Academic Relations
  Ethics
  Government Relations
  Public Policy
  Human Rights
  Anthro in Education
  Women in Anth
  Minority Issues

  Press Room
  Members in the News
  Anthropology News
  Human Sciences News

  
  Max Rows:
  

  Go to AAA Home

From the October 2005 Anthropology News

A Different Global Scenario in Anthropology

Gustavo Lins Ribeiro
U Brasilia

Gustavo Lins Ribeiro

Not surprisingly, new challenges and opportunities are emerging for anthropology in the current global era. Indeed, the discipline has historically reflected the transformations of the world system. In the 20th century, anthropology was highly impacted by changes in natives’ social positions. From distant others, natives became global migrants, active political and economic members of ethnically segmented nation-states. But now anthropologists have an additional factor to consider: the qualitative and quantitative growth of anthropological production outside of historically hegemonic centers. In the past five decades, the worldwide expansion of Western university systems made anthropology a globalized discipline in itself.

Confined within Nation-States
Globalization has increased the number of contacts and exchanges among people located in different countries. In the academic world, this has meant a growth in the international flows of knowledge and the possibility of increasing cooperation. In many ways, such trends have mirrored unequal relations existing within larger structural globalization processes. Theory, for instance, has flown from metropolitan centers to non-metropolitan centers while the flow of “raw data” makes the opposite movement. Up to the present, anthropologists from the traditional hegemonic centers of the discipline seldom take into consideration other anthropological productions. English has become the global language to the detriment of a more diversified linguistic and stylistic scenario. Think, for instance, of the size of anthropology in Japan or Brazil. But few read Japanese or Portuguese outside of their original language communities. Furthermore, only a small internationalized elite interacts on a global level. These elites often act as brokers, a way of accumulating professional power.

Although anthropologists have long been weaving transnational networks, most of their work—including systems of funding, training and publishing—remain bound within the confines of nation-states. This is mostly because anthropologists keep their allegiances to cliques that operate within these boundaries and partially derive their prestige from being members of national circuits of power. Thus, nation-states remain the primary place where the reproduction of the profession is defined in particular ways. In consequence, there is still a great need for stronger intercommunication and exchange across national borders.

Diversifying Anthropological Communities
As anthropologists, we can strive to make globalization work in favor of ever more diversified anthropological communities at the international level. We need to foster the visibility of non-metropolitan works of quality and enhance our modes of exchanging information. Translation of different anthropological materials into English is important to help diversify knowledge of the international production of anthropology. But unidirectional translation is not enough. If we want to avoid linguistic monotony, we also need to increase the quantity of heterodox exchanges and translations. German anthropologists should be translated into Japanese, Mexicans into German, Australians into Portuguese, Brazilians into Russian, and so on. National congresses of anthropology could always include sessions and debates on other forms of anthropological knowledge and on how to improve anthropological diversity within the international community of anthropologists.

Other initiatives can help to create and consolidate a more plural anthropological community as well as to offer more diversified access to global anthropological knowledge. We can take advantage of several means and processes that are already in place, such as online communication and the increased presence of international participants at national anthropology congresses. An electronic collection of classics from different countries and a global anthropology e-journal are real possibilities. Some of us are already participating in projects that have this kind of political goal, such as the World Anthropologies Network that aims to contribute to a more pluralistic landscape of forms of anthropology around the world. This network is also open to the potential of ongoing globalization processes, ones that break from the historical confines of the flow of anthropological knowledge from powerful metropolitan centers to peripheries.

Role of Professional Associations
Another way of creating connections and fostering exchange is to capitalize on already existing national and international anthropological associations, which serve as nodal points for professionals, networks, resources, policies and discourses on the aim and scope of anthropology.

The creation in 2004 of the World Council of Anthropological Associations, which I facilitate, was an important step in this direction. The Recife, Brazil, meeting was the first occasion representatives of associations discussed common issues and consistently worked on common perspectives. The council was conceived as a flexible network rather than as an institution so as to avoid the weight of formalization in decision-making.

While the founders of this network were aware of the council’s initial fragility, we also knew that such a coalition has great potential to develop international collaborations. National and international associations have capillary modes of reaching a great number of colleagues all over the world. They organize conferences, keep newsletters and have different kinds of publications and websites. The council of associations has the capital to be a powerful foothold for the international dissemination of anthropological knowledge in its diversity and a political body for anthropologists to have a voice in today’s global world.

The achievement of the council’s goals depends, as usual, on the political activity of our leaderships and on the support granted by our colleagues, although surely it is a positive sign that the creation of the council was met with unanimous enthusiasm. Besides anthropologists’ propensity to acknowledge the value of diversity, there are other reasons why the council quickly became a reality. One reason is that it is based on a democratic vision of how anthropologists should intercommunicate and cooperate in a global era. The council represents the recognition that now is the time to start new, horizontal modes of exchange and dissemination of knowledge among forms of anthropology around the world, whether they are shaped by national, regional or institutional practices. The 2004 Recife conference undoubtedly initiated a process for deepening international cooperation in anthropology in a more cosmopolitan vein.

I am sure that many colleagues and institutions are willing to explore the plurality of anthropological knowledge that is available today but which unfortunately remains largely unknown. I am also convinced that we need more diverse international voices and perspectives participating in the assessment and development of anthropological knowledge. The creation of the WCAA brings hope that a different global scenario in anthropology is possible. Its consolidation is crucial for a new global anthropological community to thrive.

Gustavo Lins Ribeiro served as president of the Brazilian Association of Anthropology from 2002–04, and is facilitator of the World Council of Anthropological Associations. He is also a member of the World Anthropologies Network and co-editor, with Arturo Escobar, of the forthcoming World Anthropologies: Disciplinary Transformations within Systems of Power. The above text expresses the author’s own views and not necessarily those of the WCAA.

Formation of the World Council of Anthropological Associations

By Gustavo Lins Ribeiro (U Brasilia)

In June 2004 the conference “World Anthropologies: Strengthening the International Organization and Effectiveness of the Profession,” sponsored by Wenner-Gren, was held in Recife, Brazil, immediately before the 24th biannual meeting of the Association of Brazilian Anthropologists. It brought together 14 representatives from anthropological organizations, including the presidents of the associations for Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, India, Russia, South Africa, the UK and the US. The presidents of the following international associations were also present: European Association of Social Anthropologists, International Union of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences, Latin American Association of Anthropology and Pan African Anthropological Association. The Japanese society sent its director of international relations.
After discussing several possible mechanisms and initiatives to increase international cooperation, participants decided to create the World Council of Anthropological Associations. The council’s primary objectives are to promote the discipline of anthropology in an international context; cooperation and the sharing of information among world anthropologists; jointly organized events of scientific debate and cooperation in research activities and dissemination of anthropological knowledge. This network is open to new members. In 2005, the Catalan and the Portuguese associations joined the WCAA. For more information, see www.wcaanet.org.

About AAA / Join AAA / Jobs & Careers / AAA Meetings / AAA Publications
Sections & Interest Groups / Staff Directory / Anthro Links / Support AAA

Questions or comments? We want to hear from you!
Contact us  / AAA Privacy Policy

Copyright 1996-2006, American Anthropological Association
2200 Wilson Blvd, Suite 600, Arlington, VA 22201; phone 703/528-1902; fax 703/528-3546