RD BA graduate Nicholes on how DANSRD prepared him for international graduate school success

At the end of Spring 2022, I will submit my graduate thesis on social movements and cultural trauma as part of the Human Security Master’s Program at Aarhus University in Denmark. Five years ago, I could not have imagined myself nearing the completion of a graduate degree or even the type of person applying to doctoral programs. Academia, in general, was outside anything I could really have imagined. All of this taken into consideration — I can only give gratitude for what feels like an endless number of people willing to put in the effort supporting me throughout my academic career. A significant amount of that effort rests with the excellent faculty and staff at the Department of Alaska Native Studies and Rural Development.

Nicholes (back row, second from the right) with DANSRD faculty, staff, and fellow graduates, May 2019.

I first began my studies in the Rural Development Bachelor of Arts program at the University of Alaska Fairbanks in 2017, leaving my home in Seattle and heading north to Alaska. I was nervous and excited about my transition to Alaska as anyone will be when taking the leap to somewhere new. I should not have worried in the least however, as the support I received from my professors and staff was fantastic from day one. All my needs as I settled into my new home were met without issue and the university environment was undoubtedly one of the most welcoming I had ever experienced. Once my studies began, I found that the topics covered were comprehensive in scope and intensive in their depth. The Rural Development program covered topics ranging from law, public policy, project development, environmental crises, history, ethics, business planning, and human development theory.

Following my UAF graduation, I applied and was accepted into Aarhus University in 2020. One more move taking me further and farther than I had been on my own. Surprisingly, I found little to no issues adapting to postgraduate education. My Rural Development degree had prepared me. Frankly, I should have realized that fact from the first class I ever took at UAF, Rural Alaska Land Issues. I still remember the first day and walking into Professor Kathleen Meckel’s class — Not only one of the most welcoming professors I ever had the opportunity to meet, but also an excellent guide into what would be an entire semester covering Alaskan land laws and policy. There was never a separation between what I studied and how it impacted Alaska, which helped me develop a skill set used throughout my master’s program today — particularly in research.

Moesgaard Campus (MOCA) where the Anthropology, Human Security, Archaeology and Sustainable Heritage Management Programs are held at Aarhus University.

On the practical side, I also learned various skills essential to anyone’s academic career. I learned how to produce written work and deliverables at the postgraduate level. More than that, I was given a practical education on project design, presentation, grant writing, and research development that I had never learned outside of university. When diving into our final semester, I received in-depth support on developing a thesis and research methods while covering criticism and theoretical developments in research methodology.  At the end of the program, I felt more than capable of discussing theory with my professors, covering figures like Amartya Sen and Paulo Freire, depopulation theory, and many others. I also found myself throughout the program learning through discussions with my classmates and peers as the diverse cohort I studied with all had experiences reached outside the classroom. Even though my studies in the master’s program have shifted their focus outside of the Alaskan context, I still find my research revolving around many of the same topics I studied in the Rural Development program. Issues of inequality, ecological crises, food scarcity, public policy, and law are not only limited to Alaska. Additionally, the focus in Alaska didn’t restrict me in the least; Instead, it allowed me to delve deeper into the topics at hand around real issues felt in the region. Ultimately, as a master’s student, research and my thesis are the final goals; I would have been on a less sure path if not for the Rural Development program and everyone involved.

Rooftop view of Aarhus, Denmark.

Senator John Sackett: Leader and Mentor by Emeritus Professor Jenny Bell Jones

DANSRD staff, students and faculty, were deeply saddened to learn of the passing of Senator John Sackett. We extend our condolences to his family and Tribe.

Senator Sackett was born June 3, 1944 at spring camp, up the Huslia River, a tributary of the Koyukuk River. When he was six, he attended St. Mark’s mission in Nenana for a year after which a school was built and the Territory sent a teacher to Huslia. Later he went to Sheldon Jackson High School in Sitka and graduated in 1963. He studied at Ohio University for a year before returning to Alaska to attend UAF.

At 21, in 1966, he was the youngest person ever to be elected to the Alaska Legislature and he won his seat by two votes. He was involved with the early development of Fairbanks Native Association in 1965 through 1967. He also served as President of Tanana Chiefs Conference from 1966 to 1968 and as President of Doyon Limited from 1972 to 1976. He received an honorary doctorate of laws from UAF in 2013.

Senator Sackett filled many important leadership positions over his years of service to Alaska including two terms in the State House serving on the House Finance Committee and fourteen years in the Senate.

After two terms in the House, he took a break from politics and completed a degree in Business Administration (Accounting with a minor in Political Science) from UAF in 1972, after which he returned to the Alaska Senate where he served on the Senate Finance Committee. Senator Sackett was a strong voice for Alaska Native land claims and made sure that the State of Alaska paid its share into the Alaska Native Fund as required by ANCSA. He used his power as chairman and co-chairman of the Senate Finance Committee to make sure that rural priorities were properly financed and services were provided.

In later years he was incredibly generous with his knowledge in participating in the DANSRD leadership seminars. He showed many of us an incredible example of how to successfully combine traditional and modern lifeways. That knowledge was foundational for many DANSRD graduates who benefited from his kindness in sharing what he knew, and he will be missed by us. We encourage you to take a little time to learn more about Senator Sackett by listening to his 1991 interviews with the late Dr. Bernice Joseph on the Fairbank Native Association Project Jukebox at https://jukebox.uaf.edu/fna/htm/sackettpg.htm

You can also read his own story, written in 2010 online at https://uaf.edu/dansrd/files/Sackett_NOVEMBER2010.pdf This story is an education in itself!

John Sackett with DANSRD faculty and students at the 2010 leadership seminar. Senator Sackett is in the center with the red pullover.

DANSRD, Development, and Education: Professor Carroll visits Finland

Beautiful curtains of lights in downtown Helsinki.

We often forget just how unique the Department of Alaska Native Studies and Rural Development (DANSRD) is in the world of Indigenous higher education and how fortunate we are to have programs that emphasize Alaska Native and rural student needs and perspectives as learners, researchers, and development practitioners instead of objects of study or top down planning.   Last year I started looking closely at our graduates’ senior and master’s projects and theses to understand what areas DANSRD students are most interested in and why, and with the budget crisis this summer I began also gathering information about the impacts of DANSRD graduates in their communities. So, this fall when I saw the call for papers for the Northern Political Economy Symposium in Rovaniemi, Finland I decided to put some of the work I’d been doing together and submit an abstract.

