Course:LFS350/Projects/2014W1/T13/Proposal
Version Control
The need to amend and change the project charter will inevitably be present. These changes should be well communicated between all project stakeholders and documented with a version control chart.
| Version | Author | Role | Changes | Date |
| 1.0 | Group 13 | All Group Members | Initial Version of all Sections | 2014/09/17 |
| 2.0 | Group 13 | All Group Members | Final Version of All Sections for Initial Proposal Submission | 2014/10/03 |
| 3.0 | Li-Chia Ko | Group Member | Milestones and References | 2014/10/22 |
| 4.0 | Tishtaar Titina | Group Member | Purpose and Research Question | 2014/10/26 |
| 5.0 | Zoë Johnson | Group Member | Project Background | 2014/10/26 |
| 6.0 | Zoë Johnson | Group Member | Stakeholder Summary | 2014/10/27 |
| 7.0 | Amanda Ellis | Group Member | Edit of all sections | 2014/10/28 |
| 8.0 | Li-Chia Ko | Group Member | References | 2014/10/28 |
| 9.0 | Camille Valencia | Group Member | Methods and Additional References | 2014/10/29 |
| 10.0 | Zoë Johnson | Group Member | References | 2014/10/29 |
| 11.0 | Amanda Ellis | Group Member | Edit of methods and success factors | 2014/10/30 |
| 12.0 | Amanda Ellis | Group Member | Final edit prior to submitting revised team charter | 2014/11/1 |
Project Background (__ / 10)
Food security is defined as “access by all people, at all times, to food that is safe, nutritionally adequate and personally acceptable and which is obtained in a manner that respects human dignity” (Koc & Welsh, 2002, p. 4). This access to nutritionally rich and culturally appropriate food is an important determinant to people’s health and well-being. One’s relationship with food is an important aspect of cultural and individual identity (Koc & Welsh, 2002, p. 1). What, when, how and where we eat is determined by a complex interaction of the cultural arrangement of our society, the organization of food systems, and social policies (Koc & Welsh, 2002, p. 1).
In the last four decades, our food system has undergone immense changes. The shift to capital-intensive industrial agriculture, especially in the West, has altered the way people engage and interact with their food system (Wilkins, 2005, p. 271). Namely, it has increased the distance between people and their food, led to a loss of local knowledge and cultural diversity (Sage, 2012, p. 39). The food system at every level (production, processing, distribution and consumption) has been altered by advances in technology, changes in market structure and the increasing globalization of the supply chain. Despite the fact that we are producing more food than ever before, there are many people around the world who lack food security.
Vulnerable members of society are most at risk of food insecurity (Koc & Welsh, p. 4). Recent immigrants are vulnerable in a number of ways. Newly landed immigrants are often; under economic stress; often confronted by language barriers; often plagued by low self-esteem; and often challenged by cultural and religious barriers (Renzaho & Mellor, 2010, p. 1). The limited availability and high cost of traditional food items, coupled with a pressure to assimilate into a new culture can exacerbate food insecurity for immigrants (Renzaho & Mellor, 2010, p. 4). In Canada, individuals who have been living in the country for fewer than ten years are at much higher risk of having nutritionally inadequate diets (Renzaho & Mellor, 2010, p. 5). According to Renzaho & Mellor (2010), the diet of newer immigrants consists of fewer fruits, vegetables and dairy products than those who have been in Canada for longer than ten years (p. 5). In their study, many new Canadians reported eating only one to two meals per day (Renzaho & Mellor, 2010, p. 5). The consequences of food insecurity however, go far beyond physical health. Becoming a citizen of a new nation can be an immensely isolating experience. The ability to take advantage of and contribute to the economy, culture and political activity of your society is important to your personal identity and understanding of how you fit into that society (Renzaho & Mellor, 2010, p. 4). The challenges faced by new immigrants to establish a sense of belonging in their new home can hamper their well-being (Renzaho & Mellor, 2010, p. 4).
Civic engagement is defined as the effort of an individual or collective group to recognize and address issues of public concern. Civically engaged individuals work to enhance the quality of life in a community, through both political and non-political processes (Ehrlich, 2000). Part of being civically engaged means recognizing oneself as part of a larger social fabric and recognizing one's responsibility to make positive changes (Erlich, 2000). For this reason, becoming civically engaged can greatly enhance one’s feeling of inclusion in society. Empowering new immigrants to contribute to their communities can help them adjust and develop their dynamic personal and cultural identity and by extension, make them more food secure.
