A Journey to an Anti-Racist & Truly Democratic Framework for Co-Produced Research
Written by Japheth ‘Jeff’ Monzon, BSWN Project Officer
Co-production can be defined as a collaborative process in which citizens can play an active role in producing public goods and services of consequence to them (Farr). In realising the ‘ambitions’ of researchers and community leaders, authentic co-productive research – that is, research that is appropriately open and democratic – must challenge the existing power differentials and hierarchies innate in knowledge production (Duros et al). But the fact that the valuable insights brought to the table by community representatives can be so easily set aside based on the prejudices and motivations of research institutions clearly indicates that there is work to be done to democratise the production of knowledge.
Whilst the aim of co-production remains noble – to influence policy and services to narrow existing inequalities between the privileged and the marginalised – it is clearly underpinned by problems that undermine the original goal. Bell & Pahl aptly note that: “[Co]-production risks functioning as a means for academics [facilitators, and organisations] to reproduce themselves through a parasitic [...] relationship with the collective labour of communities.” (Bell & Pahl, 2018). In an effort to fill the chasm left by unethical practices within co-productive research, the Research Action Coalition for Racial Equality (RACE) conducted three separate ‘visioning sessions’ with multiple community leaders and academics to learn from (and work with) each other to remedy the damage done by ‘improper’ co-productive practices.
Primary themes touted by the session collaborators include criticisms regarding the extractive nature of research on Black and Minoritised communities; criticisms towards research institutions for taking advantage of collaborators due in part to their lack of knowledge regarding their rights as participants in the project; and criticisms regarding how much community collaborators are allowed to contribute to a so-called ‘co-produced’ research project. These criticisms – made rightly so – originate from the personal experiences of the attending collaborators and are endemic to existing co-produced research frameworks. Indeed, the visioning sessions (a co-produced project in itself) could not evade the criticisms launched against larger research institutions. Taking such criticisms in stride, the researchers for RACE have taken this as a clarion call for a dramatic transformation to the approaches to co-produced knowledge.
In hopes of creating a Charter, at the time of writing, themes are being analysed and collated that span all three visioning sessions to further clarify what exactly must be done to minimise power imbalances between collaborators in a given co-produced research project. So far, pertinent issues have been raised in regard to equitable monetary compensation, empowering community collaborators, and allowing collaborators to naturally influence the direction of the research agenda. However, the path to equitable co-production remains fraught with obstacles that must be overcome. What is required – nay, what is necessary – is for a ‘Three-Legged Approach’ towards knowledge co-production.
Coined by one of our collaborators, a three-legged approach to knowledge production involves the two halves of the project (researcher and community collaborator) taking independent steps to ensure that power and privilege are sufficiently acknowledged and minimalised. This approach also involves both halves working together to reach the common goal of equitable knowledge production, much like partners in a three-legged race. This approach emphasises that in order for co-produced knowledge to be truly democratic and equitable, the path which precedes such a goal must also be paved with democratic and equitable practices. One party alone cannot achieve what is needed. Indeed, it takes a village.
Looking to the future, the collaborators of RACE hope to craft a Charter for Co-Production specific to anti-racist action. Such a charter will outline the values that underpin good, ethical, and equitable co-production. It will also provide a ‘toolkit’ that aims to guide community collaborators and researchers to make practical changes to the way that research is conducted.