Behind the Scenes: Reflecting Feminist Approaches in Participatory Mapping

Mapping Workshop with Women. Image Courtesy of Sylvana Jahre.
Employing a feminist participatory mapping approach that respects and amplifies the voices of vulnerable communities, Sylvana Jahre and Antonie Schmiz research refugee interaction with urban spaces in Berlin.
[Ed. Note: This article is part of a dossier on Creative Urban Methods.]

“There is no universal solution to the problem of uncounted, undercounted, and silenced bodies. But that’s precisely why it’s so important to listen to, and take our cues from, the communities that we as data scientists, and data feminists, seek to support.”1Catherine D’Ignazio and Lauren F. Klein, Data Feminism (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2020), 23.

Maps are often seen as neutral representations of reality that function as an objective, reliable medium.2Amy L. Griffin, “Trustworthy Maps,” Journal of Spatial Information Science 2 (2020): 5–19. However, maps have authors and these act within a certain spectrum of interests, which is often invisible. The production of a distinct reality through cartographic visualisations is especially sensitive for a highly political topic such as migration. Maps continue to be tools of colonisation and state power that are used against refugee interests.3James R. Akeman, The Imperial Map: Cartography and the Mastery of Empire (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009); Reuben Rose-Redwood, Natchee Blu Barnd, Annita Hetoevėhotohke’e Lucchesi, Sharon Dias and Wil Patrick, “Decolonizing the Map: Recentering Indigenous Mappings,” Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization 55, no. 3 (2020): 151–62. Maps about migration often contribute to populist discourses—that is, if they make migration routes visible. The visual portrayals of “migration flows” create a shared expert language and a hegemonic geographical imagination about migration and illegality, thus contributing to bordering practices.4Rose-Redwood et al., “Decolonizing the Map,” 151-62. In these maps, refugees are usually depicted as the passive and threatened Other, when arrows represent numbers of bodies entering Europe.5D’Ignazio and Klein, Data Feminism; Akerman, The Imperial Map. Why then would we still employ participatory mapping and what knowledge do we produce through it? How could we map without further harming vulnerable groups and individuals? We intend to position mapping as a creative urban method to give voice to these groups through their drawn and bodily expression of emotions, experiences, and thoughts.

In this article, we draw on insights from a university-based, EU-funded research project in which we deployed a feminist participatory mapping approach in two Berlin neighbourhoods. We were especially interested in understanding refugees’ perceptions and interactions with their spatial surroundings. Our participatory and transdisciplinary approach offers a promising epistemological framework for producing robust data in an ethical way in collaboration with vulnerable communities.6Mike Kesby, “Participatory Diagramming: Deploying Qualitative Methods Through an Action Research Epistemology,” Area 32, no. 4 (2000): 423-435. With this research we build on the work of critical mapping scholars who have pointed to the power of maps, as well as on feminist mapping that critically engages with the politics and ethics of representation. In bringing these perspectives into conversation, we draw on manifold ambiguities, and we share insights from our research practice that can be regarded as failures, thereby opening room for a creative and experimental process.

Bringing Feminist Ideas Into Participatory Mapping

Participatory or collective mapping is a method of action research and knowledge production that facilitates a collaborative process of reflection and design.7Adriana Allen, Rita Lambert, Alexandre Apsan Frediani, and Tatiana Ome, “Can Participatory Mapping Activate Spatial and Political Practices? Mapping Popular Resistance and Dwelling Practices in Bogotá Eastern Hills,” Area 47, no. 3 (2015): 261–71. Standing in the tradition of critical mapping, it seeks to challenge cartographic conventions and power structures, thereby promoting social justice and political change. By centering the knowledges and experiences of marginalised groups, participatory mapping can provide a more nuanced and complex understanding of their environment and needs.8Laura Saija and Giusy Pappalardo, “An Argument for Action Research-Inspired Participatory Mapping,” Journal of Planning Education and Research 42, no. 3 (2022): 375–85. This way, it allows “giving voice” beyond verbal expressions.9D’Ignazio and Klein, Data Feminism.

