The Conflict Sensitivity Principle: Can Best Practice in Conflict Research Fill the Ethics Gap in Terrorism and Counterterrorism Research Practice?

This article explores how best practice in conflict research can address some of the key gaps and limitations of the terrorism research field with regards to research ethics. It draws from conflict research literature, as well as the authors' primary research experience in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States (FCAS) and in the policy-oriented field of Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism (P/CVE). The analysis focuses on conflict sensitivity and the methodological approaches that have been developed and refined under the framework of that principle, including Systems Conflict Analysis. We seek to demonstrate how the integration of research methods related to conflict sensitivity represents an appropriate and fitting research agenda, through which relevant limitations of terrorism research can be addressed. This research agenda emphasizes, among other aspects, the need for solid primary research grounded in a detailed understanding of the local context, a departure from the narrow understanding of the Do No Harm principle in terrorism research, and a greater awareness about the relationship between research ethics and research methods.

Automated summary

This article explores how best practice in conflict research can address key gaps and limitations in the field of terrorism research with regards to research ethics. It emphasizes the need for solid primary research grounded in a detailed understanding of the local context, moving away from narrow interpretations of the Do No Harm principle in terrorism research, and increasing awareness about the relationship between research ethics and methods.