The Big Issue:' Empowering Homeless Women Through Academic Research?

Area (1 999) 31.3, 239-246 The Big Issue:’ empowering homeless women through academic research? Lisa Doyle Department of Geography, University of Reading, Whiteknights, Reading RG6 6AB. Email: [email protected] Revised manuscript received 14 May 1999. Summary This paper discusses academic research as a means of empowerment for people in marginalizedgroups, using the example of homeless women. Issues connected to the position of the researcher in relation to both the agencies dealing with homeless people and the homeless women themselves are discussed. Many agencies have underlying ideologies and overt practices that reinforce hierarchical relations and certain gendered expectations. The paper considers the difficulties this creates when working with and presenting findings to agencies whose princip/es ate in conflict with one‘s own, and also discusses the social relations of conducting empowering doctoral research. Introduction patory and ‘fair’ methodologies and practices; and the final section elucidates my relationship with the In late 1997, I was asked to participate in a confer- agencies through whom I accessed respondents. ence session at the RGS-IBG Annual Conference entitled ‘Social exclusion/social action’, focusing on the ethical issues raised by research about people The research project who are socially excluded; this forced me to think about whether and how my own research has the My doctoral research explores conceptualizations potential to empower those who have participated in of the spaces of ‘home’ presented by women it. From the project’s inception, I have been trying to who are or have been homeless, in relation to the use research methodologies and practices that do effects of societal expectations, personal identities not exploit either the homeless women I speak with and social exclusion on such conceptualizations. I or the agencies I work through. These considerations undertook in-depth interviews with 55 women in have been prompted by the relatively recent surge three British cities,’ whom I contacted through of literature concerned with participatory and non- voluntary and state agencies that had been exploitative academic practices, particularly that established to work with homeless people. The which has been written from feminist stances. Hav- research aimed to bring homeless women’s voices to ing now had time to reflect upon these debates in the fore when considering issues affecting their relation to my research, I realize that, despite a everyday lives, and was therefore considered to be conscious attempt to conduct empowering research, empowering. there are limitations implicit in the academic research Before discussing the intricacies of research meth- process (and, more specifically, in the process of odologies, it is pertinent to analyse the context in conducting doctoral research) that compromise which this research was undertaken and some of the these intentions. The first section of the paper briefly issues raised as a consequence. There were two outlines the project undertaken; the second section principal influences on the project. First and fore- locates the research methods used, in terms of most were my own personal identity politics and recent debates in the social sciences about partici- how they were (or were not) allied with those I was ISSN 0004-0894 0 Royal Geographical Society (with The Institute of British Geographers) 1999 240 Doyle researching. The project itself developed out of a ‘Fair’ geographical research and personal political motivation, as I identify as a femi- homelessness nist and am interested in issues of social justice; my concern about the increasing incidence of women’s Feminism challenges traditional epistemologies of what homelessness in Britain resulted in my investigating are considered valid forms of knowledge. Feminist the issue in detail. However, there was another epistemology has redefined the knower, knowing and motivation-an academic one. This thesis is aimed the known , . It questions notions of and towards a PhD which, when completed, should validates ’alternative’ sources of knowledge, such as provide me with academic credibility and ‘capital’. experience. Feminist epistemological stresses the non- The fact that this is an academic piece of work has neutrality of the researcher and the power relations undoubtedly affected the way in which I have carried involved in the research process . It also contests out and written up the research. The finished prod- boundaries between ‘fieldwork‘ and everyday life, uct will be a doctoral thesis consisting of 90 000 arguing that we are always in the field. (WGSG words, which is likely to be read only by examiners 1997, 87) and those on my research committee. Even when the research is published in academic journals, the The above quote lists some of the important ways in audience is of a limited, academic nature; such a which feminist epistemology has set up challenges to publication route may well hinder any potential what many social scientists over the last two decades empowering effects (although some measures believe to be ‘appropriate’ methodologies. Initial have been taken to counteract this, and these are challenges came from feminists arguing that objec- discussed later). tivity in research is neither achievable nor particularly The second primary influence upon the research desirable (Oakley 1981; Bowles and Duelli Klein . has been academic feminism. Of particular signifi- 1983; Stanley and Wise 1983). In an attempt to cance in guiding this research was the stress placed destabilize the fallacy of objective research, feminists by academic feminists on the value of researching turned towards qualitative methodologies3 in order how women experience their everyday lives. The to prioritize women’s voices and experiences and thesis explores the ‘meanings of home’ debates that acknowledge the subjectivities in all research. have been discussed over recent years within hous- Stanley and Wise’s work explored issues surrounding ing studies, sociology and, more recently, geographi- feminist epistemologies, highlighting implications for cal research (Madigan et a/ 1990; Saunders 1990; the research process itself. They argued that: Somerville 1992; Darke 1994; Christie 1996; Bowlby et a/ 1997; Gurney 1997). The research has not been precepts drawn from feminist epistemology need to be ‘policy led’ in relation to factors such as hostel integrated: in the researcher/researched relationship; in provision, putting figures on the extent of women’s emotion as an aspect of the research process which, homelessness or their paths to homelessness. How- like any other aspect, can be critically interrogated; in critically unpacking conceptualizations of ‘objectivity’ ever, it is hoped that the findings will be useful to and ‘subjectivity’ as binaries or dichotomies; in the organizations lobbying on behalf of homeless intellectual autobiography of researchers, that is, in the women by providing case-study material. National processes by which ‘understanding’ and ‘conclusions’ campaigning groups such as the charity ‘Shelter’ are reached; in the existence and management of the utilize such material in their attempts to bring about different ‘realities’ or versions held by researchers and legislative change and attract funding. By telling the researched; and in issues surrounding authority and stories of particular homeless people, these organiz- power in research, but also and perhaps more crucially ations can highlight experiences of homelessness in written representations of research. (1993, 189) and the loopholes that exist in present legislation. On a more local scale, individual agencies involved in Since the publication of Stanley and Wise’s original the project may be able to use my research to justify text (1983), much discussion has taken place within their services and attract funds, by illustrating their the social sciences concerning the application of importance within the three cities under investiga- these principles to feminist methodologies. Although tion. My political identification with feminism and it is acknowledged that there is no singular ‘feminist issues of social justice led me to the burgeoning methodology‘ (Moss 1993; Professional Geographer feminist literature concerned with the ethics of 1994; 1995; WGSG 1997), consideration of the research practice. aspects of the research process highlighted by The Big Issue 241 Stanley and Wise have fed into the ways in which each of the three cities, during which time I visited feminist social scientists go about their work. Conse- many different agencies dealing with homelessness. quently, there are a set of practices that are often The brevity of the contact obviously created prob- considered appropriate to this particular type of lems in forming any ’meaningful’ relationship with research. The rest of this paper will therefore discuss the women who spoke to me or the workers in the these practices in relation to my research project. agencies. When conducting the research, I was This discussion is broken down into two parts: my conscious that the process would not change the relationships with the women participating in the positions of the women I interviewed (except per- project are analysed, followed by a section outlining haps in providing them with an ‘outsider‘ with whom the methodological issues surrounding the agencies to talk). Before each interview, I explained that I was with whom I worked. carrying out independent research, making

Load more