Contribution short abstract

This study explores research as a relational and political practice, showing how positionality shapes decisions about benefits, narratives, and validity. It reflects on rethinking extractive practices and navigating ethical tensions within institutional structures for just knowledge creation.

Contribution long abstract

This contribution reflects upon research as a relational and political practice, drawing on lessons from collaborative work on socio-environmental issues in Latin America decolonizing knowledge creation. We are researchers from an international think tank focused on sustainable development, headquartered in Sweden but working from the Latin America regional office. In a region where colonial legacies remain, these histories shape us as researchers—our motivations, the questions we ask, and the decisions we make. Rather than treating positionality as a methodological add-on, we approach it as an embodied practice that actively shapes how research unfolds—who defines project goals and benefits, which narratives gain visibility, whose knowledge counts as valid, and how one navigates within institutional funding structures.

Through this lens, we explore an iterative and continuous process of transforming research practices, rethinking our academic backgrounds, which privilege technical expertise and extractive evidence standards, even with the best intentions. We discuss how shifting toward relational research requires rethinking our roles—from experts who lead to facilitators, companions and learners in shared processes of knowledge creation.

We also criticize narrative construction: who shapes the stories told about territories and the underlying assumptions they reinforce, and which worldviews are sidelined. Finally, we address ethical dilemmas in fundraising, including the strategic use of “Trojan horse” language to access donor agendas, noting both its usefulness and its risks of diluting transformative worldviews.

Overall, this contribution argues that positionality-in-practice is essential for resisting epistemic extractivism and fostering more just, reciprocal, and transformative research relationships.