Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
of Social Anthropology
Anthropology and Public Policy
Contributors: Richard Fardon & Olivia Harris & Trevor H. J. Marchand & Mark Nuttall &
Cris Shore & Veronica Strang & Richard A. Wilson
Print Pub. Date: 2012
Online Pub. Date: September 05, 2012
Print ISBN: 9781847875471
Online ISBN: 9781446201077
DOI: 10.4135/9781446201077
Print pages: 89-105
This PDF has been generated from SAGE Knowledge. Please note that the pagination
of the online version will vary from the pagination of the print book.
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
10.4135/9781446201077
[p. 89 ]
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
behaviour, define their status and frame the norms of conduct that are expected of them
(Shore and Wright 1997: 4).
Policies are typically thought of as the property of governments and political parties,
but they are now increasingly central to the functioning of a vast range of other
institutions, from schools, hospitals and universities, to commercial businesses, financial
corporations, charities and insurance companies whose products are also defined
as policies. All of these organizations depend upon policies to define their mission or
institutional raison d'tre, as well as to lend coherence and legitimacy to their goals.
Policy, it seems, has become indispensable to the work of the modern state and its
bureaucratic apparatus and to modern organizations in general.
This chapter sets out to explore anthropology's contribution to the analysis of policy and
the implications of a focus on policy for the discipline as a whole. I ask:
In addressing these questions, I want to stress two key analytical themes. First, I
show how anthropology provides a necessary corrective to the rational choice models
and unreflexive positivistic accounts that still dominate the way that policy processes
are typically conceptualized among academics and policy professionals. Second,
I argue that policy provides anthropology with a lens for analysing wider political
processes and systems of government. Through studying policy we can gain critical
insight into the complex ways in which concepts, institutions and actors (or what I
call policy assemblages) interact in different sites either to consolidate regimes of
power/knowledge or to create new rationalities of governance. In this sense, policies
are technologies that powerfully influence human consciousness and behaviour; they
create the bureaucratic taxonomies that define the conditions of people's existence.
The main contribution of the anthropology of policy, therefore, is to the sub-fields of
Page 4 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
political anthropology, the anthropology of the state and anthropology at home. The
case study I use to illustrate these points concerns two of the defining policies of this
century: the US Homeland Security Act and the War on Terror. I argue that these [p.
91 ] initiatives are both cause and effect of the pervasive sense of insecurity and risk
that has come to characterize US society. But they are also symptomatic of the way that
military norms and values are reshaping the fabric of liberal society.
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
These arguments illustrate precisely why policy analysis needs to be rescued from the
policy analysts, just as Hart (Chapter 1.10) argues that economics needs to be freed
from the myopia of economists. The same vision of policy analysis as a science, and
the same flawed rational choice models based on assumptions about rational actors
producing predictable policy outcomes, also underlies the efficient-market hypothesis
of mainstream economics and modern finance. The anthropology of policy tries to go
beyond learning the tricks of the trade in order to step outside the box and explore how
policies work in practice, the conditions that create and sustain them and the kinds of
relations they produce.
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
symbols and as floating signifiers; their meaning is cultural and defined by context.
Rather than taking policy as an un-analysed given, anthropology asks: What does policy
mean in this context? What work does it perform and what are its effects? How does
this policy relate to other institutions and practices within the particular society? And
what were the conditions that made this policy possible?
An important starting point is the meaning and use of the term policy. Mention of [p.
93 ] policy usually brings to mind public administration, government and politics
these being the standard dictionary definitions of the term. However, the semantics
of the concept reveal some important secondary meanings. From the Greek polis
(city) to the Latin politia came two associated meanings: the first was polity (meaning
civil organization, form of government and constitution of the state), and the second,
policy (meaning the art, method or tactics of government; the method for regulating
internal order (Partridge 1958: 509)). With the formation of Robert Peel's new police
in 1829, this last constellation of meanings split: administration of internal order
became a domain of policing, notionally separate from policy. The meaning of policy
as art of government has also changed. Initially a pejorative term associated with
stratagems, trickery, cunning, deceit, and hypocrisy, policy has now been made
respectable (Pick 1988: 97) in its contemporary guise and is defined in more neutral
terms as a course of action adopted and pursued by a government, party, ruler or
organization (Stevenson 2010).
