1

Thethroesofacademicobjectivity:methodologicalreflectionsonthepractitioner‐cum‐researchercontinuumPhDcourseSandbjergGods,October4‐6,2010.Workinprogress–donotquoteJacobThorsen,PhDStudentDept.InformationandMediaStudies,AarhusUniversity

AbstractThispaperrevealsreflectionsonschismsIfindbetweenmypriorexperiencesworkingasapractitionerandnowanemergingscholar,andhowItrytonavigateinattimesperplexingwaters,tryingtopositionmyselfnowtheorizingonthemesandissuessimilartothoseIworkedwithinthepastasapractitioner.Havingcompletedafirstroundoffieldstudiesfall2009andnowmakingpreparationsforasecondroundscheduledfall2010,thepaperalsodealswithsomeofmymethodologicalreflections,whichsomewhatalsoareinfluencedbythereflectionsonschismsIfindbetweenmypriorexperiencesworkingasapractitionerandnowanemergingscholar,andhowtoapplyandmakeuseofthecollectedqualitativeempiricalmaterialformycomingfieldstudies.

IntroductionOnthesidelinesofaninternationalconferenceIattendedrecently,IhadlengthyandfruitfulconversationswithaChileanfriendandscholarofcommunication,RodrigoAraya,aboutontologicalandepistemologicalissuesandhowasascholartopositiononeselfinrelationto»theobject«ofone’sresearch.Theconversationswereverystimulatingandcontinuedoveremails,andafewweeksagoRodrigosentmeanemailwithaquoteoftheColombianphilosopherandscholarofcommunicationJesúsMartín‐Barberoashethoughtthiscouldsparkfurtherdebateandreflectionsontheissue:

»Sóloinvestigamosdeverdadloquenosafecta,yafectarvienedeafecto.«[Weonlytrulyresearchwhataffectusandaffectcomesfromdevotion.]

ThequotecomesfromaspeechMartín‐Barberodeliveredin1999andinthequoteheplayswiththewords»afecta«[affect]and»afecto«[devotion],andasthetwowordsinSpanishhavesimilarletteringandpronunciationsheinsinuatestheyalsohaveasimilarmeaning.AmongvariousissuesMartín‐BarberoinhisspeechtalksabouthowmasscommunicationfromtheWestacculturatesthemassesinLatinAmericaandthusdestroyslocalcultures.Inthespeechhemakesreferencetoastudentthatinapreviousoccasionaskedhimwhyheissoobsessedwithresearchonpopularmediaandmass

2

communication?InitiallyMartín‐Barberowaspuzzledbythequestionandthenansweredthathisresearchmaybeisasecrettributetohismotherthattohimsummarizestherichestanddeepestinpopularculture:hersolidarityintheharshpost‐wartime,herabilitytorallyforpeopletodefendtheirrights,hergenerositywhenshegaveherrationcardstothepoor,andthefactshewasdeeplyreligious,whichaccordingtoherwashowshegotherstrengthandenergy.Martín‐Barbero’slifelongdevotionasaresearcheronpopularcultureandmassmediaisineffectasecretetributetohismotherthattohimsummarizesthebestinpopularculture:solidarity,defenderofrights,generosityandstrengthfromherreligion.Martín‐Barbero’squoteandreflectionsinthespeechtouchesuponcriticalissuesI’mcurrentlyreflectingoninmyresearch,thatrelatestoschismsIfindbetweenmypriorexperiencesworkingasapractitionerandnowbecominganemergingscholar,andhowItrytonavigateinattimesperplexingwaters,positioningmyselfnowtheorizingonthemesandissuessimilartothoseIworkedwithinthepastasapractitioner.WhereIasapractitionercould»devote«andidentifymyselfwiththevaluesandactivitiesoftheNGOandradioIworkedwith,Ifinditmorechallengingasanemergingscholartoidentifymyselfwiththeconventionalscholar’s»contemplativestance«as»my«positioninrelationto»theobject«attimesconfusesme.