The author and a friend siting at a restaurant table in front of a window looking out onto a community square in Helsinki.
Irja took this beautiful photo of Hanna and me at a local restaurant. One of my favorite things about being in Finland was that northern foods like reindeer, lingonberries (our lowbush cranberries) and tart northern blueberries were a part of everyday food even at restaurants.

I spent a week in Finland in mid-November, first in Helsinki and then on to Rovaniemi to present at the Northern Political Economy Symposium at the University of Lapland. In Helsinki Saami linguist Irja Seurujärvi-Kari, my excellent host, introduced me to her friends and colleagues, including Hanna Guttorm and Pirjo Virtanen, at the University of Helsinki Indigenous Studies program and we spent a lovely two days visiting and talking about Indigenous issues in Finland. I was able to speak to Professor Virtanen’s Introduction to Indigenous Research Methods class about my teaching and research at UAF and listen to some of their collaborative discussion presentations of different Indigenous research methods from around the world (if I can figure out a way to copy that assignment in a mixed face-to-face and distance class I will, so students be prepared!). I also attended their lecture series on “Sacred Spaces” – starting with presentations on sacred trees in the Amazon and in Estonia.

Sunset in Rovaniemi walking back to the hotel from the University of Lapland.

Then it was off to Rovaniemi for the Symposium. The Symposium theme asked, “What is left of development in the Arctic?’ and called for topics related to the potential (or lack of potential) for sustainable development in the Arctic. My paper, “Development Dilemmas: Rural Development Students Imagining a Sustainable Future in Alaska,”   looked at the projects and theses produced by University of Alaska Fairbanks Rural Development Master of Arts students as a reflection of changing attitudes towards development in rural Alaska. Our students’ work illustrates how the program has helped increase Alaska Native and rural peoples’ ability to participate in dialogues and negotiations about development in rural Alaska, brought Alaska Native perspectives into these development dialogues, and helped students generate self-defined visions of what development means. I think more than anything, attendees at the Symposium were impressed to hear about educational programs focused on Indigenous needs and perspectives and whose graduates (for the MA) are 65% Alaska Native.

The trip reminded me of how special our programs are, but it also reminded me that DANSRD faculty and students have not been very active in sharing and communicating our scholarship with people outside of Alaska and our immediate community and we do not pay enough attention to some of the ideas being developed in other parts of the world. Here are just a few of the interesting people, publications, and ideas from my trip.

  • Irja Seurujärvi-Kari, Pirjo Virtanen, Hanna Guttorm, and their colleagues have a new book on Indigenous research methodologies coming out next year, but in the meantime their Encyclopaedia of Saami Culture is a great resource for learning about Saami people.
  • Symposium keynote speaker Reetta Toivanen of the University of Helsinki discussed the concept of “Arcticism’ (modeled after Said’s “Orientalism’ – the way in which various discourses inform Western perceptions of the Arctic) in her presentation entitled “Whose development are we talking about? European fantasies on the Arctic.’ The term was originally coined in Arctic Discourses (2010), available at Rasmussen Library.

Frontier aesthetics: *Natural sublime to technological sublime. *God-like perspectives, bird-eye camera angles, long shots. *Straight lines, intense colors, high contrast. *Backgrounding of nature, diminution of human agency. *"Arctic: colors - visual freezing of the frontier. Shows colors moving from grays to browns to blues.
“Frontier aesthetics.” Slide from Liubov Timonina’s presentation, November 14, 2019.

  • As many of my students know, I love visual analysis and am still waiting/hoping for a student to do a visual analysis project. The Arctic Institute’s Liubov Timonina’s “Imaging and narrating development in the Arctic: Visual storytelling in times of Capitalocene’ looked at the way images shape conceptions and marketing of oil and gas development in the Yamal Peninsula. Google “Yamal’ and see if you can see the “frontier aesthetic’ she describes. How do these images compare to the images you get when you search for “Prudhoe Bay’?
  • Gerard Duhaime of Université Laval looked at how public policies reproduce or amplify inequalities in his presentation “Market inequalities and the reproduction of unsustainability in Nunavik.’ It made me think about the ways our laws around subsistence also reproduce unsustainability in rural communities. I’m also going to check out Arctic Food Security (2008), edited by Duhaime and Nick Bernard, also available at the Rasmussen Library.
  • We often talk about Canada in my classes on the circumpolar north, but it can be hard to grasp the variability in the Indigenous settlements across the country and how they have responded to colonialism. Philippe Boucher of Concordia University focused on understanding Inuit voices and leadership in “Sustainable development through the Inuit cooperative movement.’
  • In his presentation “’North Plan’ — What’s left for Northern Indigenous communities? Can the North bring its riches back?’ Mathieu Boivin, University of Montreal, looked at how Quebec’s “Plan Nord’ prioritized non-Indigenous peoples in planning and development and its impacts on Indigenous peoples. I enjoyed speaking to Philippe and Mathieu about the Indigenous response to colonialism and Indigenous educational opportunities in Canada.
  • Susanna Pirnes, University of Lapland, presented on “History as a resource in Russian Arctic politics,’ looking at the use of historical imagery to establish Arctic identity. The presentation is from her chapter in Resources, Social, and Cultural Sustainability in the North (2019). The book was edited by Symposium organizer Monica Tennberg, Hanna Lempenin, and Susanna Pirnes, all of the University of Lapland and includes chapters from several presenters at the Symposium.
  • I had a great time talking to Frank Sejersen, of the University of Copenhagen about development and Indigenous approaches and perspectives. His article “Brokers of hope: Extractive industries and the dynamics of future-making in post-colonial Greenland‘ (2019) looks at how mineral extraction relates to ideas of national independence and is available online to UAF students if you sign in through the Rasmussen Library.

Rural Development = Boots on the Ground: A guest post by Emeritus Professor Jenny Bell Jones

As I observe all the problems surrounding State governance and the budget, it has become clear to me that this is absolutely the time to emphasize the development potentials of the Rural Development (RD) Program. The State and its leadership need help and the RD program and its students are uniquely positioned to provide some of that assistance.

While there is no doubt that the Governor’s cuts to the budget are draconian and unworkable, this does not remove the reality that the State is in financial trouble. The time has come when everyone will have to pull together to address the budget shortfalls. Alaskans will have to accept that taxation is a part of modern life. We will have to reduce dependency on transfer payments and find ways to increase community and individual self-sufficiency. And, most of all, we must diversify our economy while at the same time retaining control over it.

