Olga Orlić

Implementacija FAIR načela za dijeljenje podataka nameće nova očekivanja široj znanstvenoj zajednici. Ta načela promiču ideju da podatci budu “otvoreni koliko je moguće, a zatvoreni koliko je potrebno”, uz uvažavanje činjenice da ne treba svaka vrsta podataka biti jednako dostupna. Iz perspektive etnologa i kulturnih antropologa, međutim, poticaj za otvaranje podataka donosi specifične zabrinutosti. Ovaj rad razmatra te izazove, osobito u vezi s posebnostima kognitivnih procesa i tipova podataka unutar etnologije i kulturne antropologije. Izložit ću stavove hrvatskih etnologa i kulturnih antropologa o toj temi te istaknuti našu zajedničku zabrinutost za zaštitu osobnih i osjetljivih podataka sugovornika u istraživanju – posebno kada je otvorene podatke moguće povezati s objavljenim etnografskim i antropološkim tekstovima.

Open science, accessibility and knowledge sharing, especially of articles and monographs stemming from publicly funded research, seem to be moving in quite a positive direction toward scientific development and have received almost unanimous approval from the scientific community. However, when it comes to data sharing, the existing practice reveals a different picture, and not exclusively a discipline-dependent one. FAIR principles are developed and promoted as guiding tools for creating contextualized standards. The fact that data obtained by a qualitative methodology deserve special attention and treatment regarding the accessibility principle is recognized. Although FAIR principles provide ways to anonymize the data and interlocutors, individuals coming from smaller communities or even communities of practice can sometimes be easily recognized by members of the same community if data are openly accessed. Sometimes the interlocutors might agree with these terms, but sometimes they do not. According to the disciplinary code of ethics, a researcher is obliged to thoroughly describe the ways of the raw data management and usage, and in the case of mandatory raw data sharing (e.g., for receiving funding), it can inevitably impact the narratives collected. The prerogative to make all data open inevitably leads to autocensorship among interlocutors, i.e., resulting in a kind of FAIRy tale being collected. The article discusses the results obtained from the survey carried out among Croatian ethnologists and cultural anthropologists about the currently practiced data sharing, their attitudes about data sharing and their perceived behavior in hypothetical situations connected with data sharing. The results show mixed opinions about data sharing and a desire to follow the disciplinary code of ethics first, i.e., to follow the interlocutors’ wishes in the case of data management and usage.

Open science, accessibility and knowledge sharing, especially of articles and monographs stemming from a publicly funded research, seem to be quite a positive direction in the development of science and have received almost unanimous approval from a scientific community. However, when it comes to data sharing, the data obtained by qualitative methodology deserve special attention and treatment. Although FAIR principles provide ways to anonymise the data and interlocoutors (as explained in Celjak et al 2020) individuals coming from smaller communities or even communities of practice can sometimes be easily regcognized by members of the same communitiy, especially if the data refers to audio files! The researcher is obliged to thoroughly describe the ways in which the data will be managed and used, and if it will state that the data will be managed in line with FAIR principles, this will inevitably impact the narratives collected. The prerogative to make all the data open will inevitably lead to autocesorship i.e. in creating a kind of FAIRy Tales for the future, interlocutors will share with researchers. Having all that in mind I argue for a more vigilant approach when embracing the idea that all the data should be made FAIR. Not all the data should be made FAIR because this could, in the end, compromise the research process itself. Some data must remain in the space of trust created between main actors in the research process. These data should be treated with CARE principles.

