Research ethics and the study of armed actors

Process vs. Practice

Datos Bibliográficos

ID5680693
AutoresChristine Cheng (0000-0002-2556-9813, King's College London, autor de correspondencia), Clive Day (0000-0002-7340-348X, College of Charleston)
Año2024
Volumen24
Número6
Páginas501-523
Fecha de publicación2024-11-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaConflict Security and Development (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1467-8802 • E-ISSN: 1478-1174
EditorialInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/14678802.2024.2436546
OpenAlexW4405719066
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas1
Referencias citadas64

This Special Issue assesses the state of the field and advances corresponding debates by reflecting unflinchingly on the unanticipated costs and consequences that have resulted from our collective studies of armed actors, especially in unstable and insecure settings. We introduce the idea of research silences – the controversial topics, regions, populations and perspectives that tend to be neglected or avoided, representing an ethical blind spot for the field. And we show how existing research ethics frameworks do not align with the realities of how field research is actually conducted on the ground. We propose a shift towards a more adaptive and context-sensitive approach to research ethics that prioritises reflexivity and acknowledges the fluid power relations between researchers and armed groups. We also advocate for ethical practices that foreground the protection of both participants and researchers, ensuring that ethical considerations are embedded directly into the research design. The ultimate goal of this special issue is to align how we discuss and practice research ethics so that it genuinely reflects the realities of studying armed actors

Engineering ethics · Epistemology · Political science · Sociology · Computer Science · Engineering · Gender, Security, and Conflict · Health and Conflict Studies · Philosophy · Political Conflict and Governance