Economy is crucial, and development strengthens local economies if it is done right. We can have positive development, but only if we get behind it and make it work. If we sit and wait for “development’ in the form of large private resource extraction projects, then we can expect to be harmed, but it does not have to be that way. Consider this: those mega-scale development projects that so many people do not like, gain traction in small communities because they promise jobs. But what if people in those communities already had jobs and decent incomes because other more modest development projects were already in place? Would there still be support for the mega-projects?

Nowhere is the need for a stronger and more diverse economy obvious than in Alaska’s Native villages. In these tribal communities, unemployment is the highest in the state, with numbers as high as 24% in the Kusilvak census area in 2017.[1] Not only are unemployment and “under-employment’ unacceptably high, but in addition a disproportionately high number of jobs are in “government.’[2] There is nothing inherently wrong with a government job but the problem here is that very few of Alaska’s tribal governments are self-supporting. They have no land bases to develop, no revenue sources from taxes and licensing, and almost all of their funding comes from the federal or state governments. If too large a proportion of the community is employed by a government that depends on another government for its revenue, that employment is not very stable. We must come up with ways to make village economies more diverse and self-sustaining.

Diversification of the Alaskan economy provides all kinds of avenues for Rural Development students, and the program should be a natural home for rural residents who care about the long term future of their communities. Now is the time to pursue partnership with entities outside of the university like tribes, ANCSA Corporations (ANCs) and private entrepreneurs that can fund student projects and research, and help students get involved in work that will produce meaningful sustainable economic development in their communities. Now is the time to encourage student interest in the economic and financial aspects of development, and explore ways to have development that is both a good cultural fit and something that produces positive change. If we miss this opportunity we will be selling both the students and the communities that we serve short.

All manner of development challenges and projects exist out there, both those we want to promote and those we want to prevent. Let’s focus on those we want to promote first because if we do this, we may find that doing so takes care of the prevention piece for us. How can we think outside the box and come up with ways to increase village sustainability. How can we grow local economies and prevent disasters like communities running out of water. How can we work with migration and make it work as a positive rather than a negative. How do we use local resources in a truly sustainable manner without depletion and cultural offence?

We cannot expect the State, under the current administration to do any of this for us. Likewise, the current federal administration is not one that understands phrases like “local control’ “sustainable uses’ or “culturally appropriate’ very well at all. What we can expect from them are developments we do not like if we sit back and do nothing. If we allow those schooled in traditional western business practices to take the lead, then we should expect to see a continuation of the colonial extraction-based model that has brought us to where we are today. Only when we begin to actively implement changes in how business is done, will we start to see long-term local improvements.

Development is going to come to rural Alaska regardless of whether people want it. That is simply a part of ongoing human change. There are plenty of aspects of development that improve the quality of life for residents, like newly paved roads in Elim[3] or battery storage projects in Kwethluk and Kongiganak.[4] Development has many faces and variations, and many benefits if it is done with the involvement of local communities. But that involvement is critical: if we are not involved we will not get what we want.

Rural Development graduates can put “boots on the ground’ in Alaska Native and rural communities to help guide developments and make sure they are place based and appropriately sized for each location. They can and must plan for the future growth of their communities and implement projects that will contribute to economic stability and independence from state and federal funding. They can build the bridges that are needed between tribes and ANCSA Corporations (ANCs), and they can develop relationships with private entrepreneurs who are willing and able to contribute positive investment in their communities. These graduates are vitally important to the future of Alaska Native and rural communities!

[1] https://labor.alaska.gov/trends/sep17.pdf

[2] https://live.laborstats.alaska.gov/alari/details.cfm?yr=2016&dst=01&dst=03&dst=04&dst=06&dst=07&r=3&b=29&p=20

[3] https://www.knom.org/wp/blog/2019/08/21/elim-residents-ride-on-new-roads-kawerak-says-theyll-improve-quality-of-life/

[4] https://www.alaskapublic.org/2019/09/04/kwethluk-gets-new-battery-storage-project/

DANSRD Fall Update: Planning for our future

The Department of Alaska Native Studies and Rural Development met August 14 through 16 to discuss and plan for the upcoming academic year and beyond. We know that the budget issues this summer have caused a lot of uncertainty for students, faculty, and staff, but we want to assure you all that the Alaska Native Studies BA, Rural Development BA, and Rural Development MA remain fully available to students.

Here are some of the highlights and important information for students.

  • There will be budget cuts, but they will have limited impact on DANSRD program or course offerings at this time and DANSRD is offering a full slate of courses this fall. We expect to continue to offer full schedules in spring and into the future.
  • We are putting our community development toolbox and skills to good use with internal department strategic planning to strengthen our position within the university system so that we will continue to offer strong programs to students across the state. We don’t just teach it, we use it!
  • We met with fellow Indigenous focused programs Indigenous Studies and Tribal Management to find ways to strengthen our programs and course offerings and make the linkages and course progressions between our programs more seamless and clearer for all of our students.

We have seen some speculation that Alaska Native Studies and Rural Development will be “dissolved’ under the “New UA’ proposal. “Although we also have questioned why the New UA planning process does not have a formal place to consider Indigenous programs, we have heard nothing that indicates that our programs will be dissolved. A statewide Alaska Native Workgroup has met to synergize and plan around our shared goals, Alaska Native serving mission, and programs.

We must all remain engaged and vigilant. Please register for the courses you need this fall AND keep advocating for our programs and all Indigenous focused programs and services across UA.

Alaska in the Upside Down Expanded Version

This is an expanded version of the community perspective I wrote that was published in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner on July 21, 2019 in response to the budget crisis and cuts to the University of Alaska. I thought it was worth putting a version on the blog that provided a bit more context and extended quotes from Frederick Jackson Turner on the importance of State Universities.   Jennie

Alaska in the Upside Down, or Stranger Things in Alaska

In the spring of 1989, I was a junior at Harvard College looking for a senior thesis topic when the Exxon Valdez ran aground on Bligh Reef, spilling approximately 11 million US gallons* of oil into Prince William Sound. Topic acquired, I returned home over the summer to travel through Alaska interviewing Alaskans from all walks of life: miners, teachers, fishermen, biologists, sales associates, homemakers, and politicians, including longtime Alaska State Senator Jack Coghill, later Lieutenant Governor (1990-94), and Governor Wally Hickel (1966-69 and 1990-94). All in all, I interviewed 47, mostly non-Native, Alaskans. Collectively they had lived an average of 31 years in the state, ranging from one year to seventy-five years. Twenty-three percent were born in Alaska.

