Analytical study of all assets and documents in your family. This topic I want introduction, aims and objectives, suggestion, procedure.
Answers
Answered by
4
This study provides a grassroots view of where South Africa stands in 2013 in fulfilling the aspirations embodied in the Constitution and the democratic system that was established almost 20 years ago.
It offers revealing bottom-up perspectives on how South Africans feel about the human rights they enjoy and see others around them enjoying, the political system and how it works for them, how political leaders are faring in representing them, and the forms of public participation that work for them, or not. This report offers the latest insights into how South Africans relate to the political parties that represent them. The voices in this study illuminate the choices that South African citizens will encounter when they go to the polls in 2014.
Using in-depth qualitative research, the study reaches beyond statistics and explores what lies in the hearts and minds of citizens. In typical focus group style, the report uses the words of the focus group participants themselves. The quotations in this report bring their experiences and perceptions to life. The analysis represents the accumulated voices of these citizen-participants stating and arguing their experiences of democracy.
1.2 METHODOLOGY AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STUDY
Focus groups are a valued research tool to gain in-depth understanding of current and unfolding phenomena, such as democracy and the experiences of human rights in South Africa. The focus groups in this study comprised 6–9 participants, all carefully recruited in line with pre-set demographic and geographic criteria.[1] Both the relative participant homogeneity and the style of moderation were designed to facilitate relaxed and non-threatening discussions. Participants were encouraged to feel free to share their experiences and insights, and the discussions reflected this. They were informed that there were no right or wrong answers and they should share their experiences, perceptions and insights. Participation was voluntary and overwhelmingly enthusiastic.
Ensuring the demographic and geographic design of focus groups in this study was of the utmost importance. The 27 groups – a high number by the standards of focus group research – provided excellent national coverage. The project complied with rigorous recruitment criteria (reflected in Table 1). Strict adherence to the recruitment schedules ensured that there were no ‘groupies’ (people who regularly attend focus groups), besides bringing participants of a range of geographic and demographic backgrounds (gender, race, age group, language, living standards measure (LSM) status, unemployment status) into the groups. Both employed and unemployed citizens were recruited.
Responsibilities in the implementation of the study were:
Susan Booysen designed the discussion guide, with valuable comment and suggestions from the Freedom House Johannesburg office staff and Ipsos.Group profiles were determined jointly by Booysen, Freedom House and Ipsos.Ipsos, Booysen and Freedom House conducted the moderator briefings.Ipsos implemented the fieldwork.The whole team conducted quality checks. These included the observation of groups that had formal observation facilities and the careful scrutiny of recordings and transcriptions of the rest of the discussions. Ipsos did the translations and transcriptions.Booysen was responsible for data analysis and report-writing, with report structuring and editing assistance by Freedom House’s team in Johannesburg and Washington, DC.
Experienced and professional moderators conducted the discussions. They were selected to be demographically as close as possible to the group characteristics and adhered to a detailed discussion guide (see Appendix A for a synopsis of the discussion guide). Discussions were audio-taped, with participants’ permission. The recordings were transcribed and translated (where applicable). The discussions lasted about two and a half hours, with a break and refreshments. All participants received a modest honorarium, as token of appreciation for the time they gave. Where required, Ipsos provided transport to and from the discussion venues.
Ipsos put a range of quality control measures in place to monitor all aspects of focus group rollout. Ipsos, along with the author-analyst and Freedom House, continuously monitored project implementation.
The discussions were conducted in the predominant language of each region, with English often mixed in. Black-African groups form the large majority (17 out of 27) of the project’s focus groups. Several groups of younger ages mixed participants from the four conventional racial categories (Johannesburg and Bloemfontein). In Cape Town the one Afrikaans language group was mainly colored with some white participants. In Pretoria the Afrikaans language group was white-only, in Pietermaritzburg the white-only group was of English background, and the Durban group was Indian-only.
It offers revealing bottom-up perspectives on how South Africans feel about the human rights they enjoy and see others around them enjoying, the political system and how it works for them, how political leaders are faring in representing them, and the forms of public participation that work for them, or not. This report offers the latest insights into how South Africans relate to the political parties that represent them. The voices in this study illuminate the choices that South African citizens will encounter when they go to the polls in 2014.
Using in-depth qualitative research, the study reaches beyond statistics and explores what lies in the hearts and minds of citizens. In typical focus group style, the report uses the words of the focus group participants themselves. The quotations in this report bring their experiences and perceptions to life. The analysis represents the accumulated voices of these citizen-participants stating and arguing their experiences of democracy.
1.2 METHODOLOGY AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STUDY
Focus groups are a valued research tool to gain in-depth understanding of current and unfolding phenomena, such as democracy and the experiences of human rights in South Africa. The focus groups in this study comprised 6–9 participants, all carefully recruited in line with pre-set demographic and geographic criteria.[1] Both the relative participant homogeneity and the style of moderation were designed to facilitate relaxed and non-threatening discussions. Participants were encouraged to feel free to share their experiences and insights, and the discussions reflected this. They were informed that there were no right or wrong answers and they should share their experiences, perceptions and insights. Participation was voluntary and overwhelmingly enthusiastic.
Ensuring the demographic and geographic design of focus groups in this study was of the utmost importance. The 27 groups – a high number by the standards of focus group research – provided excellent national coverage. The project complied with rigorous recruitment criteria (reflected in Table 1). Strict adherence to the recruitment schedules ensured that there were no ‘groupies’ (people who regularly attend focus groups), besides bringing participants of a range of geographic and demographic backgrounds (gender, race, age group, language, living standards measure (LSM) status, unemployment status) into the groups. Both employed and unemployed citizens were recruited.
Responsibilities in the implementation of the study were:
Susan Booysen designed the discussion guide, with valuable comment and suggestions from the Freedom House Johannesburg office staff and Ipsos.Group profiles were determined jointly by Booysen, Freedom House and Ipsos.Ipsos, Booysen and Freedom House conducted the moderator briefings.Ipsos implemented the fieldwork.The whole team conducted quality checks. These included the observation of groups that had formal observation facilities and the careful scrutiny of recordings and transcriptions of the rest of the discussions. Ipsos did the translations and transcriptions.Booysen was responsible for data analysis and report-writing, with report structuring and editing assistance by Freedom House’s team in Johannesburg and Washington, DC.
Experienced and professional moderators conducted the discussions. They were selected to be demographically as close as possible to the group characteristics and adhered to a detailed discussion guide (see Appendix A for a synopsis of the discussion guide). Discussions were audio-taped, with participants’ permission. The recordings were transcribed and translated (where applicable). The discussions lasted about two and a half hours, with a break and refreshments. All participants received a modest honorarium, as token of appreciation for the time they gave. Where required, Ipsos provided transport to and from the discussion venues.
Ipsos put a range of quality control measures in place to monitor all aspects of focus group rollout. Ipsos, along with the author-analyst and Freedom House, continuously monitored project implementation.
The discussions were conducted in the predominant language of each region, with English often mixed in. Black-African groups form the large majority (17 out of 27) of the project’s focus groups. Several groups of younger ages mixed participants from the four conventional racial categories (Johannesburg and Bloemfontein). In Cape Town the one Afrikaans language group was mainly colored with some white participants. In Pretoria the Afrikaans language group was white-only, in Pietermaritzburg the white-only group was of English background, and the Durban group was Indian-only.
Similar questions