Pagination ECOLEC 106379

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/334094552
From academic to political rigour: Insights from the 'Tarot' of transgressive

research
Preprint in Ecological Economics · June 2019

DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106379
CITATIONS READS
33 1,564
3 authors, including:
Leah Temper D. McGarry

McGill University Rhodes University
57 PUBLICATIONS 4,160 CITATIONS 15 PUBLICATIONS 1,063 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Leah Temper on 28 June 2019.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Ecological Economics xxx (xxxx) xxx-xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Ecological Economics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com
F
OO
Commentary
From academic to political rigour: Insights from the ‘Tarot’ of transgressive research
Leah Temper a⁠ ,⁠ c⁠ ,⁠ ⁎⁠ , Dylan McGarry b⁠ , Lena Weber c⁠
PR
a
McGill University, Department of Natural Resource Sciences, Canada
b
Environmental Learning Research Centre, Rhodes University, Rhodes University Campus, Environmental Education Dept. ELRC building, Lucas Avenue, 6140, South Africa
c
Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Spain Campus de la UAB, 08193 Cerdanyola del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain
ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT
Keywords: The role of science and knowledge production is at a crossroads, as societal transformation calls for challenging
Transgressive research dominant forms of knowledge production that have contributed to marginalizing other ways of knowing. This
D
Transformation presents a challenge to mainstream science and invites a deeper reflection on our roles as scientists and explo-
Environmental justice ration of alternative engaged, post-normal and activist approaches to research. This paper examines the diverse
Scholar activism
ways researchers are meeting this challenge. Employing the device of the Tarot deck we describe seven “char-
Transdisciplinarity
acters” to illustrate the variety of roles and approaches that trans-disciplinary, transformative, transgressive and
TE
Post-normal science
Feminism activist researchers are engaging in. These characters are used to introduce and develop the concept of political
Arts-based approaches rigour as a means of expanded academic rigour in new emancipatory scientific paradigms. We demonstrate how
these Tarot characters can be used as an activity for collective and personal reflexivity and propose ten princi-
ples that frequently emerge in a ‘political’ peer review process. We argue that the insights emerging from these
strands of radical, critical, engaged and applied forms of scholarship, can significantly improve the understand-
ing of what a “transformative knowledge paradigm” may look like in practice and how it can be mobilized for
EC
social change and environmental justice.
1. Introduction: the point is to change it for trans-disciplinarity, conceptions of post-normal science (Funtowicz
and Ravetz, 1994) to deal with wicked problems that cannot be solved
In the context of climate change, massive ecological destruction, and by purely scientific-rational approaches (Rittel and Webber, 1973), the
RR
widespread social injustice, the world currently faces immense chal- rise of activist-led sciences such as degrowth (Weiss and Cattaneo, 2017)
lenges (Future Earth, 2014). While terms like the ‘Anthropocene’ place and environmental justice (Rodríguez-Labajos et al., 2019; Conde,
responsibility for this socio-ecological disaster on humanity as a whole 2014), and a discourse on the need for “transgression” of academic pro-
(Malm and Hornborg, 2014), critical activists and academics alike in- tocols.1⁠
creasingly call for us to turn attention to the structures and systems at Trans-disciplinary research, which integrates knowledge from vari-
the root of this crisis, recognizing that true transformation will depend ous scientific and societal bodies of knowledge and includes participa-
CO
on identifying and resisting the entrenched power interests that dom- tion of actors from outside of academia to create legitimacy and owner-
inate our personal and professional landscapes (Temper et al., 2018) ship, is increasingly seen as necessary for addressing and responding to
(Fig. 1). sustainability challenges, and also for integrating questions of socio-po-
Within this transformation, the role of science and knowledge pro- litical justice in research (Moser et al., 2013; Lotz-Sisitka et al., 2015),
duction itself is at a crossroads, as societal transformation calls for chal- and as such contributing towards a new scientific paradigm based on
lenging dominant forms of knowledge production and the established very different principles from those dominant today.
protocols and discourses that have contributed to marginalizing other Other scholars are putting forward the notion of transgressive learn-
UN
ways of knowing (Klein, 2015). The critique and diagnosis of the cur- ing and science, which refers to boundary crossing and challenging
rent crisis in science (Saltelli and Funtowicz, 2017) has led to calls oppressive normative structures, and is defined by Lotz-Sisitka et al.
(2016: 51) as “critical thinking and collective agency and praxis that
directly and explicitly challenges those aspects of society that have be
⁎ Corresponding author at: McGill University, Department of Natural Resource Sciences and Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology, Autonomous University of Barcelona,
Spain Campus de la UAB, 08193 Cerdanyola del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain.

Email address: leah.temper@gmail.com (L. Temper)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106379
Available online xxx
0921-8009/ © 2019.
L. Temper et al. Ecological Economics xxx (xxxx) xxx-xxx
come normalized, but which require challenging for substantive sustain- world. For the purposes of this article, we consider the activist scholar
ability transformations to emerge (e.g. colonial practice or epistemol- as one who learns about the world through transforming it (and vice
ogy, gender and race relations, social exclusion, environmental injus- versa), inevitably transforming herself in the process. Our aim is there-
tice) (Hooks, 1996; Dei, 2012)”. It focuses specifically on structures of fore to explore the concept of transformative and transgressive activist
privilege, hegemonies of power, and innovative strategies to arrest sys- scholarship, and to provide a roadmap of sorts for the intrepid re-
temic dysfunction or systemic violence, and it foregrounds epistemic, so- searcher that is aiming to do both politically rigorous and scientifically
F
cial and environmental justice (Hooks, 1996; Dei, 2012; Lotz-Sisitka et robust research.
al., 2015).2⁠ Finally, transformative research is a concept that delineates After positioning ourselves and our motivations, we propose the con-
a new role for science, which goes beyond observing and analyzing soci- cept of ‘political rigour’ as a necessary component of transformations
OO
etal transformations to act as a catalyst for social change (Schneidewind research and explain the methodology of the collaborative reflexive
et al., 2016). While the primary goal of transdisciplinary science is to process of the Tarot. We then provide a ‘guide’ to some of the critical,
produce new knowledge based on a scientific or societal question, trans- theoretically-informed activist-scholar approaches being adopted by en-
formative research and education takes a key role in establishing cre- vironmental justice and sustainability researchers. To do this, we use
ative laboratories and room for experiments in a broader societal con- both the metaphor and the practical device of the Tarot deck to draw
text. According to Pennington et al., 2013, transdisciplinary science and from and point to diverse literatures largely absent until the present
the engagement with stakeholders it entails can provide opportunities in mainstream sustainable environmental sciences research. These in-
for the “disorienting dilemma” that can lead to transformative learning
PR
clude feminist scholarship and ethics of care, indigenous and decoloniz-
through the restructuring and integration of concepts, data, and meth- ing methodologies, critical realism, queer theory, embodied research,
ods. environmental education, and anti-oppressive research.
The call for transgressive and transformative science while novel, ex- We conclude by arguing that these tangible examples of how ac-
tends and echoes a long tradition of scientists and scholars openly and tivist-scholars are engaging with the complex spaces they live and work
unapologetically committed to radical social change (Marx, 1980) that in can significantly improve the understanding of what a transgressive
has been variously denominated as militant, emancipatory and solidar- knowledge paradigm centered on the concept of political rigour may
ity-based research, and which we refer to as engaged or activist-scholar- look like in practice and how it can be mobilized for social change to-
D
ship. While approaches like Post-Normal Science (PNS), often embraced wards environmentally just outcomes. Deeper engagement and analy-
by ecological economists (e Silva and Teixeira, 2011), hold potential for sis of shared aspects of praxis amongst these diverse approaches also
navigating activist research environments in which facts and values are brings greater clarity regarding methodological coherence for transdis-
so closely intertwined, a key problem with PNS is that it does not of- ciplinary sciences like ecological economics. We define and present po-
TE
fer a clear theory of science and methodology remains underdeveloped litical rigour as a tool for bringing reflexivity and consciousness to every
(Spash, 2012), Further, it as of yet lacks meaningful engagement with step of the research process we are engaged in and call for the elabora-
other schools of radical scholarship. Indeed, until the present there has tion of other tools, disruptive practices/pedagogies, games and exercises
been minimal engagement and synthesis between transdisciplinary sci- that can help guide a reflective process of political rigour.
ences such as ecological economics (Costanza, 1991; Shi, 2004) and the
diverse modes of radical and transgressive scholarship we explore here. 1.1. Positioning ourselves
EC
In this article, we argue that the discourse and practice on the

needed transformation of science must bring these diverse activist and We are three scholar activists who have been engaging with and
transgressive approaches into dialogue. This includes learning from mixing different approaches to environmental science, transgressive so-
activist, queer, feminist, indigenous and non-Western approaches and cial science, education, art, activism, teaching, and transformations
methodologies, embodied ways of knowing, and further openness to research. We come from inter/transdisciplinary backgrounds: ranging
novel approaches and experimentation. We do not propose acceptance from ecological economics, environmental science, biology, educational
RR
of the uncritical plurality argued by Dow (2007) and Spash (2012) as sociology/art and human geography. Understanding social and political
counterproductive, but the opposite. We argue that a deeper engage- dimensions of sustainability, we have worked carefully with our peers to
ment with diverse approaches, and the identification of shared prin- develop a device for carefully engaging with the reflexive rigour needed
ciples, perspectives, and methodological approaches can bring greater to respond to the social and political dimensions of the environmental
theoretical and methodological clarity and coherence to activist-schol- crisis.
arship. After facilitating a reflexive collaborative process with a wide spec-
CO
This paper is our offering to researchers interested in conducting trum of academic activists in Beirut Lebanon, in 2017, we went on to re-
research for transformation under this evolving paradigm, where re- fine and develop this process in South Africa, Mexico, Canada, Sweden,
sources and information can be difficult to find. While many agree on Spain, Colombia and the UK, with other academic activists and sustain-
the need to enhance and complement the sole focus on traditional ‘sci- ability practitioners. We have developed the Tarot as a metaphor and
entific’ rigour within a positivistic framework (Tacconi, 1998), alter- device for making the socio-political and ethical engagement with the
native quality standards for transformations research remain only par- social challenge of sustainability more accessible, reflexive and atten-
tially developed. We therefore gear this paper towards activist-scholars tive.
This paper serves as a theoretical base for this process and arises
UN
and other socially engaged researchers navigating this new post-normal