BeforeIelaborateonthis,however,IshallinitiallyoutlinehowIsubjectivelyperceivesomeoftheschismsbetweenpractitionerandscholarlywork.Attimesmyaccountsmightappearasquasi‐academicandevennaive,asitalsocontainssomeemotionalandmaybeirrationalreflections.Nevertheless,IincludetheseaccountsinordertogivethereaderabetterunderstandinghowIperceivesomeoftherupturesbetweenpractitionerandscholarlywork–actionandreflection.Thepractitioner‐cum‐researchercontinuumPriortotheresearchformyPhDIworkedfouryearswithaDanishINGOMellemfolkeligtSamvirke(MS)[DanishAssociationforInternationalCooperation]inNepalandnaturallyIwasinfluencedandcolouredbymyworkandthepeopleImet,aswellasthepoliticalsituationandsocietalmattersingeneral.DuringmyyearsinNepalsignificanthistoricaleventstookplace,mostnotablythe»RhododendronRevolution«thatpeakedApril2006inwhichmostofmycolleagues,neighboursandfriendstookpartandstruggledtoreplacethekingwithademocraticallyelectedconstituentassembly.Atthetimebeforetherevolutionitappearedtometheking’srepressionofthecivilianpopulationwasbackfiring.Ithoughtthepain,fearandanguishcausedbytheking’smilitarycampaignwasstrengtheningtheideologicalandemotionalcommitmentofthecivilianpopulationandIinterpretedthemobilizationofpeoplefromallwalksoflifetobesociallyaswellasindividuallyliberating.ManypeoplewereorganizedaroundanideologyofMarxistclassstruggleandromanticsocialistpopulism–otherssimplyhopingthecivilmovementcouldreplacethearmedconflictwithalastingpeace.Aspeople’scauseandresistancetomeseemedjustandtheyusedpeacefulmeans,Ihadaverystrongsenseofidentificationwiththeirstruggleandthemovementsandpoliticalactivitiestheytook

3

partin.Attimesthesituationwasquitetenseandespeciallyinthesemomentsitwasasifculturalbarriersdissolvedandasenseof»we«emerged,wherewealljointlyidentifiedwiththestruggleforajustsocietynomatterourdifferentbackgroundsandcultures.ImentionthesesubjectiveandemotionalreflectionsinordertoemphasizehowmystrongsenseofidentificationwiththeNepaleseImetandworkedwithdeeplyinfluencedmeandmyworkandstilldoestodayasanemergingscholar,workinginthesamecountrynowdoingresearchandinterviewingsomeofthesamepeoplewithwhomIworkedbefore.Obviously,myexperiencesgivesomeadvantagesintermsofnetworkandinsightsinculturalandsocietalmattersandatthesametime,ofcourse,alsotheriskofscholarlylazinesstakingforgranted»old«andpreconceivednotionsandideas.Tome,however,themostchallengingpartishowtopositionmyselfinthetransitionfrombeingapractitioner,nowbecominganemergingscholar.LetmeexplainhowIseeit.[Authorsnote:includeotherbranchesreflexivities;nursesstartresearchingonfriendsandpatients,downsidesandbenefitsofinsidersapproachtoresearch.]Apractitioner,astheworddenote,workinaconcretesettingandprojectinwhichonesselfisengaged.1Althoughtheculturalandgeographicalsettingmightbedifferenttooneshomecountryandculture,day‐to‐daylifeandworkisencountered»asitis«withoutanapriorithoughtassuchofwhatthesituationshouldbelike.Ofcourseprojectmissionstatementsandonesownvaluesystem,educationalbackgroundandlifetrajectoryingeneraldoesinfluencemotives,choices,decisionsandprioritiestovariousdegrees.Often,idealisticmotivesarealsomotivational(wantingtodogood).InthecaseofmyworkwithMSoneofthecorevalueswas»mellemfolkeligt«(people‐to‐peoplecooperation)work,whereonesselffullyembodiedidentifyandengageinsolidaritywiththoseinneedandstrugglingfora»justcause«.Thereisn’tassuchanexplicitapriorithoughtinonesengagement,exceptsolidarityandtheinter‐humandimension,whichiswhythereisalargescopetoengagedirectlywithpeople»asandwheretheyare«totryandfindcommondenominatorsandpointsofinterest,astheymightturnouttobe.Incomparison,inacademiathegeneralexpectationisthat»scientific«workoughttobeobjective,factdrivenandthusnecessarilypresupposesananalytically»detached«academicresearcher,examiningphenomenaofinterestandrecounting»findings«objectively.My»new«professionalidentityasanemergingscholarhasmademethinkofoccasionalconversationsIhadwithformerNepalesecolleaguesaboutforeignexpertsandscholarsparachutedintoNepalonfact‐findingmissions,evaluationsorpreparingforprojectproposals.Ordoingresearch.MyNepaleseacquaintancessometimesmadeboldstatementsabouttheirpresenceandtheirstereotypedperceptionofsomeoftheforeignersissomeonewhomainlyinteractwitharelativelysmallcircleofNepalesewho

