ABSTRACT Over the past 20 years, the participation of laypersons or representatives of civil society has become a guiding principle in processes of research and innovation. There is now a significant literature discussing collaboration between civil society organisations (CSOs) and researchers, with two interesting gaps. Firstly, the fact that research is mainly conducted within projects is often underestimated, although the format significantly frames knowledge production. Secondly, researchers and civil society organisations are closely related to their respective communities. We argue that this constellation – of project-related format, in combination with a strong relationship to communities – results in conflicts that express and lead to identity politics. The analysis is based on conceptual considerations as well as empirical findings, which were developed within the EC-funded CONSIDER project (2012–2015). It can be shown that identity politics is performed by socio-epistemic tactics, which are used to order the socially as well as epistemically hybrid space within projects. To explain differences in conflict intensity, we suggest the distinction between weakly tied and strongly tied identity politics. In sum, identity politics can be seen as one key element for social as well as epistemic control in transdisciplinary research projects.

中文翻译：

---

身份政治：参与式研究及其与社会和认知控制相关的挑战

摘要 在过去的 20 年中，非专业人士或民间社会代表的参与已成为研究和创新过程中的指导原则。现在有大量文献讨论民间社会组织 (CSO) 和研究人员之间的合作，但存在两个有趣的差距。首先，研究主要在项目内进行的事实经常被低估，尽管这种形式极大地限制了知识生产。其次，研究人员和民间社会组织与其各自的社区密切相关。我们认为，这个星座——与项目相关的形式，结合与社区的牢固关系——导致了表达并导致身份政治的冲突。该分析基于概念考虑以及实证结果，这是在 EC 资助的 CONSIDER 项目（2012-2015）内开发的。可以证明，身份政治是通过社会认知策略来执行的，这些策略用于对项目内的社会和认知混合空间进行排序。为了解释冲突强度的差异，我们建议区分弱联系和强联系身份政治。总之，身份政治可以被视为跨学科研究项目中社会和认知控制的一个关键因素。我们建议区分弱联系和强联系身份政治。总之，身份政治可以被视为跨学科研究项目中社会和认知控制的一个关键因素。我们建议区分弱联系和强联系身份政治。总之，身份政治可以被视为跨学科研究项目中社会和认知控制的一个关键因素。