Imperial entomology: Boris P. Uvarov and locusts, c.1920-c.1950.

IF 0.7 1区 哲学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE British Journal for the History of Science Pub Date : 2022-01-20 DOI:10.1017/S0007087421000807
Michael Worboys
{"title":"Imperial entomology: Boris P. Uvarov and locusts, <i>c.</i>1920-<i>c.</i>1950.","authors":"Michael Worboys","doi":"10.1017/S0007087421000807","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this article, I explore how the twin forces of imperial and entomological power allowed Britain to shape locust research and control across Africa, the Middle East and South Asia from the 1920s to the early 1950s. Imperial power came from the size of the formal and informal empire, and alliances with other colonial powers to tackle a common threat to agriculture and trade. Entomological authority came primarily from the work of Boris Uvarov and his small team of museum and fieldworkers based at the Imperial Bureau of Entomology (IBE), later the Imperial Institute of Entomology (IIE). I begin by discussing how Uvarov's phase theory of the origin of swarming changed the prospects for the control of locust plagues. The imperial gaze and networks of the IBE and IIE were suited to a problem that was transnational and transcontinental. In the 1930s, Britain was drawn into plans for international cooperation on locust organizations that met the needs of science, to give better sharing of knowledge, and the needs for science, to secure the resources for research and control. However, such organizations were only created during the Second World War, when new plagues threatened military operations, as I show in relation to the measures taken to control the red locust and desert locust. In the final section, I follow the fate of the wartime cooperation in initiatives to establish permanent control organizations. It is a story of the decline of British political power in locust affairs as the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and regional agencies took over. My account of British locust research and control reveals a neglected aspect of histories of entomology and imperial/colonial science, especially their international relations and the continuing importance of metropolitan research centres.</p>","PeriodicalId":46655,"journal":{"name":"British Journal for the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal for the History of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007087421000807","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, I explore how the twin forces of imperial and entomological power allowed Britain to shape locust research and control across Africa, the Middle East and South Asia from the 1920s to the early 1950s. Imperial power came from the size of the formal and informal empire, and alliances with other colonial powers to tackle a common threat to agriculture and trade. Entomological authority came primarily from the work of Boris Uvarov and his small team of museum and fieldworkers based at the Imperial Bureau of Entomology (IBE), later the Imperial Institute of Entomology (IIE). I begin by discussing how Uvarov's phase theory of the origin of swarming changed the prospects for the control of locust plagues. The imperial gaze and networks of the IBE and IIE were suited to a problem that was transnational and transcontinental. In the 1930s, Britain was drawn into plans for international cooperation on locust organizations that met the needs of science, to give better sharing of knowledge, and the needs for science, to secure the resources for research and control. However, such organizations were only created during the Second World War, when new plagues threatened military operations, as I show in relation to the measures taken to control the red locust and desert locust. In the final section, I follow the fate of the wartime cooperation in initiatives to establish permanent control organizations. It is a story of the decline of British political power in locust affairs as the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and regional agencies took over. My account of British locust research and control reveals a neglected aspect of histories of entomology and imperial/colonial science, especially their international relations and the continuing importance of metropolitan research centres.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
帝国昆虫学鲍里斯-乌瓦洛夫(Boris P. Uvarov)与蝗虫,约 1920 年至 1950 年。
在这篇文章中,我将探讨从 20 世纪 20 年代到 50 年代初,帝国权力和昆虫学权力的双重力量如何使英国在非洲、中东和南亚开展蝗虫研究和控制。帝国权力来自于正式和非正式帝国的规模,以及与其他殖民国家结盟以应对农业和贸易面临的共同威胁。昆虫学权威主要来自鲍里斯-乌瓦洛夫(Boris Uvarov)和他在帝国昆虫学局(IBE)(即后来的帝国昆虫学研究所(IIE))的博物馆和实地考察小组的工作。我首先讨论了乌瓦洛夫关于蝗虫群起源的阶段性理论如何改变了控制蝗灾的前景。国际昆虫学会和国际教育研究所的帝国目光和网络适合解决跨国和跨洲的问题。20 世纪 30 年代,英国参与了蝗虫组织的国际合作计划,以满足科学的需要,更好地分享知识;满足科学的需要,确保研究和控制的资源。然而,这种组织只是在第二次世界大战期间,当新的瘟疫威胁到军事行动时才建立起来的,正如我在介绍控制红蝗和沙漠蝗虫的措施时所展示的那样。在最后一部分,我讲述了战时合作建立永久性防治组织的命运。这是一个关于英国在蝗虫事务中的政治权力随着联合国粮食及农业组织和区域机构的接管而衰落的故事。我对英国蝗虫研究和控制的描述揭示了昆虫学和帝国/殖民科学史中被忽视的一个方面,特别是它们之间的国际关系以及大都市研究中心的持续重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: This leading international journal publishes scholarly papers and review articles on all aspects of the history of science. History of science is interpreted widely to include medicine, technology and social studies of science. BJHS papers make important and lively contributions to scholarship and the journal has been an essential library resource for more than thirty years. It is also used extensively by historians and scholars in related fields. A substantial book review section is a central feature. There are four issues a year, comprising an annual volume of over 600 pages. Published for the British Society for the History of Science
期刊最新文献
The politics of medical expertise and substance control: WHO consultants for addiction rehabilitation and pharmacy education in Thailand and India during the Cold War. Performing national independence through medical diplomacy: tuberculosis control and socialist internationalism in Cold War Vietnam. Value, knowledge and reputation: zoological exchange by Australian museums, 1870-1900. 'Like nets or cobwebs': Kenelm Digby, Isaac Newton and the problem of rarefaction. Concluding Conversation: De-centring Science Diplomacy - CORRIGENDUM.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1