Practicing Anthropology and the Politics of Engagement: 2010 Year in Review

Abstract

In 2010, a rapidly growing body of public scholars continued to conduct engaged research that involved various forms of collaboration, advocacy, and activism. Practicing anthropologists are among the most powerful champions of engaged scholarship and are increasingly focused on tracing the concrete dimensions of public engagement. Practicing anthropologists in 2010 made a concerted effort to critically assess precisely what constitutes collaboration, engagement, activism, advocacy, and a host of similarly politicized but ambiguous terms. This self-reflection has probed the philosophical, political, and methodological dimensions of engagement and painted a rich and complex picture of practicing anthropology. In this article, I review those 2010 studies that are focused on critically defining an engaged anthropology and expanding it to rigorously four-field public scholarship with conscious and reflective politics.

Enriching indigenous knowledge scholarship via collaborative methodologies: beyond the high tide's few hours

“…This differs from the growing literature that describes the collaborative method itself (e.g., Butler 2004, Shackeroff and Campbell 2007, Allen et al 2009, Lowe et al 2009, Lyver et al 2009, Mullins 2011, McGinty 2012. This relative lacuna is all the more striking given that the literatures on both indigenous knowledge and collaboration result from similar epistemological engagement on agency and power.…”

Rights: Heritage Rights and the Rhetoric of Reality in Pre-Revolution Tunisia

“…The stakes of communities living near or otherwise connected to sites of heritage has been a focal point for efforts to better distribute access to heritage and associated resources that accrue from this access (e.g., economic or educational). In recent years, scholars have worked with collaborative approaches to archaeological practice (Atalay 2007(Atalay , 2010Colwell-Chanthaphonh and Ferguson 2008;Hodder 2003;Nicholas et al 2011;Silliman 2008), introduced a politics of engagement (Mullins 2011), and employed participatory action research (PAR) methods (Hollowell and Nicholas 2009;Pyburn 2009). An especially burgeoning field is 'community archaeology,' in which archaeologists position communities as the primary participants and target beneficiaries of archaeological research programs (Agbe-Davies 2010; Moser et al 2002;Moshenska 2008;Smith and Waterton 2009;Watson and Waterton 2010).…”

Anthropological Praxis in Higher Education

“…To the peer‐reviewers who judge our scientific and scholarly contributions are added legislators and other tax payers, including members of communities that are vulnerable to violations of their human rights. States and communities demand that public institutions of higher education (IHE) participate in efforts to confront an array of problems today, e.g., health inequities, educational failures, and homelessness, as well as other political‐economic challenges, such as environmental disasters, urban development, and economic growth (Mullins ; Brondo ; Checker ). Federal funding agencies and private donors want evidence that their money is well invested in higher education, by which they mean the production of knowledge for use; the graduation of more students as “neoliberal citizens” and global workers who can actually read, write, think, and do; and the participation by university faculty in local development projects to promote public safety, security, and prosperity (Hyatt ; Beere et al ).…”

“…The tool‐kit for such work includes ethnographic, participatory action research, critical cultural analysis, and interventions that reinforce justice across scales and levels of social systems. The article also presents a model of how applied anthropologists may employ their skills and perspectives to promote engaged scholarship on social disorders through community‐based alliances (Brondo ; Checker ; Mullins ).…”