from our experiences of having to transgress typical roles and responsi-
bilities of researchers in the academy, where the concerns, needs, ten-
sions and issues we are working with, as well as our personal contexts,
1 . demand counter-hegemonic approaches. At the same time, some of our
2 Inherent in a definition for transgression, is the plurality in which transgression can
peers (often bound by bureaucratic, Cartesian and positivist orthodox-
be defined, as ‘transgressive research’ aims to challenge that which has been normalized,
and so sticking to a single overarching definition for transgression may not be helpful
ies) sometimes struggle to support us as early career researchers work-
in creating a generative and creative environment for transgression in varied contexts. ing on these issues. We are also inspired by the errors we have made,
In light of this Lotz-Sisitka et al. (2016) provide descriptors as opposed to solid or static the struggle of dealing with the imperfectness of working with ‘wicked
definitions of transgressive learning such as critical, empathetic, connective, dialogical, problems’ (a term Rittel and Webber (1973) used to describe the com-
radical, and explicitly normative (Freire, 2000, Hooks, 1996; Dei, 2010; Gablik, 1992).
plexity of social and environmental problems which could not be
2
F
OO
PR
Fig. 1. The Tarot deck of transgressive research.
solved by purely scientific-rational approaches.) that are in a constant “reliable scientific knowledge” to inclusion of “socially robust knowl-
D
state of flux; as well as what is emerging from our research community: edge” that transgresses the expert/lay dichotomy while fostering new
we see our peers grappling with similar struggles and having to navigate partnerships between the academy and society. Within this trans-dis-
these issues in a similar way, and so this paper has emerged as a way to ciplinary paradigm, and “socially distributed” knowledge production,
TE
acknowledge these struggles and open up communal reflexivity. tacit knowledge (i.e. unwritten, unspoken, and hidden knowledge held
in practice by very normal human beings, can include emotional knowl-
2. Literature review: juggling academic and political rigour edge, emotions, experiences, insights, intuition, observations and in-
ternalized information) is as valid/relevant as codified knowledge
It is increasingly acknowledged that trans-disciplinary research (TD) (Gibbons, 1994:3); quality control is exercised by a community of prac-
necessitates new forms of radical reflexivity (Cunliffe, 2003). This in- titioners rather than by the logic of narrow disciplinary academic crite-
EC
cludes the explicit articulation of values, assumptions and normative ria (Gibbons, 1994:33) and success is defined in terms of societal useful-
orientations; and renewed attention to asymmetries in power amongst ness and problem-solving ability.
participants engaging in new approaches, methodologies, and processes Van der Hel (2016) identified questions of accountability, impact
of co-production. Such reflexivity signals the need to move beyond prin- and humility as the key logics within knowledge co-production. Other
ciples of academic rigour such as internal validity, external validity, re- frameworks for critical evaluation of TD research include Mitchell et
liability and objectivity integral to a positivist framework,3⁠ to include al.'s (2015) outcome spaces framework for purposive transdisciplinary
RR
new approaches of assessment centered on accountability to the com- research, Pereira and Saltelli's (2017) call for reflexivity, quality assur-
munities we work with and for, as well as accountability to ourselves as ance and an ethos of care in post-normal science, and Kønig et al.'s
individuals and to informed by our values, knowledges and belief sys- (2017) ethos of post-normal science. Writing on the crisis of science,
tems. Rather than a dichotomy, these new approaches can There have Saltelli and Funtowicz (2017), drawing from Mellanby et al. (1971)
been proposals to critically evaluate transformative research, its meth- point out that the replacement of the ‘Gemeinschaft’, the community of
ods, processes, impacts and ways of engaging with other knowledge scientists whose personal acquaintance kept them committed to a high
holders, that we may draw from in this endeavor. Merton's “ethos of sci- moral standard, by a ‘Gesellschaft’, where the worth of each member is
CO
ence” (1973) proposed the acronym CUDOS, standing for values such as evaluated by ‘objective’ metrics, has led to degeneration and corruption
Communalism (a scientist ought to make knowledge accessible to other of the practice of science. They offer several correctives with how to
scientists, as knowledge is common ownership), Universalism (scientists cope with the democratization of expertise, and the need for new forms
ought to assess knowledge claims based on pre-established objective cri- peer review and quality control as a partial resolution to the impasse.
teria), Disinterestedness (a scientist may not hold conflicts of interest However, while these scholars and others propose a variety of tools
that can corrupt the research results) and Organized Scepticism (scien- for doing and critically evaluating transdisciplinary and activist research
tists ought to conduct organized quality control of knowledge claims)
UN
in a post-normal context, there has been a lack of engagement to date

(Merton, 1973). between this literature and an array of long-standing and emergent ac-
Nowotny et al. (2001) argued that when lay perspective knowledge tivist-scholar approaches that could have important relevance for main-
and alternative knowledge are recognized, a shift occurs from solely stream science's need to understand and address sustainability as a so-
cial challenge, not just an environmental one.
This includes a body of literature dedicated to the relationship be-
3 While there have been far greater and more rigorous critiques of Positivist and tween research and politics; ranging from the emancipatory praxis ad-
Hermeneutic framings than we can make here (Bhaskar, 1993, 2016), we attempt rather vocated by Freire (2000) and other participatory action researchers
to focus specifically on how environmental change research and its struggle against a
positivist assumption that technological invention can solve the world's ecological and
(Chambers, 2009; Fricker, 2007) to a rich body of work on the prob-
social problems (especially when we are observing scientific innovation gives birth to a lematic of politically committed research (Gramsci, 1971) and on ques
myriad of new ‘wicked’ problems (Rittel and Webber, 1973)).
3
tions such as methodological implications and negotiation of power the possibility for multiple truths (of which Bhaskar identifies four dis-
relations within the research process; how questions are formulated, tinct forms). Here multiple pathways to truth can be critically and
which publics they serve (Potts and Brown, 2005), how participatory rigorously observed through understanding their ontology, epistemol-
the approaches are (Lotz-Sisitka, 2009a, 2009b; McGarry, 2013), to ogy and rationality- and the context that these knowledge(s) emerge
more practical questions such as how to deal with risks of activism such and respond to. Political rigour therefore undermines our dogmatic
as threats and silencing tactics (Flood et al., 2013), to how science can positivistic assumption that there is one overarching truth attained
F
be mobilized and led by activists to serve their needs and contest pollu- through pure ‘scientific’ objectivity (Bhaskar, 1993; Rabinow, 1996;
tion (Conde, 2014). Lotz-Sisitka, 2009b).
Literature on scholar-activism has also examined the challenge of the While academic rigour is ensured through the scientific method
OO
“dual loyalties” (Hale, 2006) that scholar-activists must juggle while try- and verified through a process of peer review, there is no pre-con-
ing to ensure both academic and “political rigour”. ceived system of ensuring political rigour nor for navigating the po-
Scientific rigour can be defined broadly as “the development of new tential trade-offs and complementarities between academic and politi-
knowledge and innovation using a methodology that ensures the relia- cal rigour; as the forms of knowledge needed by diverse constituencies
bility and relevance of results”.4⁠ It differs amongst disciplines but may will not necessarily align (Borras, 2016). We thus argue that further de-
entail application of the scientific method, substantiating assertions, re- velopment of a reflective and iterative framework for assessing “politi-
ferring to sources and the broader literature, distinguishing between cal rigour” can be put to use to address the tensions and synergies and
PR
facts and interpretations and clearly presenting how you arrived at your challenges of activist and transformations research. This includes mech-
results. Rigour demands robustness, meticulousness and carefulness the- anisms more able to identify how future research may generate findings
oretically, methodology and empirically. It guards against recklessness, that can inform politics and practice.
cherry picking, lack of attention and groundless conclusions. It also de- Beyond this, the development of a political rigour framework can ad-
mands openness to fallibility – “the destruction of beautiful ideas by dress ways to bridge discourses between the interests and needs of social
facts.” movements and academia while building trust (Edelman, 2009); can ex-
While laudable, it is important for scientific rigour not to become pose potential contradictions, ineffectiveness and hypocrisies while sup-
rigidity. Along with rigour, vigour is also key. And scientific rigour porting a political struggle (Vinthagen, 2015); and can provide a critical
D
alone is often not enough. In his “Manifesto of Trans-disciplinarity”, perspective on participation and its constraints, and on the limits and
Nicolescu (2002) posits that the three characteristics of a transdiscipli- challenges of developing an emancipatory research program within ne-
nary perspective are rigour, opening and tolerance. According to him, oliberal academic institutions and disciplines that continue to be struc-
tured by power interests and hierarchies (Temper and Del Bene, 2016;
TE
the rigour of transdisciplinarity goes even deeper than scientific rigour,
“to the extent that it takes into account not only things but also beings Chatterton et al., 2010). Finally, it can address how overburdened aca-
demics can find space for joy in reflexivity, supporting of struggles and
and their relations to other beings and things. Taking account of all the
collective action amidst precarity and the pressures of the academic
givens present in a particular situation is a characteristic of this rigour.
publish or perish rat-race.
It is only in this way that rigour is truly a safe-guard against all possible
In the next section, we offer tangible examples of what political
turns. Opening brings an acceptance of the unknown, the unexpected
rigour looks like in practice through an exploration of the diverse roles
EC
and the unpredictable” (p. 120).

