Science for Success—A Conflict of Interest? Researcher Position and Reflexivity in Socio-Ecological Research for CBNRM in Namibia
Koot, Stasja ; Hebinck, Paul ; Sullivan, Sian - \ 2020
Society & Natural Resources (2020). - ISSN 0894-1920
CBNRM - conflict of interest - critical discourse analysis - methodology - Namibia - objectivity - professionals - reflexivity - researcher position
This paper emphasizes the importance of researcher position and reflexivity for professionals in the ecological and development sciences. We draw on critical discourse analysis (CDA) to analyze a selection of scientific papers written by Namibian Community-based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) professionals and their relationships with public discourse regarding this conservation and development program. These papers mainly show “success” whilst disregarding “failure” of elements in the program that elsewhere are highly criticized (especially trophy hunting and ecotourism). In addition, they seem to disregard questions concerning researchers’ conflicts of interest that bear on the papers’ “objectivity.” We argue that such positions beg more transparency and epistemological accountability. In particular, we propose greater disclosure and reflexivity regarding researcher positioning as an important methodological response for illuminating when and how researchers have an interest in specific outcomes of their research, so as to enhance interpretation of the knowledge produced by such research.
Getting down to business? Critical discourse analysis of perspectives on the private sector in sustainable development
Cummings, Sarah ; Seferiadis, Anastasia Alithia ; Haan, Leah de - \ 2019
Sustainable Development (2019). - ISSN 0968-0802
critical discourse analysis - international development - Millennium Development Goals - private sector - sustainable development, Sustainable Development Goals
Critical discourse analysis is employed to examine discourses of the private sector within key texts of the Millennium Development Goals and the Sustainable Development Goals. Taking a genealogical approach, four discourses are identified in the literature: the dominant, pro-private sector discourse, showing unconditional support for the private sector; the sceptical discourse; the middle-ground discourse with new approaches, specifically designed to leverage development relevance; and the antiprivate sector discourse, which considers that current approaches to the private sector will not be conducive to sustainable development of the global South. The pro-private sector discourse was found to be predominant within the global goals, reflecting the post-Washington Consensus as well as the role of the developed countries and the corporate sector in their formulation. All discourses on the private sector, however, place an emphasis on economic and social development at the expense of the key environmental component of sustainable development.
Trust and hidden conflict in participatory natural resources management: The case of the Pendjari national park (PNP) in Benin
Idrissou Aboubacary, L. ; Paassen, A. van; Aarts, N. ; Vodouhè, S. ; Leeuwis, C. - \ 2013
Forest Policy and Economics 27 (2013). - ISSN 1389-9341 - p. 65 - 74.
critical discourse analysis - organizational trust - integrative model - distrust - realities - future
This paper investigated how and why the issue of trust building between the park direction and the local communities gave way to a hidden conflict in the participatory management of the Pendjari national park (PNP) in Benin, and how it was managed. The findings revealed that calculus-based trust was built at the beginning of the process and enabled an improved relationship and collaboration between the park direction and local communities, and a subsequent raise of wildlife in the park. However, dysfunctional use of the trust built led to the emergence of distrust, which evolved into conflict. This conflict was hidden by the illusion of peaceful relationships between the stakeholders as pursued in common meetings. It was noticeable only through accusations on each other, including the shift of responsibility for solving the conflict when discussing the management separately with the different stakeholders. We conclude that (dis)trust should not be looked as a static/cognitive state, but as a dynamic frame that may be strategically used in interaction.