Journal Article


Quantity does not always mean quality: the importance of qualitative social science in conservation research

Abstract

Qualitative methods are important in gaining a deep understanding of complex problems and poorly researched areas. They can be particularly useful to help explain underlying conservation problems, as in Rust et al. (2016). However, the significance in choosing and justifying appropriate methodological frameworks in conservation studies should be given more attention to ensure data are collected and analysed appropriately. We thank Potgieter et al. (2017) for their critical analysis of Rust et al. (2016), but they appear unaware of when, why and how such methods should be used. We clarify the methods described in Rust et al. (2016) and explain sampling strategies in qualitative studies. To improve familiarity with qualitative methods among natural scientists we recommend expanded training in social sciences and collaborating with social scientists. Given the scale of human impacts on the environment, this type of nuanced analytical skill is critical for moving conservation forward.

Attached files

Authors

Rust, Niki A.
Abrams, Amber
Challender, Daniel W.S.
Chapron, Guillaume
Ghoddousi, Arash
Glikman, Jenny A.
Gowan, Catherine H.
Hughes, Courtney
Rastogi, Archi
Said, Alicia
Sutton, Alexandra
Taylor, Nik
Thomas, Sarah
Unnikrishnan, Hita
Webber, Amanda D.
Wordingham, Gwen
Hill, Catherine M.

Oxford Brookes departments

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences\Department of Social Sciences

Dates

Year of publication: 2017
Date of RADAR deposit: 2017-06-06


Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License


Related resources

This RADAR resource is the Accepted Manuscript of Quantity does not always mean quality: the importance of qualitative social science in conservation research

Details

  • Owner: Daniel Croft
  • Collection: Outputs
  • Version: 1 (show all)
  • Status: Live