I asked them what made a person an Alaskan? What kind of development was appropriate for Alaska? What was the role of government? How should we protect the environment? Had the Exxon Valdez oil spill changed their views? Throughout these interviews Alaskans used the language of the “frontier’ — what it means, how it should or should not change — to frame, explain, justify, and sometimes paper over their conflicting feelings about independence and governance, development and environmental protections.

These Alaskan’s perspectives mirrored those put forth in historian Frederick Jackson Turner’s Frontier Thesis, first published in 1883. Turner argued that the unique characteristics of American democracy were developed through the frontier experience. Individuality, independence, egalitarianism, faith in the common man [Turner excluded women and minorities from his analysis], all were forged through the pioneer experience. While there is much to dislike about Turner’s Thesis, particularly his views toward Native Americans and his celebration of unbridled opportunism and exploitation,** his ideas also express some of the best of the frontier spirit that has flourished in Alaska.

Listening to the current budget conversation in the State, I am reminded of Turner and of the conversations I had with my fellow Alaskans in 1989. I hadn’t realized just how much of those frontier ideals are missing from the current discourse. For sure, some threads of the conversation have remained the same. Many Alaskans retain the distrust of government and over-regulation of industry expressed by my interviewees. On the other hand, some foundational values expressed then seem to have all but disappeared, particularly when it comes to ideas about Alaskan self-reliance, hard-work, and neighborliness. No topic illustrates that change more clearly than how some Alaskans now view the PFD.

Alaskans in 1989 weren’t complaining about the “free money,’ but they weren’t about to depend on it either. As one person told me, “We’ll take it while it’s here, but we don’t rely on it.’ Now, as some Alaskans argue that the PFD has become sacrosanct, it feels like the key Alaskan values I was raised with have been turned on their head. The PFD has gone from a tool to an entitlement and we have become more like “food stamp pioneers,’ the term one of my interviewees gave to people who wanted to have the Alaskan experience without the actual work. So, now we have PFD pioneers who believe it is more important than education, medical care, or public safety; more important than taking care of each other. Alaska is in the Upside Down and the PFD is our Demogorgon.

Turner didn’t just look at how the frontier shaped the American democratic character, he also looked at how we could retain it even in the absence of the seemingly endless and free resources of the frontier. His answer to that was the State University. In his essay “Pioneer Ideals and the State University’ Turner argues that State Universities are a critical tool for advancing and preserving American democracy and supporting sound governance and development of resources. State Universities unite “vocational and college work in the same institution’ and train people in “service to democracy rather than of individual advancement alone.’

His arguments rest on two basic premises; first, that education is necessary for sustainable development and growth in modern societies, and second, that education must be provided to all people of talent and interest, not just the wealthy and powerful. Turner’s essay is filled with the language of optimism and hope, and no paraphrase can do them justice so here are a few excerpts.

“In the transitional condition of American democracy which I have tried to indicate, the mission of the university is most important. The times call for educated leaders. General experience and rule-of-thumb information are inadequate for the solution of the problems of a democracy which no longer owns the safety fund of an unlimited quantity of untouched resources. Scientific farming must increase the yield of the field, scientific forestry must economize the woodlands, scientific experiment and construction by chemist, physicist, biologist and engineer must be applied to all of nature’s forces in our complex modern society. The test tube and the microscope are needed rather than ax and rifle in this new ideal of conquest. The very discoveries of science in such fields as public health and manufacturing processes have made it necessary to depend upon the expert, and if the ranks of experts are to be recruited broadly from the democratic masses as well as from those of larger means, the State Universities must furnish at least as liberal opportunities for research and training as the universities based on private endowments furnish. It needs no argument to show that it is not to the advantage of democracy to give over the training of the expert exclusively to privately endowed institutions.’

To do this work, he argues, universities must act as pioneers, free to investigate and follow new ideas.

“That they may perform their work they must be left free, as the pioneer was free, to explore new regions and to report what they find; for like the pioneers they have the ideal of investigation, they seek new horizons. They are not tied to past knowledge; they recognize the fact that the universe still abounds in mystery, that science and society have not crystallized, but are still growing and need their pioneer trail-makers. New and beneficent discoveries in nature, new and beneficial discoveries in the processes and directions of the growth of society, substitutes for the vanishing material basis of pioneer democracy may be expected if the university pioneers are left free to seek the trail.’

Cutting the University of Alaska leaves the State without this important driver of innovation and development. It abandons the citizens of Alaska, taking away their opportunity for education and leaving them at the mercy of outside experts, politicians, and economic interests. It is the opposite of the ideals and values that Alaskans have worked towards for over 50 years. We must not give up on our university, our young people, or our right and ability to chart our own course. I leave you with Turner’s final words on the subject:

“The pioneer’s clearing must be broadened into a domain where all that is worthy of human endeavor may find fertile soil on which to grow; and America must exact of the constructive business geniuses who owe their rise to the freedom of pioneer democracy supreme allegiance and devotion to the commonweal. In fostering such an outcome and in tempering the asperities of the conflicts that must precede its fulfillment, the nation has no more promising agency than the State Universities, no more hopeful product than their graduates.’

If you want to read more from Turner his full collection of Essays, “The Frontier in American History,’ is available online as a Project Gutenberg eBook.

*My original community perspective said 10.1 “billion barrels” – quite a typo! The 10.1 number was the estimate from 1990 when I completed my senior thesis. Estimates today are around 11 million US gallons.

**Some people may wonder about using Turner given some of the problematic aspects of his theory. I’ll write about that in a later post.

Is your research fieldwork or homework? Kamala Visweswaran’s ideas about decolonization, anthropology, and ethnography

Theoretical Musings is an occasional series where I explore some of the significant theoretical foundations and turning points in my academic journey. See the first installment here.

