2.2 | Collecting the data
We visited each of those 12 communities for different periods of time during the months of May-October 2014. The community in which we spent the least amount of time was Pequeno William (6 hours), while the one in which we spent the most was IPEC (3 days).
Therefore, in each community we collected data through in-depth interviews, tours around the space (situated interviews) and direct observations. They were registered using video cameras, audio recorders, photo cameras and sketchbooks. In most communities, we counted with support from a professional cinematographer and a designer to collect multimedia material.Although staying for a longer time in each community could have been desirable, our main goal was to obtain data through interviews and observations, without immersing ourselves in each community’s specific dynamics. We intended to capture their perspective about their lives, not to assess our own impressions about them.
We carried out in-depth interviews with at least one member of each community, with an average of 2.5 members per case. Interviews’ length varied from 5 to 154 minutes, with an average of 59 minutes, adding up to a total of 38 hours. Interviews were semi-directive: although we had general points of interest, there was no fixed list of questions to be asked for every interviewee. Interviews included a variety of direct and indirect questions related to communities’ organizational structure, sustainability-related efforts and daily practices. We also conducted three interviews with bureaucrats from important players in Brazilian agrarian reform policy: INCRA, MDA and CONDRAF.[1]
In each community, we conducted at least one situated interview or “walking interview” (Jones, Bunce, Evans, Gibbs, & Hein, 2008) which occurs in spaces linked to the context of the interview—like a guided tour, but with questions constantly posed by the research team. This method allowed community members to describe practices with gestures and a more spontaneous interaction with objects, space and other people. Situated interviews were also recorded in video, photos and audio, although not in full. We captured 8 hours in total.
During situated interviews and researchers’ free exploration of each community’s grounds, we conducted spontaneous unstructured interviews with residents, external workers, volunteers and long-stay visitors. Those interviews were perceived as an opportunity to enrich and complement the data collected through in-depth interviews or gleaned from observations. There was no requisite number of spontaneous interviews per case.
We also collected “supporting material” that resulted from our observations. There were videos, photos and sketches from communities’ infrastructure (housing, sustainable technologies, meeting places, common crops, etc.) and from residents’ actions. This supporting material, although not essential for the analysis, has a very important role in bringing a visual dimension to the project, helping us remember important facts, and enhancing communication within the research team and with potential readers/users.
The research also contemplates data that were not produced by us, but by communities themselves, governmental bodies, NGOs and other researchers. Such data were either quantitative (e.g. statistics) or qualitative (texts, reports, photos, videos).
>>> 2.3 | Analyzing the data
[1] INCRA - National Institute of Colonization and Agrarian Reform, MDA - Ministry for Agrarian Development and CONDRAF - National Council for Sustainable Rural Development.