These semantics highlight two important points. First, if policy has become associated
with the concepts of government and administration, it also belongs to a semantic
cluster that includes policing and polishing or what we might rephrase as
disciplining and the art of spin. The second is that many languages have no word for
policy per se that distinguishes it from the broader field of politics (just as economics
was once deemed inseparable from political-economy, perhaps). We should therefore
be wary of approaches that isolate these fields into discrete disciplinary boxes, thereby
obscuring the inherently social and political nature of policy making.
Page 8 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
Page 9 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
inhabited by policy professionals, none of them have sought to theorize the category of
policy itself.
The first systematic attempt to develop policy as a coherent field of anthropological
research was Shore and Wright's edited volume, Anthropology of Policy: Critical
Perspectives on Governance and Power (1997). The authors developed three main
arguments here. The first was that policies are inherently anthropological phenomena
and should be conceptualized as discursive formations through which larger-scale
processes of social and historical change can be mapped. As they also noted, policies
often occupy the same role as myth in traditional societies, providing charters for
action, guides to behaviour and legitimating narratives for leaders and would-be rulers.
Second, while policies can be conceptualized as a type of narrative or performance,
they are also political technologies that serve to create new categories of subjectivity;
for example, citizens, taxpayers, criminals, immigrants, or pensioners. Insofar as
they become internalized, policies also work as techniques of the self. But as with most
forms of power, policy typically disguises the mechanism of its own operation, either
by seeking to naturalize its arbitrariness or by concealing the particularism and hidden
interests that often underlie its formulation.
The third argument entailed the implications of a focus on policy for anthropological
methods. If policies are instruments of power, they also provide instruments for
analysing the operation of power. Following the connections or webs of relations that
policies create provides anthropologists with a framework that links local practices
with wider events and processes. This is not so much a method for studying up
as for studying through (Wright and Reinhold 2011) and engaging in non-local
ethnography (Feldman 2011): i.e. analysing how events, processes and actors
intersect. This represents a significant improvement upon George Marcus's (1995)
ideas about multi-sited ethnography because it provides both a method for exploring
the connections between seemingly disparate nodes in a network of relations
and a framework for contextualizing and conceptualizing that network or policy
assemblage.
The methodological thrust of the essays assembled in Anthropology of Policy drew
heavily on the work of Foucault (1991) and other governmentality theorists. This
Page 10 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
is perhaps unsurprising given that these essays were written in the mid-1990s
when policies of neoliberalization appeared to be spreading particularly throughout
Western societies. Several chapters highlight this. For example, Emily Martin (1997)
shows how leading American blue chip corporations conceptualize and seek to
produce the ideal modern manager, pointing out that these ideal qualities (including
impatience, self-managing, constantly scanning the horizon for new opportunities,
etc.), bear strikingly similarities to people with attention-deficit disorder (ADD);
and Susan Hyatt's (1997) account of women on a northern England council estate
during the 1980s Thatcherite reforms, who belatedly discovered that the community
empowerment programme that they had joined in order to improve their housing estate
left them responsible for managing all its problems-while the state quietly withdrew its
responsibility.
These essays provide useful analyses of the shift from government to governance,
which has been a hallmark of the neoliberal programme for rolling back the state by
withdrawing government funding for public services provision. They also show how the
language of community, decentralization and participatory governance has been
mobilized to mask what in effect has been an extension of state power. Hence, the
oft-noted paradox that while neoliberalization and globalization appear to have left the
nation-state increasingly bereft of sovereignty and hollowed out, the power of the state
if measured in terms of state effects has actually grown under neoliberalism [p. 95
] (Mitchell 1999; Trouillot 2001; Khron-Hansen and Nustad 2005).
Neoliberal governmentality also entails instilling habits of self-government and selfmanagement; i.e. techniques of the self that transform the passive objects of state
policy (i.e. individual workers, job-seekers, customers or patients) into active subjects
of their own subjectification. Policy professionals and experts play a key role in this
process as it is by means of expertise, self-regulatory techniques can be installed in
citizens that will align their personal choices with the ends of government (Miller and
Rose 1992:188189).
Several ethnographies have ably documented this process of self-management
and regulation. Governing through empowerment and self-help is analysed in
Cruikshank's (1999) ethnographical study of homeless people in Philadelphia which
powerfully illustrates how liberal democracies increasingly use civic engagement
Page 11 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
Page 14 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
2005: 460) and successfully challenge the terms that policies attempt to foist upon
them.
