Fieldwork risks seen from the perspective of native scholars
The CMES seminar Challenges and strategies of fieldwork in repressive and illiberal countries drew a full audience and focused on an often-overlooked group: scholars conducting research in their own countries under repressive or illiberal regimes. While much academic literature addresses the risks faced by Western or non‑native researchers, the seminar highlighted that native scholars face additional and more severe challenges.
The speaker outlined how existing fieldwork guidance frequently fails to account for the realities of native researchers, who may be exposed to heightened surveillance, legal threats and pressure on family members. Unlike foreign scholars, native researchers cannot rely on consular protection and may carry what was described as having “skin in the game”, personal, social and legal ties that increase both vulnerability and risk.
“It does not matter how one identifies oneself — what matters is how the state sees the researcher.”
Structural inequalities and academic neocolonialism
A central theme of the seminar was academic neocolonialism. The speaker argued that social science research remains structurally dominated by Anglo‑American institutions, publishing practices and norms, marginalising scholars from non‑Western contexts. This imbalance begins already in fieldwork training and continues through publishing, citation practices and career development.
According to the presentation, fieldwork literature tends to prioritise the experiences of non‑native researchers and sometimes even glorifies risk, portraying dangerous research environments as sites of adventure rather than as places of long‑term harm for local scholars.
Key challenges facing native scholars
Based on contributions to an ongoing research project and forthcoming book, the speaker identified four broad categories of challenges. Among those highlighted during the seminar were:
- Family history and identity, including ethnicity, religion, caste and class, which can expose researchers to suspicion, violence or pressure to demonstrate political or national loyalty.
- State surveillance and legal threats, particularly in contexts where dual citizenship is not recognised and transparency or concealment may carry very different risks for native researchers.
- Gender and sexual orientation, where native scholars are expected to adhere strictly to local norms and laws, without the leniency often afforded to foreigners.
- Emotional and mental strain, arising from proximity to interviewees, family members and communities affected by repression.
The seminar emphasised that advice designed for non‑native researchers, such as avoiding official visibility or relying on cloud‑based data protection, can in fact be dangerous for scholars who live permanently under repressive regimes.
Towards safer and more inclusive research practices
By centring the voices and experiences of native scholars, the seminar called for a rethinking of how fieldwork is taught, evaluated and supported within academia. The speaker stressed the need for guidance that is sensitive to location, identity and power, and for institutional frameworks that recognise researchers’ own safety as an ethical priority.
The discussion concluded with a call for interdisciplinary dialogue and more inclusive approaches that amplify perspectives long marginalised in research on fieldwork and risk.