case study and theory difference

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods

Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods

Published on 5 May 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 30 January 2023.

A case study is a detailed study of a specific subject, such as a person, group, place, event, organisation, or phenomenon. Case studies are commonly used in social, educational, clinical, and business research.

A case study research design usually involves qualitative methods , but quantitative methods are sometimes also used. Case studies are good for describing , comparing, evaluating, and understanding different aspects of a research problem .

Table of contents

When to do a case study, step 1: select a case, step 2: build a theoretical framework, step 3: collect your data, step 4: describe and analyse the case.

A case study is an appropriate research design when you want to gain concrete, contextual, in-depth knowledge about a specific real-world subject. It allows you to explore the key characteristics, meanings, and implications of the case.

Case studies are often a good choice in a thesis or dissertation . They keep your project focused and manageable when you don’t have the time or resources to do large-scale research.

You might use just one complex case study where you explore a single subject in depth, or conduct multiple case studies to compare and illuminate different aspects of your research problem.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Once you have developed your problem statement and research questions , you should be ready to choose the specific case that you want to focus on. A good case study should have the potential to:

• Provide new or unexpected insights into the subject
• Challenge or complicate existing assumptions and theories
• Propose practical courses of action to resolve a problem
• Open up new directions for future research

Unlike quantitative or experimental research, a strong case study does not require a random or representative sample. In fact, case studies often deliberately focus on unusual, neglected, or outlying cases which may shed new light on the research problem.

If you find yourself aiming to simultaneously investigate and solve an issue, consider conducting action research . As its name suggests, action research conducts research and takes action at the same time, and is highly iterative and flexible. 

However, you can also choose a more common or representative case to exemplify a particular category, experience, or phenomenon.

While case studies focus more on concrete details than general theories, they should usually have some connection with theory in the field. This way the case study is not just an isolated description, but is integrated into existing knowledge about the topic. It might aim to:

• Exemplify a theory by showing how it explains the case under investigation
• Expand on a theory by uncovering new concepts and ideas that need to be incorporated
• Challenge a theory by exploring an outlier case that doesn’t fit with established assumptions

To ensure that your analysis of the case has a solid academic grounding, you should conduct a literature review of sources related to the topic and develop a theoretical framework . This means identifying key concepts and theories to guide your analysis and interpretation.

There are many different research methods you can use to collect data on your subject. Case studies tend to focus on qualitative data using methods such as interviews, observations, and analysis of primary and secondary sources (e.g., newspaper articles, photographs, official records). Sometimes a case study will also collect quantitative data .

The aim is to gain as thorough an understanding as possible of the case and its context.

In writing up the case study, you need to bring together all the relevant aspects to give as complete a picture as possible of the subject.

How you report your findings depends on the type of research you are doing. Some case studies are structured like a standard scientific paper or thesis, with separate sections or chapters for the methods , results , and discussion .

Others are written in a more narrative style, aiming to explore the case from various angles and analyse its meanings and implications (for example, by using textual analysis or discourse analysis ).

In all cases, though, make sure to give contextual details about the case, connect it back to the literature and theory, and discuss how it fits into wider patterns or debates.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, January 30). Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods. Scribbr. Retrieved 6 May 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/case-studies/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, correlational research | guide, design & examples, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples, descriptive research design | definition, methods & examples.

• Privacy Policy

Home » Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Table of Contents

A case study is a research method that involves an in-depth examination and analysis of a particular phenomenon or case, such as an individual, organization, community, event, or situation.

It is a qualitative research approach that aims to provide a detailed and comprehensive understanding of the case being studied. Case studies typically involve multiple sources of data, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts, which are analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, and grounded theory. The findings of a case study are often used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Types of Case Study

Types and Methods of Case Study are as follows:

Single-Case Study

A single-case study is an in-depth analysis of a single case. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand a specific phenomenon in detail.

For Example , A researcher might conduct a single-case study on a particular individual to understand their experiences with a particular health condition or a specific organization to explore their management practices. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a single-case study are often used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Multiple-Case Study

A multiple-case study involves the analysis of several cases that are similar in nature. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to identify similarities and differences between the cases.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a multiple-case study on several companies to explore the factors that contribute to their success or failure. The researcher collects data from each case, compares and contrasts the findings, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as comparative analysis or pattern-matching. The findings of a multiple-case study can be used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Exploratory Case Study

An exploratory case study is used to explore a new or understudied phenomenon. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to generate hypotheses or theories about the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an exploratory case study on a new technology to understand its potential impact on society. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as grounded theory or content analysis. The findings of an exploratory case study can be used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Descriptive Case Study

A descriptive case study is used to describe a particular phenomenon in detail. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to provide a comprehensive account of the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a descriptive case study on a particular community to understand its social and economic characteristics. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a descriptive case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Instrumental Case Study

An instrumental case study is used to understand a particular phenomenon that is instrumental in achieving a particular goal. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand the role of the phenomenon in achieving the goal.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an instrumental case study on a particular policy to understand its impact on achieving a particular goal, such as reducing poverty. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of an instrumental case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Case Study Data Collection Methods

Here are some common data collection methods for case studies:

Interviews involve asking questions to individuals who have knowledge or experience relevant to the case study. Interviews can be structured (where the same questions are asked to all participants) or unstructured (where the interviewer follows up on the responses with further questions). Interviews can be conducted in person, over the phone, or through video conferencing.

Observations

Observations involve watching and recording the behavior and activities of individuals or groups relevant to the case study. Observations can be participant (where the researcher actively participates in the activities) or non-participant (where the researcher observes from a distance). Observations can be recorded using notes, audio or video recordings, or photographs.

Documents can be used as a source of information for case studies. Documents can include reports, memos, emails, letters, and other written materials related to the case study. Documents can be collected from the case study participants or from public sources.

Surveys involve asking a set of questions to a sample of individuals relevant to the case study. Surveys can be administered in person, over the phone, through mail or email, or online. Surveys can be used to gather information on attitudes, opinions, or behaviors related to the case study.

Artifacts are physical objects relevant to the case study. Artifacts can include tools, equipment, products, or other objects that provide insights into the case study phenomenon.

How to conduct Case Study Research

Conducting a case study research involves several steps that need to be followed to ensure the quality and rigor of the study. Here are the steps to conduct case study research:

• Define the research questions: The first step in conducting a case study research is to define the research questions. The research questions should be specific, measurable, and relevant to the case study phenomenon under investigation.
• Select the case: The next step is to select the case or cases to be studied. The case should be relevant to the research questions and should provide rich and diverse data that can be used to answer the research questions.
• Collect data: Data can be collected using various methods, such as interviews, observations, documents, surveys, and artifacts. The data collection method should be selected based on the research questions and the nature of the case study phenomenon.
• Analyze the data: The data collected from the case study should be analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, or grounded theory. The analysis should be guided by the research questions and should aim to provide insights and conclusions relevant to the research questions.
• Draw conclusions: The conclusions drawn from the case study should be based on the data analysis and should be relevant to the research questions. The conclusions should be supported by evidence and should be clearly stated.
• Validate the findings: The findings of the case study should be validated by reviewing the data and the analysis with participants or other experts in the field. This helps to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Write the report: The final step is to write the report of the case study research. The report should provide a clear description of the case study phenomenon, the research questions, the data collection methods, the data analysis, the findings, and the conclusions. The report should be written in a clear and concise manner and should follow the guidelines for academic writing.

Examples of Case Study

Here are some examples of case study research:

• The Hawthorne Studies : Conducted between 1924 and 1932, the Hawthorne Studies were a series of case studies conducted by Elton Mayo and his colleagues to examine the impact of work environment on employee productivity. The studies were conducted at the Hawthorne Works plant of the Western Electric Company in Chicago and included interviews, observations, and experiments.
• The Stanford Prison Experiment: Conducted in 1971, the Stanford Prison Experiment was a case study conducted by Philip Zimbardo to examine the psychological effects of power and authority. The study involved simulating a prison environment and assigning participants to the role of guards or prisoners. The study was controversial due to the ethical issues it raised.
• The Challenger Disaster: The Challenger Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Space Shuttle Challenger explosion in 1986. The study included interviews, observations, and analysis of data to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.
• The Enron Scandal: The Enron Scandal was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Enron Corporation’s bankruptcy in 2001. The study included interviews, analysis of financial data, and review of documents to identify the accounting practices, corporate culture, and ethical issues that led to the company’s downfall.
• The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster : The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the nuclear accident that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan in 2011. The study included interviews, analysis of data, and review of documents to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.