The Richmond Food Security Society (RFSS) is an organization in Richmond, British Columbia, that hopes to enhance food security and justice in their community (Richmond Food Security Society, 2014). Richmond boasts a culturally diverse population. In 2011, 70.4% of Richmond residents were visual minorities (City of Richmond, 2011). Chinese Canadians represent the largest ethnic group in Richmond, comprising 49% of the population (City of Richmond, 2014). Because of the very large number of immigrants in Richmond, the RFSS faces unique challenges in trying to fulfill their mandate of ensuring “access to nutritious, safe, personally acceptable and culturally appropriate foods, produced in ways that are environmentally sound and socially just" for everyone who calls Richmond home (Richmond Food Security Society, 2014). We are interested in looking at the civic engagement of four long-term Chinese immigrants who have been living in Richmond for ten years or more. We want to construct a narrative on these individuals’ understanding of food security, and how they perceive the connection between civic engagement and food security. Furthermore, we hope these immigrants’ narratives will bring to light the ways that the relationship between civic engagement and food security has changed in Richmond in the last ten years and how these individuals expect it to change in the future. The RFSS hopes to use this narrative to inform their programming in the future to better assist new immigrants in overcoming the challenges of becoming civically involved and food secure.
Stakeholder Summary (__ /5)
| Name, Role & Organization | Responsibilities |
|
LFS 350 Students Karen Tang Isha Sekhon Amanda Ellis Zoë Johnson Mimi Ko Cecelia Liu Tishtaar Titina Camille Valencia |
|
|
Mimi Ko Cecelia Liu |
|
|
Zoë Johnson |
|
|
Community Partner Colin Dring (Richmond Food Security Society) |
|
|
University of British Columbia |
|
Purpose and Research Question (__ / 20)
Research Question: How is food security related, connected, and/or relevant to the civic engagement of four Chinese-Canadian immigrants living in Richmond for a minimum of ten years?
Purpose: The objective of this community project is to create an open dialogue with four Chinese-Canadian immigrants who have long term civic engagement in their local food system. From this dialogue we endeavour to develop narratives to see which areas of the community they are involved in, their experience with food security, or food insecurity in Richmond. Additionally, we hope to gain insight into how food security has changed within the Richmond food system over the time of their civic engagement, and whether it has affected their roles in the community. We also hope to gain our participant’s insight into how they believe the sate of food security in Richmond will affect future generations in becoming civically engaged. Our goal in conducting this study is to clarify and define some of the challenges and adjustments faced by our subjects as new immigrants to Canada in regards to their own experiences with food security and the extent to which it influenced their civil engagement. Through the interviews we hope to understand the connection between food security and civic engagement to provide insight for the better allocation of resources, and the development and improvement of initiatives to improve the food security of new immigrants in the community.
Methods (__ / 20)
Study Description: Given that the objective of our research is to create narratives about the interplay of food security and the civic engagement of four long term Chinese Immigrants, our team will be conducting an ethnographic study. Ethnography describes a holistic approach and is defined as the study of how culture influences peoples’ behaviours, opinions, and understanding of events or issues (Hammersley and Atkinson, 2007). It looks to gain insight into these areas through the analysis of people in everyday situations, and through personal accounts rather than in controlled settings (Hammersley and Atkinson, 2007). This approach usually focuses on in depth analysis with relatively small sample sizes, with data interpretation involving the elucidation of connections, and meaning to result in the development of explanations and theories on a given topic. (Hammersley and Atkinson, 2007). This method directly applies to the purpose of our research, which looks to explore how culture and food security associate with and influence the civic engagement of four long-term Chinese immigrants. Ethnography also provides a beneficial framework for our data analysis, which from our interviews intends to look for qualitative connections and common themes, rather than to derive quantitative results.
One advantage of ethnographic studies (a form of qualitative research), is the depth of information that it gives to research (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2009; Singer, 2009). Conducting ethnographic interviews and documenting the stories of our participants gives us more detailed, and personal data, than can be achieved from a quantitative study. Ethnography provides a personal, human aspect that is often lost in quantitative methods.
A disadvantage of this type of study is that it is subjective, often involving case studies, which prevent the results from being applicable to a larger population (Singer, 2009). Because the results are based on personal accounts, there are substantial limitations to the applicability of the data to the larger population.
Participants: The participants in our study include four long-term Chinese-Canadian immigrants, residing in Richmond for a minimum of ten years, with a history of civic engagement in their local food system.
