Assessment Report / Cultural and Social Anthropology

PREFACE TO THE EVALUATION STATEMENTS AND ASSESSMENT FORMS OF PANEL 24.


With this prefatory note, Panel 24 is submitting its report to the University of Helsinki on Institute of Asian and African Studies and the Departments of Classical Philology, Archaeology, Folklore, Ethnology, Cultural Anthropology, Social Anthropology and Comparative Religion.

This report consists of written comments and numerical assessments. We would like to make clear that our numerical assessments are intended to indicate the overall evaluation of the quality of research being done by the unit as a whole. It is essential that our numerical assessments be considered in relation to our written comments, which give a more ample indication of how these assessments are to be interpreted.

Several matters appear to the Panel to be worth highlighting in relation to all of the units under review. All of these units are relatively small and, as such, face similar problems. It is important to any University that it endeavour to preserve a diversity of such small specialized units, in areas in which excellence already exists or can be achieved, but the nature of the subject area or discipline does not lend itself to large-scale teaching. However there is always the danger that such small units will not have the ‘critical mass’ necessary to carry on their activities. To undertake research, teaching and administration requires a sufficient level of staff to allow for a reasonable division of labour. For this reason it is necessary for the University to assure that each unit have a certain number of continuing positions. Most units expressed concern about the possible loss of one or another position that would severely disable them from carrying out their work in the future.

All of the units reviewed are committed, to a greater or lesser extent, to fieldwork. Fieldwork is essential to support research in these units and could be considered as equivalent to laboratory work for disciplines in the natural sciences. Some thought should therefore be given to establish some additional fieldwork funding to complement funds received from outside sources for research.

To enhance the dissemination of the University’s research, a further allocation of funds might be made available to translate some of the most important research results that have been achieved. Again, this would be of particular benefit to departments with very small numbers and budgets.

It has been a pleasure to participate in this assessment. The preparations for our visit were careful, the presentations in the various units were clear and well-documented and the hospitality on the University has been most gratifying. We have enjoyed our stay in Helsinki and have learned a great deal in the process.

SOCIAL AND CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY

Anthropology at the University of Helsinki consists of both Social and Cultural Anthropology. Cultural Anthropology is a component discipline within the Institute for Cultural Research in the Humanities Faculty, whereas Social Anthropology forms part of the Department of Sociology in the Social Sciences Faculty.

Cultural Anthropology developed from general ethnology. Social Anthropology, on the other hand, – although only recently established in the University – is attempting to rekindle the pioneering vision of Edvard Westermarck whose early work was of seminal importance to the discipline. A distinguished annual lecture, which has attracted an impressive array of international speakers, has been established by Social Anthropology to commemorate Westermarck’s achievements.

Present arrangements, rather than causing difficulties, allow each form of Anthropology to maintain a distinct academic agenda and to foster separate interdisciplinary relations while at the same time cooperating in establishing a common curriculum and a mutually supportive research program. This close cooperation has extended to an interchange of academic and research staff. Such flexibility is essential to a discipline with a small staff but a substantial commitment to extensive research and advanced graduate training.

Anthropology is a relatively new field at the University of Helsinki and is indeed relatively new to Finnish academic life. Anthropology, as it has now developed, is largely the creation of the last ten years. It is truly remarkable how much has been achieved in establishing a firm foundation to the field and in gaining international recognition for its efforts.

Most remarkable of all has been the number of well-trained PhD students with excellent theses who have graduated with expertise on different parts of the world. Between 1994 and 1998, Cultural Anthropology produced four PhDs and Social Anthropology a total of eleven PhDs. Recognizing the small number of academic staff in Anthropology, this successful production of doctoral degrees is virtually unprecedented.

In addition, several of Anthropology’s brightest MA graduates have been encouraged to undertake PhD training at universities in Europe and the United States and to return to the Department to enhance its research capacities. Recent returnees have come from the University of Amsterdam and the University of Chicago; another, from the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, is expected to take up teaching in the coming year.