Application of Case Study

Case studies have a wide range of applications across various fields and industries. Here are some examples:

Business and Management

Case studies are widely used in business and management to examine real-life situations and develop problem-solving skills. Case studies can help students and professionals to develop a deep understanding of business concepts, theories, and best practices.

Case studies are used in healthcare to examine patient care, treatment options, and outcomes. Case studies can help healthcare professionals to develop critical thinking skills, diagnose complex medical conditions, and develop effective treatment plans.

Case studies are used in education to examine teaching and learning practices. Case studies can help educators to develop effective teaching strategies, evaluate student progress, and identify areas for improvement.

Social Sciences

Case studies are widely used in social sciences to examine human behavior, social phenomena, and cultural practices. Case studies can help researchers to develop theories, test hypotheses, and gain insights into complex social issues.

Law and Ethics

Case studies are used in law and ethics to examine legal and ethical dilemmas. Case studies can help lawyers, policymakers, and ethical professionals to develop critical thinking skills, analyze complex cases, and make informed decisions.

Purpose of Case Study

The purpose of a case study is to provide a detailed analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. A case study is a qualitative research method that involves the in-depth exploration and analysis of a particular case, which can be an individual, group, organization, event, or community.

The primary purpose of a case study is to generate a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the case, including its history, context, and dynamics. Case studies can help researchers to identify and examine the underlying factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and detailed understanding of the case, which can inform future research, practice, or policy.

Case studies can also serve other purposes, including:

• Illustrating a theory or concept: Case studies can be used to illustrate and explain theoretical concepts and frameworks, providing concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Developing hypotheses: Case studies can help to generate hypotheses about the causal relationships between different factors and outcomes, which can be tested through further research.
• Providing insight into complex issues: Case studies can provide insights into complex and multifaceted issues, which may be difficult to understand through other research methods.
• Informing practice or policy: Case studies can be used to inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.

Advantages of Case Study Research

There are several advantages of case study research, including:

• In-depth exploration: Case study research allows for a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. This can provide a comprehensive understanding of the case and its dynamics, which may not be possible through other research methods.
• Rich data: Case study research can generate rich and detailed data, including qualitative data such as interviews, observations, and documents. This can provide a nuanced understanding of the case and its complexity.
• Holistic perspective: Case study research allows for a holistic perspective of the case, taking into account the various factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the case.
• Theory development: Case study research can help to develop and refine theories and concepts by providing empirical evidence and concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Practical application: Case study research can inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.
• Contextualization: Case study research takes into account the specific context in which the case is situated, which can help to understand how the case is influenced by the social, cultural, and historical factors of its environment.

Limitations of Case Study Research

There are several limitations of case study research, including:

• Limited generalizability : Case studies are typically focused on a single case or a small number of cases, which limits the generalizability of the findings. The unique characteristics of the case may not be applicable to other contexts or populations, which may limit the external validity of the research.
• Biased sampling: Case studies may rely on purposive or convenience sampling, which can introduce bias into the sample selection process. This may limit the representativeness of the sample and the generalizability of the findings.
• Subjectivity: Case studies rely on the interpretation of the researcher, which can introduce subjectivity into the analysis. The researcher’s own biases, assumptions, and perspectives may influence the findings, which may limit the objectivity of the research.
• Limited control: Case studies are typically conducted in naturalistic settings, which limits the control that the researcher has over the environment and the variables being studied. This may limit the ability to establish causal relationships between variables.
• Time-consuming: Case studies can be time-consuming to conduct, as they typically involve a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific case. This may limit the feasibility of conducting multiple case studies or conducting case studies in a timely manner.
• Resource-intensive: Case studies may require significant resources, including time, funding, and expertise. This may limit the ability of researchers to conduct case studies in resource-constrained settings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Questionnaire – Definition, Types, and Examples

Observational Research – Methods and Guide

Quantitative Research – Methods, Types and...

Qualitative Research Methods

Explanatory Research – Types, Methods, Guide

Survey Research – Types, Methods, Examples

• Open access
• Published: 27 June 2011

The case study approach

• Sarah Crowe 1 ,
• Kathrin Cresswell 2 ,
• Ann Robertson 2 ,
• Guro Huby 3 ,
• Anthony Avery 1 &
• Aziz Sheikh 2  

BMC Medical Research Methodology volume  11 , Article number:  100 ( 2011 ) Cite this article

776k Accesses

1037 Citations

37 Altmetric

Metrics details

The case study approach allows in-depth, multi-faceted explorations of complex issues in their real-life settings. The value of the case study approach is well recognised in the fields of business, law and policy, but somewhat less so in health services research. Based on our experiences of conducting several health-related case studies, we reflect on the different types of case study design, the specific research questions this approach can help answer, the data sources that tend to be used, and the particular advantages and disadvantages of employing this methodological approach. The paper concludes with key pointers to aid those designing and appraising proposals for conducting case study research, and a checklist to help readers assess the quality of case study reports.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The case study approach is particularly useful to employ when there is a need to obtain an in-depth appreciation of an issue, event or phenomenon of interest, in its natural real-life context. Our aim in writing this piece is to provide insights into when to consider employing this approach and an overview of key methodological considerations in relation to the design, planning, analysis, interpretation and reporting of case studies.

The illustrative 'grand round', 'case report' and 'case series' have a long tradition in clinical practice and research. Presenting detailed critiques, typically of one or more patients, aims to provide insights into aspects of the clinical case and, in doing so, illustrate broader lessons that may be learnt. In research, the conceptually-related case study approach can be used, for example, to describe in detail a patient's episode of care, explore professional attitudes to and experiences of a new policy initiative or service development or more generally to 'investigate contemporary phenomena within its real-life context' [ 1 ]. Based on our experiences of conducting a range of case studies, we reflect on when to consider using this approach, discuss the key steps involved and illustrate, with examples, some of the practical challenges of attaining an in-depth understanding of a 'case' as an integrated whole. In keeping with previously published work, we acknowledge the importance of theory to underpin the design, selection, conduct and interpretation of case studies[ 2 ]. In so doing, we make passing reference to the different epistemological approaches used in case study research by key theoreticians and methodologists in this field of enquiry.

This paper is structured around the following main questions: What is a case study? What are case studies used for? How are case studies conducted? What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided? We draw in particular on four of our own recently published examples of case studies (see Tables 1 , 2 , 3 and 4 ) and those of others to illustrate our discussion[ 3 – 7 ].

What is a case study?

A case study is a research approach that is used to generate an in-depth, multi-faceted understanding of a complex issue in its real-life context. It is an established research design that is used extensively in a wide variety of disciplines, particularly in the social sciences. A case study can be defined in a variety of ways (Table 5 ), the central tenet being the need to explore an event or phenomenon in depth and in its natural context. It is for this reason sometimes referred to as a "naturalistic" design; this is in contrast to an "experimental" design (such as a randomised controlled trial) in which the investigator seeks to exert control over and manipulate the variable(s) of interest.

Stake's work has been particularly influential in defining the case study approach to scientific enquiry. He has helpfully characterised three main types of case study: intrinsic , instrumental and collective [ 8 ]. An intrinsic case study is typically undertaken to learn about a unique phenomenon. The researcher should define the uniqueness of the phenomenon, which distinguishes it from all others. In contrast, the instrumental case study uses a particular case (some of which may be better than others) to gain a broader appreciation of an issue or phenomenon. The collective case study involves studying multiple cases simultaneously or sequentially in an attempt to generate a still broader appreciation of a particular issue.

