uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 38 of 38
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Bartusch, Cajsa
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Juslin, Peter
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management. Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Cultural Anthropology.
    Stenberg, Jesper
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Elkonsumenters drivkrafter för en ökad förbrukningsflexibilitet: Hushålls attityder och anpassningar till en tidsdifferentierad och effektbaserad elnätstariff2014Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    De estimerade effekterna av en tidsdifferentierad och effektbaserad elnätstariff, i form av förändrade elkonsumtionsmönster, är förhållandevis marginella och begränsade till hushåll som bor i villa. Resultaten tyder på att villaägarna i Sollentuna, som ett led i sin anpassning av elanvändningen till effekttariffen, har minskat sin elanvändning under höglasttid med 2,3 och 1,2 procent under sommar- respektive vintermånaderna i jämförelse med referensgruppen i Saltsjö-Boo. Det finns inget som tyder på en liknande effekt bland bostadsrätter och motsvarande analyser avseende hyresrätter har inte varit möjliga med anledning av att referensgruppen i det här fallet inte var representativ.

    Resultaten indikerar vidare att effekttariffer tydligt påverkar hushålls attityder och intentioner att flytta elanvändning från hög- till låglasttid, men att dessa inte återspeglas i deras faktiska beteende. Det finns således endast ett svagt samband mellan förekomsten av effekttariff och andelen el som förbrukas under hög- respektive låglasttid bland de hushåll som omfattades av studien. De psykologiska faktorer som har störst betydelse för om, och i så fall i vilken utsträckning, hushållen anpassar sin elanvändning till en effekttariff i det här avseendet är de förväntade konsekvenserna av, och därmed attityden till, den aktuella beteendeförändringen samt den upplevda graden av kontroll över densamma. Mer konkret innebär det att ekonomiska besparingar samt positiva effekter för miljö, klimatförändringar och en hållbar utveckling för yngre och kommande generationer utgör de viktigaste drivkrafterna, medan omständigheten att man anser sin elförbrukning vara i princip obefintlig, eller att man redan idag använder i stort sett all el under låglasttid utgör de största hindren, för att anpassa sin elanvändning till effekttariffen.

    De skillnader som har observerats avseende såväl drivkrafter som faktiskt beteende är genomgående större mellan de olika boendeformerna än de båda områdena, det vill säga skillnaderna som beror på om hushållen har en effekttariff eller inte, vilket tyder på att man bör anpassa affärsmodeller för ökad förbrukningsflexibilitet till olika hushållskategorier. Denna slutsats bekräftas av en klusteranalys och påföljande segmentering, som identifierade sex för ändamålet relevanta och heterogena grupper av hushåll inom varje boendeformskategori.

    Slutsatsen som har dragits är således att viljan finns där, men att de önskade effekterna uteblir. Potentialen är med andra ord stor, men vi behöver mer sofistikerade affärsmodeller för att realisera den.

  • 2.
    Fornstedt, Helena
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Askfors, Ylva
    KTH Royal Institute of Technology.
    Sheep on a slide: About a culture of scepticism among healthcare professionals2016In: Sheep on a slide: About a culture of scepticism among healthcare professionals / [ed] Thomas Lennerfors, David Sköld, 2016Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 3.
    Hollmark, Malin
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Ulrika, Persson-Fischier
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    The Totemic Healthcare Organization2016In: / [ed] David Sköld, Thomas Lennerfors, 2016Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 4.
    Lindahl, Marcus
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Cruising tourism to Gotland as cargo cult?2016Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 5.
    Palm, Klas
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Tistad, Malin
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Design thinking for the implementation of innovations in the healthcare sector2018In: DESIGN THINKING FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF INNOVATIONS IN THE HEALTHCARE SECTOR, 2018Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper explores design thinking as a possible road to successful implementation of innovations in the healthcare sector. The empirical context for this paper, testing design thinking as a method for internal change management, is part of an innovation programme in the healthcare sector in the county of Dalarna in Sweden. Staff and managers are important stakeholders in the implementation process, and therefore included as stakeholders in the design thinking process, which usually primarily involves end users (patients) as stakeholders. The authors of this paper are the facilitators in this innovation programme. Since we, as facilitators, are already active within this programme, but also study the experiences from it, the method for our study must be within the field of action research. We study the processes we are part of. The innovation programme studied in this research program is still ongoing. It started in September 2017, and will continue until June of 2018. Because of this, at this moment, we have only very preliminary results. What can be learned so far is thus, for the moment, very limited. One example of an interesting result is that management highlights the question of innovation's relation to the requirement for evidence-based operational development. Several managers identify this relationship as a central dilemma to handle. This is because the foundations of design thinking's are not perceived to harmonise with the theories behind evidence-based operational development.

