The ethics of ethnographic methods in conflict zones

Abstract

This article examines the ethics of using ethnographic methods in contemporary conflict zones. Ethnographic research is an embodied research practice of immersion within a field site whereby researchers use ethnographic sensibility to study how people make sense of their world. Feminist, conflict and peacebuilding scholars who research vulnerable populations and local dynamics especially value ethnographic approaches for their emphasis on contextual understanding, human agency, egalitarian research relationships and researcher empathy. While immersion leads to knowledge that can hardly be replaced by using more formal approaches, it also elicits ethical dilemmas. These arise not only from the specific research context but also from who the researcher is and how they may navigate violent and often misogynous settings. I argue that many dilemmas may and perhaps should not be overcome by researcher skill and perseverance. Instead, ethical challenges may lead researchers to adopt limited and/or uneven immersion in their field site, not as failed or flawed ethnography but as an ethical research strategy that incorporates ethnographic sensibility to a varying extent. Examining why researchers may opt for limited and uneven immersion is important because in conflict research, stereotypes of the intrepid (male) researcher with a neutral gaze still tend to mute open discussions of how gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, class and other background factors inevitably shape immersion. This article seeks to contribute to creating discursive space for these conversations, which are vital for researchers to analyse, reflect and write from the position of a ‘vulnerable observer’ and incorporate greater transparency in the discussion of research findings.

Who researches organised crime? A review of organised crime authorship trends (2004–2019)

“…class, gender, race, ethnicity, national origin/ residency status) can also influence data access and collection. For instance, data access can be influenced by how the researcher performs ‘gendered social practices’ (Krause 2021 :335): ‘becoming one of the boys’ may facilitate discussions about violence while closing off more sensitive areas, such as past trauma (Baird 2020 ). Access to government data may also be restricted to citizens or permanent residents of that government’s country.…”

“…Organised crime scholars continue to face these challenges. Furthermore, depending on the methods used, empirical research on organised crime can be resource and time intensive, potentially risky, and fraught with ethical challenges (see Baird 2018 , 2020 ; Gundur 2022 ; Hobbs 2000 ; Krause 2021 ; Von Lampe 2016 ; Windle and Silke 2019 ). Researchers may find it difficult to convince risk-adverse university research ethics committees that the research will not harm the researcher, participants, or university’s reputation.…”

“…These experiences were often delegitimised and silenced by three widely held ‘fixations’: research should be solitary; experiencing danger in the quest for data glorifies the research, and ethnography requires intimacy with participants. Hanson and Richards concluded that the dominance of White males in academia makes it difficult for both women and men to report sexual harassment (also Krause 2021 ).…”

(Dis)courtesy Bias: “Methodological Cognates,” Data Validity, and Ethics in Violence-Adjacent Research

“…A common form of redirection is a participant in an academic interview asking for a form of aid or favor, often because they do not recognize the difference between a researcher and a humanitarian worker. Similarly, Krause (2021, p. 7) notes of her experience observing community peace meetings in Nigeria that simply “‘being there’ often [means] being perceived as understanding, professional, and available for social-psychological support.” Redirection can have diverse effects on research, from derailing interviews to opening new areas of inquiry, exposing participants to retraumatization, and eliciting poor-quality data. It may manifest in many types of research interactions, but is especially likely when participants feel as though the questions being asked or the measures used do not reflect their experienced reality (Field et al, 2019; Schlosser, 2008).…”

“…The ethics of working in or adjacent to conflict zones and humanitarian crises have received extensive scholarly treatment (Baele et al, 2018; Campbell, 2017; Fujii, 2012; Krause, 2021; Mackenzie et al, 2007; Masterson & Mourad, 2019; Mazurana et al, 2014; Parkinson & Wood, 2015; Pittaway et al, 2010; Singh et al, 2021; Wood, 2003, chapter 2, 2006). However, the ways that these settings affect scholars’ ability to collect high-quality, meaningful original data, as well as the relationship between data quality and ethical research practice, have received less attention.…”