These are however not necessarily mutually exclusive categories. In the first of our examples (Table 1 ), we undertook an intrinsic case study to investigate the issue of recruitment of minority ethnic people into the specific context of asthma research studies, but it developed into a instrumental case study through seeking to understand the issue of recruitment of these marginalised populations more generally, generating a number of the findings that are potentially transferable to other disease contexts[ 3 ]. In contrast, the other three examples (see Tables 2 , 3 and 4 ) employed collective case study designs to study the introduction of workforce reconfiguration in primary care, the implementation of electronic health records into hospitals, and to understand the ways in which healthcare students learn about patient safety considerations[ 4 – 6 ]. Although our study focusing on the introduction of General Practitioners with Specialist Interests (Table 2 ) was explicitly collective in design (four contrasting primary care organisations were studied), is was also instrumental in that this particular professional group was studied as an exemplar of the more general phenomenon of workforce redesign[ 4 ].

What are case studies used for?

According to Yin, case studies can be used to explain, describe or explore events or phenomena in the everyday contexts in which they occur[ 1 ]. These can, for example, help to understand and explain causal links and pathways resulting from a new policy initiative or service development (see Tables 2 and 3 , for example)[ 1 ]. In contrast to experimental designs, which seek to test a specific hypothesis through deliberately manipulating the environment (like, for example, in a randomised controlled trial giving a new drug to randomly selected individuals and then comparing outcomes with controls),[ 9 ] the case study approach lends itself well to capturing information on more explanatory ' how ', 'what' and ' why ' questions, such as ' how is the intervention being implemented and received on the ground?'. The case study approach can offer additional insights into what gaps exist in its delivery or why one implementation strategy might be chosen over another. This in turn can help develop or refine theory, as shown in our study of the teaching of patient safety in undergraduate curricula (Table 4 )[ 6 , 10 ]. Key questions to consider when selecting the most appropriate study design are whether it is desirable or indeed possible to undertake a formal experimental investigation in which individuals and/or organisations are allocated to an intervention or control arm? Or whether the wish is to obtain a more naturalistic understanding of an issue? The former is ideally studied using a controlled experimental design, whereas the latter is more appropriately studied using a case study design.

Case studies may be approached in different ways depending on the epistemological standpoint of the researcher, that is, whether they take a critical (questioning one's own and others' assumptions), interpretivist (trying to understand individual and shared social meanings) or positivist approach (orientating towards the criteria of natural sciences, such as focusing on generalisability considerations) (Table 6 ). Whilst such a schema can be conceptually helpful, it may be appropriate to draw on more than one approach in any case study, particularly in the context of conducting health services research. Doolin has, for example, noted that in the context of undertaking interpretative case studies, researchers can usefully draw on a critical, reflective perspective which seeks to take into account the wider social and political environment that has shaped the case[ 11 ].

How are case studies conducted?

Here, we focus on the main stages of research activity when planning and undertaking a case study; the crucial stages are: defining the case; selecting the case(s); collecting and analysing the data; interpreting data; and reporting the findings.

Defining the case

Carefully formulated research question(s), informed by the existing literature and a prior appreciation of the theoretical issues and setting(s), are all important in appropriately and succinctly defining the case[ 8 , 12 ]. Crucially, each case should have a pre-defined boundary which clarifies the nature and time period covered by the case study (i.e. its scope, beginning and end), the relevant social group, organisation or geographical area of interest to the investigator, the types of evidence to be collected, and the priorities for data collection and analysis (see Table 7 )[ 1 ]. A theory driven approach to defining the case may help generate knowledge that is potentially transferable to a range of clinical contexts and behaviours; using theory is also likely to result in a more informed appreciation of, for example, how and why interventions have succeeded or failed[ 13 ].

For example, in our evaluation of the introduction of electronic health records in English hospitals (Table 3 ), we defined our cases as the NHS Trusts that were receiving the new technology[ 5 ]. Our focus was on how the technology was being implemented. However, if the primary research interest had been on the social and organisational dimensions of implementation, we might have defined our case differently as a grouping of healthcare professionals (e.g. doctors and/or nurses). The precise beginning and end of the case may however prove difficult to define. Pursuing this same example, when does the process of implementation and adoption of an electronic health record system really begin or end? Such judgements will inevitably be influenced by a range of factors, including the research question, theory of interest, the scope and richness of the gathered data and the resources available to the research team.

Selecting the case(s)

The decision on how to select the case(s) to study is a very important one that merits some reflection. In an intrinsic case study, the case is selected on its own merits[ 8 ]. The case is selected not because it is representative of other cases, but because of its uniqueness, which is of genuine interest to the researchers. This was, for example, the case in our study of the recruitment of minority ethnic participants into asthma research (Table 1 ) as our earlier work had demonstrated the marginalisation of minority ethnic people with asthma, despite evidence of disproportionate asthma morbidity[ 14 , 15 ]. In another example of an intrinsic case study, Hellstrom et al.[ 16 ] studied an elderly married couple living with dementia to explore how dementia had impacted on their understanding of home, their everyday life and their relationships.

For an instrumental case study, selecting a "typical" case can work well[ 8 ]. In contrast to the intrinsic case study, the particular case which is chosen is of less importance than selecting a case that allows the researcher to investigate an issue or phenomenon. For example, in order to gain an understanding of doctors' responses to health policy initiatives, Som undertook an instrumental case study interviewing clinicians who had a range of responsibilities for clinical governance in one NHS acute hospital trust[ 17 ]. Sampling a "deviant" or "atypical" case may however prove even more informative, potentially enabling the researcher to identify causal processes, generate hypotheses and develop theory.

In collective or multiple case studies, a number of cases are carefully selected. This offers the advantage of allowing comparisons to be made across several cases and/or replication. Choosing a "typical" case may enable the findings to be generalised to theory (i.e. analytical generalisation) or to test theory by replicating the findings in a second or even a third case (i.e. replication logic)[ 1 ]. Yin suggests two or three literal replications (i.e. predicting similar results) if the theory is straightforward and five or more if the theory is more subtle. However, critics might argue that selecting 'cases' in this way is insufficiently reflexive and ill-suited to the complexities of contemporary healthcare organisations.

The selected case study site(s) should allow the research team access to the group of individuals, the organisation, the processes or whatever else constitutes the chosen unit of analysis for the study. Access is therefore a central consideration; the researcher needs to come to know the case study site(s) well and to work cooperatively with them. Selected cases need to be not only interesting but also hospitable to the inquiry [ 8 ] if they are to be informative and answer the research question(s). Case study sites may also be pre-selected for the researcher, with decisions being influenced by key stakeholders. For example, our selection of case study sites in the evaluation of the implementation and adoption of electronic health record systems (see Table 3 ) was heavily influenced by NHS Connecting for Health, the government agency that was responsible for overseeing the National Programme for Information Technology (NPfIT)[ 5 ]. This prominent stakeholder had already selected the NHS sites (through a competitive bidding process) to be early adopters of the electronic health record systems and had negotiated contracts that detailed the deployment timelines.

It is also important to consider in advance the likely burden and risks associated with participation for those who (or the site(s) which) comprise the case study. Of particular importance is the obligation for the researcher to think through the ethical implications of the study (e.g. the risk of inadvertently breaching anonymity or confidentiality) and to ensure that potential participants/participating sites are provided with sufficient information to make an informed choice about joining the study. The outcome of providing this information might be that the emotive burden associated with participation, or the organisational disruption associated with supporting the fieldwork, is considered so high that the individuals or sites decide against participation.

In our example of evaluating implementations of electronic health record systems, given the restricted number of early adopter sites available to us, we sought purposively to select a diverse range of implementation cases among those that were available[ 5 ]. We chose a mixture of teaching, non-teaching and Foundation Trust hospitals, and examples of each of the three electronic health record systems procured centrally by the NPfIT. At one recruited site, it quickly became apparent that access was problematic because of competing demands on that organisation. Recognising the importance of full access and co-operative working for generating rich data, the research team decided not to pursue work at that site and instead to focus on other recruited sites.

Collecting the data

In order to develop a thorough understanding of the case, the case study approach usually involves the collection of multiple sources of evidence, using a range of quantitative (e.g. questionnaires, audits and analysis of routinely collected healthcare data) and more commonly qualitative techniques (e.g. interviews, focus groups and observations). The use of multiple sources of data (data triangulation) has been advocated as a way of increasing the internal validity of a study (i.e. the extent to which the method is appropriate to answer the research question)[ 8 , 18 – 21 ]. An underlying assumption is that data collected in different ways should lead to similar conclusions, and approaching the same issue from different angles can help develop a holistic picture of the phenomenon (Table 2 )[ 4 ].

