Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Robtel Neajai Pailey
(London School of Economics and Political Science)
Kalpana Wilson (Birkbeck, University of London)
Kamna Patel (University College London)
Althea-Maria Rivas (SOAS University of London)
Jenna Marshall (University of Kassel)
Send message to Convenors
- Discussants:
-
Zuleika Sheik
(Erasmus University Rotterdam)
Clive Gabay (Queen Mary University of London)
Heloise Weber (The University of Queensland)
Jemima Pierre (University of California, Los Angeles)
- Formats:
- Roundtables
- Stream:
- Decolonial and anti-racist perspectives
- Sessions:
- Monday 28 June, -
Time zone: Europe/London
Short Abstract:
The Race and Development Working Group is pleased to facilitate a three-part Roundtable Series on the nexus between race and development, with particular emphasis on racialised ways of knowing development; racial capitalism, imperialism and development; race, racism and the everyday in development.
Long Abstract:
ROUNDTABLE 1: Racialised ways of knowing development
Racial epistemology concerns who can know, how they come to know and what counts as evidence for knowing. It contends that answers to these questions are built upon racialised taxonomies of value in the academy and society. Value regimes extend from individual researchers and their 'place' in the academy through to research methodologies.
Inherent in racialised ways of knowing development are questions of authority and legitimacy in the knowledge production process: from theorising to execution at the policy level. This includes those who do not have the authority to know or whose knowledge is rendered negligible, as illustrated by the continuous subject position of the subaltern vis-a-vis the 'epistemic entitlement' of the development expert (Thapar-Björkert and Farahani, 2019).
In Roundtable 1 of the Race and Development Roundtable Series, we will address these provocations:
1) How do racialised ways of knowing development shape what questions are deemed worthy to ask and what answers can be heard?
2) How are different knowledge producers given priority or status in the production and dissemination of useful knowledge on development practices, policies and theories?
3) What space is given or can be claimed for reflexivity, as an ethical necessity, to identify racialised ways of knowing in any and every development research project?
4) What moments are created to halt or reverse the reproduction of power embedded in racialised ways of knowing development?
5) Where does anti-racist knowledge production sit within moves for epistemic plurality? What tensions might arise?