Exploring Sensitive Topics in an Authoritarian Context: An Insider Perspective*

Abstract

Object. This article examines the methodological challenges of ethnographic research on ethnic and religious minorities, in an authoritarian context in the Russian Federation, conducted by an insider researcher. Method. The article focuses on the peculiarities of the insider position in the field of research on understudied topics concerning ethnic and religious minorities. These cover issues of influence of national and local academic agendas on the process of the research, credibility management in a highly dynamic political environment, research safety, and the researcher's influence on the field. Results. The article identifies three main challenges in doing ethnography in illiberal settings. First, the imposition of oblique political limitations on the research agenda of local researchers creates a form of methodological nationalism, leading to a paucity of research on some critical topics. Second, the continuous introduction of new restrictive legislation not only results in difficulties of accessing the field, but also demands constant reevaluation of the sensitivity of the questionnaire. Respondents often express anxiety while discussing even quotidian practices because it becomes difficult for them to anticipate whether, when, or how new restrictive legislation will be enforced. Thus, they expect insider researchers to be aware of the legal ramifications of their research. Not only does this nullify the author's ability to adopt a stance of naivety, it also means that researchers bear a greater burden in convincing respondents that the information provided will be handled responsibly. Finally, the ethnographer is constantly faced with difficult decisions regarding both scholarly and ethical reliability and, hence, is required to continuously review research ethics in such a dynamic political context. This article offers suggestions for overcoming these difficulties by means of social networking services and constant critical reflexivity. Conclusion. Authoritarian settings pose many challenges to insider researchers. The study of minority groups can be particularly sensitive since illiberal regimes often seek to homogenize their populations and portray minority groups as a threat to justify the state's increasing control over the population. Exploring even mundane, everyday manifestations of ethnicity in such situations can become highly sensitive and raise methodological problems such as limitation of available academic literature and funding, greater responsibility for research and participants' safety, and forced partisanship.Scholars of authoritarianism often argue that apart from the lack of fair elections, authoritarian regimes are also characterized by violations of the rights to freedom of expression and access to information, which make fieldwork in areas under such regimes especially difficult. However, authoritarianism does not necessarily undermine the generation of meaningful data (Reny, 2016). In spite of academic reflections on risks, challenges, and ethics in doing fieldwork in authoritari...

Guest Editor’s Introduction: “Everyday Nationalism in World Politics: Agents, Contexts, and Scale”

“…For scholars conducting qualitative research on everyday ethnicity or nationhood, these hierarchies inhere in the relationship between researcher and respondent and are typically encountered in terms of navigating one's positionality as insider, outsider, or both. 5 In turn, respondents provide insight into the broader associations and power relationships that they associate with ethnic or national identification and potentially with the identities and organizations that intersect them like race (Smith 2015), religion (Stroup 2017), or domestic political regimes (Yusupova 2019).…”

The religious field in a Russian Muslim village: A Bourdieusian perspective on Islam

“…The networks data collection followed the cognitive social structure method. All interview recordings and SNA databases were destroyed after the analysis for ethical reasons (research participants’ security) (see more on why this research needs research participants safety in Yusupova, 2019). Important to note that, actual theological debates or religious practices of villagers were not the focus of the data collection, as they would be in anthropological research.…”

The politics of state celebrations in Belarus

“…My everyday language and manner of speaking have been shaped by the education I received outside Belarus. As an international researcher, I was not bound by the same institutional restrictions and limitations imposed on local researchers in sensitive political contexts (Yusupova, 2019). Similar to other international researchers conducting ethnographic fieldwork in Belarus (Hervouet, 2019; Sasunkevich, 2018), I did not establish any formal academic collaboration with local universities.…”