Frontline collaborations: The research relationship in unstable places

Abstract

The stereotype of the ethnographic research assistant as marginal figure, 'inside' enough to facilitate access but 'outside' enough to broker worlds of understanding, has likely always been a fiction. But as qualitative researchers increasingly focus on unfolding events in unstable places, research collaborators are even less likely to be the ambiguous figures of legend. To conduct research in violent environments, researchers often find that they must rely on individuals who are central to the unfolding story of conflict. This piece explores the implications of one such relationship. In the exchange recorded here we examine what it means for ethnographers and participant/research assistants to collaborate on a project of 'frontline' anthropology. Through our own experiences during and after the war in Sierra Leone and Liberia, we focus on the ethics of ethnographic access and the problems associated with constructing ethnographic histories.

Exploring the Backstage: Methodological and Ethical Issues Surrounding the Role of Research Brokers in Insecure Zones

“…In addition researchers who originate from, or who have spent considerable time in the research setting often also become brokers for new researchers (or journalists, humanitarian workers etc.) arriving to an unknown field (Sangarasivam 2001, Luning 2013, Hoffman and Tarawalley 2014, Middleton and Cons 2014; see also contribution by Utas) or act as brokers in relation to other members of a larger research team (see the contribution by Myrttinen and Mastonshoeva).…”

“…While local brokers, such as research assistants, interlocutors and a variety of 'fixers' play a crucial role in most research contexts they tend to be particularly important in violent theatres. Not only do they have the in-depth knowledge that enables them to gather data on sensitive topics, they are also crucial in enabling researchers to navigate safely through 'dangerous fields' (Kovats-Bernat 2002) or 'frontlines' (Hoffman and Tarawalley 2014) whilst doing what Nordstrom and Robben call 'fieldwork under fire' (1995). From dealing with reluctant state agents and fostering sufficient trust to gain access to isolated groups (e.g., Norman 2009), to managing perceptions of the researcher and obtaining updated security information on the security situation: locally based brokers are key resources and gatekeepers (Campbell et al 2006, Luning 2013, Middleton and Cons 2014, as well as security and crisis managers (Mandel 2003, Hoffman and Tarawalley 2014, Jenkins 2015).…”

Research Brokers, Researcher Identities and Affective Performances: The Insider/Outsider Conundrum

“…My concern in this paper is about non-Western researchers from the Global South, based in research and academic institutions in the West, and who navigate the conflict field in Global South settings with the help of local research brokers (Sangarasivan 2001, Lunn 2014, Parashar 2014, Crawford et al 2017. The difficulties for Global South researchers based at 'foreign' and Western institutions are compounded by how they are perceived in the Global South field sites and the complex relationship they share with brokers and their research subjects (Lunn 2014, Hoffman and Tarawalley 2014, Giwa 2015, Schiltz and Büscher 2018. They are both 'insiders' and 'outsiders', viewed as 'native informants' or as privileged class of natives who can benefit the brokers and research subjects.…”

“…They also develop complex relationships with brokers in the field, some of which have been documented in written texts (Middleton and Cons 2014, Giwa 2015, Sharma 2018. Increasingly, university-based academics and researchers have also been collecting data in conflict zones, 1 and many have reflected on their methodologies, positionalities and privileges (Helbardt, Hellmann-Rajanayagam and Korff 2010, Bush and Duggan 2013, Duggan and Bush 2014, and to a lesser extent on data collection processes especially related to navigating a tough, dangerous and foreign terrain (Helbardt et al 2010, Hoffman andTarawalley 2014). Academics have always distanced themselves from journalistic processes, referring to the significance of method, ethics and rigour in data collection.…”

On Brokers, Commodification of Information and Liberian Former Combatants

“…Similar complexities especially began to characterise my view of David as an informant. Five years after first meeting him I remain in a similar ambiguous situation as where Joe Sacco was left with his Fixer in the graphic novel of the same name (Sacco 2004), to which Danny Hoffman deservedly first drew attention to in his pioneering article on research assistants (Hoffman and Tarawalley 2014). There are simply so many contradictions between David's stories and those told by people close to him that drawing any conclusions from them appears risky.…”