Virtually all of the PhDs produced in Anthropology have been based on extended fieldwork and a majority of these theses have included a critical component of international supervision and/or examination. As a result, Anthropology at the University of Helsinki has developed an extensive network of international connections in Europe, the United States and Australia, and a growing reputation for the quality of its ethnographic research.

Anthropology’s present research agenda is set to continue to build on the previous research strengths. There are ten doctoral candidates in Cultural Anthropology and twelve in Social Anthropology. Several of these students have already completed their fieldwork and others are well advanced in their preparations for fieldwork.

Social Anthropology

Social Anthropology, in particular, has taken the lead in promoting graduate education, in fostering international connections and in gaining support for its innovative research. Of particular importance was the establishment of the National Graduate School of Anthropology and Ethnographical Science which has helped students not just in Anthropology but also students in Folklore, Comparative Religion and Ethnology.

Social Anthropology has developed a most impressive and coherent research program, each component of which has received funding from the Academy of Finland. Each component is composed of a senior researcher, one or more postdoctoral fellows and a number of research students.

The first of the projects in this program is referred to as “Departures”. It considers the world-wide movement and dislocation of populations. This program, which is intended to include wide international participation, was recently launched at an international symposium held in the Department to bring international researchers together to discuss directions for research. This project will focus in particular on the island worlds of the Pacific and Southeast Asia.

A second project is focused on South Asian research and is intended to carry forward a program with strong demographic foundations. It will examine women’s roles in Indian households, occupational opportunities in the context of caste, and the regulation of fertility in Bangladesh and India. This project, in particular, has attracted the involvement of one of the most distinguished professors in the United States who has joined the Department as a Docent.

A third project looks at the historical transformation of household and family in specific European contexts. This project will have a strong social historical dimension and will endeavour to link with other similar international research.

A fourth project examines changing gender relations in several African societies. This, as in all of the Department’s other projects, builds on on-going ethnographic research linked to related international research.

Published work submitted for consideration to the Panel is of a high international standard. Most of it is in English and much of it was published internationally in the United States, the Netherlands and Australia. However, it should also be emphasized that the Department is committed to the development of a distinguished Finnish anthropology and therefore all members of the Department are strongly urged to publish both in Suomen Antropologi and in The Journal of Finnish Anthropology. All members of the Social Anthropology Department have done this during the period under review. To this publication list must be added the long list of eleven theses prepared and produced for the PhD. Together this represents an extraordinary achievement, unmatched by any single Department of Anthropology in Europe. Taking into account the small size of the full-time faculty in the Department and its recent establishment at the University, this achievement rates a 7.

Cultural Anthropology

As already stated, it is somewhat difficult to disentangle the activities of the Department of Cultural Anthropology from that of Social Anthropology especially since one member who was three years in Social Anthropology is now in Cultural Anthropology. As a consequence, the Panel has taken the decision to assess publications on the basis of where the majority of work was done.

The Panel did note several differences. To its credit, Cultural Anthropology has produced a large number of MA graduates, but it has not produced as many PhD graduates. It has established within itself a Medical and Psychological Anthropology Unit organized by able docents whose work will have both a Finnish and an African focus. The creation of this unit is to be applauded. More generally, it would appear that other research in Cultural Anthropology is carried out more on an individual research basis. Important fieldwork has been undertaken in Thailand for many decades but this work has not yet come to fruition. Similarly a great deal of stimulating work of an historical and ethnographic nature has been done on the peoples of the Portuguese colonial world but virtually all of this has been published in Finnish and is therefore difficult for the panel to assess. The most promising work available for evaluation is that on social and cultural issues of forestry in Latin America.

As a consequence, it is more appropriate to give Cultural Anthropology the lower rating of 5.


The Panel feels it is essential to maintain a coherent Anthropological Program at the University of Helsinki, especially because of the importance of its interdisciplinary influence on other fields of research in the University. The Panel has given a rating of 7 to Social Anthropology and a rating of 5 to Cultural Anthropology. Taken together, this equates to an overall rating of 6 for Anthropology as a whole.