Drawing on lessons learnt from a qualitative multi-method research project undertaken in the so-called Global South with funding granted in the Global North via a Horizon 2020 Marie Sklodowska-Curie Action, I discuss the challenges raised by a funding model that equate excellences with ambition and that rewards scholars in the North at the expense of extractivist approaches to studying the South. In an exercise of public reflexivity (Dean, 2017), I analyze the impact of the model’s biases on project design and method choice, and I reflect on the importance of listening to the realities of project participants to understand and honor the research situation’s specificity (Markham, 2018). What does it actually mean to conduct qualitative research with care for the participants that one engages in order to produce knowledge (Brannelly and Barnes, 2022)? I expect that doing reflexivity about this process may contribute to illuminating the methodological and ethical tensions, contradictions and risks that face scholars tied to Western funding, and to resetting prestigious grants as opportunities to exercise academic freedom by actively choosing to do no harm at the stage of data collection.
The presentation is part of the research project "Micro-technopolitics of engagement: the everyday communicative practices of women mobilized for gender justice, digital citizenship and better democracy in Argentina" (EmPoWer) financed by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 897318.