When I ask students to identify their theoretical framework(s) or paradigm(s), they often become what I call intellectually frozen. For many students, theories seem too broad, too abstract, or too academic to be useful and their brains (and typing fingers) become paralyzed. One common misconception they have about theory is that they have to pick just one and follow it. While it is true that some academics and policy makers pick a single theoretical approach and stick with it, most of us are theoretically pluralistic, finding nuggets of insight in many different places. This is particularly important for students who come from different cultural backgrounds with their own cultural paradigms about knowledge and learning. For me, one of those theoretical nuggets was Kamala Visweswaran’s ideas about fieldwork and homework.[i]

When I began my Ph.D. program in anthropology in 1995, I was preparing to join through marriage my intended research community. Within the common paradigms of Western scientific inquiry, this created an obvious and immediate conflict: I had become too close to the community and culture of my study. I was no longer “in the field,’ but “at home.”

Historically, in anthropology “the field’ has been both a location of transformation and a location of separation, a rite of passage through which the student passes, a vessel of concepts, theories, and methods waiting to be filled with cultural grist for the anthropological mill. For the budding anthropological scholar, the field is the location of their transformation from student to practitioner, a transformation marked preferably by physical and mental challenge, with a bit of hazing thrown in.   The field is also a location of knowledge transformation, where so-labeled traditional and cultural knowledge collected by the researcher begins that mystic transformation into academic knowledge in a dissertation or publication. These transformations depend upon and reinforce the field as a location of separation, a place that enhances boundaries between the anthropological self and exotic other, between culture A and culture B, between “cultural” knowledge and “acultural“[ii] knowledge. By becoming a part of my intended field I had at least partially collapsed those boundaries and took my transformation in a potentially unscholarly direction.

I needed to explore my new positionality and place it in context and so began to look at approaches to ethnography and oral history that explored the relationships between researcher and researched in ways that went beyond the traditional Western dichotomy. Fortunately, many feminist and postcolonial anthropologists were already working with and writing about this issue. One of those was Kamala Visweswaran, a cultural anthropologist by training who is now a professor in the Ethnic Studies department at UC San Diego.

Fictions of Feminist Ethnography was Visweswaran’s first book, a collection of essays exploring feminist theory and practice in ethnography. While her discussion of the potential nature and textual forms of feminist ethnography was useful, it was her theorizing about the nature of fieldwork and homework that gave me a piece of theoretical foundation that I use to this day: Viswesaran linked the decolonization of anthropology with the notion of homework,  an “anthropology in reverse’ that speaks “from the place one is located’ (1994, 104).

I have argued for the convergence of two distinct epistemological shifts, one where gender ceases to hold the center of feminist theory, and one where the field fails to hold the center of anthropology.   One shift signals the failure of feminist thinking, and the other, the failure of ethnography.   Both shifts, I believe, mark decolonization as an active, ongoing process — incomplete, and certainly not one to be memorialized as past historical moment…if I have strategically theorized home in order to unearth the hegemonic “field’ of feminist anthropology, I also recognize that field and home are dependent, not mutually exclusive, terms, and that the lines between fieldwork and homework are not always distinct (1994, 113).

As this quote illustrates, her arguments were highly theoretical – broad, somewhat abstract, and academic — but her core notion, that research from a place of belonging (or partial belonging) was not just a legitimate, but a necessary anthropological endeavor, helped me understand my place and has continued to help me as I work with students who are doing their own homework of some kind.

So, for your research or project, in what ways are you doing homework? In what ways are you doing fieldwork? Does it help you to think about your research as homework instead of fieldwork? Do you think it would help you explain your work to others? If so, you have a little piece of theory that supports your approach to your own work and places you within an academic tradition. Congratulations!

Next up in Theoretical Musings:

This particular theoretical idea deals with positionality — the ways in which our culture, gender, class, ethnicity, and locations in time and place influence how we understand the world. It falls under epistemology, the branch of philosophy that is concerned with theories of knowledge. In terms of research paradigms, epistemology looks at the nature of the relationship between the knower and what can be known. Establishing an understanding of your relationship to your research is important, but it (usually) will not be the only theoretical perspective you need for your work. For example, you might need to decide whether to focus on “needs’ or “assets’ for a community development project and find a framework that explains and organizes your approach. For our next installment I will look at two different types of assets based theoretical approaches, Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach and Cordelia Flora and Jan Flora’s Community Capitals Framework.

[i] Twenty-four years later her ideas still resonate within feminist anthropology circles, as this 2018 post in Anthropology News attests.

[ii] As Western academic knowledge is often presumed to be.

Fictions of Feminist Ethnography can be read online by UAF students through the Rasmussen Library website.

Visweswaran, Kamala. 1994. Fictions of Feminist Ethnography. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

 

Is Our Money Misbehaving? Part 1: Money and Traditional Values – Guest Post by Emeritus Professor Jenny Bell Jones

If you are an Alaska resident you probably just got your Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD). The State of Alaska paid out $1600 to every qualified Alaskan during October. The money is “free money’, the only thing we have to do to get it is fill out a short form, and we can spend it any way we like. It is free for the State too … all they have to do is go out to the money tree and pluck the amount they need to pay for the PFDs … Well, maybe not.

OK, now I got your attention so let’s talk about money a little more carefully. How well is that money behaving? What part does it really play in our lives and who is in control? Do we control money or does it control us? Where does the money come from and how does it affect our ability to adhere to Native values that we have been taught have their roots in “cashless’ societies … values that teach us to share with and care for others?

Whose values you ask? Good question, because there is no one universal set of Native values and by no stretch of the imagination do all Native people adhere to the same values today. For the purpose of this article I used the ones I myself live by which have their closest cousins in the Athabascan Values agreed upon at the 1985 Denakkanaaga Elders Conference (https://www.ankn.uaf.edu/ancr/values/athabascan.html). You can find other sets of values for different Alaska Native groups and all are pretty similar in terms of reminding us to share, work hard, show responsibility to our communities, and respect and care for elders and children. All of them stress respect for the land and for Native traditions and urge us to be honest in all that we do. None of them talk directly about money so now we will take a look at where money fits into those value systems.

Money has been around in one form or another for a very long time although it has been utilized differently by various groups. Before money in the form of cash came along, societies had different items of value that they used in the process of trade. While cash as we know it now (coins, paper money etc.) may be relatively new in some Indigenous communities, trade has been around for a long time. Can we say that we are practicing Native traditions when we use money? Perhaps not, but how we use it certainly can (and should) connect back to those traditions and values. The money itself is nothing more than a medium of exchange, a tool that we can use wisely or unwisely as we choose. Wise use of resources seems to be a pretty universal Native value.

The question we might ask ourselves is this: “How do we take a tool which has been used by some for a long time to support systems which perpetuate inequality and unfairness, and instead use that same tool within our own systems to do the opposite; insure equality and fair treatment for everyone?’

