A day without Global North researchers: Making space for equitable collaboration after COVID-19

IF 3.2 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Qualitative Research Pub Date : 2024-08-12 DOI:10.1177/14687941241264669
Annalisa Bolin, Tatiana Carayannis, Gino Vlavonou, David Nkusi
{"title":"A day without Global North researchers: Making space for equitable collaboration after COVID-19","authors":"Annalisa Bolin, Tatiana Carayannis, Gino Vlavonou, David Nkusi","doi":"10.1177/14687941241264669","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What happens when researchers based in the Global North are suddenly unable to access research sites, especially those in the Global South? In 2020, COVID-related public health measures and travel restrictions made clear how dependent certain categories of researchers in the North are on easy access to research sites in the South. The space opened up by their pandemic-imposed retreat and the solutions devised in response have provoked both challenges and opportunities. In this article, we reflect on this space, focusing on how forms of more just collaboration become possible when the inertia of Global North-controlled research is interrupted. Many scholars have argued for change in how Global North-South scholarly collaborations proceed, seeking to root out colonial practices and attend to power imbalances that disadvantage South-based scholars. COVID's disruptions offer a chance to reorient these collaborations toward more ethical forms of research. We examine the ethical and practical questions inherent in such collaborations and explore two case studies of attempts to reorient collaborative work, drawing primarily on examples of collaboration between African, European, and North American scholars. Cognizant that these efforts are only initial attempts toward reworking collaborative practice, we also trace the challenges they bring, from the duty of care and paternalistic approaches to funding and practical problems. We suggest that a careful consideration of these issues can help to establish more just ways to fully reengage North-South research and collaboration in the wake of the global pandemic.","PeriodicalId":48265,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941241264669","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

What happens when researchers based in the Global North are suddenly unable to access research sites, especially those in the Global South? In 2020, COVID-related public health measures and travel restrictions made clear how dependent certain categories of researchers in the North are on easy access to research sites in the South. The space opened up by their pandemic-imposed retreat and the solutions devised in response have provoked both challenges and opportunities. In this article, we reflect on this space, focusing on how forms of more just collaboration become possible when the inertia of Global North-controlled research is interrupted. Many scholars have argued for change in how Global North-South scholarly collaborations proceed, seeking to root out colonial practices and attend to power imbalances that disadvantage South-based scholars. COVID's disruptions offer a chance to reorient these collaborations toward more ethical forms of research. We examine the ethical and practical questions inherent in such collaborations and explore two case studies of attempts to reorient collaborative work, drawing primarily on examples of collaboration between African, European, and North American scholars. Cognizant that these efforts are only initial attempts toward reworking collaborative practice, we also trace the challenges they bring, from the duty of care and paternalistic approaches to funding and practical problems. We suggest that a careful consideration of these issues can help to establish more just ways to fully reengage North-South research and collaboration in the wake of the global pandemic.
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
没有全球北方研究人员的日子:在 COVID-19 之后为公平合作创造空间
如果位于全球北方的研究人员突然无法进入研究地点,特别是全球南方的研究地点,会发生什么情况?2020 年,与 COVID 相关的公共卫生措施和旅行限制清楚地表明,北方某些类别的研究人员是多么依赖于能够方便地前往南方的研究基地。这些措施和限制所开辟的空间,以及为应对这些措施和限制而制定的解决方案,既带来了挑战,也带来了机遇。在本文中,我们将对这一空间进行反思,重点关注当全球北方控制的研究惰性被打破时,如何实现更加公正的合作形式。许多学者都主张改变全球南北学术合作的方式,寻求根除殖民主义做法,关注不利于南方学者的权力失衡问题。COVID 的中断为调整这些合作提供了一个机会,使其朝着更符合伦理的研究形式发展。我们研究了此类合作中固有的伦理和实践问题,并主要借鉴非洲、欧洲和北美学者之间的合作实例,探讨了两个试图调整合作工作方向的案例研究。我们认识到,这些努力仅仅是重塑合作实践的初步尝试,我们还追踪了它们所带来的挑战,从照顾责任和家长式方法到资金和实际问题。我们建议,认真考虑这些问题有助于建立更加公正的方法,在全球大流行病之后重新全面参与南北研究与合作。
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
8.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
60
期刊介绍: Qualitative Research is a fully peer reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles on the methodological diversity and multi-disciplinary focus of qualitative research within the social sciences. Research based on qualitative methods, and methodological commentary on such research, have expanded exponentially in the past decades. This is the case across a number of disciplines including sociology, social anthropology, health and nursing, education, cultural studies, human geography, social and discursive psychology, and discourse studies.
期刊最新文献
Creative writing as critical fieldwork methodology Turning the tables or business as usual? COVID-19 as a catalyst in North–South research collaborations Awaiting further consideration ‘You’ll come back another day’ Exploring the challenges of interviewing upper class elites Troubling go-alongs through the lens of care
×
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