Ethical Guidelines for Researchers in the Field of
Gender and Peace Building1
Women Waging Peace
November 2001
Preface
Activists often have bad experiences working with researchers. As one put it, “We have
been researched to death!” Conventional academic researchers and women activists can
have different perceptions of what constitutes good research. As a working group of
activists and researchers with Women Waging Peace, we offer here preliminary
principles as the foundation for a new relationship between researchers and women
activists in conflict zones. We welcome suggestions for additions, subtractions, and
changes.
I. Before leaving for the field
1. Ask yourself why you want to do this research. It can be tempting to want to visit
“exotic” places and meet interesting people, but you should want to contribute to
the peace process in some way and should ask yourself how you can make such a
contribution. It might be better to study the institutions in your own country or the
forces that impede peace.
2. Do extensive research on what else has been written on the area. DO NOT show
up ready to re-invent the wheel.
3. After you have done preliminary research and formulated your research question,
contact other researchers who have written on women peace builders in this area to
find out
a. whether there is unpublished research that covers the topic that you are about
to study;
b. in what ways you might be useful to the groups involved; and
c. in what ways you might end up wasting the group's time or even getting in the
way of their objectives.
1
Derived in the first instance from Simona Sharoni (The Evergreen State College), “Doing Research
On/With Women in Conflict Zones: Some Ethical Considerations.” Refined and expanded by delegates to
the Women Waging Peace Colloquium, held November 10-12, 2000, and sponsored at that time by the
Women and Public Policy Program, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. In
particular, the contributions of Waging member Zorica Trifunovic, from Serbia and Montenegro, have been
invaluable.
Report on 2001 Women Waging Peace Research Symposium
1
4. Find out as much as you can about the context and background of the politics on
the ground and the group itself.
5. Know the macro political and cultural environment in which you are working.
Know how your research fits into any political agendas. Know that you may be
putting people who participate in your study at risk and consider how you will
maintain their confidentiality.
6. Examine your own politics. What are your conclusions about the justice and the
injustice of the situation? Make yourself as aware as possible of your “eyes”—that
is, the implicit lens through which you will be observing the situation. Recognize
that your politics may conflict with your loyalty to the project and the groups
working together to reduce conflict or bring about peace.
7. Ideally, your relationship with a community group would begin with an invitation
to work with them on an issue they would like to examine. Another option is for
you to approach a community, express an interest in their work, and ask whether
they are interested in the project. You should make these contacts far in advance
of your planned field research to allow ample time for negotiations between you
and the community.
8. Think hard about the group and individuals you will work with. Recognize that
the individuals and group you choose to work with will affect the process and
product of your research. In a conflict zone, almost every individual and group
will be identified with a particular political stand and even perhaps a particular
group of friends. Many will also be identified with particular donor agencies or
political parties, etc. Whom you ally with will make a difference.
9. Work through community groups that already know the situation.
10. Make contact with a particular group (or group of individuals), and make sure they
want to have you working with them. Realize that allying yourself with a particular
community, especially in a conflict situation, can significantly influence the
outcome of your research.
a. Be clear about what you will be doing, your goals, and how much time your
work will take from the group members.
b. Make an agreement with the community about the purposes of the research,
what it will be used for, and what you will “give back” to the community (see
section II below).2
2
Many issues arise regarding agreements with a community on the topic and shape of the research. They deserve a
more thorough treatment than we can give here, but they include: 1) Researchers are often tempted to “overpromise.” We all commonly underestimate the time it takes to do something. This is fine when we are the only
ones to suffer the consequences, but when we promise something to others that we can't deliver on, we cross the line
into unethical behavior. 2) Sometimes researchers find it hard or impossible to develop appropriate guidelines on
what should be agreed on, as the community itself may come to understand its concerns only as the research
develops. The researcher should try to anticipate as many concerns as possible, and provide many moments of
consultation throughout so that concerns may be voiced as soon as they occur. See Section II for more on this topic.
