Advocacy Role in Anthropology - Essay Example

Running head: ADVOCACY ROLE IN ANTHROPOLOGY Advocacy Role in Anthropology Insert Insert Grade Insert 26 August Advocacy Role in AnthropologyInvolvement in development and other social activities has become part of anthropologist’s fieldwork life. In this way majority of anthropologists have ‘refused’ to stand apart from the subjects of study and instead anthropologists are accepting some form of involvement with people especially among those they work with (Gardner and Lewis p.48). Participation by anthropologists may be in form of helping in various ways with local problems.

Other anthropologists have been involved in community in other ways such as providing resources to the community. Further, other anthropologists have taken more active role in community affairs observing that they have a wider responsibility of bringing about change (Gardner and Lewis p.48). Advocacy anthropology is a sub-field within anthropology that has been growing steadily since its initiation in early 1960s (Gardner and Lewis p.48). Advocacy anthropology has long history and attachment to applied anthropology and adoption of the role of advocacy on the part of anthropologist brings with it many risks and responsibilities (Gardner and Lewis p.48). Advocacy anthropology as it has been practiced by its proponents and to large extends anthropologists is largely concerned with efforts of indigenous people to have and establish relative more control with regard to their lives.

Some of the powers sought by indigenous people include the power to retain their cultural identities and to ensure they control and maintain access to their local natural resources. The role of anthropologists in society has become complex especially with continuing global inequalities and injustices (Kellett p.21). In this way anthropologists find themselves in complex, messy and even scenario and it is in this way anthropologists get involved usually at micro-level working with communities.

As a result, some questions that becomes pertinent for anthropologists as they get engaged in community activities include: are anthropologists supposed to act and act to improve the situation of local people? More so, should anthropologists act as intermediary and voice on behalf of local people and should anthropologists play an active role as agents of change? (Kellett p.2). When anthropologist become agents of change in any particular community it dawn on them that issues even at micro-level are not homogenous but are largely heterogeneous in nature.

In this way, advocacy is likely to conflict some interest groups or even suppress some cultures. When anthropologists become aware of this, it dawn on them that role, reaction and move in the concerned community is largely complex (Kellett p.22). At the same time, anthropologists while working in the community at micro-level they discover that they cannot operate independent of politics and opinion shapers of the society. At sometimes, the anthropologist’s advocacy role may conflict political class of opinion of the society and this add up to complexity of their role.

Therefore, with the above scenario, anthropologists have to operate under complex and sometimes in uncertain environment without loosing moral and political sensitivity in all the situations. Hence, a simple question that may be asked is, how well can an anthropologist remain committed to principles, and tenets of advocacy while remaining sensitive to political and moral obligations? Singer (1990) observes that advocacy in whichever way should constantly remain goal-oriented while the anthropologist remaining aware of the consequences of actions to the social life (Kellett p.25). In this way, it can be deduced that the anthropologist should remain objective with advocacy in the community while realizing the need for cultural relativism in situations of conflict.

Layton (1996) on his part observes that anthropologists engaged in advocacy have to establish collaborative systems with key community stakeholders and their activities should remain within the tenets of ethics and morality as part of their intervention process (Kellett p.25). Further, Wade (1996) expresses the need for advocacy activities to purely remain ‘inherent reflexive practice’ whereby anthropologists activities are multiple oriented but within the frameworks of ethics and morality (Kellett p.25). Therefore, it can be concluded that advocacy in anthropology has become incompatible in the field and anthropologists cannot remain passive scholars but they should also become active agents of change.

However, as they engage in activities of advocacy, anthropologists should not forget that, their operations are complex and even with that the sensitivity in terms of moral and political obligation should be maintained and enhanced. Works CitedGardner, Katy and Lewis, David. Anthropology, development and the post-modern challenge. VA: Pluto Press, 1996. 26 August 2011 .Kellett, Peter. Advocacy in Anthropology: Active engagement or passive scholarship? Durham Anthropology Journal, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 22-31, 2009.

26 August 2011 .