  • 6.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Anthropology and humanitarian action?2017In: International Humanitarian Action: NOHA Textbook / [ed] Hans-Joachim Heintze och Pierre Thielbörger, Springer, 2017, p. 321-338Chapter in book (Refereed)
  • 7.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Antropologi och arbete - vad kan egentligen antropologer?2017Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 8.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Att välja styrelseledamöter: Antropologiska perskriv på kultur, lokalsamhäller och utveckling2015Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 9.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Cruise tourism as a path to a sustainable future? The ethnographic case of Gotland, Sweden2018Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Cruising tourism is arguably one of the most unsustainable forms of tourism. It is ecologically unsustainable since it brings a lot of people to small places, causing environmental strain to attractions like heritage sites. It is economically unsustainable, since multinational companies drain most of the revenue away from local SMEs. It is socially unsustainable as large number of tourists for short periods of time creates places unpleasant to live in, drained of local residents. On the basis of this, cruise tourism seems to be the worst idea for achieving sustainable development. Therefore it may seem unlikely that the Island of Gotland, Sweden, chooses to put all public funding available for many years to come into a new cruising quay to attract cruise ships, and on top of it framing it in terms of sustainability. This is however the case, and the new quay was inaugurated April 29, 2018, where the mayor spoke of this will be economically, ecologically and socially sustainable, on the basis of the very high sustainability standards on Gotland. How can this be understood? To investigate how the project of building the new quay is related to sustainability; actors perception of this relationship as well as the consequences of their actions in terms of economical, social and ecological sustainability, ethnographic fieldwork over the course of two years has been carried out. During this fieldwork public and private actors involved in carrying out this project, with the basis in the DMO-like privately owned organization Gotland Tourism Business Organisation (Gotlands Förenade Besöksnäring) and the cruise tourism network Gotland Cruise Network, have been followed. On the basis of this, it seems that sustainability simultaneously becomes a tool for “green-washing”, legitimizing unsustainable practices, and at the same time a way for locals to try to make a better future for themselves through making the best possible out of this new situation. In addition, I argue that academia play a role in this, with the research programme “Sustainable Visits”, which I myself is part of, and which has as an explicit aim to contribute to, rather than merely study, sustainable visits. However, does academia contribute to sustainability or unsustainability in this case?

  • 10.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Finans, risk och kultur: Antropologiska perspektiv2016Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 11.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Fältarbete i Sibirien: Antropologisk forskning2017Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 12.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    How can entrepreneurship contribute to sustainability?2018Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 13.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    How can tourism education contribute to sustainability?2018Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In September 2018 a new masters programme in Sustainable Destination Development starts at Uppsala university, at campus Gotland. We hope for a sustainable tourism education, a hope we share with many others involved in tourism education. The development of STP, sustainable tourism pedagogy, and TEFI, the Tourism education futures initiative, are examples of the same ambition.

     

    What may be a bit different with our initiative is the scope of our ambition. Whereas United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO, 1997) describes sustainable tourism as meeting the needs of present tourists and host regions while protecting and enhancing opportunity for tourism for the future, our ambition is wider. Our ambition is not limited to the sphere of tourism, but to create tourism that increases overall sustainability, making the world more sustainable than it would be without it.