Report on 2001 Women Waging Peace Research Symposium
2
c. Be sure to tell potential participants they have the right to refuse to be in a
study or to discontinue their participation at any time.
d. Recognize the community’s goals of image management. Be clear about
whether or not you will let members of the community determine the shape of
your reporting on the research.3
e. Make sure the community knows that nothing may come of this research,
unless you have some way of ensuring publication.
II. Working with the community: What’s in it for them?
A. Gaining and keeping trust in the research process
1. When you arrive, allocate enough time for the community to get to know you and for
you to get to know them. Make your other work available to them.
2. Become a “person” as well as a “researcher.”
3. Recognize the expertise of the community in all phases of the research. LISTEN.
4. Make your agenda explicit and transparent.
5. At minimum, abide by the principle “do no harm.”
6. Be careful not to reveal facts and figures that can be used against the community.
7. Adhere to strict principles of confidentiality as defined by the community.
8. Protect privacy. Respect the community’s culture. Do not intrude on sacred issues
or ask for information you should not have.
9. Act with humility and avoid being an alarmist. What you consider “earth shattering”
may not be so to the community you are studying.
10. Remember that a community in conflict is in trauma and in need. Act accordingly.
Know where to go for local support and referrals, especially when talking with
traumatized people (i.e., don’t forge ahead completely on your own).
11. If you think you will be interviewing anyone who might reveal private, painful, and
complex matters (such as rape or domestic violence):
a. Get training on how to respond sensitively.
b. Learn what helpful resources are available for the individual so that you can
possibly be of use.
3
This topic deserves further discussion—more than we can provide here.
Report on 2001 Women Waging Peace Research Symposium
3
c. Recognize that people tell the stories they want to tell. You may be of best use by
just listening.
12. Recognize that you will have an impact on those you interview. If you are
considered a threat, a valuable resource, or a source of status, you may change the
power or status of the person or group you interview.
13. Review results and analysis with members of the community.4
14. Be prepared to give something back (see below).
15. Talk with members of the community, and try to think ahead yourself, to understand
whether the research might be misused to promote injustice or undermine the aims
of community members.
16. Be prepared to use any power and position you have to assist those in the
community who work with you.
17. Be aware that the community may be interested in more concrete, tangible outcomes
than just “knowledge.”
“Giving back” to the community
Researchers need to work with the community to find out what THEY need to
know. Researchers also need to think of ways their research can help the
community. Unfortunately, it sometimes is difficult for a community to know
exactly what its needs are and/or what information they want back at the end.
You should be willing to volunteer your skills and connections to help the
community in the ways it decides it needs help. For example:
1. Provide information about the community that may be useful for attracting
government or donor funds (e.g., documenting problems and difficulties, such
as the number of women and children displaced, going hungry, or being raped
or abused).
2. Provide information about government or donor agencies useful for getting
funds (e.g., What agencies have what programs, and how does one apply?
What are the kinds of information they need to know to make application?
What are the categories they need to use to report such information?).
3. Provide help in applying for funds. This might include helping write
proposals and applications to government agencies and NGOs, or it might be
making contacts with NGOs, government agencies, and other potential
donors.
4
Be sure to leave enough time in your research for this process and work out some method of communication after
you have left the community.
Report on 2001 Women Waging Peace Research Symposium
4
4. Give information on what similar groups have done to meet their problems,
such as
a. External organizing: How to get women involved and working together.
b. Internal organizing: How to help women keep working together well.
c. Contacts across conflict lines: Which strategies have been successful? Which
have not?
5. Help create publicity, credibility, and legitimacy within the community in which your
group is located and worldwide.
6. Provide community members with skills training such as negotiation and conflict
resolution.
7. Train community members on how to conduct their own research (“grassroots
research”).
8. Improve international understanding of the conflict so that international policymakers
can make informed decisions to bring about peace.