While much literature focuses on maps as products, the critical reflection of the role of researchers and their task to mediate interests and power imbalances in the mapping process is often disregarded.10Melinda Laituri, Matthew W. Luizza, Jamie D. Hoover and Arren Mendezona Allegretti, “Questioning the Practice of Participation: Critical Reflections on Participatory Mapping as a Research Tool,” Applied Geography 152 (2023): 102900. To address these issues, we bring feminist scholarship into conversation with participatory mapping and focus on “the politics of location,” which refers to the positioning of researchers in relation to the field, and to the participants. Similarly, the “politics of representation” pertains to the analysis and translation of participants’ lived experiences into data, as well as the subsequent representation and theorisation of that data. Lastly, the “politics of publication” encompass the dissemination of research in different formats and to diverse audiences, such as in academic publications or exhibitions.11Gesa Kirsch, Ethical Dilemmas in Feminist Research: The Politics of Location, Interpretation, and Publication (Albany: SUNY Press, 1999).

The Politics of Location

A feminist practice acknowledges that we always speak from somewhere, what Donna Haraway refers to as situated knowledges.12Donna Haraway, “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective,” Feminist Studies 14, no. 3 (1988): 575–99. Her position echoes with early feminist geographers, criticising the existence of objective, neutral knowledge and the view from nowhere into the landscape.13Gillian Rose, Feminism and Geography: The Limits of Geographical Knowledge (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1993). In considering this situatedness we were particularly focused on exploring the possibilities of including marginalised standpoints from refugees, questioning whether the process of mapping can serve to achieve this objective. Furthermore, drawing inspiration from feminist practices, our intention was to bring light to what is often invisible, leading us to prioritise the process over the product.

Mapping workshop with women. Image Courtesy of Tuline Gülgöne.

Emphasising the process allows us to uncover hidden dynamics, power imbalances, conflicting interests, and failures—aspects that cannot be adequately conveyed by a visually pleasing map alone. Intersectional feminist scholarship has highlighted the importance of not only focusing on those who are oppressed due to their gender but also at the intersections of oppression with race, class, age, etc. This guided the sampling of participants for our study as we argue that access to urban spaces follows racialized and gendered mechanisms of exclusion. We therefore engage with the significance of urban spaces for refugee women, as well as refugee youth. Their (limited) access to urban spaces has so far received comparatively little attention, so do their perspectives remain largely underrepresented in urban politics and planning. We built on representatives from a programme dedicated to enhancing social cohesion in neighbourhoods surrounding refugee shelters who acted as multipliers, assisting us in forming collaborative groups, and providing ongoing support throughout the process.

In one neighbourhood, we engaged with an existing women’s group consisting mostly of refugees. Understanding the perspective of refugee women and comprehending the role urban spaces play in their daily lives was of paramount importance to our research. We thus employed a set of methods initiated by personal mental maps of the women’s respective neighbourhoods. Subsequently, the women participated in group-based mapping workshops based on research questions, utilising printed maps, and collage materials. In the third step, a neighbourhood walk was organised collaboratively by the women’s group and the research team. Through this approach, the women shared with one another significant places that were previously unknown to the rest of the group, but also individual experiences and struggles.

The necessity for methodical reflections came into play when preparing the workshops with children and youth. A missing representation in urban planning especially applies to refugee children and youth, whom we aimed to give a voice to express their own imaginations of the city (see image 3). Doing research with children and youth affords a playful approach, which requires an openness towards process and product alike (see image 4). In this context, maps provide a means to express the subjective perspectives and emotions that children and youth have towards their social and built environment and serve as an instrument to develop emancipatory strategies.14Nils Zimmer, “Gemeinschaftsnarrative unter Kindern und Jugendlichen in marginalisierten Quartieren: Strategien im Umgang mit stigmatisierenden Diskursen am Mehringplatz in Berlin-Kreuzberg,” sub\urban. zeitschrift für kritische stadtforschung 9, no. 3/4 (2021): 123–44. Similarly to the women group, we started with the creation of individual mental maps about their neighbourhood, therefore asking how they experience their neighbourhood, how they interact with the city, what they see as important, and what they miss. We proceeded with several creative collaborative activities centred around the concept of creating a city of dreams that caters specifically to children’s and youth’s needs and desires. Within this framework, the children and youth participated in diverse activities, including composing a rap song and producing a stop-motion video. Our workshop contributed to a neighbourhood map specifically designed for and with children and youth.

Utopian City Model created by Children and Youth. Image Courtesy of Tuline Gülgönen.
Stop Motion Workshop with Children and Youth. Image Courtesy of Tuline Gülgönen.