that researchers are adopting under the new paradigm, and how they
Along the same lines, Borras (2016:33), argues that political rigour.
are navigating these uncharted waters. In the discussion, we open a di-
“means being politically informed and thorough, sensitive and alogue through a reflection on these roles and how they can inform
nuanced, and timely and relevant. It should be the opposite of a the development of a politically rigorous praxis for transformations re-
post-mortem way of thinking and doing things. It means taking search.
a position on political processes that are being researched which
RR
in turn runs the risk of compromising the rigor of the academic 3. Method: the Tarot deck of transgressive research
dimension of the research.”
In this paper we propose the Tarot as a device for exploring diverse
In this paper, we extend the concept of political rigour, as one
approaches to research. The Tarot is a set of playing cards, usually con-
that can be potentially fruitful to guide intrepid transformative ac-
sisting of a pack of 78 figures or symbols which is traditionally used as a
tivist-scholars through the tough choices they must make about where,
way to awaken the intuition of the reader and the “querent” as a means
with whom and how they engage in their quests to transform the world.
CO
to improve their understanding of a situation or provide an answer to a

Political rigour uses as its departure point the acknowledgement of the
question. The cards, divided into the minor and major arcana, represent
inherently political and culturally and historically situated nature of
a variety of different situations, archetypal concepts, and/or personality
knowledge production (Haraway, 2003) and the observation that all re-
traits, such as “the Lovers”, “the Hermit”, “Death” and “the Fool”, that
search, science and forms of knowledge production are inherently po-
litical enterprises, impacted by unequal power relations. We do not in can be read as a language, composed of symbolic representations like
this paper shun positivistic science, rather we draw inspiration from the notes in a musical scale, each one having a different effect on the reader
creative expansion of science through critiques of normal science, and of the cards (Giles, 1994).
UN
critical social theories and methodologies in post-normal social science The Tarot cards can thus be seen as keys which aim to unlock intu-
(Dean et al., 2006). ition by challenging the reader to confront symbols they would not nor-
We take inspiration from Bhaskar's (2016) critical realist theory of mally consider. In this way the Tarot can lead to new insights, out-of-the
ontology, that recognizes that our perceptions of reality are inherently box thinking and a new perspective. Each card or character will prompt
ontological and influenced by multiple renderings or perceptions of in the reader a different interpretation and association informed by her
truth. Political rigour could therefore be seen as a critical realist mech- life experiences, stories and personal narrative.
anism that is reflexive and critical of our stance of ‘truth’ and opens up Inspired by the use of the Tarot as a narrative device, a descrip-
tive tool, and a way for the researcher to connect with their intuition,
we suggest that the Tarot and its characters can be used by researchers
struggling, as do we, with defining their role as scholars and activists
4 See for example: https://www.kth.se/social/group/examensarbete-vid-cs/page/ in a transforming world in several ways. This includes surfacing and ex
requirements-of-scientific-rigour/.
4
ploring their own positionality and roles as researchers, contributing to This activist-scholar offers to a political rigour framework the need
a definition of the diverse considerations inherent in politically rigorous to transgress the boundaries of her own epistemic community and to
research and helping to define the values that inform and guide their reinvigorate debate amongst an extended peer community of “othered
own research. groupings” that bring their own diverse and situated perspectives and
To this end, we created an exercise employing arts-based meth- experiences (Salleh, 2015). In this sense, the reading of the Tarot card
ods that invites researchers to define and explore their own roles and of the Post-Normal Scientist acts as a first step; an umbrella-card of
F
responsibilities and identities as scholars. During workshops held in sorts, and an invitation to engage more deeply with any number of
Beirut, Barcelona, South Africa and Lund, Sweden,5⁠ we invited re- other transgressive characters in order to guide us through our journeys,
searchers to reflect on the following key questions, and to create their including those we dive into now, for which we highlight their back-
OO
own “Tarot card”, using a process of collage that involves selecting from ground, their specific contributions to a conceptualization of political
symbolic images provided or ones they had gathered that speak to the rigour, and challenges that might emerge within their approach (Fig. 4).
research identities, tensions, questions and concerns in their work.
4.2. The indigenous scholar/ally
• What character or role do you identify with in your research/activism
up to this point? The indigenous scholar Tarot card teaches us how we can do re-
• What images surface for you when you think of your work? search in culturally embedded ways and what we need to unlearn and
PR
• What challenges and tensions come into play when you adopt this let go of before we can do so. Indigenous communities have suffered in-
role? ordinately from the “extractivist” nature of traditional research that has
often imposed negative stereotypes, disempowered communities and
The exercise led to the creation of a space for reflexive exploration “compiled useless knowledge” (Deloria Jr., 1973) that brought no tangi-
into each researcher/activist's unique and plural expressions of their ble benefit back to the community.6⁠
roles and actions, both ideal and actual, that were generatively surfaced In response, Indigenous scholars have developed decolonizing
in this simple process (Fig. 2). methodologies that aim to place indigenous voices and epistemologies
In this paper we highlight seven “characters” that we have seen both at the center of the research process (Smith, 1999; McKenzie et al.,
D
within our own research communities and in critical literature, each of 2009). Importantly, as put by Tuck and Yang (2012), decolonization
which embodies diverse aspects of academic and political rigour in their is not a metaphor: these methodologies fall under wider strategies of
own way. There are obviously many more and it should be noted that decolonization, which work to ‘unsettle’ very specific socio-historical
these characters should be considered as emergent, flexible, and often contexts, including the indigenous scholar who prioritizes revitalizing
TE
contextually specific. We do not suggest researchers limit themselves to knowledge that can be there for cultural resurgence. Makoonz Geniusz
identifying with one “card” or the other, instead we propose that re- (2009) does this through “Biskabiiyang” which means “returning to our-
searchers use the characters presented to observe and reflect on the va- selves” to pick up the things we were forced to leave behind [like]
riety and diversity of approaches and roles that can exist in different songs, dances, values or philosophies, and bring them into existence “in
moments throughout the research process (Fig. 3). the future” (Geniusz, 2009: 49). Through Biskaabiiyang methodology,
EC
the researcher personally evaluates how they have been impacted by

4. Results: our Tarot deck colonization, rids themselves of the emotional and psychological bag-
gage they carry from this process, and then returns to their “ancestral
4.1. The post-normal scientist
traditions”.
Simpson also introduces two related Nishnaabeg concepts that can
Like the fool in the first card of the Tarot, the post-normal scientist
inform politically rigourous research. These are Naakgonige and
is one who is venturing into the unknown, or what Sardar (2010) calls
RR
Naanaagede'enmowin. The first means “to carefully deliberate and de-

the post-normal times characterized by complexity, chaos and contra-
cide when faced with any kind of change or decision”; while the second
dictions. She becomes what Funtowicz and Ravetz (2003) call “The Post
is “the art of thinking to come to a decision” (Simpson, 2011: 56–57).
Normal Researcher” who is aware that the paradigm of normal science
Weber-Pillwax (2001: 31) describes indigenous methodologies as
and its problem-solving approach is obsolete. This character emerges
founded on principles of interconnectedness, the impact of motives
out of critical realism literature (Bhaskar, 1993, 2009, 2010, 2016),
and intentions, research centered on lived indigenous experience, theo-
and out of the post-normal science canon (Ravetz and Funtowicz (ibid);
CO
ries grounded in indigenous experience, research as transformative, sa-

Dean et al., 2006; Sardar, 2010).
credness and responsibility of maintaining personal and community in-
This researcher, navigating these conditions of transition, uncer-
tegrity, and language and culture as living processes. These methodolo-
tainty, shifting power dynamics, high stakes yet urgent need for deci-
gies are embodied practices designed primarily to guide researchers in
sions, relies on tremendous creativity, imagination and acknowledge-
their work in their own communities and personal process of decolo-
ment of her own ignorance.
nization.
Regarding academic rigour, the post-normal scientist recognizes that
Naakgonige and Naanaagede'enmowin ask the person to reflect on a
problem definition, the choice of what gets measured and how, how val-
UN
problem to figure out what needs to be done. According to Simpson,