     

    How do we hope to manage such a difficult task? We use ESD, Education for Sustainable Development. I suggest that the contribution of our work to tourism in the anthroposcene is exactly that, to connect STP with ESD. This links tourism education directly to Agenda 2030, the 17 global sustainability goals, and the Global Action Plan to implement them, for which ESD has been developed. Through the link to ESD, STP may connect to global sustainability goals number 4, quality education for all, and 8, decent work and economic growth, specifically 8.9, sustainable tourism.  

     

    ESD, education for sustainable development, is a broad concept. It is based in the idea that change is needed for sustainability, both change of conventional curricula and teaching, and change as the core aim of education, to enable students to become change agents. Sustainability issues are often conceptualized as so called wicked problems, also a broad term, denoting problems that are complex, impossible to solve once and for all, but which rather needs to be dealt with continuously, and for which there are no right/wrong solutions, but rather more or less good/bad ways of dealing with them. Wicked problems are also considered to be problems that cannot be dealt with by the same methods that caused them, therefore needing new ways of doing things. Tourism can easily be argued to be wicked problems.

     

    Research on ESD often claim that what is needed for sustainability are competences, rather than only fact-based knowledge. Competences enable students to act on the basis of knowledge. There are different ways of describing such competences. Wiek et. al. (2011), synthesizes 43 research articles on competences for sustainability, and conclude that the competences can be summarized into five: systems thinking competence, strategic competence, analytic competence, normative competence and interpersonal competence.

     

    ESD also often attempts for participatory and transformative learning situation, rather than conventional authoritative and transmission situations (Heila et. al. 2015). This implies that students must be active, working with real problems and learn from each other to create their own knowledge, rather than being passive receivers of ready-made knowledge from the teacher.

     

    The content of ESD is thus is similar rather than different to the TEFI core values of ethics, stewardship, knowledge, professionalism and mutuality between stakeholders. It is also similar rather than different to Jamal, Tallon & Dredge´s (2011) technical, analytical, ecological, multi-cultural, ethical, policy- and political literacies. If what ESD can do is so similar to STP, what value does ESD add to tourism in the anthroposcene? The contribution of introducing ESD to tourism education is not that the content of it differs from STP, but rather that it creates new links that may make new, unexpected, things happen, as shown in our case.

     

    Since our programme does not start until the fall of 2018, we cannot yet evaluate it in terms of outcome for students. The only thing we know so far is that we have some 200 international applicants, which is a lot on campus Gotland, a small island in the Baltic, and a popular destination in itself, facing both sustainability challenges and with many sustainability initiatives. We also know from the personal letters of the applicants that they choose our programme because of how we approach sustainability: theory combined with practice, outside classroom in the reality of destination development on Gotland as much as critical reflections in the classroom.

     

    Even though we do not know the outcome of our efforts yet for students, our use of ESD has so far still had positive sustainability effects. Five other programmes on campus Gotland have joined us in our work with ESD, the programmes in management, cultural heritage, windpower, energy transition, and archeology. Now they also develop courses, curricula and activities in this vein. This includes;

    - voluntary education of teachers on ESD for 7 full days, which 10 teachers participate in voluntary, and choose to squeeze into their full schedules without compensation,

    - creation of a common infrastructure for voluntary community work for students and societal sustainability challenges and projects to work with in class,

    - a joint, cross-programme introductory week on sustainability for students of six programmes, with a 3-day internship working with local sustainability challenges,

    - an extra-curricular seminar series, “Sustainability talks”, for all campus students,

    - collaboration with students´ initiative “Let´s talk about it”, with practical sustainability initiatives.

     

    A result of using ESD has thus been the engagement of not only our programme  but the whole campus, which is turning into a sustainability hub. This might have been more difficult to achieve had we limited ourselves to STP, which would not have been so easy for others to connect to.

