Research as usual in humanitarian settings? Equalising power in academic-NGO research partnerships through co-production.
Research as usual in humanitarian settings? Equalising power in academic-NGO research partnerships through co-production.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s13031-021-00399-w
复制
发表时间：
2021-08-26
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Wake C
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lokot M;Wake C
在受冲突影响和人道主义环境中的研究伙伴关系可以揭示学术界和非政府组织之间复杂的权力等级。在研究过程中，决策可能偏向于更强大的行为者，他们往往指导研究范围，掌握预算并领导分析。联合制作越来越多地成为一种有用的方法，试图在研究过程中平衡权力动态。本文件的目的是提请注意与人道主义环境中的研究伙伴关系“照常研究”方法相关的主要挑战，因为权力等级在这些环境中可能特别扩大。本文是基于一个全面的文献综述和32个半结构化的采访学者和非政府组织的从业人员。参与者是根据他们在共同制作研究或在研究伙伴关系中工作的经验有目的地选择的。一些参与者曾在人道主义环境中工作，而另一些参与者则有在非人道主义环境中共同开展研究的经验。我们使用Nvivo对数据进行主题编码。本文件记录了人道主义背景下“照常研究”伙伴关系的问题，特别是：社区仅作为数据来源的负担，某些形式的知识被视为比其他形式更重要，缺乏对构建研究伙伴关系的权力等级的思考，自上而下的决策和缺乏透明度，单向的“能力建设”，缺乏互利，以及僵化的研究程序和时间框架。本文强调了人道主义环境中标准研究实践的主要挑战，并确定了合作生产的七个关键原则，这些原则有助于在研究伙伴关系中平衡权力动态，特别是在受冲突影响和人道主义环境中。在线版本包含补充材料，可通过10.1186/s13031-021-00399-w获得。
Research partnerships in conflict-affected and humanitarian settings can reveal complex power hierarchies between academics and NGOs. During the process of research, decision-making may skew in favour of more powerful actors, who often direct the scope of the research, hold the budget and lead the analysis. Co-production is increasingly emerging as a helpful approach that attempts to equalise power dynamics during research. The aim of this paper is to draw attention to the main challenges associated with a “research as usual” approach to research partnerships in humanitarian settings, as power hierarchies may be particularly magnified in these settings. This paper is based on a comprehensive literature review and 32 semi-structured interviews with academics and practitioners from non-government organisations. Participants were selected purposively based on their experience in co-producing research or working within research partnerships. Some participants had worked in humanitarian settings while others had experience co-producing research in non-humanitarian contexts. We used Nvivo to thematically code data. This paper documents the problems with “research as usual” partnerships in humanitarian settings, specifically: the burden on communities as merely sources of data, certain forms of knowledge being valued over others, lack of reflection on the power hierarchies structuring research partnerships, top-down decision-making and lack of transparency, one-way “capacity-building”, lack of mutual benefit, and rigid research processes and timeframes. This paper highlights key challenges with standard research practices in humanitarian settings and identifies seven key principles of co-production that can be helpful in attempting to equalise power dynamics within research partnerships, specifically in conflict-affected and humanitarian settings. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13031-021-00399-w.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2.5
作者：
Green G;Johns T
通讯作者：
Johns T
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
Aabe, Nura O.;Fox, Fiona;Redwood, Sabi
通讯作者：
Redwood, Sabi
影响因子：
0.9
作者：
Clayson, Amanda;Webb, Lucy;Cox, Nigel
通讯作者：
Cox, Nigel
影响因子：
1.4
作者：
Fransman, Jude;Newman, Kate
通讯作者：
Newman, Kate
影响因子：
1.5
作者：
Beebeejaun, Yasminah;Durose, Catherine;Richardson, Liz
通讯作者：
Richardson, Liz