Open science, accessibility and knowledge sharing, especially of articles and monographs resulting from publicly funded research, seem to be a positive direction in the development of science and have received almost unanimous approval from the scientific community. However, when it comes to data sharing, voices are not in unison. Concerning natural sciences, the data collected could become completely anonymised, while the anonymisation of data in Social Science and Humanities, e.g. ethnology and anthropology, could still result in recognisability of interlocutors. Anthropologists and ethnologists have been using qualitative methodological tools since the inception of the discipline, documenting their research and data collected (audio tapes, transcripts, diaries, drawings, video tapes). However the data collected were never kept in an open-source archive. On the other hand, historians “discovered” classical anthropological methodology, interviewing people of interest (recording in-depths interviews and transcribing) and applied it to, at least for them, a new type of source - people that witnessed some important (or even not so important) historical events (Dunaway and Baum 1984). They moved a step further because, unlike anthropologists, they wanted to make this source (in the shape of an edited transcript and audio file) accessible to other researchers. They have set up Oral history and Oral history archives that have now been in existence for more than half a century (Starr 1996 (1984): 40) and have started contributing to current goals of open science quite early. A standard procedure in conducting an in-depth interview (as the most common qualitative methodological tool for anthropology (today mostly anthropology by appointment (Hannerz 2006)) is providing enough information for the interlocutor in order to sign an informed consent. Apart from describing the research, the informed consent sheet has to contain data explaining the procedure of keeping and managing the data, as well as mentioning the media in which the data will be presented (articles, exhibitions, documentaries, etc.). Anonymity is always one of the possibilities informed consent offers, and while most interlocutors opt for it, not all do. Occasionally, the interlocutor insists on periodically switching off the recorder by the researcher, usually when something delicate is being recollected. Interlocutors are aware that their voices can be recognized and try to make sure that this does not happen. Also, quite often, after the interview ends, the researcher can hear the information that was not meant to be recorded. Although there are ways to anonymise the data (as explained in Celjak, et al. 2020), interlocutors coming from smaller communities or groups can be recognized from the parts of the transcript that have not been removed (to secure anonymity) or by voice. Also, the obligation of the researcher to describe the ways in which the data will be managed in the future will inevitably impact the narratives collected. Anthropologists have already noticed the difference between “order imagined” and the “order realized” (e.g., the ideal wedding vs. actual wedding traditions). One must consider that the possibility to share, for example, their wedding story with future researchers (whoever they may be), might, for some, result in the creation of a narrative with future researchers in mind - a sort of ‘FAIRy Tale’ for the future. After all, imagine yourself recollecting your own wedding to a researcher, but also knowing that it will become a story for the archive or repository? What kind of story would you tell? And what if we are researching certain delicate topics, such as in vitro fertilization (IVF) experiences or the experience of individuals working stigmatized jobs? Having all that in mind I argue for a more vigilant approach of agencies funding research when embracing the idea that all data should be available. Not all data should be made available because this could, in the end, compromise the integrity of the research process. Some data must remain in the space of trust created between main actors in the research process.

Cilj je ovog rada istražiti iskustva poljoprivrednika i institucija s kratkim lancima opskrbe hranom kao načinom ostvarenja prehrambenog suvereniteta. Istraživačko pitanje je bilo usmjereno na otkrivanje prednosti i nedostataka kratkih opskrbnih lana...

Even though community-supported agriculture (CSA) has long been present at the margins of consumerist society all over the world, it has gained more transdisciplinary attention in the past 20–30 years. It has to do with raising awareness among various stakeholders about the need to change food politics, regarding not only securing enough amounts of food to feed the growing world population (food security) but also the most ethical means of achieving this goal (food sovereignty). This awareness resulted in small but growing changes of consumption practices of individuals and their growing interest in being actively engaged in co-creation of food politics, in processes of becoming food citizens. Policy makers, at least in the EU, appropriated some of these, once alternative, efforts into their programmes. In Croatia pioneers of a struggle for achieving food citizenship in the past decade have been initiators and other actors of CSA groups. This chapter provides a brief overview of CSA development in Croatia, especially within the wider context of food citizenship and solidarity economy concepts, aiming at changing dominant food politics or even the dominant economic mode.

U ovom radu analizirat će se načini (ne)prakticiranja solidarnosti i suradničkoga ponašanja u seoskoj ekonomiji, ponajviše u zemljišnim odnosima u Hrvatskoj u prvoj polovici 20. stoljeća. U prvom dijelu rada, nakon teorijske konceptualizacije solidar...

The aim of this paper is to investigate the ways contemporary identification processes on the island of Korcula take place. The changes in the political situation during 1990s, as well as contemporary context of the accession of the Republic of Croatia into European integration, provided the new "arena" for the expression of different identifications. The positioning of identities into the wider context, either on vertical or horizontal level, is also important in these processes. The research was carried out at all the major settlements on the island of Korcula by qualitative methodological tools and ethnographic approach. The results indicate the existence of nested identities on the island of Korcula (ranging from supranational (European) to national and regional and finally to diverse local identifications and their situational and dynamic character. The nested identities on the island of Korcula demonstrate their mutual compatibility and the fact that not only identities of the higher order (regional, for example) comprise the identities of the lower order (local, for example); the reverse process also takes place. The members of seemingly close and similar island communities in fact have very differentiated local identifications that are very often equally important or even more important than identities of the higher order, such as national.