     

    In this way our programme in a way seems to fulfill its ambition to contribute with more overall sustainability, in a very unexpected way, even before it has started. On the basis of this experience, it seems ESD may be one way in which tourism education in the anthroposcene can be in the forefront of sustainability work, in line with TEFI values.

  • 14.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Hållbar Besöksnäring2017Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 15.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Hållbar Besöksnäring på Gotland2018Other (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 16.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Infrastructure and overheating - the case of a new cruising quay in Visby, Gotland2017Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Ethnographically this paper deals with an infrastructural project on the Island of Gotland, Sweden. Together with the multinational corporation Copenhagen Malmö Port, the county of Gotland is currently construction a new quay. The new quay will host large cruising ships, touring the Baltic Sea on their way to St Petersburg. The quay will be inaugurated in April 2018, and host the larger section of cruising ships. This means that up to 6000 passengers will arrive at and visit Visby for 6-8 hours over the day, and then leave again, with new visitors the following day. For a small city – and an economically weak region like Gotland - this poses enormous sustainability challenges: to finish on time and find money not only for the quay but also all other necessary infrastructure (toilets, transport, water, health care etc), to prevent wearing of the natural heritage site of the wall around Visby and other sensitive areas, to prevent overcrowding (“people pollution”), to make enough money the visitors spend stay on Gotland and not end up in the pockets of large and powerful corporations, etcetera. To explore this situation, this paper theoretically deploys notions of overheating, introduced by Thomas Hylland Eriksen (2016); social, financial and ecological clashes of scales. Methodologically, this paper relies on material from an ongoing fieldwork on Gotland, based in the local tourism business, and the organization Gotland Cruise Network, which, as it turns out, is currently at the heart of decision-making and process introduction of both public and private kind. Actors on Gotland are fully aware of the challenges Gotland faces, and strive to find ways for collaboration and cooperation, which is identified as the way forward. The ongoing fieldwork follows these processes and the obstacles encountered.

  • 17.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Kultur som tillväxtfaktor: Antropologiska perspektiv på entreprenörskap, innovation i offentlig sektor och destinationsutveckling, med exempel från Sibirien till Stureplan2017Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 18.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Museernas roll i hållbar besöknsäring2018Other (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 19.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Museiföremåls ursprung: Tid och plats eller etnisk beteckning?: Mänskliga kvarlevor efter Adolf Erik Nordenskiölds Vegaexpedition 1878-18802010In: Mänskliga kvarlevor - ett problematiskt kulturarv / [ed] Claes Hallgren, Stockholm: Etnografiska museet , 2010Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 20.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Museiföremåls ursprung: Tid och plats eller etnisk beteckning?: Mänskliga kvarlevor efter Adolf Erik Nordenskiölds Vegaexpedition 1878-18802010In: Mänskliga kvarlevor - ett problematiskt kulturarv, Stockholm: Etnografiska museet , 2010Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 21. Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Museiföremåls ursprung: Tid och plats eller etnisk beteckning?: Mänskliga kvarlevor efter Adolf Erik Nordenskiölds Vegaexpedition 1878-18802010In: Mänskliga kvarlevor - ett problematiskt kulturarv / [ed] Claes Hallgren, Stockholm: Etnografiska museet, Stockholm , 2010Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 22.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Nationaldagsfirande2017Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 23.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Nationaldagsfirande: Antropologiska perspektiv2017Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 24.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Sustainable Visits2016Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 25.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Teaching anthropology / teaching with anthropology: making anthropology relevant outside anthropology2018In: Panel 044: Teaching and learning anthropology and ethnography in transforming contexts: objectives, practices, pedagogies and challenges [Teaching Anthropology Network] / [ed] Ioannis Manos (University of Macedonia), Robert Gibb (Glasgow University), Alex Strating (University of Amsterdam), Annika Strauss (Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster), 2018Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Short abstract

    With experiences from teaching in settings such as engineering, entrepreneurship and destination development, I discuss ways to make anthropology relevant outside anthropology. This activates questions on what anthropology is and why it is important, relevant also to the inside of anthropology.

