Paper short abstract:

Moving beyond transparent reflexivity, this paper engages with absences, fallibilities and moments that require translation. How do researchers align theoretical priorities with the community concerns we want to advance, and address challenges of co/producing knowledge that speaks beyond academia?

Paper long abstract:

'We want our land back!' This autoethnographic account explores efforts to bridge the dualism between academic research and community activism through transnational collaboration. Moving beyond 'transparent-reflexivity' (Maxey, 1999), the paper will engage with absences, fallibilities and moments that require translation. As researchers, how do we align our theoretical priorities with the concerns of communities whose struggles we want to advance? How do we deal with the challenge of co/producing knowledge that ‘speaks’ the political languages of communities beyond the academy (Nagar & Ali, 2003)? It is about working with individuals and groups who see academic research output as a ‘fairly obvious’ message. E.g., it is obvious that their land rights are violated, and they experience high levels of food insecurity. All they want is their land back! I explore how building transnational collaboration can be useful for challenging the divide between politics on the ground, and research as an academic practice. This transnational activity becomes a process of learning to learn from ‘the South’ (Nagar & Ali, 2003). It is about co-determining the specific way in which ‘researchers’ can be accountable/responsible to marginalised people’s struggles for self -representation and self-determination (Visweswaran, 1994). It is a gradual and progressive journey for understanding multiple ways in which communities/individuals from the ‘South’ conceptualise and represent their struggles and challenge the problematic assumptions made by dominant forms of land ownership, including the messy dynamics of voice, authority and representation.

Paper short abstract:

Having completed my PhD about the 1999-2004 wars in Ambon, Indonesia, in this paper I would like to share my reflections about what accountability and responsible research mean to me as someone who decided to do research with her own community instead of about them.

Paper long abstract:

I just started my PhD in The Netherlands back in 2012, when a family friend I met during an event asked what my PhD was about. My research was set to understand the violence generally framed as ethno-religious conflict between Muslims and Christians in Ambon, the capital of Indonesia's province of Maluku. So responding to his question, I answered, that my PhD was about the Ambon Conflict.

I shall never forget his expression when he quietly responded that Ambon had given many people their PhDs. After all, ever since the early years of the conflict international researchers pursuing their doctoral degrees have visited Ambon for their fieldwork. I was to be one of them, of course. Yes, I am also an Ambonese who went through a violent conflict myself. Yet what makes me different from others who obtained their PhDs because Ambon went through years of violence?

This brief encounter (still) serves as a reminder throughout my research journey, reminding me of whom I should be accountable to. It cannot and should not be just the scientific community. I should be able to be held accountable by the people of Ambon who went through the wars between 1999-2004, whose embodied experiences of violence, whose stories and (re)memories led me to my academic degree.

In this space, allow me to share some of my reflections about what accountability and responsible research mean to me as someone who decided to do research with her own community instead of about them.

Paper short abstract:

Exploring human rights and development issues in North Korea raises a crucial methodological question regarding the agency of North Korean interviewees and scholars. Based on postcolonial theories, this paper addresses the agency and power dynamics within the academic and N. Korean studies domains.

Paper long abstract:

Can the subaltern speak? As G. Spivak asked this question many decades ago, the question is still valid for scholars who have been attempting to find the voices of North Koreans. This is particularly the case in research that deals with the daily lives of North Korean people and their human rights. However, while North Korean Studies has been dominated by scholars who have researched North Korea from both inside and outside the country, there have been relatively few studies on the methodological issues involved in studying North Korea.

The primary challenges in studying people’s daily lives in North Korea are that most foreign researchers either cannot visit North Korea at all or are very restricted in where they can travel, and academic freedom is highly restricted in North Korea. Therefore, under such restrictive conditions, the methodologies available to scholars who study North Korea are quite limited, including 1) relying on information from North Korean migrants who left the country, 2) studying materials published by official North Korean sources, and 3) more recently, making use of satellite images and GIS data (Son 2022).

While each method of approaching North Korea has advantages and disadvantages with regard to studying the country and its people, this paper particularly aims to focus on the first method of utilizing verbal accounts provided by North Korean settlers in other countries, mainly in China and South Korea and also with a few cases in the UK (Lee 2019, Lee and Lee 2014). This indeed is a method that is widely used since it is North Korean migrants who can most fully describe daily life in North Korea from their direct personal experience. Various methods of data collection have also been used, including (among others) surveys, experimental research methods, and in-depth interviews, often combined with an ethnographic or phenomenological approach.

