Qualitative methods in globalisation studies : or, saying something about the world without counting or inventing it
Sullivan, Sian and Brockington, Dan (2004) Qualitative methods in globalisation studies : or, saying something about the world without counting or inventing it. Working Paper. Coventry: University of Warwick. Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation. Working papers (University of Warwick. Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation) (No.139).
WRAP_Sullivan_wp13904.pdf - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Official URL: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/csgr/research/wo...
This paper originally appeared as a book chapter in a volume oriented towards social science graduate students preparing for fieldwork, primarily in ‘developing country’ contexts. It has been reworked extensively here as a contribution for a recent CSGR seminar series by core research staff regarding our methodological approaches to research. As such, the paper provides an overview of some qualitative research methods in the social sciences, and of their relevance for conducting research in a continuing context of ‘globalisation’: which here refers to increasing supraterritoriality in domains of human organisation, and the relative collapsing of temporal and spatial scales that this implies. We focus on three key methodological domains: participant observation (and/or observant participation), oral testimony and the production of ethnographic texts; discourse analysis; and considerations of the subjective implied by phenomenological and embodiment approaches. We also make some comments regarding relationships between qualitative and quantitative methods and the implications of these different tools for engagement in terms of the information they yield. We observe that it is not so much research methods that have changed under contemporary globalisation processes. Rather, we note that orientations to research and to the interpretation of ‘findings’ - particularly in relation to certainty, to the implications of notions of difference and ‘the other’, and to aspirations of objectivity - have been much affected by the intertwined theoretical fields of poststructuralism, postcolonialism and feminism. Thus by highlighting the infusion of power in research praxis as in social relations more generally, we acknowledge the always politically constitutive role(s) of academic engagement.
|Item Type:||Working or Discussion Paper (Working Paper)|
|Subjects:||H Social Sciences > H Social Sciences (General)
J Political Science > JZ International relations
|Divisions:||Faculty of Social Sciences > Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation|
|Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):||Qualitative research, Globalization -- Research, Discourse analysis, Ethnology -- Qualitative research|
|Series Name:||Working papers (University of Warwick. Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation)|
|Publisher:||University of Warwick. Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation|
|Place of Publication:||Coventry|
|Official Date:||April 2004|
|Number of Pages:||29|
|Status:||Not Peer Reviewed|
|Access rights to Published version:||Open Access|
|Version or Related Resource:||Adapted from: Brockington, D. and Sullivan, S. (2003) Qualitative methods. In Scheyvens, R. and Storey, D. (eds.) Development Fieldwork: A Practical Guide, London: Sage Publications, pp. 57-74.|
Barker, C. and Cox, L. (2003) ‘“What have the Romans ever done for us?” Academic and activist
Actions (login required)