1Withthetiebetweenindividualandsocietyalwaysinmind,Iusethetermsselfandotherinanextendedsensethroughoutthispaper,tomeannotonlyindividualsinvolvedintheencounterbutalsotheculturalandsocietalintereststhattheseindividualscarrywiththem,deliberatelyorinspiteofthemselves.Therefore,whereverthesetermsoccur,thereadershouldunderstandthemintheirextendedmeaning:individualsandsocietiesareinquestion.

4

speakEnglishandhaveasimilareducationalbackgroundandwhateverisdiscussedandconcludedcirculatewithinasmallcircleofpeopleasadisembodiedpractice,speakinginalanguageandvocabularyoftenalientolaymenandfromaprivilegedposition,notexperiencingandemotionallyengagedinday‐to‐dayhardships.Hence,complexities,paradoxesandsubtlenuancesarenotalwaysrepresentedintheirassessmentsanddiscussions.MyNepalesecolleaguestaggedsomeoftheseforeigners»talkingheads«.IunderstandwhatitwasmyNepaleseacquaintancessaw.FrommyownexperiencelivingoutsideKathmanduIremembermyoccasionalvisitstoKathmanduattimesfeltlikeenteringacocoonwherediscussionsonseriousissuesrelatedtoNepal’speace,reconciliation,democratizationprocesses,etc.seemedasdiscoursesanddiscussionscirculatinginclosedcircuitsandwherethereattimesappearedtobelittleornomatchbetweendiscourseandthepracticeandrealityoutsideKathmandu.Obviously,a»talkinghead«isn’taveryflatteringtagbeinggiventoyounordoIthinkitisveryproductive,asthereseemtobeamismatchbetweentheintentionsoftheforeignerandhowsomeNepaleseexperiencetheirpresence.NowIhaveexperiencedwhatNepalesesometimesthinkoftheirforeignexpertguestsIwonderifIasanemergingscholaralsowillbetaggeda»talkinghead«.The»talkingheadphenomenon«hasmademethinkofDescartesandhisviewofthehumanbeingmadeupofabodilymachinethatsendssensorysignalstoamindthatthenusesrationalthoughttodecipherthemessagesandformjudgments.Descartessawthinkingasaseparatedomainthat,whilephysicallyconnectedtotheworld,actedindependentlyofit.Descarteswantedtoeliminatewhatheregardedastheuncertaintiesofbodilyexperience–themessy,unpredictable,spontaneousfeelingsandemotionsthatcontinuallyeruptanddisruptthought.Obviously,bringinginDescarteshereisanextremepositionbuttojuxtaposethestrongsenseofidentificationIhadasapractitionerwith»myobject«aspreviouslyoutlined,Ifindthetwoextremepositionsusefultodiscusshowtotryandstrikeabalanceasanemergingscholarandonesownpositioninrelationtothe»theobject«.

