April 2020 Volume: 17, No: 2, pp. 201 – 210 ISSN: 1741-8984 e-ISSN: 1741-8992 www.migrationletters.com Copyright @ 2020 MIGRATION LETTERS Transnational Press London First Received: 14 March 2020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.33182/ml.v17i2.934 Editorial: Strengths, Risks and Limits of Doing Participatory Research in Migration Studies Diana Mata-Codesal 1 , Laure Kloetzer 2 and Concha Maiztegi 3 Abstract This special issue, entitled "Participatory methods in migration research", deals with the methodological challenges and ethical implications of applying participatory methods with migrant populations. Participatory research is often used as a general term for a variety of research projects using different methods, including action research, collaborative research, community-based research, co-creation or some arts-based projects. This special issue assumes that participatory research involves a different epistemology that allows for new insights, reflections and stories. Consequently, one of its main characteristics is the horizontal relationship between researchers and participants, based on the recognition of all the people involved as equal human beings collaborating on a particular research question. Through the SI, one of the themes that is discussed, from a variety of perspectives in the field of migration studies, is power distribution. The challenge is to achieve a more equal share of power among all those involved in the research process. From the set of articles presented here, another theme that emerges strongly is the struggle for social justice beyond the research process itself. The special issue contains a range of participatory research approaches in the field of migration studies from different parts of the word (Africa, Europe, USA) revealing a growing interest in these methodologies. Keywords: participatory methods; migration studies; participation; power; gender. Participatory Research in Migration Studies 50 years on, Sherry R. Arnstein’s critical words on participation in policy and social planning remain very relevant: “The idea of citizen participation is a little like eating spinach: no one is against it in principle because it is good for you. Participation of the governed in their government is, in theory, the cornerstone of democracy-a revered idea that is vigorously applauded by virtually everyone. The applause is reduced to polite handclaps, however, when this principle is advocated by the have-not blacks, Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, Indians, Eskimos, and whites. And when the have-nots define participation as redistribution of power, the American consensus on the fundamental principle explodes into many shades of outright racial, ethnic, ideological, and political opposition” (Arnstein, 1969, p.216). According to her, what participation should be, however, is very different: “citizen participation is a categorical term for citizen power. It is the redistribution of power that enables the have-not citizens, presently excluded from the political and economic processes, to be deliberately included in the future. It is the strategy by which the have-nots join in determining how information is shared, goals and policies are set, tax resources are allocated, 1 Diana Mata-Codesal, GER-Research Group on Reciprocity-Anthropology Department, the University of Barcelona, Spain. E- mail: d.mata.codesal@gmail.com. 2 Laure Kloetzer, Institute of Psychology and Education, University of Neuchâtel, Switzerland. E-mail: laure.kloetzer@unine.ch. 3 Concepción Maiztegui-Oñate, Pedagogía Social y Diversidad. Facultad de Psicología y Educación, University of Deusto, Bilbao, Spain. E-mail: cmaizte@deusto.es.