Indeed, since many scholars, research organizations, and governmental organizations want to interview them, most North Korean migrants have multiple experiences of acting as research participants. These unique experiences of North Korean migrants could be used positively in many ways if research guidelines are strictly employed in the field. Unfortunately, however, this is not always the case, and this raises ethical questions regarding the methodological approach.

This issue becomes even more challenging when dealing with human rights issues in North Korea. Because of its notoriety regarding human rights violations committed under its authoritarian political regime, North Korea has been the target of many human rights organizations, governmental organizations and researchers who have been working on that topic. Since human rights studies often have to deal with people’s deeply personal experiences that many respondents may find difficult to share, studying human rights in North Korea calls for even more sensitive approaches. However, several respondents have indicated that this was not their experience and their voices got lost in human rights activism or research on North Korea.

What are the fundamental issues underlying this issue that North Korean respondents repeatedly raise? Is it due to the social environment in South Korea, where most of the studies on North Korea are being conducted? Or are such phenomena the result of specific characteristics or circumstances in the academic community? Or is it a fundamental issue that cannot be avoided in social science studies, as has been pointed out in many studies into methodological issues? Or is it simply caused by the capability of an individual researcher?

This article is based on the research experience of the two authors, one from South Korea and the other born in North Korea, and aims to answer the above questions using post-colonial theories and various other concepts discussed in the literature on methodology.

* The previous version of this paper in Korean received a Vice Prime Minister Award.

Paper short abstract:

Insights on reconciling decolonial feminist theory with praxis amid colonial challenges, emphasizing the clashes between activism and academia and the hypocrisy of academic institutions supposedly committed to those theoretical approaches. Autoethnographic reflections on academic responsibility.

Paper long abstract:

This article aims to analyze the challenges of reconciling theory and praxis at a time when decolonial theory is prominent, and the feminist perspective is assumed in progressive social science environments. It explores how this reality directly clashes with the academic practices of institutions that self-define as critical, feminist, and decolonial. To achieve this, we will first define the characteristics of militant feminist decolonial research. Subsequently, we will contextualize the situation in Palestine in the aftermath of the 7th of October 2023. Finally, we will resort to autoethnographic practice to investigate responses to academic responsibility issues that arise in this period. The objective is to examine the practical limitations of theory and the theoretical constraints of praxis at the intersections between activism and academia.

Paper short abstract:

The paper will explore the politics of co-production in all the labours associated with research in critical development studies, and set out some parameters for a sustained, critical exploration of responsibility along this journey.

Paper long abstract:

The paper will explore the politics of 'co-production' in all the labours typically associated with research in 'critical development studies'. In doing so, it will set out some parameters for a sustained, critical exploration of responsibility along this journey. The journey invariably starts with the seeding of an idea for a research project, its germination in discussions with others, the recruitment of trusted (or simply expediently located) research partners, along with the harnessing of intellectual capability and institutional/reputational capacity into an (invariably interdisciplinary) 'team' that will go on an often emotionally fraught journey together. The early stages of the journey frequently include last minute revisions to budgets and the eleventh hour tweaking of 'work packages'. With funding secured, the nuts and bolts of the endeavour must be thoroughly visibilised, contracts signed and responsibilities to 'deliver' outputs cemented in place. But deliver what exactly? on what basis? and ultimately, to whom is it a benefit? What, in the final analysis, are these many things that we seek to 'co-produce' in the course of multi-institutional, multi-locational research? Can an explicit, sustained and critical consideration of 'responsibility' assist us to do these things in qualitatively better ways?

Paper short abstract:

This paper delves into the nuances of research carried out by organizations led by refugees collaborating with academic entities.

Paper long abstract:

This paper delves into the intricacies of research conducted by organizations led by refugees, specifically B&Z Lebanon, collaborating with the University of Sussex in Brighton, UK. The partnership was characterized by high-caliber qualitative research and meticulous data gathering, yielding exceptional academic results. The collaboration emphasized the need to critically examine power dynamics and injustices inherent in traditional research paradigms, shedding light on the experiences of researchers from refugee-led organizations. The Innovative research challenged established power structures, advocating for a collaborative, participatory model extending beyond extractive practices. This paper underscores the importance of responsible research, urging a shift from sterile ethical debates to inclusive methodologies. It emphasizes the crucial need to critically evaluate power dynamics in traditional research, endorsing a collaborative model, responsible research, and a thorough examination of temporal aspects of research responsibility. Additionally, it explores the impact of emerging technologies on refugee research, proposing balanced approaches, and scrutinizes temporal aspects of research responsibility, including project timelines and ongoing commitments. Aligned goals encompass not only research but also the identification of future interventions for the refugee community.