WhereamI?AsanemergingscholarIfindit,asmentioned,challengingtoengagewiththeconventionalscholar’s»contemplativestance«.WhereshouldIput»me«,»theself«?Isitpossibletoavoidbecominga»Descartiantalkinghead«?Orshouldn’tIcare?MostscholarsworkinginandwithforeignculturesprobablyhavehadsimilarontologicalconsiderationsandwhatIwritenowmightthereforebecommonsensealthoughitsimplicationsneedtobecarefullytraced.Fornotonlydoscholars,sayworkinginNepal,contributetothevarietyofhumanexperienceastheypracticetheirdisciplinesbut,conversely,ashumanexperiencechangessodoestheirplacewithinitand,consequently,thescholaralsochange.Thisexemplifiestheinevitabletiebetweenwhatisstudied–the»object«–andwhostudiesit–the»subject«:neithercanremainunaffectedbychangesintheother.Asascholartoembracethisrelationshipbetween

5

subjectandobject(orbetween»self«and»other«)itmust,astheselfpursuestheother,alsobecomeabletopursuetheself,andtheselfmustthereforebeexposed.[Authorsnote:includeBourdieu’sHabitusinthediscussion.]Havingsaidthis,IsensetheselfishiddenawayintheworkofsomescholarsworkinginthesamefieldasIdoastheyrefusetoadmitthattheverypossibilityofdealingwiththeotheristiedtothecapacitytoputtheselfatstake.Thehiddenselfendowsscholarlyworktoconfronttheotherpresumingthatitsobject(theother)operatesinarealmdistinctandremovedfromthatofthesubject,andthatthesubjectitselfislikealenswhich,inprinciple,canbemadefreeanddistortionandcapableofobservingandcapturingtheobjectinitstruenature.Theself‐protectiveeffectsofthislanguagearereadilyapparent:thedenialofadialecticalrelationshipbetweensubjectandobjecthidestheinfluenceandthustheresponsibilityofthesubjectin»creating«itsobject;theassumptionofasubjectfreedfromitsownhistoryandculture–a»contentless«subject–limitsallchallengestothosewhichaimtopurifythesubjectandtoendowitwithfiner,moreprecisetools.Thislanguageattempts,insum,toproduceanobserverwhoisnotpartoftheinvestigationorobjectheisstudying.Theseassumptionsreflectaviewofknowledgewhichis»sciencetistic«:itsrawmaterialsare»facts«divorcedfromtheprocesseswhichproducesthemanditsresultsareabstractedfromthehumandimensionsoftheknowingsubject.[Authorsnote:adddiscussionsongroundedtheory.]IfwetakeNepalasanexample,elitedominationisstillprominentandtheuseof»sciencetisticlanguage«blendedwithdevelopmentdiscoursesandjargonisoneofseveralmeansto»seize«andmaintainpower.UNDPNepalissuedlastyearthe2009HumanDevelopmentReportstatingthatpowerrelationshavenotchangedsignificantlysincetherestorationofdemocracyin1990.Althoughhumandevelopmenthasimprovedattheaggregatelevel,thegapbetweentheadvantagedcaste/ethnicgroupsandthedisadvantagediseitherwideningorremainsconstant.Thus,theDalit,Muslimandethnicgroupswhohavehadlowerlevelsofhumandevelopmentforgenerationscontinuetosuffertoday.Moreover,thelevelofhumandevelopmentofwomenisstilllessthanthatofmen,andthewomenstilllackfairaccesstoopportunitiesandresources.Excessiveuseof»sciencetisticlanguage«blendedwithdevelopmentbuzzwordsisinNepalalsocalled»dollartongue«andisusedbythosewhomanagethelanguageconsciouslyandsolelytoengageindialoguewithforeigndonorstoattractfundingforprojects.Theoutcomeiswhatappearas»abubbleofdiscoursescirculatinginclosedcircuits«asImentionedbefore,andalthoughthisfactisn’tanythingnew–andscholarsshouldn’ttakealltheblame–Ithinkithasn’treceivedsufficientattentionandcriticism,whichcouldbeduetothefactmostscholarsmaintaina»contemplativestance«whererealityisindependentofone’sownwillandaction,thatsomehowblindsthescholar.

