International Research Fellowship Program: Exposing the All Powerful Development Machine: The Divergence of British and American Environmental Foreign Aid

0701266科尔森国际研究奖学金计划使美国科学家和工程师能够在国外进行9到24个月的研究。 该计划的奖项提供了联合研究的机会，以及使用独特或互补的设施，专业知识和国外的实验条件。科尔森与詹姆斯·R博士合作。费尔黑德在苏塞克斯大学和威廉M。这项博士后研究比较了美国国际开发署和英国国际开发部的环境议程。具体而言，它分析了这些机构的不同政治，官僚和历史基础的意识形态方法如何产生不同的战略，将环境纳入发展议程。然后，它探讨了各机构在各自政府中的地位、它们与环境团体的关系以及它们与撒哈拉以南非洲的历史关系如何围绕“环境可持续发展”议程的产生产生了截然不同的论述和相关的物质实践。该研究解决了政治生态和后发展文学中的空白，并为围绕发展机构民族志的不断扩大的领域做出了贡献。在这样做时，它超越了对项目成果的传统发展批评，而把重点放在复杂的政策进程上。它挑战了许多关于官僚机构的流行观念，认为理解官僚机构需要“解开”它，以揭示思想如何在特定的时间和空间点上在“全能的发展机构”中发展、传播和与官僚机构实践相结合。通过这种方式，它显示了官僚“黑匣子”的局限性和脆弱性，并揭示了位置，弱点和机动开口。在探讨美国和英国的对外援助的相互宪法，这项研究将有助于更好地了解跨国联系，产生全球发展和保护议程。 最终，该研究旨在提供一个政治上有利的理解，即发展理念是如何在整个政策过程中产生和转化的，是什么影响了这一轨迹，以及决策者在美国和英国面临什么样的选择和限制。

0701266CorsonThe International Research Fellowship Program enables U.S. scientists and engineers to conduct nine to twenty-four months of research abroad. The program's awards provide opportunities for joint research, and the use of unique or complementary facilities, expertise and experimental conditions abroad.This award will support a twenty-four-month research fellowship by Dr. Catherine A. Corson to work with Dr. James R. Fairhead at the University of Sussex and with Dr. William M. Adams at the University of Cambridge in the UK.This post-doctoral research compares the U.S. Agency for International Development's environmental agenda with that of the British Department for International Development. Specifically, it analyzes how the different political, bureaucratic and historically-grounded ideological approaches of these agencies have produced different strategies to integrate environment into the development agenda. It then explores how the agencies' positions within their respective governments, their relationships with environmental groups and their historical relationships with sub-Saharan Africa have produced dramatically different discourses and associated material practices around the production of an "environmentally sustainable development" agenda. The research addresses a lacuna in political ecology and post-development literature and contributes to an expanding field around the ethnography of development institutions. In so doing, it moves beyond traditional development critiques of project outcomes, to focus on the complex policy process. It challenges many prevailing notions of bureaucracies by arguing that understanding the bureaucracy necessitates "unbounding" it to reveal how ideas develop, travel and articulate with bureaucratic practice at specific points in time and space in and among the "all-powerful development institutions." In this way, it shows the limits and fragilities within the bureaucratic "black box" and reveals sites of contestation, weakness and openings for maneuver. In exploring the mutual constitution of American and British foreign aid, this research will contribute to a greater understanding of the transnational linkages that produce the global development and conservation agenda. Ultimately, the research aims to provide a politically-enabling understanding of how development ideas are created and translated throughout the policy process, what influences this trajectory and what choices and constraints policy-makers face both in the United States and Britain.