philosophical positions, methodological strategies and analytical procedures.¹¹³ As for methodological tools, therefore, I used more than one technique of data collection utilized in the social

113 See discussion on this point in Morse, J. ‘Emerging from the data; The Cognitive Processes of Analysis in Qualitative Inquiry’ in Morse, J. (Ed.) (1994). Critical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp.23-43.

sciences.¹¹⁴ Review of relevant literature, author’s participation in international and national conferences and workshops, historical methods, descriptive methods, interview and survey questionnaire methods, were employed in the collecting data process.

According to social science research methodologists,¹¹⁵ there are three different philosophical perspectives that underlie qualitative research: positivism,¹¹⁶ interpretive and critical perspective. This three-fold classification is the one that is adopted here. However, it needs to be stated that, while these three research epistemologies are philosophically distinct (as ideal types), in the practice of social research these distinctions are not always clear. There is considerable disagreement as to whether these research paradigms or underlying epistemologies are necessarily opposed or can be accommodated within the one study.

It should be clear from the above that the word ‘qualitative’ is not a synonym for

‘interpretive,’ Qualitative research may or may not be interpretive, depending upon the underlying philosophical assumptions of the researcher. Qualitative research can be positivist, interpretive, or critical (see Figure 1 below). It follows therefore from this that the choice of a specific qualitative research method (such as the case study method) is independent of the underlying philosophical position adopted. For instance, case study research can be positivist, interpretive or critical, just as action research can be either of the three. These three philosophical perspectives are discussed below.

114 See Krishnaswami, O.R (1998), Methodology of Research in Social Sciences, Bombay: Himalaya Publishing House, at p.65.

115 Guba, G & Lincoln, S. (1998). ‘Do Inquiry Paradigm Imply Inquiry Methodology?’ in Fetteman, M.

(Ed.), Qualitative Approaches to Evaluation in Education: The Silent Scientific Revolution, Praeger, New York, p.25. See this idea offered by Klein, K & Myers, D. (1999). ‘A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information Systems.’ MIC Quarterly, vol. 23, No.1, p. 67-94.

116 Positivism is an epistemological position that advocates the application of the methods of the natural sciences to the study of social reality and beyond. See more details on this definition in Bryman, A, (Ed.), (2004). Social Research Methods, New York: Oxford University Press, p.12.

Figure 1. Underlying philosophical assumptions

A research can be classified as positivist if it is presented as being objective, seeking to explain what happens in the world by searching for regularities and causal relationships between its constituent elements.¹¹⁷ Generally, it assumes that reality is objectively given and can be described by measurable properties, which are independent of the observer (researcher) and his or her instruments.¹¹⁸ It means that the observation of phenomenon must be neutral and uncorrupted by theory, if the verification principle is to hold.¹¹⁹ This often involves manipulation of reality with variations in a single independent variable in order to identify regularities in, and to form relationships between, some of the constituent elements of the social world.

Predictions are made on the basis of previous observations and realities and their interrelationships. Positivist research can therefore be replicated by carrying out the test in the conditions that originally existed. Although there has been much debate on whether or not positivism paradigm is suitable for the social sciences, one may still safely conclude that, being reductionist in nature, positivism tackles specific aspects of the phenomenon being investigated, building understanding of parts rather than wholes.¹²⁰

117 Burrel, B & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis. London:

Heinemann. p.9.

118 Levin, C. (1988). Sociology Ideas: Concepts and Applications, Washington, DC: Wadsworth, p.66;

See also Carson, et al (2001). Qualitative Research, London: Sage, p.78.

119 Williams, M & May, T. (1996). Introduction to the Philosophy of Social Research, London:

Routledge, p.99.

120Bryman, supra note 116, p. 15.

A research is classified as interpretive if it is assumed that our knowledge of reality is gained through social constructions such as language, consciousness, shared meanings, documents, tools and other artefacts.¹²¹

Interpretive research addresses the world from the point of view of the people studied, attempting to understand phenomenon through meanings that people assign to them.¹²² The main idea is to reach an in-depth understanding of the social world and to interpret the meaningful character of social action. Such an in-depth understanding requires a researcher to immerse himself or herself in the phenomenon to be studied.¹²³ Thus instead of separating the researchers from the subjects and seeing them as simple sources of data, interpretive research defends and promotes the engagement between the researcher and the subject. However, such engagement must be exposed transparently so as to describe the conditions in which the results were found, i.e. research should be conducted not subjectively. It is from this reality that subject matters have to be set in their social and historical context so that the intended audience can see how the current situation under investigation emerged. Interpretive research does not define dependent and independent variables, but focuses on the complexity of human sense-making as the situation emerges.¹²⁴ In this view, interpretive research seeks to understand a moving target, and each instance is treated as a unique historical occurrence. Because of this reality, some interpreters have accused interpretive research as lacking generalisations.

On this point, it may be stated that one of the outcomes of the extensive debates in philosophy is that there is a philosophical basis for the abstraction and generalisation in interpretive research. According to Walsham,¹²⁵ there are four types of generalisation from interpretive case studies: the development of concepts, the generation of theory, the drawing of specific implications and the contribution of rich insight. And as Walsham stresses, the key point is that theory plays a crucial role in

121 See Klein & Myers, supra note 115, p.29.

122 Hammersley, M. (1995). The Politics of Social Research, London: Sage, p.88.

123 See generally Simon, supra note 18.

124See generally Kaplan, B. & Maxwell, J. (1994). ‘Qualitative Research Methods for Evaluating Computer Information Systems’, in Andreson, J. et al, (Eds.). Evaluating Health Care Information Systems: Methods and Applications, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, p. 54.

125 Walsham, G. (1995). ‘Interpretive Case Study in IS Research: Nature and Methods,’ in European Journal of Information Systems, vol. 4, No.2, pp. 74-91.

interpretive research, and clearly distinguishes it from just anecdotes. But it should be noted that theory is used in a different way than is commonly applied in positivist research where researchers are interested in falsifying theories. In interpretive research, theory is used as a “sensitising device” to view the world in a certain way.¹²⁶ The critical approach is concerned with the way in which current social arrangements fail to meet human needs and ideals.¹²⁷ Their objective is a political one, which is to fight oppression and radically change the status quo.¹²⁸ Proponents of this approach believe that social reality is historically constituted and that people produce it. While recognising that people can consciously act to change their social and economic conditions, they argue that their ability to do so is constrained by various forms of social, cultural and political domination.¹²⁹ Their main focus is on the oppositions, conflicts and contradictions in contemporary society, and thus seek to be emancipatory.

After reviewing the three perspectives described above, I have concluded that the best approach for the current study is primarily interpretive research. Two main points are among the many reasons for favouring interpretive research approach. First, since I am interested in investigating the complexity of the Africa’s Great Lakes conflict with a view to determining a viable conflict management mechanism, it becomes inevitable to gain an in-depth understanding of the conflict situation by tracing the actors; the root causes and to be able to make a concise analysis. Using interpretive approach will allow me to increase my understanding of the critical social, historical and political issues related to the persistence of conflicts in the research area, despite various efforts in resolving them. Second, as interpretive approach recognises the value content of research, it encourages to expose these values and to be more aware of them during the research process so as to be more conscious of their biases.

126See Klein & Myers, supra note 115.

127 See Hammersley, supra note 122, p.22.

128 See Burrel & Morgan, supra note 117, p. 21.

129 See this argument stressed in Klein & Myers, supra note 115.

1.3.2 Field Research and Literary Sources