By Anita Puckett
[pracanth@vt.edu]
Virginia Tech

Anita Puckett

The nine individually volunteered articles in the next issue of Practicing Anthropology (Spring 2013, Volume 35, Issue 2) represent three different focus areas within applied anthropology. Three articles focus on the how the constitution of ethnicity in zones of United States military conflict (Iraq and Afghanistan) create life and death situations that can be mitigated or even solved by application of anthropological methods or insights to implementations of United States military policies. Another three articles focus on how applied anthropologists are addressing the highly negative impact of neoliberal economics at local levels. One focuses on undergraduate research that examined how to add value to the cultural and natural resources of rural Appalachian communities dominated by the neoliberal paradigm, while another probes how to establish cultural protection labeling and certification for consumer products, investment portfolios, and international development projects. The third in this section builds on this protection labeling and certification argument by describing how environmentalists and others use the strategy of product certification and labeling for environmental and labor protections. The last section presents three articles that offer different paradigms for the application of anthropological methods or approaches to pressing contemporary social, medical, or ethnographic research problems through discussions of multi-sited ethnographies, incorporation of anthropological approaches in United Kingdom medical student training, and informant/researcher collaboration building in the Philippines.

Read the rest of this entry »

By Anita Puckett
[practanth@vt.edu]
Virginia Tech

Anita Puckett

The Winter 2012 issue of Practicing Anthropology is partially guest-edited by Ian Skoggard of Yale University on the topic of modeling in sociological research. Discussing how various applied anthropologists inside and outside of the academy are developing useful sociocultural models for real-world situations, the six papers in this section directly address the interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary nature of model building, a particularly relevant approach for current professional anthropologists. As Goddard states in his introduction, “All the papers . . . discuss the give and take between anthropologists, programmers, and clients, or stakeholders, and between the ethnography, ethnology, and the programming software, to achieve a more culturally nuanced model.” Practicing Anthropology readers should find these articles thought-provoking and, in some cases, applicable, perhaps with modifications, to their own fields of interest. This issue concludes with two additional volunteered papers, one on applying anthropology to strategic planning within non-profit and NGO organizations, and a second that examines “the impact of living both insides and outside of academia in the current climate.” It offers “strategies and skills for a cultural anthropologist negotiating the current job market. Consequently, it directly addresses the concerns of recent and upcoming graduates in the field, or any unemployed or underemployed applied anthropologist for that matter.

Read the rest of this entry »

By Anita Puckett
[apuckett@vt.edu]
Virginia Tech University

Anita Puckett

The fall issue (Volume 34.4) of Practicing Anthropology brings together a number of volunteered papers under the title “Complexities of Migration, Movement, and Change.” In various ways, authors address issues of cultural instability and fragmentation, whether from the outcomes of immigration, human trafficking, unavailability of health care, or climate change. In a sense, all engage in refining issues related to the elusive concept of “empowerment.”

Read the rest of this entry »

By Mark Moberg
[mmoberg@southalabama.edu]
University of South Alabama

Mark Moberg

Reflecting the high standards of the journal, Human Organization’s acceptance rate remains low for initial submissions.  In 2011, no articles were accepted upon initial submission without at least some required revision.  I have worked closely with authors to edit for stylistic consistency and to clarify arguments.  Of submissions last year, I have accepted about one in four papers received.  On average, we receive about 2 manuscripts per week, with somewhat more submissions arriving after academic (winter and summer) breaks.  Approximately 70% of the papers that are revised and resubmitted are ultimately accepted for publication. The average turnaround time remains between three and four months, although secondary review was significantly shorter for resubmissions, many of which I review in-house rather than returning them to their original reviewers.  I typically prepare four types of letters to be sent to authors: one accepting the piece contingent upon revisions; one rejecting the piece but “welcoming” a revision; one rejecting the piece with a less encouraging provision that a resubmission would be considered but demanding extensive revisions (these papers necessarily undergo external secondary review, and many are ultimately rejected); and one rejecting the piece and offering my best of luck placing the article elsewhere.

Read the rest of this entry »