( SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH COUNCIL) Volume 51 / Numbers 2-3/ June-September 1997 •
810 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10019
Internationalization of the Social Sciences and Humanities
submitted on behalf of the new ACLS/SSRC program was under review:
Report on an ACLS/SSRC meeting, April 4-6, 1997
by Itty Abraham and Ronald Kassimir* [The international program of the Council, planned and implemented jointly with the ACLS,·· has opened to mixed reviews~ndorsement and encouragement aplenty (and near universal willingnes to participate by tho e invited to the first round of meetings and activities) but al 0 strong criticism in a number of professional meetings and publications. At time it has been difficult to recognize the program being criticized, as critics have either reported hearsay or cited from old documents that bear little relation to what was propo ed. Other criticism, however, has been closer to the mark. It disputes the wisdom of what we have announced as program goals and procedures. In reflecting on the critici m, it is clear that on one central point the Councils seriously failed to communicate-thus contributing to the misapprehensions and anxieties about the program. We failed to explain that the first step is not the final step. We try again, by quoting a comment I made to Ford Foundation officers a year ago when the propo al
• Itty Abraham. a political scienti t. directs the South Asia and Southeast Asia programs at the Council; Ronald K imir. also a political scientist. directs the Africa program. •• American Council of Learned Societies.
Of one thing I am certain: what we today [July, 1996] propose as the architecture of the program will not in fact unfold in the manner we have outlined. It is in the nature of the program that its "owner hip" will hift from we who write and read propo als to the scholars who will serve on its committees, design its activities, and generally make it happen. There will be much reshaping and a more intellectually vigorous program will emerge than what we have set forth in these early documents. Only a year later, a major event-"the April meeting"-gave truth to this prediction. Smart, committed scholars drawn from around the world came to New York, argued with each other and with the Council, and began to
CONTENTS OF THIS ISSUE •
Interruuionalization of the Social Sciences and Humanities. Illy Abraham and Ronold Ka.uimir 2J Look Who's Talking: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea. uon V. Sillal 3I Fir.;t Round: TIle International Di sertation Field Research Fellowship Program. K~nlon W. Won:~S/~r 37 Identifying a Site and Funding Source. ChrislopMr B. Barrell and J~lfrty W. Cason 42 Current Activities at the Council 45 New Directors and Officers 45 Staff Promotion 45 45 New Staff Appointment
Dialogue on African Literature Southeast Asian Diasporas Crime and Punishment in Southeast Asia Culture. Health. and Human Development
45 46 47
Conference.~ 47 Models of Capitali m and Latin American Development 48 Regional Integration in Central America 48 Social Policy and Citizen hip in Contemporary Central America 49 CGP-SSRC Seminar Series SO Working Group on Cuba 51 51 Recent Council Publication
take ownership. Readers, especially the keptic, are invited to continue the argument, perhap in letters that could be published in a subsequent Ilems.-Kennelh Prewitt. SSRC Pre ident]
As is now widely known, the core international program of the ACLS/SSRC is in a period of tran ition. The program is renewing itself in relation to politicaleconomic-cultural change resulting from force shaping the contemporary world, and in titutional changes in international higher education, which we sum up in our shorthand as "the internationalization of the social sciences and humanities." What shift in global conditions have made mo t clear is that we can no longer count on many of the truths we took for granted about the nature of thing : the Council begin with that uncertainty to ask how we can comprehend anew what once eemed to be beyond question in the world around us. In doing 0, the Council al 0 affirm that the joint program's rai on d'etre i innovation rather than maintenance, through initiating and providing pace for cholarly work that cannot and would not be done el ewhere. The project we et ourselves is much easier to articulate than execute. On the one hand, the ta k i to think through the daunting set of intellectual i ue underlying the new program, including the frequently invoked relationship between the "global and the local." On the other hand, there is the organizational challenge of how to link the variou component of the new program, and indeed, to define what their mandates should be. One of our first step was to articulate the new architecture of the international program. We uggested that one way of reorganizing ourselve in titutionally would be to create "regional advi ory panel " which would bring the per pectives of different world region to bear on the re earch, training, and capacity-building components of the new program. Research agenda- eUing would be conducted primarily through collaborative re earch networks, mobilized to advance critical scholarship on pre sing ubstantive themes by linking cholar acro di cipline , regions, and methodological traditions. Finally, a human capital initiative would oversee and coordinate training and fellowship programs, and provide new thinking and occasional programmatic intervention
into capacity-building for re earch in different world region .1 The April 4-6, 1997 meeting
In order to step away from the formal architecture and to reflect on the intellectual que tions that underlie the new international program, the Council called a meeting of 70 leading cholars from around the world. We a ked them for ideas on how to conceptualize and implement the mis ion of the new program: i.e., how to maintain and extend the mo t vital element of the former program in a new context. Conference participants covered a range of intellectual po itions and institutional experiences within the humanitie and ocial cience. About half are ba ed out ide the United States. They included head of re earch networks, directors of area tudies and international programs, and university admini trators in variou parts of the world. Some had erved in mini terial po ition in government or are/were active in non-governmental organizations. All are accompli hed cholar and most had pent a good part of their career training the next generation of re earchers. The Council ' goal in assembling uch a diverse group was to maximize the range of po ible interpretations of the new program: to ee how term uch as "global-local re earch," "capacity-building," and "internationalization" took on different meaning acro s regions, discipline , and epistemologies, and to asse how the perceived consequences and advantages of focu ing on the e is ues might vary. At the ame time, it wa important to look for convergences acro these categorie : whether there was a sense that the new program was moving in the right direction, and if there was any agreement on how best to implement what had been suggested. The agenda for the meeting was tructured to en ure the engagement of different configuration of cholars and intere ts. It featured a plenary se ion, a et of roundtable discussions around specific themes, and regionally specific meeting .2 The plenary e-
1 See Kenneth Prewitt, "Presidential Items," fttms 50(2-3), JuneSeptember 1996, pp. 31-40. 2 Africa, East A ia, Eurasia, ulin America and the Caribbean, Near and Middle East, South Asia, Southeast A ia, and W, tern EuropelNorth America
51, NUMBERS 2J3
ion included comment on the broade t theme of the meeting, i.e., the internationalization of the ocial cience and the humanitie . Roundtable focu ed on four i ue: (I) creating condition for a global community of cholar ; (2) epistemological que tion and international cholar hip; (3) the nature of globallocal re earch; and (4) old and new audience for cholar hip. Participant at regional meeting were asked to di cu the condition for ocial cience and humanitie re earch in their particular region (training, infrastructure, capacity, linkage to other communitie ), to identify the mo t pre ing regional research agenda , and to con ider how the e might connect to other region 'concern . Thi report addre e the range of propo al , ideas, and clarification that emerged from regional meeting and cro -regional thematic di cu ion. It i not a ummary of tho e di cu ion; of nece sity, we provide a implification and selective account with an eye to drawing out what we think are the mo t important con ideration in the ongoing evolution of the Council 'core international program. In what follow we focu on the content of conver ation around two broad theme which permeated the meeting: (I) how to con tructively facilitate cholarly linkage acro region, disciplines, and re earch communitie (including tho e out ide the academy) while keeping in mind the variou audience that cholarly work in the ocial cience and humanitie could and hould peak to; (2) a careful con ideration of appropriate re earch trategie ,especially the Council 'provi ional tatement about the utility of a global-local research framework, the limits and strength of thi and other formulation in the context of multiple ite of knowledge production, and the po ibility of alternate epistemological frameworks.
I. Linkages, Audiences, Scholarship Communities and networks We have long implicitly as umed that the Councils' network of scholar con tituted an international scholarly community in its own right. Thi meeting was probably one of the fir t occa ion when that assumption was articulated openly and examined
publicly. At one level, we were correct: the Council ' long hi tory of international research and training activitie put u at the center of an international network of cholars, a network that would not have exi ted in thi form but for the Council. At another level, we were wrong: it became clear that a network doe not community make. In fact, the underlying premi e of uch a tatement came under que tion. We were a ked quite bluntly what our conception of community was, and why we felt that the Councils hould be engaged in nurturing one. A number of participant noted that the que tion "What i a community?" i extremely contentiou and embodie too many normative condition to be easily placed at the head of a et of objective for the Council 'international program . Far more effective and feasible, they ugge ted, would be to replace the earch for "community" with the Ie loaded and more practical term "network." Indeed, mo t of the discu ion around the i ue of the interaction of cholarly communitie implied "network" as the principal mode of international scholarly exchange and collaboration. However, if the Council ee their international program a being about, among other things, the development and maintenance of international cholarly network , a number of conditions have to be con idered. While the notion of community is perhaps nece arily ab tract, there are a number of networks of cholars already out there. The e include profes ional organization , basic re earch collaborations, training con ortia. and international policy/advocacy group. Member hip of networks include scholars based in univer itie ,non-governmental ervice organization , political NGO ,governments, multilateral organization , and bu iness con ultancie and corporate group . Some of the e organization are the initiators and con umers of re earch, others are the producers, and at time ome are both. Social scientists tend to be the mo t networked, humani ts the least. Some networks are nationally ba ed, others are quite international in scope. In general, mo t scholarly networks are organized around the study of a single country. In some place , e.g., Latin America. regional institution have been around for orne time but their importance waxes and wane in relation to conditions within national cholarly networks. In other areas, e.g., Southeast A ia.
regional institutions are in the proce of being formed for the first time. In a few case ,e.g., ubSaharan Africa, regional in titutions are near- ub titutes for some national scholarly sy tern which have been gravely weakened for lack of infrastructure and state support. In general, where they do exi t, regional networks typically take conventional geopolitical frames as an organizing principle, e.g., South Asia, Central America. On balance, regional networks are less important than the national scholarly sy tern as the unit for organizing or conducting research, or for training. It should be noted that the organization of American area studies infra tructure is fully consi tent with thi pattern, and indeed help to reinforce it. This opens up the po ibility of a niche for the Council in creating a forum for cro regional studies, as well as the tudy of regions, whether complementing national networks or strengthening nascent regional fora. Given this context, we received constant reminders from many non-U.S. participants that often the most valuable interlocutors for them were other cholars working on the same or imilar substantive que tions-independent of place-and not nece arily those who conducted re earch on their home regions. Yet these kinds of thematic networks are underdeveloped in compari on to arne-region cholarly communities. Further, given the artificiality of mo t world region , we were reminded that the study of the region is not nece arily a good in it elf. While orne re earch problems might be better understood in relation to regional considerations, others might benefit from imaginative mappings of non-proximate "regions" (e.g., the Indian Ocean). Here, too, there appears to be a lag between desirable re earch agendas and cholarly network formation. The Councils received a clear ignal that they could play an important facilitating role by bringing together orne existing but non-intersecting networks. Technologies of communication A neces ary condition upon which networks build and reproduce themselves is the technological capacity for communication, which only a certain number of scholars around the world have the lUXUry of taking for granted. If we consider international thematic networks, we find the majority are located within the developed world, ales er number are
North-South, while the lea t developed network connect the South to it elf. Certainly, the regional di tribution of network de cribed above (North-North; North-South; South-South) can be partially explained by communications link that tie the world together in a ymmetrical way . The density of phone connection , for example, between developed countrie i the highe t, between developed and developing much Ie 0, and among third world countries the least well developed. Thi pattern i exacerbated by the quality of telephone infra tructure which has obviou implication for acce to the Internet. Thus, it is incumbent upon u to con ider and attempt to devise strategie that take into account the political economy of communication. If we are to provide new, imaginative linkages between parts of the world, there may be no alternative to thinking about how we can overcome existing limit of phone, fax, and electronic mail. But lOOKing at physical capital infrastructure is not ufficient, even though it helps in understanding one et of limit on network formation. Languages: communication and training We were forcefully reminded at the meeting that the world can also be divided into spheres of knowledge production, complicated by the constraints of acce s to scholarly languages. Communication implie language, and language is a particularly vexing issue for network formation. Two broad tendencies related to language can be identified. To orne extent, these map significant differences between scholarly communities in North America and el ewhere, and cannot be obviously resolved. First, scholarly exchange is predicated upon international languages of communication. At this point, the dominant international scholarly languages are English and French. In order to speak with colleague in different national settings, read their work, and to have one' publications accessible to an international audience, a common language is a must. But which language(s)? And what does the answer imply for scholars who engage in intellectual activity in languages other than the dominant lingua franca? This condition produces a hierarchy of networks, where scholars with access to vernacular and international languages are more easily a part of international networks than others. It follows also, to the detriment of
cholars both in the North and the South, that orne important cholarly project remain out ide the purview of international cholarly knowledge because they are written up in vernacular language book and journal without international circulation.3 Second, language acqui ition i indi pen able to international re earch. Language offer mode of in ight peculiar to the culture and ociety in que tion, in ight which cannot be gleaned in other way and which are partly 10 t in tran lation. A the domain of cholarly intere t grow, the need for new language experti e grow in corre ponding fa hion. However, acquiring uperior competency in language take a long time, e pecially for non-native peaker. The e tatement are of course among the foundational a umption of American- tyle area tudie . The vitality of area tudie program at many universitie i often measured by the range of language offered, and con iderable in titutional effort i placed in retaining language experti e. In hort, we have to be careful about what we mean when we talk of language as a problem: do we mean in relation to network formation, or in relation to training? Thu ,effort in the direction of expanding the reach of an international cholarly language-language for communication-are quite di tinct from the in titutional intere t of U.S.-ba ed area tudie program -language for re earch and training. "More" language i good for reason of knowledge, and "Ie "language i nece ary for network to be formed. Effective di emination trategie therefore require new thinking about overcoming gap in the exi ting tructure of international communication and knowledge production, and recognizing pattern of asymmetry intrin ic to a field.
Audiences and basic v . applied re earch Regional variation al 0 emerged on the i ue of ba ic v . applied re earch. Some cholar argued that
3 Several p3J1icipants argued that schol3l'S w~ut knowledge of international , holarly language are, in a large nu r f cases, junior schol31'S. Sometime, but not alway. ,thi. n3lTOwing lingui tic horizons i also linked to the decline or weakne. of the quality of graduate training within different national settings. In other word .â€˘ , me junior schol3l'S are also handicapped by the lack of sufficient tmining in the methods and techniq (the rneta-Ianguag of the ocial sciences and hurnanitie. ), precluding their easy acce to international scholarly networlts, even when they peak international languag .
it wa po ible to u tain a harp di tinction between ba ic and applied research when con idering North America or We tern Europe. Their definition of ba ic re earch wa u ually taken to mean di intere ted re earch activitie , u ually without compen ation from a re earch contractor, oriented toward a mall, pecialized, cholarly audience. Others conte ted thi definition of the difference between basic and applied, noting that no cholarship wa truly di intere ted and that donor- pon ored research was equally common in the North. There wa general agreement that cholar ba ed out ide North AmericalWe tern Europe were, out of nece ity, more likely to eek extra-in titutional funding for conducting re earch, often turning to international donor for upport. In mo t part of the world it appears that the line between the academy and the world of ideas and policy was much Ie marked when compared to North America and We tern Europe.4 Thi made it appear omewhat inevitable that cholars working out ide the We t automatically thought of their work a peaking to wider audience . Thi did not nece arily make their work Ie basic, or more applied, which was more a function of the autonomy they were able to maintain from "intere ted" donors. We realized that conceptualizing this i ue a a powerlknowledge relation hip may be more useful than applying basic v . applied re earch distinction to di tingui h between form of cholarship, In fact, orne participant argued that, to the extent that external funding was very important in orne etting, certain kind of tudie were more likely to be carried out because they fit more easily into international â€˘ norm of valuable re earch que tion . In regard to 0 many of the e i ue, e pecially language and the basic-applied di tinction, many conference participant urged that the cholarly world not be con tructed along a impli tic "We tv. the re t," or North-South divide. Indeed, difference between non-We tern-ba ed cholars were al 0 aired,
4 The point W31 extended in some C3l where schol3l'S argued that it w a political neces ity to publi. h for wider, often non-scholarly audience . In other C3l ,it W31 â€˘ ugge. ted that a scholar' choice of disci pline, especially political ience, w a political atement with immediate ramilic:uions outside the academy.
mo t notably the complex and diver e political condition within which they work. In addition, within region , as well a within individual countrie, cholar ' participation in network varied along cleavage of location, di cipline, generation, and gender. The overlap with imilar divide within North American and We tern European in titution i evident. Indeed, a potential role for the new program i to erve a a torehou e of knowledge of cholarly condition within and acro world region . Even if the degree of complexity i daunting, the diver e definition of cholar hip, and what it mean to be a cholar, mu t be taken into account if we are to devi e effective networking trategie .
II. Research Strategies and Knowledge Production Multiple globals and locals During the April meeting, participants made the point that the que tion of network formation could not be con idered independently of the ub tantive intellectual que tion around which network are organized. The Council had put the relation hip between global and local phenomena on the agenda a the overarching rubric within which pecific re earch theme could be identified, and asked participants to debate and evaluate the global-local framework. Coming to grip with the global dominated many di cu ion, in the formal e ion as well as during coffee break and over meal . And it was here that the term "globalization" was often challenged a too all-encompa ing and under- pecified: a prime candidate for "empty- ignifier" tatu . Several participant in the meeting under cored the multiple and inconsi tent meaning of globalization in current u e, e.g., a another way of talking about older concept like internationalization; a a metaphor for the late t expan ion of capital; a a context within which to think about tran national policy i ue uch the environment, migration, and health; a ugge ting a tran formation of the international y tem of tate and new definitions of overeignty; a a ource of fragmentation that might generate counter-hegemonic re i tance movements, etc. Definitional fuzzine was compounded by uncertainty about when cholar meant globalization a omething to be explained
or when they were attempting to account for it conequence . Some que tioned the pre umption of the novelty of the contemporary moment. By eeming to endor e the view that the po t-cold war world wa fundamentally different from other period in recent hi tory, the Council 'focu on the global might play into an ideological po ition, rather than interrogating the "waterhed" view by contrasting the current moment with other hi torical era . On more than one occasion it wa remarked that the variou document announcing the Council 'new international program had marginalized hi tory and hi torical thinking. Thi might force hi torian to formulate re earch que tion driven olely by the demand of pre ent-day problem , leading to mi leading portrayal of the current moment and idelining que tion that problematized the pre ent by a king how the (real and ideological) condition for globalization had emerged and \yere con tructed. Some cholars tre ed how much contemporary globalization wa leading to fragmentation at the local level, and conversely, the ability of powerful centers to pas off their "local" a defining the global experience. Without careful contextualization, academic under tanding of globalization might elide other audience ' ideas of the kind of change that are underway, and 10 e the en e of how globalization i being experienced acro different etting . In tead of reifying globalization as a world phenomenon, we were reminded that there were multiple "global " engaging, and being influenced by, multiple "local." A number of participant reminded u that, globalization notwith tanding, the world was till very much divided along the line of nation- tate . Some scholars aw po itive opportunitie in the focu on the global-local as a re earch trategy. The po ibility of moving beyond exi ting political boundarie , which limit how problem or que tions hould be framed, may lead to the po ibility of producing global hi torie and analy e around theme . In thi regard, what was remarkable was the degree of overlap in the potential global-local re earch que tion that different regional e ion came up with independently. For in tance, a number of panels noted the need for comparative work on governance, democratization, and the hi tory of the public phere; others cited tran national i ue like diasporas and migration
51, NUMBERS 213
as i ue that could not be tudied without thi perpective. More than one panel felt we needed to know much more about the impo ition of common model of economic reform and democratization all over the world, and about the character of cultural change that wa emerging through the global circulation of image and objects in popular culture; it was noted how little cholars know about "globalization from below"-the international crime yndicates, tran national black and grey markets, and drug trafficking. Participant acro di cipline and region eemed to agree that global and local re earch agenda need not exi t, in practice, in a zero-sum relation hip, and indeed could not, if cholarly inquiry wa to advance. With the caveat mentioned above, many affirmed that whatever the force of globalization augured in normative term , they do generate or hape powerful phenomena and ocial proce e that the cholarly community ha not yet truly been able to capture. Nothing 0 neat a a con en u emerged from thi meeting about re earch trategie. Indeed, part of the complexity of the idea of globalization i that normative and analytical per pective appeared to orne participant a intertwined. One po ition, voiced in various way ,wa that the very focu given to proce es of globalization (including the internationalization of the cholarly community) could, intentionally or not, erve to validate them. Thi might occur de pite the Council ' elf-consciou con truing of global force as an empirical reality that create winner and 10 er , that fragment a well a unite. Maintaining uch a ubtle, "neutral" view may be difficult given the triumphali m of 0 much globalization di course outside the narrow confine of the academy.
Relations between research communities Great care mu t be taken in e tabli hing the relationship of the global to the local if it i to guide a broader intellectual agenda. Otherwi e the relationhip between different re earch communitie , and the network they con truct, will continue to mirror global inequitie . Several participant argued that global force can all too ea i1y be repre ented a the ource of ocial, cultural, political, and economic dynamism, while the local icon tructed a lacking it own capacity for action or for shaping global proce e. Some voiced the fear that the developing Ju ElSEP'rnMBER 1997
world-<:oded a local-would be een as the ource of data while We tern cholarship-coded as global-would be een as the "natural" ource of theory. Thi rai ed the que tion of what kinds of collaboration are po ible when differences in power and acce to resources are part of almo t every North-South cholarly relation hip. Hence, while there was al 0 a sen e that an emphasi on the global might privilege certain type of epi temologie over other , for mo t non-We tern cholars the i ue wa much more one of power rather than knowledge. Thu , while there was much debate about epi temologie at the meeting, divi ion did not fall automatically along regional or North-South line, but were often produced along di ciplinary lines. More broadly, tho e from di cipline in which field reearch i mo t central envi ioned the impo ition of externally framed re earch agendas over local one unle a great deal of reflexivity was exercised. A few aw thi tendency as having organizational conequence : if the global i emphasized at the ex pen e of the local, it i likely to lead a few very big initiative in re earch planning, rather than many mailer but more diverse effort .
III. In Lieu of Conclusions It would be premature to identify unambiguously the likely effects of the April meeting on the proviional architecture of the Councils' new international program. In lieu of "hard" conclu ion , we propo e to addres the changing interrelation of four core characteri tic of the international program in light of the di cu ion above. It could be said that the international program at the Councils has always been characterized by a focus on area tudie, on the region as a unit of analysi ,on the need to peak to cholarly audience, and on the centrality of interdi ciplinarity in cholar hip. How might the e underlying characteri tic be affected as we adapt the new architecture to reflect concerns and ugge tion rai ed at the meeting? The move to internationalization could well affect traditional conceptions of area tudie in a number of way . While the new international program do not imply any 10 of commitment to the primacy of deep hi torieal, cultural, and ocial undertanding of all regions of the world, adopting an ITEMsI29
international tance doe mean being sen itive to different and occasionally competing intere ts between U.S.-based area tudie and "the tudy of areas" a an international enterpri e. A in the case of language, effort to promote language a a mean of communication are quite distinct from effort to expand the range of language offered for training. I ue identified a important gap , e.g., regional and cro regional tudies, the need to connect non-intersecting networks of cholars, and to take eriou Iy a ymmetric relation of scholarly acce to re ource , move the Councils in ignificantly new direction . While the United State will urely remain a critical node in the Council 'network , it may not be the ingle axi connecting cholarly network throughout the world. The international program ha alway worked with a tatic, geopolitical, and territorially-bounded conception of the region. Thi framework i directly under que tion, even as we acknowledge the need for regional discu ion to continue. Scholars reminded u that thematic que tion often produce more informative and challenging conver ation for them, and that thematic connection were too infrequent and too likely to emerge ad hoc. In a irnilar vein, the need to under tand tran national phenomena and non-contiguou region implie that the centrality of the territorially-defined region i no longer as as ured as it once was. In effect, we are opening ourselve up to the po ibility of adopting a more fluid definition of region, whether contemporary or hi torical, than i po ible under a trictly geopolitical regime. Thi i no more than aying that the re earch question under crutiny define the boundarie of the place(s) being examined. We have een how audience for cholarly work vary greatly in different parts of the world. The norm in North America and Western Europe of the insulated academy is easily the exception, not the rule. Not only are academie very much a part of the ebb of ocial relations in mo t countries, but a great deal
of cholarly work i conducted in setting out ide the academy. The great danger in opening up the academy to the e new audience i of course the 10 of intellectual autonomy, e pecially under condition of financial tringency. The Council are thu faced with a difficult balance. On the one hand, we mu t take account of, and engage, new audience . On the other, we mu t en ure reasonable autonomy for cholar to define re earch problem for them elve and to maintain pace for critical voice . If cholars once as umed that the academy wa an in ulated and protected pace dedicated to furthering knowledge, we can no longer be 0 anguine. The que tion i not whether to engage multiple audience , but how and on what term . The international program i ,a always, committed to interdi ciplinarity as an organizing principle for it re earch planning activitie , e pecially ince univer itie are till organized around di ciplinary department . The Council continue to act as a home for conver ation that are difficult to conduct for mo t cholar for reason of di cipline, in titution, and locality. Invoking the utility of interdi ciplinarity, however, doe not get u clo er to performing it. Under condition when global-local interaction are o varied and complex, the intellectual rationale underlying interdi ciplinarity can apply not only to different di cipline (including the natural science ), but al 0 to variation acro region, language, seniority, in titution ,and 0 on. What we eem to be moving toward i a di tinctly different way of comprehending ocial phenomena and how we organize in relation to them. Whether contemporary or deeply hi tori cal, this i a way of envi ioning the world that di turb our u ual veritie about fixity, stasi , equilibrium, geography, and order. The April meeting, while till being dige ted, will have profound effects on how the Council 'core international program engages the ongoing internationalization of the social cience and humanitie . â€˘
Look Who's Talking Nuclear diplomacy with North Korea by Leon V. Sigal* In June 1994, the United State went to the brink of war in its effort to halt nuclear-anning by North Korea. A the United State ought United Nation approval of economic anction , Pre ident Clinton decided to di patch ub tantial reinforcement to Korea and the Pentagon prepared plan to attack the North' nuclear facilitie . The e tep were very likely to trigger mobilization by North Korea, ri king a war that neither ide intended. The danger wa averted when fonner Pre ident Jimmy Carter went to Pyongyang, publicly renounced the anction trategy, and per uaded North Korean leader Kim II Sung to freeze hi nuclear program. Bilateral talk between the United State and North Korea led to the October 1994 Agreed Framework, which, if faithfully implemented, will end nuclear-anning by Pyongyang. The hi tory of American nuclear diplomacy with North Korea ha been widely mi read. At any time from 1992 on, North Korea could have hut down it nuclear reactor at Yongbyon, removed pent fuel rod , and reproce ed them, extracting plutonium to make five or ix nuclear weapon . It did not. For a country uppo edly hell-bent on bomb-making, it elfre traint eem difficult to explain. North Korea' action , in tead, could be een a ign that it wa trying to trade in it nuclear weapon program for what it may have thought it needed more- ecurity, political, and economic tie to the United State . Per uading the North to give up it que t would require diplomatic give-and-take that combined reasurance with conditional reciprocity, a promi e of inducements on condition that it accept nuclear re traint .
â€˘ Leon v. Sigal i a con. ultant at the SSRC and an adjunct professor of intern tional politic at Columbia University' School of International and Public Affairs. Thi article i based on a talk given by Mr. Sigal the SSRC in January 1997 and i derived from hi . tudy. Disarming Stran/:us: Nucl~ar Diplomacy with Nonh Kor~a . fonhcoming from Princeton University Pres . The author i. grateful to the Rockefeller Foundation and the W. Alton Jones Foundation for financial uppon . and to the Social Science Research Council for rving the ho institution for this research.
Yet for four year , the United State could not bring it elf to engage in u tained diplomatic giveand-take. It in i ted that North Korea comply with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and allow full nuclear in pection a a precondition for talk , then entered into talk with extreme reluctance. Even when it engaged in negotiation , it wa unwilling to pecify what it would give North Korea in return for abandoning nuclear-arming. When the United State did make commitments, they were not always kept, often because it was dependent on others to fulfill them. It took four year of failed attempt at coercive diplomacy before Wa hington finally began cooperating with Pyongyang in the ummer of 1994. Even then, the breakthrough came as the re ult of a private initiative-Track II diplomacy by fonner pre ident Carter. Carter, backed by a handful of nongovernmental organization , overturned American policy by repUdiating the anction trategy and revived chance for a diplomatic deal. Yet hi efforts were widely di paraged, even by orne top official of the Clinton Admini tration. Pre ident Clinton, to hi credit, took advantage of the Carter initiative to change course and engage in diplomatic give-and-take. He was bitterly as ailed for doing o. In the face of evere critici m, with little upport from the American foreign policy e tabli hment, the admini tration eventually got North Korea to agree to halt and roll back it nuclear arms program in return for gradual nonnalization of political and economic relation , con truction of replacement reactors to generate nuclear power, and a upply of heavy fuel oil in the interim. The agreement could be the tart of a fundamental tran fonnation on the Korean pen in ula, ending the cold war confrontation there. American unwillingne to engage in nuclear diplomacy with North Korea i partly explained by the power of ideas and the weakne of expertise in foreign policymaking.
Shared images of nuclear diplomacy Four images widely hared in the American foreign policy e tabli hment haped the politics of nuclear diplomacy in the United State : fir t, that "rogue tates" with an aggre ive intent in acquiring nuclear ann are the main proliferation menace; econd, that as an archetypal rogue tate, and an oldJreMs/31
fashioned communi t one at that, North Korea wa ho tile to the United State and detennined to proceed with nuclear-anning; third, that once a state decide to build the bomb, it cannot be induced to top; and fourth, that the only way to get tate to abandon their nuclear ambition i to demonize them a outlaw and force them to di ann-the crime-andpuni hment approach to proliferation. Given the endemic uncertainty about North Korean nuclear capabilitie and intention and the hi tory of ho tility, these certitude filled the vacuum of knowledge of North Korea for policymaker . Even when their grip on policymaker 'mind began to loosen by the fall of 1993, the four hared image retained their hold over nearly all of the member of the academic community who commented on nuclear diplomacy in the new media. Oppo it ion to any accommodation with North Korea among vocal member of the academic community and the re t of the foreign policy e tabli hment predi po ed policymaker to favor the crime-and-puni hment approach over diplomatic give-and-take. The four hared image of nuclear diplomacy are rooted in rival intellectual tradition that dominate American academic approache to international politic : Iiberali m and reali m. The liberal tradition, as e pou ed by Woodrow Wil on and hi many follower , empha ize the common intere t of tate and the potential for cooperation in international ociety. It i a core tenet of Iiberali m that conflict and war are cau ed by tate with flawed dome tic tructure . Democratic tate with market-oriented economie ,liberal believe, are likely to cooperate with one another, and conver ely, exceedingly unlikely to go to war. The same cannot be aid of a corporati t tate with a command economy, authoritarian rule, and a cult of personality. Nor doe it apply to a gam on tate with ob e ive ecrecy and repressive internal urveillance that allot a izable hare of its budget to military purpo e . For liberal , North Korea wa a decidedly bad tate, a rogue that could not be tru ted to cooperate but, instead, wa prone to wage war on it neighbor. For liberal who embraced a live-and-Iet-live policy toward the re t of the world, North Korea wa an unattractive nui ance, not much to worry about, and be t left alone. Other liberal of a more cru ading bent wanted to pry open thi last outpo t of commu32\1TEMS
ni m and tran fonn it, or else compel it to collap e. The crime-and-puni hment approach to proliferation had orne appeal to liberal of both persuasion , who hare a legalistic view of international relation . The other intellectual ource of the four hared image of nuclear diplomacy i reali m. Reali m' central contention i that the tructure of relation among tate, not the dome tic tructure within tate , be t explain international relation . Starting from the premi e of international anarchy, reali t account for war and peace by the operation of the balance of power. Reali m treats tate a if they were unitary actor, calculating the mo t efficient way to achieve their national intere t , above all, military ecurity. Reali m took a primitive fonn in the public debate about North Korea. Reali t view the world a a war of all again t all. They were quick to dismi cooperation a , in a word, unreali tic and to favor coercive diplomacy. To mo t reali t it wa elf-evident that nuclear ann make their po e or ecure by 0 trengthening deterrence to make war unthinkable. They favored deterring a nuclear-anning North Korea by a conventional buildup and nuclear threat . Other realist feared that North Korea wa too irrational to deter. They wanted North Korea di anned but de paired of di anning it hort of all-out war. Few reali t were willing to entertain an alternative hypothe i , namely, that countrie might al 0 uffer from economic and political in ecuritie and might be moved by economic and political inducement to abandon their nuclear ambition . The reach of reali m and liberali m extended well beyond the wall of academe. The cholarly di cour e helped infonn the public di cour e, both becau e American foreign policy maker were chooled in reali m and liberali m and becau e orne of the leading scholarly proponent of the e ideas took part in the public debate that affected official and popular attitude toward nuclear diplomacy with North Korea. The taying power of these ideas impeded diplomatic give-and-take with North Korea. So did the weakne of American experti e on North Korea.
The proliferation experts Two group of peciali t influenced what the new media reported and what the foreign policy e tabli hment knew about nuclear diplomacy with VOLUME
51, NUMBERS 113
North Korea: proliferation expert and Korea experts. For very different rea on both group lent upport to coercive diplomacy and oppo ed cooperation. Foundation funding largely went to expert who were part of the problem, not part of the olution. Expert on proliferation in the academic world, think tank , and other nongovernmental organization , eemed to pend mo t of their time calling attention to the problem in tead of eeking a olution. The expert ' attention-getting helped mobilize upport for coercive measure , ranging from economic anction and antimi i1e de fen e to air trike and other form of counterproliferation. That wa not nece arily their intention. Mo t proliferation expert acted as if they had an intere t in drawing attention to the problem for it own ake, not becau e they had a policy to advocate. Simply documenting the problem of proliferation i difficult enough without trying to olve it. Would-be proliferator conduct urreptitiou bomb program di gui ed a peaceful power plant or re earch. They are careful to cloak their purcha e of dual-u e equipment and nuclear material. So are the eller of uch ware . Intelligence agencie and even international in pector do unearth u piciou pattern and practice and occasionally conduct briefing for out ide experts, but they are often reluctant to di clo e their di coverie for fear of revealing their ource and method . A a re ult, nongovernmental expert rely on unauthorized di clo ure to upplement what they can glean from publicly available ource. Often the leak are motivated, ometimes to probe proliferator ' reaction , ometimes to publicize a personal a e ment that was rejected by other intelligence analy t, ometime to pu h a policy. Nongovernmental expert may not hare the leaker ' motivation but they are willing to be used. They erve as intermediarie ,broker of information, gathering it from open and official ources and packaging it for di emination to the new media and Congre . Documenting the problem attract publicity and foundation funding. A reputation for crupulou attention to detail till matter to orne proliferation expert , but given the new media's inattention to pa t performance and its preoccupation with bumper- ticker logan , all too many find that overstatement i the way to fame and fortune in the experti e bu ine .
Experts who do promote their own olution tend to apply the arne prescriptive template to all potential proliferators: denial and afeguard to keep technology and material from being u ed in bomb-making. That template did not fit the circum tance in North Korea, however. Its nuclear program was too far along for denial to work. It already had the know-how, the technology, and the nuclear reactor fuel it needed to make bomb . Safeguarding it nuclear material and facilitie again t mi u e wa a feasible policy, but how to do that was the main point of contention in nuclear diplomacy. North Korea was unwilling to comply with the demand of the International Atomic Energy Agency without getting omething in return. With few exception , nonproliferation expert oppo ed giving North Korea what it wanted. To nonproliferation hawk North Korea' defiance howed the bankruptcy of traditional nonproliferation policie . To them the I.A.E.A. was either feckle or tooth Ie . North Korea could alway throw out the I.A.E.A. in pector and re ume bomb-making or build a clande tine nuclear program in addition to it known facilitie . If the United State was eriou about keeping North Korea from getting a bomb, it had to apply coercion. For orne hawk , nonproliferation became little more than a pretext for de troying North Korea and unifying the Korean Penin ula. More traditional nonproliferation expert wanted to trengthen the I.A.E.A. by upholding its right to in pect. Yet that led them to treat noncompliance as a crime that de erved puni hment. A deal that rewarded North Korea for noncompliance wa damaging to the nonproliferation regime. Some al 0 found fault with the form of the reward: replacement reactor, which may have been proliferation-re i tant but were not proliferation-proof, and might end up only po tponing the problem. Why were uch experts 0 disinclined to deal? They tended to treat proliferation a a technical and functional problem. On their map of the world, there were no nation ,ju t potential proliferation problem . In ofar as they focu ed on North Korea, or any other country, they tudied the details of it nuclear capabilitie , not it internal politic, it foreign policy, or it motive for acting the way that it did. Yet preventing proliferation required an intimate knowledge of North Korea' peculiar fears, want, and need , not ju t the plutonium-producing potential of it reactor.
The proliferation expert 'judgment about the pro pect for negotiating with North Korea may have been colored by their own re earch on it bombmaking effort . Inferring a country' nuclear intention from it nuclear capabilitie , they were inclined to doubt the pro pect for di arming. For the out ide experts to do their job, they also had to maintain clo e contact with the I.A.E.A. and American official working on nonproliferation, e pecially in the intelligence community. Dependent on them for information, out ider tended to ab orb the in iders' per pective . To the I.A.E.A. the crime-andpuni hment approach wa the appropriate re pon e to North Korean noncompliance. Until late 1993 it wa al 0 the policy of the United State. Mo t of the intelligence community, which regarded it main nonproliferation mi ion as denial, had concluded that diplomacy would not work. Nongovernmental expert came to hare the e view. To challenge them wa to ri k being di mis ed as naive or out of touch, and wor e, having contact and cooperation curtailed. For much of the expert community, open di ent from government policy wa a ri k, especially without influential support from opponent in Congre . To judge from the contents of new article and op-ed ,di ent in the community of proliferation expert , with few exception , took the form of more dire as e sments of the problem rather than a more imaginative view of the solution.
The Korea experts To mo t Korea expert the problem was North Korea, not proliferation, and the solution wa to do whatever South Korea thought be t. A few di enter from the dominant view were critical to re olving the cri is. Some Korea expert were American rai ed in Korea, mo tly the children of mis ionarie . Other had erved in Korea in an official capacity. Many had per onal tie and privileged access to officials in Seoul. Some spoke the language and followed the Korean pre and could interpret current South Korean thinking to American officials. The problem wa that most South Korean official and nearly all the South Korean pre were oppo ed to direct negotiations between the United State and North Korea. The South Korean government was al 0 as iduou in cultivating American Korea-watchers and u ing a 34\1TEMS
cadre of "American-handler ," many of them educated in the United State, to keep in contact and lobby on its behalf. In contrast, remarkably few Korea expert had any contact at all with North Korean official po ted at the United Nation and el ewhere. A a con equence, the Korea experts were u ually good at anticipating trouble from Seoul, but eldom helpful in under tanding Pyongyang. They were expert on South Korea. With few exceptions they embraced South Korean view of North Korea. Mo t aw pre ervation of good relation with South Korea a the dominant American intere t, one far more important than keeping North Korea non-nuclear. They al 0 deplored the lack of Korea experti e in the enior rank of Wa hington officialdom. They had a point, but they made too much of it. At the height of the nuclear crisis the Korea country de k had two of the State Department' most fluent Korea- peakers, but it wa manned mo tly by Foreign Service officer who poke Japane e, not Korean. The Korea experts' olution wa que tionable. They recommended the appointment of omeone who pecialized in Korea, or at least Northeast A ia, to replace Robert Gallucci, a nonproliferation speciali t, as the American negotiator. The di enting Korea expert fell into roughly two camp : tho e who thought that American policy hould aim primarily at improving relation between the two Korea rather than preventing proliferation and tho e who favored cooperative engagement with North Korea. Among the mo t prominent di enting Korea expert who backed engagement were Selig Harri on, Jame Laney, Donald Gregg, and Bruce Cuming . They were the exception . Mo t of the di enters were Americans of Korean extraction, often fir t-generation immigrant , who tended to be marginalized in the policy debate, both by the other expert and by U.S. officials. Some evidence for the e contentions come from a tudy by the A ia Society commissioned by the Rockefeller Foundation on the feasibility of cooperating with North Korea. The study canvassed 150 pol icymakers, nongovernmental experts, and others in the United State , South Korea, and Japan between October 19 and November 10, 1993. Of the 150 contacted, 40 were identified as East A ia experts. Another 41 were identified a Korea speciali ts and VOLUME
13 of them were of Korean extraction. The majority of the Korea expert favored the carrot-and- tick approach then being pur ued by Wa hington and Seoul. A ub tantial minority thought that no inducements would ever convince the North to abandon bomb-making. A mall minority aw South Korea as a ource of inducement or in i ted that any inducement be coordinated with Seoul. By contrast, at lea t eight of the 13 expert of Korean extraction unequivocally favored offering inducement to North Korea. Thi case ugge t that a a polyglot ociety, the United State ha much to learn about the world from the immigrant who are drawn to it hore, but only if it Ii ten , and not ju t to a cho en few.
Open covenants, privately arrived at Given the reluctance of the U.S. government to engage in u tained diplomatic give-and-take with North Korea and the ho tility of the American foreign policy establi hment to the idea, one way out of the impas e was to have nongovernmental organization and private citizen probe North Korea through Track II diplomacy. Some government official re ent the intru ion of out ider into foreign policymaking. More than profe sional jealousy or the prerogative of office i at i ue. Officials often look upon out iders as ource of political pre ure rather than as helpful informant and intermediarie . Knowledge, after all, i power. Out iders often have a de ire to demon trate influence, inten e policy preference , and a tendency to hear what they want to hear from foreigner . Officials, who typically have acce to a wide range of information ource on other countries, worry that out ider may all too willingly let them elve be used by foreign governments, who can di own an unofficial contact more readily than they can an official one. For the e reason ,official may be all too ready to di count or di credit nongovernmental ources of information, e pecially when it i di crepant with their own. Still, there i much to be gained from nongovernmental approaches. Out iders may feel freer to peak their mind to foreigners and probe more deeply than official can. Official act under in truction, which keep them on a hort leash. They are al 0 wary, knowing that a probe may reveal as much as it gather . In cases where U.S. intelligence i limited, Track
II diplomacy can open a window onto a closed ociety. With the ea ing of the ban on travel in 1988, American began vi iting North Korea in larger number and a few North Korean attended conference in the United State. They served as extra-governmental channels of communication between Wa hington and Pyongyang, and between Seoul and Pyongyang. While these exchange were example of Track 11 diplomacy, broadly con trued, they had little direct effect on the policie of any of tho e governments. In ofar a they had any di cernible influence, it wa to inform a wider group of experts in the United State and in North and South Korea who interacted with policy maker . One Korean-American, K.A. Namkung, took Track II diplomacy a step further. Namkung, who hold a doctorate in hi tory from the University of California, Berkeley, directed the Project on the United State and Ea t A ia, then at Seton Hall University, now at the Atlantic Council. He became an important gobetween. In late May 1993, ju t before high-level talk between the United State and North Korea were to resume in New York, Namkung made hi fifth vi it to Pyongyang. He met with Fir t Deputy Foreign Mini ter Kang Sok Ju and other member of the D.P.R.K. negotiating team as they were about to board a plane for New York. It was then that Namkung had hi fir t detailed di cu ion with North Korean official on i ue to be addre ed in the negotiation . From the e conver ation he concluded that Pyongyang would po tpone it withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, but try to delay in pection , pending the conclu ion of an agreement in high-level talks with the United State . Namkung encouraged hi North Korean interlocutors to remain partially in the treaty. He al 0 urpri ed them by urging them to try for a joint taternent with the United State in the coming round of high-level talks. The North Korean a ked him to ugge t communique language that the United State might find acceptable, and Namkung, drawing on the wording of the U.N. Charter, jotted down a few broad principle on a heet of paper and handed it to the North Korean . They became the basi of the June II, 1993, U.S.-D.P.R.K. joint tatement, the ftf t ever between the two countrie , in which North Korea announced it was u pending its withdrawal from the Nuclear l-rnMsI35
Nonproliferation Treaty in return for high-level talk with the United State. Jimmy Carter took Track II diplomacy much further. When Carter left for Pyongyang on June 12, 1994, talk with North Korea had broken off. The I.A.E.A., unable to get North Korea to comply fully with the Nonproliferation Treaty, had referred the matter to the U.N. Security Council, where the United State wa trying, without ucce ,to get China' upport for anction again t North Korea. Pyongyang had repeatedly denounced anction a "a declaration of war." It had ju t announced the expulion of the I.A.E.A. in pectors who were monitoring the Yongbyon reactor to prevent the diversion of pent fuel for the production of bomb . A a precaution in the event that anction were impo ed, the Clinton admini tration wa on the verge of di patching reinforcement to Korea. Carter returned to the United State with Kim II Sung' per onal pledge to freeze North Korea' nuclear program, allowing the in pectors to remain in place and monitor compliance, and to discu dimantlement of it reactor and reproce ing plant in high-level talks with the United State . Mo t important of all, he repudiated the anction trategy publicly. Once he did that, Security Council upport
for sanction evaporated. Although the Clinton admini tration pre sed on with its campaign for anction ,countrie that had previou Iy been unenthu ia tic about coercive diplomacy were now firmly committed to temporizing. That allowed diplomatic give-and-take to re ume. That private citizen could make national ecurity policy on their own is rare enough. That they could overturn exi ting policy and accompli h what the government could not i virtually unprecedented in recent years. The Carter mi ion wa a triumph of Track II diplomacy. To judge from this case, an expert i omeone who give policy makers good rea on why omething is a problem and why a propo ed olution cannot work. An academic i omeone who i not intere ted in the problem or the olution. A journali t i omeone who can alway find an expert to quote. A foundation executive fund expert. The foreign policy e tabli hment i populated by people who read what journali ts write and believe what experts ay. Succe in nuclear diplomacy with North Korea depended on people who did not fit these de criptions. They helped tum the American government around to negotiate an agreement that, if fully implemented, will keep North Korea from nuclear-arming. â€˘
51, NUMBERS 2/3
First Round: The International Dissertation Field Research Fellowship Program by Kenton W. Worcester* The election committee for the new SSRClACLSI International Oi ertation Field Re earch Fellow hip Program (IDRF) held its fir t meeting on April 26-27, 1997, to award fellow hip for area-ba ed re earch. The committee named 45 fellow for 1997, out of a pool of nearly 900 application . The IORF program wa launched in 1996 and provide upport for ocial scienti t and humani t to conduct di ertation field re earch in all area and regions of the world. With funding from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the fellow hip enable doctoral candidate to u e their knowledge of distinctive area , culture , language , economie , politie , and historical experience , in combination with their di ciplinary training, to addre i ue that tran cend their di cipline or area pecializations. Following the completion of field re earch, fellows participate in multidi ciplinary work hop that addre theme that resonate acro culture and region . The program i founded on the premi e that field re earch i a critical component of graduate training in the humanitie and ocial cience. Support for field re earch enables an influential cro - ection of the next generation of cholars to jump- tart their careers with ub tantial knowledge about orne part of the world outside the United State. Yet the fellowhip i al 0 de igned to ensure that awardees develop the capacity for cumulation, aggregation, and compari on. It i intended to help fellow u e area knowledge to make en e of global and transnational phenomena, and to a e the ways in which global trends hape and structure what occur (and has occurred) in specific place . The ability to identify and extend the comparative and interdisciplinary
â€˘ Kenton W. Worce ter. a political scienti t. i progr:un director of the We tern Europe programs and of the International Di sertation Field Research Fellow hip Program. I American Council of Learned Societi
implications of particular re earch agenda is of pecial ignificance. The program repre ent a major departure from previou SSRCI ACLS dis ertation re earch competitions that were area-focused and administered under the joint area committee tructure. The IDRF con olidate the bulk of the e competitions into a single program. It provide support to propo al that deal with place that once fell outside the area committee structure, uch a Au tralia, the Pacific Islands, and the United States. One of the important feature of the new program i that it support re earch that treats the United State as a case for com pari on, provided that the project require field re earch outside the United State. In it fir t year, the IDRF attracted trong interest, and not a little anxiety, from the cholarly community. Through a variety of mean (phone, fax, mail, e-mail, web), the program received omewhere in the area of 7,000 general inquiries. The program ent out 3,000 application packet and received 883 completed application . A multi-tier review process was e tabli hed that drew on the talent of some 75 screener and a 16-member election committee, chaired by Rayna Rapp, Department of Anthropology, New School for Social Re earch. 2 The 1997 IDRF competition attracted a diver e group of applicant . Twenty-five discipline were represented in the applicant pool, although the figure would become lightly larger if overlapping fields, uch as economics and agricultural economics, were di aggregated. Of the di cipline , the large t percentage of applicants came from anthropology (28 percent), followed by hi tory (27 percent), political CIence (15 percent), ociology (6 percent), and art hi tory (4.5 percent). Nine di cipline are repre ented in the Ii t of awardee . Three di ciplines dominate: anthropology (14 fellow), political cience (10), and hi tory (10).
2 Selection committee: Anthony Appiah. Harvard University; Sara Berry. John Hopkin University; Keith Brown. University of Pittsburgh; Rhonda Cobham-Sander. Amherst College; Laura Engelstein. Princeton University; Elli Goldberg. University of W hington; Ivan Karp. Emory University; Herbert Levine. University of Penn ylvania; Juarez Brandllo Lopes. Mini. try of Labor. Braz.il ; Margaret Nesbit. Vassar College; Sheldon Pollock. University of Chicago; Rayna R pp. New School for Social Research; Richard Salvucci. Trinity College; Juliana Schober. Arizona State University; John Stephens. University of North Carolina. Chapel Hill; Dae-Sook Suh. University of Hawaii. Manoa.
Together with sociology (four) and geography (three), these five di ciplines are re ponsible for 41 fellows, or 91 percent of the total. The other repreented disciplines are art history, economics, literature, and musicology. Applications were received from doctoral candidates at 103 institutions. Of these, 60 are public and 43 are private. A total of 20 univer itie are represented in the list of 45 fellows. Of these, nine are public in titutions and II are private. Five universitie are particularly prominent: University of California, Berkeley; Chicago, Michigan, Columbia, and Harvard. Together the e five in titutions are responsible for 24 fellows, or 53 percent of the total. This pattern of institutional dominance is striking, but a greater level of dispersion is expected in future competitions. Women are a clear majority (62 percent) of the fellows. By way of contrast, only 54 percent of the total applicant pool were women. Forty of the 45 fellows are U.S. citizens or permanent residents. All major world regions are represented in the applicant pool and in the list of fellows. Four regions are particularly prominent in the list of awardees: Latin America/Caribbean (10 fellows), East Asia (six), former Soviet Union (five), and Western Europe (five). A total of 26 fellows (58 percent) are involved in projects that focus on these regions. Interestingly, five fellows, or 11 percent of the total, are engaged in projects that require them to conduct cross-regional
research. The United State i al 0 represented in the research; three fellows propo e to treat an aspect of U.S. history, culture, and politics in a comparative manner. Of the 45 fellows, 23 were in their third year of graduate school when they ubmitted their applications, which means that field research will commence in their fourth year. Thirteen fellows were in their fourth year; seven were in their fifth year; and two were in their second year. Fellow are working on a rich and diverse range of topic , from territorial re tructuring, ocial welfare, and international debt, to folk poetry, religious belief, and intellectuals in China. A number of themes are of broad interest and cut acro area lines. The e include sex role and gender relations; race, racial conflict, and colonial legacies; the impact of global processes on local communities; the invention and re-invention of hi torical memory; the transformation of the nationtate; and shifting forms of social and cultural identity. A a sign of the times, the word "identity" appears in the titles of nine propo al . Several fellows address cross-cultural issues, including migration and migrant communities; global communication systems; ethnic diasporas; and the transmission of ideology. Roughly one-third of the projects are explicitly cross-regional and/or stipulate multiple sites of field research. The methods of study include quantitative analysis, semistructured interviews, historical case studies, participant observation, and network analysis. •
International D· ertation Field Research Fellowsbip Program 1997
D''iScipline, Number or Fellows.
Anthropology History Political Science Sociology Geography Art History Economics Literature Music
14 10 10 4 3
C"JtutnSI . h'Jp, Num be ro r Ft 110ws. US citizens & pennanent reside Non·residents
9-. 7·/ .
Gender, Number or Fellows.
-I. 40 5 45
89-;' 11% 100%
17 28 45
VOLUME 51. NUMBERS 113
rtation Field Research Fellow hip Program 1997 (Continued)
University, Number or Ffllows, -I_ University of California, Berkeley University of Chicago University of Michigan Columbia University Harvard University Massachusetts Institute orTcchnology
New York University Princeton University
5 4 3
University orC.liromia, Los Angeles
University of Pennsylvania University of Washington City University of New York Emory University Johns Hopkins University New School for Social Research Northwestern University Stanford University University ofCalifomia. Santa Cruz University of Florida University of Pittsburgh
r- - - - 4~/.
2 2 2
I I I
2'. 2'. 2'"
-r"""'.-- ---, 2',.
RfJ:lon, - Num be ro r Ff 110ws, -;. I Latin America/Caribbean East Asia Cross-Regional RussiaIFormer Soviet Union I I Westem Europe Near and Middle East I Africa Southeast Asia Eastem Europe South Asia AustraliaINZ North America
I I I I I I
10 6 5 5 5 4
7% 7% 4% 4%
3 2 2
0 0 45
11% 11% 9-1.
NOles Crou-RCJlona/ re(ers 10 prOjects In which field work Will oc= In more Ihon one 'CJIon or III ,.,tllch the rescon:hcr pi ..... to pursue the prOject In countries other than the one specified
cnunuylrCJIon o( udy
East Asia China. Japan. Monaoha. North h ."''''' South Korea. TAIwan South Asla- Banaladesh. Incba. NcpaJ, Pakl
Southeast AsI.~Cambodla. Indonesia. Laos, , lolaYSIa. Myanmar,
Pluhl'PlJIes, Slnppore, Thailand. Vietnam
Internation I D'
Ellen J. Am ter, hi tory, University of Penn ylvania. The Gender of Healing: Medicine in French Colonial Morocco, 1912-1956 Pasquale V. Baccaro, political science, Mas achu eU In tiMe of Technology. Deliberative Union Democracy: Reconciling " In iders" and "Outsiders" within the Italian Union Movement Thoma D. Boell dorff, anthropology, Stanford University. The Gay Archipelago: Tran local Identity, Community, and Citizen hip in Indone ia Ingeborg-Dorothee Brantz, hi tory, University of Chicago. Abattoirs and the City in Nineteenth-Century Europe Paulina Bren, hi tory, New York University. Con uming Past-lime: The Politic of Con umption in 19705 Czecho lovakia Neil J. Brenner, political science, University of Chicago. The Governance of Globalization: Global City Formation and State Territorial Re tructuring in Contemporary Europe Alejandra M. Bronfman, hi tory, Princeton University. From Head-Measuring to Fe tival-Gazing: Thinking about Race in Cuba, 1878-1940 Ethel C. Brook ,political ience, New York University. Tran national Production, Protest and Women's Labor: A Study of the Garment Indu try in Banglade h, EI Salvador, and New York City Cathryn H. Clayton, anthropology, University of California, Santa Cruz. Imagining Macau: Local Identitie in Tran national Formation Diana K. Davi ,geography, University of California, Berkeley. Overgrazing the Range? The Political Ecology of Pastoriali t ' Ethnoveterinary Knowledge and Ecological " Rationality" in Morocco Nara Dillon, political science, University of California, Berkeley. State, Regime, and Social Welfare Policy in Urban China Elise Edward, anthropology, University of Michigan. Ideological Con truction
rtation Field Research FeUow hip Program 1997 Fellow
and Reflection on the Field of Sport: A Study of the Japan Ladies Soccer League Marcia Good Mau t, anthropology, University of Florida. Women and Surgical Birth in Merida, Yucatan Tamar L. Gutner, political science, M achusett In tiMe of Technology. Banking on the Environment: Multilateral Development Bank (MDB ) and Environmental Policymaking in Central and Eastern Europe Nelon C. Hancock, anthropology, Columbia University. Land U ,Land Claim, and the Politic of Indigenou Identitie in Kamchatka, Ru ia Gretchen Helmke, political science, University of Chicago. The Politic of Judicial Independence in Argentina, 19 O-present Matthew J. Hill, anthropology, Univer ity of Chicago. Changing Formation of Race in Republican and Revolutionary Cuba Mala N. Htun, political science, Harvard University. Building the B i of Women' Citizen hip: Legal Reform and the Private Sphere in Latin America Yibing Huang, comparative literature. University of California, Lo Angeles. From "Orphan " to "Bastard ": The Legacy of the Cultural Revolution and Contemporary Chine e Cultural Contradiction Clare A. Ignatow ki, anthropology, University of Penn ylvania. Contested Order: Cultural Politic , Youth, and the Reproduction of Tradition in Cameroon Sarah Je up, anthropology, University of Michigan. Pea ants, Performance, and Local Identity: Shanxi Opera and the Reinvention of Tradition Jennifer A. Johnson-Kuhn, anthropology, Northwe tern University. Studying Well: Catholic Schooling and Reprodu tion in Cameroon Sarvar Kothavala, geography, Univer ity of California, Berkeley. Global Spirit , Local Vintages: The Gene i of the Indian Champagne Indu try and the Re tructuring of
the World Agro-Food Sy tern Charles C. Krusekopf, economic , University ofWa hington. Land Tenure Arrangements and Agricultural Development in Po t-Reform China Anna Krylova, hi tory, John Hopkin University. Gendering Sovet kii Chelovek: The Great Patriotic War and Soviet Identity Tong Soon Lee, mu icology, University of Pitt burgh. Performing Identity: Chinese Street Opera in Singapore Julia F. Lynch, political science, University of California. Berkeley. Social Exclu ion and Collective Parti an Identilie : The Development of Intergenerational Conflict as a New Cleavage in Italy, Spain, and the Netherland William T.S. Mazzarella, anthropology, University of California, Berkeley. Tran national Alchemy: Producing the Global Con umer in Contemporary Indian Adverti ing Michael T. McGovern, anthropology, Emory University. Identilie and the Negotiation of Di placement in Southeastern Guinea, We t Africa W. Flagg Miller, anthropology, University of Michigan. A More Situated Tribalism? Di courses of Identity in Yafi'i Cassette Folk-Poetry, Yemen Ingrid Muan, art hi tory, Columbia University. Citing Angkor: Contemporary Painting in the Age of Restoration (Cambodia) Niall F. 0 Murchu, political science, University of Washington. The Limit of Colonial Power: Briti h Rule and Communal Divi ion in Palestine and Northern Ireland Elizabeth A. Ogle by, geography, University of California, Berkeley. Politics at Work: Agrarian Re tructuring and the Tran formation of the Labor Proce on Guatemalan Sugar Plantation Tania N. Rand, sociology, Princeton University. The Po t-Soviet Family: Sex Roles and Parenthood in Ru ia and Ukraine Reinaldo L. Roman, hi tory, University of
California, Lo Angeles. Fear and Healing: Popular Belief and the Religious Imaginary in Cuba and Puerto Rico Frances A. Rosenfeld, hi tory. Columbia University. Conducting an Occupation: The Briti h in Germany, 1945-1949 Aleeze Sattar, anthropology, New School for Social Re earch. State Formation and the Reconfiguration of Indigenou Communities: Chimborazo, Ecuador, 1830-1875 Alexandra M. Stem, hi tory, University of Chicago. Producing and Reproducing Purity in the Name of Nationhood: Eugenic and Evolutionism in U.S.-
Mexican Relations, 1900-1940 Jame H. Sweet, hi tory, City University of New York. Recreating Africa: Race, Religion, and Sexuality in the Portuguese-African Diaspora, 1441 - 1700 Ayumi Takenaka, sociology, Columbia University. Communities, Identitie , and Network acro s the Pacific Ocean: Japanese-Peruvians in Peru, Japan, and the United States Michael R. Tomz, political science. Harvard University. Sovereign Commitments: The Politics of International Debt There a Truax, anthropology and history,
University of Michigan. Uzbekistan, Modernization, Decolonization, 1917-1997 Greta L. Uehling, anthropology, University of Michigan. The Idea of Homeland among Crimean Tatars in Ukraine and Uzbekistan Andres Villarreal, ociology, University of Chicago. Social Networks and Social Mobilization during the Mexican Revolution Lucia Volk, sociology, Harvard University. Rebuilding National Identity after Sixteen Years of Civil War: How do Young Lebanese Make Meaning Out of Peace?
SSRC路MACARTHUR FOUNDATION FELWWSHIPS ON PEACE AND SECURITY IN A CHANGING WORLD The Social Science Research Council announces two-year di sertation and postdoctoraJ fellow hips for training and research on peace and security in a changing world, under the direction of the Committee on International Peace and Security. These fellowships will support iMovative and interdisciplinary research on the relationships among security ISSUes and worldwide cultural. military, social, economic, environmental, and political changes, and the impact of these changes on issues of international peace and security. Eligibility: There are no citizenship. residency. or nationality requirements. The competition is open to researchers in the sociaJ and behavioral sciences (including history and area studies), the humanities, and the physical and biologicaJ sciences. Researchers in non-academic settings are welcome to apply. Dissertation Fellowships: These fellowships are open to researchers who are fini hing courseworic, examinations. or similar requirements for the Ph.D. or its equivalent. Applicants must complete all requirements for the doctoraJ degree except the
dissertation by June I, 1998. Postdoctoral Fellowships: In most cases, successful applicants will hold the Ph.D. or its equivaJent. However, possession of that degree is not a requirement for lawyers. public servants, journalists, or others who can demonstrate comparable research experience and an ability to contribute to the research literature. This competition is designed for researchers in the first JO years of their postdoctoral careers. Applicants for the postdoctoral fellowship must have received their Ph.D. by March I. 1998.
For Further Inf'ormation and AppUcation Materials
Sodal Science Researcb Coundl Program on International Peace and Security 810 Seventh Avenue New York, NY 10019 pbone: 211-377路2700 In: 211-377路2727 web site: bttp:l.www.lll.C.Ol.l Deadline for receipt of fellowship applications: Friday, November 14, 1997
Identifying a Site and Funding Source by Christopher B. Barrett and Jeffrey W. Cason * Following is an excerpt from Overseas Research: A Practical Guide. by Christopher B. Barrett. a past fellow of the SSRC International Predissertation Fellowship Program (IPFP) and Jeffrey W. Cason. Published this year by The Johns Hopkins University Press. the book examines the nuts-and-bolts of conducting field research outside the United States. The authors discuss everything from predeparture preparations. to fieldwork logistics. to "knowing when to go home." The work draws on interviews with graduate students enrolled in the MacArthur-SSRC scholars program at the University of Wiscollsin. Madison. and 011 reports from former IPFP fellows. The passage reprinted here is concerned with the question of how to identify a site for field re earch. Fieldwork begin at home, and the portion done at home i often no Ie taxing than that accompli hed abroad. Indeed, many scholars find the first tep in a research project the harde t. The initial challenges. ometime daunting, that we explore in thi chapter include selecting a ite and funding a project. We identify the i ues to con ider in the earliest tage of defining and funding an overseas r earch project. In identifying these i ues. we describe orne common ob tacles you can expect and suggest how to navigate ucce fully around them. With the important exception of research projects that are ub umed within a larger research program and evaluation of specific events or projects, the proce of electing a ite generally precede courting funding agencie . Site selection
It i perhap obviou that you need to have a re earch ite before conducting overseas field re earch. After hypothese are preliminarily defined. you mu t decide where. when, and how to inve tigate the que tion(s) at hand. This can be a difficult enterprise as you try to balance personal and profe ional objectives, often in a tate of extreme ignorance. The "homemade" deci ion that re ult sub tantially influence the course of ubsequent fieldwork and, thu , are not to be taken lightly. Certainly ite mu t be cho en because the place intere t you. However, you mu t al 0 con ider the feasibility and future marketability of the re earch project as well as â€˘ au; topher B. Barrett i St te University. Jeffrey W. Cason is ence t Middlebury College. 42\1TEM
personal and family need or preferences. In addition, timing can playa critical role. Obviou ly, the appropriate weighing of alternative profes ional and personal criteria depend on a wide variety of individual circum tances. The appropriate balance among the e criteria does. nonetheles ,vary omewhat predictably acro di cipline and method . For in tance, researchers fielding a formal urvey and aspiring to quantitative data analy i leading to general policy implication typically need to give more attention to how the location or timing of research might affect ample frame con truction or re pondent participation rate . On the other hand, researchers who are undertaking a qualitative ethnography-where they are likely to be in the field for an extended period-may be less concerned with the precise timing of the re earch. In orne ca e , once you decide upon a topic and country for re earch, the ite become obviou . A cholar tudying deci ion-making within the central tate bureaucracy almo t inevitably mu t locate in the national capital. A re earcher tudying a particular sort of economic or cultural activity mu t obviou Iy go to where uch activitie are prominent. Hi tori an generally mu t go to wherever the appropriate documents are archived. But ometime ite selection i far from obvious. One of the coauth r' work on the effects of economic liberalization on rural food marketing and production could have been conducted in any of thou and of town and villages in a ho t of countrie . Especially when the phy ical location of an appropriate ite i relatively unimportant, conideration of timing, feasibility, marketability, and peronal preference weigh heavily in the final choice of a re earch ite. There are a multitude of temporal i ue to con ider in ite selection. Tho e doing rural research mu t pay attention to agricultural calendars, which dictate seasonal labor, migration, and expenditure pattern . Rainy eason can eriou Iy di rupt travel or neces itate extra expenditure for an appropriate vehicle. Political or cultural events, uch a electoral campaign or uncommon fe tival , can heavily influence the environment in which you collect data. The month around or following Chri tmas i "down time" in many Chri tian culture. In I lamic culture, the month of Ramadan can accelerate a re pondent' fatigue in daytime interviewing, forcing much research into hour of darkne . It i important to identify local holiday and vacation period in e tabli hing your fieldwork schedule. Young scholars often overlook the crucial timing i ue of sequencing fieldwork and preparatory literature review at the home in titution. Anxiou to get to the field, many do not leave ufficient time to prepare at home before departing overseas. Although it may appear obviou , many re earchers learn the hard way the value of a complete and careful reading of the relevant empirical and theoretical IitVOLUME 51, N MOERS 2/3
erature available at the home in titution before departure. Thi ave valuable field time otherwise pent collecting uperfluou econdary material or trying to pin down the re earch que tion. One re earcher left for the field only one day after completing his Ph.D. preliminary examination , having done only a kimpy literature review, and ended up with di aslrou re UllS. He reported that a a consequence, "I had only a uperficial under tanding of the place, and I wasted enormou amounts of time and effort collecting material that were indeed available at home. Thi al 0 had a very negative impact on my ability to narrow my re earch topic. A a re ult, I con ider thi to have been my greate t mi take, and if there i anything I will make ure to do in the future, it will be to avoid a repetition of thi experience." Greg White echoe thi point in the narrative below. Another scholar, who did take time to prepare well in advance of hi departure, emph ized the "key importance of adequate prior training in field technique ," which can be central to e tabli rung the feasibility of the initial re-
The Value of Preparlnlat Home You can't underestimate the value of being thoroughly familiar with the resources available at your home institution. Furthermore, with the advent of the Internet. one i increasingly able to map what's available in the field. I was in the field for the first time in 1990, essentially the pre-inlemet era. and I was convinced that my home university's library would not have volumes from the earlyl970s of the superb Annuaire M l'AfrUIrM du Nord. A a .ault, I pent hours poring over the volumes in the archives in Tunisia and France. Of c::ourse, I "wept" when I returned to Madison and found that the library did, indeed. have a full complement of volumes. -Greg White earch de ign and adapting it accordingly. Others noted that an examination of past di sertation based on research in the targeted country can provide valuable lead to data source well as ob cure but useful archival material . In general, the more empirical the nature of a research project, the more focused ite election tend to be at the outset, thu making the research task impler. Yet reearcher with uch an early, clear vi ion of where they will do fieldwork may tart off with an in ufficient theoretical framework, which can lead to aimle empiricism and fru tration. As a corollary the more theoretical the i ues to be investigated, the Ie preci e the re earcher' initial thoughts about an appropriate ite, thu making ite selection more challenging. For scholars of this stripe, a preliminary visit to the field i especially valuable. Thi bring us naturally to con ideration regarding the broader aim of the study that i , to the de ired degree of Ju
pecificity of the re earch project, which i often correlated with it empirical or theoretical roots. Prior research about the elected area can be of enormou value, providing baseline data or, in the be t of case , a foundation for con tructing a longitudinal tudy. One anthropologi t was pleased to find that "the ethnohi toric and ethnographic record for thi area [was] ound, allowing the in ertion of [hi ] research intere ts into a broader analytical map." Preexi ting primary data ets likewise influenced ite election for a number of other, e pecially quantitatively oriented, researchers. The feasibility of the project mu t be e tabli hed clearly and early along at least two dimen ion . First, i the pro pective re earch ite relevant to the hypothese you wi h to te t? Can you get ufficient variation along a number of different axe to control for confounding variable and i olate the relation hip of intere t? Do you have the nece ary language kill to urvive and to fulfill the re earch objective in the research site? Second, can the re earch de ign be implemented logi tically and admini tratively in the propo ed ite? If interregional (much Ie international) communication or tran port are important, can the infrastructure upport project requirements? Simple i ue, like the exi tence of appropriate scale map or electricity can matter enormou Iy to the feasibility of a particular re earch de ign. Admini tratively and intellectually, it i often advantageou to have a ho t country collaborator, 0 you will want to con ider identifying indigenou re earchers conducting imilar work. A central i ue of feasibility concern the acceptability of the re earch topic to a ho t government, hould the re earch require clearance. One scholar reported to the Social Science Re earch Council (SSRC) on hi return from an exploratory re earch trip, "I am more acutely aware of the ... government' en itivity to the i ue I had planned to examine and of the difficultie of carrying out re earch that i not to the government's liking." It became plain to thi individual that his "original research plans would not be feasible without exten ive and risky ubterfuge," and he ubsequently adju ted the research topic and de ign. A a researcher, your nationality influence the feasibility of a given project. "In ider" re earchers (i.e., ho t country native ) often have more exten ive contacts and multiple mean of ati fying logi tical needs. In particular, nationals of the ho t country generally meet Ie s resi tance in ecuring research clearance on potentially inflammatory ubjects than do foreigners, whom the government might con ider in en itive to the ocial and political environment. Your gender can be a factor as well. Several women reported sen ing they had an easier time negotiating bureaucratic ob tacles, albeit for the unfortunate reason that many government do not take female researchers ITEMsl43
seriou Iy enough to con ider them a potential threat. Having raised the i ue of in ider research, we hould note it often carrie Ie tatu profe ionally. Many grantsmakers will not fund re earch in the country of origin or in peripheral communitie within the United State or its territorie . Furthermore, orne potential employers, e pecially academic departments, look down upon those who return to their native land for re earch as if they omehow lacked the courage to tep away from the familiar. In doing 0, they ignore the fact that familiarity can be a valuable as et in research. Indeed, the future marketability of research almo t invariably figure prominently in ite selection, if only ubconsciou Iy. Francisca Jame -Hernandez makes thi claim eloquently in the narrative below. Advi ers and colleague invariably recommend ite for their "policy relevance," pre tige, or potential to publi h the re ults obtained there. Choosing the Research Site
Consciou Iy or not, I submit mo t researchers con ider tatu in choo ing their research topic, field ite. theoretical orientation. and the population tudied. I u pect most deny it. however, believing academe is fundamentally meritocratic, functioning on the free trade of ideas. Even so, it' only realistic and pragmatic to be aware of how ideas are rated better or worse in the intellectual marketplace. The choice of field ite and others made throughout the re earch proces have an impact on the po ibilities of gelling an attentive or knowledgeable academic adviser (if you're a tudent). getting pubIi bed (including acces to publi hers). getting academic appointments, getting grants, getting tenure, and so on. All of these and other con ideration are the cultural capital of the field. Thi said. I don't advocate a choice of field ite based exclu ively on maximum career return .. High cultural capital can be deceptive and i not nece sari\y nurturing of one' intellectual creativity nor of that intangible rarely acknowledged in academe, one' happines. In my view. the choice of field ite i ,ideally, one of pas ion. Where do you feel mo t pas ionate a a researcher? What place gets you excited, warm your cheeks at the thought, and. above all, in pires you to write? What place and population will get you through month of 1000degree plu weather, inte tinal parasite. sexual as ault â€˘ tarantulas for the arachnophobic. or whatever eJ. e it i that will make fieldwork precariou â€˘ dangerous, boring, frightening, enraging, lUpefying, or any of the other potential myriad obstacle that will, inevitably, arise from time to time, if not con tanlly? -Francisca Jame -Hernandez Young ocial cienti ts almo t invariably, and probably wisely, tend to heed uch advice. A Hernandez note , "pas ion" i a powerful altractor
(or repellent) in ite selection. Thi accounts in part for the common phenomenon of overseas volunteers (e.g., Peace Corp ) returning later a scienti ts on a re earch project. Personal and family concern are undoubtedly the mo t understated determinant of research location and timing. Thi i probably becau e scienti t are reluctant to acknowledge anything other than scientific base for ite election. Nonethele , uch concern exert enormou influence over the ultimate choice, and properly o. Heading to the field with a pregnant wife or a hu band not quite fini hed with hi degree i hard on everyone. Taking mall children to malaria- and plague-infested areas border on reckle ne s, and living in a polluted and perhap ho tile city has it own problem . Evacuation tend to be impler and quicker for a ingle adult than for a family in a reearch area ubject to civil trife. Personal and profesional concern are difficult to di entangle. Personal mi ery or tre too often ruin the re earch experience, while a joyful personal experience often contribute to outstanding fieldwork, if only invi ibly. Many re earchers reported that their choice of ite was initially guided by per onal interests, and only the refinement of ite selection wa determined by "profe ional" criteria. The choice of country in which to undertake fieldwork i commonly influenced by dependents' language kill ,profe ional situation, and life tyle. Indeed, one reearcher remarked, only partly in jest, that "the only valid criteria for choo ing [ ite J are an abiding fondne s for the food, mu ic, and people!" Conversely, several people reported not choo ing pro pective ite becau e of seriou concerns about health conditions, security, or the availability of activities to engage accompanying dependents. Researchers with familie understandably place a great premium on finding a place where their dependent can be happy. For some, happine i equated with North American convenience, thereby harply narrowing the range of pro pective field ite. One contributor who took a wife and child to the field freely admitted that, in ite election, "my real rea on were personal, but academic theoretical reasoning matched my practical need perfectly-a rare troke of luck." We uspect hi ite selection process to be far more common than m t researchers publicly acknowledge. That aid, orne disciplined oul swallow hard and, de pite knowing the difficultie of a ite, consciou Iy choose it anyway because of its outstanding research attribute. Some reported that it took a year or more to acclimate to the discomforts of living in, as one researcher described it, "a ort of equatorial hell, a malaria-infested lowland farming center that had been de troyed in the war and then left forgotten for a decade and half." In our observation, unaccompanied fieldworkers are by far mo t likely to exhibit the grit nece ary to make uch a choice. â€˘
Current Activities at the Council New Directors and Officers
New Staff Appointment
At it meeting on June 21. 1997, the Council' board of directors elected Cora B. Marrett, University of Massachusett , as director-at-Iarge. She will erve a three-year term, effective July 1, 1997. Re-elected for a new threeyear term, effective July I, 1997, were Michelle J. White, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, as the representative of the American Economic A ociation, and Su an Fi ke, University of Ma achu ett , Amherst, representing the American P ychological A ociation. The SSRC' officer for 1997-98 were al 0 elected or reelected at the June 21 meeting. Re-elected were: Paul B. Balte , Max Planck In titute for Human Development and Education (Berlin), chair of the board; Barbara Heyn , New York University, vice-chair; Michelle J. White, trea urer; Kenneth Prewitt, SSRC, pre ident; Kri tine M. Dahlberg, SSRC, as i tant treasurer. Iris B. Berger, State Univer ity of New York, Albany, was elected ecretary.
Judith Sedaiti ha been named program director for Eastern Europe and Eurasia, effective July 7, 1997. She will be admini tering a new program that will incorporate orne of the activitie of the former Committee on the Soviet Union and It Succe or State and the Joint Committee on Ea tern Europe under the new SSRC-ACLS international program tructure. Currently a re earch as ociate in the Program on Indu trial Re tructuring and the Political Economy in Ru ia at the Center for International Security and Arm Control at Stanford Un iver ity, M . Sedaiti i a ociologi t who e work intersect with other di cipline . Her field of tudy include economic ociology and organizational theory, network analy i and ocial mobilization, and area pecialization on Ru ia and Eastern Europe. Re earch intere ts include i ue of organizational development, re tructuring, and global alliance . M . Sedaiti received an M.A. in 1982 from the Univer ity of Chicago and a Ph.D. in ociology from Columbia University in 1994. Her doctoral the i was entitled "Spinoff versu Startup Under Market Tran ition: The Development of Po t-Soviet Commodity Exchange Market ." She i a former SSRC grantee and a recipient of a Carnegie Mellon Fellow hip, as well as two fellow hip from the International Re earch Exchanges Board (IREX). She has been pro-
tatr Promotion Mary Byrne McDonnell has been named executive program director, a newly created position at the SSRC. Ms. McDonnell. who currently directs the Council's A ia pr0gram , will assist the president in overall program development and administration.
ject as ociate director for the Sloan Management Foundation and a fellow at the Harriman In titute at Columbia Univer ity. Ms. Sedaiti has publi hed extenively; her mo t recent book i Lithuania: A Rebel Nation (with V. Stanley Vardys), publi hed in January 1997 by We tview Pre
Dialogue on Mrican Literature On April 12-13, 1997, the SSRC African Studie Program held a work hop on "African Literature and Que tion of Power and Knowledge: A Dialogue Between 'Humani t 'and Social Scienti t " at Indiana Univer ity in Bloomington. The work hop wa co pon ored and ho ted by the African Studie Program at the univer ity. The meeting brought together peciali ts in African literary tudie, as well as hi torian and anthropologi t .â€˘ Workshop convener Eileen Julien introduced the main purpose of the meeting as an interrogation of the relation hip between empirical data produced through the fieldwork of historian and ocial cienti t and the knowl-
â€˘ Presenters included Susan Andrade. University of Pittsburgh; Rhonda CobhamSander. Amherst College; Mamadou Diouf. CODESRIA; Simon Gikandi. University of Michigan. Ann Arbor; Jane Guyer. Northw tern University; Nancy Hunt. University of Ariwna; Biodun Jeyifo. Cornell University; Eileen Julien. Indiana University; and Lu' White. Woodrow Wilson Center. Nana WilsonTa oc. School of Oriental and African Studie at the University of London. provided a paper but was unable to attend.
edge of Africa embodied in ae thetic and, e pecially, literary work. Many participant addre ed the connection between African literature and historical and ocial cience knowledge on Africa. On the one hand, African authors often encourage a ocial scientific reading of their text , u ing tropes from, for example, ethnographic and political theory. On the other hand, African literature i u ed as "evidence" of a ort by historian and ocial cientists. Even if not regarded as "data," literary texts can influence way of producing knowledge on Africa; African creative writing i often read as quasiethnographic text. One participant ob erved that, ironically, African literature i more central to anthropology a a di cipline than it i to literary tudie. Even pedagogically, many ocial scientists use African novel when teaching cour e on African hi tory, culture, and politic . Participant at the workhop focu ed on how uch u e of literature, as well a u e of ocial cience by author , may lead to overly impli tic image of African realitie and a narrow range for interpretation of African literary texts. Specific presentations focu ed on tendencie to e entialize "culture" and "women"; other focused on the privileging of "orality" as a ource of knowledge about Africa. The workshop enabled humanit, hi torians and ocial cienti t to elf-con ciou Iy confront how they may read texts differently, and for different purpose . Raising epi temological que tion that separate not only liter46\lTEM
ary peciali t from ocial cienti t , but increasingly ocial cienti ts from each other, the meeting expanded the cope of interdi ciplinary conver ation . Workshop paper are being revi ed for eventual publication in an edited volume to be edited by M . Julien, Mamadou Diouf of the Council for the Development of Social Science Re earch in Africa (CODES RIA), and Biodun Jeyifo of Cornell Univer ity.
Southeast Asian Diasporas A conference entitled "Southeast A ian Diaspora ," wa held at the In titute of Southea t A ian Studie in Singapore on December 5-7,1996.* The meeting was organized by the SSRC Southea t A ia Program in conjunction with the In titute for Southea t A ian Studie in Singapore. Vicente Rafael, Univer ity of California, San Diego, and Diana Wong, Institute of Southeast A ian Studie , Singapore were the conference organizers.
• Participan and d~ cus : Itty Abraham. SSRC; Chung Hoang Chuong. San FranciJ co State University; Verne Dusenbery. Hamline University; lim Harper. lrutitute of Southeast Asian Stud' • Sin pore; Ariel Heryanto. National University of Sing pore; Hue·Tam Ho Tai. Harvard University; Chua Beng Huat. National University of Singapore; Judy Ledgerwood. Northern lIIinoi University; Yen Le Espiritu. University of California. San Diego; Jane Margold. University of Hel inki; Aihwa Ong. University of California. Berkeley; Vicente Rafnel. University of California. San Diego; Teruo Sekimoto. University of Tokyo; Nancy Smith· Hefner. University of M • achu tIS. Boston; Chri tina Szanton·Blanc. Southern A ian Institute. Columbia University; Neferti Tadiar. Duke University: Wee Wan Ling. National Technological University of Singapore; and Diana Wong. In titute of Southeast A ian Studie • Singapore.
In recent year , the "diasporic" ha reemerged as a counterpoint to the "tran national" a a way of mapping populations and flow , the reconfiguration of ocial identitie , and the divergent economie of culture and power that are inherent in va tiy expan ive capitali t market and new technologie of communication and tran portation. The tudy of Southea t A ian diaspora -that i , the live of tho e who have un table and indeterminate tie to the bounded pace on the map called "Southeast A ia"-wa een as a way to come to term not only with the reality of mas movement within and out ide the region, but al 0 with the need to relocate our notion of what count as an "area" at the thre hold of the 21 t century. The conference on Southea t A ian dia poras was conceived a an effort to analyze and account for the con titution and tran formation of the very border of Southea t A ia, again t the backdrop of globalizing development that challenge notion of the local and the national. The II original paper pre ented at the conference explored the di connection between community, culture, and place that the diaspora po Topic included: "Dia poric Imaging and the Condition of Po ibility: Sikhs and the State in Southea t A ia" (Du enbury); "The (Re)Con truction of Gender Relation among Filipino Immigrant in San Diego, California" (E piritu); "Nationali m and Diasporic Con truction of Cambodia" (Ledgerwood); "Longing and Alienation: Identity and Diasporic Experience among Khmer Americans" (Hefner). VOLUME
51, NUMBER 213
Crime and Punishment in Southeast Asia A conference on "Crime and Puni hment: Criminality in Southea t A ia," jointly organized by the SSRC Southeast A ia Program and the Centre for A ian Studie , University of Amsterdam was held on March 20-22, 1997 in Am terdam. It received financial upport from the International In titute of A ian Studie , Univer ity of Leiden. Conference organizer were Vicente Rafael, Univer ity of California, San Diego and Hendrik Maier, University of Leiden.· A number of que tion were addre sed: When wa "crime" invented in Southeast A ia? How has criminality been conceived of in the region? What individuals are cast as "criminals"? How do que tion about criminality relate to inquirie regarding the genealogy of legal y tern acro variou regime? How do juridically determined ideas about self and other settle-a well as un ettIe-the borders of ocial order in Southeast Asian ocieties? Participant , who were drawn from a range of di ciplines, were encouraged to explore the contingency and the malleability of the • Participants and discu sants at the conference included Itty Abraham, SSRC; Benedict Anderson, J hua Barlcer, and Carolyn Hau, Cornell University; Daniel Lev, University of W hington; Hendrile Maier, University of Leiden; Rudolph Mrazele, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; Henle Schulte Nordholt, University of Amsterdam; John Pemberton, Columbia University; Vicente Rafael, University of California. San Diego; Laurie Sears, University of Washington, Seattle; John Sidel, School of Oriental and African Studies; James T. Siegel, Cornell University; Patsy Spyer and Margreet van TIll, University of Amsterdam; Peter Zinoman, University of California, Berkeley.
Ju ElSEPTEMBER 1997
term "criminality" a it occur in variou hi torical moment and cultural setting. Some of the topic di cu sed at the conference included "The Colonial Pri on in Indochina: Comparative Pri on Sy tern and the Vietname e Revolution" (Zinoman); "Who Will Save U From the Law? The Criminal State and the Illegal Alien in the Philippine " (Hau); "The Sound and Vi ion of Local Security in Bandung, We t Java" (Barker); and "Law i as Law Doe : Criminal Procedure in Indone ia" (Lev).
Culture, Health, & Human Development (CHHD) Conferences The primary purpo e of a conference held in San Diego on November 16-18, 1996, was to examine po ible link between the overall ethnopediatric framework already developed by orne member of the CHHD committee, on the one hand, and particular i ue and question in pediatric practice and re earch, on the other.· On the as umption that uch a two-way conver ation would be mutually beneficial, three major topic were examined: infant leeping and crying,
• Participants: Ronald Barr, Montreal Children's H pital; Thomru Boyce, University of Californi Berkeley; James Chisholm, University of Western Au tralia; Suzanne Dixon, Great Falls Clinic; Glenn Aore ,B ton Medical Center; Jacqueline Goodnow, Macquarie University; Ana M gdalen Hurtado, University of New Mexico; James McKenna. Pomona College; Meredith Small, Cornell University; Many Stein, School of Medicine, University of California. San Diego; Edward Tronick, B ton Children's H pita!; Carol Worthman, Emory University.
in the context of everyday pediatric practice; childhood asthma, in the context of national practice guideline ; and child care and feeding, in the context of international health policy. Communicating ethnopediatric to a wide audience via a general trade book wa al 0 di cu ed. Another conference, derived from the committee' "plurali m" agenda, was held on April 5-6, 1997 in Wa hington DC.· Its goal wa to addre the que tion: How much cultural diver ity in family life practice ought to be permi ible within the moral and legal framework of a liberal democratic nation uch a the United State ? Three factor prompted the conference' focal topic. (1) From within the di cipline of anthropology a morally motivated "anticulture" lance has emerged. (2) Within the discipline of con titutionallaw there ha been a renewed intere t in the ten ion between parental versus tate control over the religiou upbringing and education of children, along with a recon ideration of the power of the tate to inculcate value and anction rei igiou ly motivated action .
• Participants: Ronald Barr, Montreal Children's Hospital; Dian B urnrind, University of California, Berkeley; Arthur Eisenburg, New York Civil Liberties Union; Chris Ei gruber, NYU Law School; Jacqueline Goodnow, Macquarie University; Jill Korbin, Case Western Reserve University; Corinne KnIlz, Emory University; Hazel Markus, Stanford University; Usha Menon, Pitzer College; Peggy Miller, Universityof lIlinoi ; Manha MillOW, Harvard Law School; Martin Packer, Duquesne University; Larry Sager, NYU Law School; Brad Shore, Emory University; Richard Shweder, University of Chicago; FJlioc Turiel, University of California, Berkeley; Unni Wikan, University of Oslo; Carol Worthman, Emory University.
(3) There are public policy concern ari ing out of the fact that the United State and many We tern and northern European nation have experienced an influx of immigrant from countrie with cultural and religiou tradition which do not fit ea i1y into the cultural tradition of the ho t countrie . Against thi background, variou cultural practice were examined, e.g., the u e of di ciplinary technique , parent/child co- leeping arrangement , arranged marriage , and the egregation of gender role . The meeting brought together anthropologi ts and cultural p ychologi t , who are knowledgeable about cultural variety in family life practice , with legal cholars intere ted in the relative powers, rights, and re pon ibilitie of the individual, the family, and the" tate" in a plurali tic ociety.
Models of Capitalism and Latin American Development Latin American countrie experienced economic cri e of hi toric proportion during the "10 t decade" of the 1980 . During the 1990 ,countrie throughout the region have had mixed ucce with market-oriented policie de igned to re tore economic growth, but little progre ha been made toward reducing inequality. A May 1997 conference, funded in part by the Ford Foundation and pon ored jointly by the SSRC Program on Latin America and the Univer ityof North Carolina. Chapel Hill, analyzed interaction between growth and equity under diver e model 48\JTEM
of capitali m in advanced indu trial ocietie , in an effort to derive in ight of utility to re earchers focu ing on contemporary Latin America.* More than a dozen original paper , pre ented by economi t , political scienti t ,and ociologi t from Europe, Latin America and the United State, reviewed experience acro five critical area : compettttvene policy, international trade, inve tment promotion and aving, ocial policy, and labor market regulation. Compari on were drawn between approache typical of East A ian, continental European, and Anglo-American model of capita Ii m, on the one hand, and the emerging pattern of economic development in Latin America. Paper illuminated a range of market-enabling policy option available in Latin America and under cored their likely con equence for effort to combine growth and equity in ocio-hi tori-
• ParticipanlJ : Goo B i. Duke University: Renato Bauman. Economic Commi ion for Latin America and the Caribbean. Brazil: Su na ~ pa~ SSRC: Jonathan Hanlyn. University of North Carolina. Chapel Hill: Eric H rshberg. SSRC: Evelyne Huber. University of orth Carolina. Chapel Hill: Kee. van Kersbergen. Free University t Arru terd:un: Herbert Kil<;ehelt. Duke University: Peter Lange. Duke University: Gary Mark! • University of North Carolina. Chapel Hill : John Myle.• Aorida tate University: Joan el n. Overseas Development Council. W hington DC; TJ . Pempel. University of W hington: David Robertson. University of Missouri. St. Loui. : David S kice. WL sen haft. zentrum. Berlin: Brubara Stalling. Economic Comrni ion for Latin America and the Caribbean, Chile: John Stephen. • University of North Carolina. Chapel Hill: John Weeks. University of London: J mes White. University of orth Carolina. Chapel Hill: Michael White. Policy Studi In titutc. London: Meredith WooCumings. Northw tern University; John Zy man, Univcrsity of California. Bcrtclcy.
cal and in titutional context that prevail in Latin America. Revi ion of the paper are now underway, and publication i envi ioned in a volume to be edited by Evelyne Huber, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and Barbara Stalling , UN Economic Commi sion for Latin America and the Caribbean.
Regional Integration in Central America Debate about regional integration ha emerged intermittently ince independence a a central objective of Central American tate, but invariably effort to bring about greater integration have failed. Today, a the region eek to rebuild after a protracted period of political and economic cri i , regional integration i once again being touted a an appropriate trategy for Central American government to forge utained policie for economic growth and to connect the region to the global economy. A part of it continuing effort to promote ocial cientific analye of key i ues facing Central America, the SSRC Program on Latin America spon ored an international conference on regional integration in April 1997. Held at the Centro de Inve tigacione Regionale de Me oamerica (CIRMA) in Antigua. Guatemala, and chaired by Victor BulmerThoma , University of London, the Ford Foundation-funded work hop enabled nearly 20 leading economi t ,political cienti t ,and ociologi t to examine key aspect of the integration proce and to evaluate the likely trend in the future. Participant VOLUME
51 , NUMBER 213
included senior official of the Secretarfa de Integraci6n Econ6mica Centroamericana (SIECA), and the foreign mini ter of Guatemala, Eduardo Stein. * Workshop papers add res ed, among other i sue, public upport for integration, its in titutional underpinnings, and the impact of integration on trade in agriculture, indu try, and ervice ,a well a on environmental cooperation. A volume conisting of everal revi ed conference paper i to be published in Spani h by FLACSO-Co ta Rica, and it i hoped that a ubet of the paper , written by economi ts, will be publi hed as a ection of a leading journal in development economics.
Social Policy and Citizenship in Contemporary Central America In Central America, like el ewhere in Latin America, the role • Conference participants: Victor Bulmer. Thorn ,University of London; Luf Rem~ acere , Inter·American Development Bank, Washington DC; Edgar Chamorro, Permanent Secretariat of the Generol Treaty of Centrol American Economic Integration (SIECA), Gunternnla; ROOolfo Cerd Cruz, CIAPA, Costa Rica; Albeno Enriquez, Fundocion Nocional pam el De. arrollo (FUNDE), EI Salvador; Susnna Espasa, SSRC; Juan Albeno Fuentes, Economic Commi ion for Latin America and the Caribbean, Mexico; Eric Hershberg, SSRC; Anuro Montenegro, Economic Commi ion for Latin America and the Caribbean, Mexico; Ruben N4jern. Permanent Secretariat of the General Treaty of Centml American Economic Integration (SIECA), Guaiemala; Shelton Nicholl , University ofthe We I Indies, Trinidad and Tobago; &lelbeno Torres Rivas, UNDP, Guaternnla; Pablo Rodas, ASIES, Guatemala; Fernando Rueda, Queen Mary and We tfield College, London; Maria Pia Scarfo, University of Pittsburgh; Claudia Schattan, Economic Commi ion for Latin America and the Caribbean, Mexico; Sergio Reuben Soto, University of Costa Rica.
of the tate in directing ocial policy i currently being reevaluated. In part thi reflect the impact of fi cal cri es on central government under pre ure, often from multilateral lending agencie , to recon ider the effectivene and/or efficiency of exi ting approache to service delivery. At the arne time, there are al 0 pre ure from below re ulting from ocial and economic changes in urban and rural areas a ociated with employment re tructuring in rural and urban labor market , new pattern of migration, hift in household tructure, and increa ed female participation in the workforce. Potentially, democratization and the trengthening of gras -root organization lend greater weight to growing demand for local participation in the management of ocial policy. Di cu ion of ocial policie in the region have tended to focu exclusively on the hort-term efficiency of particular approache or the efficacy of pecific initiative , but they have rarely placed the analy is in the context of broader concern with the con truction of ocial citizenship. Yet que tion about ocial citizen hip take on pecial urgency at a moment when everal Central American countries are truggling to rebuild ocial, political, and economic in titutions in the wake of protracted civil conflict, and when the entire region eeks to con olidate or deepen democracy in a context of continuing scarcity. What kinds of citizenship are emerging in thi crucial moment of tran ition, and how do the e relate to the broader proces of democratization and economic
reform? How can ocial policie advance effort to extend ocial citizen hip to historically marginalized ector? To what extent are the e policie uited to meeting the need of societies undergoing vast demographic, economic, and ocial change ? How en itive are the e policie to the specific need of crucial actors, uch a indigenous people in Guatemala, or ex-combatant in EI Salvador and Nicaragua? The e que tion were debated by ocial cienti t from Latin America and the United States during an Augu t 1996 planning meeting at FLACSO-EI Salvador and an April 1997 workshop in Chapala, Mexico, both of which were funded by the Ford Foundation. * Revision of a dozen papers pre en ted at the Chapala meeting are now underway, and are being collected in a volume edited by Bryan Roberts, Un iver ity of Texas, Austin, to be published by A...ACSO-Costa Rica.
• Pnnicipants: George Avelino, Stanford University; Santiago Bu tos, CIESAS de Occidente, Mexico; Manuela Camus, CIESAS de Occidente, Mexico; Agu Ifn Escobar, CIESAS de Occidente, Mexico; Su a Espasn. SSRC; Fernando Filgueirn. CIESU. Uruguay; Eric Hershberg. SSRC; Evelyne Huber. University of Nonh Carolina. Chapel Hill ; Jose Itzigsohn. Brown University; Elizabeth Jelin. University of Bueno Aire ; Clam Ju idman. Direcci6n Ejeculiva del Regi tro Federal de Electores. Mexico; Mario Lungo. PRISMA, EI Salvador; Minor Morn. Technological Institute, Costa Rica; Abelnrdo Morales, Fncultnd Latinoomericana de Cienci Sociales (FLACSO), Cosla Rica; Charles Reilly. Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC; Roy Rivera, Focultad Latinoarnericana de Ciencias SocinJes (FLACSO), Co ta Rica: Bryan Roberts. University of Texas, Au tin; Juan Pablo ~rez S inz, Focultad Latinoamericana de Cienci Sociales (FLACSO), Costa Rica; Monique Segarra. Columbia University.
Ju ElSEPTEMBER 1997 ITEMsl49
CGP-SSRC Seminar Series E tabli hed in 1996 with the upport of the Japan Foundation Center for Global Partnership (CGP), thi eminar erie ek to bring together Abe Fellow researching in di cernible thematic area with Abe Fellow hip Program committee members and out ide expert who work on related topic . The meeting are intended to build network that are interdi ciplinary as well a proactive in bringing together academic ,profe ional researchers, practitioner , and policy analy ts from around the world. One of the mo t pre ing and hotly debated public policy topics facing advanced indu trial ocietie i that of the implication of rapidly aging ocietie . As a tep toward bringing basic ocial science research to bear on thi topic, a seminar on "Aging Acro Societie : Meaningful Life, Care and Clo ure," wa held on April 11 - 13, 1997 in Ann Arbor, Michigan.· Eighteen researchers, public policy planners, and medical and ocial practitioner met to examine crit• Participan included Kiy hi Ad:lchi , Kyu hu University; Fl'lII1k Baldwin, SSRC Tokyo; David Barnard, Millon S. Hershey Medical Center; Doug! Bradham, University of Maryland; John C. Campbell and Ruth Campbell, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; Sat hi Chihara, Seirei H pice; Nori Etoh. CGP; David Feathennan, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; Yuko A. ura flaherty, Friedens Hau ; Brant Fries, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; Akiko H himoto. University of Pittsburgh; Albert HermaJin, University of Michigan. Ann Arbor; Shinya H hino, Japan Women's University; Su Long, John Carroll University; Mary Byrne McDonnell, SSRC; Marcia Ory, National Institute on Aging; Yasuo Takagi, Sendai Shirayuri Women 's Colle e ; Robert J. Willi, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; Suzanne Zank, Freie Universitlit Berlin.
ical i ue in public policy on aging and care of the elderly in the U.S., Japan, and Germany. Six Japane e and American fellows of the Abe Program participated. Their research presentation focused on micro-level examination of the e i ue in individual etting. Individual contribution clo ely examined uch i ue a the ho pice movement, home health care program and outcome , the role of not-for profit organization , and method of a e ing need. The e tudie were complemented, on the one hand, by policy experts able to place the micro experience in broad national and international context and, on the other, by practitioner and advocate able to bring first-hand human experience to di cu ion of trend and policy option . Beginning with a look at broad demographic, ocioeconomic, and economic trend in the three ocietie , the work hop examined the impact of those trend on factors related to long-term health care need . Presentation gave an overall view of condition in the population from age 50-70+. Variou option were debated for financing tho e needs and developing the political capacity in individual countrie to meet them. For example, new long-term health care in urance plan and experimental care program being developed in the three countrie were outlined and the pro and con clarified. Gap between projected need based on demographic and ocioeconomic trend and the capacity to addre them were di cu sed as the option being developed in each country were examined. "US-Japan Bilateral Trade
Oi pute : End of an Era? The Ca e of Film and Civil Aviation" was the ubject of a seminar held on May 15-18, 1997 in Scottsdale, Arizona. Co-convened by Abe Fellow hip Program committee members Gary Saxon house and Takato hi Ito, participant included eight Abe Fellow , committee member Merit Janow, and peciali t in economic , law, political cience, policy tudie and bu ine tudie , as well a repre entative from the film and aviation indu trie .• The main que tion confronted by the eminar' participant wa whether or not U.S .Japan economic relation are in a period of tran ition: away from an economic diplomacy characterized by bilateral trade agreements and toward a different model mediated by trengthened multilateral trade regime uch as the World Trade Organization (WTO). To te t thi assertion participants examined two case of current bilateral
• Participanll included: William H. Barringer. Willkie Farr &. Gallagher; Tony Freyer. University of Alabama; Michael Gerlach. University of California. Berkeley; Kim Gould A. hizawa, CGP; Theresa Greaney, Syracu University; Takat hi Ito. Hitoll ubashi Unive .... ity; Merit Janow, Columbia University; Taiji Kameyama. All Nippon Airway Co. Ltd.; Michael M:lltanduno, Dartmouth College; Hideki Murakami, Kobe Unive .... ity; Cyril D. Murphy, United Airlines; Sadao Nagaoka, Hitotsu hi University; Yutaka Osada. Surugud i University; Samuel Pru sow, Harvard University; Mark Rarmeyer, University of Chicago; Sheri Rani! , SSRC; James Ratner, University of Ariwna; Gary Saxonhouse. University of Michigan. Ann Arbor; Leonard Schoppa. University of Virginia; David Weiru tein, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; Clifford Win. ton, The Brookings Institution.
friction: photographic film and civil aviation. A the factual, economic, political, and legal con ideration of each case wa di cus ed, it became clear that in both the film and civil aviation indu tries, Japane e and U.S. companie have access to each other's market ,but eek better positioning to be able to maximize profit and market share. In both cases, the indu try ha appealed to it national government to intervene on its behalf. Participants pondered the role of government in redressing those perceived di advantage , the role of multilateral organizations uch as WTO in adjudicating in the e circumtances, and what tho e multilateral remedie might be.
Working Group on Cuba In collaboration with the Christopher Reynold Foundation and the John T. and Catherine D. MacArthur Foundation, the ACLS and SSRC have estabIi hed an academic working group devoted to extending and broadening cholarly relation between Cuba and the United State , in the general context of Cuba and North America. * The working group, to be chaired by ACLS pre ident Stanley Katz and
â€˘ Members of the ACLSlSSRC Working Group on Cuba include: Stanley N. Katz (choir), ACLS and Princeton University; Gimldo Alay6n, Sociedod Zool6gico de Cuba; Susan Eck tein. Lotin American Studies A sociation and Boston University; Nancy Morejon, Teotro Nacional de Cuba; Loui Perez. Jr., University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; and Luis Rubio, Centro de Inv ligoci6n pam el Desarrollo (CIDAC), Mexico City.
Ju ElSEPTEMBER 1997
taffed at the SSRC, will work in partner hip with the Academy of Sciences in Cuba to promote cholarly exchange and cooperation and to upport activities that facilitate the flow of information between scholars in Cuba and North America. Initially, the working group expects to provide fund to enable Cuban re earchers to take part in international conference and re earch network ; facilitate travel to Cuba by North American educator ; and assist Cuban librarie , archive , and mu eum to develop and maintain re ource that will facilitate the conduct of cholarly research. It is anticipated that, over time, the working group will introduce additional programs de igned to help build relation hip of tru t which are e ential to the development of enduring network among Cuban cholars and their colleague abroad.
Recent Council Publication Making Muslim Space in North America and Europe, edited by Barbara Daly Metcalf. Spon ored by the Joint Committee on the Comparative Study of Muslim Societies (1985-93). Berkeley: University of California Pres , 1996. xix + 264 pages. Focusing on the private and public u e of space, thi volume explores the religious life of the new Mu lim communities in North America and Europe. Unlike most studie of immigrant group , the e essays concentrate on cultural practice and expression of everyday life rather than on the political issues that dominate today's headlines. The authors emphasize the cultural
trength and creativity of communitie that draw upon Islamic ymbols and practice to define "Muslim pace" again t the background of a non-Mu lim environment. The range of perspectives i broad, encompassing middleclass professionals, mosque congregation , factory workers in France and the north of England, itinerant African trader , and pri on inmates in the United State . The truism that "I lam is a religion of the word" takes on concrete meaning as these disparate communities find ways to incorporate the vi ual and aural pre ence of sacred words into the paces they inhabit. The volume includes 47 black and white photo illustrating the new Muslim space in uch diverse places as Edmonton, Philadelphia, London, and the Green Haven Correctional facility in New York. The focu on space directs attention to the new kinds of boundarie and con ciousnes that exi t not only for these Mu lim populations but for people from all backgrounds. Barbara Daly Metcalf is dean of the division of Social Sciences, College of Letters and Science, and professor of history at the University of California, Davis. Also noted: SSRC-MacArthur Foundation Newsletter, no. 9, May 1997. "SSRC-MacArthur Fellows and the Field of International Peace and Security: Reviews and Reflections." Produced by the SSRC-MacArthur Foundation Program on International Peace and Security. ITEMS/51
SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH COUNCIL SIO SEVENTH AVENUE, NEW YORK. NY 10019 (212) 377路2700
FAX (212) 3TI-2727
WEB hUp://www. rc.org
The Council was incorporat~d in th~ Stat~ of Illinois. D~ctmber 27. 1924, for tM purpos~ of odvancinl( rts~arch in th~ social sci~nc~s. Nonl(o\l~mm~ntDl and int~rdisciplinary in nature, th~ Council appoints committus of scholars which sulc to achi~v~ th~ Council's purpos~ throul(h tM g~n~ration of n~w id~as and th~ training of scholars. TM ac'iviti~s of th~ Council art support~d primarily by grants from privat~ foundotiofLf and gO~'em_nt ag~nci~s. Dir~ctors,
1997-9S: PAUL B. BALlES, M:lX Planck Institute for Human Development and Education (Berlin); ROBERT H. BAlES, Harvard University; IRIS B. BERGER, State University of New York. AIOOny; NANCY BIRDSAll., Inter路American Development Bank; ALBERT FlSHLOW. Council on Foreign Relation; SUSAN FISKE, University of Massachusetts, Amherst; BARBARA HEY S, New York University; SHIllLEY LINDENBAUM, The Graduate Center. City University of New York; CoRA B. MARRElT, University of M sachuseus; KENNETH PREWllT, Social Science Research Council; BURTON H. SINGER, Princeton University; NEIL SMELSER. Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences; KENNETH W. WACmER. University of California. Berkeley; MICHELLE J. WHTTE, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Offic~rs and
Staff: KENNEll! PREWllT. Prtsid~nt; KRISTlNE DAHLBERG, Chi~f Financial Officer; GLORIA KIRCHHElMER, Editor; 1lTI' ABRAHAM. JOSH DEWIND. MAURO. ARUN P. ELHANCE, ERIC HERSHBERG, S-reVEN HEYDEMANN, RONALD KASSIMIR. FRANK KESSEL, ROBERT LAlliAM. MARY BYRNE McDoNNEu.., Et.LEN f'EREcMAN, SHERI H. RANIS. JUDITll B. SEOAms, RAMON TORRECILHA. DAVID WEIMAN, KENTON W. WORCES-reR.
The Social Science Research Council uppons the program of the Commi ion on Pre.~ation and Access and is represented on the National Advisory Council on Preservation. The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Science9-Permanence of Paper for Printed Librnry Materials. ANSI Z39.4S-1984. The infinity symbol placed in a circle indicates compliance with thi tandard.
All issu~s of It~ms art a~'Oilab/~ in Microform. University Microfilms International 300 North Zeeb Road. Dept. PRo Ann Arbor, MI4SI06
NON PROm ORG. U.S. POSTAGE
Social Science Research Council 810 Seventh Avenue New York, NY 10019
ALBANY, N.Y. Pennlt No. 31
ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED
51, NUMBERS '1J3