ues are defined and how decisions regarding this incommensurability
this is a rigourous culturally embedded process that requires delibera-
are resolved, intrinsically entail a normative and political aspect, and
tion not just in an intellectual sense but using their emotional, physical
require a sharp critical sensitivity to these norms.
and spiritual beings as well. Similarly, the researcher should also en-
gage body, heart and mind to evaluate the wide-ranging and long-term
potential impacts of their research practices, and how their research
5 As part of our involvement in two large transformative knowledge action networks
towards sustainability (ACKNOWL-EJ and T-Learning) that brings together scholars and
activists engaged in various forms of action and collaborative research, co-produced and
expansive knowledge and agency building around complex nexus issues (climate, water, 6 .
food, energy, extractivism, alternatives and other forms of resistance and ‘re-existence’).
5
F
OO
PR
Fig. 2. The arts-based Tarot exercise.
D
TE
EC
RR
CO
UN
Fig. 3. The post-normal scientist. Fig. 4. The indigenous scholar.
may contribute to putting in place the transformation they would like to truth. She exhorts Indigenous researchers and “other researchers com-
see in the world.
mitted to critique their own gaze and to rethink how their work can
As Smith (1999) explains in Decolonizing Methodologies, traditional
support alternative readings and bring forth silenced voices.” Her work
research on Indigenous peoples, or “research through imperial eyes”,
provides guiding questions for shaping the research process in a polit-
marginalises the stories of the Other within a claim of universal
ically rigorous way, prompting us to consider aspects like accountabil
6
ity, support systems, worthiness and relevance of the study, and possi- nist thinking, argues that an ‘anti-oppressive’ practice would be one that
ble positive and negative outcomes (Smith, 1999: 173). focuses on manifestations of racism, classism, sexism, and other forms
However, according Simpson (2011), Biskaabiiyang entails not just of discrimination in interpersonal or organizational interactions where
an evisceration of colonial thinking before a new research project be- concentrations of rewards and services go towards powerful groups,
gins; it is a constant continual evaluation of colonialism within both while considering social divisions like race, gender, class, disability, age,
individuals and communities. It also encompasses a visioning process and sexual orientation as connected to broader social structures.
F
where we create new and just realities and in which our way of being The anti-oppressive researcher pays particular attention to the shap-
can flourish. Biskaabiiyang echoes the concept of decolonization, how- ing of the research agenda, examining who is and who is not involved
ever Simpson explains how for her it represents a way of grounding in picking the topic, whose interests are served and whose are not, and
OO
resurgence and decolonization within a “new emergence” (Fig. 5). what is and what is not explored. By constantly asking questions, the
researcher seeks to bring to light the assumptions about people, power,
4.3. The anti-oppressive researcher knowledge and relationships that they hold, thereby identifying how
power relations shape the research process. This attentiveness allows
The anti-oppressive researcher responds to calls from environmental a reconceptualization of research as an emergent process, not a linear,
justice groups and critical academics to investigate and resist oppressive predetermined one. An anti-oppressive researcher sees themselves as
social systems at the root of the current ecological crisis (Plumwood, both oppressor and oppressed, depending on the context, and consid-
2002; Di Chiro, 2008; Walia, 2014), including their manifestations ers that in order to challenge power relations in knowledge production,
PR
within academia and dominant processes of knowledge production one must also challenge the dominance of current paradigms of research
(Strega and Brown, 2005). This Tarot card can help guide scholar-ac- (Potts and Brown, 2005).
tivists through positionality and power relations within research Drawing from Indigenous theory, feminism, critical race theory,
processes, prompting them to center interpersonal relationships, reflex- Marxism, poststructuralism, and postcolonial thought, anti-oppressive
ivity, the question of whose interests are served by research outputs and research (AOR) can act as one strategy to challenge toxic social rela-
design and whose are not, and the identification of the research process tions via knowledge production processes (Potts and Brown, 2005). The
itself as a site for resistance and transgression. framework demands methodologies that resist dominant interests and
D
Anti-oppression as a theoretical framework stems from anti-oppres- powers within and outside of academia, centering reflexivity and con-
sion discourse and practice within the field of critical social work, which sent (Strega and Brown, 2005) and should avoid both essentialism and
highlights difference and diversity of human experience as an attempt subjectivism (Brown, 2012). In this way, AOR acts as an intervention;
to avoid reproducing harmful structures of power, exclusion and mar- a way for researchers to ask questions, seek answers, and develop new
TE
ginalization (Brown, 2012). Clifford (1995), inspired by Black femi questions all while focusing on relationship-building (Potts and Brown,
2005).
One potential pitfall of the anti-oppressive researcher is the
over-simplification or generalization of experiences of oppression and
power based on pre-set identity categories, even when using an intersec-
tional lens (as proposed by Crenshaw, 1991). They also risk becoming
EC
so focused on disrupting and opposing the status quo that they fail to
critique new normalizations and power structures emerging within their
opposition.
4.4. The co-conspirer

RR
The co-conspirer is an activist that conducts research to enrich

the justice movement that they are specifically immersed and impli-
cated in. She seeks to amplify the knowledge held in marginal spaces
that sits outside of the hegemonic meaning-making machine (Kulundu,
2016; Kulundu, 2018). She collaboratively struggles to understand the
concerns, challenges and transgressive practices of those that she is
bound with in solidarity in their quest for emancipation. She conspires
CO
with those in the fringes of society with the intention of building a

counter-hegemonic expression and practice that emerges from their
epistemic beliefs and ontological yearnings of those that she is in soli-
darity with, and she struggles with others to build on the emerging lan-
guage and practice (Kulundu, 2016). This way of working believes that
without a flourishing understanding of who we are, we lack then the
epistemological roots to guide or trace our way forward (Fig. 6).
UN
The co-conspirer works to help regenerate and reproduce the collec-

tively imagined and desired emancipation of those she is working with.
She takes careful and incremental ontological steps with the collective
to build creative and revolutionary praxis. She sees imagination as a key
tool in shifting dominant hegemonic discourse (Smith, 1999: 39) as she
understands re-imagining processes as not just a re-thinking of how one
sees the world; but expanding our way of being by opening ourselves up
to alternatives and bringing these alternatives to life through our writ-
ing, our art making and our performance.
Fig. 5. The anti-oppressive researcher.
7
1977; Abram, 1988, 1996). This phenomenologically shaped third space

generates new possibilities by questioning entrenched categorisations
of knowledge systems and cultures and opens up new avenues with a
counter hegemonic strategy (Breidlid, 2013: 626).
The co-conspirer is implicated in the movement/action and so needs
to maintain a healthy connection to her own identity and autonomy.
F
The co-conspirer also might find that she can get lost in the genera-
tive emergent processes of the group and should strike a balance be-
tween lifting out erotic knowledge systems (Lorde, 2007: 59) and per-
OO
sonal agency with the need to transfer these knowledge(s) into collec-
tive actions and agency (Kulundu, 2018). The co-conspirer might be
overwhelmed with emotional, traumatic or difficult forms of knowl-
edge that might emerge from her transgressive practice and she must be
able to find psycho-social support when necessary to hold and recognize
these emotionally complex knowledge(s) (Fig. 7).
4.5. The Responsible Participant
PR
The Responsible Participant strives to participate in and hold a trans-
formative and connective social space, that is cognizant of parity, in-
clusion, reflexivity, empathy and intuitive imaginal thought (McGarry,
2013, 2014), and that disrupts hegemonic or ‘taken-for-granted’ social
forms of engaging. The Responsible Participant - originally coined by
Shelley Sacks (2011) - refers to the researcher as reflexive practitioner/
D
intervener/facilitator in an emergent research process rather than the
dominant force controlling the shape of the process.
The Responsible Participant aims to remain present, by being pre-
sent with her own senses and sensibilities (see Scharmer, 2007 in work-
TE
ing with the concept of ‘presencing’ as part of his “U-theory”). In this
Fig. 6. The co-conspirer.

EC
In particular, the co-conspirer raises concerns over the discarding

of human embodiment of the environmental imaginary and she en-
courages an embodied ecological citizenship, that attends sufficiently
to body, place, and politics, especially as these are understood as dif-
ferent modes of engagement with the world within history (Reid and
RR
Taylor, 2000: 440). Like the trickster, personified as the jackal in many
African stories, she is able to move between worlds with ease, in this
case the existing hardened socio-economic and political histories that
we respond to daily, while maintaining a deeply connected and sensor-
ial relationship with the wider natural ecology. She responds to the cul-
tural and political “body-blindness” we see in technocratic environmen-
tal responses connected with the disparagement of local knowledge and
CO
personal forms of knowing and capacities not only in the policy system,
but also in education and even in the larger environmental movement
(McGarry, 2013). The co-conspirer challenges body-blind, non-dualis-
tic understandings of the individual within a matrix and subject/object
dualisms, and connects this to democratic freedom (Reid and Taylor,
2003).
She is sensitive and observant to surface native meanings from
UN
what we might think is routine and mundane and reveals the innate
knowledge that colours it (Fricker, 2007). She understands that erotic
knowledge (i.e. embodied, intuitive and instinctive ways of knowing)
(Lorde, 2007) of this nature is a vital resource; it is cultural capital that
holds power that grows as it is consistently surfaced and acknowledged
as knowledge, and sees this knowledge as a ‘hermeneutical resource’
(Fricker, 2007: 155). The co-conspirer opens up what Homi Bhabha
calls the generative ‘third spaces’ that go beyond dominant discourses
and binaries in educational research, and draws from phenomenolog-
ical and sensual renderings of the world (Merleau-Ponty, 1968; Cobb, Fig. 7. The Responsible Participant.
8
way she becomes an apprentice to her own intuition, imagination and

