Anthropologists behaving badly? Impact and the politics of evaluation in an era of accountability
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2014 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0873-65612014000200004 |
Resumo: | This paper discusses the move within UK social science funding to use non-academic impact as a measure of quality and success for social research. It suggests that behind this move are a set of unspoken assumptions about what constitutes good and bad impact, and the paper seeks to problematize these. By way of provocation, it presents three classic cases of anthropological research, in which the impact of anthropologists on the societies in which they worked was at worst reprehensible, and at best controversial. These controversies - Darkness in El Dorado, the Human Terrain System and Fields of Wheat, Hills of Blood - are used to demonstrate the difficulty with which we can assess impacts as good or bad, and the problems with attempting to do so. |
id |
RCAP_344ba4c92a9c800c80d9fc9aa0a47cf7 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0873-65612014000200004 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Anthropologists behaving badly? Impact and the politics of evaluation in an era of accountabilityimpactaccountabilityauditneoliberalismResearch Excellence Framework (REF)UKThis paper discusses the move within UK social science funding to use non-academic impact as a measure of quality and success for social research. It suggests that behind this move are a set of unspoken assumptions about what constitutes good and bad impact, and the paper seeks to problematize these. By way of provocation, it presents three classic cases of anthropological research, in which the impact of anthropologists on the societies in which they worked was at worst reprehensible, and at best controversial. These controversies - Darkness in El Dorado, the Human Terrain System and Fields of Wheat, Hills of Blood - are used to demonstrate the difficulty with which we can assess impacts as good or bad, and the problems with attempting to do so.Centro em Rede de Investigação em Antropologia - CRIA2014-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articletext/htmlhttp://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0873-65612014000200004Etnográfica v.18 n.2 2014reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttp://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0873-65612014000200004Mitchell,Jon P.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-02-06T17:11:36Zoai:scielo:S0873-65612014000200004Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-20T02:22:38.079009Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Anthropologists behaving badly? Impact and the politics of evaluation in an era of accountability |
title |
Anthropologists behaving badly? Impact and the politics of evaluation in an era of accountability |
spellingShingle |
Anthropologists behaving badly? Impact and the politics of evaluation in an era of accountability Mitchell,Jon P. impact accountability audit neoliberalism Research Excellence Framework (REF) UK |
title_short |
Anthropologists behaving badly? Impact and the politics of evaluation in an era of accountability |
title_full |
Anthropologists behaving badly? Impact and the politics of evaluation in an era of accountability |
title_fullStr |
Anthropologists behaving badly? Impact and the politics of evaluation in an era of accountability |
title_full_unstemmed |
Anthropologists behaving badly? Impact and the politics of evaluation in an era of accountability |
title_sort |
Anthropologists behaving badly? Impact and the politics of evaluation in an era of accountability |
author |
Mitchell,Jon P. |
author_facet |
Mitchell,Jon P. |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Mitchell,Jon P. |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
impact accountability audit neoliberalism Research Excellence Framework (REF) UK |
topic |
impact accountability audit neoliberalism Research Excellence Framework (REF) UK |
description |
This paper discusses the move within UK social science funding to use non-academic impact as a measure of quality and success for social research. It suggests that behind this move are a set of unspoken assumptions about what constitutes good and bad impact, and the paper seeks to problematize these. By way of provocation, it presents three classic cases of anthropological research, in which the impact of anthropologists on the societies in which they worked was at worst reprehensible, and at best controversial. These controversies - Darkness in El Dorado, the Human Terrain System and Fields of Wheat, Hills of Blood - are used to demonstrate the difficulty with which we can assess impacts as good or bad, and the problems with attempting to do so. |
publishDate |
2014 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2014-06-01 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0873-65612014000200004 |
url |
http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0873-65612014000200004 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0873-65612014000200004 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Centro em Rede de Investigação em Antropologia - CRIA |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Centro em Rede de Investigação em Antropologia - CRIA |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Etnográfica v.18 n.2 2014 reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799137309318184960 |