HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS IN SOUTH AFRICA 

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

CHAPTER 2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

INTRODUCTION

Public Administration research, by nature, is a dynamic process that requires a combination of research methods. The fact that Public Administration intends to inform both history and political debate thereby contributing to policy formulation, directed this study to employ a variety of research methods to legitimate its conclusions (Johnson,2002:2). The choice of these research methods, in the main, has been premised on the fact that “whilst Public Administration research accepts that things are knowable and quantifiable, due recognition should be given to the growing importance of intuition, vision and reflective thought as sources of knowledge” (Johnson, 2003:5). The intellectual consensus that not everything can be understood in terms of numbers has resulted in this study’s reliance on a qualitative research design.
In this chapter the author will provide a rationale for the choice of a qualitative research design for the study. The various qualitative research strategies and/or methods will be explained. These will be supported by expanding on qualitative analysis methods and thereafter by describing the impact of research ethics that provided navigational coordinates to arrive at the conclusions in this study. In closing the author will argue for a combination of these methods and provide a list of the main sources used in this research.

THE RATIONALE FOR QUALITATIVE RESEARCH DESIGN

Qualitative research is defined as any type of research that produces findings not only arrived at by statistical procedures or other means of quantifications (Straus and Corbin, 1998:10). It is also refers to research about persons’ lives, lived experiences, behaviours, emotions as well as about organizational functioning, social movements, socio-cultural phenomena and interaction between individuals (Straus and Corbin, 1998:5). Dooley defines this as research based on non-quantitative observations made in the field and analyzed in non-statistical ways, and in most cases the subject(s) may not be aware that they are being observed (1990:276). Creswell states that qualitative research is an inquiry process of understanding based on distinct methodological traditions of inquiry that explore a social or human problem (1998:15). In a qualitative research process the researcher consistently builds a complex and holistic picture, analyses words, reports views of informants or practitioners and restricts the study to its natural setting (Creswell, 1998:16).The reliance of qualitative research on a range of variables but using few cases has revolutionarised the need always to present research as a fixed process that had to first present a problem, ask questions, collect data to answer the question, analyse the data and then answer more questions (Creswell, 1998:16-18). The traditional inquiry process has been found to be responsible, in many cases, for the obfuscation of concepts and theory development thus limiting the flow of ideas. The qualitative research process entails direct observation and relatively unstructured interviewing in natural field settings where genuine interactions occur between participating observers and the subjects (Dooley, 1990:277). Observations and/or research data is typically less structured, and is often spontaneous, flexible and open-ended.The scientific reality of Public Administration research is that it also uses systematic observation and experimentation to test ideas in order to understand why the world works as it does (Johnson, 2002:10). Unlike the natural sciences, the laboratory of Public Administration is represented by an environment where the researcher is within and among phenomena to be observed, as opposed to observing some incubated phenomena. The positional interchange between the researcher, research process and existing theory often correlates with the intention of Public Administration researchers in the contested terrain of objectivity versus subjectivity. Such a scenario is often associated with social science research. The almost scale-free topology of Public Administration dictates research approaches that demonstrate a researcher’s will to draw on own experiences when analysing source materials (Straus and Corbin, 1998:5). Hence the research paradigm of this study has been rooted, primarily, in the qualitative domain.

READ  The state of the press: local and global context and critiques

CHAPTER 1 NATURE OF THE STUDY 
1.1 Introduction 
1.2 The Purpose of the Study 
1.3 Significance of the Study 
1.4 Limitations of the Study 
1.5 Definition of Terms and Explanations of Concepts 
1.5.1 Intergovernmental relations
1.5.2 Co-operative Government
1.5.3 Spheres of Government
1.5.4 Federalism
1.5.5 Decentralisation
1.6 Organisation of the Study 
CHAPTER 2  RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 
2.1 Introduction 
2.2 The Rationale for Qualitative Research Design 
2.3 Qualitative Research Approaches
2.3.1 The Case Study Method
2.3.2 The Grounded Theory Approach
2.3.3 The Ethnographic Approach
2.3.4 Action Research
2.3.5 The Phenomenological Approach
2.4 Research Tools
2.4.1 Literature Review
2.4.2 Hermeneutics
2.4.3 Content Analysis
2.4.4 Policy Analysis
2.5 Ethical Concerns 
2.6 Sources Used 
2.7 Conclusion
CHAPTER 3  HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS IN SOUTH AFRICA 
3.1 Introduction 
3.2 The State of IGR Structures within the 1961 Constitutional Dispensation 
3.2.1 Structure of the Legislatures
3.2.2 The Powers of the Legislatures
3.3 The National-Provincial IGR Structures: 1983 – 1993 
3.4 The National-Provincial IGR Structures: 1993 – 1996 
3.5 The National-Provincial IGR Structures: 1996 – 2000 
3.6 Conclusion
CHAPTER 4  LITERATURE REVIEW: THEORETICAL ISSUES IN INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS
4.1 Introduction 
4.2 Origin of Intergovernmental Relations: A Comparative Overview 
4.2.1 The Distinctive Features of Intergovernmental Relations
4.3 Models of IGR
4.3.1 The Coordinate Authority Model
4.3.2 The Inclusive Authority Model
4.3.3 The Bargaining Authority Model
4.4 The Intergovernmental Relations Normative Guidelines
4.4.1 Supreme Political Authority
4.4.2 Public Accountability
4.4.3 Efficiency and Effectiveness
4.4.4 Legal Probity
4.4.5 Societal Values
4.5 Factors that Influence Intergovernmental Relations 
4.5.1 Constitutional Jurisdiction
4.5.2 Form and Character of Second Chambers
4.5.3 The Political Party Systems
4.5.4 The Judicial System
4.5.5 The Financial State of Each Sphere
4.5.6 Human Behaviour
4.5.7 Circumstances
4.5.8 Demographic and Geographic Factors
4.5.9 Historical Factors
4.6. Conclusion 
CHAPTER 5  THE NATIONAL-PROVINCIAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS INSTITUTION IN SOUTH AFRICA: A CRITICAL REVIEW
5.1 Introduction 
5.2 The National Council of Provinces (NCOP) 
5.3 The Intergovernmental Forum (IGF) 
5.4 The President’s Coordinating Council (PCC) 
5.5 The Intergovernmental Relations Committees of Ministers and Members of Provincial Executive Councils (MINMECS)
5.6 Forum for South African Directors-General (FOSAD)
5.7 Cabinet Clusters (Committees) System in the Presidency 
5.8 Conclusion 
CHAPTER 6  TOWARDS A NEW SYSTEM OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS:AN ANALYSIS 
6.1 Introduction 
6.2 The Character of the South African IGR System 
6.2.1 Agenda Determination
6.2.2 Accountability
6.2.3 Executive Position
6.2.4 Legislating Intergovernmental Relations
6.3 A Reconstructed Intergovernmatnal Relations System
6.3.1 The Intergovernmental Forum (IGF)
6.3.2 Intergovernmental Relations Committees of Ministers and Members of Provincial Executive Councils (MINMECS)
6.3.3 The Presidential Coordinating Committee
6.3.4 Cabinet Clusters (Committees) System in the Presidency
6.3.5 Forum of South African Directors-General (FOSAD)
6.3.6 National Council of Provinces (NCOP)
6.4 Conclusion
CHAPTER 7  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Conclusions 
7.3 Policy Implications and Recommendations
7.4 Recommendations for Further Studies 
7.5 Conclusion

GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT

Related Posts