6

Knowledgeandaction–theconstitutionofsocialrealityAlthoughobjectificationisanecessarymomentinanyconsciousattempttotranscendtheself,itisofcoursenotasufficientone.Asweacknowledgethismoment,wemustmovebeyondittoaskfurtherquestionsconcerningthekindofobjectificationofothersandofourselvesthatweasscholarscreate.Thesequestionsareparticularlyvitalwhenwephrasethemwithreferencetocontextswhereoursocialactionismostimmediateandmostsuspectinourinteractionwithpeople.Therehavebeensomeattemptstocontest»theabstractother«byscholarswhofeelthelossoftheother’s»humanity«andlongforaconcreteexpressionoftheother’ssubjectivity.Thislongingfortheconcreteobjectoftenfocusesonthe»personaldocument«and»lifehistory«.Yetthisapproachdoesn’trelatetothedialecticalrelationshipbetweensubjectandobject,andastheactivityofthesubjectremainsbeyondscrutinyforgoesthepossibilityofcallingitselfintoquestionandpromotestheillusionofitsowninvulnerability.IagreewithKantthereareaprioricategoriesofpurethoughtunitingpeoplecrossculturesandyetthe»realworld«isanythingbutfixedaseverythingiscontinuallyinflux,evenourownbodies.Ourphysical»I«iscontinuallybeingrepositionedandremademomentbymoment,yetouridentitysomehowseemstoremainintact.Personally,Ithinkwehavetogiveuptheideathatknowledge,reasonandthoughtitselfaresomethingthatexistaprioriandthatrealityismadeofaseparatephenomenathatcanbemeasuredinisolation,categorizedandconnectedinasterilecausalway.MentallifeisalwaysrelationalbecauseitisbasedontheideathatIknow,thatyouknow,thatIknow,thatyouknow.Thedevelopmentofthoughtitselfnecessitatesrelationshiptoothers.Wecanonlyknowourselvesinrelationshiptoothers.Itisbythecontinuousprocessofengagementwithothersthatwebecomewhoweare.Inthissense,weareeachanembodimentofthepartoftheothersexperiencewithusthatwehaveabsorbedintoourselves.Ourrelationshipsformusandmakeuswhoweare.Languageitself,theabilitytoformthoughtswithwords,onlyemergesinrelationshipswithothers.Incontrasttotheconventionalscholar’s»contemplativestance«wheretheselfishiddenandoperatesinarealmdistinctandremovedfromthatofthesubject,theaboveengagedstanceanddialogicalapproachhowthoughtisdevelopedisinconcordancewithMartín‐Barbero(1999)whosuggestsweonlytrulyinvestigatewhataffectus(whicheventuallycomesfromdevotion).AlthoughMartín‐Barbero(1999)mightbeworriedforeigninfluencemightacculturatelocalculturesandtraditions,hisstancelegitimises»self«toengageinresearchifandwhentheselfisaffected.ArturoEscobar(1995)hasrootsinthesamedependencyschoolasMartín‐Barbero(1999)buttriestoestablishabridgebetween»outsiders«whoseekanactiveengagementonbehalfpeopleandthosewhodistancethemselvesto»outsiders«infearof,forexample,»Westernacculturatisation«.Hedoessobyjuxtaposingthetwopositionsthatatfirstglanceseemcontradictory;howisitpossibletohavesomeonefromoutsidewhoisactivelyengagedonbehalfofpeopleandbeguaranteedthisisn’trelatedtooutsideagency?

