"Balancing the books"

S. Ashencaen Crabtree, Jonathan Parker, O. Sylvester, A. García Segura, Z. Man
{"title":"\"Balancing the books\"","authors":"S. Ashencaen Crabtree, Jonathan Parker, O. Sylvester, A. García Segura, Z. Man","doi":"10.18800/debatesensociologia.202302.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Strongly emerging Indigenous methodologies have attracted researchers to employ diverse research paradigms within a moral commitment to conducting research based on ethical sensitivities and appropriate research protocols, as informed by research work with marginalized and unfamiliar groups including Indigenous Communities. However, adopting Indigenous methodological approaches may raise additional ethical considerations requiring a nuanced examination of what these may entail and competing ethical claims regarding research funding, research processes, outcomes and output. In this article, we draw sociological insights from Bourdieusian theory, as well as feminist epistemology, to explore the ethical implications arising from qualitative research the authors recently completed with Indigenous communities in equatorial Malaysia and Costa Rica, where Indigenous land rights and access issues form the contextualizing and comparative backdrop to the study, with reference to relevant international UN policies such as the Sustainable Development Goals.","PeriodicalId":152035,"journal":{"name":"Debates en Sociología","volume":"30 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Debates en Sociología","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18800/debatesensociologia.202302.003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Strongly emerging Indigenous methodologies have attracted researchers to employ diverse research paradigms within a moral commitment to conducting research based on ethical sensitivities and appropriate research protocols, as informed by research work with marginalized and unfamiliar groups including Indigenous Communities. However, adopting Indigenous methodological approaches may raise additional ethical considerations requiring a nuanced examination of what these may entail and competing ethical claims regarding research funding, research processes, outcomes and output. In this article, we draw sociological insights from Bourdieusian theory, as well as feminist epistemology, to explore the ethical implications arising from qualitative research the authors recently completed with Indigenous communities in equatorial Malaysia and Costa Rica, where Indigenous land rights and access issues form the contextualizing and comparative backdrop to the study, with reference to relevant international UN policies such as the Sustainable Development Goals.
"平衡账目"
新兴的土著方法论吸引了研究人员在道德承诺的范围内采用不同的研究范式,在与 边缘化群体和陌生群体(包括土著社区)开展研究工作的过程中,根据道德敏感性和适 当的研究规程开展研究。然而,采用土著方法论可能会引发更多的伦理问题,需要对这些问题可能带来的影响以及有关研究资金、研究过程、成果和产出的相互竞争的伦理主张进行细致的研究。在本文中,我们将从布尔迪厄斯理论和女权主义认识论中汲取社会学见解,探讨作者最近在马来西亚赤道地区和哥斯达黎加土著社区完成的定性研究中产生的伦理影响,土著土地权利和使用权问题构成了研究的背景和比较背景,并参考了联合国的相关国际政策,如可持续发展目标。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信