Brazier and colleagues used a mixed-methods case study approach to investigate the impact of a cancer care programme[ 22 ]. Here, quantitative measures were collected with questionnaires before, and five months after, the start of the intervention which did not yield any statistically significant results. Qualitative interviews with patients however helped provide an insight into potentially beneficial process-related aspects of the programme, such as greater, perceived patient involvement in care. The authors reported how this case study approach provided a number of contextual factors likely to influence the effectiveness of the intervention and which were not likely to have been obtained from quantitative methods alone.

In collective or multiple case studies, data collection needs to be flexible enough to allow a detailed description of each individual case to be developed (e.g. the nature of different cancer care programmes), before considering the emerging similarities and differences in cross-case comparisons (e.g. to explore why one programme is more effective than another). It is important that data sources from different cases are, where possible, broadly comparable for this purpose even though they may vary in nature and depth.

Analysing, interpreting and reporting case studies

Making sense and offering a coherent interpretation of the typically disparate sources of data (whether qualitative alone or together with quantitative) is far from straightforward. Repeated reviewing and sorting of the voluminous and detail-rich data are integral to the process of analysis. In collective case studies, it is helpful to analyse data relating to the individual component cases first, before making comparisons across cases. Attention needs to be paid to variations within each case and, where relevant, the relationship between different causes, effects and outcomes[ 23 ]. Data will need to be organised and coded to allow the key issues, both derived from the literature and emerging from the dataset, to be easily retrieved at a later stage. An initial coding frame can help capture these issues and can be applied systematically to the whole dataset with the aid of a qualitative data analysis software package.

The Framework approach is a practical approach, comprising of five stages (familiarisation; identifying a thematic framework; indexing; charting; mapping and interpretation) , to managing and analysing large datasets particularly if time is limited, as was the case in our study of recruitment of South Asians into asthma research (Table 1 )[ 3 , 24 ]. Theoretical frameworks may also play an important role in integrating different sources of data and examining emerging themes. For example, we drew on a socio-technical framework to help explain the connections between different elements - technology; people; and the organisational settings within which they worked - in our study of the introduction of electronic health record systems (Table 3 )[ 5 ]. Our study of patient safety in undergraduate curricula drew on an evaluation-based approach to design and analysis, which emphasised the importance of the academic, organisational and practice contexts through which students learn (Table 4 )[ 6 ].

Case study findings can have implications both for theory development and theory testing. They may establish, strengthen or weaken historical explanations of a case and, in certain circumstances, allow theoretical (as opposed to statistical) generalisation beyond the particular cases studied[ 12 ]. These theoretical lenses should not, however, constitute a strait-jacket and the cases should not be "forced to fit" the particular theoretical framework that is being employed.

When reporting findings, it is important to provide the reader with enough contextual information to understand the processes that were followed and how the conclusions were reached. In a collective case study, researchers may choose to present the findings from individual cases separately before amalgamating across cases. Care must be taken to ensure the anonymity of both case sites and individual participants (if agreed in advance) by allocating appropriate codes or withholding descriptors. In the example given in Table 3 , we decided against providing detailed information on the NHS sites and individual participants in order to avoid the risk of inadvertent disclosure of identities[ 5 , 25 ].

What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided?

The case study approach is, as with all research, not without its limitations. When investigating the formal and informal ways undergraduate students learn about patient safety (Table 4 ), for example, we rapidly accumulated a large quantity of data. The volume of data, together with the time restrictions in place, impacted on the depth of analysis that was possible within the available resources. This highlights a more general point of the importance of avoiding the temptation to collect as much data as possible; adequate time also needs to be set aside for data analysis and interpretation of what are often highly complex datasets.

Case study research has sometimes been criticised for lacking scientific rigour and providing little basis for generalisation (i.e. producing findings that may be transferable to other settings)[ 1 ]. There are several ways to address these concerns, including: the use of theoretical sampling (i.e. drawing on a particular conceptual framework); respondent validation (i.e. participants checking emerging findings and the researcher's interpretation, and providing an opinion as to whether they feel these are accurate); and transparency throughout the research process (see Table 8 )[ 8 , 18 – 21 , 23 , 26 ]. Transparency can be achieved by describing in detail the steps involved in case selection, data collection, the reasons for the particular methods chosen, and the researcher's background and level of involvement (i.e. being explicit about how the researcher has influenced data collection and interpretation). Seeking potential, alternative explanations, and being explicit about how interpretations and conclusions were reached, help readers to judge the trustworthiness of the case study report. Stake provides a critique checklist for a case study report (Table 9 )[ 8 ].

Conclusions

The case study approach allows, amongst other things, critical events, interventions, policy developments and programme-based service reforms to be studied in detail in a real-life context. It should therefore be considered when an experimental design is either inappropriate to answer the research questions posed or impossible to undertake. Considering the frequency with which implementations of innovations are now taking place in healthcare settings and how well the case study approach lends itself to in-depth, complex health service research, we believe this approach should be more widely considered by researchers. Though inherently challenging, the research case study can, if carefully conceptualised and thoughtfully undertaken and reported, yield powerful insights into many important aspects of health and healthcare delivery.

Yin RK: Case study research, design and method. 2009, London: Sage Publications Ltd., 4

Google Scholar  

Keen J, Packwood T: Qualitative research; case study evaluation. BMJ. 1995, 311: 444-446.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Sheikh A, Halani L, Bhopal R, Netuveli G, Partridge M, Car J, et al: Facilitating the Recruitment of Minority Ethnic People into Research: Qualitative Case Study of South Asians and Asthma. PLoS Med. 2009, 6 (10): 1-11.

Article   Google Scholar  

Pinnock H, Huby G, Powell A, Kielmann T, Price D, Williams S, et al: The process of planning, development and implementation of a General Practitioner with a Special Interest service in Primary Care Organisations in England and Wales: a comparative prospective case study. Report for the National Co-ordinating Centre for NHS Service Delivery and Organisation R&D (NCCSDO). 2008, [ http://www.sdo.nihr.ac.uk/files/project/99-final-report.pdf ]

Robertson A, Cresswell K, Takian A, Petrakaki D, Crowe S, Cornford T, et al: Prospective evaluation of the implementation and adoption of NHS Connecting for Health's national electronic health record in secondary care in England: interim findings. BMJ. 2010, 41: c4564-

Pearson P, Steven A, Howe A, Sheikh A, Ashcroft D, Smith P, the Patient Safety Education Study Group: Learning about patient safety: organisational context and culture in the education of healthcare professionals. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2010, 15: 4-10. 10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009052.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

van Harten WH, Casparie TF, Fisscher OA: The evaluation of the introduction of a quality management system: a process-oriented case study in a large rehabilitation hospital. Health Policy. 2002, 60 (1): 17-37. 10.1016/S0168-8510(01)00187-7.

Stake RE: The art of case study research. 1995, London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Sheikh A, Smeeth L, Ashcroft R: Randomised controlled trials in primary care: scope and application. Br J Gen Pract. 2002, 52 (482): 746-51.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

King G, Keohane R, Verba S: Designing Social Inquiry. 1996, Princeton: Princeton University Press

Doolin B: Information technology as disciplinary technology: being critical in interpretative research on information systems. Journal of Information Technology. 1998, 13: 301-311. 10.1057/jit.1998.8.

George AL, Bennett A: Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. 2005, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Eccles M, the Improved Clinical Effectiveness through Behavioural Research Group (ICEBeRG): Designing theoretically-informed implementation interventions. Implementation Science. 2006, 1: 1-8. 10.1186/1748-5908-1-1.

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Netuveli G, Hurwitz B, Levy M, Fletcher M, Barnes G, Durham SR, Sheikh A: Ethnic variations in UK asthma frequency, morbidity, and health-service use: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2005, 365 (9456): 312-7.

Sheikh A, Panesar SS, Lasserson T, Netuveli G: Recruitment of ethnic minorities to asthma studies. Thorax. 2004, 59 (7): 634-

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hellström I, Nolan M, Lundh U: 'We do things together': A case study of 'couplehood' in dementia. Dementia. 2005, 4: 7-22. 10.1177/1471301205049188.

