Social science research in the middle east: The American University in Cairo, Egypt

Journal o f the Historv of the Behuuioral Sciences 15 (1979): 115-127.

SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH IN THE MIDDLE EAST: THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY IN CAIRO, EGYPT

LAWRENCE R. MURPHY

An examination of the history of the Social Research Center at the American University in Cairo, Egypt, reveals the kinds of changes which social research has under one in res onding to the social and political pressures of developin countries. Founfed in 195% the Center initially relied heavily on foreign researcfers, made grants to individual investigators, and concentrated on subjects of academic interest. Through experience with land reclamation projects, an extensive ethnographic survey of Egyptian Nubia, and an analysis of the population problem in Egypt, the Center has come to focus on larger, interdisciplinary studies conducted by its personnel, to use local researchers to the virtual exclusion of foreigners, to select topics of immediate concern to Egypt, and to emphasize in-house reports or local seminars rather than scholarly publications. Support has come from U. S. government grants and the Ford Foundation, neither of which is entirely satisfactory. The experience of the Social Research Center may suggest a model which can be employed in other developing nations.

Immense problems confront social scientists inaugurating research programs in developing countries. An absence of professionally trained local investigators has frequently resulted in foreign domination which can reinforce the political and economic objectives of colonialism. Moreover, the money needed to support research often comes from overseas foundations, governments, or agencies whose objectives do not always coincide with the needs or interests of developing nations. Growing nationalism in many areas has stimulated local politicians to demand control over social research and to limit the activities of foreign investigators. Finally, while many researchers prefer to work alone or in small groups and to focus on limited topics, greater social or national service requires the cooperation of many individuals whose efforts are directed toward a single project or endeavor. The study of one well-established organization - The Social Research Center of the American University in Cairo - provides insight into ways in which these broader problems are manifested in a particular situation. Historical perspective demonstrates the ways social science research has evolved to meet changing political and social situations. The Social Research Center (SRC) may suggest models for international cooperation in research which can be used elsewhere.

Founded in 1920 by American Protestants, the American University in Cairo is a small liberal arts institution financed largely from the United States but serving students from Egypt and other Arab countries. During the first thirty years of its operation, the university student body seldom exceeded 300; and, despite its name, the majority of enrollees were often in precollege programs. Since 1960 the university has grown to nearly 1,500 undergraduate students and developed graduate programs in a variety of fields.’

The initial interest in social research came from senior professors who were dedicated, American-born missionaries. Years of service in the area had imbued them with a desire to help Egyptians solve the many social, political, and economic problems which beset their country. They also recognized that basic information was needed before

LAWRENCE R. MURPHY, Associate Professor of History and Director of Non- Traditional Programs at Western Illinois University, served on the faculty of the American University in Cairo from 1971 to 1973. He established a university archives and has written a history of the university. soon to be published. In addition, he has published extensively on the history of the American Southwest, concen- trating on relations among Indians, Anglos, and Mexican-Americans in the nineteenth century. He acknowledges the assistance of Dr. Laila El-Hamamsy, Dr. Saad Gadalla, and Mr. Carl V. Schieren in the preparation of this article, although the views expressed are his own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of these individuals or of the American University in Cairo.

115

116 LAWRENCE R. MURPHY

intelligent discussions could begin, much less workable solutions reached. Wendell Cleland, the university’s Extension Director, who went to Cairo prior to World War One, was the most influential proponent of initiating research activities. He had returned to Princeton in the 1930s to study demography and eventually wrote a dissertation, The Population Problem in Egypt, published in 1936.2 Cleland hoped to encourage other foreigners to initiate research projects in the country and to begin at least elementary training programs by which Egyptians could be taught western social science techniques.8

There was also pressure from outside the university to organize a program of research. With Egypt rapidly expanding its social service activities after World War Two, government officials often lacked accurate information on which to base laws and programs. The motives of British researchers might be suspect because of their country’s colonial interest in Egypt, but the same was not true of American researchers. Both the Egyptian Minister of Social Affairs and the prestigious council which advised the Divi- sion of Extension encouraged the American University to sponsor more research activities. Two social welfare seminars sponsored by the United Nations in the early 1950s stressed the value of basic research, and U. N. officials joined the Egyptians in urging the Americans to investigate the social conditions in Egypt and neighboring countries, to encourage and assist individual research scholars, and to help train Arabs in modern in- vestigative techniques.‘

The question of how to finance such research became paramount. The American University was poor, and few of its religiously motivated supporters were willing to have their money used for either pure or applied research. During World War Two Cleland worked for the U. S. Office of War Information, and he suggested applying for American government assistance to develop social research and training centers. The u- niversity trustees, suspicious of the government’s motives and fearful of outside control, rejected his proposal, and Cleland resigned.s Another possibility, more palatable to the trustees, was to seek help from a private American foundation. Early in 1951 University President John S . Badeau proposed the creation of a Social Research Center and asked the Ford Foundation for a three-year, $85,000 grant to operate it. Ford enthusiastically supported the project, and when the grant was approved in October 1952, Badeau assured foundation officials “that this project will make an urgently needed contribution to the social advance of Egypt.”