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
filled with metaphors of danger, the urgency of a nation at war and the need to bring
down walls between intelligence-gathering and law enforcement. A recurring motif in
the discourse of the US government was that these measures were necessary tools
to enable our nation's law enforcement, national defense and intelligence personnel
to bring terrorists and other dangerous criminals to justice (US Department of Justice
2004: 1). The Act was followed in November 2001 by the signing of a presidential
directive authorizing trials of suspected terrorists and their collaborators in military
tribunals rather than the courts. Bringing terrorists to justice thus translated into a
curious form of military justice involving detention without trial, extraordinary rendition
of foreign nationals and holding suspects in legal black holes like Guantanamo Bay
all of which violated human rights and the norms of international law.
Following the bombing of Afghanistan and the military assault on Osama bin Laden's
hideout in the Tora Bora caves, Bush delivered his 2002 State of the Union address
in which he coined the phrase axis of evil and warned that the United States would
not permit dangerous regimes in the world to threaten America with weapons of mass
destruction. This provided a foundation for two further key policy developments. [p.
98 ] The first policy was the announcement in June 2002 of the new US defence
doctrine of pre-emption (the right to inflict military strikes on any country suspected
of harbouring terrorists). The second policy was the signing into law in November of
a bill creating a unified Department of Homeland Security, which entailed the largest
reorganization of federal government in over half a century. Born from the post-9/11
climate of insecurity, these two policy initiatives came to define the United States during
the Bush era (Besterman and Gusterson 2010).
These events surrounding the creation of the US state of exception are well
contextualized in the anthropology of militarism literature. The study of militarism, I
argue, represents one of the latest and perhaps most innovative developments within
the fields of political anthropology and the anthropology of policy. Militarism is one
of the most influential cultural forces of our time, drawing together a powerful nexus
of institutions, money, power and influence. Like policy, militarism raises awkward
questions regarding anthropologists' own entanglements with government. Just as
militarism continues to violently shape the international order through the so-called War
on Terror, it is also having a profound effect on democracy and civil liberties through
the impact of the PATRIOT Act and Homeland Security Bill. But, beyond this, militarism
Page 16 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
the world's largest arms manufacturer and dealer, with sales for 2006 alone totalling
US$123.54 billion, [p. 99 ] some five time higher than the next five major arms
suppliers combined (Sharp 2008). All this money is mobilized to sustain the hegemonic
military ideal that war is human nature and violence has the power to get things
done (Lutz 2010: 55). The military is also the largest employer in the United States,
with a workforce of 2.3 million soldiers and 700,000 civilians and millions more receiving
defence-related contracts (Lutz 2010: 47). Some 5% of the US workforce is thus directly
or indirectly employed by the military and fully one quarter of all US scientists and
technicians work on military contracts (Lutz ibid).
According to a two-year investigation by the Washington Post, the massive US
intelligence community created in response to the 9/11 attacks has now become so
inefficient, unmanageable and extensive that no-one knows its exact costs or size
(Priest and Arkin 2010). Among its discoveries, the Washington Post investigation
found: 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies working on
programmes related to counterintelligence, homeland security and intelligence in about
10,000 locations across the United States; an estimated 854,000 people who hold topsecret security clearances (a population one-and-a-half times that of Washington), and
who publish between them over 50,000 reports each year a volume so large that
many are routinely ignored. In the Washington area alone, 33 building complexes for
top-secret intelligence work are either under construction or have been built since 2002,
amounting to some 17 million square feet of space the equivalent of three Pentagons
(Priest and Arkin 2010). If this illustrates how militarism is reshaping the US system of
government, it also reminds us of how policies work to construct new communities of
practice and new social worlds. (Shore and Wright 2011).
The distorting effect of militarization is also evident within US universities (Giroux 2008).
Since 9/11, the US army has actively sought to recruit anthropologists for its war on
terror, particularly its Human Terrain System (HTS) project in Iraq and Afghanistan
(Price 2007). Some anthropologists have responded to this call by arguing that cultural
knowledge of adversaries should be considered a national priority (McFate 2004: 43).
Montgomery McFate, who defines anthropology as a discipline invented to support war
fighting in the tribal zones (2004: 43, 2005: 24), even wrote part of the US Army's 2006
counterinsurgency manual (FM 324). For a discipline more commonly aligned with
social critique, this attempt to co-opt anthropology to serve the CIA and the Pentagon
Page 18 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
has raised a heated debate over professional ethics and the uses of anthropological
knowledge (AAA 2007; Gonzales 2007; Gusterson 2007; McFate 2007; Price 2007,
2010).
