AO: The analysts propose six theoretical perspectives to explain and examine collaborative behavior: resource dependence, corporate social performance/institutional
AO: She does not describe this but it would be assumed that the colonial acts of taking native lands and one's relationship to those lands.
AO: Citing Kelty, the analyst calls collaboration: “mutifaceted and rhizomic” and asks if it could be too weak of a word to describe the entanglements of complicity, cultural
In this article, Mike Fortun discusses discusses the complicated double-binds that impacted his "response-ability" while working in and on the Institute for Science and Interdisciplinary Studies (ISIS).Read more
AO: A convening power that has legitimacy among the stakeholders and the authority to organize the domain as well as an unbiased and even-handed approach to the problem
AO: This is a discourse analysis of the way that organizational theorists are thinking about collaboration (authors map nine papers over 6 domains of collaboration to
AO: Not mentioned but the creation of numerous journals that touch on econ and psych are noted.
AO: The analysts note that increasingly, the only way to identify whether someone is a psychologist or economist is to look at their institutional affiliation.
AO: Contrary to much of the development literature I have been reading which emphasizes the normative value of collaboration as empowering and benefiting, this piece highlights
AO: Fortun and Cherkasky develop the term “counter-expertise” to conceptualize ways that people who work with one foot in academia and one food in direct advocacy for political change...Read more
AO: She does not point to data practices explicitly although she mentions methodology and attempts to develop more “decolonized methodologies” (citing Smith).
AO: Fortun and Cherkasky introduce essays that speak from the “messy middle” between the university and direct engagements with politics to suggest how “critiques of expertise can...Read more