empathic capabilities, as well as an apprentice to the participants' on-
tologies that she is working with (McGarry, 2014). She ensures that
the pressures of moral imperatives do not govern her praxis alone, but
rather her personal ability to act in an intuitive, reflexive and car-
ing way, which guide her participation beyond a basic commitment to
F
do-no-harm (McGarry et al., 2017). As Social Development practition-
ers and authors of ‘artists of the invisible’, Kaplan and Davidoff (2014)
quote Rudolf Steiner's (1995) insistence of an ‘intentional wakefulness’
OO
that ensures they are vigilant in avoiding strengthening the very pat-
terns and behaviours that they have set out to change.
A primary aim is to reduce the power of the researcher as facilita-
tor and to avoid the facilitator's potential capacity to manipulate - or
what Chambers (2009) calls facipulation (manipulated facilitation). This
character calls for sensitivity to the tyranny of participation (Hickey
and Mohan, 2004) by relying on generative and accessible facilita-
PR
tive forms, such as connective aesthetics (Gablik, 1992) and/or so-
cial sculpture methodology (Beuys, 1977; Sacks, 2011; McGarry, 2013).
The Responsible Participant sees the aesthetic as the opposite of anes-
thetic (Benjamin, 2008; Buck-Morss, 1992; Sacks, 2011). The aesthetic
is therefore an enlivening, sensorial and awakening force that can cre-
ate spaces of extra-social authority that exist outside of a human being,
and within a collectively agreed upon culture of engagement around a
central connective image/space or a sculptural object.
D
Through a combination of internal and social reflexivity, the Re-
sponsible Participant is able to navigate their power and thus to hold
the learning/transgressive space on the behalf of the whole, allowing
the research to participate in a more equitable (less-dominant) form in
TE
the learning/exchange. McGarry (2013, 2014) highlights the potential
for this approach in collaborative practice-based research for develop-
ing methodologies and pedagogies for embodied ecological citizenship
(Reid and Taylor, 2000).
We have also seen the Responsible Participant as responsible for
carefully disrupting normative absences through applying disruptive Fig. 8. The critical comrade.
EC
pedagogies that lift out the systemic causes for significant ills plaguing
a group or a community. A simple example is removing the waste bin can exist significant differences in objectives, outputs and time frames.
from a household which removes the possibility to have a place to throw For example, activists often need to take decisions urgently and hope
away and therefore absents waste, which could lead to generative new that academic research will be able to inform struggles in the moment;
possibilities of avoiding waste. In the same way the Responsible Partic- they can be unaccustomed to the slow pace of meticulous research.
ipant is constantly collaboratively seeking out ways to absent the “ab- Other tensions entail the researcher's propensity to probe which may en-
RR
sences” (Bhaskar, 2016) inherent in driving many of our daily social and tail asking uncomfortable questions and lead to frictions, either because
environmental problems. of a lack of delicacy; insufficient relationship building; or because of a
The Responsible Participant needs to avoid becoming over-reliant hesitance to engage with difficult questions within the movement.
on exercises, procedures, games, models and frameworks that she uses Every academic invested in social movement struggle continually
to in her repertoire (Kaplan and Davidoff, 2014: 4). While these in- needs to question how her research will be used to advance the cause
struments are useful for engendering participative thinking and action, or how it may be wielded politically – this is what we term the political
impact and rigour of research. As Edelman (2009: 249) points out this
CO
they should not be dogmatically applied to all manner of situations

as techniques that must always resolve both our social and ecological leads to the need to avoid on the one hand an approach “which in its
dead-ends (Chaves et al., 2015), there are many subtle and nuanced more extreme manifestations critics sometimes characterise as ‘self-cen-
paradoxes that come with being human (Kaplan and Davidoff, 2014: 4) sorship’, ‘uncritical adulation’ or even ‘cheerleading’” and on the other
and she should find a balance between the instruments/processes she to make sure that the research does not unwittingly strengthen the an-
uses with their intuitive, empathetic and imaginal reflexive capacities, alytical capabilities of repressive forces, state surveillance, elite inter-
that allow for innovation and emergence (Fig. 8). ests, or other hostile opponents, providing fuel against the movement
UN
and leading to divisiveness. Perhaps the most challenging for the en-
4.6. The critical comrade/the dialectic activist scholar gaged researcher is to find the way to be critically constructive, and to
offer analytical and theoretical insights that can enrich the movement.
The critical comrade is a character that allows us to think through In this, the critical comrade must rely on his own judgement as well as
and deal with both the synergies and potential tensions that may arise on a form of peer review that takes place through a dialectical process
when juggling the dual roles of movement activist and professional of debate, joint analysis, strategizing and discussion within movement
academic/researcher. The critical comrade is committed to help gen- spaces.
erate knowledge which would be useful to social movements from As Bond (2015) writes, “To fail to offer critical perspectives on
below, however she acknowledges that while the collaborations be- movements against power is as serious an intellectual flaw as suffered
tween scholars and activists can be immensely fruitful, they can also be by so many of our colleagues who write uncritically about the status
knotty and problematic and loyalties to both aims may conflict as there
9
quo, succumbing to flatteries gained by serving power”. Bond elaborates tic, and provides for transgressive methodologies that can be used
10 sins that sympathetic academics must avoid when working alongside as tools to disrupt hegemonic, normalized, and naturalized structures
social movement agents, these include hijacking, in which a researcher within academia. Through a lens of ex-centricity and queer flexibil-
takes ownership of a movement and its interpretation; substitutionism: ity, methodology becomes a radical strategy of resistance while adding
whereby the researcher replaces local understanding with his own vi- transformative possibilities into a researcher's toolbox (Ibid.)
sion; Ventriloquism: re-phrasing of movement texts in his own (acad- Queer Enquirers reject binaries and recognize the value of experien-
F
emic) words; careerism through parasitism: technicism, hucksterism, tial knowledge. They build and imagine alternative worlds out of neces-
divisiveness, and betrayal. Within this the cardinal sin is perhaps “Fail- sity and center the concept of consent as active and enthusiastic. Just as
ure of analytical nerve: inability (often due to fear) to draw out the there are many more ways to love and express ourselves than the op-
OO
fully liberatory potentials of the movement and its struggles or offer tions presented to us as children, Queer Enquirers know there are limit-
comradely critique of those movements.” In this line, Edelman (2009) less alternatives to normative scientific research. While underlying val-
points out that one of the most productive contributions of researchers ues, ethics and standards exist, there is no one ‘right’ way to be a re-
can be to identify exclusions and imbalances or organizational patterns searcher. They notice similarities between the punishment, exclusion,
through candid discussions with potential members who feel alienated, and severe pressure to conform to normative gender and sexuality (Elia,
uninvolved or disaffected. Such insights that may be difficult to identify 2003) and the risks faced by scholar-activists (Flood et al., 2013) who
from within. fall outside of the ‘charmed circle’ (Elia, 2003) of ‘acceptable’ academic
PR
behaviour.
4.7. The Queer Enquirer These researchers “advocate for humane, equitable change and con-
ceive of ways research, texts, and bodies can serve as sites of ideological
The Queer Enquirer sees opportunity for resistance in every step of and discursive ‘trouble’” (Burlington & Butler, 1999; Munoz 1999; So-
the research process, using their position at the margins to creatively lis, 2007 in Adams and Jones, 2011, p. 110). However, they must avoid
challenge hegemonic norms present in research institutions (Fig. 9). the traps of whiteness, elitism, and coloniality associated with some dis-
Queer theorist herising (2005) proposes the possibility of ex-centric courses around Queerness (Adams and Jones, 2011; Haritaworn, 2008;
research and queer flexibility as one way to respond to calls to chal- Elia, 2003), and should constantly seek to avoid (re)creating hierarchies
D
lenge current dominant research paradigms. An ex-centric researcher within heterogeneous marginalized groups.
uses their research process to disrupt the academy's exclusion of mar- Queer Enquirers see knowledge production as a performance, with
ginalized voices by centering subjugated knowledges and advocating for the potential to both perform the world we live in as well as the world
their epistemic value, while queer flexibility implies an on-going op- we might live in (Gibson-Graham, 2008). Through embracing the trans-
TE
position to the status quo by challenging the idea of identity as sta gressive potential of the latter, Queer Enquirers engage in imaginative
processes of activism (Hwang, 2013) that seek to open new possibilities
and support the building of alternatives (Gibson-Graham, 2008) (Fig.
10).
EC
4.8. The slow and care-full scholar
The slow and care-full scholar seeks to create spaces for care and car-
ing relationships amidst the demands of the neoliberal university that
tends to devalue such relations and practices (Mountz et al., 2015). She
resists these demands by prioritizing well-being, including one's own, in
a space that would see the researcher primarily as a source of labour,
RR
and those she engages with in research processes as subjects to extract

from.
This scholar rejects the dehumanization of herself and others, em-
bodying an ethics of care that directs attention towards the most vulner-
able amongst us. This can include our own students, anonymous schol-
ars seeking critically constructive revisions, or adjuncts and teacher's
CO
assistants who are struggling with precarity. It may also include our-
selves, and the challenge becomes how to engage in these relations of
care while also practicing “self-care”, being cognizant that “care work
is work. It is not self-indulgent; it is radical, necessary and risky, im-
posing a burden on those who undertake it.” (Ahmed, 2014). Or to
be even more provocative in Ahmed's words (2014) echoing of Audre
Lorde (2007), “self-care is also warfare” for those whose self-preserva-
UN
tion acts as a form of resistance against a neoliberal system that threat-

ens their very existence.
The slow and care-full scholar advocates for slowness not just as a
form of resistance but also as a way to improve the quality and depth
of scholarly material. Instead of rushed, superficial readings and in-
teractions, she engages deeply and care-fully with texts and her re-
search communities, taking time to think, consider, critique, and create
(Mountz et al., 2015).
Care means accepting and embracing failure, it entails guarding
against self-exploitation of care work and strategies to respond to the
Fig. 9. The Queer Enquirer. dictates of academic orthodoxy and success. It can mean a process and
10
prompt an ongoing conversation, inviting us to consider how we see our

scientific practice, our engagement with other agents within the process
of research, how values are reflected in the work we do, and how we
sense that research leads to social and political change and transforma-
tion.
The Tarot exercise is just one example of a tangible strategy to open
F
up space for individual and collective, collaborative reflexivity in our
research communities. This exercise is a way to explore our own posi-
tionality and can be used as one piece in a more comprehensive effort to
OO
be more intentional in our research and activism practices. It also aims
to awaken ourselves to the other senses that come into play in our re-
search practices, including our bodies, our emotions, and our intuitions.
In this way the Tarot serves as a device and an entry point for explor-
ing the “political rigour” of our knowledge practices. By drawing out
key aspects of diverse transgressive research approaches, some of which
we include in this paper, we can begin to give shape to this concept and
how it can be applied.
PR
Similarly to how scientific rigour can be defined as the application
of the scientific method to ensure robust experimental design, method-
ology, analysis and reporting of results, we define political rigour as
the application of methods of reflexivity in knowledge creation through
which power relations and explicit values and aims of societal transfor-
mation are identified, reflected on, socialized and evaluated amongst an
extended peer community, and reflected in the research design, method-
D
ology and research outputs.
If the methodology of the scientific method ensures the reliabil-
ity and robustness of results for scientific rigour, for political rigour, a
process of radical, intentional and inclusive reflexivity is what ensures
TE
accountability for the practical and political outcomes of the knowledge
creation process. While scientific rigour uses peer review to as a means
of verification, political rigour is verified through an iterative cycle of
political peer review.
Like scientific rigour, political rigour also entails substantiating as-
Fig. 10. The slow and care-full scholar. sertions, referring to sources and broader literature and discussions, dis-
EC
tinguishing between facts and interpretations, but does so through a

