From ‘Here’ to ‘There’: Social Movements, the Academy and Solidarity Research

IF 0.7 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Socialist Studies Pub Date : 2014-08-08 DOI:10.18740/S47P4F
J. Brem-Wilson
{"title":"From ‘Here’ to ‘There’: Social Movements, the Academy and Solidarity Research","authors":"J. Brem-Wilson","doi":"10.18740/S47P4F","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Increasing numbers of social movement scholars now advocate participatory and collaborative research approaches. These are often premised upon the assertion of a convergence between movement and researcher that implicates the latter in the struggles of the former. Naming this approach “solidarity research”, in this article I identify the components that provide the rationale for its pursuit. As well as affirming movement-researcher solidarity, this rationale also comprises a situated epistemology that asks academics to think reflexively about their research practice, the roles they play, and the interests they serve. This reveals the diverging positionality, of knowledge and interests, that often exists between movements and academics. Such concerns give rise to specific methodological and ethical principles that indicate the importance of negotiating this positionality to successful collaboration. Reflecting on my own experiences trying and sometimes failing to conduct participatory research with transnational agrarian movements, I identify dynamics that enable and constrain the pursuit of such collaborative research within commitments to broader methodological and ethical principles of solidarity.","PeriodicalId":29667,"journal":{"name":"Socialist Studies","volume":"54 1","pages":"111-132"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2014-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Socialist Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18740/S47P4F","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

Increasing numbers of social movement scholars now advocate participatory and collaborative research approaches. These are often premised upon the assertion of a convergence between movement and researcher that implicates the latter in the struggles of the former. Naming this approach “solidarity research”, in this article I identify the components that provide the rationale for its pursuit. As well as affirming movement-researcher solidarity, this rationale also comprises a situated epistemology that asks academics to think reflexively about their research practice, the roles they play, and the interests they serve. This reveals the diverging positionality, of knowledge and interests, that often exists between movements and academics. Such concerns give rise to specific methodological and ethical principles that indicate the importance of negotiating this positionality to successful collaboration. Reflecting on my own experiences trying and sometimes failing to conduct participatory research with transnational agrarian movements, I identify dynamics that enable and constrain the pursuit of such collaborative research within commitments to broader methodological and ethical principles of solidarity.
从“这里”到“那里”:社会运动、学院和团结研究
越来越多的社会运动学者提倡参与性和合作性的研究方法。这些通常是以运动和研究者之间的趋同的断言为前提的,这意味着后者在前者的斗争中。将这种方法命名为“团结研究”,在本文中,我确定了为其追求提供基本原理的组成部分。除了肯定运动-研究者的团结,这一理论还包括一种情境认识论,要求学者反思他们的研究实践,他们扮演的角色,以及他们所服务的利益。这揭示了运动和学术之间经常存在的知识和兴趣的分歧地位。这种关切引起了具体的方法和伦理原则,这些原则表明谈判这一立场对成功合作的重要性。反思我自己在跨国农业运动中进行参与性研究(有时失败)的经历,我发现,在对更广泛的方法和团结的伦理原则的承诺范围内,推动和限制这种合作研究的动力。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信