Vi PREFACE 



The body of this report consists of a somewhat detailed account of 

 the activities of the Ethnogeographic Board. No attempt has been 

 made to follow a chronological order, except when sequence is needed 

 to explain some action, or to illustrate speed. The approach is frankly 

 topical and, after each topic is described, an analysis and evaluation 

 is added. Were the techniques and accomplishments effective or inef- 

 fective? What techniques were not employed and why? Such a de- 

 tailed presentation is justified on the grounds that the actual actions of 

 the Board form the documentation on which this study is based. If 

 minimized, the report becomes little more than the personal reflections 

 and prejudices of its author. 



An over-all appraisal follows the topical description. The service 

 and research features, as well as some of the specific techniques and 

 materials, are reviewed in the light of their general usefulness for 

 future emergencies and for other than wartime situations. For ex- 

 ample, dinner conferences, problem conferences, liaison officers, sur- 

 veys, and interviews are all techniques which have wide application. 

 Likewise, certain materials such as the /^rea Roster, the area bibliogra- 

 phies, the survival library, and the area reports might be worth while 

 preserving and elaborating. 



The Board is more than an illustration of an emergency service or- 

 ganization. For example, it was also a joint committee of the three 

 Councils, cooperating, in this case, with the Smithsonian Institution. 

 Implicit in this review is, then, an evaluation of the effectiveness of 

 joint committees. The Ethnogeographic Board was characterized, as 

 its name implies, by the area approach. Since area versus discipline is 

 a question of considerable interest, it seems worth while to emphasize 

 the area techniques and materials assembled by the Board. 



Finally, the future, both immediate and distant, must be faced. This 

 can be treated in three ways. First, the experience of this Board 

 should serve as a basis for determining the nature and function of a 

 similar organization in the next emergency. Second, the efforts of the 

 Board to supply needed information to the Government war agencies 

 pointed up many lacunae in area materials, organized knowledge, and 

 trained personnel. These demand serious consideration by both aca- 

 demic institutions and Government agencies. Third, the usefulness of 

 an organization similar to this one in the immediate postwar period 

 merits discussion. Insofar as suggestions about the future are derived 

 from this analysis, they are placed in the final chapters. Other sug- 

 gestions, formulated independently by the author, have been submitted 

 directly to the Board and the Sponsors. 



