The purpose of this paper is to deconstruct the current discourse on researcher positionality in disaster research and it aims to enhance disaster researchers’ reflexivity, using Bourdieu’s capital, field and habitus theories.
This conceptual paper relies on secondary literature from empirical and theoretical works and incorporates critical self-reflection from author’s own research experience.
As Bourdieu would argue, one’s habitus is interactive and responsive to contexts (field and other agents’ habitus and capital), thus reflexivity requires more than the acknowledgement of one’s ascribed and achieved social characteristics. Bourdieu’s theories help disaster researchers enhance their reflexivity and better understand the nature of researcher positionality: contextual, dynamic and negotiated.
This research provides a critical and theoretical discussion of researcher positionality in disaster research. Drawing from Bourdieu’s theories, researcher positionality can be framed in relation to not only researcher’s structurally differentiated insider–outsider status but also how interactions with the research participants and contexts in which the research is conducted influence that positionality.
