Judd Antin at TechnoTaste recently informed us about two new anthropology centers. One of them Laboratory for the Anthropology of the Contemporary seems to take knowledge sharing more seriously than other research centers. You can click on and read every article on their list over publications.
The introductory paper Steps toward an anthropological laboratory by Paul Rabinow starts promising:
The challenge is to invent new forms of inquiry, writing, and ethics for an anthropology of the contemporary. The problem is: how to rethink and remake the conditions of contemporary knowledge production,
dissemination, and critique, in the interpretive sciences?
They continue explaining the background for their research methods at the new center, dedicated to the invention of new modes of collaborative work among and between social and natural scientists:
Given that the social sciences and humanities disciplines in the U.S. university system are essentially those of the nineteenth century, and there is little motivation from within the disciplines to abolish themselves, we are not optimistic that new work can be exclusively based in the university. The university (or restricted parts of it) remains a source of employment, of resources such as libraries, and of pedagogy. In that light, we imagine new hybrid organizations, adjacent to and in many parasitic on, the university.
(...)
It is quite remarkable that the contemporary self-understanding of anthropology includes few examples of collective work. (...) New forms of collaboration and coordination among and between anthropologists (and other knowledge workers) is unquestionably going to be required to adequately address the scope, complexity, and temporality of contemporary objects and problems.
>> read the whole text by Paul Rabinow (pdf, 19pages)
>> overview over all publications (much on biosecurity)
This entry was posted by admin and filed under Open Access Anthropology and Knowledge Sharing, fieldwork / methods, Northern America, anthropology (general), journal articles / papers. 
You might be right in your analysis.
Thanks for the post. Quite interesting article, and I think quite timely too. The concepts of collaboration and 21st century culture are well worth mention here. As Rabinow proclaims, most anth work is done sans collaboration, and most anth depts single-authoritative and theory driven. I’ve experienced that for myself as a Geertz fan studying in a Marvin Harris-centered dept; although subtle, the dept’s attitude towards my interest in Geertz was quite negative. But this left little wiggle-room for any intellectual discourse on the two disparate theorists.
I think anthropology would benefit tremendously from collaboration–preferably non-marital, and perhaps outside the discipline. I’ve recently posted a short commentary on my Consumption blog concerning a mid-20th century collaboration between an anth and Marshall McLuhan, which I find intriguing. Although the “collaboration movement” fell out of favor long ago, I think this Rabinow article makes clear that there is enough reason to revisit the idea in a 21st century context. Thanks!