Power and politics in research design and practice: Opening up space for social equity in interdisciplinary, multi-jurisdictional and community-based research

IF 0.9 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Gateways-International Journal of Community Research and Engagement Pub Date : 2017-06-22 DOI:10.5130/IJCRE.V10I1.5307
V. Gagnon, H. Gorman, E. Norman
{"title":"Power and politics in research design and practice: Opening up space for social equity in interdisciplinary, multi-jurisdictional and community-based research","authors":"V. Gagnon, H. Gorman, E. Norman","doi":"10.5130/IJCRE.V10I1.5307","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Working collaboratively with communities is commonly considered a cornerstone of good practice in research involving social-ecological concerns. Increasingly, funding agencies also recognise that such collaborations are most productive when community partners have some influence on the design and implementation of the projects that benefit from their participation. However, researchers engaged with this work often struggle to actively engage community members in this way and, in particular, Indigenous peoples. In this article, we argue that useful strategies for facilitating such engagement are to leave space in the research plan for questions of interest to community partners and to encourage equitable interactions between all participants through the use of forums in which power dynamics are intentionally flattened. We demonstrate the use of this technique in an interdisciplinary, multi-jurisdictional research study involving the fate and transport of toxic compounds that lead to fish consumption advisories throughout the world. In this project, the use of participatory forums resulted in community partners in Michigan’s Keweenaw Bay area of Lake Superior shaping a key aspect of the research by raising the simple but significant question: ‘When can we eat the fish?’. Their interest in this question also helped to ensure that they would remain meaningful partners throughout the duration of the project. The conclusion emphasises that further integration of Indigenous and community-based research methods has the potential to significantly enhance the process and value of university-community research engagement in the future.","PeriodicalId":53967,"journal":{"name":"Gateways-International Journal of Community Research and Engagement","volume":"19 1","pages":"164–84-164–84"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gateways-International Journal of Community Research and Engagement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5130/IJCRE.V10I1.5307","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Working collaboratively with communities is commonly considered a cornerstone of good practice in research involving social-ecological concerns. Increasingly, funding agencies also recognise that such collaborations are most productive when community partners have some influence on the design and implementation of the projects that benefit from their participation. However, researchers engaged with this work often struggle to actively engage community members in this way and, in particular, Indigenous peoples. In this article, we argue that useful strategies for facilitating such engagement are to leave space in the research plan for questions of interest to community partners and to encourage equitable interactions between all participants through the use of forums in which power dynamics are intentionally flattened. We demonstrate the use of this technique in an interdisciplinary, multi-jurisdictional research study involving the fate and transport of toxic compounds that lead to fish consumption advisories throughout the world. In this project, the use of participatory forums resulted in community partners in Michigan’s Keweenaw Bay area of Lake Superior shaping a key aspect of the research by raising the simple but significant question: ‘When can we eat the fish?’. Their interest in this question also helped to ensure that they would remain meaningful partners throughout the duration of the project. The conclusion emphasises that further integration of Indigenous and community-based research methods has the potential to significantly enhance the process and value of university-community research engagement in the future.
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
研究设计与实践中的权力与政治:在跨学科、多司法管辖区和社区研究中为社会公平开辟空间
在涉及社会生态问题的研究中,与社区合作通常被认为是良好实践的基石。供资机构也日益认识到,当社区伙伴对因其参与而受益的项目的设计和实施产生一定影响时,这种合作最具成效。然而,从事这项工作的研究人员往往难以以这种方式积极地吸引社区成员,特别是土著人民。在本文中,我们认为促进这种参与的有效策略是在研究计划中为社区合作伙伴感兴趣的问题留出空间,并通过使用有意平摊权力动态的论坛鼓励所有参与者之间的公平互动。我们在一项跨学科、多司法管辖区的研究中展示了这种技术的使用,该研究涉及有毒化合物的命运和运输,导致世界各地的鱼类消费建议。在这个项目中,密歇根州苏必利尔湖的Keweenaw湾地区的社区合作伙伴通过提出一个简单但重要的问题,形成了研究的一个关键方面:“我们什么时候可以吃鱼?”他们对这个问题的兴趣也有助于确保他们在整个项目期间仍然是有意义的合作伙伴。结论强调,土著和社区研究方法的进一步整合有可能在未来显著提高大学-社区研究参与的过程和价值。
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
1.00
自引率
28.60%
发文量
5
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊最新文献
Stroke Community Rehabilitation Centre (SCORE): A community transformation program Oral health education for school children and capacity building of local community health workers in cleft care: An experience of student-led community service in a West Java village Voice, Choice and Power: Using co-production to develop a community engagement strategy for an ethnically diverse community Gardening education in early childhood: Important factors supporting the success of implementing it Re-imagining the research article: Social-semiotic signposts and the potential for radical co-presence in the scholarly literature
×
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