    Long abstract

    After a presentation in Vietnam about teaching entrepreneurship, a woman told me "I am an anthropologist and I see that your view of entrepreneurship is very anthropological". I hold a PhD in anthropology, but inside academia I teach entrepreneurship, engineering and destination development. Outside academia I lecture in financial risk management and innovation in the health care sector. I do not teach anthropology - I teach with anthropology.

    I use anthropological perspectives in my teaching, in a world in which what an anthropologist says is often automatically discredited, while what an engineer or economist says is taken seriously also regarding things beyond their training, like people and culture.

    I think that by using anthropological perspectives I add value in these educational settings. I teach things these students need to learn, that will enable them to make better decisions in their future careers. I also add value to anthropology, since I contribute to making anthropological perspectives part of the conceptual tool-kit of more people than only trained anthropologists.

    However, making anthropology relevant outside anthropology raises questions about what anthropology really is and why it is important. Are there such things as generic "anthropological perspectives" applicable to any context? What are they, if not field-related? Can anthropology be used for anything, and still maintain its value and relevance? Does anthropology risk being "sold out"? Are there some fields that are more "anthropological" than others? These questions are probably also relevant to the inside of anthropology, and will be discussed here.

  • 26.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Tekniker för hållbar besöksnäring?2018Other (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 27.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Oslo universitet.
    The Social Life of Ethnic Categories: Three cases of indigeneity, Russia and anthropological knowledge production2016Doctoral thesis, monograph (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Examining three cases on indigeneity, Russia and anthropological knowledge production, this thesis investigates indigeneity as a form of ethnic classification. The first case is about the so-called census-war in the Republic of Altai, and who, thus, is allowed to be indigenous. The second is about how the construction of ´the north´, the very epitome of Russian indigeneity, becomes attached to one particular village and only parts of its inhabitants, by way of association with Scandinavian Saami, excluding other potentially ´northern´ people. The third case is about how ethnic classifications, on part of the Vega expedition in 1878, collecting ethnographic objects and human skulls along the Siberian coast, have been reproduced over time at Swedish institutions, and now form the basis of repatriation of human remains at the Ethnographic Museum in Stockholm, reproducing a colonial mindset. I all three cases global indigeneity, Soviet and post-Soviet Russian variants, clash with complex local situations, with the consequence that many local actors are excluded from indigeneity. It turns out that anthropology plays a crucial role in these processes of inclusion and exclusion.

  • 28.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Urbefolkningar ofta stolta över sin resliens2017Other (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
    Abstract [sv]

    Debatt - replik Eftersom Skoglund och Reid inte diskuterar urbefolkningars egna uppfattningar öppnar de tyvärr för att deras argument kan läsas som en del av marginaliseringen, skriver Ulrika Persson-Fischier.

    Urbefolkningsfrågor debatteras i UNT (19/3). Annika Skoglund och Julian Reid påpekar att försörjningsmöjligheterna i till exempel Arktis utarmats, och att samhället inte tar ansvar för detta, utan lämnar urbefolkningar att ta hand om sig själva, med argument om “resiliens”. Skoglund och Reid menar att Arktiska Rådets rapport därför utgör problematisk forskning om och politik gentemot urbefolkningar.

    Efter ett årslångt fältarbete i Sibirien har jag nyligen disputerat på en avhandling om urbefolkningspolitik, forskning om urbefolkningar och urbefolkningars egna uppfattningar om detta.

    Jag välkomnar därför Skoglunds och Reids debatt och vill tillföra ett perspektiv, nämligen vad urbefolkningar själva tycker om sin påstådda resiliens. Detta komplicerar frågan om riskerna med resiliens.

