Abstract
Qualitative empirical enquiries into dynamics of security and insecurity often include a blind spot that bear theoretical ramifications because only those areas and respondents that allow for relatively safe fieldwork are studied. To transparently articulate the spheres of projection that creep into our knowledge production, we propose a distinction between inner and outer circles as highly fluid but separate geographical, socio-political and methodological spaces. Drawing on fieldwork in the Central African Republic and South Sudan, we discuss the risks posed by incomplete data and subsequently flawed inferences. We argue that the perceptions of fear projected onto the outer circle shape people’s behaviour more than measurable insecurity incidents and that increased interaction between actors in both circles reduces the perceived threats coming from the outer circles. We demonstrate how studying insecurity from inner circles risks securitizing outer circles while further centralizing the inner ones. We thus urge transparency in data collection and the related inferences that underpin our knowledge production.
Highlights
Qualitative empirical enquiries into dynamics of security and insecurity often include a blind spot that bear theoretical ramifications because only those areas and respondents that allow for relatively safe fieldwork are studied
Academic work on security dynamics and causes of conflict risks is often inferred from a mixture of hearsay, projections and assumptions voiced by people who were accessible to the researcher
In Obo, for instance, we focused on the alleged Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) threat – which to this day internationals describe as the main danger in the area – and the relations between local inhabitants, security actors, and the massive international intervention missions stationed in this peripheral town
Summary
Qualitative empirical enquiries into dynamics of security and insecurity often include a blind spot that bear theoretical ramifications because only those areas and respondents that allow for relatively safe fieldwork are studied. We hoped we could find out more about the presence and movements of the Darfuri rebels present on South Sudanese soil, but the priest and others were keeping quiet about it all It had taken several days of convincing before National Security in Wau agreed to let us, two white researchers based at European knowledge institution, visit Raja. What we could get a glimpse of was its impact on people who were afraid to talk about it and the quick silencing of those willing to discuss the issue This brings us to the heart of the twofold dilemma this article addresses: 1) What can we know about dynamics of (in) security in spaces outside our immediate observation? Academic work on security dynamics and causes of conflict risks is often inferred from a mixture of hearsay, projections and assumptions voiced by people who were accessible to the researcher
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
