Where the power lies: multiple stakeholder politics over natural ...

people, coincidences of finding documents, coincidences of context and coincidences of
timing that have much to do with the type of data that is collected.
Over different issues, stakeholders regroup and there are sometimes different types of
relations among them. So at any given point, one can expect to have a complex constellation
of relations overlying each other. Over much more critical issues, these constellations may
be easy to identify, but over less critical issues, they may be less visible, but still exist.
What to look for:
Where are the relations played out?
What form do the relations take?
What drives the processes through which the relations are formed? and
What is the effect of these power relations on management?
Relations between different stakeholders impact the group to varying degrees. Not all
relations, whether conflict or cooperation, have an adverse effect on the group. However,
the balance of power must be maintained in a state where no one stakeholder or faction
within the group holds absolute power and cannot be challenged.
Methodological issues:
For this type of analysis one needs to be very sensitive to context, i.e. have a sense of
time and place and be careful to not offend. Such sensitivity will determine when you
speak, with whom you speak and how you approach the subject. You will need to investigate
the source and conditions under which the information is being given. Specific issues
may relate to your appreciation of the following:
24
Who talks about power?
Where can one discuss power?
Who is present during the discussion?
With whom can one discuss power?
What is the relationship between the person giving the information and the one receiving it?
What is the perception of the respondent stakeholder about the person receiving
the information (i.e. their affiliations, alliances, roles and place within the group).
It is also important that one is able to interpret the ‘language’ used in discussing relations.
Quite often in some cultures, veiled statements, metaphors and other conversational
tactics are used to deliberately avoid direct reference. It would be important in these
instances to check interpretations of this ‘language’ with others before documenting
one’s interpretations. There are political as well as cultural norms that influence where
and how we can talk about relationships among stakeholders.
Some field workers have indicated that the problem of familiarity with the stakeholders can be
resolved by working with someone who is familiar with the group. In both sites in Zimbabwe,
discussing issues like witchcraft, illicit relationships between married people or political
affiliations was very sensitive yet our appreciation of some of these attributes is crucial to our
understanding of group dynamics at a local level, where some stakeholders have these attributes.
However, in some situations where the outsider is very well known in the area, some of this
data is derived through less informal methods through everyday gossip, or catching up between
friends and neighbours. In one example, in Zimbabwe, the researcher found that less formal
association and communication with the community was one way to gather data. However this
data is embedded within wider conversation about events in the community. In the case presented
in Box 11, he describes events related to one of the key stakeholders in a community project.