Presentation short abstract

We show how emotions shape decisions and interpretations throughout the entire research process. Using a self-reflexive analysis of intersectional positionalities, we explore how personal, professional and global events shaped our doctoral development and political ecology research in East Africa.

Presentation long abstract

Self-reflexivity is increasingly common in development and political ecology studies and attention to the role of emotions in research is growing. Yet, reflexive work on emotions often focuses mainly on the data-collection phase, usually tied to long-term, place-based fieldwork. Our paper departs from the conviction that researcher emotions influence actions, decisions and interpretations across the entire research process – from choosing where and what to study, to decisions about methods, theory and analysis. Acknowledging and reflecting on emotions throughout, we argue, can inform findings, enrich our disciplines and support researcher wellbeing. Grounded in a self-reflexive analysis of intersectional positionality, we – two white, European, queer women – reflect on how emotions linked to personal, professional and global events became entangled with our methodological pathways during our doctoral research in rural development in Uganda and Rwanda. We show how related emotional experiences, grounded in particular identities, translated into different methodological choices and research experiences due to our distinct positions and relations in university and field settings. Life and world events such as the Covid-19 pandemic, meeting a new partner and becoming a parent evoked complex, sometimes contradictory emotions that significantly shaped our methodological processes. By tracing this emotional journey, we demonstrate the subjective and messy nature of (postgraduate) development and political ecology research. We encourage political ecologists to attend closely to emotional and subjective experiences throughout the entire research. In doing so, we seek to promote greater transparency in methodological accounts and inspire to ‘alternative’ methodologies that challenge unrealistic scientific norms.