Indigenous Peoples did not participate haphazardly in trade. They placed a value on different items and expected certain amounts of other items in return when they traded with each other or with neighboring tribes. When they began trading with colonists and long distance partners the trading networks expanded and over time began to include cash in some of the transactions. The more expansive the trade network became, the more likely you were to see money involved, until we reached the point we are at today where the large majority of business transactions in North America involve some exchange of cash. Responsible involvement in the trade network certainly met the Athabascan values of self-sufficiency, hard work, and care and provision for family and can continue to do so today especially if we respect the knowledge and wisdom that can be gained from life experiences. The initial incorporation of money into the traditional systems did not result in the widespread abandonment of values.

But itself money is not a bad thing and it allows a much wider range of goods and services to change hands than could ever take place otherwise. It would be very difficult for instance to exchange bead work for a plane ticket to Anchorage or to try to pay the utility bill with a bag of dry meat. Both of those items are very valuable in some communities but that value cannot be readily changed into plane maintenance or diesel fuel. When used this way to pay for things we need, money can provide support for the practice of all the values we hold dear. When new tools arrived in Native communities, people decided if they worked well or not. They kept on using those which did and discarded those which did not. Money is a tool and a good one if it is used wisely. We do not have to abandon our values to use this tool but we do need to control its behavior.

Problems arise when we stop controlling the behavior of our money and it starts to take on a life of its own. When we start valuing money for its own sake and trying to accumulate far more than we actually need, it becomes much harder to align our use of money with our Native values. We are surrounded by a wider system that helps us to allow our money to misbehave. That system encourages us to spend more than we have, and to buy all manner of things we do not really need. We are also encouraged to support development that damages our lands and waters so that we can have more money to spend. This system does not encourage sharing with others. Instead, it rewards those who accumulate lots and do not share. When acquiring more money than we need becomes a goal, even if it comes at the expense of our lands, communities, and future generations, we have gone beyond the healthy incorporation of money, and added something new to the traditional system by sanctioning uncontrolled acquisition.

When we allow organizations we are involved with to focus on wealth accumulation at the expense of everything else, we find ourselves even further removed from those traditional value systems. Now we are turning control of the money over to someone else and washing our hands of the responsibility for how it behaves. We are hoping that somehow those organizations will be held accountable, and contribute in some way to our future well-being, but we are not doing our part to control the behavior of the money very well.

Using money while staying true to our values requires that we understand the financial system, and be prepared to take control and say no to things that do not align with those values. It means understanding investing and about things like taxes and why we pay them. As communities grew in permanent locations the need for communal-use facilities increased. Schools, roads, hospitals, tribal halls, libraries, recreational facilities … all of these require much more money than a few individuals could provide so we use taxes to pay for them. None of us expect to have to shoulder the entire cost of fixing the school roof but most of us love children and are willing to pay a little towards it. We love and respect elders and do not mind contributing to programs that help them. We do that when we pay our taxes.

Public education is especially important. Private industry requires employees to have all sorts of skills but, in general, those industries expect the employees to have acquired those skills elsewhere. Imagine how expensive it would be for today’s businesses and corporations if they had to teach prospective employees to read and write! On a more personal level, think about how difficult things would be if every family had to teach all the basics to their own children with no support from the state. At least one parent would need to stay home and be a full-time teacher, assuming they had the skills to do this. The world we live in now cannot operate without public education so it makes sense that we all contribute to cover the cost and insure that we can continue to participate in the economy.

When businesses or individuals say they want to “save money on taxes’ this really means they want to spend the money on something else for their own good rather than contributing that money to the public good. It may be legal to do so but is it really fair and honest … does tax avoidance fit well with traditional values of sharing and caring about communities? What would have happened if people in subsistence-based communities had withheld labor and resources but then expected an equal share of the annual catch of salmon? When we view taxes as some kind of unfair burden rather than our way to contribute to everyone’s well-being, and find ways to avoid paying them, there will be less money for the public services we all need and use.

If too many tax payers find ways to avoid paying their share, many of the things we use will be unavailable. Almost all of the federal funding for tribal programs is derived from taxes so tribal citizens will suffer. If schools are underfunded children suffer. If we lack proper law enforcement everyone in the community suffers. If Medicare and Social Security are raided to make up for the shortfall, elders suffer. Tax cuts may sound good on paper but they are not free; we will absolutely have to pay for them. Money goes around in a circle and when we disrupt part of that circle the progress stops.

In an article on shopping locally, Jeremiah Moss suggests that we need to act like citizens rather than consumers when it comes to controlling the behavior of our money and I agree.[1] Instead of blindly following along and placing the acquisition of more money in front of everything else, we must look at the big picture. Our elders knew that if we trapped too many beaver or caught too many fish there would not be enough in the following years. If we demand more free money in the form of larger PFDs there will less to go around in the future. If wealthy people and large businesses avoid paying taxes there will be fewer services for all of us and eventually even the tax-avoiders will suffer.

At some point we all have to stop taking out and put something back in the same way as those elders preserved the animal populations by “resting’ different areas from hunting over time. Those who are taking out the most need to set an example by limiting their take and making sure their use of money is not hurting others. When we all start being more conscious about how we control our money we will have taken a step in the right direction to properly incorporate its use into our Native value systems.

[1] https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/10/16/17980424/shop-local-jeremiah-moss?fbclid=IwAR12FCHVDh_qQYrgS3ICwqPyPHrb_KvlNDk5mAgCfD3N71Dh6C4tDmOjtzo

What Are ANCSA Settlement Trusts? Researched and written by Jenny Bell Jones with input from current and former DANSRD colleagues

In recent weeks DANSRD has received a number of questions from both students and faculty regarding ANCSA Settlement Trusts. Most of these questions seem to have been generated by a recent push by some of the ANCSA Regional Corporations (ANCs) to establish these Trusts in response to changes in tax requirements under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, also known as Public Law 115-97.   Others have come because these Trusts were part of required course work. While we recommend that shareholders ask their respective ANCs for information if a Settlement Trust is being considered, some questions had come from students who simply were not understanding the information the ANC had provided. With that in mind, we put together some basic information to try to answer some of the questions.