But what would the Center do? Badeau’s initial proposal envisioned a modest operation. The staff would be limited to one Egyptian and one American scholar aided by one or two clerks. They would collect a library of social science materials and buy some sim- ple equipment. The first codirectors, Dr. Hanna Rizk, Clelands prottgt and successor as director of the Extension Division, and Dr. Frank Dorey, a Fulbright professor, spent the first year gathering published data, locating extant studies of Egypt and other countries, gathering materials on research techniques, and looking for examples of good research projects conducted elsewhere. Lists of qualified researchers, social agencies, and organizations which might be useful were also compiled. Meanwhile, Rizk started a demographic study of rural Egypt, and Dorey began to compile a social fact book on Cairo.’

These limited activities satisfied university officials, but they showed little promise for having any real impact on Egypt and lacked the dramatic effect Ford had expected. In 1954 the foundation concluded that the Center had suffered from an “inadequate con- ception” and “inadequate professional staff time devoted to its administration and operation.” A larger, more comprehensive program was needed. Dorey outlined ex-

SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH IN THE MIDDLE EAST 117

panded activities encompassing the entire Middle East and requiring a larger staff. Grants would be made to individual scholars conducting research; a publications program would be inaugurated; and a series of courses and workshops on social science research methods would be offered. The university’s trustees pledged to “continue the program . . . as a permanent unit of the University,” and “to make every effort to carry on the function of the center indefinitely, or as long as the need for it exists.” Faced with growing deficits, however, they insisted that Ford assume full financial responsibility for the project. Early in 1955 the Foundation agreed to provide an additional $240,000 grant.8

The Center was to be run primarily by foreigners. The first director, Dr. John H. Provinse, an anthropologist trained at the University of Chicago, had been an Assistant Commissioner of the U. S. Bureau of Indian Affairs and had worked in India. He had no previous experience in Egypt, nor had his assistant, Dr. Gordon Hirabayashi, a sociologist schooled at the University of Wisconsin.s The assumption implicit in these selections was that social science methods were universally applicable; a person trained in a first-rate American university could easily apply his knowledge to a new setting without knowledge of its culture, history, or social structure. It was also presumed that the essential purpose of their research was to increase scholarly.knowledge of social conditions in various parts of the world, not to solve the problems of particular nations.

The major activities of the Social Research Center during its formative years were to make grants and assist individual scholars in completing whatever research interested them. Some recipients were Americans on short-term appointment to the American University. An anthropologist investigated an Egyptian village, for example, while a political scientist surveyed Middle East attitudes toward United States foreign policy, and a sociologist studied the adjustment problems of Nubians who became servants in Cairo. Other grants went to Egyptians on the university staff: the Dean of Education, Amir Boktor, secured Center support for a psychological testing program; Hanna Rizk continued his demographic work; and education psychologist Risk Guirgis developed tests to evaluate Egyptian secondary school students. European. or American-trained scholars at Egyptian universities also qualified for money. Iskander Ibrahim and Emad Ismail from Cairo University compared rural and urban family structures; Fathalla El Khatib studied local government; two Alexandria University professors examined the impact of industrialization on their port city.1°

There were inevitable problems with this approach. Researchers normally focused on subjects of narrow interest. After grants had been made, a report later summarized, “ , . . many projects petered out, and a few were never really begun.” Occasional scholarly articles resulted, but the authors rarely even gave the Center credit for its assistance, and studies were occasionally conducted so poorly that the data were un- reliable, and the conclusions, therefore, were worthless. Moreover, individuals retained their research files, so no bank of information accumulated at the Center.”

More serious questions have been raised about the abilities of foreigners, especially those on short-term assignment, to conduct meaningful research in a foreign setting. “Too often on the basis of his superficial acquaintance with some African problem,” Professor P. E. Temu of Tanzania has noted, “a foreign ‘expert’ offers hurried prescrip- tions for particular (often imagined) social ills, based on the results of a few months’ in- quiry.” n In addition, excessive specialization, disciplinary compartmentalization, and superficiality severely limited the value of these studies. Most had little direct relation to

118 LAWRENCE R. M U R P H Y

the concerns of the Egyptian people or their government, and they provided little, if any, assistance in suggesting workable solutions to the country’s real problems.

