American foundations and the development of international knowledge networks

Abstract

This article examines the role and influence of three American foundations -Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford -in developing international knowledge networks that significantly impacted upon the Third World, helping to consolidate US hegemony after 1945, fostering pro-US values, methods and research institutions. The international networks were modelled on prior domestic initiatives resulting in the effective intellectual hegemony of 'liberal internationalism', of empirical scientific research methods, and of policy-oriented studies. Such domestic hegemony constructed a key basis of America's rise to globalism, which after 1945 required a continuing and enhanced foundation role, especially with the onset of the Cold War. The article, which examines the role of the US foundations in relation to intellectual hegemony construction in Latin America, Indonesia, and Africa, concludes that the evidence is best explained by Gramscian theory, and calls for further empirical research in this vital area.This article is concerned with the role of American philanthropic foundations in the development of international knowledge networks.1 By an international knowledge network is meant a system of coordinated research, disseminated and published results, study and often graduate-level teaching, intellectual exchange, and financing, across national boundaries. The international networks may also include official policymakers and international aid and other agencies. Landrum Bolling (1982) shows that, despite the lack of a 'grand design', American foundations (and other agencies) have constructed a remarkable foreign aid (educational and other) network that, he suggests, has had a significant impact on the Third World. It is clear that American foundations consciously helped to construct US international hegemony after 1945 through international knowledge networks that aimed to foster a pro-US environment of values, methods and research institutions across a range of fields and academic disciplines. Such international networks were modelled on previous foundation initiatives within the United States itself, from the 1920s to the 1940s, resulting in the effective intellectual hegemony of 'liberal internationalism', of empirical scientific research methods, and of policy-oriented studies (mostly under the banner of 'realism' or 'realistic' research, designed to be of practical utility to policymakers). Such domestic hegemony constructed a key basis of America's rise to globalism, 2 which after 1945, required a continuing and enhanced foundation role, especially with the onset of the Cold War.The international knowledge networks of interest here were constructed and

Ensino superior em administração entre os anos 1940 e 1950: uma discussão a partir dos acordos de cooperação Brasil-Estados Unidos

“…We noted this in the documents that report the experiences of implementing the schools in Brazil. We also recalled that at this time, the American Way of Life, despite its internal contradictions, guided government efforts, creating the image of a specific and clear American culture that served as a product for export (PARMAR, 2002).…”

Estudos organizacionais, (des)colonialidade e estudos da dependência: as contribuições da Cepal

“…Não obstante, podemos reconhecer que a penetração das ideias da Cepal nos EUA "pelo menos destruiu o otimismo ingênuo sobre desenvolvimento professado pelos teóricos da modernização estadunidense" (CHIROT e HALL, 1982, p. 93 militares e das manifestações de colonialidade epistêmica contra o conhecimento da Cepal discutidas, não deveria ser surpresa que as intervenções do estruturalismo da Cepal nas economias locais passassem a mostrar sinais de exaustão (LOVE, 2005). Dessa maneira, o corpo de críticas externas à Cepal cresce e vê-se impulsionado pela concentração em Santiago de diversos pensadores de esquerda que haviam sido expulsos de seus respectivos países após os golpes militares, o que propicia o início da discussão dos estudos da dependência sob uma perspectiva marxista (FRANK, 1966;SANTOS, 1970 (PARMAR, 2002;ALCADIPANI, 2010), ao mesmo tempo que o projeto "Camelot", engendrado no Norte para "ordenar" a produção de conhecimento em ciências sociais no Sul, é colocado em marcha (ver, para o caso chileno, NAVARRO e QUESADA, 2010). Entendemos que esse processo, que representa como funciona a lógica da colonialidade (MIGNOLO, 2011), levou ao enfraquecimento da posição da Cepal, ao mesmo tempo que os estudos da dependência viriam a ser reformulados como a teoria marxista/neomarxista da dependência, sempre seguindo uma lógica de pensamento da (e a partir da) América Latina.…”

Foundation Networks and American Hegemony

“…Self-confident, optimistic and armed with the findings of social sciences like sociology, economics and political science, foundation leaders rarely consulted those at whom their programmes of reform were targeted and on whose behalf they claimed to be acting. 9 …”

“…Briefly, networks are "systems of coordinated research, disseminated and published results, study and often graduate level teaching, intellectual exchange, and financing, across national boundaries." 35 Networks normally include official policy-makers and perform two broad but vital functions: internal and external. 32 Internal functions refer to what the network does as a system of scholar, knowledge, and money flows, inter-institutional connections, and as a source of attraction.…”

“…59 42 Located at prestigious universities such as Harvard, Columbia and Chicago, area studies programmes featured funded chairs, departments, professional associations, conferences, doctoral students and research fellowships. 60 Relatively small investments had powerful 'multiplier' effects as the symbolic power of the Ivy league encouraged other elite and non-elite universities to invest in their own area studies programmes. 61 The foundations' efforts in this area were assisted by regular advice and encouragement by an enlarged postwar State Department that yearned for trained graduate students for public service and a more internationally-conscious American public.…”