Highlighted Selections from:

‘Beyond Text’: Exploring Ethos and Method in Co-Producing Research with Communities


DOI: 10.1093/cdj/bst008

Beebeejaun, Y et al. “‘Beyond Text’: Exploring Ethos and Method in Co-Producing Research with Communities.” Community Development Journal 49.1 (2014): 37–53. Web.

p.38: Some argue thatmarginalized groups cannot contributemeaningfully to analytical thinking (Richardson and Le Grand, 2002); ‘naı¨ve knowledges [are seen as] beneath the required level of [. . .] scienticity’ (Foucault, 1980, p. 82). Some argue that there are many other techniques for making the substantive content of research accountable to the true complexity of participants’ views, which do not pose the risks inherent in participation (Wingenbach and Phillips 2004). That the perspectives of research participants can be so glibly dismissed is perhaps indicative of the hidden power dynamics at work (Redwood, 2008, p. 7; Orr and Bennett, 2009) and reects deeper tensions in howdifferent forms of knowledge are seen, produced and validated. -- Highlighted mar 13, 2014

p.38: Others have challenged the lack of evidence on the impact of participatory research (Catalani and Minkler, 2009); as Riger comments, simply ‘intending to create social change is no assurance of actually doing so’ (1992, p. 736). Ghose (2007) highlights that where attempts at participatory research have been made, continuing structural inequalities, hierarchical dominance and fluctuating resources within spaces for engagement create new divisions within communities. -- Highlighted mar 13, 2014

p.39: Despite these challenges to participation, the marginalization of communities remains, along with a need to form different patterns of connectivity with those in power and claimto speak on their behalf. Could different approaches to doing research help to shift power towards the powerless? -- Highlighted mar 13, 2014

p.40: These approaches propose that research is done inways thatpromote and privilege the voice of the community, is respectful of local or indigenous practices and is culturally safe (Williamson and de Souza, 2010, p. 1). Documentation of participatory approaches to research illustrates specific sets of research tools and technical tips about process, for example in toolkits based on international research (Reitbergen, McCracken and Narayan, 1998). However, participatory approaches to research and moves towards co-production in research are also distinct in terms of broader ethos and approach. -- Highlighted mar 13, 2014

p.41: Challenges to power asymmetries would need to unpick a deeply rooted set of power relationships, tensions about different claims to knowledge and complex accountability and governanceworlds. ‘Interactive knowledge production’ rests on developing a shared ‘thought style’ (Pohl et al., 2010, p. 271) within a ‘boundary space’ which facilitates different social worlds working together, with ‘distinct lines of accountability to each’ (Pohl et al., 2010, p. 268). -- Highlighted mar 13, 2014

p.41: All of this suggest that some of the barriers to co-productive research are greater than technical issues such as the application of specic participatory research methods. -- Highlighted mar 13, 2014

p.42: For Walker (2010), academic practices can be a refuge from engagement, describing the peer review process as ‘epistemological protectionism’ which asserts monopoly rights to defining and legitimating knowledge. -- Highlighted mar 13, 2014

p.48: Clements et al. (2008) warn against the fetishization of community participation processes (p. 3). In a dynamic two-way process, beyond-text methods in our case studies provided a symbolic way for communities to voice their dissatisfaction with gaps in a co-productive ethos and challenge academic-led processes. -- Highlighted mar 14, 2014

p.48: Simply applying the label of ‘co-production’ to research does not mean scholars are truly delivering on their desired aims. Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed gives enough warning: ‘The leaders cannot treat the oppressed as mere activists to be denied the opportunity of reection and allowed merely the illusion of acting, whereas in fact they would continue to bemanipulated – and in this case by the presumed foes of manipulation’ (1970, p. 107). -- Highlighted mar 14, 2014

p.49: One conclusion from our work is that toolkits focusing on specic research methods and other technical solutions are insufcient to challenge the underlying power dynamics which prevent their application. -- Highlighted mar 14, 2014