Extraction, entanglements, and (im)materialities: Reflections on the methods and methodologies of natural resource industries fieldwork

Abstract

This multi-authored collection of papers examines the complex realities of research on natural resource industries, including the messy entanglements of extraction, materiality, and everyday social life this research entails. Of central importance to the contributors is how scholars confront fieldwork challenges ethically, methodologically, and corporeally. The collection has two key objectives. First, it expands our understanding of extractive industry by bringing together work on resources conventionally understood as extractive (e.g. oil and minerals) alongside resource-intensive industries not typically examined through an extractive lens, for instance fisheries, agricultural monocultures, water, and tourism. As such, it considers the historical and current conditions that facilitate the extraction of resources in parallel, cyclical, and reproducing forms. Second, the collection examines scholarly positionalities, methodologies, and dilemmas that arise when studying nature-intensive industries, including the extractive dimensions associated with social research itself. Together, the pieces argue that research concerning extractive industries entails multiple scholarly positions—positions problematically inflected with colonialism and always shaped by power relations. Contributors to the section draw largely from feminist, postcolonial, anti-racist, and historical materialist insights to frame and problematize the corporeal and representational concerns arising from their scholarship on nature-intensive industries, including personal dilemmas that they have encountered in their work. Overall, the collection is driven by the realization that research, and the analyses it entails, may serve as a tool for emancipatory intervention yet also reproduce inequality. The futures of the people and ecosystems at the center of our studies impel constant reflection so that our work, and that of the next generation of scholars, may offer critical analysis that contributes to transforming—rather than reinforcing—oppressive relations associated with extractive sectors and industries.

How Identity Enriches and Complicates the Research Process: Reflections from Political Ecology Fieldwork

“…As pointed out by Harris (2015), the theoretical basis of FPE is now well established, but "there is still considerable work to be done to continue extending and building FPE's analytical tools and frameworks" (xxi). This article's reflections echo the point that social identities like gender can cross-cut with other axes of difference to shape how a researcher gains access to populations, maintains rapport, and develops insights into the personal experiences of research subjects (Sultana 2007;Faria and Mollett 2016;Johnson et al 2020;McFarlane-Morris 2020). Even when research is conducted at "home," as shown in this article, some intersectional identities can still act as a distancing device, particularly if analysis is pitched at the household level or scaled further down to the human body.…”

“…Indeed, these issues have rarely been singled out for critical analysis in FPE, notwithstanding the voluminous literature providing general overviews of this subfield (e.g., Rocheleau, Thomas-Slayter, and Wangari 1996;Mollett and Faria 2013;Elmhirst 2015). A few notable exceptions include Rocheleau (1995) and Johnson et al (2020). Feminist political ecologists need to spend more time thinking and reflecting critically about methodology, identity, and fieldwork relational quality.…”

“…Sharing such experiences might not only provide thoughts for graduate students preparing for fieldwork but also bring fresh perspectives and new questions to old and emerging challenges in the field. Moreover, given that FPE fieldwork itself can be an emotionally taxing activity (see Johnson et al 2020), sharing data collection experiences can serve as "emotional catharsis" (Skinner 2014, 186) for both emerging and established scholars as challenges unfold in the field. If this article accomplishes anything, I hope that it inspires and provides guidance for those preparing for first-time fieldwork in FPE or political ecology more broadly.…”

“…Such experiences can help to further interrogate the epistemological foundations of our discipline: How, as geographers, do we identify with other people's experiences? In a recent article, Johnson et al (2020) also made a point about political ecologists more specifically regarding a general uneasiness "in sharing personal experiences in scholarly journals" (7).…”

“…Overall, the article seeks to contribute to the epistemological and methodological aspects of doing feminist political ecology (FPE), particularly work on embodiment, affect, and emotions. Although FPE is being advanced on the theoretical front, particularly using insights from postcolonial, poststructural, and performative approaches (Elmhirst 2011;Mollett and Faria 2013;Wangui 2014), issues around methodology, methods, fieldworkers' identity, and fieldwork relational quality all remain largely underexplored (Rocheleau 1995;Johnson et al 2020).…”