In this article, we discuss how new configurations of stakeholders are implicated and can be conceptualised in digital-visual applied and public ethnography. We set the discussion in the context of the increasing calls for researchers to have impact in the world and the ways that digital technologies are increasingly implicated in this. In doing so, we situate ethnographic practice and stakeholder relationships within a digital-material world. To develop our argument, we discuss examples of two recent digital video ethnography projects, developed in dialogue with anthropological theory, with online digital-visual applied and public dissemination outputs. As we show, such projects do not necessarily have one direct applied line, but rather can have multiple impacts across different groups of stakeholders.
AbramSPinkS (2015) Introduction: mediating publics and anthropology. In: AbramSPinkS (eds) Media, Anthropology and Public Engagement. Oxford: Berghahn.
2.
BeckSMaidaC (2015) Public Anthropology in a Borderless World. Oxford: Berghahn.
3.
BucklerS (2007) Fire in the Dark: Telling Gypsiness in North East England. Oxford: Berghahn.
4.
CarlinDAkamaYPinkSet al. (2015) Essaying the FabPod: An improvised experimental collaborative account of the uncertain cultural life and futures of the Fabpod, as of August 21, 2014. Axon. Available at: http://www.axonjournal.com.au/issue-8-1/essaying-fabpod
5.
CefkinM (ed.) (2009) Ethnography and the Corporate Encounter: Reflections on Research in and of Corporations. Oxford: Berghahn.
6.
CliffordJMarcusG (eds) (1986) Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press.
7.
DuringtonM (2007) The Hunters Redux: Participatory and applied visual anthropology with the Botswana San. In: PinkS (ed.) Visual Interventions: Applied Visual Anthropology. Oxford: Berghahn, pp. 191–208.
8.
EriksenTH (2006) Engaging Anthropology: The Case for a Public Presence. Oxford: Berg.
9.
FieldLWFoxRG (eds) (2007) Anthropology Put To Work. Oxford: Berg.
10.
FloresC (2007) Sharing anthropology: Collaborative video experiences among Maya film-makers in post-war Guatemala. In: PinkS (ed.) Visual Interventions. Oxford: Berghahn, pp. 209–224.
11.
GreenM (2005) International development, social analysis and anthropology? Applying anthropology in and to development. In: PinkS (ed.) Applications of Anthropology. Oxford: Berghahn, pp. 110–129.
12.
GunnWDonovanJ (2012) Design anthropology: An introduction. In: GunnWDonovanJ (eds) Design and Anthropology. Farnham: Ashgate, pp. 1–16.
13.
GunnWOttoTSmithRC (eds) (2013) Design Anthropology: Theory and practice. Oxford: Bloomsbury Publishing.
14.
HarrisM (2007) Introduction: Ways of knowing. In: HarrisM (ed.) Ways of Knowing, New Approaches in the Anthropology of Experience and Learning. Oxford: Berghahn, pp. 1–25.
15.
HolmesDMarcusG (2008) Para-ethnography. In: GivenLM (ed.) The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 596–598.
16.
IngoldT (2008) Anthropology is not ethnography. Proceedings of the British Academy154(11): 69–92.
17.
JamesAHockeyJDawsonA (1997) After Writing Culture: Epistemology and Praxis in Contemporary Anthropology. London: Routledge.
18.
KulickDWillsonM (eds) (1995) Taboo: Sex, Identity and Erotic Subjectivity in Anthropological Fieldwork. London: Routledge.
19.
Leder MackleyKPinkS (2017) From Emplaced Knowing to Interdisciplinary Knowledge: Sensory Ethnography in Energy Research. In: ForsVO’DellTPinkS (eds) Working in the Between: Theoretical Scholarship and Applied Practice. Oxford: Berghahn.
20.
MacDougallD (1998) Transcultural Cinema. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
21.
MacDougallD (2005) The Corporeal Image: Film, Ethnography, and the Senses. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22.
MartinezA (2007) The rhythm of our dreams: A proposal for an applied visual anthropology. In: PinkS (ed.) Visual Interventions: Applied Visual Anthropology. Oxford: Berghahn, pp. 227–246.
23.
MorosanuR (2016) An Ethnography of Household Energy Demand in the UK: Everyday Temporalities of Digital Media Usage. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
24.
NaderL (ed.) (2010) The Energy Reader. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
25.
PinkS (ed.) (2005) Applications of Anthropology. Oxford: Berghahn.
PinkSLeder MackleyK (2014) Reenactment methodologies for everyday life research: Art therapy insights for video ethnography. Visual Studies29(2): pp.146–154.
33.
PinkSPostillJ (2017) Student migration and domestic improvisation: Understanding transient migration through the experience of everyday laundry. Transitions1(1): 13–28.
PinkSArdevolELanzeniD (2016) Digital materiality: Configuring a field of anthropology/design? In: PinkSArdevolELanzeniD (eds) Digital Materialities: Anthropology and Design. Oxford: Bloomsbury, pp. 1–26.
36.
PinkSForsVO’DellT (eds) (2017a) Theoretical Scholarship and Applied Practice. Oxford: Berghahn.
37.
PinkSLeder MackleyKMorosanuRet al. (2017b) Making Homes: Ethnography and Design. London: Bloomsbury.
38.
RouchJ (2003 [1974]) The camera and man. In: FeldS (ed.) Cine Ethnography: Jean Rouch. Minneapolis, MN:University of Minnesota Press.
39.
ShoveE (2010) Beyond the ABC: Climate change policy and theories of social change. Environment and Planning A42(6): 1273–1285.
40.
SillitoeP (2007) Anthropologists only need apply: Challenges of applied anthropology. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute13(1): 147–165.
41.
SneathDHolbraadMPedersenMA (2009) Technologies of the imagination: An introduction. Ethnos: Journal of Anthropology74(1): 5–30.
