Newsletter: January 2001
Ann Miles and Fred Bloom Co-Contributing Editors
A Note from the Editors
Because of financial constraints on the level of the AAA, starting this month all section columns have been reduced in size by a half. We are now limited to a mere 700 words per printed column. So, in order to maintain the high quality associated with this column over the years, and to preserve this important means of communication to the entire membership we have decided this month to inter-mingle our print and web columns. So, this month’s printed column introduces articles which can be found in their entirety on the SMA webpage. While the column Editors as a group expressed our outrage at the cuts there is not much we can do alone. Please also let the AAA board and AN Editors know how you feel about having your column news cut in this way.
Call for SMA Invited Session Proposals: 2001 Annual Meetings November 28-December 2, Washington D.C.
SMA members are encouraged to submit proposals for SMA Invited Sessions for the 2001 AAA Annual Meeting, the theme for which is “100 Years of Anthropology: Transformations of the Discipline.” Proposals selected for Invited Session status are ensured a spot on the meeting schedule and receive special designation in the printed program. Invited Sessions are reviewed in advance, and proposals must be received no later than March 19, 2001. Proposals should be sent directly to Andrea Wiley, Anthropology, MSC 7501, James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA 22807. Do not send registration forms and fees to the program chair. If your panel is selected, you should send in the materials to AAA by the deadline for all proposals (April 2, 2001) along with our letter of acceptance.
For more information, and to discuss your proposal ideas contact Andrea Wiley (wileyas@jmu.edu; 540-434-5764).
How to Write an Effective Abstract for the SMA Program
By Ruthbeth Finerman (U Memphis)
Having served on the 1999 and 2000 SMA program committees, I wanted to pass along some brief suggestions that could help your proposal compete for a spot on the 2001 annual meeting program. Admittedly, no volunteered paper or organized session abstract can be guaranteed a place on the program, since the ultimate decision to accept or reject submissions lies with the AAA Program Chair. It's also worth noting that AAA Program Chairs must contend with a number of restrictions, including equity in representation among the various AAA Sections, and unpredictable variations in the total volume of submissions and meeting room space. Nevertheless, proposals that are highly ranked by the SMA's program committee are likely to receive approval on the final program.
Since program committees are generally unreceptive to bribery or extortion, your best bet to win support for the SMA program is to write a superior proposal. A high quality submission should accomplish all of the following:
First, be sure you follow directions on all materials for submission. AAA Headquarters will not even forward your proposal to the SMA if it arrives after the deadline or if the paperwork is faulty. This means that you must meet the AAA time table and complete all required sections on proposal cover sheets and registration forms. I particularly encourage individuals preparing paper abstracts to check the box agreeing to chair their session; this makes it easier for committees to create panels from volunteered papers.
Second, and I can't stress this enough: make sure your proposal is as specific, detailed and well-constructed as possible. Your paper or session will receive a higher rating if the committee understands precisely what it is that you intend to accomplish with your presentation or panel. Delineate key topics, note if presentations will be based on original research (vs. secondary sources) and, if possible, include an overview of the data and methodology. It is also helpful to identify the location and time frame for research. Papers and panels may choose to address the AAA meeting theme, but they are not required to do so.
Third, ensure that paper and session abstracts are well-written and carefully proofed. Proposals that are poorly composed and troubled by fundamental errors in spelling and grammar are disheartening to review and, even if accepted, can become a lingering embarrassment to the author once published in the AAA Meeting Abstracts.
Fourth, session organizers should constitute the best possible panel. Make sure that all abstracts are well written, closely match the session theme, and combine to form a cohesive whole. Also, recruit the proper number of high caliber presentations. While you should never "pad" sessions with unsuitable papers, proposals with just 3 or 4 participants can appear weak when reviewed along with panels featuring a rich array of well-matched abstracts. Above all, avoid creating double sessions unless truly merited; it is far preferable to limit your proposal to a single session of up to 7 exceptional papers. Double sessions that contain just 8 to 10 presenters, that feature a full roster of weak abstracts, or that address a topic of limited appeal will receive a lower rating from the program committee. Session organizers are also cautioned most emphatically to avoid "inbreeding" among panelists; be as inclusive as possible in recruiting presenters. While there are some exceptions, the SMA and AAA alike strongly discourage panels with numerous presenters affiliated with the same agency or institution.
Finally, be aware that fresh and innovative proposals are greeted with particular enthusiasm by the SMA Program Chairs. Individuals are encouraged to develop papers and sessions that address a cutting edge or underrepresented topic, offer inventive approaches to issues, and/or feature a creative format for exchanging insights.