First, the Settlement Trust option for ANCSA Corporations (ANCs) is not new. There were 18 established by December 31st 1999[1] and over 30 are now in existence.[2] The tax incentives are new and they are substantial for the ANCs so in 2018 there is renewed interest in establishing these Trusts. Settlement Trusts were included in the statute[3] as part of the “1991 Amendments’ and there is some good information about the original intent of the Trusts in the “1991: Making it Work’ publication published by the Alaska Federation of Natives to explain changes to ANCSA made in 1987. That publication, which was re-issued by Sealaska in 2001, describes Settlement Trusts as follows:

Under the “1991’ law, a Native corporation may transfer some or all of its assets – such as surface land, stock and property – to a trust created just for the benefit of its shareholders. The main purposes of the Settlement Trust are to promote the health, education and welfare of Native shareholders; preserve Native heritage and culture; and give greater protection to Native corporation lands.’[4]

In general, the Settlement Trust option appears to be a good one for ANCSA Corporations. It is one that has long been under-utilized for various reasons involving tax structure. Those who want to learn more about this, and the tax law changes, should review a very recent article by Bruce Edwards entitled “The 2017 Tax Act and Settlement Trusts’.[5] The new tax law allows Settlement Trusts to be funded on a pre-tax rather than an after tax basis, as has been the case since 1988, so this is a good incentive for the Corporations as it will give them a substantial tax-break.

These trusts are intended to “promote the health, education and welfare of the beneficiaries of the Trust and preserve the heritage and culture of Alaska Natives‘ and should be able to provide some benefits for shareholders who will then be referred to as beneficiaries of the Trust, however it is important to understand how they work so that people do not have unrealistic expectations.

You can examine a few different Trust Agreements online to get an idea what they contain. The Bristol Bay Native Corporation Trust Agreement online at https://www.bbnc.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Trust-Agreement-of-the-BBNC-Settlement-Trust.pdf  is one of the longer Agreements. If you look at paragraph 6.1.1 Types of Benefits, you will get an idea of what BBNC envisions their Trust might do for beneficiaries. It is important to understand that these benefits are things that could be provided by the Trust, but there is no guarantee that they actually will be. The ability of the Trust to provide any or all of these benefits is dependent on the amount of assets contributed to the Trust and how well those assets are managed going into the future. It is up to the Trustees to decide how best to manage the Trust and distribute benefits.

Settlement Trust Agreements vary. They all will contain some boiler plate language that indicates their compliance with the law, but beyond that shareholders being asked to vote on establishing a Settlement Trust need to read the Trust Agreement for their own ANC and be sure they understand its contents. Something important to consider is who the Trustees will be and how they will be chosen. The Trustees will have very significant power over the assets in the Trust and hold the responsibility for its success so it is important for them to know what they are doing. Some of the Settlement Trust Agreements call for Trustees and ANC Boards of Directors to be one and the same, but the duties and responsibilities for these two positions are quite different, so meeting them both could be quite challenging.

How does a Settlement Trust work?

When the Corporation establishes a Trust it is giving some of its assets to the Trust and the Trust will then manage the assets separately from those that the Corporation keeps. The ANC can do this in one of two ways: on a regular basis, perhaps annually, or as an endowment which means the Corporation makes a large one time contribution to the Trust. Corporations that are using the Settlement Trust as a vehicle to reduce their tax burden would likely make annual contributions. If an ANC endows a Trust this does not prevent it from making more contributions later on.

Under the new tax law, the Corporation makes those contributions to the Trust pre-tax, and then the Trust pays tax at a lower rate. If the Corporation pays dividends to shareholders those dividends are subject to taxation. If the Trust pays distributions to beneficiaries, those distributions are, in most cases, tax exempt. Distributing the assets through the Trust means, at least in theory, that more money is available to the beneficiaries. The CIRI website provides a table which describes clearly how much money might be saved by using a Settlement Trust. It shows what recipients actually keep from $1 million in corporate earnings distributed by an ANC versus a Trust:

Table credit: https://www.ciri.com/overview-of-settlement-trust-after-2017-tax-act/

While there is a clear tax benefit, it may be difficult for a Settlement Trust to actually serve to “promote the health, education and welfare of the beneficiaries of the Trust and preserve the heritage and culture of Alaska Natives’ over the short term in ways that the Corporation does not already do, unless it is very well funded. In order for the principal or “corpus’ of the Trust to grow it will need ongoing contributions from the ANC plus income from investments to remain in the Trust so that over time it can make larger distributions. The Trust cannot pay out everything it receives from the ANC every year because if it does the principal will not grow. If the ANC experiences some bad years where profits are low or non-existent, it may not make any contribution to the Trust. If that happens the Trust needs to have enough in its principal to hold its own using investment income until contributions start again.

If the only actual benefits to Trust beneficiaries are tax free distribution payments, occasional educational benefits, elders benefits and assistance with funeral potlatches, then these benefits are the same as what most shareholders currently receive with the exception of tax exempt distributions.  If distributions from the Trust are always made in the form of cash to beneficiaries, rather than used for some of the things the BBNC Settlement Trust envisions, then it is up to those beneficiaries how the money is spent. That money may or may not be spent to “promote the health, education and welfare of the beneficiaries of the Trust and preserve the heritage and culture of Alaska Natives’. A less obvious but longer term benefit to beneficiaries is the protection that assets acquire once they are a part of the Trust and can no longer be used by the ANC in ways that may incur risk. This does not mean that there is no risk involved with the kinds of investments a Trust can make but risk will be much lower as long as the Trust is managed responsibly.

The tax exemption will result in some small savings for most shareholders who would otherwise pay taxes on an ANC dividend. Shareholders with higher incomes may see more savings. It will make no difference for those whose incomes are so low that they already pay no federal income taxes. The tax exemptions correspond to different tiers described in the new tax law so most of the time they will apply.  If a much larger than usual distribution were to be made then it most likely would not be tax exempt because it would fall into the Tier 4 category of distributions.[6]

How much these Trusts can provide to beneficiaries is really dependent on two things: the amount of the assets that the Corporation contributes to the Trust, and how well those assets are managed going into the future. A Trust cannot do more than it has money for. The BBNC Trust Agreement provides a very expansive picture of all the things it might do. Other Trust Agreements are a lot more conservative in their description of distributions than the BBNC Agreement, and may provide a more realistic picture of what a Settlement Trust could provide.

There is a possibility that Settlement Trusts could do a lot more for Alaska Native communities than the ANCs are currently able to but, as noted earlier, their success will be dependent on how well they are funded by the ANCs and the skill of the Trustees who are managing them.

