Situations and Circumstances for Anthropological publishing in Japan

Abstract (English)

Anthropological research and practices in Japan originate basically in Western thoughts and has been heavily influenced by them, but at the same time anthropological knowledge have been largely produced domestically by Japanese anthropologists and intellectually consumed by domestic readers and audiences. Publication activities have been inwardly oriented, being supported and promoted by the leading anthropological association (JASCA) with regular journals both Japanese and English, and they have also supported and promoted by the National Museum of Ethnology (Minpaku) with numerous journals (both for the use of professionals and for the general public) and book and report series sometimes in multiple languages. There are some anthropological journals based on departments of universities, but a local feature of publishing in this country is that it is centered on publishing houses which are commercial as well as academic. The markets for printed books and periodicals are shrinking as elsewhere, but the humanities and human sciences, including anthropology, are doing relatively well as a kind of “liberal arts” in the context of other disciplines, fields, and general concerns for practical activities. Characteristically enough, even in the pervasive audit culture and ranking with quantification of the value of publications in all academic fields, there is a general feeling, or agreement, that the humanities and human sciences should be evaluated by standards different from the technological and “scientific” research. However, this agreement is rather vague and there is no consensus about exactly what those specific standards or criteria should be. In recent years discussion for the review of evaluation of works in the humanities and human sciences (including anthropology) was conducted at NIHU (the National Institutes for the Humanities), SCJ (the Science Council of Japan), and NIAD-QE (the National Institution for Academic Degrees and Quality Enhancement of Higher Education). This review work still continues, and the relevant factors at the focus are: the use and meaning of the Impact Factor; identifying the most cited papers or “top 10 percent papers” in each field; relative importance of academic articles, books, book chapters and other forms of publications; peer-review of and by academic and other communities; evaluation of performance of individual scholars in relation to the missions of institutions and organizations to which they belong; mapping of diversities and distributions of research in various fields in human sciences; statical methods for the analysis of degree of cross-disciplinarity of research; objectives of research contribution to interested stakeholders; evaluation in terms of dissemination of knowledge among the general public; exhibitions and outreach activities in relation to published materials, and other factors. Given these situations and circumstances, anthropologists need to act and perform effectively and innovatively considering how to relate their anthropological activities to their publications.