Sampling Methods: Prior to identifying a sample, a set of criterion was developed to aid in the screening of potential candidates. Our inclusion criteria requires participants to be long term Chinese Canadian immigrants having resided in Canada for a minimum of ten years, and currently living in Richmond. We also require our participants to either be currently engaged, or have a history of civic engagement in their local food system. The interviews of any candidates that do not meet all of the above criteria will not be included in the analysis of our data, or the final report.
To obtain a sample of four long-term Chinese immigrants to interview, we will utilize a snowball sampling technique. This method involves asking the participants involved that meet the criteria to name other people they know that could be potential candidates (Goodman, 1961). This techniques is beneficial in situations where the objective is to look at a population that may be difficult to access by other means, such as our population of interest (Goodman, 1961). Our first interview candidate will be provided by our community partner, and from this individual we will utilize a snowball sampling technique to find three more participants that meet our inclusion criteria.
An advantage of the snowball sampling technique is the ability to develop a referral chain that can greatly increase the sample size (Biernacki & Waldorf, 1981). This can prove beneficial in a scenario such as our research project that includes a very specific population of interest that may otherwise be difficult to locate.
Snowball sampling also has some notable disadvantages. This sampling method requires the research group to be continuously involved in the entire process of obtaining potential participants, and following up with referrals (Biernacki & Waldorf, 1981). This can prove to be a time consuming process. A second disadvantage of this method is that the sample produced is not random, and thus biases may be present that are not found with a randomized sampling technique (Biernacki & Waldorf, 1981).
Confidentiality: To maintain the confidentiality of our participants, all interviewees will sign a confidentiality form stating that their name and identifying characteristics will be withheld from inclusion in the final report, in addition to stating that the information collected is only to be used in the context of our research and production of our final report. We will also ensure them that the information collected will be shared with no one other than the members of our research team, and our community partner.
To ensure confidentiality, we will assign each participant an identification number that will be used in the handling of data and the reporting process. If there happens to be a breach of confidentiality with a given identification number, a new number will be assigned, and all association to the prior one discarded (O'Hara & Neutel, 2002).
Data Collection: Considering our intended purpose, which is to create narratives about the relationship of food security and the civic engagement of our participants we will conduct four open-ended interviews. This technique is used to gather opinions, ideas and personal experiences from participants through either telephone, or in person interviews (Monroe, 2002). Our interviews will be conducted in person at a location and time agreed upon by the interviewers and participants. Each interview will be carried out by two to three of our team members, and be an open dialogue rather than a question and answer type format. To initiate the conversation the interviewer will ask a couple of personal background questions such as length of time in Canada and past and current roles in their food system, and subsequently begin the dialogue by asking more specific questions about food security. The interviews will either be video recorded, or voice recorded depending on the preference of the participant. If the individual does not wish to be recorded, another team member will transcribe their responses.
Data Analysis: Considering the qualitative nature of our data, inductive data analysis will be utilized. This type of qualitative analysis involves intensive review of raw data to generate common trends and themes (Thomas, 2006). Upon conducting the interviews we will analyze and compare them to one and other to look for common themes and trends, as well as noting any differences. Throughout this process we will look for connections between our data and our research question to draw meaningful conclusions, ideas and trends (Thomas, 2006).
Key Sources of Information: In regards to the background information, and information used during our research project, we drew on two different sources. To develop a background knowledge of our topic, we carried out a literature review of relevant peer reviewed and scholarly sources which are fully listed in the reference section of this document. The second source of information we utilized in both our background research and throughout our research process was our community partner, Colin Dring. He has provided us with resources that enhanced our background information, provided us with our initial interview candidates, and gave us recommendations on how to contact our participants, and carry out our interviews.
Additional Resources Needed:For the purpose of our project the only resources we will need access to is a video camera, a voice recording device, and access to a video editing software.
Deliverables (__ / 5)
Interm Deliverables:
- Regular (bi-weekly) status updates for our community partner Colin detailing project progress
- Project Proposal Presentation (October 1)
- First Draft of Project Proposal (October 4)
- Second Draft of Project Proposal (November 1)
Final Deliverables:
- A documentary style video recording which provides a narrative of long term Chinese-Canadian immigrants' experiences and relationship with the food system. Footage will be in stakeholders' native language and will have English subtitles.