labour of creating new metrics and fostering a culture of appreciation lens of power analysis, rejecting neutrality and false objectivity, and
for collective authorship, mentorship, collaboration, community build- purposefully seeking out those voices often excluded in dominant sci-
ing, and activist work in the germination and sharing of ideas and for ence. In this way, political rigour uses scientific rigour strategically as
convivial resistance to the current models of knowledge production. As a counter-hegemonic tool. In this way scientific and political rigour can
Mountz et al. (2015) explain, “Care-full scholarship is also about engag- be synergistic. While tensions surely exist, these are approached through
RR
ing different publics … refining or even rejecting earlier ideas, engaging being explicit and intentional with our biases and aims and clearly posi-
in activism and advocacy, and generally amplifying the potential im- tioning ourselves. Political rigour makes space for the existence of mul-
pact of our scholarship rather than moving on to the next product that tiple truths and uncertainty, but not uncritically. Above all, political
‘counts’ to administrators.” rigour is fluid and heavily dependent on context.
The heroine who rejects the conformity and the metrics of the ne- Political rigour involves embedding active, strategic reflexivity into
oliberal university and focuses instead on relations of solidarity and a every step of the research process and entails social evaluation of the re-
search amongst an extended peer community. It is process-oriented, not
CO
revalorization of marginalized caring activities inevitably faces a strug-

gle to thrive and flourish within the university (Kronlid, 2009). In re- outcome oriented. It is a key consideration in a new knowledge praxis
sponse she actively continues to remake the university, to at least name and includes consideration of epistemic justice (Fricker, 2007; Temper
and acknowledge the power hierarchies she may be unable to confront and Del Bene, 2016), that may be defined as the valorization and recog-
(Temper and Del Bene, 2016), and to avoid academic ‘counting culture’ nition of other forms of knowing and other life-worlds, including knowl-
that breeds institutional shaming and self-audit, instead counting friend- edges “From below, to the Left, with the Earth” (Escobar, 2016).
ships, collaborations, and thank yous (Mountz et al., 2015). We aim to develop further tools such as the Tarot process for eval-
uating political rigour and for guiding reflexivity so as to assess the
UN
The slow and care-full scholar might become so focused on care,

however, that they become averse to the challenges, frustrations, and consequences of the research and how these fit into our values, ob-
risk-taking often necessary to move through complex research jectives and broader transformative visions. We may ask of research
processes. intended for social transformation: “Research for what? With whom?
How? What kind of change? How in practice will this production of
5. Discussion: political rigour knowledge transform power relationships?” Such a critical politically
rigorous reflection would include consideration of the ontologies (what
Perhaps one or several of the archetypes included in this paper rang is truth?), epistemologies (what is the connection between the knower
true to you, or, perhaps you would identify with a very different ap- and what is or could be known), methodologies (how do we set out to
proach and would want to add your own character to the growing
Tarot deck of transgressive research. These characters are intended to
11
create and discover knowledge) and axiologies (what is essentially valu- to the politics of co-production and how politics, interests, imperatives
able and important) that inform the research process (Guba and Lincoln, and knowledge of different actors and stakeholders are reflected in the
1994, Vargas et al., 2019). It includes a constant interplay and dialectic final research. The new transformative knowledge paradigm demands
between action and reflection, often referred to as the praxis of research such a newer deeper form of radical reflexivity that is in the making.
(Freire, 2000).
Questions to be examined include those on the transformative aims 6. Conclusion
F
and desired political impacts emerging from the project, methodologies,
explorations into the meaning and forms of participation, solidarity and This paper has presented a variety of approaches that transgressive
reciprocity in the research, questions of relations with co-researchers, activist researchers are engaging in, directing the reader to references
OO
authorship and acknowledgment and enquiries into the sources of and literature on each and has forcefully argued for the need for po-
knowledge and attention to who is considered an expert, what forms of litical rigour informed by explicit values as a complement to acade-
knowledge are valued and which are marginalized7⁠ ? What are our re- mic and scientific rigour within a new paradigm of scientific quality
search publics and outputs - who are we speaking to and how in what for transgressive and transformative knowledge production and science.
forms? And how do we evaluate ourselves and seek evaluation from oth- By identifying commonalities across diverse critical and emergent ap-
ers? proaches to science, this paradigm helps us move towards more coher-
Beneath all this is the question of the values and the criteria that in- ent methodological approaches in transdisciplinary sciences like ecolog-
form the research. Here, based on our own experiences and those of oth- ical economics that have struggled with uncritical plurality and method-
PR
ers in our research communities, we propose some principles that fre- ological confusion (Dow, 2007; Spash, 2012).
quently emerge in a ‘political’ peer review process. These are principles Our future research agenda in this line includes the elaboration of
that have been reflected through the Tarot characters that we have just other tools, disruptive practices/pedagogies, games and exercises that
described which we suggest can act as guides in how some researchers can help guide a reflective process of political rigour. This process in-
apply these values in their own work. Thus the slow and careful scholar cludes ongoing individual reflexivity, but also a collective exploration
reminds us how to care and how to deal with the blurring of our per- into the politics of knowledge and the thorny work we must do of com-
sonal and professional lives and the indigenous ally may teach us what plicating standard academic protocols and the transformation of the in-
D
reciprocity might look like even towards our non-human plant and ani- stitutions we work in; and of how we produce and value knowledge pro-
mal research partners. duction. In this vein, we must constantly ask ourselves and others, “how
While these are values which have emerged here, we suggest each is this work transgressive?” (Lotz-Sisitka, 2016). How are we upending,
researcher to work together with their co-researchers and participants challenging and questioning the assumptions, the dualisms, the anthro-
TE
to jointly define the values and criteria that inform their own collective pocentrism and objectification of traditional academic knowledge? Fi-
and individual processes. nally, how do we see our research as a process of becoming, and trans-
Political peer review entails the joint definition of shared values as formation rather than an uncovering of existing truth? We hope this pa-
those above, the co-development of means to verify their application per contributes to opening up further space for discussion on how sci-
and integrity, and the outlining of an iterative call and response process ence needs to transform itself and serves as a vehicle for critical reflec-
for adjusting the research design, process and outcomes to ensure them. tion for researchers redefining themselves and their work.
EC
1. Accessibility (research can be understood broadly and a means for Funding and acknowledgements
social learning)
2. Reflexivity (critically examination of our own practices, presump- We are grateful to the International Social Science Council (ISSC)
tions and assumptions and the power relationships in our work). and the Transformations to Sustainability for their financial and aca-
3. Relevance (co-defining Matter of Concern with all involved. Research demic support in creating the means for this collaborative paper to
RR
must be useful to emancipatory efforts of groups we work with) emerge. We are indebted to Susanne Moser for her kind critical review
4. Transparency (clarity of structure, processes and outcome) of earlier drafts of this paper, and her constant support in helping guide
5. Care-full ness (relations of care with oneself, loved ones, commu- and shape the ACKNOWL-EJ and T-Learning Network. We are grateful
nities of scholar and participants) for Injairu Kulundu for providing us first hand insights for the “co-con-
6. Respectfulness (how are other forms of knowledge and worldviews spirer” Tarot Card, and her courageous co-conspiring action in South
valorized, recognized and integrated into the research process) Africa. Special thanks to Heila Lotz-Sisitka for her guiding light in all
7. Relationality (research should be grounded and context dependent)
CO
things transgressive.
8. Reciprocity (co-design of research question, methods, analysis and
outputs works as one method to help ensure reciprocity) Uncited references
9. Fallibility (possibility to fail and learn from failure)
10. Transformativity/Transgression (how is the research transforming Chatterton, 2006
power relations and transgressing practice as usual to open up new Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1993
emancipatory possibilities). Kaplan, 2002
UN
Sudbury and Okazawa-Rey, 2015

