Send message to Authors

Paper short abstract

The precondition for fieldwork in the archive is knowing about it and getting access. Despite attention from scholars, activists, and policymakers, access remains shaped by informal power structures. How can more ethically sound archival practices and pluralistic interpretations be promoted?

Paper long abstract

The precondition for conducting fieldwork in the archive is knowing about and getting access to the archive. In the emerging field of postcolonial provenance research, issues relating to the accessibility of collections and archives have therefore been a central point of debate. Activists and scholars have demanded more transparency and easier access to holdings. Guidelines and policies that aim to create frameworks for more equitable knowledge production have urged institutions and their staff to provide online inventories, respond promptly to requests, and disclose what they have. However, despite this long-standing attention from scholars, activists, and policymakers, access to archives remains shaped by multiple layers of informal power structures. Too often, the decision about who gets access and to what, as well as the knowledge about who does which kind of research in that particular archive, lies with the very same individual. Informal networks of gatekeeping and selective granting of access are far more common than formal frameworks suggest, and archives often operate without formal, transparent rules regarding their politics of access. Complex webs of dependency and a lack of institutionalised, transparent monitoring, mediation, and accountability complicate an open discussion of such hindrances. In this presentation, we would like to discuss the impact of these conditions on the production and circulation of knowledge. What strategies can be developed to ensure more transparent, accountable, and ethically sound archival practices that foster pluralistic interpretations of the diverse field sites?