The major essay gives students the opportunity to apply the theoretical, conceptual and analytical tools from earlier weeks in the course to a case study of their choice relating to the course content. Students are required to identify a particular topic relating to the course and develop a specific research question which they will respond to in the form of an academic research essay. Students are given considerable freedom in how they chose their topic. It may be focusing on a specific theoretical approach, a specific policy challenge or a specific aid organisation.
II would like to cover ‘why the culture is often regarded as obstacles in development?’, with the argument of James Scott’s ‘Seeing Like a State’.
I felt the logic applies quite similar: the modern countries start trying to make their citizens ligible , and something cannot be grasped is an obstacle. Likewise, the donors may want to have the recipient countries legible but often the different culture makes it difficult. I thought that was the one of main reasons why the culture is deemed as obstalces in the development sector.
So the components of the essay will be;
1. The concept of legibility in ‘Seeing Like a State’
2. How this can be applied in the development field within one or more case studies
[Weekly Topics and Readings]
Week 1 Introducing culture and development
Eriksen, T.H., 2015. Small Places, Large Issues: An Introduction to Social and Cultural Anthropology. London: Pluto Press. Chapter 1. (available as e-book)
Week 2: development, culture and anthropological engagements
Mosse, David. 2013. The Anthropology of International Development. Annual Review of Anthropology 42 (1): 22746.
Crewe, E. and Axelby, R., 2013. Anthropology and Development: Culture, Morality and Politics in a Globalised World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 1&2.
Week 3: Subjects and objects of development: aid institutions and “the poor”
Mosse, David. 2005. The Goddess and the PRA: Local Knowledge and Planning. Cultivating Development: An Ethnography of Aid Policy and Practice, no. August: 75102.
Lie, Jon Harald Sande. 2015. Developmentality: Indirect Governance in the World BankUganda Partnership. Third World Quarterly 36 (4): 72340.
Crewe, E. and Axelby, R., 2013. Anthropology and Development: Culture, Morality and Politics in a Globalised World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 3&4.
Fisher, William F. 1997. DOING GOOD? The Politics and Antipolitics of NGO Practices. Annual Review of Anthropology 26 (1): 43964.
Week 4: Entitlement and authority (human rights and development hierarchies)
Eriksen, Thomas Hylland. 2001. Between Universalism and Relativism: A Critique of the UNESCO Concept of Culture. In Culture and Rights, edited by Marie-Bndicte Dembour, Jane K. Cowan, and Richard A. Wilson, 12748. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crewe, E. and Axelby, R., 2013. Anthropology and Development: Culture, Morality and Politics in a Globalised World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 6.
Crewe, E. and Axelby, R., 2013. Anthropology and Development: Culture, Morality and Politics in a Globalised World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 5.
Week 5: Economic and political dimensions of development
Ferguson, James. 2015. Give a Man a Fish: From Patriarchal Productionism to the Revalorization of Distribution. In Give a Man a Fish: Reflections on the New Politics of Distribution, 3562. Durham: Duke University Press.
Crewe, E. and Axelby, R., 2013. Anthropology and Development: Culture, Morality and Politics in a Globalised World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 7&8.
Week 6: Culture as obstacle or resource?
Nyri, P. and Breidenbach, J., 2009. Chapter 2: Culture. In: Seeing Culture Everywhere, from Genocide to Consumer Habits. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 84121. (e-book)
Crewe & Harrison, 2005. “Seeing Culture as Barrier”, in Edelman, M. and Haugerud, A., The Anthropology of Development and Globalization: From Classical Political Economy to Contemporary Neoliberalism. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 232-234.
Week 7: Anthropological Perspectives on poverty measurements
Green, M., 2007. Perspectives on poverty from social anthropology. The Journal of Development Studies, 42 (7), 11081129.
Sen, A., 1998. Mortality as an indicator of economic success and failure. Economic Journal, 108 (446), 125.
Apthorpe, R., 1997. Human development reporting and social anthropology. Social Anthropology, 5 (1), 2134.
Merry, S.E., 2016. The seductions of quantification: Measuring human rights, gender violence, and sex trafficking. University of Chicago Press. (chapter 2)
Week 8: Anthropology of Development and Development Anthropology (brokers)
Stirrat, R.L., 2000. Cultures of consultancy. Critique of Anthropology, 20 (1), 3146.
Malam, L., 2012. Sewing The Line A Qualitative Baseline Analysis Of The Risks And Opportunities Posed For Young Women By Migration From Rural Laos To Vientiane For The Purpose Of Employment In The Garment Manufacturing Industry, (July), 1-35 & 52-54.
Olivier de Sardan, Jean-Pierre. 2005. Anthropology and Development: Understanding Contemporary Social Change. London: Zed Books. Chapter 11.
Week 9: Humanitarianism
Fassin, D., 2007. Humanitarianism as a Politics of Life. Public Culture, 19 (3), 499520.
Dunn, E.C., 2012. The Chaos of Humanitarian Aid: Adhocracy in the Republic of Georgia. Humanity: An International Journal of Human Rights, Humanitarianism, and Development, 3 (Spring), 123.
Stirrat, Jock. 2006. Competitive Humanitarianism: Relief and the Tsunami in Sri Lanka. Anthropology Today 22 (5): 1116.
Week 10: Health & Development
Lyttleton, Chris. 2008. Mekong Erotics: Men Loving/Pleasuring/Using Men. Bangkok: UNESCO. Please read the foreword, introduction, chapter 6, conclusion and recommendations.
Week 11: Development-Migration nexus
Bylander, M., 2014. Borrowing across borders: Migration and microcredit in Rural Cambodia. Development and Change, 45 (2), 284307.
Molland, S., 2018. Sedentary optics: Static anti-trafficking and mobile victims. Current Anthropology, 59 (2), 115137.
Lindquist, Johan. 2015. Of Figures and Types: Brokering Knowledge and Migration in Indonesia and Beyond. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 21 (S1): 16277.
Week 12: Development, Culture and Futures
Li, Tania Murray. 2017. After Development: Surplus Population and the Politics of Entitlement. Development and Change 48 (6): 124761.
Crewe, E. and Axelby, R., 2013. Anthropology and Development: Culture, Morality and Politics in a Globalised World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 9.
[Marking Criteria]
1. Argument: Essay contains a strong and lucid argument which is clearly substaniated throughout the main body of the essay. The essay may be highly thought-provoking and contribute to scholarly knowledge. Introduction and conclusion used effectively, including signalling the primary contents of essay.
2. Evidence&Lit: Uses variety types of evidence effectively; demonstrates an outstanding comprehension of the source material; Literature contexualises the research elegantly; Draws connections or conclusions from different forms of evidence.
3. Expression: Writing is clear, consice, and direct. Grammatical and speeing errors are rare. Author presents ideas in accessible way with some sense of reader’s need for variety, examples, and explanation.
4. Referencing: In-text citations and References. Cited all complete and appropriate. Author integrates acknowledging sources with paraphrased as well as quoted material.
5. Structure: Fully & imaginatevely supports argument & purpose. Sequence of ideas is effective. Transitions are effective.

Order Now