Whose knowledge counts cjdavies phd final june16

WHOSE KNOWLEDGE COUNTS? EXPLORING COGNITIVE JUSTICE IN COMMUNITY-UNIVERSITY COLLABORATIONS CERI JAYNE DAVIES A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment on the requirements of the University of Brighton for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy February 2016 Abstract There is a growing contemporary interest in how universities can play a role in making a difference to community and social issues, and to question how universities’ authority to create and legitimate knowledge becomes an increasingly important in the struggle for social justice. This thesis engages with this timely debate by exploring the intersection of knowledge, power and participation in community-university engagement. I situate my enquiry in specific forms of practice between academic and community and social actors collaborating to produce shared knowledge about issues of social justice. My particular focus is on how diverse ways of knowing, including that of Indigenous peoples, can count towards the way in which such issues are both defined and addressed.

I specifically make use of the concept of ‘cognitive justice’ – or whose knowledge counts – to analyse how attention is paid to epistemology in these collaborations. I used a qualitative research design and conducted fieldwork in Canada and the UK to develop 10 case studies. I interviewed academic and community partners about a project they collaborated on in order to explore how people understood what they were doing together, how knowledge was used, shared and legitimated and how these encounters were framed with respect to social justice. My conceptual and analytical framework focused on an exploration of deliberative processes of participation and cognitive justice in this landscape.

This thesis makes the case for cognitive justice in community-university engagement in three main areas. The first is to suggest that the participative conditions necessary for cognitive justice include relational practices of engagement and the presence of deliberative characteristics to knowledge creation and use. The second is to argue for an inseparable connection between knowledge and participation in practice, and thus that the degree to which cognitive justice can be considered central to social justice requires practices to go ‘beyond recognition’ of diverse knowledges alone. The third considers the ways in which forms of engagement themselves can be considered cognitively just.

I argue ‘doing’ cognitive justice requires new arrangements between researchers and researched which also brings with it ethical and methodological considerations. Table of Contents List of Tables. i List of Abbreviations. 2 Aims & Conceptual Framework.

3 Outline of Thesis. 4 Intended Audience and Contribution .9 Universities and the ‘Idea of Engagement’. 9 A Brief History of the ‘University’. 17 The Idea of Engagement.

20 Civic & Community Engagement. 22 Engagement & Social Justice. 24 Modes and Practices of Engagement. 25 Contexts of Engagement in the UK & Canada.

32 The UK’s Path Towards Public Engagement. 33 Canada & Community Based Research .40 Knowledge, Social & Cognitive Justice. 40 Distinguishing Forms of Knowledge. 45 The Relationship Between Forms of Knowledge.

47 Different Epistemological Assumptions. 50 Science and the ‘Universal’. 54 Relationship Between Knowledge and Power. 57 Social & Cognitive Justice.

68 Participatory Action Research. 69 Ethics and Positionality. 74 Community-University Engagement. 80 Communicative Norms & Dialogue.

84 Community-University Engagement as Democratic Engagement. 97 Implications for the Research Design. 101 The Case Study. 103 Case Study Selection.

106 Negotiating Case Studies in Fieldwork. 112 Semi-Structured Interview. 112 Field Notes and Documentation. 116 Description – Analysis - Interpretation .123 The Case Studies: Context, Aims and Participants.

124 Island Place - Canada. 124 River Place - UK. 144 Island Place - Canada. 146 River Place - UK .148 Putting Engagement into Practice.

148 Academics and Activists?. 148 Beyond the Binary. 149 Community-Based Identities. 154 Different Contexts, Different Approaches?.

160 The Bigger Picture. 160 Doing Things Differently. 165 Spaces of Change?. 171 Duration and Pace.

176 Responsibility and Relational Accountability .184 Locating Knowledge in Community-University Collaborations. 185 ‘New Knowledge’/’Old Knowledge’…. 192 The Deliberative Basis of Collaborations. 198 Legitimacy and Knowledge Use.

200 Whose Knowledge Counts? .212 Knowledge, Power & Participation in Community-University Engagement. 212 Understanding Community-University Collaborations. 212 The Big Picture. 214 A Relational Practice of Engagement.

218 Values, Identity and Positionality. 225 Exploring Cognitive Justice .237 Cognitive Justice as a Normative Idea. 237 Participative Spaces for Change – Implications & Potential. 241 Future Directions for Research .249 Appendix 1: Topic Guide for Semi-Structured Interviews .272 Appendix 2: List of Respondents in Guided Conversations .274 List of Tables Table 1: Distinctions Between Forms of Engagement Table 2: Summary of Data i List of Abbreviations ARVs Antiretroviral drugs BME Black & Minority Ethnic CBPR Community Based Participatory Research CBR Community Based Research CBRC Community Based Research Canada CE Chief Executive CEIMH Centre of Excellence in Interdisciplinary Mental Health DRC Development Research Centre on Citizenship, Participation and Accountability CR Critical Realism CSDS Centre for the Study of Developing Societies Cupp Community University Partnership Programme CURA Community University Research Alliance GUNi Global University Network for Innovation HEIs Higher Education Institutions IK Indigenous Knowledge JRF Joseph Rowntree Foundation LEK Local Ecological Knowledge LGB Lesbian, Gay & Bisexual LGBT Lesbian Gay Bisexual or Transgender MoU Memorandum of Understanding NCCPE National Coordinating Centre for Public Engagement Nesta National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts NIHR National Institute of Health Research OCAP Ownership, Control, Access and Possession PAR Participatory Action Research ii PPI Patient and Public Involvement PRIA Participatory Research In Asia RCUK Research Councils UK REF Research Excellence Framework 2014 SSHRC Social Science & Humanities Research Council for Canada UKCPN UK Community Partner Network iii Acknowledgements I begin these acknowledgements by recognising and honouring the gift of stories that people were prepared to share with me that made my empirical research possible.

