Search Results

This chapter examines potential and the limitations of current projects to promote the concept of partnership, focusing on the collaborative projects of the British National Health Service (NHS) and Personal Social Services (PSS) and between the local NHS, PSS and education department. It evaluates the extent to which the pitfalls of collaborative working can be resolved and effective collaboration developed and argues that the benefits will ultimately be lost without the development of the internal collaborative capacities of the participating agencies.

This chapter points out different ways involvement with collaborative projects share form, shape, or style, and may be imagined as nested within each other, like matryoshka dolls. It deals with the Platform for Experimental Collaborative Ethnography (PECE), the digital infrastructure that support new collaborative projects in anthropology. It also cites the long-standing collaboration of The Asthma Files (TAF), which is an experimental ethnographic research project that eventually led to the conceptualization and development of PECE. The chapter mentions the Digital Practices in History and Ethnography Interest Group (DPHE-IG) that was organized within the Research Data Alliance (RDA), a global collaboration of individuals and institutions working to make data more easily and openly shareable. It emphasizes how the collaborative form is the experimental form analyzed by Hans-Jorg Rheinberger as essential to a modern scientific style.

This chapter describes experiences in collaborative projects through the 1990s and from 2009 to 2010 that have made an impression about how ethnographic work builds collaborative contexts. It provides a commentary on the perspective in collaborations with Doug Holmes, who co-authored an account on sustained collaborative friendship, and Keith Murphy, who tried to introduce a design-influenced pedagogical form that teaches the model of ethnographic research in a collaborative form. It also talks about the collaboration with Luke Cantarella and Christine Hegel on the atelier model of artistic collaboration across ethnographic projects based on scenic studio design and workshop methods. The chapter explores the heightened assessments of change that was brought on by the self-consciousness in the 1990s. It mentions a series of annuals by the University of Chicago Press on recruiting those with specific ethnographic experience to document change.

This chapter examines online prosocial behavior, defined as voluntary intentional actions, taking place on the Internet, to benefit others with no expectation of personal reward. The focus is on understanding prosocial behavior in public online contexts including support group discussion forums, service projects, open collaborative work projects, and citizen science projects. The chapter discusses three main classes of variables that affect prosocial behaviors: Attributes of the online context, individual attributes and motivations, and interaction processes. The chapter describes studies of prosocial behavior in a variety of contexts that draw on diverse theories such as motivation and personality theories, Social Learning Theory, and Social Identity Theory to provide a general overview of how, why, and to what degree people engage in online prosocial behavior. Evidence of the value both to the direct providers of prosocial contributions and their beneficiaries as well as to society at large is presented. The chapter concludes with an overview of opportunities for furthering research on online prosocial behavior by extending the inquiry to include more varied contribution contexts, new technological contexts for helping, and a greater diversity in research methods.

This chapter argues that urban built environments are essential elements for the success of collective projects associated with the concept of Co-Creation as a contribution to a sociological approach that favours other political, organizational or financial aspects. The research considers geographical analysis, fieldwork and semi-structured interviews with staff members of cultural venues in Mexico City, an iconic metropolis of the Global South with a long tradition of socially engaged art, and frequently associated with informal urbanisation processes which are the origin of more than 50 per cent of the city’s neighbourhoods. The chapter considers the built environment as a useful medium to achieve the social benefits that Co-Creation promoters look for, through diverse participatory methodologies. In this sense, the definition of Co-Creation in this chapter favours the process, more than the product, in which various agents participate to produce knowledge about their current urban situation and expectations. The chapter clarifies the relationships between the location and characteristics of official and independent art and cultural venues, the key social components for successful Co-Creative projects, and the agents involved in the process.

The late 1960s and early 1970s was a moment of political and cultural radicalism during which the authority of governments, institutions and ways of thought were challenged across Europe. From Paris to Prague, and from Athens to Copenhagen, a diverse set of newly assertive activisms arose in universities, factories and public spaces. The Introduction presents this study, which is based on the stories of a diverse range of these activists whose political and cultural radicalism animated the European politics of this period. It explores the challenges inherent in writing a history of Europe's 1968 and the advantages of a collaborative project involving an international team of historians. It explores the oral history approaches used and situates the work in relation to previous oral history studies. The final part sets out the structure of the book

This chapter reflects on the partnership between Gendered Intelligence and the Science Museum and highlights the importance of gender diversity in collaborative projects. It discusses how co-produced research impacts both organisations and conversations through the ways in which museums posit particular values and ‘norms’ around gender identity. The chapter also outlines the ‘Hacking In’ project and the impact it had on the partners involved, and reflects on the potential within collaborative projects to redress and acknowledge the power imbalances that exist within the narratives of cultural institutions. It offers a study about empowerment and the social responsibility to include, listen to, and work with those whose histories, stories, and identities have been marginalised, excluded, or communicated with little, if any, involvement from those communities.