The significance of the politics of location extends beyond the participants alone and encompasses a thoughtful examination of the research team as well. Both workshop series were conducted in a transdisciplinary manner with two female university-based scholars, a mixed-gender activist mapping collective, a female independent urban scholar, as well as multiplicators from the neighbourhood programme. As white female scholars without an individual experience of (forced) migration, we entered the field with an awareness of our educational, class and racial privilege. Through our reflexive, feminist approach to migration research, we aim to constantly reflect on what this means for our research process and interpretation of findings. While the activist mapping collective took over the lead in conceptualising and operating the workshops, the independent scholar is an expert on participatory methods. She supported the workshops by taking care of the social constitution of the group and by several reflexive conversations during and after the actual mapping activity.

However, it is important to acknowledge that persistent markers of difference, such as material, social, and political power differences often precondition hierarchies within the research process, which is difficult (if not impossible) to solve, as the example of payment illustrates.15Farhana Sultana, “Reflexivity, Positionality and Participatory Ethics: Negotiating Fieldwork Dilemmas in International Research,” ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies 6, no. 3 (2007): 374–85. One member of the university research team was employed in the project on a temporary basis, with a vested long-term interest in the research field. The activist collective and the independent scholar were subcontracted by the university and contributed their work on an hourly basis. In the case of the mapping collective, this resulted in them primarily focusing on completing tasks rather than reaching a consensus and reflecting on the mapping workshops. The multipliers for the women’s group and the youth centre were employed in a municipal programme and dedicated externally paid working hours to our project. The participants, however, did not receive any payment. We considered providing participants with an expense allowance to incentivize regular attendance and to reduce power imbalances between researchers and participants.16Mary Brydon-Miller, Patricia Maguire, and Alice McIntyre, eds., Traveling Companions: Feminism, Teaching, and Action Research (Westport: Praeger, 2004). However, paying participants raises several ethical concerns, such as potentially compromising free and informed consent.17Emma Head, “The ethics and implications of paying participants in qualitative research,” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 12, no. 4 (2009): 335–44. Ultimately although we were attentive to the various histories and local realities, existing hierarchies and perpetuated precarious conditions were reinforced.

The Politics of Representation

Following Judith Butler’s “gender performativity,” we see gender and its associated societal expectations as intricate acts that individuals engage in their daily lives, with dominant understandings of “man” and “woman.”18Judith Butler, Gender Trouble : Tenth Anniversary Edition (New York: Routledge, 1999). We argue from an intersectional perspective that not only gender but also other societal categories are performed in everyday lives. Our objective was to bring attention to these dynamics. It is not solely the personal perception but also the responses to expressions that influence the sense of identity, which is narrated through the mapping process itself, comprising both the maps and the reflection process. Understanding knowledge as gained, mediated, and articulated through interactions, formed an integral part of our participatory research approach. Adhering to the principles of community-based participatory research, we aimed to foster collaboration among diverse partners (as described above), involving them in all stages of the research process.19Barbara A. Israel, Amy J. Schulz, Edith A. Parker, Adam B. Becker, Alex J. Allen, J. Ricardo Guzman, and Richard Lichtenstein, “Critical Issues in Developing and Following Community-Based Participatory Research,” In Community-Based Participatory Research for Health, 31-46 (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2008). To implement this, we draw on feminist scholars who have critically highlighted the androcentric bias in participatory research, as women’s voices remain largely excluded in participatory discourse and community engagement. 20Brydon-Miller et al., Traveling Companions. Furthermore, participatory research has historically failed to be inclusive of marginalised communities, and it often likewise failed to acknowledge race.21Ella E. Bell, “Infusing race into the US discourse on action research,” in Handbook of Action Research: The Concise Paperpack Edition, 48–58 (London: Sage, 2006). From an intersectional perspective, it is therefore not only relevant to acknowledge the situatedness of the researcher, the co-researchers and participants and possible power asymmetries among them but also to hand over control of the research process.22Alice McIntyre, Participatory Action Research (London: SAGE Publications, Inc, 2008).

We aimed to empower the participants to play an active role in shaping the direction of the research, thereby recognising the situatedness of those involved in creating, mapping, writing, and speaking. The independent urban scholar strongly mirrored this approach and advocated to involve the participants in the preparation and formulation of topics and questions. However, several incidents prevented us from doing so: The identification of the topic, the formulation of the objectives and research questions, and the selection of research methods took place long before co-researchers and participants could be involved. This ambivalence addresses the imperatives of funding agendas with pressing deadlines that are not aligned with the different timings, rhythms and requirements of transdisciplinary research – especially not with those team members in least powerful positions.23Laituri et al., “Questioning the Practice of Participation.”; Charlotte Räuchle and Antonie Schmiz, “Wissen Macht Stadt: Wie in Reallaboren Stadt verhandelt und Wissen produziert wird,” sub\urban. zeitschrift für kritische stadtforschung 8, no. 3 (2020): 31–52. As a consequence, research questions are usually defined before the project starts and often do not include the perspectives and relevancies of the communities.

