Paper short abstract:

This paper explores the ethical pitfalls of interacting with political elites in ethnographic research on global health diplomacy. It focusses on issues of consent and the unequal relationship between researcher and informant.

Paper long abstract:

Policy-making within global health is often a diplomatic endeavour: countries send delegations to places like Geneva and New York to agree policies and goals, ranging from World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Ethnographic research on ‘global health diplomacy’ relies on interaction with policy elites, at both national and international levels. These include representatives of the private sector and non-governmental organisations, scientific experts, civil servants and diplomats, including ambassadors.

In this paper, I discuss the opportunities and challenges of interacting with policy elites, examining negotiating access to institutions and meetings for participant observation, conducting interviews and communicating research findings. I draw upon several projects over the past twelve years on policy-making at the WHO and on Sweden’s role in global health policy, based on participant observation, interviews and archival research. While the vast majority of my interactions with policy elites have been positive, in the paper I discuss a situation in which an ambassador withdrew consent after reading my preliminary research findings, using degrading and bullying language to do so.

This vignette raises questions of consent, academic freedom, the protection of researchers and the relationship between public and private personas. While in many cases it is reasonable for individuals to censor material about personal opinions, I argue against government representatives censoring material about their official duties, and call into question the usefulness of traditional research ethical frameworks to handle these situations.