Adherence to such values can help inform scholar-activists in a col-
lective process of creating transformative knowledge, that is sensitive References
Abram, D., 1988. Merleau-Ponty and the voice of the Earth. Environmental Ethics 10 (2),
101–120.
7 In this line, an interesting initiative is the citation practices challenge (http://www. Abram, D., 1996. The Spell of the Sensuous: Perception and Language in a More-than-hu-
criticalethnicstudiesjournal.org/citation-practices/), which reminds us to be intentional in man World. Vintage, New York.
our citation practices. Adams, T.E., Jones, S.H., 2011. Telling stories: reflexivity, queer theory, and autoethnog-
raphy. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies 11 (2), 108–116.
Ahmed, S., 2014. Self-care as Warfare. Feminist Killjoys Blog https://feministkilljoys.com/
2014/08/25/selfcare-as-warfare/Accessed 9 August 2017.
Benjamin, W., 2008. The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. Penguin,
UK.
12
Beuys, J., 1977. Eintritt in ein Lebewesen: lecture given during Documenta 6 in Kassel, Haraway, D., 2003. Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privi-
Germany. Audio cassette. Wangen: FIU. In: Lern Hayes, C.M., Walters, V. (Eds.), In S. lege of partial perspective. In: Turning Points in Qualitative Research: Tying Knots in
Sacks (2011). Social Sculpture and New Organs of Perception: New Practices and New a Handkerchief. pp. 21–46.
Pedagogy for a Humane and Ecologically Visible Future. (2011) Beuysian Legacies in Haritaworn, J., 2008. Shifting positionalities: empirical reflections on a queer/trans of
Ireland and Beyond: Art Culture and Politics Lit Verlag, Berlin. colour methodology. Sociol. Res. Online 13 (1), 1–15.
Bhaskar, R., 1993. 2008. Dialectic: The Pulse of Freedom. Routledge, London. herising, F., 2005. Interrupting positions: critical thresholds and queer pro/positions. In:
Bhaskar, R., 2009. Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation. Routledge. Susan Strega and Leslie Brown, Eds. Research as Resistance: Critical, Indigenous and
Bhaskar, R., 2010. Reclaiming Reality: A Critical Introduction to Contemporary Philoso- Anti-oppressive Approaches. Canadian Scholars' Press, Toronto, ON, pp. 127–152.
F
phy. Taylor & Francis. Hickey, S., Mohan, G., 2004. Participation--From Tyranny to Transformation?: Exploring
Bhaskar, R., 2016. Enlightened Common Sense: The Philosophy of Critical Realism. Rout- New Approaches to Participation in Development. Zed books.
ledge. Hooks, B., 1996. Teaching to transgress: education as the practice of freedom. J. Leis. Res.
Bond, P., 2015. The intellectual meets the South African social movement: a code of 28 (4), 316.
OO
conduct is overdue, when researching such a conflict-rich society, Politikon. South Hwang, L., 2013. Rethinking the creative economy: utilizing participatory action research
African Journal of Political Studies 42 (1), 117–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/ to develop the community economy of artists and artisans. Rethink. Marx. 25 (4),
02589346.2015.1035483. 501–517.
Borras, S.M., 2016. Land Politics, Agrarian Movements, and Scholar-activism. Paper Pre- Kaplan, A., 2002. Development Practioners and Social Process: Artists of the Invisible.
sented to the International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University, 14 April. Pluto Press.
In: http://repub.eur.nl/pub/93021/Jun_Borras_Inaugural_14Apr2016.pdf, Accessed 8 Kaplan, A., Davidoff, S., 2014. A Delicate Activism Is Truly Radical a Radical Approach
February 2017. to Change. Proteus Initiative http://www.proteusinitiative.org/Accessed September
Breidlid, A., 2013. Education, Indigenous Knowledges, and Development in the Global 2018.
South: Contesting Knowledges for a Sustainable Future. vol. 82, Routledge. Klein, J.T., 2015. Reprint of “Discourses of transdisciplinarity: looking back to the future”.
Brown, C., 2012. Anti-oppression through a postmodern lens: dismantling the master's
PR
Futures 65, 10–16.
conceptual tools in discursive social work practice. Crit. Soc. Work 13 (1).
Kønig, N., Børsen, T., Emmeche, C., 2017. The ethos of post-normal science. Futuresin
Buck-Morss, S., 1992. Aesthetics and anaesthetics: Walter Benjamin's artwork essay recon-
press https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2016.12.004.
sidered. October 62, 3–41.
Kronlid, D., 2009. Sigtuna think piece 2: climate capabilities and climate change education
Chambers, R., 2009. So that the poor count more: using participatory methods for impact research. Southern African Journal of Environmental Education (26), 27–37.
evaluation. Journal of development effectiveness 1 (3), 243–246.
Kulundu, I., 2016. Regenerating and Re-imagining African Liberatory Pedagogy in the
Chatterton, P., 2006. “Give up activism” and change the world in unknown ways: or, learn- 21st Century. Transgressive Learning for the Common Good Amongst a Community of
ing to walk with others on uncommon ground. Antipode 38 (2), 259–281. Change Drivers', (PhD Proposal submitted to Rhodes University Higher degrees Com-
Chatterton, P., Hodkinson, S., Pickerill, J., 2010. Beyond scholar activism: making strate- mittee).
gic interventions inside and outside the Neoliberal University. Acme: An international Kulundu, I., 2018. Think piece: intersectional resonance and the multiplicity of being in a
D
e-journal for critical geographies 9 (2). polarised world. Southern African Journal of Environmental Education 34.
Chaves, M., Macintyre, T., Riano, E., Calero, J., 2015. Death and rebirth of Atlántida: the Lorde, A., 2007. Sister Outsider. The Crossing Press, Trumansberg and New York.
role of social learning in bringing about transformative sustainability processes in an Lotz-Sisitka, H., 2009. Sigtuna think piece 8: piecing together conceptual framings for cli-
ecovillage. Southern African Journal of Environmental Education 31, 22–32. mate change education research in Southern African contexts. Southern African Jour-
Clifford, D., 1995. Methods in oral history and social work. Journal of the Oral History nal of Environmental Education 26, 81–92.
TE
Society 23 (2). Lotz-Sisitka, H., 2009. Why ontology matters to reviewing environmental education re-
Cobb, E.M., 1977. The Ecology of Imagination in Childhood. Routledge and Kegan Paul, search. Environ. Educ. Res. 15 (2), 165–175.
London. Lotz-Sisitka, H., Wals, A.E., Kronlid, D., McGarry, D., 2015. Transformative, transgressive
Conde, M., 2014. Activism mobilising science. Ecol. Econ. 105, 67–77. social learning: rethinking higher education pedagogy in times of systemic global dys-
Costanza, R., 1991. Ecological economics: a research agenda. Struct. Chang. Econ. Dyn. 2 function. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 16, 73–80.
(2), 335–357. Lotz-Sisitka, H., Ali, M.B., Mphepo, G., Chaves, M., Macintyre, T., Pesanayi, T., Wals, A.,
Crenshaw, K., 1991. Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence Mukute, M., Kronlid, D., Tran, D.T., Joon, D., McGarry, D., 2016. Co-designing re-
against women of color. Stanford Law Review 43 (6), 1241–1299.
EC
search on transgressive learning in times of climate change. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sus-
Cunliffe, A.L., 2003. Reflexive inquiry in organizational research: questions and possibili- tain. 20, 50–55.
ties. Hum. Relat. 56 (8), 983–1003. Malm, Andreas, Hornborg, Alf, 2014. The geology of mankind? A critique of the An-
Dean, K., Joseph, J., Roberts, J.M., Wight, C., 2006. Realism, Philosophy and Social thropocene narrative. The Anthropocene Review 1, 62–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/
Science. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 2053019613516291.
Dei, G.S., 2012. Indigenous anti-colonial knowledge as ‘heritage knowledge’ for promot- Marx, K., 1980. Theses of Feuerbach. In: Marx/Engels: Selected Works in One Volume.
ing Black/African education in diasporic contexts. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Edu- Lawrence and Wishart, London.
cation & Society 1 (1). McGarry, D., 2013. Empathy in the Time of Ecological Apartheid a Social Sculpture Prac-
RR
Deloria Jr., V., 1973. Custer died for your sins. In: Weaver, T. (Ed.), To See Ourselves: An- tice-led Inquiry Into Developing Pedagogies for Ecological Citizenship. Department of
thropology and Modern Social Issues. Macmillan, New York, pp. 130–137. Education, Rhodes University, (Doctoral thesis for the Degree of Doctor of Philoso-
Di Chiro, G., 2008. Living environmentalisms: coalition politics, social reproduction, and phy;supervised by Prof. Heila Lotz-sisitka).
environmental justice. Environmental Politics 17 (2), 276–298. McGarry, D., 2014. The empathetic apprentice: pedagogical developments in the aesthetic
Dow, S.C., 2007. Variety of methodological approach in economics. J. Econ. Surv. 21 (3), education of the social learning practitioner in South Africa. Chapter 12 in Corco-
(447-19). ran. In: Blaze, Peter, Hollingshead, Brandon P. (Eds.), Intergenerational Learning and
e Silva, M.C., Teixeira, A.A., 2011. A bibliometric account of the evolution of EE in the last Transformative Leadership for Sustainable Futures. Wageningen Academic Publishers,
two decades: is ecological economics (becoming) a post-normal science?. Ecol. Econ. Wageningen, the Netherlands, (in press).
70 (5), 849–862. McKenzie, M., Hart, P., Bai, H., Jickling, B., 2009. Fields of Green. Hampton Press Inc,
CO
Edelman, M., 2009. Synergies and tensions between rural social movements and profes- Cresskill, NJ.
sional researchers. J. Peasant Stud. 36 (1), 245–265. Mellanby, K., Price, T., Ravetz, J.R., 1971. Conflicts of loyalty in science. Nature 234
Elia, J.P., 2003. Queering relationships. J. Homosex. 45 (2–4), 61–86. (5323), 17–21.
Escobar, A., 2016. Thinking-feeling with the earth: territorial struggles and the ontolog- Merleau-Ponty, M., 1968. The Visible and the Invisible. (A. Lingis, Trans.). Northwestern
ical dimension of the epistemologies of the south. AIBR. Revista de Antropología University Press, Evanston.
Iberoamericana 11 (1). Merton, R.K., 1973. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations.
Flood, M., Martin, B., Dreher, T., 2013. Combining academia and activism: common ob- University of Chicago Press.
stacles and useful tools. Australian Universities' Review, The 55 (1), 17. Mitchell, C., Cordell, D., Fam, D., 2015. Beginning at the end: the outcome spaces frame-
Freire, P., 2000. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Bloomsbury Publishing, Chicago. work to guide purposive transdisciplinary research. Futures 65, 86–96 https://doi.
UN
Fricker, M., 2007. Epistemic Injustice, Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford Univer- org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.10.007.
sity Press, New York. Moser, S., Hackmann, H., Caillods, F., 2013. Global environmental change changes every-
Funtowicz, S., Ravetz, J., 1993. Science for the post-normal age. Futures 25, 739–755. thing: key messages and recommendations. In: World Social Science Report 2013. pp.
Funtowicz, S.O., Ravetz, J.R., 1994. The worth of a songbird: ecological economics as a 46–64.
post-normal science. Ecol. Econ. 10 (3), 197–207. Mountz, A., Bonds, A., Mansfield, B., Loyd, J., Hyndman, J., Walton-Roberts, M., Basu,
Future Earth, 2014. Strategic Research Agenda 2014: Priorities for a Global Sustainability R., Whitson, R., Hawkins, R., Hamilton, T., Curran, W., 2015. For slow scholarship:
Research Strategy. International Council for Science (ICSU), Paris. a feminist politics of resistance through collective action in the neoliberal university.
Gablik, S., 1992. Connective aesthetics. American Art. 6 (2), 2–7. ACME: an international E-journal for critical geographies 14 (4), 1235–1259.
Geniusz, W.D., 2009. Our Knowledge Is Not Primitive: Decolonizing Botanical Anishinaabe Nowotny, H., Scott, P., Gibbons, M., 2001. The co-evolution of society and science. In:
Teachings. Syracuse University Press. Re-thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. pp. 30–49.
Gibbons, M., 1994. Transfer sciences: management of distributed knowledge production. Pennington, D.D., Simpson, G.L., McConnell, M.S., Fair, J.M., Baker, R.J., 2013. Transdis-
Empirica 21 (3), 259–270. ciplinary research, transformative learning, and transformative science. BioScience 63
Gibson-Graham, J.K., 2008. Diverse economies: performative practices for ‘other worlds’. (7), 564–573.
Prog. Hum. Geogr. 32 (5), 613–632 https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132508090821. Pereira, A.G., Saltelli, A., 2017. Post-normal institutional identities: quality assurance, re-
Giles, C., 1994. The Tarot: History, Mystery and Lore. Simon and Schuster. flexivity and ethos of care. Futures https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2016.11.009, in
Gramsci, A., 1971. Selections From the Prison Notebooks. International Publishers, New press. ISSN 0016-3287.
York. Plumwood, V., 2002. Environmental Culture: The Ecological Crisis of Reason. Routledge,
Guba, E.G., Lincoln, Y.S., 1994. Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In: Hand- London.
book of Qualitative Research. vol. 2, pp. 163–194, (105). Potts, K., Brown, L., 2005. Becoming an anti-oppressive researcher. In: Strega, S., Brown,
L. (Eds.), Research as Resistance: Critical, Indigenous and Anti-oppressive Approaches.
Hale, C.R., 2006. Activist research v. cultural critique: indigenous land rights and the con-
Canadian Scholars' Press, Toronto, ON, pp. 255–286.
tradictions of politically engaged anthropology. Cult. Anthropol. 21 (1), 96–120.
Rabinow, P., 1996. Essays on the Anthropology of Reason. Princeton University Press, Smith, L.T., 1999. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. Pal-
Princeton, NJ. grave, New York.
Reid, H., Taylor, B., 2000. Embodying ecological citizenship: rethinking the politics of Spash, C.L., 2012. New foundations for ecological economics. Ecol. Econ. 77, 36–47.
grassroots globalization in the United States. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 25, Steiner, R., 1995. Intuitive thinking as a spiritual path: a philosophy of freedom. (M. Lip-
439–446. son, Trans.). In: In the Philosophy of Spiritual Activity. Anthroposophic Press, Hudson,
Reid, H., Taylor, B., 2003. John Dewey's aesthetic ecology of public intelligence and the N.Y, p. 1986.
grounding of civic environmentalism. Ethics and the Environment 8 (1), 74–92. Strega, S., Brown, L., 2005. Research as Resistance: Critical, Indigenous and Antioppres-
Rittel, H., Webber, M., 1973. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy. Sci. 4, sive Approaches. Canadian Scholars' Press, Toronto, ON.
F
155–169, (Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company. [Reprinted in 1984 in Sudbury, J., Okazawa-Rey, M., 2015. Activist Scholarship: Antiracism, Feminism, and
N. Cross (Ed.), Developments in Design Methodology (pp. 135-144), Chichester: J. Wi- Social Change. Routledge.
ley and Sons]. Retrieved on February 16, 2010, from http://www.uctc.net/mwebber/ Tacconi, L., 1998. Scientific methodology for ecological economics. Ecol. Econ. 27 (1),
Rittel+Webber+Dilemmas+General_Theory_of_Planning.pdf). 91–105.
OO
Rodríguez-Labajos, B., Yánez, I., Bond, P., Greyl, L., Munguti, S., Ojo, G.U., Overbeek, W., Temper, L., Del Bene, D., 2016. Transforming knowledge creation for environmental and
2019. Not so natural an alliance? Degrowth and environmental justice movements in epistemic justice. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 20, 41–49.
the global south. Ecol. Econ. 157, 175–184. Temper, L., Walter, M., Rodriguez, I., Kothari, A., Turhan, E., 2018. A radical perspective
Sacks, S., 2011. Social sculpture and new organs of perception: new practices and new on transformations to sustainability: resistances, movements, alternatives. Sustain. Sci.
pedagogy for a humane and ecologically viable future. In: Lern Hayes, C.M., Walters, Tuck, E., Yang, W., 2012. Decolonization is not a metaphor. In: Decolonization, Indigene-
V. (Eds.), Beuysian Legacies in Ireland and Beyond: Art Culture and Politics. Lit Ver- ity, Education and Society. vol. 1, No. 1.
lag, Berlin. van der Hel, S., 2016. New science for global sustainability? The institutionalisation of
Salleh, A., 2015. 31. Neoliberalism, scientism and Earth System Governance. In: The Inter- knowledge co-production in Future Earth. Environ. Sci. Pol. 61, 165–175.
national Handbook of Political Ecology. p. 432. Vargas, I., Temper, L., Sterlin, J., Smolyar, N., Sellers, S., Moore, M., Melgar-Melgar, R.,
PR
Saltelli, A., Funtowicz, S., 2017. What is science's crisis really about?. Futures 91, 5–11. Larson, J., Horner, C., Erickson, J.D., Egler, M., Brown, P.G., Boulot, E., Belgi, T.,
Sardar, Z., 2010. Welcome to postnormal times. Futures 42 (5), 435–444. Babcock, M., 2019. From the Anthropocene to mutual thriving: an agenda for higher
Scharmer, O., 2007. Addressing the Blind Spot of Our Time: An Executive Summary of the education in the Ecozoic. Sustainability
New Book by Otto Scharmer Theory U: Leading From the Future as It Emerges. Re- Vinthagen, S., 2015. An invitation to develop “resistance studies”, editorial. Resistance
trieved September 4, 2012, from www.theoryU.com. Studies Journal 1, 1.
Schneidewind, U., Singer-Brodowski, M., Augenstein, K., Stelzer, F., 2016. Pledge for a Walia, H., 2014. Panel Discussion of Naomi Klein's New Book: This Changes Everything:
Transformative Science: A Conceptual Framework, Wuppertal Papers, No. 191. Wup- Capitalism vs. the Climate. Simon Fraser University, Institute for the Humanities, Van-
pertal Institut für Klima, Umwelt, Energie, Wuppertal http://nbn-resolving.de/urn: couver, Canada.
nbn:de:bsz:wup4-opus-64142. Weber-Pillwax, C., 2001. What is indigenous research?. Can. J. Nativ. Educ. 25 (2),
Shi, T., 2004. Ecological economics: moving towards a transdisciplinary research on sus- 166–174.
D
tainability. J. Interdiscip. Econ. 15 (1), 61–81. Weiss, M., Cattaneo, C., 2017. Degrowth–taking stock and reviewing an emerging acade-
Simpson, L., 2011. Dancing on our Turtle's Back: Stories of Nishnaabeg Re-creation, Res- mic paradigm. Ecol. Econ. 137, 220–230.
urgence and a New Emergence. Arbeiter Ring Pub.
TE
EC
RR
CO
UN
14
View publication stats

