New publication on researcher, assistant and participant subjectivities

Situated knowledge in cross-cultural, cross-language research: a collaborative reflexive analysis of researcher, assistant and participant subjectivity 

Martina Angela Caretta 

This article analyzes situated knowledge through the lens of the author and her three field assistants. This work is written self-reflexively and is based on geographical fieldwork in Eastern Africa. It seeks to capitalize on the personal and professional relationships of the researcher and her field assistants to improve both research outcomes and working arrangements. Reflecting on episodes of failure, anxiety and misunderstanding, it disentangles the power geometry of situated knowledge and sheds light on the vital role played by the assistant/interpreter and by his/her positionality ‘in the making’ of cross-cultural, cross-language research. Grounded in a feminist epistemological perspective, this article shows that methodological reflexivity should engage not only the researcher or the participants but also the field assistants. This praxis is crucial to enhancing the validity of studies conducted in a cross-cultural, cross-language environment across social science.

Read the full article here doi:10.1177/1468794114543404

Frosty and cold winter .. . .

July 11th  at 0730. A frosty morning the Witwatersrand University research station at Komati Gorge.

For a Swede it does not really make sense to leave for 25 degrees South and 1600 m above sea level in the middle of July, when summer finally has come to the northern hemisphere. But the attraction, in spite of cold mornnings and cold lecture halls, is the combination of a meeting in Komati Gorge and surrounding Bokoni area with the network "African Farming: an interdisciplinary pan-African perspective on farming" and the long row of papers presented on the "Farmers" session of the combined meeting in Johannesburg of The 14th Congress of Pan African Archaeological Association for Prehistory and Related Studies & The 22nd Biennial Meeting of the Society of Africanist Archaeologists. Four papers and two poster presentations report on work in the interdisciplinary Bokoni research programme, where one component has been the cooperation (2010 to 2012) between South African archaeologists and Swedish geographers under Swedish-Research Links programme.  New to me this time were the commendable efforts to make Bokoni sites accessible for the general public and to cooperate with local communities in this. This webpage is an example of this. It provides a good overview of the fascinating history of the Bokoni people and their system of intensive and terraced agriculture.

Hydropatriarchies and landesque capital.

2014 is the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations’ year of family farming.Moreover, the African Union designated 2014 the year of agriculture and food security. Family farming, and hence food security, in Africa would not be possible without the contribution of women, who make up for circa 50% of small holder farmers. The majority of agricultural production in Africa is in fact in the hands of smallholders. Nevertheless, women´s role in agricultural production is still somehow not at the forefront of the debate on food security, as it should be. Continue here...

This is the blog post I wrote on the RGS-IBG journals blog Geography Directions to advertise my recent publication on The Geographical Journal titled 

Hydropatriarchies and landesque capital: a local gender contract analysis of two smallholder irrigation systems in East Africa

Here is the abstract: 

Water is a natural resource whose control for productive purposes is often in the hands of men. Societies grounded on such unequal gender relations have been defined ‘hydropatriarchies’. Against this background, this paper presents a gender analysis of landscape investments, conceptualised as landesque capital in smallholder irrigation farming in East Africa. Based on the analysis of how local gender contracts are negotiated, I argue that as processes of landesque capital formation are often explicitly gendered, attentiveness to gender dynamics is required to fully understand such practices. Moreover, as investments in landesque capital, for example, irrigation, terracing and drainage systems, have primarily been conceptualised as the result of men's systematic work, this study highlights women's contributions to the creation of landesque capital, taking smallholder irrigation as an example. Findings show that a distinction between ‘incremental’ and ‘systematic’ change (Doolittle 1984; Annals of the Association of American Geographers 74 124–37) is central to understanding the gender dynamics of landesque capital investment, but it is not sufficient. As women's work processes are typically not systematic, possibly promoting incremental change, they contribute to the production of landesque capital by supporting and facilitating men's work. However, the work of women is, as a rule, homogenised and stereotypically rendered as reproductive and secondary, due to the underlying cultural norms that limit, control or exploit women. This conceptualisation, or rather lack of, I argue, risks leading to a gender-blind analysis of land use intensification processes. Building on the gendered and symbolic nature of landesque capital, I propose a local gender contract analysis that integrates the cultural, symbolic and physical dimensions of the local gender division of labour into agricultural work and landscape change processes.

Read the full article here