Methods & Ethics

Research methodology, ethical considerations, and limitations

Research Methodology

This learning resource draws on multiple methodological approaches to examine contested heritage and institutional obstruction:

Archival Research

The project draws on primary sources including UNESCO documentation, Japanese government publications, regional media archives, and institutional correspondence. Where possible, sources are provided in their original languages with English translations. The Sources section provides access to key documents and contextualises their significance.

The Archive of Obstruction

A distinctive methodological contribution of this resource is treating the project's non-release as a finding rather than a failure. The "archive of obstruction" comprises documented instances of institutional gatekeeping: refusals, requests for "balance," procedural delays, and withdrawn permissions. This approach follows scholarship on "reading for organisation"—treating the structure of documents and institutional responses as evidence of how contested histories are managed.

Critical Heritage Studies

The theoretical framework draws on critical heritage studies, particularly Laurajane Smith's concept of "Authorised Heritage Discourse" (AHD) and subsequent scholarship on heritage governance, memory politics, and the production of historical silence. Key theoretical sources are cited in the Bibliography and discussed in Module 03: How Heritage Works.

Ethical Considerations

Representation of Contested Histories

Hashima Island's history involves coerced labour, colonial violence, and ongoing transnational disputes over historical memory. This resource aims to present these histories with appropriate gravity while maintaining scholarly rigour. We do not claim to speak for survivors or their descendants, but rather to analyse how institutional processes shape what can be publicly remembered.

Survivor Testimony

Users sometimes ask why this resource does not present extensive survivor testimony from Korean workers mobilised to Hashima during the 1940s. The answer is itself part of what this resource examines: testimony is fragmentary, contested, and shaped by decades of political dispute. To present such testimony as simply "available" would misrepresent the evidentiary landscape. Module 05: Labour, Empire, and Evidence addresses these questions directly.

Positionality

The author of this resource, Christopher Gerteis, is a historian of modern Japan based at SOAS University of London. This institutional position shapes both the questions asked and the access available. The resource is written primarily in English for an international academic audience, though it engages with Japanese, Korean, and Chinese-language sources. The author acknowledges that this perspective is necessarily partial.

Institutional Relationships

The HashimaXR project involved partnerships with heritage institutions that later became part of the "archive of obstruction." This resource discusses those relationships analytically, focusing on institutional processes rather than individual actions. No individuals are named in connection with specific gatekeeping decisions unless they have made public statements in official capacities.

Limitations

Scope

This resource focuses on one case study—Hashima Island and the HashimaXR project. While the analytical frameworks developed here may apply to other contested heritage sites, readers should exercise caution in generalising from a single case.

Language Access

The resource draws on sources in Japanese, Korean, and Chinese, but the author's language competencies are strongest in Japanese and English. Korean and Chinese sources are engaged through a combination of original-language reading and consultation with regional specialists. Key terms are provided in multiple languages in the Glossary.

Temporal Boundaries

The analysis of media discourse and institutional positions focuses primarily on the period 2015–2025, from Hashima's UNESCO inscription to the present. Earlier periods are addressed through historical scholarship rather than direct archival engagement.

Living History

Hashima's contested heritage remains an active site of political dispute. New developments—diplomatic statements, institutional changes, media coverage—may affect how the material in this resource should be understood. The Version History documents significant updates.

Ethics Approval

This learning resource does not involve human subjects research in the traditional sense. Evaluation surveys are conducted in accordance with SOAS University of London's data protection policies and UK GDPR requirements. See the Privacy Notice for details on data collection and processing.

Contact

Questions about methodology, ethics, or the research underlying this resource may be directed to the author via the Contact page.