What will NOT happen if a Settlement Trust is established?

  • Land placed into a Settlement Trust will not become Indian Country.
  • A Settlement Trust cannot operate a businesses and cannot “go under’ as a result of a joint venture the ANC is involved in failing.
  • An ANC cannot convey sub-surface land to a Settlement Trust.
  • Trust distributions are unlikely to be a whole lot more than dividend payments were at least until such time as the Trust is well established and its investments are doing well.
  • If land is placed into the Settlement Trust it cannot then be conveyed to another party.
  • Shareholders will not vote on the transfer of assets from the ANC to the Trust UNLESS the ANC is going to transfer all or substantially all of its assets.
  • The ANC cannot take back assets after it has contributed them.

What should shareholders ask about?

Each ANC has provided different information for shareholders regarding these trusts. We looked at several FAQ sheets and found Calista Corporation to have the most transparent and comprehensive document. We mentioned earlier that shareholders should review materials from their own ANC however most of what Calista has is very standard information and you can review this at https://www.calistacorp.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Settlement-Trust-FAQs-FINAL.pdf

After researching all of the available materials we compiled a list of general questions that we felt were important, especially for shareholders. Some of these are questions we had been asked by students, and we found we could not answer them using the materials available to us, so it is likely that others would also have trouble answering them:

  • Under what circumstances would distributions from the Settlement Trust received by beneficiaries NOT be exempt from taxation?
  • What is the real impact for people in different tax brackets?
  • How will distributions from this trust affect federal needs-based eligibility programs such as food stamps? (This may be covered under 43 U.S.C. § 1626(c)(E) https://lbblawyers.com/ancsa/1626.htm but it would be a good thing to verify)
  • If Trustees are going to be the same people as the ANC Board how will the rights and responsibilities of each position differ?
  • Could the dual responsibility of being a Board Member and a Trustee create a conflict of interest and, if so, how would that be addressed?
  • What assets are going to be placed into the Trust?
  • Will the distribution that I receive as a Trust beneficiary be INSTEAD OF or IN ADDITION TO the dividend I usually receive from my ANC?
  • Will any surface land owned by the ANC be placed into the trust?
  • For how long and how often will the ANC continue to contribute to the Trust?
  • Is there any requirement for the ANC to continue making contributions to the Trust?
  • Suppose the ANC has no need for a tax deduction in a given year, will it still contribute to the Trust?
  • How will this Trust affect shareholder’s future rights and responsibilities with their ANC? (Some ANCs already have problems getting enough shareholders to vote; will this change make things worse?)
  •  Will Trustees invite shareholder input on decisions on the addition of additional types of distributions that could be created in the future and, if not, how will the Trustees make those decisions?
  • If my ANC has a Foundation how will this be affected by the Trust?
  • What happens to the Trust if shareholders vote to lift restrictions on Corporation shares?

In Conclusion:

Settlement Trusts can secure investments in ways that the ANCs do not, and have the potential to provide significant benefits to shareholders but these benefits will be dependent on:

  • The terms of the Trust Agreement.
  • The amount that the ANC contributes to the Trust.
  • The skill of the Trustees.

DANSRD cannot advise you on how to vote but we recommend you educate yourself thoroughly if you are being asked to vote on establishing a Trust. If you have already voted, be an active beneficiary and keep abreast with your Trust and what it is doing!

[1] Edwards, Bruce N. UNDERSTANDING AND MAKING THE NEW SECTION 646 ELECTION FOR ALASKA NATIVE SETTLEMENT TRUSTS. Alaska Law Review 2001. Page 223

[2] QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE DOYON SETTLEMENT TRUST. FAQS

[3] 43 U.S.C. § 1629e Settlement Trust option https://lbblawyers.com/ancsa/1629e.htm

[4] 1991: Making It Work A Guide to Public Law 100-241 1987 Amendments to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. Alaska Federation of Natives Reissued in PDF October 2001 by Sealaska Corporation www.sealaska.com. Page 43

[5] Edwards, Bruce N. THE 2017 TAX ACT AND SETTLEMENT TRUSTS. ALASKA LAW REVIEW Vol. 35:1 https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1538&context=alr

[6] Edwards, Bruce N. THE 2017 TAX ACT AND SETTLEMENT TRUSTS. ALASKA LAW REVIEW Vol. 35:1. Page 25, 26

Introducing “Theoretical Musings”

Any student who has taken one of my classes knows that I love theory and think they should love it to. And what’s not to love? Theories — your own, disciplinary theories, knowledge paradigms —  are foundational for our research and praxis in this world.  Most students, though, don’t love theory. They often find it clunky and confusing. It’s hard to see why you need to have a theory when you just want to ensure your village has access to quality food. But, how you approach that problem depends on your theory. For example, food security theory and food sovereignty theory are two different approaches to understanding and resolving issues of food insecurity.[1] Food security theory emphasizes physical and economic access to safe, nutritious, and affordable food and looks primarily to market forces to provide that access. Food sovereignty theory arose from the activist group La ViaCampesina (The Way of Peasants), an international farming and peasant movement, and emphasizes the right to maintain and develop local capacity for a nation or area to produce its own basic food needs. Which one fits with your ideas about maintaining and enhancing community food supplies? And, theory doesn’t just help you articulate your perspective on your issue; it also allows you to enter into broader conversations in academia and elsewhere and see how local issues and concerns fit into global contexts.

Trying to encourage students to enjoy theory as I do has led me to think back on all of the times a theory has changed or enhanced my way of thinking about an issue. Certain quotes and perspectives come back to me again and again. Through a series of posts on “theoretical musings’ I am going to share these quotes and theories that have guided me in academia and in life and I hope other faculty will join me in sharing the quotes that have guided them as well. . First up from me will be a post on Kamala Viswesaran’s Fictions of Feminist Ethnography.[2] Look for it soon!

[1] For a brief discussion of food sovereignty theory check out this entry — https://globalsocialtheory.org/concepts/food-sovereignty/ —  at the site “Global Social Theory.’ The site is organized by Gurminder K. Bhambra, Professor of Postcolonial and Decolonial Studies in the School of Global Studies, University of Sussex. Professor Bhambra is co-editor with Dalia Gebrial and Kerem Nisancioglu of Decolonizing the University (Pluto Press, 2018).

[2] Kamala Visweswaran, Fictions of Feminist Ethnography (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1994).