factors such as poverty and discrimination, which are hardly unique to “indigenous peoples.”
Many anthropologists have been recruited by NGOs working in the “indigenous peoples” field, or given evidence in support of land claims in the courts, or engaged in advocacy. Yet there are obviously dangers if anthropology becomes, as Plaice remarks, “the academic wing of the indigenous rights movement” (Plaice 2003: 397). If ethnographers report only what is politically convenient and refrain from analyzing intellectual confusions, then our ethnographies will lose their credibility and authority. And, fortunately, a number of ethnographers—activists among them—have contributed insightful analyses of particular movements. The present volume is packed with valuable case studies of local land struggles, the travails of traditional medical practitioners, and the often unintended effects of state policies.
But while local case studies are often illuminating, various indigenist movements across the world do share an ideology, if little else. In part, this is obviously because international agencies and NGOs have fostered a common doctrine. Several anthropologists have also related the emergence of the indigenous peoples’ movement to an even more widespread fashion for movements of ethnic assertion (see, e.g., Friedman 1994; Hannerz 1996). The example of racial and ethnic movements in the USA, the end of the Cold War, and the rise of NGOs are all relevant. The internet has become the indispensable medium of internationalization. Some of the most interesting recent studies address the global discourse of indigeneity, and the interplay between international agencies, local activists, and the people they target. This volume is distinguished not only by the quality of its regional case studies, but also by the attention given to the whole machinery of the global indigenous peoples’ movements. And it moves the discussion on, posing the important and difficult question of the future of indigeneity.
Adam Kuper (PhD, Cambridge) is a visiting professor at both the London School of Economics and Political Science and at Boston University, and he is a Fellow of the British Academy. Among his books are The Chosen Primate: Human Nature and Cultural Diversity (Harvard University Press, 1994), ‘Culture’: The Anthropologists’ Account (Harvard University Press, 1999), The Reinvention of Primitive Society (Routledge, 2005), Incest and Influence: The Private Life of Bourgeois England (Harvard University Press, 2009), and Anthropology and Anthropologists: The British School in the Twentieth Century (4th edition, Routledge, 2016).
Note
1. On the sorts of issues that recur where activists do engage, see, for instance, Dombrowski (2002), or an interesting ethnographic report by Robins (2001) himself, and also several illuminating case studies in the present volume.
Bibliography
Barnard, Alan. 2004. “Indigenous Peoples: A Response to Justin Kenrick and Jerome Lewis.” Anthropology Today 20(2): 19.
Dombrowski, Kirk. 2002. “The Practice of Indigenism and Alaska Native Timber Politics.” American Anthropologist 104(4): 1,062–73.
Friedman, Jonathan. 1994. Cultural Identity and Global Process. London: Sage.
Gracey, Michael and Malcolm King. 2009. “Indigenous Health Part 1: Determinants and Disease Patterns.” The Lancet 374(9,683): 65–75.
Hannerz, Ulf. 1996. Transnational Connections: Culture, People, Places. London and New York: Routledge.
Horton, Richard. 2006. “Indigenous Peoples: Time to Act Now for Equity and Health.” The Lancet 367(9,524): 1,705–7.
ILO (International Labour Organization). 1989. Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention (No. C169). Retrieved 28 July 2017 from http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO:12100:P12100_ILO_CODE:C169.
Kuper, Adam. 2003. “The Return of the Native.” Current Anthropology 44(3): 389–402.
Plaice, Evie. 2003. “Comment on ‘The Return of the Native’.” Current Anthropology 44(3): 397–98.
Ramos, Alcida Rita. 2003. “Comment on ‘The Return of the Native’.” Current Anthropology 44(3): 397–98.
Robins, Steven. 2001. “NGOs, ‘Bushmen’ and Double Vision: The # Khomani San Land Claim and the Cultural Politics of ‘Community’ and ‘Development’ in the Kalahari.” Journal of Southern African Studies 27(4): 833–53.
———. 2003. “Comment on ‘The Return of the Native’.” Current Anthropology 44(3): 398–99.
Stephens, Carolyn, et al. 2005. “Indigenous Peoples’ Health—Why Are They Behind Everyone, Everywhere?” The Lancet 366(9,479): 10–13.
Suzman, James. 2003. “Comment on ‘The Return of the Native’.” Current Anthropology 44(3): 399–400.
United Nations. 2004. “The Concept of Indigenous Peoples.” Background paper prepared by the Secretariat of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues for the Workshop on Data Collection and Disaggregation for Indigenous Peoples. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
Acknowledgments
This book is the outcome of our joint efforts to explore how indigeneity has been reinvented, adopted, and reinterpreted in various local contexts, in light of recent initiatives taken by global civil society and international institutions. Although we share a common interest in South Asia, we seek to move beyond this regional focus and take a deeper look into the manifestations of indigeneity on a more global scale. In order to bring together scholars working on indigeneity in different parts of the world, we organized an informal workshop entitled “Futures of Indigeneity: Spatiality, Identity and Politics” at Ruhr-University Bochum in autumn 2013. This event turned out to be an extraordinary space for thought-provoking and productive exchanges, not only across world regions but also across disciplines. For us, the opportunity to continue this joint effort in the form of a book project became the option that would also enable us to extend this space of constructive engagement towards the wider community, particularly those who are interested in the various issues surrounding indigeneity as an academically and politically challenging concept, and as a project in (trans-)local identity politics. We sincerely hope that as many readers as possible share our interest.
During the past five years, we have received constant support, suggestions, and assistance in various forms from individuals and institutions. Without their commitment, this book would never have reached this point. First of all, we are grateful to our colleagues who have contributed their pieces and thereby turned this project into the book you are now reading. Their high level of commitment, anecdotic patience, and responses to all sorts of editorial queries have been invaluable. We sincerely mean it when we say that this book is the result of a truly collective effort.
This book would not have seen the light of day if not for the commitment, support, and encouragement extended to us by a number of individuals. In particular, we are indebted to Jürgen Straub, Ellen Bal, and Cora Bender for their significant contributions, and also to William Sax and Willem van Schendel for their suggestions. With their relentless support, they have made this project academically enlightening. We also thank Berlin-based filmmaker Shaheen Dill-Riaz for showing his award-winning documentary Sand and Water at the workshop and for sharing his perspectives