Another aspect that challenged our expectation of participation was the divergence we encountered with our co-researchers. The roles were often delineated, with the white male mapping expert explaining the workshops’ aims to the participants (predominantly refugee women, children, and youth) without being involved in shaping the research direction.

Lastly, the already mentioned constraints with regards to payment led to the very limited time that each of the co-researchers, the multipliers, and the participants were able to invest in the project. The missing time to establish a shared understanding of the process, methods, and researcher roles aligns with Kelly and Bosse, who emphasise the importance of “pressing pause” to intentionally slow down and create room for reflection within workflows and collaborations. 24Meghan Kelly and Amber Bosse, “Pressing Pause, ‘Doing’ Feminist Mapping,” ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies 21, no. 4 (2022): 399–415.

Neighbourhood Walk with Women. Image Courtesy of Sylvana Jahre.

Our findings demonstrate that children and youth residing in the refugee shelter expressed specific preferences, particularly regarding the accommodation itself. Disparities between the maps created by children and youth from the refugee shelter and those residing in decentralised rented apartments are mobility patterns of the two groups, with greater mobility observed among children and youth in decentralised housing. In contrast, children and youth from the shelter venture barely outside the shelter due to stringent security measures. They focused primarily on the accommodation and perceived the refugee shelter as a place of community yet also acknowledged its potential for conflicts. Through our mapping with the women’s group, we learned that their mobility within the city and access to new spaces were significantly influenced by their responsibilities in childcare and the absorption of language learning. For those with limited mobility, the availability of neighbourhood infrastructure becomes particularly crucial. The opening of the first Arabic supermarket in the area marked a significant change, as it reduced the need for women to travel long distances for groceries. It was noticeable that they were just as unfamiliar with educational and leisure infrastructures – such as the library or the swimming pool – as they were with social meeting places, in other words, places that are commonly negotiated as central arrival infrastructures. This summary of the workshop results is constrained in scope as it is based on our own interpretations of the data, missing a collaborative reflection with the women, children, and youth. Participation was thus limited to the process of mapmaking and did not encompass the creation of the products. However, we facilitated a mutually beneficial exchange by empowering women, children, and youth. Their positive feedback and their expressed desire for further interactions indicate that these formats are generally effective. However, it left us with the question of whether academic and public outcomes can be beneficial for marginalised communities.

The Politics of Publication

When findings of research projects are published, often only university scholars are available for this task. Feminist approaches challenge these academic writing habits, especially when knowledge is collectively produced and later interpreted, streamlined, and written down by the scholarly team members only. One approach to address this ethical dilemma and to include participants’ perspectives is by involving them in a dialogical writing process and granting them co-authorship.25Anthony Ince and Richard J. White, “Activist Geographies,” in Research Ethics for Human Geography: A Handbook for Students (London: SAGE Publications, Inc, 2020), 118–130. This allows a shift from conventional and often extractive to subjective approaches.26Sarah Nimführ and Martina Blank, “Kollaboratives Schreiben mit Personen aus dem Feld. Annäherungen an eine dekoloniale Wissensproduktion,” in Writing Together. Kollaboratives Schreiben mit Personen aus dem Feld, ed. Martina Blank and Sarah Nimführ (Bielefeld: Transcript, 2023), 9–27. Bielefeld (2023), 9-27, transcript. However, this leads to several challenges, such as the restriction to academic writing conventions, which often preconditions the roles in such collaborations. An alternative is to work on different publication formats that are more open to non-academic practices.

This reflection shows that academic knowledge is often disseminated in exclusionary language, locked behind paywalls, and not accessible to the researched communities. 27Michele Lobo, Kelly David and Helen F. Wilson, “Participatory Approaches,” in Research Ethics for Human Geography: A Handbook for Students, 130-143 (London: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2020). We addressed this concern by displaying the exhibition not only at an academic event in the centre of Berlin Kreuzberg, but to bring it back to the women’s neighbourhood—driven by the idea of handing over ownership to the participants and enabling representation within their local social networks. However, publishing alternative formats, such as essays, podcasts, theatre productions, or—in our case—exhibitions, highlights the clashes that scholars face with the publishing pressure of the neoliberal university.

