Take A Part (TAP) works with communities that have historically and systemically been underserved across the UK, using creative practices to support community-led and community-determined change. Reflecting on the collaborative practices of cultural democracy and co-creation developed over the 17 years of Take A Part’s national practice, Kim Wide MBE, founder and Co-CEO, explores the urgent need for "Research Sovereignty”. This is a term that supports community-centred research practices and working towards openness, co-creation and true representation of community goals. Her aim is to create a more relevant, useful, welcomed, celebrated and applied space for research practices within Take A Part’s work and more broadly.
A new year is here, and with it, the welcome pause for reflection. On my 2025 list was a specific ambition: I wanted to seek out research spaces and collaborations with academics to help tell the story of what the work of Take A Part truly means to the communities we collaborate with. I additionally wanted to share how its methodologies and frameworks can support more strategic and community-led placemaking opportunities.
However, entering this space felt like there were a long series of hurdles to be negotiated, I am not an academic, nor do I have a traditional background in the arts sector. For a long time, my lack of formal training, coupled with a perceived lack of "academic prowess," left me feeling daunted. The imposter syndrome was deep and real. I felt like an outsider looking into a world of complex terminology and rigid structures.
It made me consider what community members we work with might think of academia. People we tend to work with have lower levels of formal education and are less likely to interact with the research process. How does the language, the approaches, the paywalls, the journals etc feel or appear to them? Is it creating further barriers to how much communities value research if it feels out of reach? As I dipped my toe into research practices across 2025, I began to see that my "outsider" perspective wasn't a deficit; it was a lens that allowed me to spot a critical tension within Knowledge Exchange - Research Sovereignty.
THE PROBLEM OF CULTURAL EXTRACTION
The research sector is one that has been built on inherited methodologies that can sometimes take on an anthropological or colonial approach. Researchers can arrive to observe, document, and evaluate. They write, they publish, and then - all too often - they leave. It can feel extractive and leave communities feeling like subjects rather than partners.
Often the research ‘question’ has been devised in advance of engaging the community/subject. Even when approached with generosity and ethics, the institutional machinery of research often fails the very people it wants to support through research due to these same inherited frameworks. We see this through:
- The Validation Gap: Institutional approaches mean that data can take years to be validated or made publicly available.
- The Resource Lag: Communities often have to wait far too long for research findings that they desperately need now for funding applications or to bring forward local policy changes.
- The Paywall Barrier: Academic journals often lock valuable insights behind paywalls, making the research inaccessible to the practitioners and residents who co-created it.
I know that many researchers in the field of community development and socially engaged practices want deeply to share value. But the system of research, while changing, still struggles to shed its extractive roots.
TOWARD RESEARCH SOVEREIGNTY
I find myself wary of traditional research engagement. Yet, I know that EVERYONE wants to do better. If we are to truly "champion and facilitate" Knowledge Exchange, as NCACE aims to do, we all must demand flattened hierarchies and more collaborative practices that include communities, researchers and investors FROM THE START to obtain Research Sovereignty.
What does this look like in practice?
- Values-Driven Boundaries: We need to be values-driven and "hold the line." This means being willing to refuse research partnerships that don’t guarantee/seek to benefit the community involved.
- Community-First Ownership: Research sovereignty means the community has a say in how frameworks are created (the language, the approaches to collection), how data is stored and shared, who owns the outcomes, and how it is jointly used. It is about "nothing about us, without us."
- Allyship Over Leadership: This world needs allies. In a research context, the academic should act as an ally to the community’s goals, using their skills to amplify existing expertise and opportunities - making room for community futures.
- Radical Transparency and Speed: We must find ways to bypass the slow crawl of traditional publishing when local needs are urgent. Knowledge flows must be circular, not one-way - be creative in what you share and don’t wait.
BEING HUMAN IN THE SYSTEM
Being kind and being human are not just soft skills; they are radical acts for the emergence of a more generous research system. True impact is built on radical kindness, listening hard to new ideas and approaches and developing genuine allyship. As we look toward this new year, I am reflecting on how we can ensure power is shared through research, rather than concentrated within it - moving away from extraction and toward a future where communities don't just participate in research, but truly own it.
About the Author: Kim Wide MBE is the founder and Co-CEO of Take A Part. Take A Part builds frameworks for creative social change and is dedicated to community-first socially engaged art and cultural democracy.
Image caption: Plain Speaking Tour of "I Am Your Voice", Claire Fontaine (2017). Photo courtesy of Dom Moore Photography.