7

TodosoEscobar(1995)bringsinpost‐structuralism,whichhighlightstheroleoflanguageandmeaningintheconstitutionofsocialreality.Languageanddiscourseareseennotasareflectionofsocialreality,butasconstitutiveofit:itisthroughlanguageanddiscoursethatsocialrealitycomesintobeing,whichmeansthereisavitalconnectionbetweenknowledgeandaction.Thismeansknowledgeisn’tonlysomethingoutthere–itisalso»inside«peopleengagedwithresearch,whichiswhythesitesandmechanismsofknowledgeproductionhavetobeunveiledbecausethewaysknowledgeisproducedeventuallyalsobecomemanifested.Inthisdiscussion,issuesofothernessandempathybecomecrucialandhowweasscholarsunderstandourselvesinrelationtoothers.Withthenotionofothernesscomessharingandunderstandingotherpeopleandwhatkindofstakeweasscholarshaveinourattemptsnotsimplytounderstandothersbutalsotounderstandourselvesfromtheperspectiveofothers.

TheauthenticselfThis,whatIwillcallan»authenticself«,challengestheconceptionsofanindependentselfandother,andcallsintoquestionviewsthatbreakthetiebetweenindividualactionanditssocialcontext.HavingmadethisclarificationInowattempttofurtherdistilwhatatfirstglanceseemedtobeacrossroadbetweeneitherapositionofasubjectwhoassumestheattitudeofthepureobserverofartificially,abstractprocesses,oronewhosolelyreactonthepurelyimmediate,trappedinsubjectivityandactingwithoutreflection.Tobridgethegapbetweenpurescholarly‐orientedresearchandmoreengagedresearch,thefirstbeingconcernedwithimprovingscholarlyintellectualknowledgeandthesecondaimingtoengagewithpeople,Iseehereaschismbetween»researchabout«and»researchwith«.Whereasmostcurrentsocialscienceisresearchabout(socialgroups,processes,events),engagedresearchersaimtomakeresearchwith(i.e.,incollaborationwith)thesesubjects.Pursuingthelatterapproachmeanssocialrealitiesnotaretoperceivedasstatic,highlylocalizedandboundary‐oriented,butasrelationalandhybrid(seee.g.Appadurai1990andhisfive»scapes«).InlinewithZerubavel(1997)whomadethestatementthatsincethesocialworldisregardedasnaturalonlybythosewhohappentoinhabititandthereforetakeitforgranted,themorewecangainaccesstosocialworldsthataredifferentfromtheonewehavecometoregardasagiven,themorewewillbeabletorecognizethesocialnatureofboth.[Authorsnote:includenegotiatingreflexivity(LindaFinlay)]

Practicalimplications:thefieldworksituationInafieldworksituationthedirectpersonalconfrontationwiththeotherunmistakablysubvertsacontemplativeepistemologyasthesubjectattemptstoimplementitsownwill.Inadialogicalfieldworksituation,however,thewilloftheothernecessarilyhastobetakenintoaccount,astheillusionofaconfrontationbetweenself‐contained,»contentless«individualscannotbesustained.Theverynatureofselfandotherandthepossibilityoftheconfrontationitselfemergefromculturalandhistoricalconditions,whichbothenlistandtranscendeachparty.Suchaconfrontationisdialogicalandrun

