Syndicate content

Add new comment

Submitted by Jose Cossa on

Mike, this is very true and I think your observations are enough qualitative data and a good argument to spark any one's interest, if they are serious about equity! As one who is a firm advocate of equitable participation (e.g., I write extensively on power dynamics in international negotiations leading to policy) in global affairs, I was please to see this perspective. On one hand, thinking carefully before engaging is something that most are not interested in doing (in fact, those who think this way suffer because they are not singing with the choir yet they don't have the resources to "force" their views to the public as their counterparts do), or maybe there is too much pressure in doing something that makes us look good over doing something because it really matters to all parties and is founded on a principle of justice for all. On the other hand, the most revolutionary/innovative/creative ideas are appropriated by those who have the advantage, i.e., s in the "Matthew effect" scenario, just as the profound knowledge possessed by respondents in qualitative studies have been appropriated by researchers and no credit (and I mean academic) has been given to the sources of the knowledge that made our doctoral degrees possible.