Part 2: Methodology
2.1 Research team
There were three members in the research team [ Sara Kindon, Geoffrey Hume-Cook, Marg Gilling- project leader. Sara and Geoff were sub-contracted for part of the time period only ] and an Advisory Group established in Palmerston North. [ Bruce Withell- MAF Policy; Bruce Beard, Federated Farmers Field Representative; Margaret Millard, Women’s Division Federated Farmers; Rick Ussher, Ussher Associates; Stuart Morriss, Massey University; Evelyn Hurley, Massey University; Barrie Wallace, Regional Policy Manager, MAF- chair] A number of meetings were held with this Advisory Group, and in December 1996 the research team was taken by one of their number to a farm family in the mid-Rangitikei. It was through the goodwill of this family [ Gavin and Dianne Reeves. Most families have chosen to remain anonymous. If named, they have given permission] , Viv Eames, the Rangitikei Rural Community Worker, and Bruce Withell, MAF Policy Agent, that we established a foothold in the area.
2.2 Geographic considerations
The focus was on a specific area in order to gain a ‘multi layer snapshot’ of families, farms and the communities to which they belong. For pragmatic considerations - travel time and costs - we needed an area accessible to Wellington, and the Advisory Group chose mid-Rangitikei as a suitable location.
Taihape, Mangaweka and Hunterville are the urban centres on State Highway 1 which runs through the middle of the selected area which stretches from Rangiwahia in the east and Papanui Junction in the west, to Rata in the south and just south of Waiouru. [ see map] It is primarily, from a farming perspective, steep hill or medium hill sheep and beef country, with finishing farms scattered through the river valleys. Diversification is increasing, including tourism ventures with the ‘best’ bungy jump in the world, homestays, gardens and fishing expeditions.
2.3 Research process
The two research instruments were interviewing and ‘immersion’ and we used a technique we called ‘snowballing’ to locate respondents. We initially contacted people whose names we were given by Viv Eames, then followed up names given by people being interviewed, people involved in activities such as tourism, service delivery, local businesses. We phoned these people and asked if we could talk with them. We had only one refusal.
The research team made several visits to the mid-Rangitikei, staying overnight on two occasions, then lived in the area for three plus weeks in February 1997. We distributed over 400 copies of a pamphlet introducing ourselves and the research in early February 1997. [ see appendix a] Subsequent visits were made to clarify information and details, and provide opportunities for people to speak to the report draft.
We talked with over 160 people - from 50 plus farm families, and police, health professionals, real estate agents, teachers, principals, accountants, shopkeepers, people on the benefit, rural delivery people, garage owners, and local and national government representatives.
Mostly we met in people’s homes, though some interviews took place in the pub, at people’s work, at the shed during the dog trials. We made several trips with health professionals; attended meetings, such as those of the Taihape Community Rural Health Group, Taihape Rotary, the Country Women’s Institute and a meeting of the Women’s Division of Federated Farmers. A meeting was set up to which all families living down one road were invited, and another in an area located round a primary school. We asked questions of people we met casually as well.
We met with a number of Maori at Komiti Maori and in other venues but we did not use the material other than as general input to farming - Maori research demands Maori researchers, or negotiations over a longer period of time than we had available.
After the research we held two public meetings, one in Mangaweka, one in Taihape, to listen and feed back information. A number of people read the draft report and made recommendations.
2.4 Limitations
The project was never intended to be a scientific study with a statistically valid sample from which quantifiable results might be obtained. It has a different kaupapa or logic - to ‘ground truth’ knowledge and understanding of factors affecting the sustainability of farm families.
We talked to people if they were willing (only one refused) and constantly watched the growing sample to ensure we were covering the selected area in a geographical sense and in terms of age, gender, size of farm and social class. People we interviewed were assured of confidentiality, and knew they could withdraw from the research at any stage.
People take for granted the positives in society, but when questioned may use the opportunity ‘to have a moan’. Therefore negative aspects may sometimes be emphasised.
MAP (Click on thumbnail image below for relevant map)
Contact for Enquiries
Rural Affairs Coordinator
Sector Performance Policy
MAF Policy
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 4 894 0675
Fax: +64 4 4 894 0745
Contact this person
