跨国研究能力建设:谁的标准更重要?

IF 1.3 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY Critical African Studies Pub Date : 2020-07-02 DOI:10.1080/21681392.2020.1724807
L. Madsen, H. Adriansen
{"title":"跨国研究能力建设:谁的标准更重要?","authors":"L. Madsen, H. Adriansen","doi":"10.1080/21681392.2020.1724807","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay explores transnational capacity building projects to highlight some of the structural and processual challenges in decolonizing institutional spaces and power structures. We offer a view from the Global North by drawing on our own experiences of such projects and argue that issues of coloniality in research capacity-building projects must be understood together with the concepts of dependency and universality of knowledge. Two examples are used to question who defines excellence and relevance at African universities. We conclude that many collaborative projects regard scientific knowledge and notions of excellence and standards as universal and therefore transferable without considering an African academic context. Moreover, the mobility of scholars leads to the mobility of knowledge and norms, which may emphasise the notion of universality. More research from the Global South is needed to illustrate how the paradoxes and dilemmas of international research collaboration and capacity building are experienced and understood.","PeriodicalId":37966,"journal":{"name":"Critical African Studies","volume":"20 1","pages":"49 - 55"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transnational research capacity building: Whose standards count?\",\"authors\":\"L. Madsen, H. Adriansen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21681392.2020.1724807\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This essay explores transnational capacity building projects to highlight some of the structural and processual challenges in decolonizing institutional spaces and power structures. We offer a view from the Global North by drawing on our own experiences of such projects and argue that issues of coloniality in research capacity-building projects must be understood together with the concepts of dependency and universality of knowledge. Two examples are used to question who defines excellence and relevance at African universities. We conclude that many collaborative projects regard scientific knowledge and notions of excellence and standards as universal and therefore transferable without considering an African academic context. Moreover, the mobility of scholars leads to the mobility of knowledge and norms, which may emphasise the notion of universality. More research from the Global South is needed to illustrate how the paradoxes and dilemmas of international research collaboration and capacity building are experienced and understood.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37966,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical African Studies\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"49 - 55\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical African Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21681392.2020.1724807\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical African Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21681392.2020.1724807","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

本文探讨了跨国能力建设项目,以突出非殖民化制度空间和权力结构中的一些结构性和程序性挑战。我们利用我们自己在这类项目中的经验,从全球北方的角度提出了一个观点,并认为,研究能力建设项目中的殖民问题必须与知识的依赖性和普遍性的概念一起加以理解。两个例子被用来质疑谁定义了非洲大学的卓越和相关性。我们的结论是,许多合作项目认为科学知识以及卓越和标准的概念是普遍的,因此是可转移的,而不考虑非洲的学术背景。此外,学者的流动性导致知识和规范的流动性,这可能会强调普遍性的概念。需要来自全球南方的更多研究来说明如何经历和理解国际研究合作和能力建设的悖论和困境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Transnational research capacity building: Whose standards count?
This essay explores transnational capacity building projects to highlight some of the structural and processual challenges in decolonizing institutional spaces and power structures. We offer a view from the Global North by drawing on our own experiences of such projects and argue that issues of coloniality in research capacity-building projects must be understood together with the concepts of dependency and universality of knowledge. Two examples are used to question who defines excellence and relevance at African universities. We conclude that many collaborative projects regard scientific knowledge and notions of excellence and standards as universal and therefore transferable without considering an African academic context. Moreover, the mobility of scholars leads to the mobility of knowledge and norms, which may emphasise the notion of universality. More research from the Global South is needed to illustrate how the paradoxes and dilemmas of international research collaboration and capacity building are experienced and understood.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Critical African Studies
Critical African Studies Arts and Humanities-Arts and Humanities (all)
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: Critical African Studies seeks to return Africanist scholarship to the heart of theoretical innovation within each of its constituent disciplines, including Anthropology, Political Science, Sociology, History, Law and Economics. We offer authors a more flexible publishing platform than other journals, allowing them greater space to develop empirical discussions alongside theoretical and conceptual engagements. We aim to publish scholarly articles that offer both innovative empirical contributions, grounded in original fieldwork, and also innovative theoretical engagements. This speaks to our broader intention to promote the deployment of thorough empirical work for the purposes of sophisticated theoretical innovation. We invite contributions that meet the aims of the journal, including special issue proposals that offer fresh empirical and theoretical insights into African Studies debates.
期刊最新文献
A criticism of the notions of Nwansa and Nwanju in conversational approach to African philosophy Colour-blind racism in post-apartheid South Africa The ‘iron donkey’: the social lives of bicycles in northern Uganda, 1903–2015 Hybrid ‘Authenticities’ in youth popular culture: performing costume and identity in the work of South Africa’s Sho Madjozi Ancestral rendezvous: leveraging the San culture in Botswana contemporary theatre
×
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