[English] Towards an Anthropology of Small Cities: Transformations and Solidarities
As the world’s population becomes increasingly urban, with more than half living in urban areas, cities have become salient sites for the constitution of different citizenships, different understandings of rights, entitlements, and responsibilities (Holston and Appadurai 1996) and different solidarities. However, the “city” is broadly defined and cities vary widely based on population size and density, land use, built structures, political economy, demographics and identities of the inhabitants, and patterns of migration in and out of the city. About 80% of all North American citizens live in “cities” of more than 2,000 people. Much of the research in urban anthropology focuses on large cities and urban centers, those with populations of more than 500,000. However, much of the North American urban landscape is constituted by small cities with populations of less than 200,000 people (e.g. Norman 2013). This panel asks what characterizes an anthropology of small cities? How might small cities be theorized differently than large urban centers? What kinds of methodologies ought to be employed when working in small cities that may (or may not) differ from work in rural areas or large cosmopolitan centers? More specifically, this panel will address how solidarities (trans)form through small cities, not simply in them.
[English] The Latin American State and its Agents
The papers in this panel approach the Latin American state with an ethnographic eye, exploring the everyday practices of state agents and a range of ways that the targets of state programs interpret them, respond to them, and sometimes alter those projects to fit their needs. The cases to be presented include: how public health emerged as an arena of legitimate state activity in Ecuador, and helped make the state seem real and effective; the ambivalent role of educators in the context of Argentina's conditional cash transfer program.
[English] Becoming a Veteran: Investigating the Transition from Military to Civilian Life in the Canadian Context
Following over a decade of constant deployment in Afghanistan (2001-2014) by soldiers of the Canadian Armed Forces, there is a renewed interest in how soldiers transition to civilian life after leaving the military. The majority of the published research is based on depersonalized and anonymous surveys, leading to policies and programs that are based on the aggregate but applied to the individual. This, in turn, has led to repeated criticisms from the veterans’ community that the available programs do not meet their needs or are inaccessible. This panel seeks to explore: (1) the ways in which veterans have navigated the available programs and supports; (2) the ways in which solidarity thru shared identity affects the transition from the role of soldier to that of being a veteran within Canadian civilian society; and (3) the unique forms of interaction with society that transitioning veterans have engaged in an attempt to shape their new identities.
Please send short abstracts (150 words) by 31 January 2016 to:
Department of Anthropology
University of Toronto
Métis Acadien, Acadien Métis, Canadien Métis, French-Indian ou/or Simply Métis Tout Court?
Avec la reconnaissance des Métis comme peuples autochtones protégés par la Constitution de 1982, les politiques identitaires métisses deviennent de plus en plus tendues. Les différentes identités se voient contestées tant d'un point de vue intérieur qu'extérieur à celles-ci. Cette session explorera les défis historiques et contemporains au sujet de ce que signifie être « Métis. » Plus précisément, elle réexaminera certains documents historiques afin d'explorer l'émergence de communautés s'identifiant « Métis, » tout particulièrement dans les régions de l'Atlantique et du Pacifique de l'Amérique du Nord. Plutôt que de présenter l'émergence de ces identités comme suivant un processus linéaire et géographiquement restreint ou délimité, cette session explorera la possibilité d'un processus d'ethnogenèses souple et multipolaire, accommodant l'émergence de différentes identités métisses, à de maints endroits, et selon différents processus de résurgence identitaire. L'objectif de cette session sera d'explorer un cadre théorique capable de reconnaître simultanément les divers aspects culturels, de même que la complexité historique lorsqu'il s'agit des identités métisses.
[English] Common Values for Anthropological Practice - Round-table
Following a 1749 settling of Halifax, land known as the Halifax Common was designated to provide free livestock pasturage and camping for citizens. The Common began with, and continues to be, encroached by uncommon interests. Canadian anthropologists share a collective discomfort in developing a common code of prescribed ethics. We conduct our work within the interstices of the Tri-Council Policy Statement (TCPS), institutional Research Ethics Boards, government and private contracts and other working agreements while critically engaging wider contexts. This roundtable will workshop the collective values that shape our engagements with the professional practice of anthropology. Our goal is to arrive at a living document that can be used by Canadian anthropologists in their scholarly and applied work. All are welcome to attend and contribute to this process.
