Search results

This article aims to set a roadmap for an ethical programme, which we call “qualitative migration research ethics” (QMRE). It is a scoping review that maps current ethical challenges that migration scholars often face and provide guidance, while acknowledging the fact that many researchers deal with ethical issues on a case-by-case basis.

By connecting three lines of debates – ethics in social sciences, in qualitative research and in migration studies – this article addresses the following core questions: What are the particular ethical dilemmas in qualitative migration research (QMR)? How do migration researchers deal with these ethical dilemmas? What is the role of universal ethical codes of conduct and case-by-case ethical considerations in dealing with particular situations?

This review demonstrates that special aspects of migration research context, e.g. participants' mobility, potential vulnerability and migration as a politicized issue as well as the flexible and exploratory nature of qualitative research require particular ethical awareness that cannot be sufficiently addressed by standardized guidelines.

It proposes that efforts to raise ethical awareness must go beyond researchers' ethical confessions or blind adherence to pre-fixed guidance. Researchers must have critical “ethical radar” before, during and after their fieldwork; not only while working on extreme and vulnerable cases but also while doing all kind of research regardless of the level of vulnerability. Last but not least, this article claims the need for including critical ethical consciousness substantially in higher education programmes at the very beginning of the research career.

Argued is the need for: (1) a clearer interpretation of procedural ethics guidelines; (2) the identification and development of ethical field case study models which can be incorporated into university ethics teaching; (3) an understanding of the vulnerabilities of researchers and participants as reflected in the researchers' positionality and reflexivity and (4) ethnographic monitoring as a participant-friendly and participatory ethics methodology.

This article, drawn from the author's four-decade trajectory of collective ethnographic research, addresses the ethical challenges and dilemmas encountered by researchers when conducting ethnographic research, particularly with vulnerable migrant women and youth.

The author addresses dilemmas in field research resulting from different interpretations of ethics and emphasizes the need for researchers to be critically aware of their own vulnerabilities and those of migrants to avoid unethical practices in validating the context(s), language(s), culture and political landscape of their study.

The author presents case studies from the US and the Netherlands, underlining her positionality and reflexivity and revisits Dell Hymes' ethnographic monitoring approach as a participant-friendly, bottom-up methodology which enables researchers to co-construct knowledge with participants and leads to participatory ethics.

She presents case studies from the US and the Netherlands underlining her positionality and reflexivity and revisits Dell Hymes’ ethnographic monitoring approach as a participant-friendly, bottom up methodology which enables researchers to co-construct knowledge with participants and engage in participatory ethics.

Finally, she proposes guidelines for the ethical conduct of research with migrant populations that contribute to the broader methodological debates currently taking place in qualitative migration research.

Expected from this reading is the legacy that as a qualitative migration researcher one can after 4 decades of research leave behind as caveats and considerations in working with vulnerable migrants and the ethical dilemmas and challenges that need to be overcome.

This article engages with the framework of performativity to unpack ethical challenges of interviewing migrants in the setting of shared ethnic background of researchers and participants. From a temporal perspective of shifting contexts from a shared space of the research process, to the post-research reciprocity management, it focusses on the particular aspect of disclosure.

Drawing on several qualitative studies performed by the authors as Polish migrant researchers with Polish migrant communities in Norway, Germany and the United Kingdom, the article documents the ethical challenges that come from a shifting “audience” of the research performance.

Specifically, it discusses how the researchers perform their roles in the field with the focus on rapport building (relational disclosure), to then addressing how this performance changes when the dissemination of findings (representational disclosure) begins and continues over time.

This article contributes to the long-standing anthropological debate on self-reflection in the field. Also, demythologizing the relations between a researcher and participants, as well as cautioning research by reporting difficulties at different stages of the research process, will likely make it easier for future researchers who may now be better prepared and anticipate the complexities of doing fieldwork. From a temporal perspective, it can also help a broader scientific community avoid pitfalls from presenting unfavourable results prematurely. Thus, the authors hope that this paper may sensitize migration scholars to the possible predicaments in the process of interviewing their co-ethnics.

A methodological innovation lies in a clear focus on the cluster of ethical disclosure dilemmas and the article contributes to a lively debate on ethics of “insider research” in migration studies.

This paper describes distinctive ethical challenges encountered in qualitative research with migrant children. It brings attention to how the exploratory nature of qualitative research, intersected with the multifaced realities of migrant children, shapes stances towards these ethical challenges.

The paper is developed through conceptual and reflective contributions. It narrates distinctiveness within ethical challenges via the literature. It then illustrates these, through the author's experiences of negotiating such tensions on a project with a category of migrant children, namely, separated children.

Ethical choices are made throughout the research processes. These choices need to be matched to distinctive childhood and migration intersections, and methodological frameworks must reflect these, including when applied to standardised ethical guidelines. Transparency, reflexivity and positionality influence these choices, and researchers have enhanced responsibility to minimise harm in how they research migrant children.

Findings relate to work in development, where sensitivities regarding research conduct are still present. The scope is therefore on particular challenges of dealing with ethical codes and practices. The intention of the author is for this to be a reflective discussion producing paper, but not a practice guide.

Its value is centred on taking generalised ethical challenges in qualitative work with children and systematically contextualising these regarding factors specific to migrant children, arguing that the way which migrant children are represented is in itself a key ethical challenge. It further contributes to the body of knowledge by describing procedures of a qualitative study which address some of this distinctiveness.

