1) We do work on Central Asia because we want a deeper understanding of the social, environmental, political, cultural realities of the region. We are interested here in the deep context, the so-called webs of meaning, that are easily overlooked or ignored. This work is usually decidedly un-positivistic; there are rarely distinct dependent, independent or control variables and we are uninterested in generalizeability. Work like this often, but not always, is done to advocate for something (e.g. to “spread awareness”). Applying the “journalism” label to work in this category should not be considered derogatory.

2) We do work on Central Asia to develop and test general theories. These theories should be able to be applied to other regions, so deep context is downplayed. This work is, by its nature, positivisitic; there are distinct dependent, independent, and control variables. This type of work should rarely, if ever, be used to advocate for anything directly (although indirect utilization is the dream of us all). Applying the “journalism” label
to work in this category should be considered derogatory.

It seems that Michael’s article fits squarely in category 1. While it is probably not the definitive piece on the topic, he never claims it to be as such. But it was very readable piece on an issue that is not widely discussed in English language sources. And posting it on this blog certainly helps the author to raise awareness, which was his stated attention. So it was a success.

Oldschool boy’s comments, however, suggest that he wishes the paper were in the second category. I am sympathetic to this wish (if not the tone of the postings); but that is due to my bias as a social scientist. I, personally, would be insulted if someone called my work “a fine piece of journalism.” But this has more to do with my intentions than in the inherent qualities of journalism. Afterall, even the most hardcore positivist Econometrician will rely on journalistic reports to produce her dataset.

So Michael, keep posting your work. It is valuable and interesting…even if it doesn’t have a decision tree or equations.

I can’t [and wouldn't] physically stop OldSchool Boy from commenting, but I can ask him to refrain in the same air as “if you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all.” In any event, he still had the last word, impugning my manhood, which is comical and a fine climax to the nature of his comments.

I guess my skin isn’t as thick as it used to be. I think it stems more from the fact that this wasn’t just a blog post, but a paper that saw many, many drafts, and something I really labored over. Also, using the word “journalist” as an insult is kind of nasty, especially since I respect journalism and think it also has a lot to offer in the area. In any event, I hope to keep posting now that midterms are coming to an end and I can hopefully find a spare moment.

The Balkhash Forum you refer to was a part of my research, and from what I have seen, it is an ineffectual joke. If we leave the preservation of Balkhash up to such forums and the government, then you can kiss the lake goodbye already.

Again, at this point, I would prefer that you not comment on my articles anymore. They are not welcome if you are going to be so disrespectful without adding anything. You are coming close to being a blog “troll,” in my opinion.

I did not criticize your paper, I just pointed out for you criteria against which you should assess worthiness of your work.
If you disagree with me that the points I mentioned are feasible, then say so. Do not take defensive position.
By the way, people who you have referred to as “mythical” in fact exist. You do not seriously think that someone who grew up in the region can not get a degree in hydrology or environmental science and does not read newspapers and can not understand English.
By saying that academics in US do NOT know about one of the biggest environmental problems in Central Asia – you yourself “hold US academia to be worthless and below respect”, you reinforce this approach even further by presenting them with a paper that lacks statistics, figures and authentic research. The standard I proposed to you is indeed very high, but that is the standard of true scientist. and you said “I think that getting a Masters Degree will help me understand more about the region.” — i strongly disagree with this idea. you should be awarded a Master’s degree based on your already acquired profound understanding about the region. with the level of knowledge and facts presented in your paper one might think you are pursuing a degree in journalism.
“You might think that it’s a pathetic waste of time to go to a conference and present a paper to ‘people that can’t do anything” —> this is exactly what I think.
By the way, do you know what Chinese comrades think about the issue? Do you think they do not care at all? in 2001 , September Kazakhstan – China and Kazakhstan signed a bilateral agreement on cooperation in environmental issues concerning Ili- Balkhash area. Every year concerned international scholars gather for a Forum “Balkhash” – organized annually since 2004.
Basically, contents of your paper is commonly known facts for ecologists, it may be good for popular magazine (since it lacks numbers and facts) if you add some more pictures and “interesting facts”. It may be good for raising “awareness”.
The thing with the Internet is that you do not know who your audience can be.

With regards to Oldschoolboy’s criticism, I should think it would be clear to anyone that any expert does not possess a full knowledge of the subject. Therefore, all benefit when they share their knowledge, however little it might be.

I also think that it is strange in this day and age to question the value of education or feel the need to defend one’s choice to better educate oneself.

Michael, look forward to your next articles. By the way, what does it mean to latinize an alphabet? Did they add latin letters to the cyrillic alphabet they were using?

You make some very large assumptions about my target audience, most of which are wrong. Apparently I should write for the mythical person that: A)grew up in the region, B)has a degree in hydrology or environmental science, and C) knows about the problem because it has been in newspapers and magazines and school courses.

Since I wrote in English, my main target audience is decidedly NOT people that grew up in the region, but academics in the US, who are NOT familiar with the region, and who have NOT heard about the problem in any newspapers you’ll find here, let alone school courses. The standard you’re holding me to is ridiculous.

I understand that you hold academia to be worthless and below respect, and that’s fine. However, I think that getting a Masters Degree will help me understand more about the region. You might think that it’s a pathetic waste of time to go to a conference and present a paper to ‘people that can’t do anything,’ but I don’t know what you would prefer. Where do people actually ‘do something?’ In Kazakhstan? At USAID or Soros?

This was not a paper written for this blog, but a paper I wrote that might be of interest to readers of this blog.

The main issue is that we need to raise awareness about Balkhash outside of Kazakhstan since, as my paper states, it is not “up to Kazakhstan” to decide whether or not Balkhash remains, but rather a decision for China. And China should not care if a ‘minor lake’ disappears. However, more foreign attention on the matter might add the pressure necessary to realize how important Balkhash is to Kazakhstan.

And I think my paper makes an important point that most articles on Balkhash miss – that Kazakhstan is almost powerless in this situation, considering how much water in the region is flowing downstream from China, who is hoping to utilize more of that water for itself. A similar problem lies in wait in Afghanistan, should it rise out of civil/social instability, and start taking more than a pittance out of the Amu Darya, as is its right.

In short, I prefer constructive criticism to comments along the lines of “your paper is a waste of my time.” Your patronizing attempts to ‘help’ are thinly veiled efforts to let me know that I’m a complete failure for attempting to move through Academia. I’d rather you didn’t make comments on my writing, thank you, if that’s all you’re going to say.

In other words if I grew up in the region, have a degree in hydrology or environmental science and know about the problem because it has been in newspapers and magazines and school courses, will it still be worthwhile for me to read your paper or listen to your presentation?
If you can answer honestly and positively to at least one of the above 4 questions, then you can pat yourself on the shoulder. Otherwise it will be just another school-paper-level article just for the sake of presenting on a conference for people who do not know anything about the issue and just can do nothing to change the situation.