"Representing"

Much has been said about ethics of researchers conducting research in communities. And for good reason. But little has been written about the responsibility of individuals, representing communities, who engage in community-academic partnerships. Some of the literature around how to define community skirts this issue. Community can be place-based, or experience-based. We can see the tensions in many CBPR case studies, between community members who are on one side of an issue and a partnership on the other side. Sometimes these conflicts are classic, labor v. environment, service organizations v. clients, cultural clashes, old feuds. Sometimes they are more complex and subtle.

"Representing" is always fraught with difficulty. We wear multiple hats; we have many interests. Rightly, people working in partnership are very careful about claiming to represent others. However, even when their is verbal clarity about this, I find that the pressure to be representative to funders, to researchers, to policymakers, is somewhat overwhelming. Action, often in the form of influencing policy, is a long process. Momentum is difficult to sustain. We quest to accomplish, to have impact, to be large.

Obviously, researchers forming partnerships are somewhat responsible for making certain that they are not taking sides and creating conflict in a community. But to put this responsibility totally on their shoulders simply adds to the power imbalance that community-academic partnerships struggle with. So let us together begin to think about ways in which community members can take responsibility for the power that they gain in partnership.