Doing mobile ethnography: Grounded, situated and comparative

Monika Streule

Urban Studies, 2020, vol. 57, issue 2, 421-438

Abstract: This paper explores and discusses the experimental, critical and self-reflective use of differing methods in urban studies. In the context of frequent calls to investigate urban processes in a planetary and comparative perspective, the empirical groundedness of research is among the particularly complex challenges urban scholars are confronted with. The key question is: how can qualitative-empirical methods, such as ethnography or qualitative mapping, be adapted to explore contemporary urban conditions? This paper seeks to contribute to current debates by introducing a specific methodological design of a mobile ethnography that enables an analysis of large and heterogeneous urban territories, in three main ways: first, by offering a theoretically informed and empirically grounded transductive research design; second, by proposing a complementary set of cartographic, historiographic and comparative methods of which mobile ethnography is a part; and third, by suggesting post- and decolonial methodological perspectives, both conceptually by engaging with Latin American urbanisms, as well as empirically by furthering collaborative ways of knowledge production. To conclude, the paper stresses the need to continually develop new inventive methods for comparative urban research, for two main reasons: (1) to enable scholars to question established geographical representations and parochial imaginaries of urban space, and (2) to problematise methodological and theoretical dogmas with situated knowledge. By suggesting different representations of the urban, the paper thus emphasises how important it is to transductively entangle empirical and theoretical conceptualisations to further decentre and pluralize urban knowledge production.

Keywords: comparative urbanism; decolonial thought; methods; Mexico City; multi-sited ethnography; social production of territory; urbanisation; urban theory; 比较城市化; é žæ®–æ°‘ä¸»ä¹‰æ€ æƒ³; 方法; 墨西哥城; å¤šåœ°ç‚¹æ°‘æ— å¿—; 领土社会生产; 城市化; åŸŽå¸‚ç †è®º (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0042098018817418 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:57:y:2020:i:2:p:421-438

DOI: 10.1177/0042098018817418

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Urban Studies from Urban Studies Journal Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().