III. “Participatory Action Research”
Participatory action research is a more time-consuming but more mutually rewarding form
of research than the more superficial type to which the general guidelines refer. In
participatory action research, the researcher and community actively collaborate on all
aspects of the research process in ways designed to benefit both. Although this takes
considerable time and energy for both the community and the researcher, we strongly
recommend it, particularly for extensive projects that will in any case engage the time of
community members. This is particularly valuable when the research is taking place in the
context of potential mistrust or in sensitive conditions.5
1. Each collaboration will be different, depending on the particular community,
researcher, and research project. Researchers need to work with the community to
determine what THEY need to know. Researchers will also need to think of ways their
research will help the community. Note that it is sometimes difficult for a community to
know exactly what its needs are and/or what information they will want back at the end.
2. Negotiate the terms of collaboration BEFORE the project begins. Bring the different
stakeholders to the table to discuss this issue. This process is EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT. It can also be time-consuming and contested, but time put in at the
5
Problems of implementing participatory action research include: 1. Proper acknowledgment of credit and
“ownership” for different authors and research participants; 2. Dual agendas, e.g., a) furthering the researcher’s own
career versus the needs of community; b) the pressure that funders may put on the researcher; c) tensions between
groups within the community; and d) competition with other agencies or researchers engaging in rapid assessments.
These issues deserve further discussion.
Report on 2001 Women Waging Peace Research Symposium
5
beginning will build trust later. Be prepared to change the entire shape of your project.
The negotiation should include who has control of the final product and what kind of
compensation the community will receive.
3. The community should outline its priorities and determine whether it would be useful to
them to embark on a collaborative project with outside researchers. They also should
determine the focus of the research and the process of data collection and interpretation.
Conducting research on a particular topic can provide an opportunity for reflection.
The research can provide useful information that a group can use for advocacy.
Research can also inspire action. Reciprocity and collaboration are easier when the
community treats research as a venue for reflection, advocacy, and action rather then
simply as an academic endeavor.
4. The community should play a major role in defining the methodology for data
collection and analysis. The community itself is in the best position to assess these
issues. The researcher should consult and work with the community on all interview
schedules and other approaches.
5. Openly discuss how differences in power and position may affect the collaboration.
6. Work collaboratively on analysis and interpretation.
7. The academic researcher should try to co-author work with at least one member of the
community.
8. What the researcher writes should be understandable and useful to the community.
IV. As you leave the community
1.
Thank those who helped you.
2.
Restate what you will send back and on what expected timeline, and leave multiple
ways for members of the community to get in touch with you.
V. After you have left the community
1. Stay in touch as you work on the research, develop your ideas, and write your results.
2. Consider how the research might have unintended consequences. Your work may be
used by individuals, groups, and governments for ends that you oppose.6
3. Get back to the community about what has happened to the research (what has been
published, etc.).
6
The problems involving data misuse also deserve further discussion. Sometimes it is impossible to prevent one’s
data being misused in ways no one would have foreseen, but it is important to think and consult carefully about the
potential dangers.
Report on 2001 Women Waging Peace Research Symposium
6
4. Try to translate your most useful findings into the community’s language and get those
findings back to them in some way. If you use interviews and stories that others tell you,
create a document for the community’s records that has those stories in their language.
5. Support the work of the community’s own scholars. Try to help them get funding and
access to publishers.
6. Try to convey the community's perspectives to donors, governments, and the media.
7. Try to get other researchers to work on issues of importance to the community.
IV. Using the results in policymaking
1. Try to think of ways you can use your information to prompt governments to be
responsive to the needs and efforts of women.
2. Try to find ways to increase international comprehension of local conflicts and influence
policymakers to promote peace.
