Experts et expertise dans les mandats de la société des nations : figures, champs, outils
Expertise in the colonial world can be characterized, more perhaps than in any other context, by the tension between abstract knowledge and acquaintance with the field as inspirations for decision making. The League of Nations mandates instituted after World War I should not be understood as a labor...
Đã lưu trong:
| Định dạng: | Online |
|---|---|
| Ngôn ngữ: | Tiếng Pháp |
| Được phát hành: |
Presses de l’Inalco
2022
|
| Những chủ đề: | |
| Truy cập trực tuyến: | ONIX_20220701_9782858313471_1210 |
| Các nhãn: |
Không có thẻ, Là người đầu tiên thẻ bản ghi này!
|
| _version_ | 1869518607799549952 |
|---|---|
| collection | Directory of Open Access Books |
| description | Expertise in the colonial world can be characterized, more perhaps than in any other context, by the tension between abstract knowledge and acquaintance with the field as inspirations for decision making. The League of Nations mandates instituted after World War I should not be understood as a laboratory of expertise in the colonial world, but as an early instance of the implications of bringing experts to the global South. Not only does colonial expertise combine the distance of the expert to their objects and the overbearing position inherent to the colonizer’s gaze: the international organizations of the League of Nations system created further institution distance to colonial realities. Yet is the point of involving expertise in the administration of the mandates not to counter the discredited image of brutal colonial, counter-insurrectional rule, by inserting skilled and knowledgeable actors in the decision process? Intensely discussed though they were, the mandates can hardly be said to have become the object of a well-defined field of expertise, complete with unified methods, systematized bodies of knowledge and formalized procedures of certification for its experts. Institutional expert discourses on the mandates, diverse and lacking cohesion as they were, were often smokescreen for colonial rule as usual. Yet the times were changing, and because international organizations relied on the formalization (through comparison and quantification) and publicity of information, it opened a space where would‑be experts coming from different corners could present alternative views on colonial rule. |
| format | Online |
| id | doab-20.500.12854ir-85738 |
| institution | Directory of Open Access Books |
| language | fre |
| publishDate | 2022 |
| publishDateRange | 2022 |
| publishDateSort | 2022 |
| publisher | Presses de l’Inalco |
| publisherStr | Presses de l’Inalco |
| record_format | ojs |
| spelling | doab-20.500.12854ir-857382024-03-29T19:31:39Z Experts et expertise dans les mandats de la société des nations : figures, champs, outils Bourmaud, Philippe Neveu, Norig Verdeil, Chantal Mandates Experts Colonial Empire League of Nations Expertise Development South thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JP Politics and government::JPS International relations Expertise in the colonial world can be characterized, more perhaps than in any other context, by the tension between abstract knowledge and acquaintance with the field as inspirations for decision making. The League of Nations mandates instituted after World War I should not be understood as a laboratory of expertise in the colonial world, but as an early instance of the implications of bringing experts to the global South. Not only does colonial expertise combine the distance of the expert to their objects and the overbearing position inherent to the colonizer’s gaze: the international organizations of the League of Nations system created further institution distance to colonial realities. Yet is the point of involving expertise in the administration of the mandates not to counter the discredited image of brutal colonial, counter-insurrectional rule, by inserting skilled and knowledgeable actors in the decision process? Intensely discussed though they were, the mandates can hardly be said to have become the object of a well-defined field of expertise, complete with unified methods, systematized bodies of knowledge and formalized procedures of certification for its experts. Institutional expert discourses on the mandates, diverse and lacking cohesion as they were, were often smokescreen for colonial rule as usual. Yet the times were changing, and because international organizations relied on the formalization (through comparison and quantification) and publicity of information, it opened a space where would‑be experts coming from different corners could present alternative views on colonial rule. 2022-07-01T16:07:20Z 2022-07-01T16:07:20Z 2020 book ONIX_20220701_9782858313471_1210 9782858313471 9782858313464 https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/85738 fre TransAireS image/png n/a https://www.7switch.com/fr/ebook/9782858313471/from/openedition https://books.openedition.org/pressesinalco/37738 Presses de l’Inalco 10.4000/books.pressesinalco.37738 Expertise in the colonial world can be characterized, more perhaps than in any other context, by the tension between abstract knowledge and acquaintance with the field as inspirations for decision making. The League of Nations mandates instituted after World War I should not be understood as a laboratory of expertise in the colonial world, but as an early instance of the implications of bringing experts to the global South. Not only does colonial expertise combine the distance of the expert to their objects and the overbearing position inherent to the colonizer’s gaze: the international organizations of the League of Nations system created further institution distance to colonial realities. Yet is the point of involving expertise in the administration of the mandates not to counter the discredited image of brutal colonial, counter-insurrectional rule, by inserting skilled and knowledgeable actors in the decision process? Intensely discussed though they were, the mandates can hardly be said to have become the object of a well-defined field of expertise, complete with unified methods, systematized bodies of knowledge and formalized procedures of certification for its experts. Institutional expert discourses on the mandates, diverse and lacking cohesion as they were, were often smokescreen for colonial rule as usual. Yet the times were changing, and because international organizations relied on the formalization (through comparison and quantification) and publicity of information, it opened a space where would‑be experts coming from different corners could present alternative views on colonial rule. 10.4000/books.pressesinalco.37738 a988fd18-fa61-4b95-b658-b8b53fe4cc1c 9782858313471 9782858313464 374 Paris open access |
| spellingShingle | Mandates Experts Colonial Empire League of Nations Expertise Development South thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JP Politics and government::JPS International relations Experts et expertise dans les mandats de la société des nations : figures, champs, outils |
| title | Experts et expertise dans les mandats de la société des nations : figures, champs, outils |
| title_full | Experts et expertise dans les mandats de la société des nations : figures, champs, outils |
| title_fullStr | Experts et expertise dans les mandats de la société des nations : figures, champs, outils |
| title_full_unstemmed | Experts et expertise dans les mandats de la société des nations : figures, champs, outils |
| title_short | Experts et expertise dans les mandats de la société des nations : figures, champs, outils |
| title_sort | experts et expertise dans les mandats de la societe des nations figures champs outils |
| topic | Mandates Experts Colonial Empire League of Nations Expertise Development South thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JP Politics and government::JPS International relations |
| topic_facet | Mandates Experts Colonial Empire League of Nations Expertise Development South thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JP Politics and government::JPS International relations |
| url | ONIX_20220701_9782858313471_1210 |