Individuals requiring information or wishing to discuss their ideas for papers or sessions are welcome to contact the 2001 SMA Program Chair, Andrea Wiley at wileyas@jmu.edu.
Praxis, Policy and the Poor: Critical Ethnography of International Health Policies
By Arachu Castro (Harvard / Partners in Health) and Joyce V. Millen (Institute for Health and Social Justice)
Medical anthropologists have long participated in national and international efforts to improve health. We have worked with epidemiologists to explain disease patterns and we have collaborated extensively with public health providers to promote successful, “appropriate,” and “culturally sensitive” health interventions. But with few exceptions, we have focused most of our efforts on analyzing, improving, or evaluating specific problems within health programs, such as discrepancies of beliefs and values between implementers of health initiatives and their targeted recipients. Rarely have we stepped back to examine the wider socioeconomic constraints placed on those who control the purse strings of national and international health policies. Yet, if we are to get to the heart of why some health initiatives succeed in terms of improving health outcomes, while others fail or even worsen health problems, we must also examine these constraints and the core principles that guide national level and international efforts to eradicate or control disease. These were the goals of the session organized by Critical Anthropology of Health and presented at the AAA meeting in San Francisco. The session was chaired by Kristian Heggenhougen (Harvard) and Paul Farmer (Harvard / Partners In Health) served as discussant.
Are the principles guiding health policy based on beliefs in health as a human right and a public good? Are they tied to notions of health equity, with an ethical imperative to protect the poor and other vulnerable groups? Or, are they driven more by fear and less benign ideological and geopolitical objectives? These are among the questions we sought to address in this panel. Using both conventional and novel anthropological approaches, panelists examined the decision-making processes and rhetorical devices employed by governments and intergovernmental agencies—the traditional actors of international health. We also scrutinized the increasingly influential role and approaches used by new players in the field of international health, including private business, the media, and nongovernmental organizations. The six papers in this session addressed these themes and asked hard questions regarding the implications for poor people of health policies generated from non-health concerns.
Jim Kim (Harvard / Partners In Health) began by analyzing how the neoliberal paradigm has influenced public perceptions of cost effectiveness in health and ultimately thwarted efforts to control the rapid spread of diseases such as tuberculosis. Joyce V. Millen (Institute for Health and Social Justice) explored how reigning, yet conflicting, ideologies of intellectual property protection and global free trade impede international efforts to render AIDS medicines more affordable to the majority of people afflicted with the disease. Arachu Castro (Harvard / Partners In Health) examined the politics and consequences of aid conditionality in Zanzibar; Rhoda Kanaaneh (New York) presented Israel’s political misuse and differential use of population policies based on fear and geopolitics; and, Margaret M. Connors (Institute for Health and Social Justice), the ideological contradictions and corporate incentives behind the United States’ “assistance” to Colombia as part of the war on drugs. Lastly, Dina Martínez (South Florida) and Linda Whiteford (South Florida) compared infectious disease incidence rates between the Dominican Republic and Cuba, two countries that have adopted distinctive ideological, political, and social directions.
The session reflected that even when sound epidemiological findings, considerations of equity and health as a fundamental human right form the core of bilateral and international health policy, well intentioned health efforts are often undermined at the implementation stage when the interests of capital and the interrelated trilogy of fear, ideology, and geopolitics come to take precedence over public health concerns.
Grant Opportunity: NIH Cancer Research Opportunity
In order to encourage investigators with expertise in the social and behavioral sciences, The Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, has developed a new mechanism. It is designed to encourage applications which emphasize innovative, developmental behavioral research in cancer prevention and control. This program is intended to encourage a group of investigators in cancer control, using both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Please note the annual receipt dates for this program are February 1, June 1, and October 1. Applicants may request up to $100,000 per year in direct costs, the total project period not to exceed two years. Applications may be obtained through your University’s Sponsored Programs Office or directly at Division of Extramural Outreach and Information Resources, NIH, 6701 Rockledge Dr., Bethesda, MD 20892-7910, Telephone (301)435-0714. Email grantsinfo@nih.gov,http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/index.html. Contact Sabra Woolley at (301) 435-4589 or sabra_woolley@nih.gov with questions.
SMA members are encouraged to submit announcements, essays, reviews, brief research reports or news from the field. Column space is extremely limited, so submissions should be brief, some may be edited for clarity or length or abridged in print and found in their entirety on the website. Longer essays should be accompanied by an abstract, Submissions are needed about two months prior to publication. Please include affiliation details for yourself and for people whom you may mention. Send submission to Ann Miles, Anthropology, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49008; tel 616/387-3983, fax 616-387-3999 or Miles@wmich.edu.
To submit to this column, contact Ann Miles at miles@wmich.edu.