AO: not discussed at all. It is unclear how the interlocutors are interested in the collaboration.Read more
AO: Binaries and metaphors are not used explicitly but in naming a reconstitution of anthropology towards “elites,” the analysts are also implying the opposite of elites (non-elites)...Read more
AO: A discursive risk in this analysis is the assumption of intellectual partners among “elite” communities. I think the example of “professionalized” Kibera research subjects who
AO: The analysts are looking at “team science” which they note can be conducted within a single, focused discipline or can span multiple disciplines. They also describe
AO: A researcher who operates under the methodological premise of deferral allows for generative different collaborative confirgurations of ethnography (82).
AO: The issue of authorship begins even before the actual writing of the paper as the analysts note: “Who is given the opportunity to contribute, and thus potentially qualify as an
AO: The two authors appear to work in the field of global health (based at UK university) and focus on economic inequalities of research funding (“Research and devel- opment
AO: The authors are focused on collaboration as not equal between global North and global South partners and despite a desire to be more equal, structural inequalities continue to lend...Read more
AO: the analysts noted that conceptualization and investigation around interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary collaboration processes and outcomes has been led by behavioral
AO: The analysts argue that within some communities (they name the Central bank of Chile or an environmental NGO in Costa Rica or an alternative art space in Tokyo), there are
AO: Western funding organizations are said to shape collaborations because they often give funding (and power) to western researchers.Read more
AO: The authors are thinking about how they can address ICT design problems through engagement with their users.Read more
