Front and Back Covers. Volume 19 Number 5. October 2003

Back cover caption The minutes of the first meeting of the Association of Social Anthropologists of the UK and Commonwealth (ASA), held in Oxford on 23 July 1946. In this issue (pp. 8‐13), David Mills delves into the discipline's archives to recount the history of the relationship between the ASA and Royal Anthropological Institute, and provocatively asks what the future holds for anthropology's professional associations. As UK universities increasingly mutate into commercially‐driven 'multiversities', and students are encouraged to think like consumers, are scholarly associations still relevant and will they continue to play an important role? Should they become mass market‐oriented public relations agencies, dedicated to disciplinary profile‐raising, or should their priority be to steward the profession and its scholarly specialisms within a fast‐changing academy? How many associations does a 'small' discipline really need, and can they represent an increasingly diverse international constituency of students, academics and practitioners effectively? The work of such associations has often depended on a spirit of disciplinary public service by scholars, but there is a pressure to professionalise membership services, administration and fund‐raising. The author argues that learned societies need to redefine and reassert their role as senior university managers prove increasingly willing ‐ in the name of institution‐building ‐ to abrogate academic agendas. In a world where more and more research is driven by private grants and donations with limited outcomes, scholarly societies are more than ever called upon to uphold the ideals of independent and value‐free scholarship. In recent years, several major scandals have put pressure on learned societies to develop clearer standards concerning consultancy and ethics. Also in this issue, Adrian Peace (pp. 1‐2) describes unfavourable media publicity for the discipline in Australia following the Hindmarsh affair . This is a difficult issue, given the nature of the discipline, the diverse activities in which anthropologists engage and the functioning of national political agendas and the media. However, should the discipline be brought into disrepute, consequences can be serious. Are scholarly societies as presently structured in Britain adequately equipped to engage the entire profession in debating these and other issues? Are they sufficiently responsive to issues of concern to their membership? What changes, if any, do we need to equip the profession to face what looks like an uncertain future? In 2001 RAI Director Hilary Callan initiated a comprehensive strategic review of RAI activities, services, structure and resources in consultation with Council. Recommendations are to be published soon in the form of a Strategic Plan for consolidation and development over the coming years.