Afro-Belgian activist resistances to research procedures: Reflections on epistemic extractivism and decolonial interventions in sociological research

IF 1.9 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIOLOGY Current Sociology Pub Date : 2022-07-21 DOI:10.1177/00113921221105914
Sarah Demart
{"title":"Afro-Belgian activist resistances to research procedures: Reflections on epistemic extractivism and decolonial interventions in sociological research","authors":"Sarah Demart","doi":"10.1177/00113921221105914","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines Afro-Belgian resistance to sociological research procedures and in particular, the way in which demands for compensation and citation policies have recently emerged as a sine qua non activist condition for participation in academic devices. Grounded on a long-term ethnography conducted within Afro-Belgian anti-racist circles (2011–2019), the article argues that activist resistances, whether or not they give rise to political claims, have something to do with the colonial engagement of sociology and more generally of science. Building on postcolonial/black/feminist studies and decolonial indigenous research, the article explores to what extent, academic politics of citation and compensation of anti-racist activists could then be considered as decolonial interventions. Against the background of research involving groups whose activism is intrinsically linked to a political and epistemic domination, the paradigm of ‘protection’ of the ‘researched’ (through procedures of anonymization) is not only insufficient but problematic. Decolonial intervention should not only be addressed under the lens of knowledge co-production (participative/decolonial/anti-racist research) but also in terms of co-ownership policies of data/knowledges.","PeriodicalId":47938,"journal":{"name":"Current Sociology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00113921221105914","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article examines Afro-Belgian resistance to sociological research procedures and in particular, the way in which demands for compensation and citation policies have recently emerged as a sine qua non activist condition for participation in academic devices. Grounded on a long-term ethnography conducted within Afro-Belgian anti-racist circles (2011–2019), the article argues that activist resistances, whether or not they give rise to political claims, have something to do with the colonial engagement of sociology and more generally of science. Building on postcolonial/black/feminist studies and decolonial indigenous research, the article explores to what extent, academic politics of citation and compensation of anti-racist activists could then be considered as decolonial interventions. Against the background of research involving groups whose activism is intrinsically linked to a political and epistemic domination, the paradigm of ‘protection’ of the ‘researched’ (through procedures of anonymization) is not only insufficient but problematic. Decolonial intervention should not only be addressed under the lens of knowledge co-production (participative/decolonial/anti-racist research) but also in terms of co-ownership policies of data/knowledges.
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
非裔比利时活动家对研究程序的抵制:对社会学研究中的认识抽取主义和非殖民化干预的思考
这篇文章考察了非裔比利时人对社会学研究程序的抵制,特别是对补偿和引用政策的要求最近成为参与学术手段的必要条件。文章基于非裔比利时反种族主义圈子内进行的长期民族志(2011-2019),认为活动家的抵抗,无论是否引发政治主张,都与社会学和更广泛的科学的殖民参与有关。在后殖民主义/黑人/女权主义研究和非殖民化土著研究的基础上,本文探讨了反种族主义活动家的引用和补偿的学术政治在多大程度上可以被视为非殖民化干预。在涉及激进主义与政治和认识论统治有内在联系的群体的研究背景下,“保护”“被研究者”的范式(通过匿名化程序)不仅不足,而且存在问题。非殖民化干预不仅应该从知识共同生产(参与性/非殖民化/反种族主义研究)的角度来解决,还应该从数据/知识的共同所有权政策的角度来处理。
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
Current Sociology
Current Sociology SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
5.00%
发文量
65
期刊介绍: Current Sociology is a fully peer-reviewed, international journal that publishes original research and innovative critical commentary both on current debates within sociology as a developing discipline, and the contribution that sociologists can make to understanding and influencing current issues arising in the development of modern societies in a globalizing world. An official journal of the International Sociological Association since 1952, Current Sociology is one of the oldest and most widely cited sociology journals in the world.
期刊最新文献
Dissenting and innovating: Freelancers’ emerging forms of organising in the Netherlands The German social space and its homologies: National variation on a basic structure Scapegoating queers: Pink-blocking as state strategy Southern theory, knowledge production and Russia’s war in Ukraine: An interview with Raewyn Connell Do countries’ freedom status and gender equality level inform gender differences in bribery? Evidence from a multi-country level analysis
×
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