Furthermore, seeming to accept the foreign domination of research in Egypt as a permanent situation, the Social Research Center put relatively little emphasis on training Egyptians so they could play a larger role in conducting research. Only a few SRC research assistants enrolled for classes at the American University. A four-day “Seminar on Economic Development” designed to introduce Egyptians to modern trends in economic research, late in 1955, attracted few participants, and the long, dull papers bored many of those who did come, showing the need for a different format in the future.13 For most Egyptians the kind of training needed if they were to become professional social researchers was unavailable

Changes in what might be termed a benign but essentially colonialist approach to social research began in the mid- 1950s. The overthrow of the regime of King Farouk and the rise of Gamal Abdul Nasser as Egypt’s revolutionary leader necessarily affected the nature and purpose of Bocial research. The Egyptian government, like others in the developing world, wanted to exercise closer supervision over research conducted within the country, especially where foreigners were involved. Law 19 of 1957 required government approval of all research projects. When the Social Research Center submitted a list of activities, the government’s response was generally, Provinse reported, “friendly and constructive,’’ although in some cases additional information about the samples being studied or evaluative techniques was required. A few questionnaires had to be revised. The American University, recognizing the political reality of its status, complied with such requests. “The Center wants its research and related activities,” Director Provinse assured an Egyptian official, “ . , . to become as useful as possible in the many large tasks your government is undertaking to improve the condition of the country and the welfare of the Egyptian people.” l4

A second important development was the increasing autonomy of the Social Research Center within the American University. Staff members complained during the mid-1950s of their excessive involvement in teaching and administrative activities. In Oc- tober 1956 Provinse complained that such work had “almost brought the research work of the center to a standstill.” He feared that if such outside demands continued, the u- niversity would be violating its commitments to Ford.15 These concerns, coupled with the perceived possibility of the foundation cutting off vital financial assistance, resulted in SRC staff members devoting less of their time to teaching classes, administering academic departments, or participating in other university affairs. The Center slowly drew away from the rest of the institution, establishing its own semiautonomous status. Center directors, for example, dealt directly with foundation officials, and grants were often made to the Social Research Center, not to American University.

This independence became more important when an Egyptian was named director of the Center, first on an acting and later on a permanent basis. Laila Shukry El- Hamamsy, who joined the SRC in 1954 after completing a doctorate in anthropology at Cornell University, was selected to head the Center when Provinse resigned in the fall of 1956.18 A tall, gregarious, strong-willed, energetic woman, Dr. El-Hamamsy gave power- ful direction to the Center, and its activities became the major interest in her life. To a large extent her interests and personality determined the directions the SRC took for the next two decades. Under her leadership the Center became increasingly Egyptian, while the rest of the university remained under American

119 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH IN THE MIDDLE EAST

Activities gradually shifted to areas where senior staff members had particular interests or expertise. Fewer small grants were made to individual researchers, and the major responsibility for the design of projects, the execution of investigations, and the preparation of reports moved to SRC personnel. An increasing number of senior researchers, usually Americans, came to the Center for two or three years, and additional junior staff members were employed to assist in the research while learning basic field techniques.

One topic on which the Center focused considerable resources was urbanization. Dr. Alphonse Said, head the university’s sociology-anthropology department, began to analyze city growth in the late 1950s and authored The Growth and Development of Ur- banization, published by the university in 1960. The Center also organized an inter- pretative study of the 1947 Cairo census, providing detailed statistics on each population tract. Janet Abu-Lughod, an American married to a Palestinian, and Ezz el-Din Attiya used this data as the basis for a Cairo Fact Book, published in 1963. Using historical perspectives which could be obtained by comparing this information with the results of the 1960 census, Abu-Lughod began publishing important articles on the process of urban growth in Egypt, the problems of migrants, and the differences between urban and rural life. In 1971, long after she left Egypt, Dr. Abu-Lughod’s monumental Cairo: I001 Years of the City Victorious appeared from Princeton University Press.18

The tendency of the Social Research Center to concentrate its efforts on well- defined projects raised questions about its relationship with funding agencies. As part of its program to expand agricultural productivity in Egypt, the government hoped to develop new farming areas by draining swamps and irrigating deserts. The United States supported these activities as part of its foreign aid program in Egypt, and in 1959 American specialists began helping with drainage projects through what was called the Egyptian-American Rural Improvement Service (EARIS).lS Experts realized that the resettlement of farmers onto newly opened lands would cause many human problems, and in 1960 they asked the Social Research Center to evaluate the effectiveness of the program by studying socioeconomic change in communities that had moved. Here, then, was a project initiated not by the Center but by the funding agency. It was large, complex, and financed by contracts between the SRC and EARIS. Dr. Saad Gadalla, an Egyptian population expert trained at the University of Missouri, investigated the village of El Wasta, many of whose residents were to be moved to a new town, El Quta. Immediately after their resettlement, Dr. Alphonse Said directed a study of the same families in their new environment. Dr. Lucie Wood studied another village in the Delta prior to the resettlement of its residents.20

The project was important for several reasons. It suffered many of the problems associated with federally funded research. As part of the United States’ foreign aid assistance program to Egypt, it was subject to cancellation whenever U. S.-Egyptian relations deteriorated, and the presence of U. S.-paid investigators, many foreigners in villages necessarily stimulated some suspicion. Not all the non-Egyptians were suf- ficiently familiar with Egyptian life and customs to reach valid conclusions. There was also pressure, subtle though it was, to reach positive conclusions. No one in either the Egyptian or the American governments wanted social scientists to conclude that the land reclamation projects were failures.

