Is it even worth it? The ethics of researching armed groups in ‘the field’

Abstract

Conflict scholars are increasingly voicing concerns about the risks and challenges of conducting research in violent environments. Yet, this collective effort remains largely driven by the underlying belief that conducting fieldwork in conflict settings is both necessary for knowledge production and social change, and appropriate with regards to mainstream ethical guidelines and practices. In this article, we reflect on our experiences and positionalities conducting field research on armed groups in Afghanistan to question these assumptions. We challenge common understandings of ‘the field’ itself as a bounded, demarcated space in which the consequences of a researcher’s actions can be anticipated, mitigated or prevented. We expose the fallacy of ever controlling ‘the field’ and argue that the likelihood of achieving any unquestionable good through immersive research is therefore quite low. We advocate for a more humble approach to our research endeavours and, overall, more restraint. The bar for ethical field-intensive research might be much higher than we all assume. We must accept that, at times, the risks are not worth it.