2025/07/01 by Meera Kaul Shah, Ben Tantua, Joe Devine · 1 voice
Social Sciences · #Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics #Social Science and Policy Research #Gender, Security, and Conflict
paper · doi:10.1177/16094069251369310
openalex publication_date 2025/07/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
Research in conflict settings is evolving, especially regarding the institutionalization of ethics. Despite an emphasis on standardized ethical guidelines, the reality is that ethical considerations in conflict environments often leans on the researchers’ own intuition, rather than strict adherence to academic rules, acknowledging the dynamics of power and politics present in conflict research. This paper advocates for the need and value of continuous and multifaceted reflexivity to effectively navigate these dynamics. It argues against a uniform approach to ethical guidelines, suggesting instead that researchers need to flexibly adjust their methods according to varying contexts for deeper field engagements. This paper draws from the field experiences of two researchers who used political ethnographic methods in diverse conflict settings: one in the former Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan (FATA) and the other in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria. It delves into discussions on the perspectives of insiders versus outsiders, examining how differing levels of reflexivity, shaped by diverse experiential backgrounds and positions, influence knowledge production. By comparing our interactions in two varied conflict environments, we outline unique trajectories and demonstrate how the intricate, rich knowledge of insider researcher, alongside the objective, distanced observations of outsider researcher, provide complementary perspectives for both developing a critical reflection and engagement in conflict research. Questions about ethics, power imbalances, emotional management, and how to immerse within the field emerged during our fieldworks, and our findings illustrate that constructivist customized context-specific reflexivity enhances security, ethics, as well as research quality. The integration of these reflexive approaches promotes innovative solutions, benefiting practical applications in conflict studies.