Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Advocacy Anthropology: An Introduction


Advocacy anthropology can be included under the broad umbrella term of ‘development anthropology’ in that it “proactively represents, defends and supports the members of disempowered or disenfranchised groups”. Advocacy anthropology in particular is most concerned with “identifying, addressing and critiquing imbalances in the allocation of power, economic resources, social status and material goods” at the community, social or national level. This form of applied anthropology can take many different forms. 

Broadly, any anthropologist who is requested by members of a disempowered or marginalised group to help promote and assist their cause could be considered an advocacy anthropologist. However, some disagree with this definition and see anthropological research done within these communities in support of community defined goals as a tool for the members to create change themselves. They believe that it is not the role of the anthropologist to be mere champion or defender of disempowered groups, but instead to educate people and equip them with the knowledge and tools to solve their own problems from within their communities. 

Current theoretical trends within the discipline state that it is not enough to just study, observe and research communities for mere academic purposes alone, but that instead there should be a degree of knowledge dissemination and reciprocity; that something must be given back to the community should they want it. Additionally, it is almost inevitable of course that anthropologist develop both affection and concern for the people they and that in light of their education, social status and anthropological skill set that they are in a well placed in position to give voice to the issues concerns of the communities they study. Although this may not be the original intention of the anthropologist, ‘traditional’ ethnographic work can often lead to advocacy, with the anthropologist becoming more and more involved quite slowly and over an extended period.

While advocacy work is often done with good intentions, there is also the need to be wary when approaching this highly sensitive area. Advocacy is not always appropriate for every situation and should not be pushed upon people, no matter the best intentions. There are always numerous ethical factors to consider when embarking upon this type of anthropology; primarily, whom is the anthropologist advocating for?
Advocacy done by anthropologists should support the position of the communities most affected by certain practices or policies. It would be highly unethical for an anthropologist to advocate on behalf of large companies and corporations whose intentions may have damaging effects within communities on the ground.
Perhaps most importantly, if they are to be taken seriously the anthropology must keep their advocacy “dispassionate, empirical, and substantiated; but must also be prepared for the potential fire-storm of public response”

Shannon Turner-Riley
ANTH 311: Applied Anthropology
Instructor: Dr Heather Botting
Friday 2nd December, 2011

2 comments:

  1. Since I keep seeing this perspective repeated in numerous articles on Anthropologist as Advocate, I have to ask, Why is it always assumed that one group is inherently more worthy of an Anthropologists support over another? I agree that if you are hired as an advocate by group A, then you are obligated to advance group A's interests. But why does it seem to be assumed that group A will always be an ethnic, underprivileged, minority group? What is the inherent difference between group A & group B? Is group A somehow more worthy because they're a minority? Is group B less worthy because they're white? Or wealthy? Or American ranchers instead of Peruvian herders? What is the difference that makes advocacy in one circumstance more "anthropologically acceptable" than the other?

    ReplyDelete