On the more positive side, the EARIS project demonstrated the value of a fairly complex, multifaceted research project directly related to a current Egyptian problem,

120 LAWRENCE R. MURPHY

and it contributed to the construction of a model SRC project. Such a model required sufficient size and complexity so that experts from several social science disciplines could be involved, yet it needed a focus which brought diverse studies together. In addition, it should produce valuable information and knowledge for Egypt, but at the same time contribute to the increase of social science expertise; foreigners as well as Egyptians should participate; and, finally, it should appeal to those funding agencies, foundations or government agencies, which would have to pay the expenses.

Another such project soon emerged. Soon after joining the American University staff in 1959, Dr. Robert Fernea, an American anthropologist trained at the University of Chicago, suggested to Dr. El-Hamamsy that the Center develop a research plan related to the construction of the Aswan High Dam in upper Egypt. Construction of the dam would flood several thousand square miles, forcing the removal of an estimated 50,000 people, mostly Nubians, who would be resettled on newly irrigated land near Kom Ombo, north of Aswan. Such a relocation project had broad anthropological im- plications. Old Nubia would disappear as the folkways and customs of its people changed. If their traditions were ever to be recorded, it would have to be prior to relocation. Moreover, if the resettlement project were to succeed, social studies similar to those done in the Delta for EARIS needed to be conducted to anticipate and help solve adjustment problems. Information valuable to government resettlement officials would inevitably be collected. Lastly, these circumstances provided a unique opportunity to com- pare Nubian society before and after resettlement, demonstrating the social modifications which occur as a result of traumatic migration and environmental change.21

The project had a dramatic appeal which helped secure the needed sponsorship. Widespread publicity associated with the United States’ denial of funds for the dam’s construction and Egypt’s subsequent alliance with the Soviet Union had made the public aware of the project. The idea of individual American scientists participating in a project from which the government had withdrawn was attractive. When Fernea and El- Hamamsy approached the Ford Foundation, it seemed eager to underwrite the project, and soon a $100,000 grant led to the formal inauguration of an “Ethnological Survey of Egyptian Nubia.” 22

Like many of the Center’s earlier activities, the principal investigators were still Americans. In addition to Fernea, the survey brought in Dr. Thayer Scudder, an anthropologist trained at Harvard and the London School of Economics; Dr. Charles Calender, from the University of Chicago; and Dr. Peter Geiser, Dr. Jane Phillips, and Dr. John Kennedy from UCLA.2S For the first time, however, the study required close cooperation and assistance from a great many Egyptian government agencies, which granted permission for the work to be initiated and closely observed its implementation. The ministries of Social Affairs, Agrarian Reform, and Culture and National Guidance were involved, as well as United Nations agencies, and ultimately the Sudanese go~ernment.~’ Another important new aspect of the program was its increased emphasis on training Egyptians to conduct research. Four junior research assistants who accom- panied the foreigners received training in social science research techniques. Ultimately Ford provided a supplementary grant which included money to send the most promising of them abroad for advanced, doctoral-level training.2s

The work of the survey went well. The visiting scholars were welcomed into the Nu- bian communities, where they collected information about customs, folkways, and social organizations, ultimately making the Nubians one of the best documented peoples in the


Middle East. Preliminary conclusions forwarded to the government suggested ways in which settlement could be conducted with minimal disruption of traditional Nubian society. Because Egyptian officials also needed to know how resettlement would affect Nubians who had moved to Egyptian cities, Scudder collected information to determine the relationship between inadequate resources and the tendency to seek work in the city. Peter Geiser and a team of interviewers questioned nearly one thousand immigrants to Cairo about past immigration patterns and future plans.2e

The dissemination of the information obtained in the study took two forms. The first, not previously utilized, provided immediate, usable information to Egyptians. A “Symposium on Contemporary Nubia,” held at Aswan in January 1964, was attended by scholars, representatives from Egyptian government ministries, and social scientists from Egyptian universities. Scudder, Calender, and other staff members presented the conclusions of their research. Dr. J. Clyde Mitchell of the University of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, an authority on labor migration and urbanization, related the Nubian situation to similar problems elsewhere. “The symposium,” Fernea concluded, “ . . . made clear the meaning of social research and the kind of information it can provide, and emphasized the importance of social research as an adjunct to the planning and execution of resettlement.” 27

Second, a substantial published bibliography on Nubia resulted from the project, primarily for the use of the international academic community. In addition to two volumes of the papers prepared for the Aswan conference,28 Fernea and Kennedy contributed a brief discussion of Nubian resettlement problems to Current Anthropology, and Kennedy’s articles on Nubian ceremonies and belief systems appeared in American Anthropologist, Man, and Human Organi~at ion.~~ The latter also published Peter Geiser’s study on the factors influencing migration.30 Charles Calender and one of his assistants, Fadwa El Guindi, coauthored a book on Kenuz ritual^.^' Early in 1974 the photo essay Nubians in Egypt: Peaceful People appeared under the imprint of the University of Texas Press.