    Ett förtryck urbefolkningar utsatts för är att de inte haft kontroll över de sätt de beskrivits på. De har behandlats som barn som inte vet sitt eget bästa, och majoritetssamhället har tagit sig rätten att definiera vilka de är och hur de bör leva. Rasbiologiska institutet var ett utslag av denna form av paternalism. Därför anses det numera av största vikt att urbefolkningars egna perspektiv inkluderas i alla frågor som berör dem. Till exempel anger bland annat FN:s deklaration ILO 169 självidentifikation som det avgörande kriteriet för erkännande som urbefolkning, snarare än extern definiering.

    I min avhandling visar jag att det gamla paternalistiska synsättet tyvärr fortlever i forskning och politik.

    Många människor i Sibirien vill överhuvudtaget inte bli kallade urbefolkningar, trots att ryska staten, på antropologers inrådan, definierar dem som sådana. Detta kan tyckas något paradoxalt, eftersom antagandet är att erkännande som urbefolkning är något som eftersträvas av marginaliserade grupper. Men det är inte så förvånande som det verkar.

    I denna kontext får nämligen status som urbefolkning negativa, och inte positiva, politiska konsekvenser för lokalbefolknings kamp för självständighet.

    Det som förvånar är snarare att antropologer trots detta ändå beskriver människorna som urbefolkning. Det är problematiskt, och ger antropologin anledning till kritisk självreflektion.

    Skoglund och Reid diskuterar inte urbefolkningars egna uppfattningar om deras påstådda resiliens. Många tycker emellertid inte alls att det är dåligt att kallas resilienta.

    Tvärtom vill ofta urbefolkningar, genom de politiska organisationer som representerar dem, gärna vara resilienta, med allt som detta associerar till. De sätter en stolthet i att vara och vill gärna betraktas som resilienta.

    Ett exempel är Raipon, The Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East, en organisation för de 45 urbefolkningarna i Ryssland (exakt hur många urbefolkningar Ryska staten erkänner växlar). Tillsammans med Samerådet är Raipon medlemmar av Arktiska Rådet, så båda dessa organisationer har kunnat delta i utformandet av rapporten som Skoglund och Reid kritiserar.

    Urbefolkningar är numera på intet sätt passiva mottagare av forskning och policy. En stor del av forskningen om urbefolkningar görs av personer som själva identitiferar sig som urbefolkning.

    När jag promoverades vid universitetet i Oslo bar en annan nydisputerad, som forskat om identitet bland unga samer, samisk dräkt vid cermonin. Med andra ord var det en same som forskat om samer. Det är inte osannolikt att forskare som tagit fram Arktiska Rådets rapport själva identifierar sig som urbefolkning.

    Om man inkluderar urbefolkningars egna perspektiv blir frågan om resiliensens risker mer komplicerad än vad Skoglunds och Reids kritik ger vid handen. Om urbefolkningar själva vill beskrivas som resilienta, skall vi då ändå låta bli? På basis av vad?

    Om de vill vara resilienta, skall vi då tala om för dem att de inte vet sitt eget bästa? Dessa frågor har inga enkla svar.

    Eftersom Skoglund och Reid inte diskuterar urbefolkningars egna uppfattningar öppnar de tyvärr för att deras argument kan läsas som en del av själva marginaliseringen – att det urbefolkningar själva vill inte spelar någon roll, med paralleller till de ryska antropologerna eller rasbiologiska institutet.

    Att utelämna urbefolkningars egna perspektiv är etiskt problematiskt ur perspektiv av vad som är gångbart inom dagens urbefolkningspolitik.

    Det riskerar i sin tur att denna viktiga debatt kan kvävas i sin linda: lättare att avfärda av meningsmotståndare och svårare att få gehör för hos de människor det i slutändan handlar om. Det vore beklagligt, då frågorna faktiskt når så mycket längre än den förhållandevis smala urbefolkningsfrågan (i absoluta tal handlar det om en mycket liten del av befolkningen). Principiellt sett är detta relevant för oss alla, eftersom det berör alla kollektiva identifikationer: etniska grupper, minoritet-majoritet, nationer och nationalism, raser och rasism.

