Cited by 28Anthropological Studies and InsightsHerbal Medicine and Trade CooperationAfrican Studies and Ethnography

"Good" Manufacturing by Whose Standards? Remaking Concepts of Quality, Safety, and Value in the Production of Tibetan Medicines

Craig, Sienna R.·2011·Anthropological Quarterly

Abstract

This essay analyzes the impacts of global and national pharmaceutical governance on the production of traditional medicines—specifically the making and marketing of Tibetan medicines in contemporary China. Based on research conducted in Tibetan medical factories and with practitioners, producers, and consumers of Tibetan medicines in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) and Qinghai Province between 2002–2010, this article presents ethnographic evidence for the ways Tibetan knowledge systems and the value of medicines themselves are being transformed through interlinked engagements with science, technology, and the market. I focus on the implementation of Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) and related regulations: state-mandated standards that govern the conditions under which raw materials are evaluated, medicines are made, and finished products are sold. This article responds to calls for an anthropology of pharmaceutical practice in the context of social transformation. I propose that ethnography of Tibetan pharmaceutical production provides an apt illustration of global governance in action because it shows how shifts in medical production practices are tied to much larger processes of political and economic change within China and beyond. Further, my examination of points of incommensurability and ambivalence with respect to GMP regulations contributes to an anthropological analysis of the constitutive role cultural politics plays in the construction of value and meaning with respect to traditional medicine.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1353/anq.2011.0027

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • GPP-certified medicines should be used only within the hospital and must be prescribed to in- and out-patients with a valid prescription; they are produced locally in relation to clinical need and large-scale production is not allowed; in contrast, profit-oriented pharmaceutical companies produce Tibetan medicines for mass-consumption and a wider market based on GMP.

    “Tsering, a pharmacist in his forties from the hospital, explained that GPP-certified medicines should be used only within the hospital and must be prescribed to in- and out-patients with a valid prescription. GPP-certified medicines are produced locally in relation to the clinical need at a hospital, and thus large-scale production is not allowed. In contrast, profit-oriented pharmaceutical comp”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Craig, S. R.
Corresponding author
Craig, Sienna R.
Venue
Anthropological Quarterly
Publisher
Project MUSE
Published
2011-03
Volume
84
Issue
2
Pages
331-378
ISSN
  • 0003-5491 (ISSN-L)
  • 1534-1518
OpenAlex
W2109895605
Cited by
28
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2015: 8 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
5.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Anthropological Quarterly (publishedVersion)
  • Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Anthropological Studies and Insights
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Herbal Medicine and Trade Cooperation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › African Studies and Ethnography
Keywords
Tibetan medicine, traditional medicine, good manufacturing practices, drug regulation, pharmaceutical governance, quality standards, cultural politics, value of medicines, globalization of medicine, Tibet, Qinghai, traditional knowledge

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review