Though the Nubian project seemed to demonstrate a happy marriage between scholarly and nationalistic objectives and showed that foundation funds could be ac- quired for a comprehensive study, it still had drawbacks from an Egyptian perspective. The project lacked immediacy; that is, the problems it dealt with, while interesting to social researchers and having some impact on public policy decisions, were of minor importance considering the other immense social and economic problems which confronted a developing country like Egypt. Second, it was largely conceived, designed, and conducted by foreigners. Some Egyptians received training as a result of the Nubian survey, but, with the exception of Director El-Hamamsy, Egyptians clearly played roles which were secondary to Americans.

Of greater immediate concern was the problem of overpopulation, about which worldwide concern was being expressed by the early 1960s. That worry was justified in few countries more than Egypt, whose population density of up to 6,000 per square mile and annual growth were among the highest in the world. In Egypt, as elsewhere, most population research was medically oriented, and researchers tended to focus their efforts on developing new contraceptive devices and instructing people on how to use them. Dr. El-Hamamsy, like other anthropologists and sociologists, knew childbearing was too essential a part of the social and economic fabric for individuals to stop having children just because they were able to do so. Before any particular contraceptive method would be

122 LAWRENCE R . MURPHY

successful, adequate research had to be done on the attitudes and practices of people in different social environment^.^^

The success of the Nubian project and continued difficulties with small, individual research activities prompted El-Hamamsy to seek a major research effort into which to channel and focus the center’s resources and make the contribution to Egypt which had so long been promised. Population was a logical, even a compelling choice. She and her associates outlined a comprehensive program, the basic objective of which was “to ac- quire accurate and reliable data to enable a full understanding of the local population problem and to furnish information for administrative decisions on best ways to imple- ment, promote, supply, and support family planning throughout the country.” Clearly the research design was much more pragmatic and oriented toward Egyptian needs than any previous undertaking of the Center. Like the Nubian survey, the project encom- passed a number of smaller segments. One team would analyze Egyptian population growth patterns historically, examining factors which influenced change, and predicting the scope and impact of future population increases. Another would question women in cities, villages, and factory towns about their families and their knowledge and attitudes about contraceptive techniques. Still another would evaluate family planning centers established by the Egyptian government to determine their effectiveness and suggest new or revised methods which might be more successful by interviewing staff members and clients at selected centers. Researchers would also attempt to determine how population programs in test areas had changed productive behavior there, while a broader examination of marriage patterns, family organization, and other social factors would help ex- plain the complexities of demography and family planning.33

Project staffing differed considerably from the Nubian project. Originally it was planned that some Americans would participate on a short-term basis: senior American professors would come from the Havard University Center for Population Studies and the University of North Carolina Population Studies Center; doctoral dissertation fellowships would be offered to graduate students from a b r ~ a d . ~ ‘ The 1967 Arab-Israeli war disrupted these plans, however. With Egyptian suspicions of foreigners, especially Americans, intensified, non-Arabs were severely restricted as to where they could travel, making field work impossible. The cooperative programs with American universities had to be ~uspended .~~

As a result, the Center turned exclusively to Arabs, mostly Egyptians. Some had worked as junior researchers for the SRC before travelling abroad to receive doctoral- level training. Helmi Tadros and Hussain Fahim, for example, had earned doctorates in the United States and now returned as senior researchers. Saad Gadalla, who became Assistant Director and subsequently succeeded El-Hamamsy as head of the Center, planned several projects. Increased emphasis was also placed on training young Egyptian social scientists. Short, specialized training was offered in Egypt, and fellowships were available for overseas study.3s

Securing needed financial support for such a large, comprehensive project also proved difficult. American wheat sales to Egypt through Public Law 480 had accumulated substantial amounts of United States-owned Egyptian pounds which could be used by federal agencies for projects within Egypt. The Welfare Administration of the U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare indicated a willingness to support the project, initially in the amount of L. E. 69,200. The Ford Foundation was giving final consideration to a $236,000 grant when the 1967 war broke out. The foundation, doubtless pressured by anti-Arab sentiments in the United States and concerned about

123 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH IN THE MIDDLE EAST

the unstable political situation in the area, delayed approval until the fall of 1968, when the grant was finally made. In 1971 an $800,000 grant from the U. S. Agency for Inter- national Development, part of a broader U. S. assistance package to Egypt, paid most major expenses for a four-year population research program. This was the largest grant the Social Research Center had ever re~eived.~?