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
(Besterman and Gusterson 2010: 14). The phrase War on Terror itself contains a
fundamental paradox. As Nelson (2003: 21) observes, terror is not a thing but a
relationship (my emphasis). It is far from clear how one can wage war on something
as abstract as a relationship but perhaps that is precisely the point: War on Terror
serves a multitude of political and military goals. Policies are tools of government,
political technologies and floating signifiers. An important challenge for anthropology,
beyond analysing the work of policy and the meanings that policies hold, is to develop
alternative analytical frameworks for interpreting policies and analysing the regimes of
truth that they create.
An example of such a challenge is Mahmood Mamdani's (2002) article Good Muslim,
Bad Muslim: A Political Perspective on the Culture of Terrorism. Mamdani offers a
more historically contextualized account of the link between Islam and terrorism in
post-9/11 Western discourse by exploring the processes of meaning-making and
identity formation of those who grew up in the refugee camps of Afghanistan. The
Iranian revolution of 1979, he notes, was a turning point for US foreign policy. The
Reagan administration aimed to expand the pro-US Islamic lobby and isolate Iran
both of which were important to the wider goal of intensifying its Cold War with the
Soviet Union. In Afghanistan, its strategy was to unite Muslims in a holy war against
the Soviet Union. The US government therefore trained, equipped and financed the
neofundamentalist mujahidin and al-Qaeda. This was to be the largest covert operation
in the history of the CIA, which in the fiscal year of 1987 alone amounted to 660 million
dollars (Mamdani 2002: 771). The Taliban was a movement born across the border
with Pakistan that grew from the dislocation and brutalization caused by the US war
against the Soviet Union. The Taliban become progressively radicalized and militarized
through the raids and atrocities of the mujahidin. Simply put, after the defeat in Vietnam
and the Watergate scandal, the United States decided to harness, and even to cultivate,
terrorism in the struggle against regimes it considered pro-Soviet (Mamdani 2002: 769).
But this policy had a further twist. To fund this massive covert operation, the CIA used
the drugs trade just as it had previously done for its operations in Nicaragua. The
effect was to turn the Pakistan-Afghanistan border into the world's top heroin producer,
supplying some 60% of US demand, and raising heroin addiction in Pakistan from zero
in 1979 to 1.2 million by 1985 (Mamdani 2002: 771. Mandani thus offers an alternative
anthropologically informed reading of the War on Terror, one that calls on political
Page 20 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
leaders in the United States and Britain to face up to the relationship between their own
policies and contemporary terrorism (Mamdani 2002: 773).
Conclusion
Policies reflect ways of thinking about the world and acting upon it. They contain
implicit models of social organization and visions of how individuals should relate to
society and to each other. They can therefore be analysed as charters for actions and
condensed symbols or blueprints that reflect [p. 101 ] key elements of the wider
cultural systems in which they are embedded. But if policies are performative and
instrumental, they are also inherently political; the quintessential tools of government
and technologies of governance. They are the vehicles through which institutions seek
to act upon the world and to manage, regulate or change society. Policies are therefore
concerned with the imposition of order and coherence on the world; they express a
will to power. However, to describe policies as instrumental should not be taken to
mean they are devoid of symbolism and meaning or that they are necessarily rational
in the conventional positivistic and predictable sense of the term. As the case of the
US Homeland Security Policy illustrates, policies have complex social lives that often
produce irrational and contradictory consequences and set in motion perverse runaway
effects.
The anthropology of policy has become an increasingly significant and coherent subfield of anthropology, but it is still developing. More ethnographies and case studies are
needed to develop this field, but anthropological work on bureaucracy, the state, elites,
militarism and systems of governance are indicative of its challenges and potential.