Even though we aimed at establishing ongoing collaboration on the exhibition and publications with the participants, this text is written exclusively by the scholarly team, two years after the mapping workshops, long after partners who had initially agreed to collaborate were available. Shortly after the workshops, some participants were relocated elsewhere, showing how the temporality of the government of migration makes refugees highly vulnerable to decisions of movement, particularly when residing in refugee shelters. To make our findings as representational as possible, they were critically reviewed by those working in the interest of migrants and refugees, such as migrant self-organisations and the projects’ multipliers. This shows how diverging spatio-temporal constraints, such as temporalities of availability and funding, counteracted an ethical and collaborative publication process.

Part of the Exhibition. Sylvana Jahre.

Lastly, the politics of publication comprise the principle of informed consent, which ties into feminist research ethics to “do no harm” by being confidential and attending to participant’s needs. This includes the publication of photos and maps, which in our project provoked a conflict within the research team about whether and when to gain informed consent. The conflict shows that diverging understandings of participatory research processes come into play within transdisciplinary research teams. Incorporating a feminist approach that places ethics at the forefront, one must consider the time-intensive nature of internal negotiations and communication when allocating project resources.

Conclusion

The application of mapping as a creative urban method with vulnerable groups offers a means to transform the epistemological understanding of the city and the neighbourhood. Although our workshops were implemented in an urban context and reacted to the missing representation of access to (public) urban infrastructures by marginalised groups and its missing addressing in urban planning, the methods and our reflections on failures are not exclusively urban. By shifting the power of map-making to refugee women, children, and youth, new knowledge is produced that extends far beyond the map alone. The focus on the process makes the often-obfuscated research dynamics visible—it incorporates diverse perspectives and locations and addresses power dynamics and conflicts that cannot be adequately portrayed in a map. Moreover, we highlight the potential tension between viewing participation as a process of gathering rich, relevant, illustrative, and vibrant data, and a process guided by feminist research ethics that leads to meaningful and situated outcomes through reflexivity. Embracing failure as a constructive element within the research process, we welcome and integrate it into our methodology, subsequently influencing the results. A creative urban method such as the mapping process pays particular attention to the dynamics between the researchers and the researched. By bringing feminist ideas into conversation with participatory mapping, we were sure to create a care-ful approach, sensitive to the needs and desires of the participants rather than the funding institutions. However, introducing a feminist approach within a transdisciplinary team required ongoing negotiation. It also raises the question of how funded research projects can ensure sustained participation without exploiting the participants, particularly when operating on a voluntary basis. Through our experience with this research project, it becomes evident that power asymmetries are not eradicated through participative mapping but, at most, can be embedded in a dialogical process and continuously reflected upon.

Mapping as a creative urban method can serve to include marginalised perspectives from refugees and make them visible to a wider audience. Through such mappings, structural barriers for refugee women, children, and youth and their needs can be identified in a collective process, but not be solved. However, through the reflexive research process, we gained some insights into feminist mapping with refugees: Firstly, the process needs time to build a joint understanding of the collaborative mapping process, to accommodate participants’ needs, and to make everybody feel comfortable and heard within the group. Secondly, through this method needs and vulnerabilities of refugees are expressed, such as the exposure to relocation and the access to specialised shops and infrastructures. At the same time, new knowledge is produced on unequal (racialised and gendered) access to public infrastructures and shared with a broader audience, including policy officials. In this way, the research project is an amplifier from marginalised voices into politics. Thirdly, a feminist approach emphasises the need to foster change and provide marginalised communities with strategies and instruments for agency.