Les échelles de solidarité : Engagement et recherche en Acadie et milieu francophone minoritaire
Qu'en est-il de la solidarité en recherche? Quels sont les enjeux liés à la proximité et à la distance vis-à-vis des milieux étudiés, notamment en Acadie et dans les autres francophonies canadiennes en milieu minoritaire?
Faire de la recherche sur les francophones vivant en milieu minoritaire, est-ce nécessairement faire de la recherche engagée? La tenue du congrès à Halifax servira de prétexte pour inviter à une réflexion sur les postures du chercheur.e en Acadie en tenant compte des échelles du terrain, des définitions diverses de l'Acadie et des différentes méthodes. Les réflexions sur d'autres aires du Canada francophone ou d'ailleurs sont également les bienvenues. Ces interrogations sont plus que jamais de mise, car les communautés comprennent qu'elles doivent forger divers types de solidarités, que ce soit avec le groupe majoritaire, les communautés autochtones ou les nouveaux arrivants francophones et francophiles, ainsi qu'à l'intérieur même du noyau familial dans les familles exogames. La présentation de travaux portant sur ces processus serait également pertinente à cette table ronde.
[English] Infrastructures: Materializing Publics and Persons in Colonial and Postcolonial Contexts
Jean Mitchell, University of Prince Edward Island
Sandra Widmer, York University
There is growing interest among anthropologists in examining the socialities, effects and affects of infrastructure(s). Their material-semiotics engage environments, persons, technologies and objects that shape everyday lives. Infrastructures can be sites of nation-building that offer possibilities for citizenship in contexts of colonial and postcolonial governance. Promises of infrastructure enroll people in particular forms of politics aimed at better futures (Hetherington 2014). Infrastructures also chart the changing relations of power with “the thinning of the state” in neoliberalism (Allison and Piot 2012). This panel explores infrastructures as ways of understanding postcolonial social formations and forms of economic distribution. You are invited to consider how infrastructures both connect and fragment social worlds in colonial and postcolonial contexts. Papers could consider topics such as: Public/private infrastructures; Food systems; Medical care; Emergency preparedness; Public health surveillance; Cell phone infrastructures; Indigenous/state relationships, Energy conflicts.
[English] Para-ethnography: a method for decolonizing Anthropology?
This roundtable will consider the following question: what are the benefits of stepping outside of the traditional methodological toolkit, particularly when working with community groups involving Indigenous people? Our central focus will be on para-ethnography, or the positioning of participants as experts in their own right, as a methodological framework for reconciliation work. While traditional methods have been criticized for reproducing colonial practices, the papers discussed here will address this call for decolonization by considering alternative methods. Although not limited to these, we are particularly interested in: participatory action research, child-centred action research, and digital and visual methods. Attention to how an emphasis on methods can foster reconciliation and solidarity between academics and community groups is encouraged.
This panel will bring together 3-4 scholars. Each participant will speak about their research for twenty minutes, and the roundtable will conclude with a lively discussion between participants and the audience.
If you are interested in participating, please submit a one-page cv and a brief description of your proposed research talk (approximately 100 words) to Dr. Erin Spring (firstname.lastname@example.org) by February 1st, 2015.
[English] Language and Technology: Usage, Interaction, and Change
Organizers: Alexis Black and Christine Jourdan (Concordia University)
Language and technology have been intimately linked through the materiality of linguistic practice (e.g. stylus, pen and paper, telephones, social media) and the cognitive and emotive effects of language use. This panel will engage with technology as a mediator for language use from an anthropological perspective. It will explore how people use language through technologies and how languages and technologies interact. Pertinent questions for examination could include how technology affects language use, how language is constrained or nourished by technology and the relationship between technology and language in practice and cognition.
This panel is sponsored by CASCA'S LingAnthLing interest group. Subjects may include research into language creation to accompany emerging technologies (e.g. the creation of new metaphors or terminologies to support communication of new technological realities), the particular challenges posed by attempts to create technologies that can respond to and mimic natural human language (e.g. problems in AI research to create 'talking' machines), or ethnographic or discursive study of changing patterns and functions in everyday language in tandem with changing technologies (e.g. text messaging and social media as the locus of new linguistic products and practices).