The interface between anthropology and policy studies offers exciting possibilities,
notwithstanding the methodological and epistemological differences that may divide
these disciplines. Anthropology's main contribution to the study of policy has been
to show how policy processes are embedded in larger social systems, how policies
connect with processes of meaning-making and subjectivity and how policies work in a
political and symbolic sense. Similarly, policy's contribution to anthropology has been to
open up rich new fields of study that not only connect anthropology to other disciplinary
concerns but also to wider public debates. The study of policy places demands on
anthropology which are potentially transformative for the discipline. Policy also offers
Page 21 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
an ideal venue for examining the grounding of global processes in our increasingly
mobile and transnational world (Wedel and Feldman 2005: 1). Anthropology was
traditionally associated with the study of poor, colonized and marginalized people: a
policy perspective takes seriously Nader's call to study up and provides a methodology
for redirecting anthropology's analytical gaze towards the rich, the colonizers and the
powerful.
References
AAA (American Anthropological Association) (2007) Commission on the Engagement
of Anthropology with the US Security and Intelligence Communities . Report: November
2007. http://www.aaanet.org/pdf/FINAL_Report_Complete.pdf
Akrich, Madeleine and Latour, Bruno (1999) A Summary of a Convenient Vocabulary
for the Semiotics of Human and Nonhuman Assemblies , in J. Law, ed. and J. Hassard
(eds) Actor Network Theory and After . Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Appadurai, Arjun, (ed) (1986) The Social Life of Things: Commodities in cultural
perspective . Cambridge/ New York: Cambridge University Press.
Besterman, Catherine and Gusterson, Hugh (2010) Introduction , in H. Gusterson,
ed. , and C. Besterman (eds) The Insecure American: How we got here and what we
Should do about it . Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Borneman, J. and Fowler, N. (1997) Europeanization , Annual Review of
Anthropology , vol. 26 : pp. 487514.
Bush, George W. (2001) Remarks by the President at Signing of the Patriot Act (Press
Release), 26 October 2001 . http://www.whitehouse.gov/news.releases/2001/10/
print/2001 10265.html [Last accessed 21/12/2005].
Callon, Michel (2002) Actor-Network Theory , International Encyclopedia of the Social
& Behavioral Sciences . Elsevier/Science Direct, pp. pp. 6266.
Page 22 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
Chalfin, B. (2006) Global Customs Regimes and the Traffic in Sovereignty: Enlarging
the anthropology of the state , Current Anthropology , vol. 47 ( no. 2): pp. 243244.
Clarke, John. (2005) New Labour's citizens: Activated, empowered, responsibilized,
abandoned? , Critical Social Policy vol. 25 ( no. 4): pp. 447463.
Cochrane, G. (1980) Policy Studies and Anthropology , Current Anthropology vol. 21
( no. 4): pp. 445458.
Colebatch, Hal, Hoppe Rob and Noordegraaf Mirko (2010) Introduction , in Hal
Colebatch, ed. , Rob Hoppe, ed. and Mirko Noordegraaf (eds) Working for Policy .
Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Cruikshank, Barbara (1999) The Will to Empower: Democratic citizens and other
subjects . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
DeLeon, Peter and Martell, Christine (1996) The Policy Sciences: Past, present, and
future , in B. Guy Peters, ed. and Jon Pierre (eds) Handbook of Public Policy . London/
Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage, pp. pp. 3147.
Dye Thomas, R. (1972) Understanding Public Policy . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Evans-Pritchard, E. (1951) Social Anthropology . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Feldman, Gregory (2005) Culture, State, and Security in Europe: The case of
citizenship and integration in Estonia , American Ethnologist , vol. 32 ( no. 4): pp. 676
695.
Feldman, Gregory (2007) Following or Facing the Governmental Gaze: Academic and
policy intellectuals in the early twenty-first century , Roundtable, Conference of the
Canadian Anthropological Society-American Ethnological Society, University of Toronto,
May 812, 2007.
Page 23 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
Page 24 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
Gottweis, H. (2006) Argumentative Policy Analysis , in B. Guy Peters, ed. and Jon
Pierre (eds) Handbook of Public Policy . London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage, pp.
pp. 461479.
Greenhalgh, Susan. (2008) Just One Child: Science and Policy in Deng's China .
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Gusterson, Hugh (2007) Anthropology and Militarism , Annual Review of
Anthropology , vol. 36 : pp. 155175.
Hertz, Ellen, (1998) The Trading Crowd: An ethnography of the Shanghai stock market .
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ho, Karen (2005) Situating Global Capitalisms: A view from Wall Street investment
banks , Cultural Anthropology , vol. 20 ( no. 1): pp. 6896.
Hyatt, Susan B. (1997) Poverty in a Post-welfare landscape: Tenant management
policies, self-governance and the democratization of knowledge in Great Britain , in
C. Shore, ed. and S. Wright (eds) Anthropology of Policy: Critical perspectives on
governance and power , London: Routledge, pp. pp. 166182.