- A written report detailing our findings, methods (of data collection and analysis), and conclusions. (December 3)
Success Factors/Criteria (__ / 10)
Various success factors used to gauge the success of our progress and final report include:
- 1) Positive feedback from our interactions with our community partner:
This will be done throughout our ongoing communications with our community partner Collin, through both email and face-to-face meetings. This is a success factor as it helps us ensure that our research connects to what he, and the Richmond Food Security Society are looking for. Through this constant feedback we are able to ensure that we are successful in staying on track to achieve the best possible results for both our community partner and us. In addition to this on going feedback throughout the semester, prior too our final delivery we will show Colin our final results, and the feed back we receive will be used to judge our the success of our research, and make final adjustments before our final presentation.
- 2) Personal development of the team members:
This project provides a unique opportunity to combine education with community involvement. Thus a relevant indicator of success is the personal growth, learning and practical experiences gained by all team members. In order to evaluate this development, we will discuss through out the term how each of us feel they have grown, and how this experience has provided us with not only knowledge but also real life experience. Such real life experiences include the ability to work in a group, communicate professionally with individuals such as our community partner, and how to properly conduct an interview. Noted development in any of these areas will be an indicator of success.
- 3) Positive feedback on preliminary assignments (initial proposal presentation, and the primary and secondary proposal submissions):
This feedback will come from both our TA Kristina, as well as our community partner Collin. This is an important success factor, as it will help us make adjustments to our proposal, and research process throughout the term, to ensure that we are successful in producing an exemplary final report. This is beneficial as it enables us to address areas of concern prior to the final delivery that may otherwise go unaddressed.
- 4)Successful delivery of our report and compiled video interviews
This aspect of success is closely associated to those indicators listed above. Successful delivery of our final report is important, as it will act as the main indicator of whether our research project is successful. To evaluate this factor we will have to maintain good communication with Collin and the Richmond Food Security Society to ensure we fulfill their requests. Also, feedback from Kristina after our final presentation and the final report submission will help us determine our level of accomplishment.
Scope Change
Scope changes requested by any stakeholder of the project must be agreed upon, approved and signed by all stakeholders. The agreed format is to revise this charter with version controls. Because this is critical to keep track of, the version control is displayed at the beginning of the charter.
Communication Plan (__ / 5)
On Going Communication Plan:
| Action Item | Deliverable | Dates | Accountable |
| Technical Meeting (in person whenever possible) | check-in, progress update, question period | Monthly | Colin and all group members (whenever possible) |
| Progress Reports | project specific information update from group to Colin via email | Weekly (Wednesdays) | Zoë |
| Ongoing Communication | topic specific questions/discussion on Facebook group, GoogleDoc or by email | Whenever necessary (group members expected to reply within 48 hours) | All Group Members |
| Group Meetings | work on project components, delegate tasks | Weekly (Wednesdays- break out room time) | All Group Members |
Date Specific Communication Plan: (to be updated as we progress)
| Action Item | Deliverable | Dates | Accountable |
| First Meeting with Colin | overview of project, project background, expectations, feedback on systems map | September 24th, 2014 | Amanda Ellis, Cecilia Liu, Tishtaar Titina, Camille Valencia, Karen Tang, Isha Sekhon and Colin |
| In-Person Meeting with Colin (#2) | Contact info for interview subjects (long-term civically engaged Chinese Canadians), previous years' data/footage. | October10th, 2014 | Colin and all group members available at set time |
| In-Person Meeting with Colin (#3) | Check in with our research project | October 24, 2014 | Cecilia Liu and Isha Sekhon |
Milestones (__ / 5)
| Milestone | Event or Deliverable | Target Date | Responsibility | |
| Milestone 1 | Email Communication with Colin | Wednesday, September 10 | Zoë Johnson | |
