Abstract

This article outlines the debate around the emancipatory claims of community-based research (CBR) and identifies discursive frictions as a pivotal point upon which much of CBR practice revolves. Using a Foucauldian theoretical lens, we suggest that CBR is neither inherently emancipatory nor repressive, but that research outcomes are more often a product of power asymmetries in CBR relationships. To illustrate how power asymmetries in research relationships produce discursive frictions, several studies from our work and the literature are presented. The article provides examples of CBR relationships between the researcher and community members and relationships within the community to illustrate how power asymmetries and discursive frictions in these relationships dynamically influence research outcomes and thus alert researchers to the need to address power asymmetries not just before initiating CBR projects, but during CBR projects as well. We interrogate how power asymmetries and discursive frictions operate and are constructed in CBR in an attempt to highlight how research might be conducted more effectively and ethically. Finally, we indicate that some of the tensions and challenges associated with CBR might be ameliorated by the use of participatory facilitation methodologies, such as photo-voice and story circle discussion groups, that draw attention to power asymmetries and purposefully use more creative participatory tools to restructure power relationships and ultimately address the inequities that exist in the research process. Because CBR is continually caught up in power dynamics, we hope that highlighting some examples might offer an opportunity for increased dialogue and critical reflection on its claims of empowerment and emancipation.Keywords: discursive friction, Foucault, participatory methodologies, power asymmetries, research relationships, emancipatory research

Highlights

  • Community-based research (CBR) is a preferred approach to conducting research that affects disenfranchised groups because of its egalitarian tenets and its emphasis on building partnerships between the researcher and the community. Strand et al (2003) characterise CBR as a collaborative engagement between academic researchers and the community that endorses multiple sources of knowledge and has as its goal the pursuit of social justice

  • The purpose of this article is to detail some of the dangers inherent in uncritical CBR practice, highlight the pervasiveness of power asymmetries in CBR relationships, and explore how Foucault’s notions of power can be used to interrogate how CBR partnerships function and how they might be challenged through participatory methodologies to achieve

  • It is an attempt to generate dialogue and understanding of how a research practice that is aimed at restructuring power relationships can be used to reinforce inequities

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Community-based research (CBR) is a preferred approach to conducting research that affects disenfranchised groups because of its egalitarian tenets and its emphasis on building partnerships between the researcher and the community. Strand et al (2003) characterise CBR as a collaborative engagement between academic researchers and the community that endorses multiple sources of knowledge and has as its goal the pursuit of social justice. 76) troubles the emancipatory claims of CBR and notes that it is ‘deeply contextual, inevitable and uneven, not manipulated yet still dynamic’ She questions the material practice in CBR by academic researchers of ‘giving up’ power and ‘taking up’ new subject positions, and suggests that this practice is used to co-opt the voice and knowledge of the community by reinscribing academic privilege to the academic in the production of knowledge. Guta, Flicker and Roche (2013) explore the disconnect that exists between the stated emancipatory goals of CBR projects and practices that inadvertently advance oppressive neoliberal agendas They identify the process of community ‘capacity-building’ that involves finding the ‘right’ community members to train, to help achieve the goals of the research project, as a technology of governance that reshapes community life by differentiating between community members who can do research and those who cannot. This perspective offers the opportunity to critically examine CBR praxis on a case-by-case basis

Objectives
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call