The WCAA Global Survey of Anthropological Practice (2014-2018): Reported Findings

P. McGrath, G. Acciaioli, A. Millard, Emily Metzner, Vesna Vučinić Nešković, Chandana Mathur
{"title":"The WCAA Global Survey of Anthropological Practice (2014-2018): Reported Findings","authors":"P. McGrath, G. Acciaioli, A. Millard, Emily Metzner, Vesna Vučinić Nešković, Chandana Mathur","doi":"10.1590/1809-43412022v19d701","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Global Survey of Anthropological Practice (GSAP), the first of its kind, was undertaken by the World Council of Anthropological Associations (WCAA) to provide insights about anthropology as a transnational profession, the ongoing relevance of the discipline in addressing global problems, issues in employment and gender equity, and the range of anthropological practice and expertise. Respondents to the survey were living in 113 different countries. This article summarizes some of the GSAP’s most general global findings. The GSAP data suggest that within the discipline of anthropology, woman-identified practitioners predominate, except in archaeology and linguistics; yet, women were more likely to report being under-employed and/or not fairly compensated for their work. Universities were the largest employers of anthropologists, but public policy work and public engagement featured centrally in many respondents’ work. The social and cultural anthropology subdisciplines appear to be the most widely practiced the world over, but many respondents also engaged in applied anthropology. However, social media platforms, which might allow anthropologists to reach broader publics, were under-utilized by respondents, who were more likely to publish in closed, internal, and disciplinary specific forums. The GSAP illustrated the global mobility of respondents, including for higher education (and the data on this reflected the hegemony of North Atlantic centers of higher education); yet, many anthropologists around the world have expertise and undertake research in their home countries. Finally, the GSAP found that respondents published their work predominantly in English, although not exclusively, and documented a diversity of languages in which anthropologists publish.","PeriodicalId":37082,"journal":{"name":"Vibrant Virtual Brazilian Anthropology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vibrant Virtual Brazilian Anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-43412022v19d701","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract The Global Survey of Anthropological Practice (GSAP), the first of its kind, was undertaken by the World Council of Anthropological Associations (WCAA) to provide insights about anthropology as a transnational profession, the ongoing relevance of the discipline in addressing global problems, issues in employment and gender equity, and the range of anthropological practice and expertise. Respondents to the survey were living in 113 different countries. This article summarizes some of the GSAP’s most general global findings. The GSAP data suggest that within the discipline of anthropology, woman-identified practitioners predominate, except in archaeology and linguistics; yet, women were more likely to report being under-employed and/or not fairly compensated for their work. Universities were the largest employers of anthropologists, but public policy work and public engagement featured centrally in many respondents’ work. The social and cultural anthropology subdisciplines appear to be the most widely practiced the world over, but many respondents also engaged in applied anthropology. However, social media platforms, which might allow anthropologists to reach broader publics, were under-utilized by respondents, who were more likely to publish in closed, internal, and disciplinary specific forums. The GSAP illustrated the global mobility of respondents, including for higher education (and the data on this reflected the hegemony of North Atlantic centers of higher education); yet, many anthropologists around the world have expertise and undertake research in their home countries. Finally, the GSAP found that respondents published their work predominantly in English, although not exclusively, and documented a diversity of languages in which anthropologists publish.
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
WCAA全球人类学实践调查(2014-2018):报告结果
全球人类学实践调查(GSAP)是由世界人类学协会理事会(WCAA)开展的首个此类调查,旨在提供有关人类学作为跨国专业的见解,该学科在解决全球问题,就业和性别平等问题方面的持续相关性,以及人类学实践和专业知识的范围。调查的受访者生活在113个不同的国家。本文总结了GSAP的一些最普遍的全球发现。GSAP数据表明,在人类学学科中,女性认定的从业者占主导地位,考古学和语言学除外;然而,妇女更有可能报告就业不足和/或工作报酬不公平。大学是人类学家的最大雇主,但公共政策工作和公众参与在许多受访者的工作中占据中心地位。社会和文化人类学的分支学科似乎是世界上最广泛实践的,但许多受访者也从事应用人类学。然而,可能让人类学家接触到更广泛公众的社交媒体平台没有被受访者充分利用,他们更有可能在封闭的、内部的、特定学科的论坛上发表文章。GSAP说明了受访者的全球流动性,包括高等教育的流动性(这方面的数据反映了北大西洋高等教育中心的霸权地位);然而,世界上许多人类学家都有专门知识,并在他们的祖国进行研究。最后,GSAP发现受访者主要用英语发表他们的作品,尽管不是全部,并记录了人类学家发表作品的语言多样性。
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
Vibrant Virtual Brazilian Anthropology
Vibrant Virtual Brazilian Anthropology Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊最新文献
Conflicts surrounding the “natural antidote against COVID-19”: Brazil sanitation governance in action Entre la teoría y el barrio. Etnografía caminante, política gubernamental y matriz académica en un programa de urbanización integral del hábitat en el Nordeste Argentino Ethnographic Encounters: Using Ethnography to Study Brazil’s Participatory Governance Institutions Gobernanza, reciprocidad y dinámicas políticas en Brasil: la auditoría como campo etnográfico La cara pública de lo secreto: Antropología de la Investigación policial
×
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