Jackson, Robert and Towle, Philip (2006) Temptations of Power: The United States in
global politics after 9/11 . Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
Khron-Hansen, Christian, ed. and Nustad, Knut (eds) (2005) State Formation:
Anthropological perspectives . London: Pluto Press.
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999) Epistemic Cultures: How Science Makes Knowledge .
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lea, Tess (2008) Bureaucrats and Bleeding Hearts: Indigenous health in Northern
Australia . Sydney, NSW: UNSW Press.
Lutz, Catherine (2002a) Homefront: A military city and the American twentieth century .
Boston, MA: Beacon.
Page 25 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
Lutz, Catherine (2002b) Making War at Home in the United States: Militarization and
the current crisis , American Anthropologist , vol. 104 : pp. 723735.
Lutz, Catherine (2010) Warmaking as the American Way of Life , in H. Gusterson,
ed. , and C. Besterman (eds) The Insecure American . Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press.
Mamdani, Mahmood (2002) Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: A political perspective on
culture and terrorism American Anthropologist , vol. 104 ( no. 3): pp. 766775.
Marcus, George (1983) Elites: Ethnographic issues . Albuquerque, NM: University of
New Mexico Press.
Marcus, George (1995) Ethnography in/of the World System: The emergence of multisited ethnography , Annual Review of Anthropology , vol. 24 : pp. 95117.
Martin, Emily (1997) Managing Americans: Policy and changes in the meanings of
work and the self , in C. Shore, ed. and S, Wright (eds) Anthropology of Policy: Critical
perspectives on governance and power . London: Routledge, pp. pp. 239260.
Masco, J. (2004) Nuclear Technoaesthetics: Sensory politics from trinity to the virtual
bomb in Los Alamos , American Ethnologist , vol. 31 ( no. 3): pp. 349373.
McFate, Montgomery (2004) The Military Utility of Understanding Adversary Culture ,
Joint Forces Quarterly , vol. 38 : pp. 4248. Available at http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/
jfq_pubs/1038.pdf
McFate, Montgomery (2005) Anthropology and Counterinsurgency: The strange story
of their curious relationship , Military Review , vol. 85 ( no. 2): pp. 2438. Available at;
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/milreview/mcfate.pdf
McFate, Montgomery (2007) Building Bridges or Burning Heretics , Anthropology
Today , vol. 23 ( no. 3): pp. 21.
Miller, Peter and Rose, Nikolas (1992) Political Power beyond the State: Problematics
of government , British Journal of Sociology , vol. 43 ( no. 2): pp. 173205.
Page 26 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
Mitchell, Timothy (1999) Society, Economy, and the State Effect , in G. Steinmetz
(ed.) State/Culture . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, pp. pp. 7697.
Moran, Michael, ed. , Rein, Martin, ed. and Goodin, Robert (eds) (2006) The Oxford
Handbook of Public Policy . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mosse, David, (2005) Cultivating Development: An ethnography of aid policy and
practice . London: Pluto Press.
Miyazaki, Hirokazu, (2006) Economy of Dreams: Hope in global capitalism and its
critiques , Cultural Anthropology, Cultural Anthropology , vol. 21 ( no. 2): pp. 147172.
Nader, Laura, (1972) Up the Anthropologist-perspectives gained from studying up , in
D. Hymes (ed.) Reinventing Anthropology . New York: Random House.
Nelson, Diane, (2003) Relating to Terror: Gender, anthropology, law, and some
September elevenths , Duke Journal of Gender Law and Policy , vol. 10 : pp. 195210.
Partridge, Eric (1958) Origins. A Short Etymological Dictionary of Modern English .
London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Per, Davide (2007) Inclusionary Rhetoric/Exclusionary Practices: Left-wing politics and
migrants in Italy . Oxford: Berghahn.
Peters, B. Guy and Pierre, Jon, (2006) Introduction , in B. Guy Peters, ed. and Jon
Pierre (eds) Handbook of Public Policy . London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage.
Pick, John (1988) The Arts in a State . Bristol: Bristol Classical Press.
Power, Michael (1997) The Audit Society: Rituals of verification . Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Price, David (2007) Buying a Piece of Anthropology , Anthropology Today , vol. 23
( no. 2): pp. 813.
