© UNHCR 2007, all rights reserved
‘I know what you're doing’, reflexivity and methods in Refugee Studies
European University Institute, Florence, Italy
 |
Abstract |
|---|
What considerations should inform the choice of methods in Refugee Studies? In a widely shared dictum of social science, the primary research question largely conditions the methods chosen to answer it. More problematic is whether the meta-purpose – the ultimate purpose and target audience of our research – conditions methodology. This paper analyses the methodological implications of different primary and meta purposes of research in Refugee Studies and shows how and where the two are linked. One prominent feature of forced migration is that it frequently takes place in a highly political environment. This has direct methodological consequences. For a number of reasons discussed here, forced migration research can be described as taking place in what sociologist would call situations of ‘heightened refl exivity’ where both findings and terrain are strongly infl uenced by the presence of the researcher. Drawing on Weber's ‘science as a vocation’ and Barbara Harrell-Bond's defence of ‘advocacy research’, the final section of the paper suggests some of the methodological and ethical consequences of this fact.
Key Words: methodology • refugee studies • forced migration • advocacy research • ethics
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  O. Bakewell Research Beyond the Categories: The Importance of Policy Irrelevant Research into Forced Migration Journal of Refugee Studies, December 1, 2008; 21(4): 432 - 453. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|