Humanizing Refugee Research in a Turbulent World

Auteurs-es

  • Oliver Bakewell Global Development Institute, University of Manchester, UK

DOI :

https://doi.org/10.25071/1920-7336.40795

Mots-clés :

refugee research, humanizing research, dehumanization, policy, categorization

Résumé

Cet essai adopte une perspective critique à l’égard de l’idée d’humaniser la recherche sur les réfugiés. Il soutient qu’une grande partie de la recherche en sciences sociales est intrinsèquement déshumanisante en ce qu’elle simplifie et réduit l’expérience humaine à des catégories et des modèles se prêtant à l’analyse. Les tentatives d’humaniser la recherche peuvent efficacement remettre en question et déstabiliser les structures hégémoniques puissantes et dominantes qui encadrent les politiques publiques et la recherche sur la migration forcée. Par contre, elle pourrait les remplacer par de nouveaux cadres de recherche, désormais imprégnés d’autorité comme représentant des expériences plus authentiques ou plus proches de réalités vécues. Plutôt que de revendiquer une position de supériorité morale en humanisant la recherche, une ambition plus restreinte, et peut-être plus honnête, serait de reconnaître que la déshumanisation est inévitable dans la recherche sur les réfugiés et de chercher à déshumaniser autrement.

Statistiques

Chargement des statistiques…

Références

Bakewell, O. (2008). Research beyond the categories: The importance of policy irrelevant research into forced migration. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21(4), 432–453. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fen042

Brubaker, R. (2013). Categories of analysis and categories of practice: A note on the study of Muslims in European countries of immigration. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 36(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2012.729674

Cole, G. (2021). Sampling on the dependent variable: An Achille’s Heel of research on displacement? Journal of Refugee Studies, Article feaa123. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/feaa123

Crawley, H., & Skleparis, D. (2018). Refugees, migrants, neither, both: Categorical fetishism and the politics of bounding in Europe’s “migration crisis.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(1), 48–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2017.1348224

Dahinden, J., Fischer, C., & Menet, J. (2021). Knowledge production, reflexivity, and the use of categories in migration studies: Tackling challenges in the field. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 44(4), 535–554. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2020.1752926

Gatrell, P. (2019). The unsettling of Europe: The great migration, 1945 to the present. Allen Lane.

Gonzalez Benson, O., Temprosa, F. T., & Shlebah, S. (2020). From policy irrelevance to a return to relevance: Active strategies in forced migration research. Refugee Review, 4(1), 69–83. https://espminetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Benson-Temprosa-and-Shlebah.pdf

Humanising Studies of Refuge and Displacement. (2018, 9 November). Oxford Talks. School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford. https://talks.ox.ac.uk/talks/id/1002227d-9e39-4a40-9a81-6a2d06135af3/

Lee, C. S. (2019). Datafication, dataveillance, and the social credit system as China’s new normal. Online Information Review, 43(6), 952–970. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-08-2018-0231

Muiruri, P. (2021, April 30). Kenya delays closure of camps housing half a million people. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/apr/30/kenya-delays-closure-of-camps-housing-half-a-million-people

Nguyen, V. (2019). Refugeetude: When does a refugee stop being a refugee. Social Text, 37(2), 109–131. https://doi.org/10.1215/01642472-7371003

Sözer, H. (2019). Categories that blind us, categories that bind them: The deployment of vulnerability notion for Syrian refugees in Turkey. Journal of Refugee Studies, Article fez020. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fez020

Sturridge, C., Bakewell, O., & Hammond, L. (2018, June). Return and (re)Integration after displacement: Belonging, labelling and livelihoods in three Somali cities. Research and Evidence Facility: EU Trust Fund for Africa (Horn of Africa Window). https://blogs.soas.ac.uk/ref-hornresearch/files/2020/02/Return-and-ReIntegration.pdf

Tometten, C. (2018). Resettlement, humanitarian admission, and family reunion: The intricacies of Germany’s legal entry regimes for Syrian refugees. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 37(2), 187–203. https://doi.org/10.1093/rsq/hdy002

Will, A.-K. (2018). On “genuine” and “illegitimate” refugees: New boundaries drawn by discriminatory legislation and practice in the field of humanitarian reception in Germany. Migration, Boundaries and Differentiated Citizenship, 6(3), 172–189. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v6i3.1506

Wood, G. (1985). The politics of development policy labelling. Development and Change, 16(3), 347–373. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.1985.tb00214.x

Zetter, R. (1991). Labelling refugees: Forming and transforming a bureaucratic identity. Journal of Refugee Studies, 4(1), 39–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/4.1.39

Zetter, R. (2007). More labels, fewer refugees: Remaking the refugee label in an era of globalization. Journal of Refugee Studies, 20(2), 172–192. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fem011

Publié-e

2021-11-22 — Mis(e) à jour 2021-11-22

Versions

Comment citer

Bakewell, O. (2021). Humanizing Refugee Research in a Turbulent World. Refuge : Revue Canadienne Sur Les réfugiés , 37(2), 63–69. https://doi.org/10.25071/1920-7336.40795

Articles similaires

<< < 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 > >> 

Vous pouvez également Lancer une recherche avancée d’articles similaires à cet article.