Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

Eco-ethnography in Pattiyawala, a rural village in Sri Lanka, revealed the ethical ambiguities innate in human–non-human relationships and their implications for participatory research. Exploring how moral controversies intersect with collaborative knowledge production to enhance citizen science.

Paper long abstract

Eco-ethnography in Pattiyawala, a rural agricultural village in Sri Lanka, revealed the ethical ambiguities inherent in human–non-human relationships and their implications for participatory research. Two field episodes: a boy discarding a fish kept briefly as an ornament, and the killing of a mother dog and her puppy by a local hunter, highlight how care, harm, and moral responsibility are interpreted divergently, challenging assumptions about right and wrong (Despret 2004; Haraway 2008; Puig de la Bellacasa 2017).

These tensions were not only morally striking but also shaped the design and practice of collaborative citizen science, as weekly language lessons became sites for negotiating knowledge, discussing multispecies ethics, and reflecting on local environmental engagement. The fieldwork shows that ethical pluralism complicates standard approaches to participation: what counts as “responsible” or “caring” varies across actors, requiring citizen science initiatives to adapt to contested moral landscapes rather than imposing uniform scientific or ethical frameworks.

By foregrounding how moral controversies intersect with collaborative knowledge production, this study illustrates the methodological potential of eco-ethnography to make citizen science more attentive, context-sensitive, and socially accountable, especially in situations where environmental practices and values are politically, culturally, or ethically contested. In this sense, attending to ethical ambiguities in the field contributes to broader discussions on polarization, inclusion, and the negotiation of authority in participatory science.