There were obvious disadvantages to such a financial arrangement. To a considerable extent the Center had staked its future on continued good relations between Egypt and the United States; a serious rift could easily lead to a suspension of assistance programs. The fact remained, however, that few other sources of substantial money to support research were available. Either the Center could obtain money from the U. S. government or the Ford Foundation, or it could suspend its work.

In addition to influencing the personnel policies and the financing of the Social Research Center, the 1967 war resulted in closer coordination with the Egyptian government. A lengthy agreement negotiated between SRC and Egyptian officials established a cooperative framework among the Social Research Center, the Ministry of Health, and the Executive Council for Family Planning. An advisory committee was created to coor- dinate research activities and help secure required government clearances. In addition, project administrators worked closely with the Faculty of Medicine and Institute of Statistics at Cairo University and with numerous officials in government ministries concerned with population and other social problems.s8

The project began in 1966 with an intensive study of four communities in Giza, near Cairo. A population census was taken and files developed on each family. Four family planning clinics were established in the area, and social and medical records were kept on each of 600 women who sought their services. Community studies aimed at discovering what social and cultural factors affected attitudes toward family planning. In addition, researchers examined women who visited the Kasr el Aini Hospital's family planning clinic and evaluated the work of several clinics established by voluntary organizations. They also studied the effects of contraceptive pills on the lactation patterns of 150 women.sg

It was March of 1969 before the results of the 1967 war had diminished enough for the Center's studies to resume. Manufia, a densely populated rural province thirty miles north of Cairo, became the SRC's principal area of study. During the summer of 1969, household and fertility studies began there, and local family clinics, their clients, and staff members were evaluated.'O By 1971 the Center was able to expand its population work into a major, long-term research project covering additional areas representing a cross-section of Egyptian communities from Assiut in the south to the Nile delta in the north. Many were rural, but for purposes of comparison a densely populated neighborhood in Cairo was studied as well. In each area the kinds of research originated in Giza and Manufia continued: household and fertility studies to secure basic demographic information, sociological investigations to determine factors influencing willingness to accept family planning programs, studies of women attending family planning clinics, and evaluations of birth control programs and the methods used to promote them."

Frequently in the administration of its grants, the SRC was able to overlap different activities in the same areas, with resettlement and population studies, for example, tak- ing place at the same site using the same personnel. Sometimes if new locations seemed promising, if necessary government clearances could not be obtained, or if there were personnel or logistical problems, areas originally slated for study could be abandoned

124 LAWRENCE R . MURPHY

and new ones adopted. A newly settled village near Alexandria, for example, substituted for a traditional community because it afforded particularly interesting research possibilities. Sayida Zeinab, a densely populated Cairo neighborhood, proved a fruitful area for research, so the Center devoted major research to the area in cooperation with the Cairo Family Planning Association. Using computer techniques and a structured interview schedule, researchers interviewed more than 2,000 women attending clinics to determine their opinions regarding the activities of the Center and the effectiveness of contraceptive services pro~ided.‘~

Just as the topics studied, the personnel employed, and the research orientation of the Social Research Center changed in response to local needs, so too have the methods used to disseminate results. Much greater emphasis has been placed on providing immediate, useful information to Egyptian officials and social scientists. Reports for limited distribution to those vitally concerned with a particular problem or location in Egypt have often resulted from the research. Workshops, small meetings, and seminars have been held periodically to report on findings of importance. Inevitably this has led to the production of fewer fully polished, scholarly reports for publication in international social science publications.

In 1974 the Social Research Center took the lead in establishing a regional international organization of Arabs interested in social research. Experts who gathered in Cairo from throughout the Middle East felt that continued interchange among social scientists in the area was necessary, and they established the “Organization for the Promotion of the Social Sciences in the Middle East,” (OPSSME). Dr. El-Hamamsy was named the first Secretary General, and a secretariat was established at the Social Research Center. The Ford Foundation sponsored the workshop and provided additional funds to establish a regional network of social science researchers in the area.4s

The experiences of the American University in Cairo’s Social Research Cent,er demonstrate the changes which social necessity and nationalistic fervor have imposed on social scientists working in the developing world. The kinds of narrow, academically oriented research projects which social researchers commonly undertake in their own countries are of little value in overcoming the immense problems facing developing nations. The history of the Social Research Center demonstrates the greater utility of long-term, interdisciplinary, multifaceted studies which analyze a problem of major immediate concern to the host nation. An agency like the SRC enables many social scientists to work together under central direction and in close cooperation with local government officials and funding agencies. Seminars, conferences, and in-house reports may be more useful results of such work than scholarly articles published years later.“

When the Social Research Center was established more than a quarter century ago, there were few Egyptian social scientists qualified to undertake sophisticated research. What work was to be undertaken had to be done by foreigners. Now, thanks in part to the educational opportunities offered to junior research assistants by the Social Research Center, that situation has changed. In 1968, when the SRC began to rely almost exclusively on Egyptians and other Arabs, there were nearly 1900 social scientists in the country, many of them as qualified or more so than the vast majority of foreigner^.'^ Ex- cept for rare instances of highly specialized expertise, there is simply no reason to import investigators from the developed world. The foreigners who are allowed to participate in field work may gain as much or more from the experience as they are able to contribute to the country where they work.