Som CV: Nothing seems to have changed, nothing seems to be changing and perhaps nothing will change in the NHS: doctors' response to clinical governance. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2005, 18: 463-477. 10.1108/09513550510608903.

Lincoln Y, Guba E: Naturalistic inquiry. 1985, Newbury Park: Sage Publications

Barbour RS: Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?. BMJ. 2001, 322: 1115-1117. 10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115.

Mays N, Pope C: Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ. 2000, 320: 50-52. 10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50.

Mason J: Qualitative researching. 2002, London: Sage

Brazier A, Cooke K, Moravan V: Using Mixed Methods for Evaluating an Integrative Approach to Cancer Care: A Case Study. Integr Cancer Ther. 2008, 7: 5-17. 10.1177/1534735407313395.

Miles MB, Huberman M: Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. 1994, CA: Sage Publications Inc., 2

Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N: Analysing qualitative data. Qualitative research in health care. BMJ. 2000, 320: 114-116. 10.1136/bmj.320.7227.114.

Cresswell KM, Worth A, Sheikh A: Actor-Network Theory and its role in understanding the implementation of information technology developments in healthcare. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010, 10 (1): 67-10.1186/1472-6947-10-67.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Malterud K: Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001, 358: 483-488. 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05627-6.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Yin R: Case study research: design and methods. 1994, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing, 2

Yin R: Enhancing the quality of case studies in health services research. Health Serv Res. 1999, 34: 1209-1224.

Green J, Thorogood N: Qualitative methods for health research. 2009, Los Angeles: Sage, 2

Howcroft D, Trauth E: Handbook of Critical Information Systems Research, Theory and Application. 2005, Cheltenham, UK: Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar

Book   Google Scholar  

Blakie N: Approaches to Social Enquiry. 1993, Cambridge: Polity Press

Doolin B: Power and resistance in the implementation of a medical management information system. Info Systems J. 2004, 14: 343-362. 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2004.00176.x.

Bloomfield BP, Best A: Management consultants: systems development, power and the translation of problems. Sociological Review. 1992, 40: 533-560.

Shanks G, Parr A: Positivist, single case study research in information systems: A critical analysis. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems. 2003, Naples

Pre-publication history

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/11/100/prepub

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the participants and colleagues who contributed to the individual case studies that we have drawn on. This work received no direct funding, but it has been informed by projects funded by Asthma UK, the NHS Service Delivery Organisation, NHS Connecting for Health Evaluation Programme, and Patient Safety Research Portfolio. We would also like to thank the expert reviewers for their insightful and constructive feedback. Our thanks are also due to Dr. Allison Worth who commented on an earlier draft of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Division of Primary Care, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

Sarah Crowe & Anthony Avery

Centre for Population Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

Kathrin Cresswell, Ann Robertson & Aziz Sheikh

School of Health in Social Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah Crowe .

Additional information

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

AS conceived this article. SC, KC and AR wrote this paper with GH, AA and AS all commenting on various drafts. SC and AS are guarantors.

Rights and permissions

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A. et al. The case study approach. BMC Med Res Methodol 11 , 100 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Download citation

Received : 29 November 2010

Accepted : 27 June 2011

Published : 27 June 2011

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Case Study Approach
• Electronic Health Record System
• Case Study Design
• Case Study Site
• Case Study Report

BMC Medical Research Methodology

ISSN: 1471-2288

• General enquiries: [email protected]

All about higher education & research

Marked Similarities and Key Differences between Case Study and Phenomenological Research Design

Case study and phenomenological research design share commonalities as qualitative research methods. Both approaches seek to provide in-depth insights into the complexities of human experiences and phenomena. They emphasize a qualitative nature, prioritizing rich, detailed exploration through methods like interviews, observations, and document analysis. Additionally, both approaches acknowledge the importance of context in understanding the subject matter and often involve flexible research designs that adapt to evolving insights. Moreover, they share a participant-centered focus, valuing the perspectives and experiences of those involved. In terms of analysis, both methodologies often employ inductive approaches, deriving themes and patterns from the collected data rather than imposing pre-existing theories.

Despite these similarities, key distinctions exist between case study and phenomenological research design. The primary focus of case studies is on a specific instance or bounded system, aiming for a holistic understanding within its real-life context. In contrast, phenomenological research design centers on uncovering the essence of lived experiences, exploring how individuals interpret and make sense of their encounters. The unit of analysis differs, with case studies examining a case itself (individual, group, organization), while phenomenological research focuses on the lived experiences of individuals.

Generalization is not the primary goal for either, but case studies may contribute to theory development, whereas phenomenological research is more inclined towards describing experiences rather than theory building. The role of the researcher also varies, with case study researchers often actively engaging with the case, while phenomenological researchers adopt a more neutral stance, bracketing preconceptions to facilitate a direct exploration of participants’ experiences.

These differences underscore the importance of choosing the most appropriate approach based on the specific research objectives and questions at hand. In this blog post, we highlight some of the noticeable similarities and stark differences between case study and phenomenological research design. But first of all, let us discuss the similarities between the two research designs.

Similarities between Case Study and Phenomenological Research Design

  While case study and phenomenological research design have distinct characteristics, there are some very profound similarities between the two qualitative research approaches:

• Qualitative nature:
• Both case study and phenomenological research are qualitative research designs. They aim to explore and understand the complexities of human experiences and phenomena in depth.
• In-depth exploration:
• Both methods involve an in-depth exploration of the subject matter. Whether it’s a specific case or the lived experiences of individuals, researchers using these approaches seek to uncover rich, detailed information.
• Emphasis on context:
• Both approaches acknowledge the importance of context in understanding the phenomenon under investigation. Case studies often examine a case within its real-life context, while phenomenological research explores the subjective experiences within the context in which they occur.
• Flexible research design:
• Both case study and phenomenological research design allow for flexibility in their research design. Researchers have the freedom to adapt their methods and data collection techniques based on the evolving understanding of the phenomenon.
• Holistic approach:
• Both approaches often take a holistic perspective. Case studies aim to provide a comprehensive understanding of the entire case, considering various aspects and relationships. Phenomenological research seeks to capture the essence of the lived experience as a whole.
• Use of qualitative data collection methods:
• Both methodologies typically rely on qualitative data collection methods, such as interviews, observations, and document analysis. These methods allow researchers to gather rich, detailed information directly from participants.
• Participant-centered:
• Both approaches prioritize the experiences and perspectives of participants. Whether studying a case or exploring lived experiences, the goal is to capture the participant’s viewpoint and make sense of their unique context.
• Inductive analysis:
• Both case study and phenomenological research often involve inductive analysis. Researchers aim to derive themes, patterns, and insights from the data rather than imposing pre-existing theories or frameworks.
• Rich descriptions:
• Both methodologies value the production of rich, detailed descriptions. Whether describing the intricacies of a case or the nuances of individual experiences, researchers aim to provide a thorough account of the subject of study.
• Subjectivity of Researcher:
• Both methods recognize the subjectivity of the researcher and the influence they may have on the research process. Researchers in both case study and phenomenological research design often engage in reflexivity to acknowledge and address their own biases.