Report on 2001 Women Waging Peace Research Symposium
7
For further reading:
Abdulhadi, Rabab. “The Palestinian women's autonomous movement: Emergence, dynamics,
and challenges” in Gender & Society, Thousand Oaks; Dec 1998; Vol. 12, Iss. 6; pg. 649, 25 pgs
Aitken G, Burman E. “Keeping and crossing professional and racialized boundaries Implications for feminist practice” in Psychology of Women Quarterly. 23: (2) 277-297 JUN
1999
Alcoff, Linda. “The Problem of Speaking for Others” in Judith Roof and Robyn Weigman, eds.
Who Can Speak?: authority and critical identity. (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1995.)
WID-LC HM271.W48 1995
Allen KR, Baber KM. “Ethical and Epistemological Tensions in Applying Postmodern
Perspective to Feminist Research” in Psychology of Women Quarterly. 16: (1) 1-15 MAR 1992
Arora V. “Subaltern studies VIII: Essays in honour of Ranajit Guha.” In Contributions to Indian
Sociology 34: (1) 153-154 JAN-APR 2000
Bakalaki A. “Students, natives, colleagues: Encounters in academia and in the field” in Cultural
Anthropology. 12: (4) 502-526 NOV 1997
Bangura, Abdul Karim. Research Methodology and African Studies. (Maryland: University Press
of America, 1994.) DT19.8.B36 1994)
Berger, Sherna and Daphne Patai. Women's Words: The Feminist Practice of Oral History. (NY:
Routledge, 1991).
Berkovitch N, Moghadam VM. “Middle East politics and women's collective action:
Challenging the status quo” in Social Politics. 6: (3) 273-291 FAL 1999
Bhave, Sumitra. Pan on Fire: Eight Dalit Women Tell Their Story. (Delhi: Indian Social
Institute, 1988.) HQ1745.P86 B47 1988.
Bloom LR. “Locked in uneasy sisterhood: Reflections on feminist methodology and research
relations” in Anthropological Education Quarterly. 28: (1) 111-122 MAR 1997
Bondi L. ‘In whose words? On gender identities, knowledge and writing practices” in The
Institute of British Geography (“T I Brit Geogr”) 22: (2) 245-258 1997
Bottomley, G. “Culture, Ethnicity, and the politics/poetics of Representation” in Diaspora.
1(3):303-20.
Bourgois P. “Confronting anthropology, education, and inner-city apartheid” in American
Anthropology. 98: (2) 249-& JUN 1996
Report on 2001 Women Waging Peace Research Symposium
8
Campbell, David and Michael J. Shapiro, eds. Moral Spaces: Rethinking Ethics and
World Politics. (Minneapolis, MN : University of Minnesota Press, 1999.) WID-LC BJ55.M57
1999.
Campbell R. “Weaving a New Tapestry of Research – A Bibliography of Selected Readings on
Feminist Research Methods” in Women’s Studies International Forum. 18: (2) 215-222 MARAPR 1995
Cerulo KA. “Identity construction: New issues, new directions” in Annual Review of Sociology
23: 385-409 1997
Chouinard V and Grant A. “On Being Not Even Anywhere Near the Project – Ways of Putting
Ourselves in the Picture” in Antipode. 27: (2) 137-166 APR 1995
Clifford, James. Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Fieldwork. (Berkeley: University
of California Press, 1986.)
Clopton, Nancy A. and Gwendolyn T. Sorell. “Gender Differences in moral reasoning: Stable or
situational?” in Psychology of Women Quarterly. Cambridge, (17) 1:85- Mar 1993.
Cockburn, Cynthia. The Space Between Us: Negotiating Gender and National Identity in
Conflict. (London: Zed Books, 1998).
De Andrade LL. “Negotiating from the inside - Constructing racial and ethnic identity in
qualitative research” in Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 29: (3) 268-290 JUN 2000
DeVault ML. “Talking back to sociology: Distinctive contributions of feminist methodology” in
Annual Review of Sociology. 22: 29-50 1996
Doyle L. “The Big Issue: empowering homeless women through academic research?” in Area.
