...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Contemporary social science >Environmentalist protection: feminist methodology and participant risk for research with Chinese NGOs
【24h】

Environmentalist protection: feminist methodology and participant risk for research with Chinese NGOs

机译：环境保护：女权主义方法论和与中国非政府组织进行研究的参与者风险

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Environmentalism has emerged as an arena in which Chinese civil society has become increasingly active, with influence potential still unimaginable in other areas. While the political sensitivity of environmental research and safety concerns for environmentalist participants have certainly dissipated somewhat since the 1990s, ethical considerations remain crucial for my research on Chinese non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and corporate environmental responsibility. The relative legitimisation of NGOs presents a new dilemma for contemporary fieldwork; participatory methods and publication of findings may affect - for better or worse - the activities and results of organisations and members. This article examines how methodological approaches affect researcher positionality and participant risk for environmentalist fieldwork in China. Reflecting on interviews in Beijing, Yunnan and Zhejiang during 2015 and 2016, it presents feminist techniques as one means to reconcile the tension between the academic urge to more deeply understand participants' experiences and the ethical desire to avoid impacting their safety or organisational activities. Building on Harding's [(1987). Feminism and methodology: Social science issues. Bloomington: Indiana University Press] 'standpoint' epistemology and Worell and Etaugh's [(1994). Transforming theory and research with women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 443-450] feminist interviews, I propose extension beyond explicit gender research, and critically reflect on power and exploitation. Insights from fieldwork with environmentalists in China may support contextualised application of feminist methodologies to reduce participant risk in broader politically sensitive areas.
机译：环保主义已经成为一个舞台，在这个舞台上，中国公民社会变得越来越活跃，在其他领域，影响力仍然难以想象。尽管自1990年代以来，环境研究的政治敏感性和对环保主义者的安全担忧已经消散，但是出于道德考虑，对于我对中国非政府组织（NGOs）和公司环境责任的研究仍然至关重要。非政府组织的相对合法化给当代田野调查带来了新的困境。参与性方法和调查结果的发表可能会（无论好坏）都会影响组织和成员的活动和结果。本文探讨了方法论方法如何影响中国环境主义者实地考察的研究人员的地位和参与者风险。回顾2015年和2016年在北京，云南和浙江的采访时，它提出了女权主义技巧，作为调和学术冲动（一种更深刻地了解参与者的经历）与避免影响其安全或组织活动的道德愿望之间的张力的手段。建立在哈丁的[（1987）。女权主义和方法论：社会科学问题。 Bloomington：印第安纳大学出版社]的“立场”认识论和Worell and Etaugh的（（1994）。与女性一起改变理论和研究。 《女性心理学季刊》，第18期，第443-450页），我建议将范围扩展到明确的性别研究之外，并批判性地反思权力和剥削。在中国与环境保护主义者进行的实地考察得出的见解可能会支持女权主义方法在情境下的应用，以减少更广泛的政治敏感领域的参与者风险。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号