8

countertoacontemplativeinterpretation.Intheconfrontationbetweenselfandother,bothpartieschangeanddevelopastheyinteractwithoneanother.Inthesuccessionofeventanddialogues,weareabletoseewhatweshouldinthepresentationofthescholar’sfieldworkexperience:acomplexprocessofadjustmentandreadjustment.Thisapproachhaspracticalimplicationsformyfieldworkandquasi‐ethnographicstudiesthataimstocapturequalitativeinformationregardingnorms,feelings,representationsandactionssignifyingmedia’sinfluenceonvariouslevelsofsociallife.MyempiricalmaterialwillbecollectedduringtwoperiodsoffieldworkinNepalfall2009andfall2010andayearinbetweenfieldworkwillallowforinitialanalysisoftheformerfieldworkinordertoinformandadjustthelatterandencompassaperspectiveofchange.Differentqualitativemethodswillbeusedinordertoinvestigateandtriangulatefindingsofthecomplexinterplaybetweeninstitutions,discoursesandpractices.ToapplyadialogicapproachIattempttosituate»facts«withintheresearchprocessandfieldworkcontext.Factsunderstoodasmyinterpretationsandfindingshavingreadandanalysedtranscriptsofinterviewsconductedfall2009.Inmyfall2010fieldstudiesIattempttolocalizerespondentswithwhomIdidqualitativeinterviewsthepreviousyear.Findings,understandings,interpretations,doubts,uncertaintieswillbeconfrontedtherespondentsinordertoseekformsofsocialactionwhichdonotabstractfromthecontextandwillallowtherespondentstocriticallyaddressmyfindings.Listeningtopeople’sreflexivitymeansacknowledgingthatthoseIinterviewmayfacemanyofthesamepuzzlesasIdo,particularlyaboutthenatureofthespacestowhichwesupposedly»belong«(Gaventa,2006).ThisistheresearchstandpointthatGeorgeMarcus(1999)hascalled»complicity«(seediscussioninCouldry,2003).AsMarcusargues,agoodwaytoexpresswhatisatstakein»ethnographic«encountersisa»mutualcuriosityandanxiety«feltbybothresearcherandresearchedabouttheirrelationshiptoa»third«–thatis,tothesiteselsewherethataffect,orevendetermine,theirexperiencesorknowledgehere(Marcus,1999).If»citizenship«,forexample,whichismytopicofmyresearch,potentiallyisdispersedacrossmanypracticesandsites,thenresearchmust,inthatspiritofcomplicity,beopentoarangeofimages,languagesandmodelsofconnection.

9

ReferencesAppadurai,Arjun(1990):DisjunctureandDifferenceintheGlobalCulturalEconomy.FromPublicCultureVol.2,No.2.RetrievedJanuary,2010,http://publicculture.dukejournals.org/cgi/pdf_extract/2/2/1Couldry,Nick(2003):PassingEthnographies:RethinkingtheSitesofAgencyandReflexivityinaMediatedWorld,inPatrickD.MurphyandMarwanKraidy(eds)GlobalMediaStudies:EthnographicPerspectives,pp.40–56.LondonandNewYork:Routledge.Escobar,Arturo(1995):AnthropologyandDevelopment.RetrievedJanuary,2010,www.unc.edu/~aescobar/text/eng/arturoanthropogyanddevelopment.pdfGaventa,John(2006):FindingtheSpacesforChange:APowerAnalysis.IDSBulletinVolume37,Number6.RetrievedJanuary,2010,http://www.forumsyd.org/upload/tmp/kapacitet/amnen_metoder/demokrati/PowerAnalysis_John_Gaventa.pdfMarcus,George(1999):TheUsesofComplicityintheChangingMise‐en‐sceneofAnthropologicalFieldwork,inS.Ortner(ed.)TheFateof‘Culture’:GeertzandBeyond.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPressMartín‐Barbero,Jesús(1999):Aventurasdeuncartógrafomestizoenelcampodelacomunicación.RetrievedSeptember24,2010,fromwww.ull.es/publicaciones/latina/a1999fjl/64jmb.htmUNDPNepalHumanDevelopmentReport2009.RetrievedSeptember24,2010,fromwww.undp.org.np/publication/html/nhdr2009/Zerubavel,Eviatar(1997):Socialmindscapes:aninvitationtocognitivesociology.HarvardUniversityPress