While these similarities exist, it’s essential to recognize the differences as well, as they shape the specific goals, methods, and outcomes of each approach. Researchers should carefully consider their research questions and objectives when choosing between case study and phenomenological research design. In the next section of the write-up, we discuss key differences between case study and phenomenological research design

Key differences between Case Study and Phenomenological Research Design

Case study and phenomenological research design are two distinct qualitative research approaches, each with its own set of characteristics and purposes. Here are the key differences between them:

• Focus and purpose:
• Focuses on a particular instance or a bounded system (the “case”).
• Aims to provide an in-depth understanding of a specific phenomenon, often within its real-life context.
• Emphasizes a holistic approach to exploring the complexities of a case.
• Focuses on understanding and describing the essence of lived experiences.
• Aims to explore how individuals make sense of and interpret their experiences.
• Emphasizes the subjective nature of the phenomenon under investigation.
• Nature of data:
• Involves a rich and detailed description of the case, including various sources of data such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts.
• Seeks to capture the complexity and uniqueness of the case.
• Involves gathering in-depth descriptions of participants’ experiences through methods like interviews and sometimes participant observations.
• Focuses on the meanings individuals attribute to their experiences.
• Unit of analysis:
• The unit of analysis is the case itself, which could be an individual, a group, an organization, or a community.
• The unit of analysis is the lived experience of individuals who have directly encountered the phenomenon being studied.
• Generalization:
• Generalization is typically not the primary goal; instead, the emphasis is on providing detailed insights into a specific case.
• Generalization is often not the main objective, as phenomenological research aims to explore the depth and richness of individual experiences rather than making broad generalizations.
• Analysis approach:
• Analysis often involves pattern recognition, exploring relationships between different elements within the case, and deriving meaningful insights.
• Analysis is focused on identifying and describing the essential themes and structures that characterize the lived experiences of participants.
• Theory development:
• May contribute to theory development, especially when patterns and relationships observed in the case have broader implications. However, it is not the sole and prime aim of the research endeavour
• Emphasizes the description of experiences rather than theory development. However, findings can inform or contribute to existing theories.
• Role of Researcher:
• The researcher often plays an active role, engaging with the case and collecting multiple forms of data.
• The researcher aims for a more neutral stance, trying to bracket their preconceptions to allow for a more direct exploration of participants’ experiences.

Conclusion:

In summary, while both case study and phenomenological research are qualitative approaches that delve into the richness of human experiences, they differ in their focus, purpose, unit of analysis, and the nature of data they collect and analyze. The choice between the two depends on the research question, objectives, and the nature of the phenomenon under investigation.

Dr Syed Hafeez Ahmad

You Might Also Like

03 Useful examples of data analysis in grounded theory research design

Choosing the Right Research Philosophy for Grounded Theory Research Design

10 important points the evaluators should consider while evaluating PhD Research Proposals.

How to select a fascinating research topic?

Plagiarism: How the smart cheaters beat the technology?

Learning from a sample PhD Research Proposal: A step by step guide.

What do you think cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

No Comments Yet.

Recent Posts

Lost islamic history: reclaiming muslim civilization from the past, philanthropy in higher education in pakistan: learning to donate, how to overcome inordinate delays in recruitment and selection in universities in pakistan, appointment of new vice chancellors: demands urgent attention of the government in pakistan.

• How the graduates, medical professionals and healthcare system in Pakistan shall be benefited from PM&DC accreditation by the WFME?

Recent Comments

• February 2024
• January 2024
• December 2023
• November 2023
• October 2023
• September 2021
• November 2020
• September 2020
• August 2020
• February 2020
• January 2020
• December 2019
• November 2019
• October 2019
• September 2019
• August 2019
• January 2019
• December 2018
• November 2018
• October 2018
• September 2018
• August 2018
• Academic Integrity
• Academic Leadership
• Book Review
• Critical Thinking
• Data Analysis
• Enterprising skillset
• Ethnography
• Grounded Theory
• Historical Research
• Innovations
• Leadership Theories
• Medical Education
• Personalities
• Phenomenology
• Public Policy
• Public Sector
• Research Proposal
• Universities Governance
• University-Industry Collaboration
• Work from Home

About Author

Hi, my name is Dr. Hafeez

I am a research blogger, YouTuber and content writer. This blog is aimed at sharing my knowledge, experience and insight with the academics, research scholars and policy makers about universities' governance and changing dynamics of higher education landscape in Pakistan.

Historical Research Design: A step-by-step guide on how to develop it?

Home » Education » Difference Between Case Study and Phenomenology

Difference Between Case Study and Phenomenology

Main difference – case study vs phenomenology.

Case study and phenomenology are two terms that are often used in the field of social science s and research. Both these terms refer to types of research methods ; however, phenomenology is also a concept in philosophical studies. As a research methodology, the main difference between case study and phenomenology is that case study is an in-depth and detailed investigation of the development of a single event, situation, or an individual over a period of time whereas phenomenology is a study that is designed to understand the subjective, lived experiences and perspectives of participants.

In this article, we will be discussing,

     1. What is a Case Study           – Definition, Use, Data Collection, Limitations      2. What is Phenomenology           – Definition, Use, Data Collection, Limitations      3. What is the difference between Case Study and Phenomenology

What is a Case Study

A case study is defined as “an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context; when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident; and in which multiple sources of evidence are used” (Yin,1984).  In simple terms, it is an in-depth and detailed investigation of the development of a single event, situation, or an individual over a period of time. Case studies are often used to explore and unearth complex issues such as social issues, medical conditions, etc. Many researchers use case study method to explore social issues like prostitution, drug addiction, unemployment, and poverty. Case studies can be qualitative and/or quantitative in nature.

A case study commences with identifying and defining the research problem; then the researcher has to select the cases and decide techniques for data collection and analysis. This is followed by collecting data in the field and evaluating and analyzing the data. The final step in a case study involves preparing the research report.  Data collection methods in a case study involve observations, questionnaires, interviews, analysis of recorded data, etc. A successful case study is always context-sensitive, holistic, systematic, layered and comprehensive.

Case studies are sometimes classified into three categories known as exploratory, descriptive and explanatory case studies. Ethnographies are also considered as a type of case studies.

Although case studies offer detailed and in-depth information about a particular phenomenon, it is difficult to use this information to form generalization since they only focus on a single phenomenon.

Figure 1: Questionnaires can be used to collect data for case studies.

What is Phenomenology

Phenomenology is both a philosophy and a research method. As a philosophical study, phenomenology refers to the study of the structures of experience and consciousness. In the field of research, it refers to a study that is designed to understand the subjective, lived experiences and perspectives of participants. Phenomenology is based on the principle that a single experience can be interpreted in multiple ways and that reality consists of each participant’s interpretation of the said experience. Thus, phenomenology provides information about unique individual experiences, offering a rich and complete description of human experiences and meanings.

Data is collected in phenomenology through long and intensive, semi-structured or unstructured personal interviews. The researcher may also have to conduct several interview sessions with each participant since phenomenology relies heavily on interviews. However, the information gathered through these interviews may also depend on the interviewing skills of the researcher and the articulate skills of the participants. This is a limitation of this method.

Figure 2: Phenomenology often involves long personal interviews.

Case Study: Case study is an in-depth and detailed investigation of the development of a single event, situation, or an individual over a period of time.

Phenomenology: Phenomenology is a study that is designed to understand the subjective, lived experiences and perspectives of participants.

Data Collection

Case Study: Data collection methods include observations, interviews, questionnaires, etc.

Phenomenology: Interviews are the main method of data collection.

Case Study: Case studies focus on a single incident, event, organization, or an individual.

Phenomenology: Phenomenology focus on various individuals and their experiences.

Limitations

Case Study: The information obtained from a case study cannot be used to make generalizations.

Phenomenology: Information relies heavily on the interviewing skills of the researcher and the articulate skills of the participants.

Reference: 1. Yin, Robert. “Case study research. Beverly Hills.” (1984).

Image Courtesy: 1. “5 Candidates reading a questionnaire Photo Tony Ntumba MONUSCO” by MONUSCO Photos (CC BY-SA 2.0) via Flickr 2. “1702648” (Public Domain) via Pixabay

About the Author: Hasa

Hasanthi is a seasoned content writer and editor with over 8 years of experience. Armed with a BA degree in English and a knack for digital marketing, she explores her passions for literature, history, culture, and food through her engaging and informative writing.

​You May Also Like These

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Man or bear? Hypothetical question sparks conversation about women's safety

Women explain why they would feel safer encountering a bear in the forest than a man they didn't know. the hypothetical has sparked a broader discussion about why women fear men..

If you were alone in the woods, would you rather encounter a bear or a man? Answers to that hypothetical question have sparked a debate about why the vast majority say they would feel more comfortable choosing a bear.

The topic has been hotly discussed for weeks as men and women chimed in with their thoughts all over social media.

Screenshot HQ , a TikTok account, started the conversation, asking a group of women whether they would rather run into a man they didn't know or a bear in the forest. Out of the seven women interviewed for the piece, only one picked a man.

"Bear. Man is scary," one of the women responds.

A number of women echoed the responses given in the original video, writing in the comments that they, too, would pick a bear over a man. The hypothetical has people split, with some expressing their sadness over the state of the world and others cracking jokes. Some men were flabbergasted.

