Assessment of Methodology
Focus Group Meetings
During the initial focus group meetings, there was concern that the participants from the local community would have difficulty in understanding the purpose of the landscape character assessment process and their role within it. We were also aware that although their values could be readily incorporated into the study, their perceptions were often in conflict with known facts and their aspirations beyond the scope of influence of the study. However, it was this very conflict that brought certain aspects of the landscape into sharp focus. For example, a perceived lack of access to the countryside and fear of trespassing; a preference for managed landscapes such as country parks for recreational use; and a lack of interest in modern landscapes. Aspirations were often found to be either controversial or contrary to accepted policies. (See Focus Group Findings May 2003).
There was a positive benefit to setting up the focus groups early in the project, allowing participants to get to know each other and to be involved from the outset. This ‘blank page’ approach to the first focus group meetings provided a much better understanding of the views of people who live, work and play in the landscape and who have not had their perceptions influenced by specialist knowledge. The prompting through open questions helped to guide the discussion away from planning issues that tended to surface continually. It also led to the questioning of professional assumptions and the need for professionals to explain more clearly that, because the landscape was made up of a complex mix of different features, it both required and lent itself to classification.
By its very nature, qualitative research of the kind used for this study does not, and neither does it intend to, provide statistically robust findings. It does, however, offer a depth of insight which it is not possible to obtain by quantitative methods. As far as this particular exercise was concerned, it offered the further advantage that the views of people who did not have either a particular or specialised interest in the landscape could be sought.
The focus groups had a good cross section of age groups and backgrounds and were able to prompt each other. Their knowledge of the landscape was however very variable and participants were better able to discuss general trends than specific issues in their area at this stage. This contrasted strongly with the very specific comments made at the workshop.