Anthropology still finding its feet
In 1974, seven years before the forma! study of sociology and anthropology by Nepali scholars had even begun, Khem Bahadur Bista asked the "Nepalese authorities to consider whether to remain indifferent and let., .(foreign) researchers do whatever they like or channelise them in a desirable way to meet the requirements of the Nepalese government, which is preoccupied with the socioeconomic development of the country. "Bista, a Nepali anthropologist trained in France and now working for the Centre for Economic and Development Administration at Tribhuvan University, had signalled (he start of a battle that still rages today over the merits of applied anthropology as against those of pure research.
The schism that grew between some foreign and Nepali research camps was still apparent at the first national congress of the Sociological -Anthropological Society of Nepal
Ram Chhetri, a Nepali anthropologist now working for the Nepal Australia Community Forestry Project, says foreign scholars have done research "with no relevance to Nepali society" for many years. The he art-searching over relevant really took off at Tribhuvan University after 198l when it began to offer Nepali students Masters degrees in sociology and anthropology. People then asked why such obscure research was encouraged. Why should the university bother to grant affiliation to such researchers? Chhetri, if you had not already guessed, believes Nepal needs applied research that addresses local problems and which can guide policy makers. Both Nepali and foreign scholars, Chhetri says, should be encouraged in this type of study. "I´ve a friend doing research among the Jhonkris. But the abstract level at which he [works]…is of no importance even to the local community, forget about others", Chhetri complained.
While Declan Quigley, of Queen´s College, Bel fast, drew comparisons between the literature of the Newar caste system and that found in India, at the CNAS/Sydney conference, one Nepali scholar whispered to a foreign colleague:"If this is anthropology, then I´m definitely not a social anthropologist." But, says Bruce Owens, presently at the University of Chicago, if anthropology in Nepal is to make sense to the larger community of scholars, then "there is need, at least academically, to get into the larger theoretical body of literature. That might be frustrating to our Nepali colleagues who do not share this need."
Prayag Raj Sharma, former dean of CNAS, feels that the Nepali-foreigner divide is not as wide as some people make out. "Resentment between Nepali and Western scholars has been played up", Sharma said. Diverse factors, such as institutional and national traditions of research, as well as personal preferences, may influence a foreign scholar´s choice of research topic. Sharma adds that it is unreasonable for Nepalis to resent the Western scholar´s abstract level of analysis. "They are ready for it", he says, "and it might be some time before we Nepalis can do the same." But if there really were a schism, Sharm a believes, Nepali scholars should be encouraged to first identify national research needs and then to invite foreign scholars to collaborate. But. Sharma regrets, "examples of collaborative research are rare. There is non eat CNAS right now."
The argument is clearly not black and white. Development has been a national priority for four decades, yet its meaning is still a subject of heated debate. If is no wonder that Nepali anthropologists participate more actively in discussions on anthropology´s relationship with development. But, given that the concept is so nebulous, is it possible to sort research proposals into those that are relevant and those that are not? Who is to say that today´s abstract research will not turn out to answer tomorrow´s development goals? And is it wise for anthropologists to identify so closely with development goals officially stated by political parties? Doing so would make them as vulnerable and no more valuable than, say, historians who, in the service of state powers that be, invent ancient histories suitably steeped in glory.
Given the interest of donors in applied anthropology, it is perhaps easier to see why, at least for Nepali scholars, there may be less attraction for abstraction. Indeed, there were many papers at the two conferences concerning anthropology and the management of resources such as forests, traditional irrigation systems, wetlands and agricultural land. More than half, though, concerned aspects of social forestry, such as the social consequences of deforestation, indigenous forest knowledge and management systems and gender dimensions of the´ ´ecological crisis". This is perhaps not surprising given that "Nepali social forestry studies have led the world", according to Don Messerschmidt, an advisor at Pokhara´s Institute of Forestry.
Attraction for Abstraction
Messeischmidt says social forestry is a new field which Nepali scholars can pioneer. "Also, there are plenty of jobs since there are more than 50 social forestry projects in Nepal at the moment." Messerschmidt sees social forestry as an ideal field for collaboration between Nepali and foreign scholars. He says that although relatively better access to current literature has helped Nepali scholars to succeed in social forestry "it is the wide open field and the money that is there to support this type of research that matters more."
Om Gurung, former head of sociology and anthropology alTribhuvan needs no convincing of the valuable contribution that applied anthropologists can make to development programmes. In 1990, he wrote of their role in providing information to donors and motivating communilies to accept the implementation of programmes. However, Gurung observed, "becauseNepali sociologists and anthropologists are working primarily to serve the interests of funding agencies, they have been unable to develop a particular Nepali theory of development." And therein lies a danger.
Social forestry is not the only area of research that has captured the imagination of donors. Applied anthropology in agriculture, irrigation and community medicine have proved equally appealing to donor agencies. It´s very success — at least in terms of donor support raises worries about whose interests such research is meant to serve. Michael Allen, organiser of the CN AS/Sydney conference, warns that "a distinct type of Nepali anthropology might develop on the back of donors." Such an anthropology might lose sight of its intellectual base.