| Milestone 2 | Email Communication with Colin | Wednesday, September 15 | Zoë Johnson | |
| Milestone 3 | Email Communication with Colin | Wednesday, September 19 | Zoë Johnson | |
| Milestone 4 | In-Person Meeting with Colin | Wednesday, September 24, 2:00pm | All group members | |
| Milestone 5 | Proposal Presentation | Wednesday, October 1 | All group members | |
| Milestone 6 | Email Communication with Colin | Wednesday, October 2 | Zoë Johnson | |
| Milestone 7 | Written Project Charter & Proposal | Saturday, October 4, 11:59pm | Zoë Johnson | |
| Milestone 8 | Email Communication with Colin | Wednesday, October 9 | Zoë Johnson | |
| Milestone 9 | Group Meeting | Wednesday, October 15, 12:00pm | All group members | |
| Milestone 10 | Email Communication with Ian Lai | Wednesday, October 15 | Zoë Johnson | |
| Milestone 11 | Group Meeting | Wednesday, October 22, 12:00pm | All group members | |
| Milestone 12 | Phone Communication with Colin | Wednesday, October 22, 3:15pm | Cecelia Liu | |
| Milestone 13 | In-Person Meeting with Colin | Friday, October 24, 12:00pm | Isha Sekhon, Li-Chia Ko and Cecelia Liu | |
| Milestone 14 | Email all Possible Interview Candidates | Saturday, October 25 | Zoë Johnson | |
| Milestone 15 | Interview with Ian Lai | Friday, October 31, 9:00am | Isha Sekhon and Zoë Johnson | |
| Milestone 16 | Revised Charter and Proposal | Saturday, November 1, 11:59pm | All group members | |
| Milestone 17 | Dates Set for (minimum) Four Interviews | Monday, November 3 | Zoë Johnson | |
| Milestone | Interviews with Participants | TBD | TBD | |
| Milestone | Data Collection Complete | Wednesday, November 5 | TBD | |
| Milestone | Data Analysis Complete | Wednesday, November 19 | TBD | |
| Milestone | Video Editing Complete | Sunday, November 16 | TBD | |
| Milestone | Final Presentation | Wednesday, November 26 | TBD | |
| Milestone | Draft of Final Report | Wednesday, December 3, 11:59pm | TBD | |
| Milestone | Final Report (final version) | Wednesday, December 3, 11:59pm | TBD |
Approvals (__ / 5)
The following individuals hereby approve this Project Charter:
| Role or Title | Name and Signature | Date |
| LFS 350 Group Member | Zoë Johnson | October 3rd, 2014 |
| LFS 350 Group Member | Tishtaar Titina | October 3rd, 2014 |
| LFS 350 Group Member | Cecelia Yan Lian Liu | October 3rd, 2014 |
| LFS 350 Group Member | Karen Tang | October 3rd, 2014 |
| LFS 350 Group Member | Amanda Ellis | October 4th, 2014 |
| LFS 350 Group Member | Isha Sekhon | October 4th, 2014 |
| LFS 350 Group Member | Li-Chia Ko (Mimi) | October 4th, 2014 |
References (__ / 5)
Biernacki, P., & Waldorf, D. (1981). Snowball sampling: Problems and techniques of chain referral sampling. Sociological Methods and Research 10(2), 141-163.
Erlich, T. (2000). Civic responsibility and higher education. Westport, CT: The American Council on Education and The Oryx Press.
City of Richmond. (2011) Ethnicity hot facts. Richmond, BC. Retrieved from http://www.richmond.ca/__shared/assets/2006_Ethnicity20987.pdf
Goodman, A. (1961). Snowball sampling. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics. 32(1), 148-170. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2237615
Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice. New York; London: Routledge
Koc, M. & Welsh J. (2011, November). Food, foodways and immigrant experience. Paper written for the Multiculturalism Program, Department of Canadian Heritage
- at the Canadian Ethnic Studies Association Conference, Halifax, NS.
Monroe, M. C. (2002). Evaluation s friendly voice: The structured open-ended interview. Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 1(2), 101-106.
- doi:10.1080/15330150213993
Oatey, A. (1999). The strengths and limitations of interviews as a research techniques for studying television viewers. Retrieved from
O'Hara, P., & Neutel, C. I. (2002). Maintaining confidentiality in research data. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 11(1), 75-78.
- doi:10.1002/pds.680
Renzaho, A. M. N. & Mellor, D. (2010). Food security measurement in cultural pluralism: Missing the point or conceptual misunderstanding?. Nutrition, 26, 1-9.
- doi:10.1016/j.nut.2009.05.001
Richmond Food Security Society. (2014). Mandate. Retrieved from http://www.richmondfoodsecurity.org.
Rojas, A., Black, J., Chapman, G., Lomas, C., Orego, E., Valley, W., & Mansfield, B. (2012). Annual report. Retrieved from:
Sage, C. (2012). Environment and food. Abingdon, Oxon: Routlege.
Singer, J. (2009). Ethnography. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 86, 191-198. doi: 10.1177/107769900908600112
Thomas, D. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation 27, 237-246.
- doi:10.1177/1098214005283748
Wilkins, J. L. (2005). Eating right here: Moving from consumer to food citizen. Agriculture and Human Values, 22(3), 269-273.