![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
In a social and political context marked by increasingly polarized attitudes towards immigration and ethnic diversity, the paper uses the results of two research projects conducted ten years apart in Brussels and Montréal to reflect on methodological issues. The paper discusses two themes to show how to engage methodologically within a changing context, both theoretically and politically, and how various methodological choices might be used to fill some knowledge gaps. The first theme concerns the choice of research methods, and the type of knowledge they produce. The second theme addressed in this paper stresses the importance of paying more attention to the context where the research takes place, a process denoted here by the term situating. Two different interview methods are central to the discussion: in-depth interviews and ‘on-the-spot’ short interviews. The paper contrasts their use in relation with each project’s research objectives.
Acknowledgement
An early version of this paper was presented at the workshop Everyday Cohabitation: Methodologies for the Study of Social Interaction in Increasingly Diverse Cities, held in Montréal in July 2018. I would like to thank Bob White and Annick Germain for inviting me. Comments made by attendees to the workshop and by two anonymous reviewers greatly contributed to improve the content of the paper. Finally, I would like to express my special thanks to Marie-Hélène Chastenay for her careful proofreading of the last version of the article. This reading has greatly improved the clarity and quality of the article.
Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 The Brussels project was under the direction of Bernard Francq. I was involved as a research assistant and doctoral student. The Montréal project was led with Annick Germain in collaboration with Martha Radice. It employed several research assistants with a diverse ethnic and linguistic background. The Montréal project was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).
2 I was directly confronted with this theoretical frame at the beginning of the research. At the end of a presentation of its first findings during a seminar, one of the neo-Marxist geographers asked me: ‘Why did you choose the Place Flagey neighbourhood? There is nothing to learn there about segregation and exclusion’, except that we were not only interested in these two questions.
3 It is the self-declared identity given by the respondent, showing the difference that can exist between ethnic identity and citizenship.
4 The officials of the European Commission benefit from a special tax status that exempts them from paying taxes in Belgium. Their presence in Brussels is often criticized because, although they benefit from the city’s infrastructure, they do not contribute to it in the same way than other residents. The Place Flagey neighbourhood is located near the European district, where several European institutions are concentrated, and is directly affected by their increasing presence in the city (Leloup Citation2011).
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Xavier Leloup
Xavier Leloup, PhD, is an urban sociologist with a strong interest in housing, neighbourhood change and inequalities. Over the years, he has conducted several research projects linking immigration and the city, including work on residential segregation, interethnic cohabitation, income inequalities and the working poor. His most recent projects focus on residentiel insecurity and policies aimed at fighting substandard housing, and the effects of different forms of social housing on household well-being. He is a research professor at INRS - Centre Urbanisation Culture Société in Montréal.