Live archives: Freedom of information requests as political methodology

Author:

Schmidt Jeremy J.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. School of Geography Queen Mary University of London London United Kingdom

Abstract

AbstractFreedom of information requests are an important research tool yet receive comparably little methodological scrutiny relative to other methods commonly used by geographers. This article considers two methodological aspects to freedom of information requests. The first is how they operate as “live archives” that take shape as batches of files are compiled in ways that reflect search terms, negotiations over the scope of requests, bureaucratic processes, and considered judgments of researchers in response to variables both within and beyond their control. The second considers how freedom of information requests operate as a political methodology through the encounter they produce with state bureaucracies. Using examples that cut across these concerns and illuminate some of the ways that methodological scrutiny matters, the article discusses how freedom of information requests present overlapping yet distinct concerns for qualitative research on issues of reflexivity, ethics, and positionality. The methodological concerns that arise are not frequently discussed but, as with other methods, are important to understanding the limits and reach of data collection, analysis, and accessibility both for researchers and for the communities who may have interest in, or be impacted by, geographic research.

Publisher

Wiley

Reference48 articles.

1. Access to Information and Privacy. (2022). File reference: CIRNAC‐A‐2022‐00173.

2. Anderson D.(2023). Alberta officials did nothing wrong when an oilsands leak went unreported for 9 months report finds.The Narwhal 27 September. Accessed 4 January 2024.https://thenarwhal.ca/kearl-oilsands-spill-alberta-report/

3. Hidden carbon costs of the “everywhere war”: Logistics, geopolitical ecology, and the carbon boot‐print of the US military

4. Conveyor-Belt Justice: Precarity, Access to Justice, and Uneven Geographies of Legal Aid in UK Asylum Appeals

5. The Transit of Empire

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3