Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2005. / Title from first page of PDF file. Includes bibliographical references (p. 186-192).

Thesis (M.S.W.)--Smith College School for Social Work, Northampton, Mass., 2009. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 81-86).

Thesis (Ph.D.)--York University, 2004. Graduate Programme in Social and Political Thought. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 371-402). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://wwwlib.umi.com/cr/yorku/fullcit?pNQ99242

This thesis concerns the history of humanitarian nutrition and its political implications. Drawing on aid agency archives and other historical sources, it examines how food has been delivered in emergencies, from the First World War to the present day. The approach is ethnographic: this is a study of the micro-level practices of relief, examining the objects distributed, the plans made, the techniques used. It is also historical: examining how such practices have changed over time. This thesis makes five interlocking arguments. First, I make a political point: that humanitarian action is always political, and that it is impossible to adhere to ‘classical’ humanitarian principles such as neutrality, impartiality and independence. Second, I make a sociological argument: that the activities of humanitarian nutrition have been shaped by a number of themes, which include militarism, medicine, modernity, and markets. Third, I make a historical argument: that the main features of humanitarian nutrition were solidified between the 1930s and the 1970s, and were largely in place by the time of the Biafran war. Fourth, I make a sociological argument: that these mid-century changes involved a profound redefinition of hunger and food (with hunger conceived as a biochemical deficiency, and food as a collection of nutrients). Finally, I make a normative argument, suggesting that this redefinition has not necessarily benefited the starving: the provision of food in emergencies, I argue, is often concerned with control and efficiency rather than the suffering individuals themselves.

This thesis examines the role and relationship of standardization and advocacy in humanitarian aid planning processes within the emergent field of education and instability. Standardization refers to the aid industry’s increasing emphasis on establishing ‘universal’ principles and normative frameworks. Advocacy refers to transnational-policy-network activities that move forward the global standardization agenda. The study focuses on the purposes and practices of knowledge creation by an education-and-instability ‘epistemic community’: the Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE). Drawing on global-level interviews with key figures, participant observations, and documentary analysis, the research explores how this epistemic community promotes its core tenets: that education is an inherent human right and that educational provision should be a frontline humanitarian response on par with food distribution and shelter construction. The thesis analyzes the consensus-making process that resulted in the publication of the 2004 INEE Minimum Standards handbook, the then-epitome of the epistemic community’s knowledge. Next, the thesis examines the local application and adaptation of such global standardization processes in post-conflict Uganda. The case study presents the relationships among international and local ‘development partner’ institutions concerned with educational planning as a complex and contradictory story of power dynamics and knowledge circulation. These ‘partnerships’ are characterized by a shared quest for adherence to the knowledge encapsulated within standardized global frameworks and their normative principles. For Ugandan institutions, fluency in this discourse is a powerful tool to appropriate for their own ends. For international institutions, the knowledge is at once a technical resource and a means to bring ever more stakeholders into the wider epistemic community concerned with humanitarian aid. I argue that, through judicious use of standardization and advocacy mechanisms, INEE seeks to legitimize the education sector’s existence within the humanitarian aid industry and expand support for (or ‘conversion’ to) the education-and-instability epistemic community’s core beliefs.