Paper short abstract:

In the context of my research experiences in Ethiopia and the making of an ethnographic documentary (“Arho”), the primary aim of this presentation is to provoke conversations that allow for an exchange of ideas and visions about what the future of (visual) ethics can, should or must look like.

Paper long abstract:

Insofar as ethnographic practice involves representing others, it always raises political and ethical questions of the power asymmetry between the researcher and the people they are working with. Unfortunately, in the last few years Universities in the United Kingdom and elsewhere, have moved quickly from seeing ethics as a process that can help think through research, to treating ethics as a form of compliance and subtle form of censorship.

This development raises fundamental methodological and moral questions about consent and responsibilities of anthropologists conducting ethnographic research. If we consider anthropology (ideally) to be a reflexive dialogue, a co-production, and re-discovery of knowledge, how can this help us think about the ethical and political implications of ethnographic research? After all, is this not what participant observation teaches us? To question, rethink, and reflect upon our intellectual abilities and moral resources? How then can make our reflexive practices visible when presenting our work? Furthermore, is moving towards online research and correspondences via social media really “innovative” or are these new methodological approaches just posing more challenges to the key ethical research principles of consent, voluntary participation, and vulnerability?

In the context of my concrete research experiences among pastoral groups in north-eastern Ethiopia and the making of an ethnographic documentary (“Arho”), the primary aim of this presentation is to provoke conversations that allow for an exchange of ideas and visions about what the future of (visual) ethics can, should or must look like.