Paper short abstract:

It is very critical to probe the intricate interplay of research ethics in a polarized world. This study explores the complex decisions researchers encounter in upholding ethical standards amid contemporary controversies, contributing to a discourse on responsible research practices.

Paper long abstract:

As a researcher from an international crops research organization, ethical considerations are pivotal in projects involving human participants. Researchers bear responsibilities to ensure the well-being and confidentiality of study participants, contribute positively to society, meet commitments to funding agencies, uphold academic integrity, and respect cultural sensitivities, especially in the rural agrarian context in India. Additionally, interdisciplinary collaborations demand effective communication and mutual respect among collaborators from diverse disciplines. The case study highlights the successful attainment of research objectives. However, it underscores the need for the research team to expand their involvement beyond the initially identified participants. To catalyze collective action, the team actively engaged additional household members, demonstrating the dynamic and inclusive nature of the research process. In conclusion, this exploration underscores the critical role of ethical considerations throughout the research continuum. From the meticulous integration of ethical principles during project design to the sustained commitment to participant welfare, transparency in dissemination, and the evaluation of long-term impacts, ethical responsibility remains paramount. Challenges, particularly in engaging illiterate and low socio-economic groups, emphasize the importance of vigilant ethical practices. The presented case study further exemplifies the adaptive nature of ethical research, necessitating outreach beyond designated participants for effective collective action. This reaffirms that ethical research is not only a procedural requirement but an ongoing commitment to integrity, inclusivity, and societal well-being. Researchers must continually navigate the ethical landscape, recognizing its dynamic nuances to ensure meaningful contributions to knowledge while upholding the dignity and rights of all involved groups.

Paper short abstract:

In Africa, the "publish or perish" mindset among academics escalated breaches of research integrity. This paper reports confirmed cases of violations of research integrity and case studies by an author who handled several research grants aimed at developing strategies to tackle academic dishonesty.

Paper long abstract:

Ethical considerations and research integrity are parts of the big issue in academic dishonesty which has generated serious concerns in higher educational institutions and research agencies in Africa. Taking Nigeria as a big mirror of the African continent, there are confirmed and reported cases on the violations of research ethics and integrity by academics in a bid to satisfy personal interest. This paper chronicles several of such cases as well as reports findings from empirical case studies among faculty and students of higher educational institutions. It adopts the Hong Kong five principles (responsible research practices; transparent reporting; open science (open research); valuing a diversity of types of research; and recognizing all contributions to research and scholarly activity) as basis for drawing up questionnaire items for eliciting responses from participants in a bid to measure their compliance with ethical responsibilities and research integrity. This is part of the author’s long-standing research efforts to develop proactive frameworks for checkmating academic dishonesty which attracted research grants from the Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFund) and the National Research Fund (NRF) of Nigeria. From the findings in these previous studies, it was noted that the “punitive sanctions” meted out to culprits who were found guilty of involvement in academic dishonesty have not been deterrent enough. Therefore, the “preventive” approach becomes very pertinent. Several suggestions are made on how the preventive approach could be applied to ensure research integrity and address the question of “responsible research”. Researchers should be responsible to humanity and its survival.

Paper short abstract:

Researching pregnancy, childbirth, and sensitive personal information usually requires several steps of ethics checks. Again, respondents may object to disclosure. Even with a disclosure agreement, personal data protection might be complicated. The respondents might hide or improvise original inform

Paper long abstract:

A researcher must adhere to research ethics. Upholding research ethics would be simple when the research does not involve any sensitive personal information. However, when it comes to collecting data on medical issues, complicated pregnancy or childbirth, critical illness, or involving vulnerable adults, there might be three alternative scenarios. The respondents often tend not to participate, respond anonymously, and do not share accurate information or provide improvised responses. All these three scenarios entail three different types of challenges of doing ethical research. When the respondent completely denies participating, it involves additional time and resources to recruit new respondents. Anonymous responses could be dealt with by marking the answer scripts as non-disclosure. However, in this case, respondents would have to completely rely on the research ethics of the researcher, which might put the respondents in a vulnerable position. For the last scenario, the data collection and quality of research is severely hampered. Knowing the fact that the respondents might be manipulating the response, since there is no way to verify the information, the researcher is bound to depend on the saturated response as part of doing responsible research.

This context above presents an ethical dilemma for the researcher between the need to collect authentic data and adhering to research ethics.

Keywords: Ethic challenges, Sensitive information, Research Ethics, Data collection, ethical dilemma.