Between Knowing and Writing: Ethics of Declining Use in Conflict Environments

ABSTRACT How should researchers in “closed contexts”, navigate “post‐access” scenario when their own positionality conflicts with ideologically driven keepers of “information” in conflict/authoritarian settings? If they decide to consciously write/not write such information, do researchers perpetuate “relations of domination” prevalent on field or compromise agency of the marginalized populations? Also, how should researchers navigate indirect threats, suspicion and fear that come along while navigating through such information? Based on my fieldwork experience of doing policy ethnography (October 2022–June 2023) in spatially polarised Ahmedabad (and a short fieldwork in Dimapur (Nagaland) studying mob lynching incident and peacekeeping in 2015 in which a mosque was attacked), this short paper engages with the ethical implications of “possessing information” through what I call “declining to use access”. Declining access implies selective withdrawal of access to sensitive information that could be valuable to research as it is shared on perceived perceptions of mutual trust (intimacy) by partisan and non‐partisan actors in authoritarian settings.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PoLAR Political and Legal Anthropology Review
Published
2026-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.70053
Primary Topic
South Asian Studies and Conflicts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Between Knowing and Writing: Ethics of Declining Use in Conflict Environments

Devansh Shrivastava
PoLAR Political and Legal Anthropology Review
South Asian Studies and Conflicts
article

Between Knowing and Writing: Ethics of Declining Use in Conflict Environments

Devansh Shrivastava
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT How should researchers in “closed contexts”, navigate “post‐access” scenario when their own positionality conflicts with ideologically driven keepers of “information” in conflict/authoritarian settings? If they decide to consciously write/not write such information, do researchers perpetuate “relations of domination” prevalent on field or compromise agency of the marginalized populations? Also, how should researchers navigate indirect threats, suspicion and fear that come along while navigating through such information? Based on my fieldwork experience of doing policy ethnography (October 2022–June 2023) in spatially polarised Ahmedabad (and a short fieldwork in Dimapur (Nagaland) studying mob lynching incident and peacekeeping in 2015 in which a mosque was attacked), this short paper engages with the ethical implications of “possessing information” through what I call “declining to use access”. Declining access implies selective withdrawal of access to sensitive information that could be valuable to research as it is shared on perceived perceptions of mutual trust (intimacy) by partisan and non‐partisan actors in authoritarian settings.

PoLAR Political and Legal Anthropology ReviewVol. 49(1)
National Law School of India University (IN)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
South Asian Studies and Conflicts
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.