Live archives: Freedom of information requests as political methodology

IF 1.4 4区 社会学 Q2 GEOGRAPHY Canadian Geographer-Geographe Canadien Pub Date : 2024-04-17 DOI:10.1111/cag.12922
Jeremy J. Schmidt
{"title":"Live archives: Freedom of information requests as political methodology","authors":"Jeremy J. Schmidt","doi":"10.1111/cag.12922","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><i>Freedom of information requests are an important research tool yet receive comparably little methodological scrutiny relative to other methods commonly used by geographers. This article considers two methodological aspects to freedom of information requests. The first is how they operate as “live archives” that take shape as batches of files are compiled in ways that reflect search terms, negotiations over the scope of requests, bureaucratic processes, and considered judgments of researchers in response to variables both within and beyond their control. The second considers how freedom of information requests operate as a political methodology through the encounter they produce with state bureaucracies. Using examples that cut across these concerns and illuminate some of the ways that methodological scrutiny matters, the article discusses how freedom of information requests present overlapping yet distinct concerns for qualitative research on issues of reflexivity, ethics, and positionality. The methodological concerns that arise are not frequently discussed but, as with other methods, are important to understanding the limits and reach of data collection, analysis, and accessibility both for researchers and for the communities who may have interest in, or be impacted by, geographic research</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":47619,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geographer-Geographe Canadien","volume":"68 4","pages":"503-512"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cag.12922","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Geographer-Geographe Canadien","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cag.12922","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Freedom of information requests are an important research tool yet receive comparably little methodological scrutiny relative to other methods commonly used by geographers. This article considers two methodological aspects to freedom of information requests. The first is how they operate as “live archives” that take shape as batches of files are compiled in ways that reflect search terms, negotiations over the scope of requests, bureaucratic processes, and considered judgments of researchers in response to variables both within and beyond their control. The second considers how freedom of information requests operate as a political methodology through the encounter they produce with state bureaucracies. Using examples that cut across these concerns and illuminate some of the ways that methodological scrutiny matters, the article discusses how freedom of information requests present overlapping yet distinct concerns for qualitative research on issues of reflexivity, ethics, and positionality. The methodological concerns that arise are not frequently discussed but, as with other methods, are important to understanding the limits and reach of data collection, analysis, and accessibility both for researchers and for the communities who may have interest in, or be impacted by, geographic research.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
现场档案:作为政治方法的信息自由申请
信息自由申请是一种重要的研究工具,但与地理学家常用的其他方法相比,它在方法论方面受到的审查却相对较少。本文探讨了信息自由申请的两个方法论方面。第一,信息自由申请是如何作为 "活档案 "运作的,它是如何随着成批文件的编纂而形成的,这些文件反映了搜索条件、对申请范围的协商、官僚程序,以及研究者对其控制范围内外的变量所做出的深思熟虑的判断。第二部分探讨了信息自由申请如何通过与国家官僚机构的交锋而成为一种政治方法。这篇文章利用贯穿这些关注点的例子,阐明了方法论审查的一些重要方式,讨论了信息 自由申请如何在反身性、伦理和立场性等问题上为定性研究带来重叠但又不同的关注点。所产生的方法论问题并不经常被讨论,但与其他方法一样,这些问题对于了解数据收集、分析的局限性和范围,以及对于研究人员和可能对地理研究感兴趣或受地理研究影响的社区的可获取性都很重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
76
期刊最新文献
Measuring the use of energy poverty coping strategies and the heat-or-eat trade-off in Bridgewater, Nova Scotia Issue Information / Dans ce numéro “It's not being ‘on-the-land,’ it's like we are a part of the Land”: Indigenous youth share visual stories at “on-the-land” camps in the Dehcho Do neighbourhood challenges affect the mental health of residents? Insights from the 2018 and 2021 Canadian Housing Surveys Hills thought to be mountains: A geobiocultural characterization of island highlands in Canada's continental plain
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1