In this paper, I discuss dominant and counter-dominant ideas about risk that inform methodologies for doing research with marginalized communities in the context of the United States. I argue that dominant ideas about risk are influenced by regimes of compliance and a “politics of demonstrability.” In this framing, risk becomes a barometer for measuring how much change colonial, capitalist, white supremacist, ableist institutions can endure while not relinquishing their dominant position.This idea of risk, I argue, limits the methodological scope of research that is supposedly in the service of, yet falls exceedingly short of, moving institutions closer to equity and social justice. I move on to discuss counter-dominant ideas about risk that are essential for doing research that is more aligned with the transformative goals of social justice. In this reevaluation of risk – a move away from neoliberal logics that define dominant versions of risk – I draw on examples from my involvement in community-led research with Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) communities in the U.S. state of Oregon. I explore how an intersectional, culturally-specific, and community-based understanding of risk sets of the conditions for research methodologies that truly center and advance justice.
