Critical interventions: Dilemmas of accountability in contemporary ethnographic researchHodgson, Dorothy L.
doi: 10.1080/1070289X.1999.9962643pmid: N/A
Anthropologists are accountable in unique ways to “the people we study” in “the field.” Yet today “the field” is more likely to be some transnational process linking multiple actors, sites, and agendas rather than a bounded physical space. To whom, then, are we accountable in a world of blurred boundaries and of intersecting and often contradictory oppressions based on gender, class, ethnicity, nationality, and sexuality? Are we equally accountable to everyone we encounter in “the field?” If not, are there some ethical or political principles that we can use to help us determine to whom we are most accountable and how? In this essay I explore these questions through an interrogation of my own work on the cultural politics of “indigenous” development among Maasai in Tanzania.
Writing for, versus about, the ethnographic other: Issues of engagement and reflexivity in working with a tribal NGO in IndonesiaDove, Michael R.
doi: 10.1080/1070289X.1999.9962644pmid: N/A
This article examines current thinking about the divide between the ethnographic subject and object, based on my recent work with a Dayak NGO in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. I suggest that the increasing complexity of relations between ethnographer and subject, as in my involvement with this NGO, necessitates some rethinking of our concept of the ethnographic project. I argue, first, that this new ethnographic order of things challenges us to think strategically about the need to counter rather than critique monolithic representations. There may be a need for us to contribute to the construction of representation, rather than to avoid representation. Second, I argue that we need to worry less about the unintended consequences of our study of local organizations and movements, and to worry more about the intended consequences of our relative lack of study of central institutions of power. The proliferation of local organizations challenges us to rethink key ethnographic boundaries, not just between subject and object, but also between the center and periphery of the discipline, between North and South, and between modern and post‐modern paradigms.
Ecofeminist appropriations and transnational environmentalismsSturgeon, Noël
doi: 10.1080/1070289X.1999.9962645pmid: N/A
Though U.S. ecofeminist thinkers comprise a diverse group of viewpoints, and there is much debate over a number of core concepts within ecofeminism, there is basic agreement within this political position that sexism has had environmental consequences and that environmental degradation has produced special burdens for women. Western ecofeminists have been criticized, however, for appropriating the environmental activism of Third World1 and Native American women as “ecofeminist,” and for using essentialist conceptions of these women as being closer to nature. Allowing that these criticisms have merit, I reflect here on the implications of leveling such a devastating critique in a context of rapidly developing environmentalisms. Despite its problematic aspects, all ecofeminist discourse should not be simply dismissed as a form of racist and sexist essentialism; indeed, it can be argued that, in some cases, ecofeminism has made several useful interventions within “Women in Development” discourse. Further, credit should be given to Third World activists who have made use of Western ecofeminist interventions in order to build coalitions both horizontally and vertically within the international political arena of post‐Cold War “globalizing environmentalisms.”
The politics of ethnographic practice in the Colombian vaupésJackson, Jean
doi: 10.1080/1070289X.1999.9962646pmid: N/A
The current situation in Colombia's Vaupés region involves a complicated mosaic of various change agents, colonists, and indigenous communities. This paper discusses the role of the anthropologist investigating ethnic nationalism in such a setting, asking questions about: (a) the best position to take with respect to helping local communities carve out geographical and cultural space for themselves; (b) how best to help Indian organizations, when requested, understand the costs and benefits of proposed development projects; (c) how best to analyze, write about, and interact with local indigenous organizations and the communities they represent when different factions see things differently; and (d) in such cases, who constitutes a concerned anthropologist's constituency? The general issue of what the role of anthropology should be in such highly politicized situations is also considered.
The importance of being local: Villagers, NGOs, and the world bank in the Arun valley, NepalForbes, Ann
Armbrecht
doi: 10.1080/1070289X.1999.9962647pmid: N/A
This paper reflects on the ways in which “local” identity became an important basis of legitimacy in the organization of opposition to the Arun dam in Nepal. Large projects such as dams have multiple effects over space and time so that there are many locales that can constitute the proper domain of the “local” voice. Looking only for the most strictly local privileges place over politics and implies that physical boundaries are impermeable. This paper suggests shifting analysis from a search for the legitimate “local” to an understanding of the processes by which different identity claims are employed by various agents to achieve different strategic ends.
Locations and representations: Writing in the political present in Sarawak, East MalaysiaBrosius, J. Peter
doi: 10.1080/1070289X.1999.9962648pmid: N/A
Since 1987, the Malaysian state of Sarawak has been the focus of a broad‐based transnational environmental campaign concerned with large‐scale mechanized logging and the dispossession of indigenous communities. In the present discussion I examine a series of concerns relating to my efforts to write a history of the Sarawak campaign. I do so as a way of elucidating the argument that taking seriously the multi‐sitedness of such research projects, particularly those that focus on subaltern social movements, demands that anthropologists and other scholars engaged in the study of such movements rethink the implications of their ethnographic presence and their efforts at representation. This in turn might have a transformative effect on their thinking about the possibility of alternative forms of ethnographic practice.