Page 27 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
Price, David (2010) Human Terrain Systems Dissenter Resigns, Tells Inside Story
of Training's Heart of Darkness , http://www.counterpunch.org/price02152010.html.
Accessed 25/07/2010.
Priest, Dana and Arkin, William (2010) Top Secret America: A hidden
world growing beyond control , The Washington Post , 19 July 2010. http://
media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/tsa/static/articles/hidden-world.html.
Accessed 22/07/2010.
Rabinow, Paul (1999) French DNA: Trouble in purgatory . Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press.
Rhodes, Rod, ed. , t'Hart, Paul, ed. and Noordegraaf, Miro (eds) (2007) Observing
Government Elites . Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
Riles, Annelise (2006) Anthropology, Human Rights, and Legal Knowledge: Culture in
the iron cage , American Anthropologist , vol. 108 ( no. 1): pp. 5265.
Schwegler, Tara (2008) Take it from the Top (Down)? Rethinking Neoliberal Economic
Knowledge and Political Hierarchy in Mexico , American Ethnologist , vol. 35 ( no. 4):
pp. 682700.
Scott, James (1985) Weapons of the Weak: Everyday forms of peasant resistance .
New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Sharp, Travis (2008) U.S Arms Sales Agreements Worldwide , Centre for Arms
Control and Proliferation. http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/policy/iran/articles/
arms_sales_99_to_06/index.html. Accessed 13/07/2010.
Shore, Cris (2000) Building Europe: The cultural politics of European integration .
London: Routledge.
Shore, Cris (2008) Audit Culture and Illiberal Government , Anthropological Theory ,
vol. 8 ( no. 3): pp. 278299.
Page 28 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
Shore, Cris, ed. and Nugent, Stephen (eds) (2002) Elite Cultures: Anthropological
perspectives . London/New York: Routledge.
Shore, Cris, ed. and Wright, Susan (eds) (1997) Anthropology of Policy: Critical
perspectives on governance and power . London: Routledge.
Shore, Cris and Wright, Susan (1999). Audit Culture and Anthropology: Neo-Liberalism
in British Higher Education , Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute , vol. 5 , ( no.
4): pp. 557575.
Shore, Cris, and Wright, Susan (2011) Conceptualising Policy: Technologies of
Governance and the Politics of Visibility . In Cris Shore, ed. , Susan Wright, ed. , and
Davdie Per, (eds) Policy Worlds: Anthropology and the Analysis of Power , Oxford:
Berghahn. pp. pp. 126.
SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) (2008) Recent Trends
in Military Expenditure , in SIPRI Yearbook 2008: Armaments, Disarmament and
International Security . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stevenson, Angus (ed) (2010) Oxford Dictionary of English. Oxford Reference Online .
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Strathern, Marilyn (1992b) Reproducing the Future: Essays on anthropology, kinship
and the new reproductive technologies . London/New York: Routledge.
Strathern, Marilyn (ed) (2000). Audit Culture: Anthropological studies in accountability,
ethics and the academy . London: Routledge.
Tett, Gillian (2009) Fool's Gold: How the bold dream of a small tribe at J. P. Morgan was
corrupted by Wall Street greed and unleashed a catastrophe . New York: Free Press.
Traweek, S. (1988) Beamtimes and Lifetimes: The world of high energy physicists .
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Trouillot, Michel-Rolph (2001) The Anthropology of the State in the Age of
Globalization , Current Anthropology , vol. 42 ( no. 1): pp. 125138.
Page 29 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
Page 30 of 31
University of Auckland
Copyright 2012
Yanow, Dvora (1996) How Does a Policy Mean? Interpreting Policy and Organizational
Actions . Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Yanow, Dvora (2000) Conducting Interpretive Policy Analysis . Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Yanow, Dvora (2011) Afterword: A policy ethnographer's reading of policy
anthropology , in C. Shore, ed. , S. Wright, ed. and D. Per, (eds) Policy Worlds .
Oxford: Berghahn.
Yanow, Dvora, ed. and Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine (eds) (2006) Interpretation and
Method: Empirical research methods and the interpretive turn . Armonk, NY: M E
Sharpe.
Zaloom, Caitlin (2006) Ambiguous Numbers: Trading technologies and interpretation in
fFinancial markets , American Ethnologist , vol. 30 : pp. 258272.
10.4135/9781446201077.n8
Page 31 of 31