- What are the challenges for teaching anthropology within an increasingly pragmatic, “job-oriented” student culture, and how do we address them?
- How does the imposition of student “client-based” models of pedagogy affect us as teachers of anthropology? What does it mean to engage students in this context? What strategies do we use to work within, or perhaps against, this model?
- How is the discipline impacted by the development of two-tiered streams of professorships (teaching track versus research stream)?
- How does this new landscape affect contract teachers of anthropology, and how does increase in precarious employment effect the way anthropology is being taught?
- How are instructors engaging with administrative pressures to incorporate various teaching technologies in the classroom? What technologies (if any) do you find most helpful in teaching critical thinking skills?
[English] Seeds and power
- complet -
Farmers face complex pressures to adopt so-called modern varieties of seed, ranging from development projects that prioritize industrial inputs to trade agreements that require the adoption of intellectual property rights or seed certification laws, among other factors. Activists argue that these pressures, along with seed regulations that criminalize the exchange of traditional varieties, are part of a new enclosure movement that seeks to advance the market for transnational seed corporations and the industrial food system.
This panel explores political conflicts over seed as property, knowledge and labour. Do competing understandings of seed –as the results of particular forms of expertise and particular types of labour, for example-- contribute to such conflicts, and if so, how? Can these conflicts over seed be understood as ontological conflicts? And how might struggles over seed provide insight into understandings of the commons, agricultural development, and peasant resistance and identities?
Organiser: Liz Fitting
[English] North American Borders/Borderlands
Anthropological study of borders and borderlands in North America have been dominated by ethnography and theory about the Mexico-USA border “where the third world grates against the first and bleeds” (Anzaldúa 1987). However, North America is also the site of multiple political, cultural, or linguistic borders/borderlands between Indigenous peoples, European empires, and contemporary nation-states. The objective of this panel is to make these zones of interaction visible through careful ethnographic work and theorize North American borders and borderlands in historical, critical, and/or comparative perspective. Papers in this session will take up the study of North America from its limits and crossings, from sites of connection and entanglement, and from positions of solidarity, division, or refusal. In this way, scholars can better understand the making, unmaking, and refusal of borders, the characteristics of borderland life, and work to build solidarities across space.
Interested scholars should send a title and 150-word abstract to Sara Komarnisky (email@example.com) by January 31, 2016.
Le public et le privé dans l’espace urbain
Les villes concentrent des institutions, intérêts et ressources que l’on classe souvent comme étant soit privés, soit publics. En fait, le public et le privé s’imbriquent l’un dans l’autre, les préoccupations privées devenant souvent le moteur des actions publiques et vice versa. Tandis que la dimension publique de la ville a été grandement étudiée, sa dimension privée demeure sous-théorisée; les recherches actuelles portent surtout sur les effets néfastes de la privatisation de l’espace public sans s’attarder, par exemple, sur les dynamiques de l’intime ou du domestique en ville. Comme l’a mis en évidence l’anthropologie féministe, les sphères publiques et privées se co-produisent et sont traversées par des rapports de force et des flux de pouvoir. En transposant cette approche sur les espaces urbains, cette session cherche à explorer les interstices, les imbrications et les intersections du public et du privé et leurs conséquences sur les relations sociales dans la ville.
Veuillez envoyer votre proposition de communication avec un titre, un résumé de 100 à 150 mots, des mots clés et les noms des co-auteurs (le cas échéant) avant le 22 janvier à Martha Radice firstname.lastname@example.org et Nathalie Boucher email@example.com
[English] Debt and the Double Edge of Solidarity
Anthropologists have long been interested in the paradoxical roles that financial and other forms of debt play in social life: its potential to bind and to divide, to intensify social inequalities and to blur them; its role in both expressing and destabilizing care and kinship; its ability to render people solid citizens and deadbeats. Since the global financial crisis, as Holly High observes, debt is approaching a Maussian “total” social phenomenon, one in which “everything intermingles.” This panel explores the paradoxes of the credit/debt dyad (Gustav Peebles’s term), with particular attention to its work at/as a “double edge” of solidarity. Possible topics include but are not limited to: the role of various types of debt in forming and fracturing solidarities across and within social and geopolitical boundaries; the role of elite solidarities in establishing debt as a mechanism for governmentality and subjectivation; and anthropology’s potential to illuminate debt’s part in making and unmaking shared identities, interests and struggles within and across political movements, groups, classes, institutions and households.