The problems of financing social research in developing countries have yet to be solved. I t is apparent, as Robert Broadhead and Ray Rist have pointed out, that government agencies, foundations, and other funding sources do serve as “gatekeepers.” They determine what agencies or individuals are to receive support, what problems are worthy of study, and to a much more limited extent, can influence the kinds of conclusions which are reached.‘“ Financing social research necessarily has a low priority among the pressing needs in most developing countries like Egypt. Securing financing from other governments is possible, as the SRC demonstrated, although the danger of funds being cut off because of diplomatic or political disagreements well outside the realm of social research is ever present. Private foundations in capitalist countries like the United States may also provide support, although they have become increasingly selective in their activities and may impose controls which make such grants undesirable. It is easiest, as was the case in the early history of the Social Research Center, where such grants are of a general nature and the exact disposition of money is left up to the receiving agency. The more specific the project, however, the greater possibility for abuse.

In its broadest context, the experience of the Social Research Center of the American University in Cairo over twenty-five years may suggest a model which can be employed in other developing nations. Change came about slowly, gradually, naturally, without impeding the Center’s activities or endangering its fragile relationships with funding agencies or the Egyptian government. Not threats of being closed but a clear recognition of national evolution and growth and a desire to be of service to Egypt precipitated these modifications. As a result, today, as never before in its history, the Social Research Center can, as was promised in 1952, “make an urgently needed contribution to the social advance of Egypt.”

NOTES

1. These conclusions are drawn from the author’s book-length history of the American University in Cairo, which is soon to be published. Also his “Charles R. Watson,” in John A. Garraty and Edward T. James, eds., Dictionary of American Biography. Supplement Four, 1946-1950 (New York: Scribner’s, 1974), pp. 859-861; and E. Freeman Gossett, Foreign Higher Education in Egypt During the Nationalist Era: The American University in Cairo (Cairo: privately printed by the American University in Cairo, 1962). 2. Wendell Cleland, The Population Problem in Egypt (Lancaster, Pa.: privately printed, 1936). Egyptian

Gazette (Cairo), 6 February 1937, 20 February 1937; Egyptian Mail (Cairo), 23 February 1939. 3. Cleland, “Report of the Sub-committee on Degrees for Work Done in the Division of Extension,”

21 December 1946, John Badeau Papers, American University in Cairo Archives (AUCA), Cairo, Egypt. 4. “A Project to Establish a Social Science Research Center,”l3 January 1951, AUCA. 5 . Cleland to Charles R. Watson, 20 February 1946, AUCA. 6. “A Project to Establish a Social Studies Research Center,” 28 May 1952; Paul Hoffman, Director,

The Ford Foundation, to Badeau, 16 October 1952; and Badeau to Hoffman, 3 November 1952, AUCA. Egyptian Gazette, 22 February 1953. 7. “Social Research Center - First Year Program,” (1953). and Minutes, AUC Council, 9 June

1953, AUCA. 8. Farank Dorey, “Pro osal for the Development of a Near East Social Research Program,” n.d., attached

to Dorey to Cleland, 21 kovember 1953; Kenneth Iverson to Cleland, 24 November1953;“Social Research Center” (November 1953); Cleland to Ward Madison, 29 May 1954; Madison to Iverson, 17 November 1954, reporting a resolution to the board of trustees, 13 November 1954; and Joseph M. McDaniel Jr. to Douglas Horton, 1 February 1955, AUCA. 9. AUC, The Chronicle (Philadelphia, Fall 1954).