Could an endless flow of donor money eventually tip the scales in,favour of applied anthropology? It seems not. Chhetri, for one, believes there should be "continuous cross-fertilisation between the two sub-disciplines of anthropology." Academic anthropologists should also look into the "grey literature" of dev elopment projects, says Chhetri, because it too contains "new concepts, insights and methods useful for all scholars in the discipline." Messerschmidt feels that applied experts could benefit from occasional removal from the field to a place where they might be "allowed to think and write exclusively for the academic world."
Bikas Wizardry
Listening to Gurung, it seems that Nepali anthropologists have helped to extend the network of government and donor-sponsored program mes. B ut these programmes, replete with the most up-to-date development rhetoric, have hardly empowered their stated beneficiaries. Nepal now has what anthropologist Padam La] Devkota at Tribhuvan calls "-silent listeners" — masses for whom participatory development means participating in a predetermined way in projects designed elsewhere and by others.
In a paper presented at theSASON Congress entitled "Anthropology and Development in Nepal: A Vision from Below", Devkota envisaged an anthropology of Nepal that would empower the poor and help to bring about socioeconomic transformations. He called on Nepali colleagues to accept the challenge of transforming anthropology into an art of human emancipation by being willing to leam from people who may be poor but know more about their needs and concerns than educated experts have ever acknowledged. Devkota wants to see the emergence of an anthropology that feeds directly into grassroots development activity.
But judging from the record of the role played by Nepali anthropologists in the country´s development there seems little hope for such an emancipatory anthropology in the near future, Dilli Ram Dahal, a senior Nepali anthropologist at CNAS, says improving their living conditions — the "bread and butter" factor — has defined the participation of social scientists in Nepal´s development. He says that the conlribution of Nepali anthropologists to Devkota´s empowering development lias been "non-existent".
Anthropologists and social scientists, whether Nepali or foreign, have fed the top-down delivery of anti-people "development" projects. Nepali social scientists have been described as "bikas wizards" who wave magic wands to produce the instant feasibility, evaluation and impact studies. Working as development advisors, consultants, project researchers, programme officers, and soon, they profit financially from a knowledge of the "native´s point of view" that is supposedly superior to that of their expatriate counterparts.
The Natives Strike Back
Twenty years ago, A nthr apology and tlie Colonial Encounter (edited by Talal Asad) opened discussion on anthropology´s colonial links. It showed how ethnographies were written to meet imperial administrative needs. Anthropologist Arturo Escobar, of Smith College, Massachussetts, recently suggested in the pages of American Ethnologist that ii might be equally relevant now to discuss anthropology and the development encounter.
Escobar is referring to the development of an industry which profits by the study of "backwardness". The anthropologists it employs study the natives on behalf of their would-be saviours, powerful institutions such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and its lookalikes, which pay highly for such studies. The prescriptions of such institutions are then adopted by the Third World country. The anthropologists´ roie in development in Nepal to date would provide rich material for analysing the Development Encounter.
The close questioning, in recent years, of the methods employed to lend authenticity to anthropological works is a measure of anthropology´s search for purpose. Such reflection has primarily focussed on the anthropologists´ claim that living among their subjects affords them unique insight into the native point of view. The scrutiny has brought into question the legitimacy that field work has traditionally lent anthropological research.
Anthropological authority is further shaken when the very subjects of anthropological research begin to appear in seminar rooms, asking questionsoftheintrepidstudents of their culture. The subjects talk back, and not always with the kind of politeness that is expected in seminar rooms, questioning the academic study of their livesinwaysthat sometime s m akes anthropology appear absurd. Their judgement wrests power from the anthropologists to being "experts" on their "local customs". Are they, then, any any more well-informed than the interested lay person who is familiar with an area and its people?
Objectivity has been the prime disciplinary goal of anthropology thus far, but with native scholars and native subjects around, objectivity, if indeed such a thing is possible, becomes only one among many goals of anthropological research. Breaking anthropology´s encounter with development reduces the power it has so far enjoyed but also gives hope for the emergence of an empowering anthropology.
Anthropology 2000
Antliropology of the modern world, if it is to be meaningful, is forced to address the nation state. In the anthropology of Nepal it is the newest area of study. Since the politics of identity is the politics par excellence of any modern nation state — and the advent of democracy in Nepal permits more strident expression of politics and identity — alliances between national politics and ethnicity deserve more anthropological attention. Bill Fisher, currently in Nepal to study the emergence otjanajati politics at the national level is confident that the "relationship between national politics and politics of ethnicity will be the topicof the anthropology of Nepal during the 1990s." As Fisher notes, Nepal already has a wide range of ethnographic studies (except for the Terai region) which new researchers build on to tackle this relationship. Such research may present us with fewer boring debates on whether a particular people arc a tribe or a caste, bu t rather emphasise their place in history and reveal the factors and interaction between them that contribute to the complexity that is Nepal today.