    I slutändan handlar det om var och hur gränsen mellan “oss” och “dem” dras, och hur vi hanterar detta i vårt samhällsbygge.

    Ulrika Persson-Fischier, doktor i socialantropologi, adjunkt vid avdelningen för Industriell Teknik, Uppsala universitet

  • 29. Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Vad är meingen med mänskliga kvarlevor? Från Vega-expeditionen 1878 till repatriering vid Etnografiska museet 2008 - och tillbaka igen2009In: Benbiten: Osteologiska föreningens tidsskrift, ISSN 1652-4667, no 1, p. 9-18Article in journal (Other academic)
  • 30.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Vad är meningen med mänskliga kvarlevor? Från Vega-expeditionen 1878 till repatriering vid Etnografiska museet 2008 - och tillbaka igen2009In: Benbiten: Osteologiska föreningens tidskrift, ISSN 1652-4667, no 1, p. 9-18Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 31.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Varför gör de inte som vi säger?: Antropologiska perspektiv på kultur, risk och diabetes2014Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 32.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Varför gör de inte som vi säger?: Diabetes, kultur och antropologi2015Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 33.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Varför gör människor som de gör?: Antropologiska perspektiv från Sibirien till Stureplan2018Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 34.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Varför gör människor som de gör?: Antropologiska perspektiv på antropologi, kultur och risk2010Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 35.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Varför gör människor som de gör?: Antropologiska perspektiv på kultur, risk och hållbarhet2017Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 36.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Varför gör människor som de gör?: Finans, risk och kultur: antropologiska perspektiv2011Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 37.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    When Culture is Everywhere: The case of financial risk management2017Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper considers how the concept of "culture" has become increasingly used and important within financial risk management. It is based on the findings from low-intensive, long-term "collatoral" (Marcus 2013) fieldwork, in the form of dialogical lecturing within financial risk management, at which anthropological perspectives on risk management are discussed with practitioners in finance. It takes as point of departure Ulf Hannerz (1993) discussion on culture, and how it has come to be used not only to denote commonalities between groups of people, but also to describe individual as well as universal human traits. This paper argues that the concept of culture is deployed within financial risk management with the aim to avoid or minimize financial risk and crisis. There indeed are cultural commonalities within the financial sector that effect the way risk management is carried out and that result in both financial risk and crisis. However, the way "culture" is understood within financial risk management is rather, one the one hand, as individual traits (of persons or singular corporations) or, on the other, as universal traits ("greed"). This means that they way culture is understood within this sector, makes they way the sector as such both rests upon, recreates and depends upon common, cultural understandings which uphold practices that result in crisis, invisible. The way "culture" is understood within financial risk management thus makes it impossible to get sight of, deal with or prevent the way financial culture actually causes financial risk and crisis. This paper then ends with a discussion on how, as culture is everywhere, also within financial risk management, culture is understood an deployed in ways different, or even contradictory to anthropological understandings and practices. How does anthropology react to this? Do we become upset that our favourite concept is kidnaped and used differently to how we might like it to be? Do we simply note that emic understandings of culture in various concepts differ from anthropological understandings, and study this as a peculiar practice of our informants? Or is anthropology put at work in a dialogical collaboration about different understandings of the concept of culture, and the consequences of them as they are used in practice, with the hope of better mutual understanding, and possibly also a transformation of how culture is conceived - in this particular case - for transformed financial risk management? The latter view is the view of this paper.

  • 38.
    Persson-Fischier, Ulrika
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Lindahl, Marcus
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering & Management.
    Gebert Persson, Sabine
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Business Studies.
    Elbe, Jörgen
    DMOs as cargo cults? A (provocative) perspective on destination management2018Conference paper (Refereed)
1 - 38 of 38
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf