On Anthropology and Policy Studies

• Published in: Current anthropology 1980-10, Vol.21 (5), p.682-684
• Main Authors: Fikry, Mona, Horowitz, Michael M., Maloney, Clarence, Cochrane, Glynn
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Anthropology/Anthropological; Discussion and Criticism; Policy/Policies; Study/Studies
• ISSN: 0011-3204; 1537-5382
• DOI: 10.1086/202551

Three comments are presented on Glynn Cochrane's essay, "Policy Studies and Anthropology" (see abstract in this section). Mona Fikry (US AID, Mauritania) stresses the need to link anthropologists not only to policy but to its implementation; omissions in Cochrane's analysis are cited, including the limited time spent in policy-making research, the shortcomings of "community development" along Western lines, & the substantial community impact often facilitated by developmental anthropologists. The critical role that anthropologists may play in determining the very existence of a policy is discussed by Michael M. Horowitz (Instit for Development Anthropology, Binghamton, NY), along with the political dangers of such responsibility. Clarence Maloney (US AID, Bangladesh) finally notes that researchers who refuse predictions do often suffer professionally; the general lack of project-design personnel at any level of most policy organizations is emphasized. In Reply, Cochrane (Maxwell School of Citizenship & Public Affairs, Syracuse U, NY) distinguishes between single-project & policy studies, & notes the special constitutive demands in feasibility studies as such; a trend away from both exclusively macro- & microlevel planning is identified. L. Whittemore.