Diverging Data: Exploring the Epistemologies of Data Collection and Use among Those Working on and in Conflict

The emergence of ‘big data’ and calls for ‘evidence-based decision-making’ to increase the effectiveness of peacekeeping, humanitarian, and development programming have resulted in an often-unadulterated embrace of the promise of data as a solution to a diverse set of problems facing these sectors. At the same time, however, the increasing and widespread collection of data–by researchers, policymakers, and operational actors–directly contrasts with the sense that data are often collected yet not used. Taking a step back, this article examines the epistemologies of data collection and use from the perspectives of the scholar/researcher, and the practitioner/operational actor to illustrate how these perspectives elicit a series of data divergences. I argue that the collection and use of data replicate and are poised to extend the theory-practice divide that exists between researchers who study violence–those working ‘on’ conflict–and the peacekeepers, peacebuilders, and aid workers who work ‘in’ the midst of it. Differing conceptions of the purpose and use, sources and characteristics, and time frames of data reflect role-based positionalities that shape practices of collection, affect their interoperability, and limit their possible use, even as combining these types of data could also address their inherent limitations.