126 L A W R E N C E R . M U R P H Y

10. “SRC Project Summary,’’ 1 April 1956; Laila Shukry El-Hamamsy, “Ten Year Report of the Activities of the Social Research Center”; Minutes, S R C Administrative Committee, 17 December 1954, 28 March, 9 November 1955, 23 November 1955, 4 April 1956, 15 May 1958; “Social Research Center Projects, 1953/54,” all in the Social Research Center Archives (SRCA). Cairo. The author also benefited from lengthy interviews with Dr. El-Hammamsy and Dr. Saad Gadalla, Cairo, in May 1973 and June 1974. I I . El-Hamamsy, “Ten Year Report,” pp. 2-3. 12. Edward W. Weidner, “The Professor Abroad: Twenty Years of Change,” The Annals of the American Academy of Polirical and Social Science 368 (November 1966): 65-67; P. E. Temu, “Reflections on the Role of Social Scientists in Africa,” International Social Science Journal 27, no. 1 (1975): 191. 13. Minutes, S R C Administrative Committee, 21 December 1955, SRCA. 14. Hassan Hussein to Provinse, I August 1957; Provinse to Hussein and Raymond F. McLain, 5 August 1957, AUCA. 15. Provinse to McLain, 12 October 1956, AUCA. 16. Alan W. Horton to “All S R C Personnel,” 24 September 1957, AUCA. 17. Interviews with El-Hamamsy and Gadalla, May 1973 and June 1974. 18. “List of Publications from Work Undertaken in the Social Research Center,” 7 November 1971, SRCA. 19. Harry B. Ellis, Challenge in the Middle East (New York: Ronald Press, 1960), pp. 57-58. 20. Minutes, S R C Administrative Committee, 2 March 1960, 3 April, 29 October 1961, 11 January, 15 February 1962, I May, 10 October 1963; “Social Research Center Work (1961-2),” p. 2-3, SRCA. 21. “Statement of Purpose and Organization of the ‘Ethnological Survey of Nubia,’” n.d., SRCA. Elizabeth Warnock Fernea, A View of the Nile (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1970), pp. 114-115. 22. Minutes, S R C Administrataive Committee, 2 March 1960; 5 February 1963, 15 February 1963; “Social Research Center Work (1961-2),” SRCA. The author also benefited from an extended interview with Fernea, Austin, Texas, October 1973. 23. Robert A. Fernea and John G. Kennedy, “Initial Adaptation to Resettlement: A New Life for Egyptian Nubians,” Current Anthropology, 7 (June 1966): 349-354. Fernea interview. 24. “Statement of Purpose and Organization,” SRCA. Fernea interview. 25. [Fernea], “Request for a Terminal Grant”; and El-Hamamsy, “Activities Report and Financial Statement on the Nubian Project Supplementary Grant. Final Report,” 8 April 1968, SRCA. 26. “Statement of Purpose and Organization,” SRCA; Interview with Fernea; E. Fernea, View of the Nile, pp. 106 ff; Robert A. Fernea, “The Ethnological Survey of Egyptian Nubia,” Current Anthropology, 4 (February 1963): 122-123. 27. El-Hamamsy, “Activities Report,” SRCA. AUC, The Chronicle (New York), Spring 1964.

28. Robert A. Fernea, ed., Contemporary Egyptian Nubia: A Symposium of the Social Research Center, American University in Cairo, 2 vols. (New Haven: Human Relations Area Files, Inc., 1966). 29. Fernea and Kennedy, “Initial Adaptation.” “Mushahara: A Nubian Concept of Supernatural Danger and the Theory of Taboo,” American Anthropologist, 69 (December 1967): 686-702. “Circumcision and Excision in Egyptian Nubia,” Man, 5 (June 1970): 171-191; “Nubian Zar Ceremonies as Psychotherapy,” Human Organization 26 (1967): 185-194. 30. “Some Differential Factors Affecting Population Movements: The Nubian Case,” Human Organization 26, no. 3 (February 1967): 164-177. 31. S. R. C. Bulletin, April 1972, p. 1. 32. Minutes, S R C Administrative Committee, 7 October, 23 November 1964, 16 February 1965, SRCA. 33. “A Proposed Research Program in Demography and Family Planning” SRCA. 34. “Report of Activities, 1966-67,” SRCA. Interviews by the author with Drs. Gadalla and El-Hamamsy. 35. “Report of Activities, 1966-67,” SRCA. 36. Ibid.; Gadalla interview by the author. 37. “Social Welfare in Family Planning. Progress Report,” October 1969, SRCA. James T. Ivy, “The Ford Foundation in the United Arab Republic,” April 1971, description of Grant 680-847, provided the author by the Ford Foundation. “Research Pro;osal. Population and Family Planning Research in the Middle East,” March 1971, SRCA. 38. 39. “Social Welfare and Family Planning. Progress Report, March-November 1966”; “Report of Activities, 1966-1967,” pp. 2-6, SRCA.

“Social Welfare and Family Planning. Progress Report,” October 1969, SRCA.


40. “Social Welfare and Family Planning. Progress Report, October 1969,” SRCA. 41. “Progress Report. Population and Family Planning Research in the Middle East,” May 1972, SRCA. 42. Ibid. 43. Caravan (Cairo), 27 May 1974, p. 4. Chronicle of Higher Education. 10 February 1975, p. 12. 44. For a discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of such centralized research, largely oriented toward the United States, see Paul F. Lazarsfeld, Qualitative Analysis: Historical and Critical Essays (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1972), pp. 332-337. 45. 46. Social Problems 23, no. 3 (February 1976): 325 ff.

Temu, “Social Scientists in Africa,” p. 190. Robert S. Broadhead and Ray C. Rist, “Gatekeepers and the Social Control of Social Research,”

Documents

Social science research in the middle east: The American University in Cairo, Egypt