UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

Researching Between Conviction and Constraint in Postgraduate Studies

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.47967/tor11gy6b

Auteurs

Alessia Sofia

Année déclarée

2026

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

article

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:17:47.546010+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-09T19:17:47.546010+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

University of Bristol

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

Academic research is often narrated retrospectively as a coherent and linear journey: a clearly defined question, a carefully chosen method and a set of outcomes that appear to follow logically from the initial design. Yet for many postgraduate researchers, the lived experience of research is far messier. It is shaped not only by intellectual curiosity, but also by funding priorities, institutional agendas, supervisory expectations and personal commitments that do not always align neatly with what is considered academically “safe” or strategically valuable. This article reflects on my own research lifecycle as a postgraduate researcher in Sociotechnical Futures and Digital Methods, focusing on the decision-making processes that underpin my research design and the persistent tension between academic and funding interests on the one hand and personal, political and ethical motivations on the other. Rather than presenting my research as a stable project with a fixed trajectory, I explore it as a negotiated and evolving process, marked by uncertainty, compromises and reorientation. By situating this reflection within broader discussions around creativity, impact and knowledge production, I argue that moments of tension and apparent failure are not peripheral to the research lifecycle, but central to how postgraduate researchers learn to navigate academia and to imagine what their work is ultimately for. Postgraduate research projects, which are often exploratory and developmental in nature, may generate impact not only through definitive findings, but through the process of learning to ask better questions and engaging in informal, yet meaningful, scholarly discussions.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

W7204460191

DOI

10.47967/tor11gy6b

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Doctrine

Types déclarés par les sources

article

Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.

Sources

OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.47967/tor11gy6b
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W7204460191

Statut documentaire

Pertinence à examiner

Bibliothèque

Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.