Here's what we know.

A bear is the safer choice, no doubt about it, many say

There were a lot of responses, more than 65,000, under the original post. Many wrote that they understood why the women would choose a bear.

"No one’s gonna ask me if I led the bear on or give me a pamphlet on bear attack prevention tips," @celestiallystunning wrote.

@Brennduhh wrote: "When I die leave my body in the woods, the wolves will be gentler than any man."

"I know a bear's intentions," another woman wrote. "I don't know a man's intentions. no matter how nice they are."

Other TikTok users took it one step further, posing the hypothetical question to loved ones. Meredith Steele, who goes by @babiesofsteele , asked her husband last week whether he would rather have their daughter encounter a bear or a man in the woods. Her husband said he "didn't like either option" but said he was leaning toward the bear.

"Maybe it's a friendly bear," he says.

Diana, another TikTok user , asked her sister-in-law what she would choose and was left speechless.

"I asked her the question, you know, just for giggles. She was like, 'You know, I would rather it be a bear because if the bear attacks me, and I make it out of the woods, everybody’s gonna believe me and have sympathy for me," she said. "But if a man attacks me and I make it out, I’m gonna spend my whole life trying to get people to believe me and have sympathy for me.'"

Bear vs. man debate stirs the pot, woman and some men at odds

The hypothetical has caused some tension, with some women arguing that men will never truly understand what it's like to be a woman or the inherent dangers at play.

Social media users answered this question for themselves, producing memes, spoken word poetry and skits in the days and weeks since.

So, what would you choose?

Advertisement

Evaluating the Impact of Agricultural Product Geographical Indication Program on Rural Income: A Case Study of the Yangtze River Delta Region in China

• Published: 29 April 2024

Cite this article

• Hongkai Qie 1 ,
• Hui Chen 1 ,
• Yong Lu 1 ,
• Xiaoyu Zhao 1 &
• Zhiwei Wang   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1615-1220 1 , 2  

32 Accesses

Explore all metrics

In the pursuit of high-quality agricultural development and rural vitalization, China has embarked on an ambitious journey with its Agricultural Product Geographical Indication Program. This research paper delves into the multifaceted effects of this policy initiative, focusing on the dynamic Yangtze River Delta region. The study employs a robust difference-in-differences (DID) model to analyze the policy’s net impact on rural residents’ income within Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Anhui Provinces from 2017 to 2020. Our findings reveal that the program implementation has yielded tangible benefits, significantly increasing rural residents’ per capita disposable income in these provinces. This positive outcome can be attributed to the program’s funding allocation, accelerating agricultural infrastructure development, enhancing product productivity and quality control. Consequently, this amplifies the market premium effect, contributing substantially to income growth. However, the research also underscores the importance of considering regional heterogeneity. While Jiangsu and Zhejiang Provinces have experienced significant gains, Anhui Province lags due to varying resource endowments and development stages. Moreover, the time-lagged effect of policy implementation plays a role in these disparities. Based on these insights, we propose a set of policy recommendations. First, continued implementation of the Agricultural Product Geographical Indication Program should be prioritized, focusing on enhanced funding management and multi-party participation. Second, harnessing regional cooperation and resource sharing is vital for optimizing policy outcomes. Finally, the establishment of a comprehensive risk prevention and control mechanism is crucial for the industry’s resilience in the face of unforeseen challenges. This research provides empirical evidence of the program’s economic benefits and valuable policy implications for China’s journey towards high-quality agricultural development and rural prosperity, aligning with the overarching goals of innovation, entrepreneurship, and societal progress.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

The CAP 2013 reform of direct payments: redistributive effects and impacts on farm income concentration in Italy

Can China’s Transferable Development Rights Programme (The Link Policy) Increase Farmers’ Income? Evidence from the Land Coupon Programme in Chongqing

Rural financial development and achieving an agricultural carbon emissions peak: an empirical analysis of Henan Province, China

Data availability.

The data can be obtained according to the requirements.

Since most parts of Shanghai are metropolitan, villages only take up a very small percentage. (Even though rural areas take up a large percentage in Qingpu District and Congming District, these districts are not comparable with counties in Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Anhui.) Thereby, to ensure the quality of data, we choose some cities from Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Anhui in the Yangtze River Delta city cluster as research objects.

Huoshan News Network, Huoshan Mengya Geographical Indication Protection Program is Taking Effect, Retrieved from http://www.huoshannews.com/system/2021/07/22/011885793.shtml on July 22, 2021, and March 30, 2022.

Ullah, Subhan; Zaefarian, Ghasem; Ullah, Farid. How to use instrumental variables in addressing endogeneity? A step-by-step procedure for non-specialists[J]. Industrial Marketing Management. 2021.

In 2016, the National Development and Reform Commission issued Development Planning for Yangtze River Delta City Cluster as a major guidance for the integrated development of the Yangtze River Delta city cluster.

Addor, F., & Grazioli, A. (2002). Geographical Indications beyond Wines and Spirits - A Roadmap for a Better Protection for Geographical Indications in the WTO TRIPS Agreement., 5 , 865–897.

Google Scholar  

Bardaji, I., Iraizoz, B., & Rapun, M. (2009). Protected geographical indications and integration into the agribusiness system [with respect to the beef supply chain]. Agribusiness, 25 (2), 198–214. https://doi.org/10.1002/agr.20198

Article   Google Scholar  

Barham, E. (2003). Translating terroir: The global challenge of French AOC labeling. Journal of Rural Studies, 19 (1), 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(02)00052-9

Barjolle, D., Quiñones-Ruiz, X. F., Bagal, M., & Comoé, H. (2017). The role of the state for geographical indications of coffee: Case studies from Colombia and Kenya. World Development, 98 , 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.12.006

Belletti, G., Marescotti, A., Sanz-Canada, J., & Vakoufaris, H. (2015). Linking protection of geographical indications to the environment: Evidence from the European Union olive-oil sector. Land Use Policy, 48 , 94–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.05.003

Belletti, G., Marescotti, A., & Touzard, J. (2017). Geographical indications, public goods, and sustainable development: The roles of actors’ strategies and public policies. World Development, 98 , 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.05.004

Berard, L., & Marchenay, P. (2006). Local products and geographical indications: Taking account of local knowledge and biodiversity. International Social Science Journal, 58 (187), 109–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2451.2006.00592.x

Bertrand, M., Duflo, E., & Mullainathan, S. (2004). How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119 (1), 249–275. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25098683

Biénabe, E., & Marie-Vivien, D. (2017). Institutionalizing geographical indications in southern countries: Lessons learned from Basmati and Rooibos. World Development, 98 , 58–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.04.004

Blakeney, M. (2017). Geographical indications and environmental protection. Frontiers of Law in China, 12 (2), 162–173. https://doi.org/10.3868/s050-006-017-0011-9

Boland, B. (2020). Social capital and the diffusion of learning management systems: A case study. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 9 (1), 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-020-00139-z

Boncinelli, F., Contini, C., Romano, C., Scozzafava, G., & Casini, L. (2017). Territory, environment, and healthiness in traditional food choices: Insights into consumer heterogeneity. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 20 (1), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.22434/IFAMR2015.0177

Bowen, S. (2010). Embedding local places in global spaces: Geographical Indications as a territorial development strategy. Rural Sociology, 75 (2), 209–243. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.2009.00007.x

Bowen, S., & Zapata, A. V. (2009). Geographical indications, terroir, and socioeconomic and ecological sustainability: The case of tequila. Journal of Rural Studies, 25 (1), 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2008.07.003

Cei, L., Stefani, G., Defrancesco, E., & Lombardi, G. V. (2018). Geographical indications: A first assessment of the impact on rural development in Italian NUTS3 regions. Land Use Policy, 75 , 620–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.01.023

Dentoni, D., Menozzi, D., & Capelli, M. G. (2012). Group heterogeneity and cooperation on the geographical indication regulation: The case of the ‘Prosciutto di Parma’ Consortium. Food Policy, 37 (3), 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.02.003

Deselnicu, O. C., Costanigro, M., Souza-Monteiro, D. M., & McFadden, D. T. (2013). A meta-analysis of geographical indication food valuation studies: What drives the premium for origin-based labels? Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 38 (2), 204–219.