Session Organizers: Robin Whitaker & David Cooney (Department of Anthropology, Memorial University of Newfoundland)
[English] Solidarit(i)és at the Intersection of Food and Religion
Food and religious communities offer a unique perspective to explore the complexities, tensions, and contradictions that arise within the dual nature of solidarity as both a place of cohesion and separation. The panel addresses foodways as political, economic, and/or cultural dimensions of production, distribution, preparation, and/or consumption in relation to religious rituals, beliefs, and practices. Though we hope to offer an open and general call to the panel, we ask that papers ethnographically consider the conference theme of Solidarit(i)és (http://cascasana2016.com/call-for-papers/) at the intersection of food and religion.
Please send inquiries and/or short abstracts (150 words) to Jason WM Ellsworth by February 4th, 2016 at Jason.Ellsworth@dal.ca
[English] Cultural Production and the State
Institutionalized arenas of culture production like film, music and performing arts industries have been described as spaces both nurturing critical public dialogue and advancing hegemonic projects. By employing notions like cultural and creative industries, culture as a resource for governance, alternativity, and artistic public sphere, arenas of cultural production can be seen as zones where government institutions, transnational agencies, cultural producers and consumers negotiate dissent and incorporation. This panel welcomes contributions of anthropologist exploring the intersections of art, market, society and state. Among the questions we would like to consider are: How do states incorporate, marginalize, engage or ignore artistic practices? How do artistic projects permeate state's projects? How do social actors in this field articulate and narrate social solidarities?
Please send inquiries and abstracts to Daniel Salas-Gonzalez (Daniel.Salas@Dal.ca) by January 31, 2016.
[English] Emerging economic futures: The intersections of informality and formality
Co-organizers: Alan Smart (University of Calgary) and B. Lynne Milgram (OCAD University)
One of the key legacies of Keith Hart’s original work is that current scholarship has replaced the informal/formal sector dualism with the recognition that informality/formality are interdependently linked. Indeed, both academic analysis and development policy increasingly bring informal and formal together, especially as policies encourage the formalization of informality. This panel will broaden the terms of this engagement by analyzing a range of formal/informal intersections. Governments and corporations, for example, may formalize informality by engaging informal actors as subcontractors or salespeople; within supra-national institutions formality/informality are negotiated and enforced through non-legally binding (soft law) tools (e.g., treaties, conventions); and NGOs, grassroots movements and civic associations often struggle to formalize and legalize their practice. By analyzing the myriad ways in which formality and informality intersect and interact – subordination, toleration, regularization, eradication, exploitation and subversion – panel papers will effectively inform the economic futures that emerge in a less Euro-centric global economy.
Key words: formality/informality; legality/illegality; Global South; development; governmentality
• DEADLINE: We ask that paper proposal Abstracts and Key Words be submitted by
January 15, 2016. Please also include your full contact and affiliation details.
• Notification of acceptance of proposals will be sent by January 22, 2016.
• Note: In order to present a paper at the 2016 CASCA/SANA conference, presenters must be members of one of these organizations.
• Further information about the conference is available at: http://cascasana2016.com/call-for-papers/
[English] Solidarities at the Edge of Exclusion
Solidarity is usually celebrated as a good thing and something that ought to be promoted. But the forging of solidarity movements necessarily sets one locus of collective values and commitments against others and can lead to marginalization, rupture, scapegoating, and exclusion. This panel engages with the irresolvable tension between inclusion and exclusion in the forging of solidarities by paying particular attention to their exclusionary sides, broadly understood. It invites contributions that ethnographically investigate how troubled forms of social difference are produced, lived, and interpreted at the level of everyday practice. We will be especially interested in the following questions: How do the dualities of solidarity making – inclusion and exclusion – play out in practical contexts? When solidarities collapse, how do social actors make sense of the breakdown of collective attachments and commitments? How do individuals and collectives navigate the everyday tensions that might develop when they are allied in one context or moment, but opposed in others? How fixed are group boundaries, and even in cases of deep collective antipathies, is group membership always or ever an “all or nothing matter”? When social actors engage in exclusionary boundary work, what justifications do they give to these practices? Finally, are there particular theoretical, methodological, or other challenges associated with ethnographic investigations of solidarity’s exclusionary sides?
Please send inquiries or abstracts of 150 words to Laura Eramian (Sociology and Social Anthropology, Dalhousie University) at firstname.lastname@example.org by January 27, 2016.
[English] Solidarity with who?: On the Challenges of Studying Up
Session to be submitted for the CASCA/SANA meetings at Dalhousie University, May 11 - 15, 2016
Anthropologists often position themselves in solidarity with marginal groups, frequently represented by our research participants. Yet, for several decades, anthropologists have also focused on studying powerful institutions, including sites of scientific and technological practice, government bureaucracies, and legal and policing systems. Through this practice of “studying-up,” anthropologists unpack the meanings and practices of those operating within and through often opaque institutional systems, providing a means of understanding and often critiquing operations of power (Nader 1989). Yet, conducting ethnographies of powerful actors and institutions can put us at odds with the interests, goals, and politics of our research participants. This panel invites papers that explore the complexities of enacting solidarities while “studying-up,” including discussions of productive and problematic solidarities in the field and beyond, different means and forms of solidarity, analyses of critical versus collaborative approaches to ethnography, and considerations of relationships other than solidarity in fieldwork.
Please send inquiries and abstracts to Samantha Breslin (email@example.com) by January 22, 2016.
*Samantha Breslin, PhD Candidate *
Department of Anthropology
Memorial University of Newfoundland
[ENGLISH] Solidarities with Indigenous Peoples in Canada and Beyond
Anthropologists work with and for Indigenous peoples in Canada and beyond. They expose negative representations about Indigenous peoples within all forms of media. In consultation with Indigenous stakeholders, anthropologists revise education programs, systems and resources providing better access and culturally appropriate instruction. Anthropologists act as expert witnesses for Indigenous peoples within the courts. They work toward solutions to pressing health challenges and problems confronting Indigenous peoples. Applied anthropologists work closely with Indigenous peoples on a host of practical projects designed to address routine and extraordinary needs while creating capacity within communities. Anthropologists collaborate with Indigenous historians and linguists building archives using Indigenous knowledge and practices to save and maintain Indigenous histories and languages. These panels invite, among other things, anthropologists and Indigenous peoples to reflect upon what solidarity requires, where solidarity-building has worked or not, and what could have been done differently.
Please submit abstracts for consideration to:
St. Thomas University
[English] More-Than-Human Solidarities: Conceptual Insights and Multispecies Political Possibilities
Session to be submitted for the CASCA/SANA meetings at Dalhousie University, May 11-15, 2016
Session organized by Kendra Coulter, Brock University
Interest in human-animal-environmental relations, posthumanism, and multispecies ethnography is growing within and beyond anthropology. How do and could webs of solidarity that move beyond anthropocentrism figure in social theory, methods, and praxis, and in the many communities with which scholars are involved? In this session, we will highlight and analyze more-than-human approaches to solidarity, and consider both the challenges and possibilities of such political and ethical commitments. In the interest of breadth and a holistic discussion, and in keeping with the spirit of solidarity, papers concentrating on solidaristic dynamics that are ethnographically-rooted, conceptual, action-oriented, and/or exploratory are welcome. Please send inquiries and/or short abstracts (150 words) to Kendra Coulter by December 1st, 2015 at firstname.lastname@example.org
More information about the CASCA/ SANA (Canadian Anthropology Society/Society for the Anthropology of North America) meetings is available at: http://cascasana2016.com/ and details about registration fees, etc. will be posted later in October.
La date limite pour les Subventions de voyage pour étudiant(e)s est le 4 mars 2016! Lisez les détails ici.
Participez au prochain numéro de Culture sur le thème de l'exclusion. Date limite de soumission: le 1 mars 2016.
Planifiez votre séjour en Nouvelle-Écosse au colloque annuel de la CASCA-SANA grâce à ces suggestions!
Vous cherchez des panélistes? Vous voulez des conseils sur l'hébergement ou les activités lorsque vous serez au colloque? Dans tous les cas, n'hésitez pas à soumettre une brève annonce à email@example.com. Nous publierons ici toutes les informations pertinentes pour faciliter la communication entre les membres tandis qu'ils se préparent pour le colloque à venir.