| Abstrakt: |
What does it mean to be an advocate, to conduct research and assert findings in public ways with obvious and concerted purpose? Voicing what concerns? On whose authority? For what purpose, and to what effect? Can such work produce credible scientific outcomes? These questions and the underlying ethics and praxis issues of participatory action anthropology are explored here through a reflexive lens. In this article, I argue that anthropological praxis based on collaborative and participatory engagement produces credible research outcomes, allows informed consent, and fosters equity in the science-subject relationship. Because it is both problem and remedy focused, collaborative and participatory engagement allows the identification, and ideally the implementation, of meaningful remedy. When such work is the product of or is endorsed by professional disciplinary organizations, the opportunity for peer review further strengthens the scientific integrity, enhances the credibility of findings, and amplifies the power of any subsequent advocacy effort. To illustrate, I detail some of my own efforts and after-the-fact insights on advocacy-oriented anthropology. The primary point is that to work in the public interest is an honor, a duty, and at times an intensely problematic burden that demands explicit attention to the social terms and potential ramifications of engagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
