APPLIED CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY IN ALASKA: NEW DIRECTIONS Kerry D. Feldman Department of Anthropology, University of Alaska Anchorage, Anchorage, AK 99508; [email protected] INTRODUCTION This volume of the Alaska Journal of Anthropology (AJA) to an expanded post-colonial collaboration in Alaska brings together papers presented at the 2006 meet- anthropology, it is hoped that more essays by Alaska ing of the Society for Applied Anthropology (SfAA) in Native scholars and researchers will be submitted to AJA. Vancouver, B.C. In response to a request by the president The two papers by Smith et al. on nutrition among ru- of SfAA for a significant “Alaska presence” at this most ral and urban Alaska Natives were also primarily written northerly conference ever held by the SfAA, thirty-three by non anthropologists (co-author Wiedman of Florida papers were solicited and presented, many in the area of International University is an anthropologist and former cultural resource management (CRM), the rest in applied president of the National Association for the Practice of cultural anthropology. Although not the focus of this vol- Anthropology); other co-authors of this paper are mem- ume, CRM research is also a significant form of applied bers of Alaska tribal elders councils. Urban and applied archaeology/anthropology in Alaska, requiring in its full research often involves interdisciplinary and collaborative dimension a clear delineation of the human/cultural as- efforts as is evident in these papers. pects of such work and, where appropriate, framing the Finally, no prior volume of AJA has focused on ap- results in relevant anthropological theory. plied cultural anthropology, although most of the cultural The essays presented here have two main foci: Urban- anthropological research in Alaska is and has been of an based papers primarily on non-Alaska Native populations applied nature. Feldman, Langdon, and Natcher (2005) and urban/rural health/aging research among Alaska provide an overview of the history of applied cultural an- Natives. There are several aspects of these papers that are thropology in Alaska. Their essay summarizes the accom- “new” in Alaska anthropology. First, there are three pa- plishments and gaps in applying cultural anthropology to pers on Hispanic populations in Anchorage, by Raymond Alaska contexts and issues. For those unfamiliar with the Wiest and his graduate student, Sara Komarnisky, who are history and dimensions of applied anthropology, the fol- both from Canada; and a paper by Belkis Marín Carrillo lowing comments are provided. from the University of Alaska Anchorage’s master’s pro- The concept of “applied anthropology” dates back gram in applied anthropology. No prior anthropological to at least 1906, when it was used to announce the research on any current ethnic group in Alaska besides establishment of a diploma program at Oxford, Alaska Natives, other than one on Filipinos, has been pub- while the term “practical anthropology” was used lished. Another paper, by Meadow, Meek, and McNeeley as early as the 1860s by James Hunt, founder of from the University of Alaska Fairbanks, examines poten- the Anthropological Society of London. (Eddy and Partridge 1987:4) tial rural-urban migration scenarios in Fairbanks, among northern Alaska Native villagers, that might result from The British were the first to formally recognize climate change impacts. the practical value of anthropology and also the first to employ applied anthropologists. E. B. Also, new in health and nutrition studies of Alaska Tylor considered anthropology to be a “policy sci- Natives for AJA is a paper authored by Alaska Natives ence” and advocated its use in improving the hu- (Graves et al., who are not anthropologists). As we move man condition. Anthropology was first used in Alaska Journal of Anthropology vol. 7, no. 1 (2009) 1 the administration of the British colonies under Studies Center and other agencies and universities. the rubric of indirect rule (originated by Lord (Crowell 2000, italics added) Lugard) by Northcote Thomas in Nigeria in 1908. (Reed 1998) These approaches to research in Alaska have formed and continue to be situated along a continuum, often with A simple definition of applied anthropology is offered no clear boundaries separating them. That is, applied re- by van Willigen (1993)—“anthropology put to use”— searchers in Alaska can and do add to basic anthropologi- which is research or work not primarily or in its origin cal knowledge and research methods in Alaska, and basic aimed at adding basic, pure, or abstract knowledge to the research provides a foundation for effective practice or ap- discipline of anthropology itself, although the latter can plied projects. This joining of basic and applied anthropo- and does occur. One main point of the Feldman, Langdon, logical research has been occurring since 1999 in the MA and Natcher essay was to explain why the separation of ba- degree program of the Department of Anthropology at sic from applied research, found elsewhere in the U.S., has the University of Alaska Anchorage, which offers applied been and continues to be illusory in Alaska. As explained tracks in archaeology, cultural anthropology, and biologi- by Aron Crowell, director of the Arctic Studies Center of cal anthropology. the Smithsonian Institution in Anchorage: There are several kinds of applied anthropology, all There is a growing recognition that a collaborative, of which have occurred in Alaska, beginning with the community-based research model can be applied “traditional applied anthropology” visible in the careers in a wide range of contexts and work effectively of Malinowski and Radcliffe-Brown from Great Britain within the value systems of both villages and scientific in the early twentieth century who offered data useful to disciplines. Archaeological excavations, linguistic studies, oral history, cultural landscape studies, the British colonial administrators for more effective man- subsistence studies, documentation of museum agement of indigenous people (the “know-it-all” anthro- collections and recording of indigenous knowledge pologist proposes solutions to problems of administering of arctic ecosystems are a few examples of current the Other). In the 1950s and 1960s this approach was re- cooperative work. Both communities and research- placed by “action anthropology” in the U.S., now referred ers benefit from consultation, information sharing, to as participatory action research or collaborative research cost sharing and co-design of such projects, and many are organized, funded, or directed by Alaska (Stull and Schensul 1987). It places emphasis on the host Native organizations. Such projects help to support community’s control of the identification and proposed essential goals of Alaska Native communities: the solutions to their problems, using anthropological exper- integration of cultural heritage and contemporary tise. Policy research, which formally entered applied an- identity, social health, education and management thropology in the 1980s, aimed at identifying the assump- of critical resources. Local involvement and educa- tions, implementation, and outcomes of policy regardless tional outreach can be incorporated through many channels. For example, anthropologists and others of the policy intent (Feldman and Langdon 1982). contribute to the development of tribal museums, cul- In that decade, “practicing anthropology” became tural centers and exhibits and to educational materi- identified as a potent career track, and the National als for schools. (Crowell 2000, italics added) Association for the Practice of Anthropology (NAPA) was formally recognized within the American Anthropological Crowell describes numerous collaborative archaeological Association in 1983. Practicing anthropologists are those and other projects in Alaska. For example: employed in public and private nonuniversity organiza- The Utqiagvik Archaeology Project in Barrow tions or agencies. Advocacy anthropology and contract (State University of New York, North Slope anthropology are other kinds of applied work that com- Borough, National Park Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs) was another landmark project. Research plete the typology described in Feldman et al. (2005) re- was carried out jointly, including studies made of garding the history of applied cultural anthropology in human remains recovered at the site. Over the past Alaska. Advocacy anthropologists from the 1960s onward 15 years, many excavations and field schools have abandoned the stance of “value free” science and promot- featured close cooperation between Native organi- ed a moral or social value for the survival and well-being of zations and the National Park Service (especially its some group. “Anthropology under contract” simply iden- Shared Beringian Heritage Program), University of Alaska, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arctic tifies the nature of the relationship between the anthro- 2 applied cultural anthropology in alaska pologist and the contracting organization: The results of seems as though “applied anthropologist” was a lesser pro- the research are produced for an organization at a specified fessional identity in Alaska academia. Similar academic time under specified circumstances. Applied anthropolo- pecking order conflicts are found at universities in physics gists, in Alaska and elsewhere in the U.S., are expected or chemistry departments, in that basic/abstract research to know all that abstract/basic anthropologists know in