Search

This paper focuses on the use of emancipatory research principles in archival research and contends with the suitability of academic conventions that characterise ethical practice when the research goal is to elevate the voices of marginalised historical groups. Drawing on a case study of Le Court Cheshire Home, England (1948–1975) to address a critical gap in the literature, I highlight some ethical dilemmas I encountered when working at the nexus of historical geography and geographies of disability. This paper demonstrates what an emancipatory research approach means for an archival study of disability, using examples to illustrate how ethical decisions impacted all stages of the research design and the write‐up of findings. I argue that ethics should not be envisaged solely as an approval process completed at the project's outset. Rather, the explorative nature of archival research necessitates that ethics should be an iterative undertaking, with archival sources having the potential to shape both the content and conduct of the research. The paper uses a case study of Le Court Cheshire Home to explore research ethics and the applicability of emancipatory research principles for an archival study of disability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a growing trend across the social sciences to engage with archives. Within human geography, this has stimulated a debate about the nature of archives, including moving from considering 'archive as source' to 'archive as subject.' We build on and extend this thinking, suggesting that an even more active appreciation of the dynamic nature of relationships between researchers, owners of records, and archival material is needed. This paper draws on an interdisciplinary study of voluntary action and welfare provision in England in the 1940s and 2010s to highlight how the different iterative processes involved in collaborative archival research are part of what we call co‐curation. Co‐curation involves the negotiated identification, selection, preparation, and interpretation of archival materials. This has implications for both research processes and outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]