It is these voices and perspectives from two continents that you see as you read and that I have heard and conversed with in my mind as my thesis took shape. These stories also gave me the gift of new transatlantic friendships, and Maeve in particular; with whom I share a new found sisterhood. Grateful and unending thanks must go to Professor Marian Barnes and Dr Kepa Artaraz who have tirelessly, patiently and incisively guided me towards what you read today. Six years and 131 days is quite a commitment to me and my ideas – and my mind and sentence structure are now sharper things.

Deep thanks also to other kind colleagues at the University of Brighton who have given me precious time, lunchtime therapy sessions, flexibility, understanding and motivation to arrive here. To my family: whose history and background I draw on as a source of strength and inspiration. They are the roots of fairness, equality and community that are in my being. They remind me who I am and where I come from and they gave me the gifts of enquiry, exploration, determination and to know what it is to work hard.

I have followed the Welsh proverb ‘dyfal donc a dyr y garreg’ to the letter! Translated to Rhondda English – ‘constant beating breaks the stone’ (Diolch, Cu). They have offered me their care, love, unstinting belief, chocolate brownies and proofreading skills to keep me going forwards. To my dear friends: who never once failed to ask how it was going – now we can finally talk about something else and I can have that extra Tuscan mule/stay out past midnight/visit for the weekend/not have to call you back (delete as appropriate). I look forward now, with my face towards the sun, proud that I have travelled this distance and explored a new path, where I seek to make a difference anew.

Lastly and most completely, to my travelling companion and beloved – Dougal, to whom I owe (mostly my sanity, and a few months of cooked dinners), but most seriously my deepest love and gratitude. iv Declaration I declare that the research contained in this thesis, unless otherwise formally indicated within the text, is the original work of the author. The thesis has not been previously submitted to this or any other university for a degree, and does not incorporate any material already submitted for a degree. Signed: Dated: v Chapter 1 Introduction In this chapter I introduce the focus and scope of my research enquiry.

I include my personal motivation for this research and explain my research aims and conceptual framework. I follow this by briefly describing the main aspects of my study. I then provide an outline of the thesis, noting the key issues and arguments developed in each chapter. I conclude by suggesting intended audiences for my research and how it makes a contribution to the field.

Research Enquiry In this thesis I explore how academics and community groups work together to produce shared knowledge about issues of social justice. My particular focus is on how diverse ways of knowing, including that of Indigenous peoples, can count towards the way in which such issues are both defined and addressed. I specifically make use of the concept of ‘cognitive justice’ – or whose knowledge counts – to analyse how attention is paid to epistemology in these collaborations. Different ways of knowing are not recognised in traditional forms of knowledge production and are thus excluded from or misrecognised in defining and understanding everyday lives.

I locate this enquiry in specific forms of practice between academic and community and social actors in the context of community-university engagement. This in turn sits within a contemporary interest in how universities can play a role in making a difference to community and social issues, and to question how universities’ authority to create and legitimate knowledge becomes an increasing pivotal force in the struggle for social justice (see Gaventa & Bivens, 2014). This is not a new argument. Scholars and activists working in participatory and emancipatory paradigms have taken a critical and explorative stance to this agenda.

Feminist theory, for example, which I make use of in my thesis offers theory and practice of alternative means of creating and using knowledge that re-situates legitimate knowledge and contests dominant paradigms. However, in recent times, the proliferation of activity under the umbrella of engagement has brought with it a range of specific opportunities for academic and community actors to participate together, from public engagement with research to co-production of knowledge. 1 These different forms of participation thus constitute different opportunities for who can get involved in this activity and in what ways. Empirical literature on community-university engagement has tended to focus on accounts of projects and best practice to build and sustain collaborations.

Yet the relationship between participation by different groups in forms of knowledge production and their epistemic inclusion cannot be assumed, and so warrants additional attention here. Motivations My interest in this topic stems from my own personal and professional background as a community practitioner/activist with commitments to equality, participation and social justice. I have a longstanding interest in questions of why it is that some knowledge counts for more than others – why as a woman my opinion has in some circumstances been overlooked in favour of explanations from men, or why when as a community development worker, I frequently encountered groups struggling for recognition to be experts in their own lived experience, for example, caring for their disabled children. When I first joined the University of Brighton, in a role supporting the development of community-university partnerships, I became more interested in the narrative of the university playing a role in social and community issues and how that was actually happening in practice in different contexts.

Knowledge is central to this interest because it is a key site of struggle in terms of defining and determining issues and solutions that make a difference to people’s lives.