Theorizing Risk and Research: Methodological Constraints and Their Consequences release_un2w3uxmenagpb5fnygtfoh5mm

by Geoffrey Swenson, Kate Roll

Published in PS: Political Science and Politics by Cambridge University Press (CUP).

2019   p1-6

Abstract

<jats:title>ABSTRACT</jats:title> Conflict, postconflict settings, and other risky research sites are important with wide-ranging policy implications. Microlevel, field-based research lends critical insights to how conflicts work and the mechanisms behind macrolevel correlations that underpin quantitative political science. This article identifies how the risks associated with conflict and postconflict contexts influence researchers' choices by theorizing the existence of distinct adaptive strategies. Specifically, researchers facing elevated risk generally manage it through three main strategies: outsourcing risk, avoiding risk, and internalizing risk. We argue that these strategies systematically shape and circumscribe outputs. We conclude by discussing how the relationship between risky fieldwork and what we know about conflict is poorly acknowledged. Thinking about how we manage risk should play a larger role in both our preparation for and interpretation of research, particularly in conflict and postconflict contexts.
In application/xml+jats format

Archived Files and Locations

application/pdf   547.1 kB
file_j2f7gfp6dzehver3ulcmrcsf54
www.cambridge.org (web)
web.archive.org (webarchive)
Read Archived PDF
Preserved and Accessible
Type  article-journal
Stage   published
Date   2019-12-09
Language   en ?
Container Metadata
Not in DOAJ
In Keepers Registry
ISSN-L:  1049-0965
Work Entity
access all versions, variants, and formats of this works (eg, pre-prints)
Catalog Record
Revision: 9cc49993-decd-4094-92a8-caeca9ce9d1d
API URL: JSON