Beck and Sznaider call on ‘methodological cosmopolitanism’ to transcend methodological nationalism and account for an increasingly cosmopolitanized reality. We take up their challenge by drawing on our experiences of conducting a collaborative ethnography of methodological changes in the production of population statistics within and between European national and international statistical institutes. Drawing on debates in science and technology studies, we depart from some conceptual presuppositions of methodological cosmopolitanism to define a ‘transversal method’. Referring to this method as performative and ontopolitical, we reflect on how it requires collaboration and, in our ethnography, gave rise to three practical challenges – (1) going beyond the individual project; (2) using each other's field notes; (3) and working against the national order of things. To meet these challenges, we reflect on how this method required us to practise three modes of care – thinking with others, tinkering with field notes, and dissenting within.

中文翻译：

---

采取横向方法：在合作研究项目中发展护理伦理

贝克和斯奈德呼吁“方法论世界主义”超越方法论民族主义，并解释日益世界化的现实。我们利用我们在欧洲国家和国际统计机构内部及其之间进行人口统计方法编制方面的方法学变化的协作人种学的经验，来应对他们的挑战。借助科学技术研究中的争论，我们从方法论世界主义的一些概念前提出发，定义了一种“横向方法”。我们将此方法称为具有执行力和政治意义的方法，反思了它如何需要协作，并且在我们的人种志中，提出了三个实际挑战：（1）超越单个项目；（2）利用彼此的田野笔记；（3）和违背国家秩序的事情。为了应对这些挑战，我们反思了这种方法如何要求我们实践三种护理模式–与他人思考，修补田野笔记和内部意见分歧。