Notes

Notes
1 Catherine D’Ignazio and Lauren F. Klein, Data Feminism (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2020), 23.
2 Amy L. Griffin, “Trustworthy Maps,” Journal of Spatial Information Science 2 (2020): 5–19.
3 James R. Akeman, The Imperial Map: Cartography and the Mastery of Empire (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009); Reuben Rose-Redwood, Natchee Blu Barnd, Annita Hetoevėhotohke’e Lucchesi, Sharon Dias and Wil Patrick, “Decolonizing the Map: Recentering Indigenous Mappings,” Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization 55, no. 3 (2020): 151–62.
4 Rose-Redwood et al., “Decolonizing the Map,” 151-62.
5 D’Ignazio and Klein, Data Feminism; Akerman, The Imperial Map.
6 Mike Kesby, “Participatory Diagramming: Deploying Qualitative Methods Through an Action Research Epistemology,” Area 32, no. 4 (2000): 423-435.
7 Adriana Allen, Rita Lambert, Alexandre Apsan Frediani, and Tatiana Ome, “Can Participatory Mapping Activate Spatial and Political Practices? Mapping Popular Resistance and Dwelling Practices in Bogotá Eastern Hills,” Area 47, no. 3 (2015): 261–71.
8 Laura Saija and Giusy Pappalardo, “An Argument for Action Research-Inspired Participatory Mapping,” Journal of Planning Education and Research 42, no. 3 (2022): 375–85.
9 D’Ignazio and Klein, Data Feminism.
10 Melinda Laituri, Matthew W. Luizza, Jamie D. Hoover and Arren Mendezona Allegretti, “Questioning the Practice of Participation: Critical Reflections on Participatory Mapping as a Research Tool,” Applied Geography 152 (2023): 102900.
11 Gesa Kirsch, Ethical Dilemmas in Feminist Research: The Politics of Location, Interpretation, and Publication (Albany: SUNY Press, 1999).
12 Donna Haraway, “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective,” Feminist Studies 14, no. 3 (1988): 575–99.
13 Gillian Rose, Feminism and Geography: The Limits of Geographical Knowledge (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1993).
14 Nils Zimmer, “Gemeinschaftsnarrative unter Kindern und Jugendlichen in marginalisierten Quartieren: Strategien im Umgang mit stigmatisierenden Diskursen am Mehringplatz in Berlin-Kreuzberg,” sub\urban. zeitschrift für kritische stadtforschung 9, no. 3/4 (2021): 123–44.
15 Farhana Sultana, “Reflexivity, Positionality and Participatory Ethics: Negotiating Fieldwork Dilemmas in International Research,” ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies 6, no. 3 (2007): 374–85.
16 Mary Brydon-Miller, Patricia Maguire, and Alice McIntyre, eds., Traveling Companions: Feminism, Teaching, and Action Research (Westport: Praeger, 2004).
17 Emma Head, “The ethics and implications of paying participants in qualitative research,” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 12, no. 4 (2009): 335–44.
18 Judith Butler, Gender Trouble : Tenth Anniversary Edition (New York: Routledge, 1999).
19 Barbara A. Israel, Amy J. Schulz, Edith A. Parker, Adam B. Becker, Alex J. Allen, J. Ricardo Guzman, and Richard Lichtenstein, “Critical Issues in Developing and Following Community-Based Participatory Research,” In Community-Based Participatory Research for Health, 31-46 (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2008).
20 Brydon-Miller et al., Traveling Companions.
21 Ella E. Bell, “Infusing race into the US discourse on action research,” in Handbook of Action Research: The Concise Paperpack Edition, 48–58 (London: Sage, 2006).
22 Alice McIntyre, Participatory Action Research (London: SAGE Publications, Inc, 2008).
23 Laituri et al., “Questioning the Practice of Participation.”; Charlotte Räuchle and Antonie Schmiz, “Wissen Macht Stadt: Wie in Reallaboren Stadt verhandelt und Wissen produziert wird,” sub\urban. zeitschrift für kritische stadtforschung 8, no. 3 (2020): 31–52.
24 Meghan Kelly and Amber Bosse, “Pressing Pause, ‘Doing’ Feminist Mapping,” ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies 21, no. 4 (2022): 399–415.
25 Anthony Ince and Richard J. White, “Activist Geographies,” in Research Ethics for Human Geography: A Handbook for Students (London: SAGE Publications, Inc, 2020), 118–130.
26 Sarah Nimführ and Martina Blank, “Kollaboratives Schreiben mit Personen aus dem Feld. Annäherungen an eine dekoloniale Wissensproduktion,” in Writing Together. Kollaboratives Schreiben mit Personen aus dem Feld, ed. Martina Blank and Sarah Nimführ (Bielefeld: Transcript, 2023), 9–27. Bielefeld (2023), 9-27, transcript.
27 Michele Lobo, Kelly David and Helen F. Wilson, “Participatory Approaches,” in Research Ethics for Human Geography: A Handbook for Students, 130-143 (London: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2020).
Jahre, Sylvana, and Antonie Schmiz. "Behind the Scenes: Reflecting Feminist Approaches in Participatory Mapping". Mediapolis: A Journal of Cities and Culture 8, no. 4 (November 2023).
and
Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.