31: (3) 239-246 SEP 1999
Dunn D, Waller DV. “The methodological inclinations of gender scholarship in mainstream
sociology journals” in Sociology Spectrum. 20: (2) 239-257 APR-JUN 2000
Dyck I, Lynam JM, and Anderson JM. “Women talking - Creating knowledge through difference
in cross-cultural research” in Women’s Studies International Forum. 18: (5-6) 611-626 SEPDEC 1995
Edwards R. “Connecting Method and Epistemology – A White Woman Interviewing Black
Women” in Women’s Studies International Forum. 13: (5) 477-490 1990
England KVL. “Getting Personal – Reflexivity, Positionality, and Feminist Research” in
Professional Geographer. 46: (1) 80-89 FEB 1994
Eriksen, Thomas Hylland. Ethnicity and nationalism : anthropological perspectives. (London ;
Report on 2001 Women Waging Peace Research Symposium
9
Boulder, Colo. : Pluto Press, 1993.) WID-LC GN495.6.E75 1993
Ferber, Marianne. Review of “Feminist Morality: Transforming Culture, Society, and Politics” in
Studies in Comparative International Development. New Brunswick; (29)3: 107
Friedrichs, Jurgen and Harmut Ludtke. Participant Observation: Theory and Practice. (England:
Saxon House, 1975.)
Gatenby B, Humphries M. “Feminist participatory action research: Methodological and ethical
issues” in Women’s Studies International Forum. 23: (1) 89-105 JAN-FEB 2000
Gergen M, Chrisler JC, LoCicero A. “Innovative methods - Resources for research, publishing,
and teaching” in Psychology of Women Quarterly. 23: (2) 431-456 JUN 1999
Green G, Barbour RS, and Barnard M et al. “Who Wears the Trousers – Sexual Harassment in
Research Settings” in Women’s Studies International Forum. 16: (6) 627-637 NOV-DEC 1993
Grossman FK, Kruger LM, and Moore RP. “Reflections on a feminist research project Subjectivity and the wish for intimacy and equality” in Psychology of Women Quarterly. 23: (1)
117-135 MAR 1999
Hancock M. “Unmaking the 'great tradition': Ethnography, national culture and area studies” in
Identities – Global Studies in Culture and Power. 4: (3-4) 343-388 JUN 1998
Harding, Sandra, ed. Feminism and Methodology: social science issues. (Bloomington : Indiana
University Press ; Milton Keynes [Buckinghamshire] : Open University Press, 1987.) WID-LC
H61.F38 1987
Held, Virginia. Feminist Morality: Transforming Culture, Society, and Politics. (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1993.) WID-LC HQ1190.H44 1993.
Herod A. “Reflections on interviewing foreign elites: praxis, positionality, validity, and the cult
of the insider” in Geoforum. 30: (4) 313-327 NOV 1999
Hodgson DL. “Critical interventions: Dilemmas of accountability in contemporary ethnographic
research” in Identities – Global Studies in Culture and Power. 6: (2-3) 201-224 JUL 1999
Ibrahim, Huma. “Ontological Victimhood: Other Bodies in madness and exile – toward a third
world feminist epistemology” in The Politics of (M)Othering: Womanhood, Identity, and
Resistance in African Literature. Ed. Obioma Nnaemeka. (London: Routledge, 1997).
