Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Politics of Conducting Research in Africa pp 133–151Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Gatekeeping Success in the Namibian CBNRM Program

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

In this chapter, Carolin Stamm illustrates how research that heavily relies on fieldwork is profoundly influenced by the opportunities and constraints encountered during data collection, which often lie in the hands of gatekeepers. Taking a different approach from the usual scholarly discussions that focus on the role of the gatekeeper as a static figure to navigate around, Stamm uses her fieldwork with CBOs and NGOs in rural conservation projects in Namibia to reconceptualize the gatekeeper–researcher relationship. Through a critical evaluation of the role that gatekeepers played in the data collection process, analysis, and formation of her empirical findings, Stamm argues that the manner in which access to knowledge is negotiated should not be divorced from the results it generates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bondy, C. (2013). How Did I Get Here? The Social Process of Accessing Field Sites. Qualitative Research, 13(5), 578–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brosius, J. P., Lowenhaupt Tsing, A., & Zerner, C. (1998). Representing Communities: Histories and Politics of Community-Based Natural Resource Management. Society and Natural Resources, 11(2), 157–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, L. M., Gray, N. J., Meletis, Z. A., Abbott, J. G., & Silver, J. J. (2006). Gatekeepers and Keymasters: Dynamic Relationships of Access in Geographical Fieldwork. Geographical Review, 96(1), 97–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, T. (2008). We’re Over-Researched Here!’ Exploring Accounts of Research Fatigue Within Qualitative Research Engagements. Sociology, 42(5), 953–970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, T. (2010). On ‘Being Researched’: Why Do People Engage with Qualitative Research? Qualitative Research, 10(4), 399–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowhurst, I. (2013). The Fallacy of the Instrumental Gate? Contextualising the Process of Gaining Access Through Gatekeepers. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 16(6), 463–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Laine, M. (2000). Fieldwork, Participation and Practice: Ethics and Dilemmas in Qualitative Research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, J. E., & Dukerich, J. M. (2006). The Relational Foundation of Research: An Underappreciated Dimension of Interesting Research. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 21–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easton, G. (2010). Critical Realism in Case Study Research. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(1), 118–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Government of the Republic of Namibia. (2015). Poverty and Deprivation in Namibia 2015, Windhoek, Namibia: National Planning Commission. http://www.un.org.na/home_htm_files/NPC-Summary%20Report.pdf. Accessed December 10, 2017.

  • Grant, A. (2017). “I Don’t Want You Sitting Next to Me”: The Macro, Meso and Micro of Gaining and Maintaining Access to Government Organizations During Ethnographic Fieldwork. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gummesson, E. (2000). Qualitative Methods in Management Research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • IRDNC—Integrated Rural Development and Nature Conservation. (2016). About Us/History and Awards. http://www.irdnc.org.na/history.html. Accessed October 27, 2017.

  • Jänis, J. (2014). The Tourism-Development Nexus in Namibia: A Study on National Tourism Policy and Local Tourism Enterprises’ Policy Knowledge. Ph.D. thesis, University of Helsinki, Finland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jezewski, M. (1993). Culture Brokering as a Model for Advocacy. Nursing and Health Care, 14(2), 78–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, B. T. B. (2010). The Evolution of Namibia’s Communal Conservancies. In F. Nelson (Ed.), Community Rights, Conservation and Contested Land: The Politics of Natural Resource Governance in Africa (pp. 106–120). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitchin, R., & Tate, N. (2013). Conducting Research in Human Geography: Theory, Methodology and Practice. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Long, N. (2001). Development Sociology: Actor Perspectives. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mandel, J. L. (2003). Negotiating Expectations in the Field: Gatekeepers, Research Fatigue and Cultural Biases. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 24(2), 198–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McAreavey, R., & Das, C. (2013). A Delicate Balancing Act: Negotiating with Gatekeepers for Ethical Research When Researching Minority Communities. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 12(1), 113–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Environment and Tourism Namibia. (2013). National Policy on Community Based Natural Resource Management. http://www.met.gov.na/files/files/CBNRM_20Policy%20Approved.pdf. Accessed January 10, 2018.

  • Mosse, D. (2005). Cultivating Development. London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulhall, A. (2003). In the Field: Notes on Observation in Qualitative Research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 41(3), 306–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NACSO—Namibian Association for CBNRM Support Organizations. (2017). Conservancies and Conservancies Overview. http://www.nacso.org.na/conservation-and-conservancies. Accessed September 27, 2017.

  • Peace Parks Foundation. (2017). Kavango Zambezi. http://www.peaceparks.org/tfca.php?pid=27&mid=1008. Accessed October 7, 2017.

  • Reeves, C. (2010). A Difficult Negotiation: Fieldwork Relations with Gatekeepers. Qualitative Research, 10(3), 315–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ribot, J. C. (2002). Democratic Decentralization of Natural Resources: Institutionalizing Popular Participation. Washington: World Resources Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robson, C. (1993). Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioners-Researchers. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, S., Miller, F., & Lloyd, K. (2006). Doing Fieldwork in Development Geography: Research Culture and Research Spaces in Vietnam. Geographical Research, 44(1), 28–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, I. (2008). Ethics and the Practice of Qualitative Research. Qualitative Social Work, 7(4), 400–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverman, D. (2010). Doing Qualitative Research (3rd ed.). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siwale, J. (2015). Why Did I Not Prepare for This? The Politics of Negotiating Fieldwork Access, Identity, and Methodology in Researching Microfinance Institutions. SAGE Open, 5(2), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, S. (2001). Fieldwork as Commitment. The Geographical Review, 91(1–2), 66–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, S. (2002). How Sustainable is the Communalizing Discourse of ‘New’ Conservation: The Masking of Difference, Inequality and Aspiration in the Fledgling “Conservancies” of Namibia. In D. Chattyand & M. Colchester (Eds.), Conservation and Mobile Indigenous Peoples (pp. 158–197). Oxford: Berghahn Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, S. (2003). Dissent or Libel in Resistance to a Conservancy in North-West Namibia. In E. Berglund & D. Anderson (Eds.), Ethnographies of Conservation: Environmentalism and the Distribution of Privilege (pp. 69–86). Oxford: Berghahn Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M. L., & Katz, R. (1980). External Communication and Project Performance: An Investigation into the Role of Gatekeepers. Management Science, 26(11), 1071–1085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wanat, C. L. (2008). Getting Past the Gatekeepers: Differences Between Access and Cooperation in Public School Research. Field Methods, 20(2), 191–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolcott, H. F. (2005). The Art of Fieldwork. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • WWF—World Wide Fund For Nature. (2016). Namibia: The Greatest Wildlife Recovery Story Ever Told. http://www.worldwildlife.org/pages/namibia-the-greatest-wildlife-recovery-story-evertold. Accessed May 31, 2016.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. SRH University of Applied Sciences Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Carolin H. Stamm

Authors
  1. Carolin H. Stamm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, UK

    Lyn Johnstone

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Stamm, C.H. (2019). Gatekeeping Success in the Namibian CBNRM Program. In: Johnstone, L. (eds) The Politics of Conducting Research in Africa. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95531-5_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation