Re-imagining your knowledge equity praxis
Watch on YouTubeVideo summary
The speaker describes a significant shift in their research methodology, moving away from traditional academic exercises where they analyzed others' projects to designing their own participatory studies. A core component of this new approach is the integration of a "platform" for knowledge sharing directly into the research design, rather than treating dissemination as a final step. By engaging with organizations and gatekeepers early on, the researcher ensures that participants are involved in creating change or developing policies from the outset. This strategy involves realistic time commitments, such as meeting for half a day every three months to build tools and share knowledge together. Consequently, even if the formal project ends and practitioners return to their daily lives, the embedded sharing mechanisms ensure that valuable insights continue to benefit them long after the research concludes, effectively decoupling immediate utility from the rigid timeline of academic publication.
A pivotal moment in reimagining this praxis occurred when the researcher encountered a complex reality regarding sex work that challenged existing binary frameworks. The conventional academic view often treats sex work as a static status where one either is or is not in it; however, the speaker observed individuals who had left the profession to pursue other careers but still engaged in sex work during vacations. This nuance revealed that for many, sex work was not a defining moral identity but rather a fluid activity, rendering standard indicators of "exiting" sex work irrelevant. This finding forced a complete reversal of previous knowledge and research questions, demonstrating how lived experiences can invalidate linear assumptions. It highlighted the difficulty in addressing morally charged issues with simple binaries and underscored the need to adapt research frames to accommodate the messy, non-linear realities of human experience.
Furthermore, the speaker critically examines the concepts of privilege and intersectionality within their own positionality. Initially focusing on personal deprivation or discrimination, the analysis expanded to include privileges enjoyed not just by the individual but by their entire social identity, such as nationality or gender. The speaker argues that mainstream approaches often treat intersectionality as a simple linear addition of deprivations, whereas in reality, these identities interact in complex ways that cannot be easily quantified. To truly understand the lived experiences of underprivileged groups, the researcher advocates for a model inspired by Buddha, who abandoned his own privilege to become part of the community he studied. This suggests that researchers must subsume themselves into the cause they are investigating to gain genuine understanding, rather than observing from a detached, privileged position.
Despite these theoretical advancements and the growing importance of critical ethnography and postcolonial debates regarding the researcher's role, the speaker notes a persistent disconnect between academic requirements and practical impact. Universities still primarily demand arcane articles for career progression, even as there is increasing pressure to demonstrate knowledge exchange and societal impact. The speaker feels that while it is valid to write traditional papers, the true value of research lies in outputs like videos and guides that people can actually use. There is a strong belief that knowledge equity requires continuous involvement with participants throughout the entire research process, not just at the beginning or end. Although designing projects with these embedded sharing platforms has sometimes led to funding challenges, the speaker views this participatory model as an essential requirement for meaningful work, prioritizing practical utility and ongoing collaboration over distant, finalistic academic deliverables.
Read the full video transcript
So, how did I become able to do this
stuff? I mean, part of how I became able
to do this stuff was to get out of doing
other people's research and to design my
own research. But you know what? Having
that experience actually of having to
have been required to conduct these kind
of parachuting researches in little bit
parts and I've done analysis on other
people's projects. I've done interviews
on other people's projects. So, you
know, I did have all of that in my
background. I I guess I try and do this
with a lot of things that I do now is
that there's a platform built into it.
So, there's a sharing. So, there's maybe
four points. Depends on what it is. But
if you're engaging with organizations
and gatekeepers, they usually want the
knowledge straight away. You're also
interviewing them and they're part of
creating change or delivering a service
or maybe they're developing their own
policies. Increasingly I try to design
research that funds and incorporates and
is realistic about time saying to
practitioners for example you're going
to come for half a day every 3 months
and we're going to build together the
research tools we're going to build
together the knowledge we're going to
share the knowledge
>> and so that even if you get to the end
of that research project and you sat
around twiddling your thumbs well mean
people just get on with their lives
completely forget about it then 12
months later you come along going oh
I've published this article or I've
written this research report then you've
already hopefully benefited from some
kind of knowledge sharing. How we
look at uh look at this knowledge
transaction process or facilitation
process was to to say that uh our
knowledge on expertise on
on a particular particular aspect which
you engage with
is is going to be is zero whereas you
want to learn more from the rest of the
people. So you know as a as a
facilitation research itself is about
facilitation where we try to bring it
but some of the interesting thing which
I feel is with the with
intergenerational sex work you know
communities with which when I was
engaging with and uh uh the idea was to
find out about u
how they look at sex work right is it a
sex work is uh is it a work or is Is it
something which is not work and uh and
within the sex work is it a matter of
choice or is it a matter of being forced
into it or is it about you are being
forced into sex work but after that you
start exercising a choice to be in sex
work. So you have these different ways
to look at it. But one thing which uh
which I felt was um where I started
reimagining some of the knowledge some
of these debates was to and forced me to
go beyond it is probably one of the
scenarios where I found that the that
the that some of the girls with whom we
I was engaging with for them [snorts]
it was like as a as a researcher many of
us come with a binary either you are in
sex work or you are not in sex work.
Right? So if you have been taken away
from sex work means you are not in sex
work. So but here is a situation where
we met somebody that particular girl has
moved away from sex work and she's
largely into the into got into uh some
kind of a profession and she's engaging
in that work. But then when I was asking
talking to her and then she said that I
went back when I go for a vacation
summer vacation when I go back home I do
sex work. So then all your indicators
that whether you are no longer in sex
work does because the sex work is a
moral binary right it's like either you
are in sex work or not in sex work. But
these kind of people who get into sex
work and then leave for them sex work is
immaterial. it is not so important for
them to even look at sex work as a as
something which is defining them as a
thing. So while this kind of analysis
has happened for other things but for
something which is morally right or
wrong issue it's very difficult for us
to to put it in that kind of a thing. So
I thought those were some of the areas
where certain findings make you think
that uh you know some of the knowledge
which you had has to be has to be
completely reversed. So your indicators
have to change your all the research
frame questions might have to change.
All the questions were devised in such a
way that it is about one part of it. But
then this knowledge actually makes your
entire thing irrelevant. Earlier I was
looking at uh myself from the location
of uh what are the privileges that I
don't have or what are the things where
I feel discriminated what are the things
where I have a lived experience of uh
deprivation or discrimination
but then it it also had another aspect
of what are the privileges you have so
your locations is about about the
privileges that you enjoy privileges not
only you enjoy but privileges is that uh
that uh that the social identity of
yours enjoy. So you may not be enjoying
directly but anybody who is similar to
you uh do enjoy it. So in a way it's
about while in in such an
individualistic world where we we are
constantly look at everything from an
individual self whether it is about
deprivation or privilege.
there is an element of uh of privilege
which comes from your social identity,
national identity and many other
identities. Right? So that that that is
something which some of them have been
captured through feminism, some of some
isms but some of them are not because
they are they are largely intersectional
and more than intersectional also is
often looked at as a linear addition of
it. Like if you are a if you are a
female plus a black it is a female plus
black but often it is it is not as
linear addition of uh deprivations. So
intersectionality sometimes is uh this
uh mainstream isisms give you uh give
you give for example will give women a
privilege right within the patriarchy.
So how to how to understand those things
are something which is important to
important here to analyze that uh so in
my location I feel this uh uh constantly
a lot of things is about u about my
engagement with the with an
underprivileged
who is whom I am studying. So that power
thing matters. And for me uh the best
example of a of a researcher who I keep
in mind is is is is
Buddha. I would call him the first
researcher because if you if you look at
the history of his uh his life history
gave up his position of
privilege and he went and studied and he
became part of the
the cause which he is studying and he
just subsumed himself into that thing
and then he came out with a
recommendation or findings or what thing
and all. So in a way his life is a
history and it's a it's a kind of a
thing for any of many of us like
privileged who want to study
underprivileged. I think that's the
example which I always keep in mind that
you have to become part of the problem.
You have to become part of the cause
which you are studying for you to
understand that lived experience. I do
think that we are starting to really
take seriously changing the outputs and
I think that's something that has
changed critical ethnography I think no
m you know positionality all of those
debates the subalter the other
postcolonial approaches that haven't
been taken on board as much as they
should have been in my view have all
questioned a lot about the author
like and or the and the subject like
author or researcher researched
inside or outside and all these kinds of
things, but very much less critique
and advice and change has been
done in the area of what we do with all
of this stuff. It is still the case.
Obviously, we're universities. Our main
job is to write arcane articles. No
matter how much money gets spent on
knowledge, exchange and impact, that's
still what we have to do to be able to
get our job and keep our job and
progress in our job, right? But I do
think I feel that in this project for
example that I'm doing now that I mean
yeah of course I'm under pressure to
write an article about it and and you
know what I probably should but I do
feel like things have shifted a bit in
that it's valid more valid than it used
to be and okay the output of a research
project is some videos and guide stuff
that people might actually use. We still
have this idea that you do research, you
you start research, you plan research,
you do research, you finish research,
you come up with the genius plan and
then you share it with the world. I
think knowledge equity there needs to be
more involvement with people throughout
the course.
>> And I think having sharing and things
like that within a project built in and
these these are the sorts of projects
that I I mean I've put a lot of energy
and effort and time into trying to
design projects like that in recent
years and not been funded. [laughter]
For me, the work that I the area that I
work in now, it's a requirement. This is
the sort of thing that I'm working on.
It's like what I would call a platform
that is built as part of a research
project. So that it's not it's just so
distant and far off in time. Even if
it's a one-year project, you come to the
end and you do like a sharing of
research findings. And research findings
isn't even necessarily
like the way that we do it as academics
isn't even necessarily the most useful
thing.