Abstract Concepts
Abstract concepts are an important tool in community based participatory research because they can serve as a tool to begin unpacking the complexities present within the research and community context.
Agency, put simply, is our capacity to take action, usually with the aim of achieving some outcome or result (de Courville Nicol, 2022). However, as social actors, our agency is not fixed, nor do we all share the same capacity to make agential choices as we move through the social world; in fact, such an understanding of agency risks reinforcing neoliberal notions of individual responsibility. In striving for social justice, agency must be understood as inextricably bound to the circumstances of an individual, as well as the broader environments in which they are situated. Further, there are consequential boundaries placed on the possible actions an individual can even imagine choosing; thus, creating unseen “agential cuts” which limit potentialities and foster perceived inaction among those facing these boundaries (Barad, 2007; Whynacht, 2018). Community-based participatory research allows one to gain insight into the barriers which limit the agency of marginalized populations, which may otherwise remain overlooked when examined through dominant frameworks of functionality (Dunbar & Sheppard, 2023; Gartner et al., 2018; Nathoo et al., 2013). When we make meaning of the social world through the lenses of different social actors, we can begin to co-construct knowledge which highlights and seeks to address the boundaries placed on agential social beings, rather than blaming them for a perceived failure to act (Gartner et al., 2018; Jull et al., 2017).
Agency
By Isabella Gallant
(Photo credit to Stephaniuk, 2020a)
Agency
By Isabelle Williams
(Photo credit to Stephaniuk, 2020b)
Agency refers to the capacity of individuals or groups to act independently and make choices that influence their lives as well as the world around them. It encompasses the ability to recognize options and take deliberate actions to achieve desired outcomes. Agency is a fundamental aspect of human existence and is essential for personal growth, empowerment, and fulfillment (Dunbar Winsor & Sheppard, 2023).
Agency involves a sense of autonomy and self-determination. It allows individuals to exercise control over their thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, as well as to navigate social, economic, and political structures (Dunbar Winsor & Sheppard, 2023). Having agency includes the ability to set goals, make decisions, and take responsibility for the consequences of one's actions.
Agency is shaped by a complex interplay of internal and external factors, including personal beliefs, values, experiences, and social contexts. While individuals possess inherent agency, it can be both facilitated and constrained by various influences, such as cultural norms, socioeconomic status, institutional policies, and power dynamics (Dunbar Winsor & Sheppard, 2023). Moreover, agency is not static but rather dynamic and situational, evolving over time and in response to changing circumstances. It can be enhanced through education, empowerment, and access to resources, while it may be diminished by oppression, discrimination, and systemic barriers. Agency is not solely an individual attribute but can also be collective, manifesting in social movements, advocacy groups, and community organizing efforts aimed at challenging injustices and effecting positive change (Dunbar Winsor & Sheppard, 2023). In these contexts, agency is expressed through collective action, solidarity, and the pursuit of common goals.
Max Weber's Iron Cage of Rationality theory is a closed, rational system model which focuses on the relative stability of internal tasks within an organization, the structures, goals, as well as the associated outcomes, rather than examining the potential influence of the outside environment and often dismisses and minimizes its impact (Godwin & Ward‐Edwards, 2018). This theory is often the mode in which bureaucratic institutions operate (Godwin & Ward‐Edwards, 2018). Bureaucratic institutions, such as spaces like women's prisons, developed simultaneously with capitalism, becoming deeply concerned with the cost-benefit analysis for decision-making (Frigon & Merrill, 2015; Godwin & Ward‐Edwards, 2018). Sociologists working towards researching the benefits of utilizing arts-based practices (e.g., dance and theatre) in women's prisons, must understand this impact of the const-benefit analysis (Dunbar Winsor & Sheppard, 2023; Frigon & Merrill, 2015). Researchers will often have to work within the cost-benefit analysis for their program and research method to be viewed as legitimate and to have the ability to aid incarcerated women (Dunbar Winsor & Sheppard, 2023; Frigon & Merrill, 2015). These closed rational systems are now often criticized, and there is growing support for shifting to an open system method of examining bureaucratic organizations, understanding that the outside environment can be highly influential (Godwin & Ward‐Edwards, 2018).
The Iron Cage of Rationality in Prison Organization
By Alison Parrell
(Photo credit to Stephaniuk, 2020c)
Truth
By Isabella Gallant
(Photo credit to Stephaniuk, 2020d)
What is considered truth when analyzing our social world must be understood as extending far beyond what is deemed ‘objective fact’ and seemingly existing outside of human perception. Rather, truth is merely how meaning has been made of our contextual experiences and realities which are socially, culturally, historically, and economically situated (Jull et al., 2017; Liboiron et al., 2024; van de Sande & Shwartz, 2017). Further, truth is constructed through frameworks of knowledge which provide ways of understanding the material world and our social relations. These understandings may be uplifted as dominant ways of knowing, or should they challenge the existing social structure, are often subjugated and repressed (Jull et al., 2017). Truth is thus a discursive practice, emerging through a dynamic process where social actors construct and make meaning of their realities, while being further limited by the boundaries imposed by dominant knowledge frameworks on our possible understandings (Godwin & Ward-Edwards, 2018; Jull et al., 2017; van de Sande & Shwartz, 2017). What is true only carries as much weight as the theoretical frameworks and knowledge which serve as the foundation of such claims; thus, we must remain critical of what is considered truth, questioning who benefits and what perspectives are missing from widely accepted understandings of our shared world (Liboiron et al., 2024; Schilling, 2010, as cited by van de Sande & Shwartz, 2017). To truly know what is true, “we must see beyond the quantifiable to our shared humanity”, acknowledging our differences and individual truths as they are lived, experienced, and defined (Schilling, 2010, as cited by van de Sande & Shwartz, 2017, p. 1).