Scrutinising Public Institutions

Part of the Critical Criminological Perspectives book series (CCRP)


The fourth chapter aims to highlight the methodological issues that were encountered during the fieldwork that have informed the findings of this book. The research fieldwork lasted for two years, during which the British enforcement institution attempted to discourage the author from interviewing occupational health and safety (OHS) enforcement officers. Empirical investigations concentrating on social elites are challenging because academics often deal with people and organisations located in a higher social hierarchy than themselves. Researching up, thus, is challenging because it is extremely difficult to get access, and these studies are usually affected by complicated ethical and legal issues.


Researching up Researching powerful organisation Access Ethical issues Access Fieldwork Interviews Qualitative Britain Italy Harm 


  1. Almond, P. (2008, June). Investigating health and safety regulation: Finding room for small-scale projects. Journal of Law and Society, Special Issue: Law’s Reality: Case Studies in Empirical Research on Law, 35(Issue Supplement 1), 108–125.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, S. J. (1994). Political interviews and the politics of interviewing. In G. Walford (Ed.), Researching the powerful in education. London: UCL Press.Google Scholar
  3. Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the sociology of deviance. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bernard, R. H. (2013). Social research method: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Broadfoot, P. (2000). Interviewing in a crosscultural context: Some issues for comparative research. In S. Hillyard (Series ed.). Studies in qualitative methodology (Vol. 6, pp. 53–65). London: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
  6. Broadfoot, E. M., Osborn, M. J., Gilly, M., & Blucher, A. (1993). Perception’s of teaching: Teachers’ lives in England and France. London: Cassells.Google Scholar
  7. Bryman, A. (2008). Social research method (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Cole, G. F., Frankowski, S., & Gertz, M. G. (1987). Major criminal justice systems: A comparative survey. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Dammer, H. R., & Albanese, J. S. (2011). Comparative criminal justice. Belmont: Thomson.Google Scholar
  10. Dantzker, M. L., & Hunter, R. (2012). Research methods for criminology and criminal justice (3rd ed.). Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Learning.Google Scholar
  11. Fields, C. B., & Moore, R. H. (Eds.). (2005). Comparative criminal justice. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
  12. Fitz, J., & Halpin, D. (1994). Ministers and mandarins: Educational research in elite settings. In G. Walford (Ed.), Researching the powerful in education. London: UCL Press.Google Scholar
  13. Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research (4th ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Gewirtz, S., & Ozga, J. (1994). Interviewing the education policy elite. In G. Walford (Ed.), Researching the powerful in education. London: UCL Press.Google Scholar
  15. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln, Handbook of qualitative research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. Hawkins, K. (2002). Law as last resort: Prosecution decision-making in a regulatory agency. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Kogan, M. (1994). Researching the powerful in education and elsewhere. In G. Walford (Ed.), Researching the powerful in education. London: UCL Press.Google Scholar
  18. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  19. Neal, S. (1995). Researching powerful people from a feminist and anti-racist perspective: A note on gender, collusion and marginality. British Educational Research Journal, 21(4), 517–531. Scholar
  20. Nelken, D. (2010). Comparative criminal justice: Making sense of difference. London (UK), Thousand Oaks (CA), New Delhi (IND) and Singapore: SAGE Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  21. Pearce, F. (1976). Crimes of the powerful: Marxism, crimes and deviance. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  22. Silverman, D. (2011). Interpreting qualitative data: A guide to the principles of qualitative research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Snape, D., & Spencer, L. (2003). The foundation of qualitative research. In J. Ritchie & J. Lewis (Eds.), Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Walford, G. (2011). Researching the powerful. British Educational Research Association [Online]. Available from: Accessed 25 Aug 2014.
  25. Westmarland, L. (2011). Researching crime and justice: Tales from the field. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Whyte, D. (2000). Researching the powerful: Towards a political economy of method. In R. King & E. Wincup (Eds.), Doing research in crime and justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Social SciencesUniversity of RoehamptonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations