Skip to Main Content
Table 3

Summary of analysis approach, by question

Guiding questionAnalysis approach summary
1. Does your organisation have a definition for urban water security? Coded to: no or yes (including those who adopted LOS objectives established by the State). All associated comments were noted as free text, including the definition itself and how it is applied. 
2. Would a definition provided by the State or other respected institution be useful? Coded to: yes; no; maybe; not relevant. 
3a) Do you understand the level of service (LOS) way of describing water security?
3b) Do you think the community understands the LOS way of describing urban water security? 
Content of free text coded to: yes, understand ok; do not understand well; do not understand.
Content of free text coded to: yes, understandable; possibly understand or understand some aspects; very difficult to understand; no, they do not understand. 
4. What does the term ‘urban water security’ mean to you? Content of statements were recorded directly, grouped according to their complexity and themes identified. The prevalence of themes determined; 100% corresponds to all respondents mentioning the theme when describing urban water security, either in direct response to this question or prior to this point in the interview. Analysis was aligned with the 11 themes used in Q5. 
5. To what extent do you think planning for urban water security should consider the following themes? (Refer to Table 2 for full details). Deductive analysis based on 11 themes with responses noted against a five-point Likert scale: 5 = critical or very high importance; 4 = high importance; 3 = medium/secondary importance; 2 = low importance; 1 = very low importance.
Analysis of entire group, and then according to the participants' roles, broken into:
  • operational (n = 13): roles in operations, operational strategy and planning; aligns with water service provider organisations

  • non-operational (n = 9): roles in policy and oversight, and advocacy; aligns with state government and representative organisations.

 
6a) Do you think there are any themes missing? 6b) If yes, what? (a) Coded to: yes; no.
(b) If yes, expanded content of response was noted. 
Guiding questionAnalysis approach summary
1. Does your organisation have a definition for urban water security? Coded to: no or yes (including those who adopted LOS objectives established by the State). All associated comments were noted as free text, including the definition itself and how it is applied. 
2. Would a definition provided by the State or other respected institution be useful? Coded to: yes; no; maybe; not relevant. 
3a) Do you understand the level of service (LOS) way of describing water security?
3b) Do you think the community understands the LOS way of describing urban water security? 
Content of free text coded to: yes, understand ok; do not understand well; do not understand.
Content of free text coded to: yes, understandable; possibly understand or understand some aspects; very difficult to understand; no, they do not understand. 
4. What does the term ‘urban water security’ mean to you? Content of statements were recorded directly, grouped according to their complexity and themes identified. The prevalence of themes determined; 100% corresponds to all respondents mentioning the theme when describing urban water security, either in direct response to this question or prior to this point in the interview. Analysis was aligned with the 11 themes used in Q5. 
5. To what extent do you think planning for urban water security should consider the following themes? (Refer to Table 2 for full details). Deductive analysis based on 11 themes with responses noted against a five-point Likert scale: 5 = critical or very high importance; 4 = high importance; 3 = medium/secondary importance; 2 = low importance; 1 = very low importance.
Analysis of entire group, and then according to the participants' roles, broken into:
  • operational (n = 13): roles in operations, operational strategy and planning; aligns with water service provider organisations

  • non-operational (n = 9): roles in policy and oversight, and advocacy; aligns with state government and representative organisations.

 
6a) Do you think there are any themes missing? 6b) If yes, what? (a) Coded to: yes; no.
(b) If yes, expanded content of response was noted. 
Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal