Paper short abstract:

To understand the asymmetries of scientific co-production of knowledge across the Global South/North divide, I propose a reflexive stance of the involved researchers in terms of methodology, epistemology and positionality.

Paper long abstract:

Following the postulation of a reflexive turn as a reaction to a crisis of representation in different disciplines (e.g. anthropology in the 80s or most recently migrations studies), we can identify different areas of research where reflexivity helps to see (power) asymmetries. These include methods, epistemologies, the research goals, or the positionality of the involved researchers. On the one hand the semantic modalities of representation are subject to critique and on the other there is the issue of positionality (who can legitimately speak for whom). These problematizations of asymmetries cannot be solved in a unidimensional way, because this would create new inequities. To understand the asymmetries of co-production of knowledge across the Global South/North divide, we should adopt a reflexive stance that opens up a meta-framework for reflecting and relating the diversity of different forms of knowledge production without having to synthesize them. This means embracing the methodological and epistemological pluralism that exists within the Global South/North and also across. I exemplify this by analyzing the difficulties that arose in the trans-university preparation of a seminar on 'Urban Transformations'. Actors from different European and African universities were involved, some of whom pursued very different agendas. The most important asymmetry concerned the epistemological-methodological approach regarding the goal of the seminar (more oriented towards science or applicability), its relation to practice and subsequent the adequate methods. The solution was no attempt to dissolve these differences but rather to appreciate the disparities as equal perspectives enriching each other in a pluralistic way.