Trial-and-error: Securing field access for qualitative research in Vietnam

IF 0.7 3区 社会学 Q3 ANTHROPOLOGY
Nicolas Lainez, Emmanuel Pannier
{"title":"Trial-and-error: Securing field access for qualitative research in Vietnam","authors":"Nicolas Lainez,&nbsp;Emmanuel Pannier","doi":"10.1111/taja.12507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Field access is frequently regarded as a mere practical step in the research process, with insufficient attention given to its broader implications. Numerous writings that focus on gaining field access offer just a collection of practical tips. While these recommendations are valuable, they are specific to each setting and individual experiences. Such an ad hoc approach fosters a limited understanding of the research permit application process and limits the discussion of access by disregarding its inherent uncertainty and its manifold consequences. In authoritarian contexts, obtaining field access remains highly uncertain and can be further complicated by arbitrary decision-making. This article demonstrates that in Vietnam, social scientists, including anthropologists, must navigate ambiguous processes of trial-and-error to secure field access. With the term ‘trial-and-error’ we refer to an approach to problem-solving in which various methods are attempted. Proceeding through trial-and-error involves familiarisation, networking, and improvisation. Based on 15 years of experience working in Vietnam we provide evidence that the process of trial-and-error is inherent in all three aspects. Beyond the issues surrounding access for foreign researchers, our observations also underscore the pivotal role of trial-and-error as a mechanism that Vietnamese citizens employ to navigate the uncertainties and arbitrariness associated with bureaucracy.</p>","PeriodicalId":45452,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Anthropology","volume":"35 3","pages":"302-320"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/taja.12507","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/taja.12507","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Field access is frequently regarded as a mere practical step in the research process, with insufficient attention given to its broader implications. Numerous writings that focus on gaining field access offer just a collection of practical tips. While these recommendations are valuable, they are specific to each setting and individual experiences. Such an ad hoc approach fosters a limited understanding of the research permit application process and limits the discussion of access by disregarding its inherent uncertainty and its manifold consequences. In authoritarian contexts, obtaining field access remains highly uncertain and can be further complicated by arbitrary decision-making. This article demonstrates that in Vietnam, social scientists, including anthropologists, must navigate ambiguous processes of trial-and-error to secure field access. With the term ‘trial-and-error’ we refer to an approach to problem-solving in which various methods are attempted. Proceeding through trial-and-error involves familiarisation, networking, and improvisation. Based on 15 years of experience working in Vietnam we provide evidence that the process of trial-and-error is inherent in all three aspects. Beyond the issues surrounding access for foreign researchers, our observations also underscore the pivotal role of trial-and-error as a mechanism that Vietnamese citizens employ to navigate the uncertainties and arbitrariness associated with bureaucracy.

试错:确保越南定性研究的实地准入
实地访问常常被认为仅仅是研究过程中的一个实际步骤,对其更广泛的影响没有给予足够的注意。许多专注于获得实地访问权限的文章只提供了一些实用技巧的集合。虽然这些建议很有价值,但它们对每个环境和个人经历都是特定的。这种特别的方法促进了对研究许可申请过程的有限理解,并通过忽视其固有的不确定性及其多方面后果而限制了对获取的讨论。在专制环境下,获得实地访问仍然是高度不确定的,并且可能因武断的决策而进一步复杂化。这篇文章表明,在越南,社会科学家,包括人类学家,必须通过模棱两可的试错过程来确保实地访问。“试错法”指的是一种解决问题的方法,其中尝试了各种方法。试错过程包括熟悉、建立网络和即兴发挥。根据我们在越南15年的工作经验,我们提供的证据表明,试错的过程在这三个方面都是固有的。除了围绕外国研究人员访问的问题之外,我们的观察还强调了试错法作为一种机制的关键作用,越南公民利用这种机制来应对与官僚主义相关的不确定性和随意性。
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
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
38
×
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