Abstract
This chapter seeks to bring together the diverse lessons provided throughout the volume. The chapter first returns to the five key strengths of the Ethnographic Peace Research (EPR) approach as described in the Introduction to describe how they are related and to what extent they are facilitative elements, required elements, or potentials of an EPR approach. A preliminary definition of EPR is then provided based on these distinctions. The chapter then progresses to address an interdisciplinary tension which became clear over the course of editing this volume, which evidences the challenges of interdisciplinary work, and which highlights the difficulties faced in the effort to consolidate a robust EPR agenda. The chapter concludes, however, by noting the need to see this as a generative tension and something to build on. The process of developing a new approach to Peace Research which can forward the local turn will not be simple, but it is required.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Brown, M. Anne. 2013. Anthropology and Peacebuilding. In Routledge Handbook of Peacebuilding, ed. R. Mac Ginty, 132–146. New York, NY: Routledge.
Chambers, Erve. 1987. Applied Anthropology in the Post-Vietnam Era: Anticipations and Ironies. Annual Review of Anthropology 16: 309–337.
Chandler, David. 2013. Peacebuilding and the Politics of Non-Linearity: Rethinking ‘Hidden’ Agency and ‘Resistance’. Peacebuilding 1 (1): 17–32.
Clifford, James, and George E. Marcus. 1986. Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Ferraro, Gary, and Susan Andreatta. 2015. Cultural Anthropology: An Applied Perspective. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Holmes, Douglas R., and George E. Marcus. 2008. Collaboration Today and the Re-Imagination of the Classic Scene of Fieldwork Encounter. Collaborative Anthropologies 1: 81–101.
Ingold, Tim. 2011. Being Alive. Essays on Movement, Knowledge and Description. London: Routledge.
———. 2014. That’s Enough about Ethnography! HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 4 (1): 383–395.
Lattuca, Lisa R. 2001. Creating Interdisciplinarity: Interdisciplinary Research and Teaching among College and University Faculty. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
Lewis, Diane. 1973. Anthropology and Colonialism. Current Anthropology 14 (5): 581–602.
Marcus, George E. 1998. Ethnography through Thick and Thin. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Meeth, Richard L. 1978. Interdisciplinary Studies: A Matter of Definition. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning 10 (7): 10.
Millar, Gearoid. 2010. Local Evaluations of Truth Telling in Sierra Leone: Getting at ‘Why’ Though a Qualitative Case Study Analysis. International Journal of Transitional Justice 4 (4): 477–496.
———. 2011. Between Western Theory and Local Practice: Cultural Impediments to Truth-Telling in Sierra Leone. Conflict Resolution Quarterly 29 (2): 177–199.
———. 2012a. ‘Our Brothers who went to the Bush’: Post-Identity Conflict and the Experience of Reconciliation in Sierra Leone. Journal of Peace Research 49 (5): 717–729.
———. 2012b. ‘Ah Lef ma Case fo God’: Religious Belief and Personal Autonomy in Sierra Leone’s Postwar Reconciliation. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology 18 (2): 131–143.
———. 2014. An Ethnographic Approach to Peacebuilding: Understanding Local Experiences in Transitional States. London: Routledge.
———. 2015a. Investing in Peace?: Foreign Direct Investment as Economic Justice in Sierra Leone. Third World Quarterly 36 (9): 1700–1716.
———. 2015b. Performative Memory and Re-Victimization: Truth-Telling and Provocation in Sierra Leone. Memory Studies 8 (2): 242–254.
———. 2016a. Local Experiences of Liberal Peace: Marketization and Emerging Conflict Dynamics in Sierra Leone. Journal of Peace Research 53 (4): 569–581.
———. 2016b. Knowledge and Control in the Contemporary Land Rush: Making Local Land Legible and Corporate Power Applicable in Rural Sierra Leone. Journal of Agrarian Change. 16 (2): 206–224.
Moran, Joe. 2002. Interdisciplinarity. New York, NY: Routledge.
Paffenholz, Thania. 2015. Unpacking the Local Turn in Peacebuilding: A Critical Assessment Towards an Agenda for Future Research. Third World Quarterly 36 (5): 857–874.
Paris, Roland. 2010. Saving Liberal Peacebuilding. Review of International Studies 36 (2): 337–365.
Pels, Peter. 2008. What has Anthropology Learned from the Anthropology of Colonialism. Social Anthropology 16 (3): 280–299.
Richmond, Oliver P. 2011. De-Romanticising the Local, De-Mystifying the International: Hybridity in Timor Leste and the Solomon Islands. The Pacific Review 24 (1): 115–136.
Robben, Antonius C.G.M. 2009. Anthropology and the Iraq War: An Uncomfortable Engagement. Anthropology Today 25 (1): 1–3.
Rubenstein, Robert A. 1986. Reflections on Action Anthropology: Some Developmental Dynamics of an Anthropological Tradition. Human Organization 45 (3): 270–279.
Schensul, Jean, Marlene Berg, Daniel Schensul, and Sandra Syndlo. 2004. Core Elements of Participatory Action Research for Educational Empowerment and Risk Prevention in Urban Youth. Practicing Anthropology 26 (2): 5–9.
Schierenbeck, Isabell. 2015. Beyond the Local Turn Divide: Lessons Learnt, Relearnt and Unlearnt. Third World Quarterly 36 (5): 1023–1032.
Stodulka, Thomas. 2015. Emotion Work, Ethnography, and Survival Strategies on the Streets of Yogyakarta. Medical Anthropology 34 (1): 84–97.
Tax, Sol. 1975. Action Anthropology. Current Anthropology 16 (4): 514–517.
Theidon, Kimberly. 2006. Justice in Transition: The Micropolitics of Reconciliation in Postwar Peru. Journal of Conflict Resolution 50 (3): 433–457.
Thomson Klein, Julie. 1990. Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory, & Practice. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.
Webster, Steven. 1986. Realism and Reification in the Ethnographic Genre. Critique of Anthropology 6 (1): 39–62.
Zenker, Olaf, and Karsten Kumoll. 2010. Beyond Writing Culture: Current Intersections of Epistemology and Representational Practices. New York, NY: Berghahn Books.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Millar, G. (2018). Conclusion: The Constructive Tension of Interdisciplinary Endeavours. In: Millar, G. (eds) Ethnographic Peace Research. Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65563-5_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65563-5_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-65562-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-65563-5
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)