This article reflects on the praxis of collaborative research with social movements, taken here as reflexive/epistemic communities that develop their own para-ethnographic knowledge-practices. What does it entail to do research with subjects that conceive and conduct research as a key dimension of their political praxis? How does this affect the ethnographic encounter? How does it modify fieldwork? Drawing on my own research experience with social movement networks, I will discuss two challenges in collaborative research: a) the question of power, the (a)symmetry — the hierarchy — among actors; and, b) the concerns regarding the analytical autonomy of scholars. Within this framework, the article will advocate for establishing logics of co-presence and shared authority with our co-researchers.
English:This article reflects on the praxis of collaborative research with social movements, taken here as reflexive/epistemic communities that develop their own para-ethnographic knowledge-practices. What does it entail to do research with subjects that conceive and conduct research as a key dimension of their political praxis? How does this affect the ethnographic encounter? How does it modify fieldwork? Drawing on my own research experience with social movement networks, I will discuss two challenges in collaborative research: a) the question of power, the (a)symmetry — the hierarchy — among actors; and, b) the concerns regarding the analytical autonomy of scholars. Within this framework, the article will advocate for establishing logics of co-presence and shared authority with our co-researchers.
CR - Copyright; 2021 Asociación AIBR, Antropólogos Iberoamericanos en Red ER -