Learning to say ‘no’: privilege, entitlement and refusal in peace, (post)conflict and security research

IF 1.8 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Critical Studies on Security Pub Date : 2023-05-04 DOI:10.1080/21624887.2023.2208902
Jamie J. Hagen, Ilaria Michelis, Jennifer Philippa Eggert, L. Turner
{"title":"Learning to say ‘no’: privilege, entitlement and refusal in peace, (post)conflict and security research","authors":"Jamie J. Hagen, Ilaria Michelis, Jennifer Philippa Eggert, L. Turner","doi":"10.1080/21624887.2023.2208902","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this forum, we focus on the possibility and necessity for active refusal in research, and the complexities of refusal. We offer four different perspectives, based on our shared concerns and understanding of the harms caused by some field research, and driven by our engagement with and membership in some of the communities experiencing this harmful fieldwork in peace, (post)conflict and security settings.Drawing on feminist, queer, indigenous, anti-racist and decolonial literatures and interventions, we seek to further a practice of refusal as an essential component of researcher reflexivity Our various positionalities and privileges, and the research entitlement they can bring, necessitate grappling with refusal: we must do better at saying ‘no’. We must also be careful about the ethics of refusal itself: Who gets to say ‘no’ to whom? What comes after the refusal? We hope our interventions encourage more of these conversations and (more importantly) practices.Refusals can be an important ‘full stop’ that interrupt exploitative relationships, and that challenge neoliberal and neocolonial conditions of knowledge production. But they can also be generative of different ways of sharing knowledge, leading to new partners and locations, new conversations that cross the boundaries between the imperialist categories of the researcher and the researched, and new relationships outside of research and outside of work.","PeriodicalId":29930,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies on Security","volume":"11 1","pages":"126 - 144"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Studies on Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21624887.2023.2208902","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract In this forum, we focus on the possibility and necessity for active refusal in research, and the complexities of refusal. We offer four different perspectives, based on our shared concerns and understanding of the harms caused by some field research, and driven by our engagement with and membership in some of the communities experiencing this harmful fieldwork in peace, (post)conflict and security settings.Drawing on feminist, queer, indigenous, anti-racist and decolonial literatures and interventions, we seek to further a practice of refusal as an essential component of researcher reflexivity Our various positionalities and privileges, and the research entitlement they can bring, necessitate grappling with refusal: we must do better at saying ‘no’. We must also be careful about the ethics of refusal itself: Who gets to say ‘no’ to whom? What comes after the refusal? We hope our interventions encourage more of these conversations and (more importantly) practices.Refusals can be an important ‘full stop’ that interrupt exploitative relationships, and that challenge neoliberal and neocolonial conditions of knowledge production. But they can also be generative of different ways of sharing knowledge, leading to new partners and locations, new conversations that cross the boundaries between the imperialist categories of the researcher and the researched, and new relationships outside of research and outside of work.
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
学会说“不”:和平、(后)冲突和安全研究中的特权、权利和拒绝
摘要在本论坛中,我们重点讨论了主动拒绝在研究中的可能性和必要性,以及拒绝的复杂性。我们提供了四种不同的观点,基于我们对一些实地研究造成的危害的共同关注和理解,以及我们与在和平、(后)冲突和安全环境中经历这种有害实地调查的一些社区的接触和成员关系。根据女权主义、酷儿、土著、反种族主义和非殖民化的文献和干预,我们试图进一步推动拒绝的做法,将其作为研究者自反性的重要组成部分。我们的各种立场和特权,以及它们可能带来的研究权利,都需要与拒绝作斗争:我们必须更好地说“不”。我们还必须小心拒绝本身的道德:谁可以对谁说“不”?拒绝之后会发生什么?我们希望我们的干预措施能鼓励更多这样的对话和(更重要的)实践。拒绝可能是中断剥削关系的重要“句号”,并挑战知识生产的新自由主义和新殖民主义条件。但它们也可以产生不同的知识共享方式,导致新的合作伙伴和地点,跨越帝国主义研究者和被研究者之间界限的新对话,以及研究和工作之外的新关系。
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
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
期刊最新文献
Chair in Entebbe Things never remain the same Poetics of silence Not just a hashtag Your security, our territories
×
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