John ME. “Fictions of feminist ethnography - Visweswaran, K” in Economic and Political
Weekly. 31: (38) 2598-2599 SEP 21 1996
Kirsch GE and Ritchie JS. “Beyond the Personal – Theorizing a Politics of Location in
Composition Research” in College Composition and Communication. 46: (1) 7-29 FEB 1995
Report on 2001 Women Waging Peace Research Symposium
10
Kleinman A. “Moral experience and ethical reflection: Can ethnography reconcile them? A
quandary for "the new bioethics"” in Daedalus. 128: (4) 69-97 FAL 1999
Lather P. “Troubling clarity: The politics of accessible language” in Harvard Educational
Review. 66: (3) 525-545 FAL 1996
Lawson V. “The Politics of Difference – Examining the Quantitative Qualitative Dualism in
Poststructuralist Feminist Research” in Professional Geographer. 47: (4) 449-457 NOV 1995
Legesse, Asmarom. “Essay in Protest Anthropology” in Gada: Three Approaches to the
Study of African Society. (New York: Free Press, 1973). Widener: Afr 4598.11
Luff D. “Dialogue across the divides: 'Moments of rapport' and power in feminist research with
anti-feminist women” in Sociology. 33: (4) 687-703 NOV 1999
Maguire S. “Gender differences in attitudes to undergraduate fieldwork” in Area. 30: (3) 207214 SEP 1998
Mattingly DJ and Falconeralhindi K. “Should Women Count – A context for the debate” in
Professional Geographer. 47: (4) 427-435 NOV 1995
Maxey I. “Beyond boundaries? Activism, academia, reflexivity and research” in Area. 31: (3)
199-208 SEP 1999
McDowell L. “Women/gender/feminisms: doing feminist geography” in Journal of Geography
in Higher Education. 21: (3) 381-400 NOV 1997
Medicine B. “American Indians and anthropologists: Issues of history, empowerment, and
application” in Human Organization. 57: (3) 253-257 FAL 1998
Mee KH. “Power and representation: The case of South Korean women workers” in Asian
Journal of Women’s Studies. 4: (3) 61-108 1998
Messer E. “Anthropology and Human Rights” in Annual Review of Anthropology. 22: 221-249
1993
Moss P. “Reflections on the Gap as Part of the Politics of Research Design” in Antipode. 27: (1)
82-90 JAN 1995
Moss P, Debres KJ, Cravey A, et al. “Toward mentoring as feminist praxis: strategies for
ourselves and others” in Journal of Geography in Higher Education. 23: (3) 413-427 NOV 1999
Mullings B. “Insider or outsider, both or neither: some dilemmas of interviewing in a crosscultural setting’ in Geoforum.30: (4) 337-350 NOV 1999
Report on 2001 Women Waging Peace Research Symposium
11
Naples NA. “Towards a Comparative analyses of women’s political praxis: Explicating multiple
dimensions of standpoint epistemology for feminist ethnography” in Women and Politics. 20: (1)
29-57, 1999.
Nast HJ. “Women in the field – Opening Remarks” in Professional Geography. 46: (1) 54-66
FEB 1994
Needham AD. “Fictions of Feminist Ethnography – Visweswaran K” in Journal of Asian
Studies. 54: (2) 606-608 MAY 1995
O'Leary CM. “Counteridentification or counterhegemony? Transforming feminist standpoint
theory” in Women and Politics. 18: (3) 45-72 1997
Pollitt, Katha and Deborah Tannen. “Are Women really morally superior to men?” in Utne
Reader. Minneapolis, (59) Sep 1993 101Porter G. “Third World' research by 'First World' geographers: An Africanist perspective” in
Area. 27: (2) 139-141 JUN 1995
Preston LM. “Theorizing Difference – Voices From the Margins” in American Political Science
Review 89: (4) 941-953 DEC 1995
Raghuram P, Madge C, and Skelton T. “Feminist research methodologies and student projects in
geography” in Journal of Geography in Higher Education. 22: (1) 35-48 MAR 1998
Reinharz, Shulamit. Feminist Methods in Social Research. (NY: Oxford, 1992).
Riger S. “Epistemological Debates, Feminist Voices – Science, Social Values, and the Study of
Women” in American Psychology. 47: (6) 730-740 JUN 1992
Rodriguez C. “African American anthropology and the pedagogy of activist community
research” in Anthropological Education Quarterly. 27: (3) 414-431 SEP 1996
Rosaldo, Michelle Z. “ The Uses and Abuses of Anthropology: Reflections on Feminism and
Cross-Cultural Understanding” in Signs. (5) 3: 389-417, Spring 1980.