Pagination ECOLEC 106379

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pagination ECOLEC 106379

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pagination ECOLEC 106379

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

From academic to political rigour: Insights from the 'Tarot' of transgressive

Preprint in Ecological Economics · June 2019

Leah Temper D. McGarry

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

social change and environmental justice.

Spain Campus de la UAB, 08193 Cerdanyola del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain.

In this article, we argue that the discourse and practice on the

and other socially engaged researchers navigating this new post-normal

in a post-normal context, there has been a lack of engagement to date

and the unpredictable” (p. 120).

to improve their understanding of a situation or provide an answer to a

the researcher personally evaluates how they have been impacted by

Naanaagede'enmowin. The first means “to carefully deliberate and de-

ries grounded in indigenous experience, research as transformative, sa-

problem to figure out what needs to be done. According to Simpson,

Fig. 3. The post-normal scientist. Fig. 4. The indigenous scholar.

4.4. The co-conspirer

The co-conspirer is an activist that conducts research to enrich

with those in the fringes of society with the intention of building a

The co-conspirer works to help regenerate and reproduce the collec-

1977; Abram, 1988, 1996). This phenomenologically shaped third space

4.5. The Responsible Participant

Fig. 6. The co-conspirer.

In particular, the co-conspirer raises concerns over the discarding

way she becomes an apprentice to her own intuition, imagination and

they should not be dogmatically applied to all manner of situations

4.8. The slow and care-full scholar

and those she engages with in research processes as subjects to extract

tion acts as a form of resistance against a neoliberal system that threat-

prompt an ongoing conversation, inviting us to consider how we see our

tinguishing between facts and interpretations, but does so through a

revalorization of marginalized caring activities inevitably faces a strug-

The slow and care-full scholar might become so focused on care,

Sudbury and Okazawa-Rey, 2015

View publication stats

You might also like