Many funding bodies emphasise the advantages of using multi-disciplinary approaches; in response, in this paper we consider our reflections on doing such a project. We contribute to the multidisciplinary literature by considering the standardizing effect of collaboration on multifarious research approaches. We argue that greater attention should be paid to 'doing' qualitative multidisciplinary research. We find that elements of 'letting go' and 'coming together' are important when new perspectives and knowledge are engaged. Therefore, we call for clarity on the multidisciplinary approaches and discuss how we came to understand the collaborative processes of researching, thinking, and writing. The paper begins with vignettes about our ontological journeys during the research project. In developing our argument, we consider the retrospective and reflexive qualities expressed in our vignettes and examine how our collaborative theorizing shaped the research project.
The UK Counter Terrorism and Security Act (2015) (CTSA) calls for a partnership between the government, individuals, organisations and communities to prevent the radicalisation of individuals and to prevent their participation in terrorist and illegal activities. As part of this strategy, universities have a statutory duty placed upon them to remain vigilant to signs of extremism. Based upon 20 interviews with UK university lecturers, the paper examines reactions of the academic community to this governmental mandate. Key to our understanding is the deputisation of lecturers into a security regime and how they perform the duty of identifying and monitoring extremism. Equally, forms of resistance are evident in how lecturers understand their new roles and for universities themselves a conservative approach to risk may be gaining traction. We argue there is confusion around the CTSA based upon the ambiguous language in which it is presented and the conservative and defensive reactions that have subsequently produced concern amongst lecturers and UK universities.
Abstract:In the social sciences there has been much exciting and informative work on farmers' markets and this paper contributes to this literature by considering how the place of farmers' markets affects the way consumers understand the taste of food. I draw on the difficulty faced by many consumers in articulating the taste of food, especially when food is perceived to taste good. I explore how consumers demonstrate their evaluations of taste, whether through descriptions of taste that are metaphor-laden or through beliefs and values emboldened by food knowledges and opinions. I argue these are how farmers' market consumers understand and perform taste in relation to market food. The findings that inform the paper are taken from interviews with farmers' market consumers in the UK.
Security is an important feature of the macro environment for tourism that affects the consumption of travel products. Following high-profile terrorist attacks, UK border security measures have been increased through the implementation of the e-Borders programme. This initiative requires passenger carriers to collect and electronically transmit travel document information and service information for any individual entering or leaving the UK. The commercial impact of e-Borders on travel firms is investigated by examining the relationships between the affected stakeholders, considering the power and decision making at play, and exploring the outcomes. The e-Borders programme is described, and a framework for the in-depth, qualitative study is presented. The findings show that passenger carriers and travel firms manage the negative consequences of compliance and restore their commercial interests by engaging in a process we describe as recognizing, rationalizing and refashioning. The implications for research and practice are explored.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.