Rose D. “On Feminism, Method and Methods in Human Geography – An Idiosyncratic
Overview” in Canadian Geographer. 37: (1) 57-61 SPR 1993
Rose G. “Engendering and Degendering” in Progress in Human Geography. 18: (4) 507-515
DEC 1994
Routledge P. ‘The third space as critical engagement” in Antipode. 28: (4) 399-419 OCT 1996
Rowe AMC. “Locating feminism's subject: The paradox of white femininity and the struggle to
forge feminist alliances” in Communication Theory. 10: (1) 64-80 FEB 2000
Report on 2001 Women Waging Peace Research Symposium
12
Sharoni, Simona. "Doing Research On/With Women in Conflict Zones: Some Ethical
Considerations." ms., available from the author, The Evergreen State College, 2700 Evergreen
Parkway NW, Olympia, WA 98505.
Scheyvens, R. “Subtle strategies for women's empowerment - Planning for effective grassroots
development” in Third World Planning Review 20: (3) 235-253 AUG 1998
Scheyvens, Regina and Helen Leslie. “Gender, ethics, and empowerment: Dilemmas of
development fieldwork.” In Women’s Studies International Forum. (23) 1 (Jan/Feb 2000): 119130
Silverblatt I. “Women in States” in Annual Review of Anthropology. 17: 427-460 1988
Simpson JS. “Easy talk, white talk, back talk - Some reflections on the meanings of our words”
in Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 25: (3) 372-389 OCT 1996
“Situating knowledges: positionality, reflexivities and other tactics” in Progress in Human
Geography. 21: (3) 305-320 SEP 1997
Sivaramakrishnan KS. “Situating the Subaltern: History and anthropology in the Subaltern
studies project” in Journal of Historical Sociology. 8: (4) 395-429 DEC 1995
Smith FM. ‘Problematising language: Limitations and possibilities in 'foreign language'
research” in Area. 28: (2) 160-166 JUN 1996
Speer PW. “Intrapersonal and interactional empowerment: Implications for theory” in Journal of
Community Psychology. 28: (1) 51-61 JAN 2000
Staeheli LA and Lawson VA. “Women in the Field – The Politics of Feminist Research –
Discussion” in Professional Geographer. 46: (1) 96-102 FEB 1994
Stanley L, Wise S. “Feminist Epistemology and Ontology – Recent Debates in Feminist SocialTheory” in Indian Journal of Social Work. 53: (3) 343-365 JUL 1992
St Pierre, E.A. “The work of response in ethnography” in Journal of Contemporary
Ethnography. 28: (3) 266-287 JUN 1999
Sutton D. “Re-scripting women's collective action: Nationalist writing and the politics of
gendered memory” in Identities – Global Studies in Culture and Power. 5: (4) 469-500 APR
1999
Twyman C, Morrison J, Sporton D. “The final fifth: autobiography, reflexivity and interpretation
in cross-cultural research” in Area. 31: (4) 313-325 DEC 1999
Visweswaran K. “Histories of feminist ethnography” in Annual Review of Anthropology. 26:
Report on 2001 Women Waging Peace Research Symposium
13
591-621 1997
Wheatley E.E. “How Can We Engender Ethnography with a Feminist Imagination – A Rejoinder
to Stacey, Judith” in Women’s Studies International Forum. 17: (4) 403-416 JUL-AUG 1994
“The Women’s Way” in New Statesman and Society. London, (7)306:18- Jun 10, 1994.
Wuest J. “Feminist Grounded Theory – An Exploration of the Congruency and Tensions
Between Two Traditions in Knowledge Discovery” in Qualitative Health Research. 5: (1) 125137 FEB 1995
Report on 2001 Women Waging Peace Research Symposium
14