‘We need solidarity’: Reflections on Building and Troubling Solidarity in Research Ethics in Myanmar

ABSTRACT Calls for solidarity by civil society are taking place alongside changes in how researchers navigate shifting research landscapes. Yet what solidarity‐based research entails in practice and how this might guide, critique, or challenge institutionalised ethics can be elusive. This is particularly the case in complex conflict and authoritarian research environments like Myanmar, which require us to question how solidarity can be practiced with civil society movements. In this paper, we draw on our experiences in research and reflect on our positions ‘in‐between’ universities and civil society movements to illustrate how solidarity can be practised and how we can navigate tensions with institutional ethics processes. Through our own reflections of building solidarity in our research in Myanmar and its borderlands, we identified the key foundations of positionality, building trust and relationships, approaching time critically, and moving beyond ‘do no harm’ in research. We argue that placing relationships at the forefront of the research process also requires moving beyond claiming solidarity by engaging in critical reflexivity and ‘troubling’ our own research practices and positionalities.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Asia Pacific Viewpoint
Published
2026-04-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/apv.70045
Primary Topic
Asian Geopolitics and Ethnography
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

‘We need solidarity’: Reflections on Building and Troubling Solidarity in Research Ethics in Myanmar

Saw John Bright, Anne Décobert, Phyo Pyae Thida Htwe, Vanessa Lamb
Asia Pacific Viewpoint
Asian Geopolitics and Ethnography
article

‘We need solidarity’: Reflections on Building and Troubling Solidarity in Research Ethics in Myanmar

Saw John Bright, Anne Décobert, Phyo Pyae Thida Htwe, Vanessa Lamb
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Calls for solidarity by civil society are taking place alongside changes in how researchers navigate shifting research landscapes. Yet what solidarity‐based research entails in practice and how this might guide, critique, or challenge institutionalised ethics can be elusive. This is particularly the case in complex conflict and authoritarian research environments like Myanmar, which require us to question how solidarity can be practiced with civil society movements. In this paper, we draw on our experiences in research and reflect on our positions ‘in‐between’ universities and civil society movements to illustrate how solidarity can be practised and how we can navigate tensions with institutional ethics processes. Through our own reflections of building solidarity in our research in Myanmar and its borderlands, we identified the key foundations of positionality, building trust and relationships, approaching time critically, and moving beyond ‘do no harm’ in research. We argue that placing relationships at the forefront of the research process also requires moving beyond claiming solidarity by engaging in critical reflexivity and ‘troubling’ our own research practices and positionalities.

Asia Pacific Viewpoint
The University of Melbourne (AU), York University (CA), Wageningen University & Research (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Asian Geopolitics and Ethnography
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

‘We need solidarity’: Reflections on Building and Troubling Solidarity in Research Ethics in Myanmar — Saw John Bright, Anne Décobert, et al. · Asia Pacific Viewpoint (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS