Search

This paper discusses the lasting impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on research ethics in social sciences by focusing on the concept of vulnerability. We unpack the current conceptualisations of vulnerability and their limitations and argue for the need to reconceptualise vulnerability as multidimensional, consisting of both universal and contextual dimensions, as well as their dynamic interplay. Multidimensional vulnerability is inspired by and relevant to social science research during the pandemic but can also be useful in other contexts such as climate change or conflict. The paper puts forwards several considerations about how this revised concept of vulnerability may be useful when evaluating ethical dimensions of social science research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the field of critical research, there is significant interest about the extent and forms of the researcher's proactive engagement with marginalized and excluded communities being researched. However, it is not always clear what makes this involvement part of the research, or how much it serves as a moral position located in the process of building relationships with the community being researched. Based on a retrospective and reflexive observation of extended ethnographic fieldwork, between 2005 and 2016, with Israel's Mountain Jewish Community, this paper presents an analysis of Research from an Active-Involved Critical Stance (RAICS). In the conceptual-theoretical dimension, this position is anchored in the theory of intersubjective relationships, critical ethnography, and community-based participatory research. With respect to the structural aspect, RAICS will be explicated through the various positions taken up by the researcher within the field, and across three stages in the development of the relationship with the community during the study, namely: the store-windows; behind the scenes; and onstage. Eight principles of RAICS will be presented. Finally, RAICS will be discussed in the context of developments in the critical research field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper uses David Graeber's work on the moral grounds of economic relations as a vantage point from which to reflect on the ethics of giving back in field research, drawing on my own fieldwork experiences in Sierra Leone and Sri Lanka as well as examples from existing literature. I argue that Graeber's exposition of different moral logics for economic relations – hierarchy, exchange and communism – provides a valuable set of conceptual distinctions for thinking through what is owed by, and to, researchers in different research interactions. In addition to a recognition of the incommensurability of what is often being exchanged, this approach responds to the danger of researchers setting the terms of ethical interaction, through distant institutional processes and practices built on logics of exchange, in ways that might constrain the ability of interlocutors to meaningfully articulate their own positions in fieldwork relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyses the implications of qualitative research on migration in terms of reflexivity and positionality. In particular, it presents research as care, revolved around three main critical nodes of reflection: the epistemological importance of emotions, intersectional positionality and the ethics of care. Drawing upon the insights concerning a qualitative research on migration in Italian shrinking areas, the contribution underlines the importance of conceiving research as a process of negotiation. Moreover, it shows how positionality in qualitative migration research is not static but flexible, and is conditioned by different emotionalities emerging during the fieldwork. In this sense, the continuous negotiation that exists between researchers and participants can imply affectivities and kinship that valorises the relationships created during the research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ethnographic practice in contentious and high-risk spaces raises important ethical and methodological questions. When working with grassroots activists who actively avoid forms of surveillance, the boundary between consensual observation and potentially harmful documentation becomes difficult to discern. This article aims not only to identify the gaps in qualitative research methodologies for scholars working with grassroots activists, but also to think of practical ways in which researchers should mitigate concerns both for participants and themselves. Based on fieldwork in Australia, the author explores the ethical, methodological, and emotional dilemmas of conducting research with activists as a militant ethnographer. The article argues that activist-centred project designs must consider the challenges between the researcher's mandate to collect data and their responsibility to uphold security culture both in and outside activist spaces. Reflexive research ethics, further, should be a part of ongoing research engagement to address the emotional tensions overlooked in standardized ethical protocols. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Based on the shift from face-to-face participatory action research (PAR) with groups in situations of vulnerability to digital methods during COVID-19, we reflect on how we can go beyond compensating for the physical absence of the researcher from the field. We argue that instead of simply aiming to replace face-to-face research with a digital equivalent for maintaining 'participatory' and 'inclusive' research practices, remote practices have the potential of being more-than compensatory. We suggest that when producing multi-method digital approaches, we need to go beyond a concern with participant access to remote practices. By rethinking remote PAR in the light of expressive rather than participatory research practices, we critically reflect on the (sometimes experimental) process of trying out different digital research method(s) with Brazilian youth in situations of digital marginalisation, including the initial 'failures' and lessons learned in encouraging diverse forms of participant expression, and ownership using WhatsApp. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The growth of relational, participatory, collaborative and emergent research approaches in recent years has brought new ethical challenges for research with children and youth. These approaches require greater consideration of the specific social and cultural contexts of the research, along with the greater emphasis on researcher–participant relationships that often occur over sustained periods of time. Very few tools are available to help researchers think through the everyday ethical dilemmas such research can raise. In this article, we review the theoretical underpinnings of feminist and indigenous research methodologies that have encouraged these emerging approaches. Through examining an 18-month Youth Participatory Action Research (YPAR) project case study, we critically review ethical moments relating to negotiating consent over a sustained period of time, enhancing co-design and navigating power issues between adult and youth researchers. We conclude with a number of questions to 'think with' when reflecting on ethical research with children and youth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]