Desquilbet, M., & Monier-Dilhan, S. (2015). Are geographical indications a worthy quality label? A framework with endogenous quality choice. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 42 (1), 129–150. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbu008

Domi, S., & Belletti, G. (2022). The role of origin products and networking on agritourism performance: The case of Tuscany. Journal of Rural Studies, 90 , 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.01.013

Egelyng, H., Bosselmann, A. S., Warui, M., Maina, F., Mburu, J., & Gyau, A. (2017). Origin products from African forests: A Kenyan pathway to prosperity and green inclusive growth? Forest Policy and Economics, 84 , 38–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.09.001

Fracarolli, G. S. (2021). Mapping online geographical indication: Agri-food markets on e-retail shelves. Agronomy-Basel, 11 . https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11122385

Ibele, E. (2009). The nature and function of geographical indications in law. Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, 10 (1), 36–49.

Irshad, R., & Mehr-un-Nisa, G. N. (2023). Infrastructure and economic growth: Evidence from lower middle-income countries. Journal of the Knowldege Economy., 14 (1), 161–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00855-1

Jean-Marc, C. (2006). Quality labels and rural development: A new economic geography approach. Cahiers D’economie Et Sociologie Rurales, 78 , 31–51.

Jena, P. R., & Grote, U. (2012). Impact evaluation of traditional Basmati rice cultivation in Uttarakhand State of Northern India: What implications does it hold for geographical indications?[J]. World Development, 40 (9), 1895–1907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.04.004

Jena, P. R., Ngokkuen, C., Rahut, D. B., & Grote, U. (2015). Geographical indication protection and rural livelihoods: Insights from India and Thailand. Asian-Pacific Economic Literature, 29 (1), 174–185. https://doi.org/10.1111/apel.12092

Lence, S. H., Marette, S., Hayes, D. J., & Foster, W. (2007). Collective marketing arrangements for geographically differentiated agricultural products: Welfare impacts and policy implications. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 89 (4), 947–963. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8276.2007.01036.x

Likudis, Z., Costarelli, V., & Vitoratos, A. (2014). Determination of pesticide residues in olive oils with protected geographical indication or designation of origin. International Journal of Food Science & Technology, 49 (2), 484–492. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.12326

Lopez-Bayon, S., Fernandez-Barcala, M., & Gonzalez-Diaz, M. (2020). In search of agri-food quality for wine: Is it enough to join a geographical indication? Agribusiness, 36 (4), 568–590. https://doi.org/10.1002/agr.21665

Marie-Vivien, D., & Biénabe, E. (2017). The multifaceted role of the state in the protection of geographical indications: A worldwide review. World Development, 98 , 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.04.035

Menapace, L., Colson, G., Grebitus, C., & Facendola, M. (2011). Consumers’ preferences for geographical origin labels: Evidence from the Canadian olive oil market. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 38 (2), 193–212. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbq051

Menapace, L., & Moschini, G. (2012). Quality certification by geographical indications, trademarks and firm reputation. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 39 (4), 539–566. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbr053

Neilson, J., Wright, J., & Aldimawati, L. (2018). Geographical indications and value capture in the Indonesia coffee sector. Journal of Rural Studies, 59 , 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.01.003

Nizam, D., & Tatari, M. F. (2022). Rural revitalization through territorial distinctiveness: The use of geographical indications in Turkey. Journal of Rural Studies, 93 , 144–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.07.002

Penker, M., Scaramuzzi, S., Edelmann, H., Belletti, G., Marescotti, A., Casabianca, F., & Quiñones-Ruiz, X. F. (2022). Polycentric structures nurturing adaptive food quality governance - Lessons learned from geographical indications in the European Union. Journal of Rural Studies, 89 , 208–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.11.023

Sepúlveda, W. S., Maza, M. T., Pardos, L., Fantova, E., & Mantecón, Á. R. (2010). Farmers’ attitudes towards lamb meat production under a Protected Geographical Indication. Small Ruminant Research, 94 (1–3), 90–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2010.07.005

Sgroi, F. (2021). Territorial development models: A new strategic vision to analyze the relationship between the environment, public goods and geographical indications. Science of the Total Environment, 787 (147585). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147585

Staten, T. L. (2005). Geographical indications protection under the TRIPS Agreement: Uniformity not extension. Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 87 , 6–11.

Suh, J., & MacPherson, A. (2007). The impact of geographical indication on the revitalization of a regional economy: A case study of ‘Boseong’ green tea. Area, 39 (4), 518–527. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4762.2007.00765.x

Tashiro, A., Uchiyama, Y., & Kohsaka, R. (2019). Impact of Geographical Indication schemes on traditional knowledge in changing agricultural landscapes: An empirical analysis from Japan. Journal of Rural Studies, 68 , 46–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.03.014

Ullah, S., Zaefarian, G., & Ullah, F. (2021). How to use instrumental variables in addressing endogeneity? A step-by-step procedure for non-specialists. Industrial Marketing Management, 96 , A1–A6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.03.006

Vecchio, Y., Iddrisu, A. L., Adinolfi, F., & De Rosa, M. (2020). Geographical indication to build up resilient rural economies: A case study from Ghana. Sustainability, 12 (5), e2052. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12052052

Wang, H. Y., Anh, D. T., & Moustier, P. (2021a). The benefits of geographical indication certification through farmer organizations on low-income farmers: The case of Hoa Vang sticky rice in Vietnam. Cahiers Agricultures, 30 , 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1051/cagri/2021032

Wang, J. Y., Xue Y. J., Wang, P., Chen, J. C., Yao L. (2021b). Participation mode and production efficiency enhancement mechanism of Geographical Indication products in rural areas: A meta-frontier analysis. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 121 , N.PAG.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2021.102982

Wang, K., Lei, L., Qiu, S., & Guo, S. (2020). Policy performance of green lighting industry in China: A DID analysis from the perspective of energy conservation and emission reduction. Energies, 13 (22), 5855. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13225855

Williams, R. M., & Penker, M. (2009). Do geographical indications promote sustainable rural development. Journal of the Austrian Society of Agricultural Economics, 18 (3).  http://hdl.handle.net/10182/585

Winfree, J. A., & Mccluskey, J. J. (2005). Collective reputation and quality. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 87 (1), 206–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0002-9092.2005.00712.x

Wing, C., Simon, K., & Bello-Gomez, R. A. (2018). Designing difference in difference studies: Best practices for public health policy research. Annual Review of Public Health, 39 , 453–469. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040617-013507

Wongprawmas, R., & Canavari, M. (2017). Consumers’ willingness-to-pay for food safety labels in an emerging market: The case of fresh produce in Thailand. Food Policy, 69 , 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2017.03.004

Zhan, H. B., Liu, S. F., & Yu, J. L. (2017). Research on factors influencing consumers’ loyalty towards geographical indication products based on grey incidence analysis. Grey Systems-Theory and Application, 7 , 397–407. https://doi.org/10.1108/GS-10-2016-0037

Download references

Acknowledgements

This manuscript was not funded, but I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers whose comments and suggestions helped improve this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Humanities & Social Development, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, 210095, China

Hongkai Qie, Hui Chen, Yong Lu, Xiaoyu Zhao & Zhiwei Wang

Kunming University, Kunming, 650214, China

Zhiwei Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Hongkai Qie was responsible for study conception and design. Hui Chen was responsible for data collection and analysis. Yong Lu was responsible for interpretation of results. Xiaoyu Zhao was responsible for the project administration. Zhiwei Wang was responsible for draft manuscript preparation. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhiwei Wang .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval.

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Consent to Participate

The authors declare that all the authors have informed consent.

Competing Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on  Innovation Management in Asia

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Qie, H., Chen, H., Lu, Y. et al. Evaluating the Impact of Agricultural Product Geographical Indication Program on Rural Income: A Case Study of the Yangtze River Delta Region in China. J Knowl Econ (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-024-01935-8

Download citation

Received : 14 December 2023

Accepted : 22 March 2024

Published : 29 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-024-01935-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Agricultural development
• Geographical indication
• Rural income
• Policy impact
• Economic development
• Quality improvement
• Difference-in-differences (DID) Model
• Yangtze River Delta
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research