Prejudice against Jews was part of the landscape in the Union of South Africa long before Nazism made inroads into the country during the 1930s, at which stage Jews constituted approximately 4.6% of the country’s white (or European) population. Aggressive Afrikaner nationalism was marked by fervent attempts to proscribe Jewish immigration. By 1939, Jewish immigration was included as an official plank in the political platform of the opposition Purified National Party led by Dr D.F. Malan, along with a ban on party membership for Jews residents in the Transvaal province. Racial discrimination, in a country with diversified ethnic elements and intense political complexities, was synonymous with life in the Union long before the Apartheid system, with its official policy of enforced legal, political and economic segregation, became law in May 1948 under Dr Malan’s prime ministership. Although the Jews, while maintaining their own subcultural identity, were classified within South Africa’s racial hierarchy as part of the privileged white minority, the emergence of recurrent anti-Jewish stereotypes and themes became manifest in a country permeated by the ideology of race and white superiority. This was exacerbated by the growth of a powerful Afrikaner nationalist movement, underpinned by conservative Calvinist theology. This chapter focusses on measures taken in South Africa by organisational structures within the political sphere to restrict Jewish immigration between 1930 and 1939 and to do so on ethnic grounds. These measures were underscored by radical Afrikaner nationalism, which flew in the face of the principles of ethics and moral judgement.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of migration on the livelihoods of Ethiopians. It is widely acclaimed that migration has positive effects on livelihoods. This paper investigates whether this claim is a fallacy or a reality. Can migration be conceptualized as a strategy for livelihood enhancement? Although Ethiopia has a large number of migrants both internally and externally, this paper focuses on the impact of external migration on the livelihoods of Ethiopian migrants and their families.

Using primary data, the paper attempts to establish whether migration enhances livelihoods. Qualitative data are used. Primary data were collected and analyzed using SurveyMonkey. SurveyMonkey is an internet-based software that has a facility for interview questions and it analyses data automatically on submission of responses. The survey achieved a response rate of 52 percent (218 out of 420). A follow-up survey, done between March 20 and April 16, 2018 to validate the online responses, involved 12 respondents.

Results show that migration is important in the sustenance of livelihoods. Both pecuniary and non-pecuniary benefits have been realised. In addition, migration also benefits development at home.

The Ethiopian Government should develop policy options that promote the inflow of remittances for livelihood enhancement.

The paper uses SurveyMonkey to gather data from a number of respondents (crowdsourcing data collection). The SurveyMonkey made possible a crowd data gathering process.

A reflexive ethnographic account of the practical and emotional challenges encountered by the researcher during fieldwork is too often separated from the analytical research results, which, as argued by this paper, downplays or even ignores the analytical value of the encountered challenges. Drawing on personal examples from ethnographic research in immigration detention, the purpose of this paper is to show that these challenges have an intrinsic analytical value.

Ethnographic research was carried out in two immigration detention centres in Belgium and one in the Netherlands. Observations, informal conversations with detainees and staff, and semi-structured interviews with detainees were triangulated. Extracts from fieldnotes are presented and discussed to demonstrate the analytical value of the challenges experienced during fieldwork.

Three important challenges are presented: distrust from organisational gatekeepers and research participants, disruptions of the organisational routines, and witnessing and experiencing feelings of powerlessness. The analytical value of these challenges is strongly connected to theoretical and analytical themes that emerged during the research.

Ethnographic researchers are encouraged to explicitly treat the reflexive accounts of practical and emotional challenges as “data in itself” and as such nested within their analytical results.

The paper is a conceptual investigation of the metaphysics of personal identity and the ethics of biometric passports. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Philosophical argument, discussing both the metaphysical and the social ethics/computer ethics literature on personal identity and biometry.

The author argues for three central claims in this paper: passport are not simply representations of personal identity, they help constitute personal identity. Personal identity is not a metaphysical fact, but a set of practices, among them identity management practices (e.g. population registries) employed by governments. The use of biometry as part of these identity management practices is not an ethical problem as such, nor is it something fundamentally new and different compared to older ways of establishing personal identity. It is worrisome, however, since in the current political climate, it is systematically used to deny persons access to specific territories, rights, and benefits.

The paper ties together strands of philosophical inquiry that do not usually converse with one another, namely the metaphysics of personal identity, and the topic of identity in social philosophy and computer ethics.

To critically analyse how Latin American migrant women entrepreneurs living in Ireland and the UK negotiate their entrepreneurial and motherhood identities in transnational settings. The paper explores (1) how motherhood influences the choices of becoming entrepreneurs; (2) how women reconcile the social imaginaries of motherhood from their country of origin in the new contexts of settlement; and (3) the impact of these transformations on their businesses.

This paper draws on six biographical case studies (three in Ireland and three in the UK) and employs the theoretical lens of translocational positionality to analyse entrepreneurship as context-specific and relational processes that bring together a multiplicity of social and geographical locales.

Latin American women entrepreneurs navigate their roles as “good mothers” and “good businesswomen” by simultaneously (1) complying with core values of marianismo that confine them to traditional gender roles and (2) renegotiating these values in ways that empower them through entrepreneurship. Finally, juxtaposing these two contexts (Ireland and the UK), this study (3) illuminates the similarities of the ever-continuing gender power struggles of egalitarianism for Latin American migrant women in both contexts.

Despite the agreed need for exploring motherhood as one of the critical aspects shaping family and business cycles, this area needs to be sufficiently analysed in its intersection with ethnicity or migratory status, particularly with participants from the global South. This article aims at bridging that gap.