全球复杂紧急情况下的南北研究合作:COVID-19 期间的定性知识生产与共享

IF 3.2 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Qualitative Research Pub Date : 2024-08-07 DOI:10.1177/14687941241264677
Adriana Rudling, Mohamed Sesay, Eric Wiebelhaus-Brahm, Angelika Rettberg
{"title":"全球复杂紧急情况下的南北研究合作:COVID-19 期间的定性知识生产与共享","authors":"Adriana Rudling, Mohamed Sesay, Eric Wiebelhaus-Brahm, Angelika Rettberg","doi":"10.1177/14687941241264677","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Large multinational teams of academics and activist-practitioners that span the Global North-South divide have become common in qualitative research because of the reliance of field of peace and conflict studies on “local” knowledge and expertise. Complex global emergencies, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, present the opportunity to (re)shape and (re)consider these endeavors in key some ways. This article focuses on the involvement of South-based activist-practitioners in three large North-South collaborations, one pre-pandemic (Beyond Words: Implementing Latin American Truth Commission Recommendations), one ongoing when the pandemic began (Gender, Justice, and Security Hub), and one launched during the pandemic (Truth Commissions and Sexual Violence: African and Latin American Experiences). Drawing on center-periphery framework, we adopt an autoethnographic approach, to reflect on how the pandemic has not only reinforced existing structural and institutional asymmetries through reduced funding, professional uncertainty, and personal loss and insecurity but also added some new ethical concerns. This reality has tested both our capacity and commitment to work toward the decolonization of knowledge in the field. In making this argument, we seek to contribute to the discussion on research ethics and the politics of knowledge production and sharing in qualitative peace and conflict research.","PeriodicalId":48265,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research","volume":"63 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"North-South research collaboration during complex global emergencies: Qualitative knowledge production and sharing during COVID-19\",\"authors\":\"Adriana Rudling, Mohamed Sesay, Eric Wiebelhaus-Brahm, Angelika Rettberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14687941241264677\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Large multinational teams of academics and activist-practitioners that span the Global North-South divide have become common in qualitative research because of the reliance of field of peace and conflict studies on “local” knowledge and expertise. Complex global emergencies, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, present the opportunity to (re)shape and (re)consider these endeavors in key some ways. This article focuses on the involvement of South-based activist-practitioners in three large North-South collaborations, one pre-pandemic (Beyond Words: Implementing Latin American Truth Commission Recommendations), one ongoing when the pandemic began (Gender, Justice, and Security Hub), and one launched during the pandemic (Truth Commissions and Sexual Violence: African and Latin American Experiences). Drawing on center-periphery framework, we adopt an autoethnographic approach, to reflect on how the pandemic has not only reinforced existing structural and institutional asymmetries through reduced funding, professional uncertainty, and personal loss and insecurity but also added some new ethical concerns. This reality has tested both our capacity and commitment to work toward the decolonization of knowledge in the field. In making this argument, we seek to contribute to the discussion on research ethics and the politics of knowledge production and sharing in qualitative peace and conflict research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48265,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Qualitative Research\",\"volume\":\"63 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-07\",\"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/10.1177/14687941241264677\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941241264677","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

摘要

由于和平与冲突研究领域对 "当地 "知识和专业技能的依赖,由跨越全球南北鸿沟的学者和活动家组成的大型多国团队在定性研究中已十分常见。复杂的全球紧急事件(如 COVID-19 大流行病)为我们提供了机会,使我们能够以关键的方式(重新)塑造和(重新)考虑这些努力。本文重点介绍了南方活动家参与三项大型南北合作的情况,一项是大流行前的合作(超越言语:落实拉丁美洲真相委员会的建议),一项是大流行开始时正在进行的合作(性别、正义与安全中心),还有一项是大流行期间启动的合作(真相委员会与性暴力:非洲和拉丁美洲的经验》)。借鉴中心-边缘框架,我们采用了一种自述式方法,反思大流行病不仅通过资金减少、职业不确定性、个人损失和不安全感加剧了现有的结构和制度不对称,而且还增加了一些新的伦理问题。这一现实考验了我们努力实现该领域知识非殖民化的能力和决心。通过提出这一论点,我们试图为和平与冲突定性研究中的研究伦理和知识生产与共享政治的讨论做出贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
North-South research collaboration during complex global emergencies: Qualitative knowledge production and sharing during COVID-19
Large multinational teams of academics and activist-practitioners that span the Global North-South divide have become common in qualitative research because of the reliance of field of peace and conflict studies on “local” knowledge and expertise. Complex global emergencies, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, present the opportunity to (re)shape and (re)consider these endeavors in key some ways. This article focuses on the involvement of South-based activist-practitioners in three large North-South collaborations, one pre-pandemic (Beyond Words: Implementing Latin American Truth Commission Recommendations), one ongoing when the pandemic began (Gender, Justice, and Security Hub), and one launched during the pandemic (Truth Commissions and Sexual Violence: African and Latin American Experiences). Drawing on center-periphery framework, we adopt an autoethnographic approach, to reflect on how the pandemic has not only reinforced existing structural and institutional asymmetries through reduced funding, professional uncertainty, and personal loss and insecurity but also added some new ethical concerns. This reality has tested both our capacity and commitment to work toward the decolonization of knowledge in the field. In making this argument, we seek to contribute to the discussion on research ethics and the politics of knowledge production and sharing in qualitative peace and conflict research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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