A Model for an Anthropological Economy: Beyond the Universal and the Particular

A dissertation submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Master of Arts in the Faculty of Humanities

2010

Alexander Parkinson School of Social Sciences

Introducing the Eye of Providence Economic Model ........................................................................................... 7 Bridging the Intellectual Divide? ......................................................................................................................... 12 Why the Great Transformation Today? ............................................................................................................... 7 Outlining the Eye of Providence Methodology .................................................................................................. 8 Dialectical Interconnectivity of Components ................................................................................................. 11

Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................... 5

List of Contents

Theorising with the Eye of Providence Model ..................................................................................................... 14 Political Economy ...................................................................................................................................................... 14 An Interpretative Theory of Value...................................................................................................................... 18

Wall Street in an Anthropological Economy ....................................................................................................... 23

Migrant Remittances in an Anthropological Economy ................................................................................... 34 Remittances and the Eye of Providence Model............................................................................................... 41 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................................................... 49 What the Economists Say… ................................................................................................................................... 34

Articulations of Value Realms ..........................................................................................................................45 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................47

Transnational Dynamics of Remittances .....................................................................................................42

Remittances and Macroeconomics .................................................................................................................37

Remittances and Microeconomics ..................................................................................................................35

Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................33

Masters of a Symbolic Universe of Value .....................................................................................................30

The Politics of Shareholder Value in a Finance-led Economy .............................................................27

The Economy, The Whitehouse, Wall Street, and High Financiers ...................................................23

The Values of Price ................................................................................................................................................21

The Problem of “Economic” Value ..................................................................................................................19

Local Expressions, Global Forces, and Elite Interests ............................................................................15

Word count: 17,594

The Eye of Providence model…………………………………………………………………………………………………10

List of Diagrams

1

This paper critiques the privileged place of economic expertise in contemporary society and introduces the Eye of Providence model - intended for economic anthropology - that directly engages and challenges knowledge from the discipline of economics. The formal and substantive elements of the economy are situated in dialectically embedded relationships with individuals, institutions, and ruling powers. I exemplify how an anthropological approach to value is useful when highlighting the limits of economic knowledge. This is achieved theoretically by blending ideas from political economy with perspectives from interpretive or symbolic anthropology. The result is an approach that, on the one hand, pays careful attention to wider systems of power, such as those embodied by the term “neoliberalism”, and how these articulate with local political contexts. On the other hand, it uses the concept of value or values to probe the social, political, and cultural dynamics of economic value and to interpret meaningfully how values shape economic action from the perspective of economic actors.

ABSTRACT

The model is tested comparatively, firstly with financiers that operate in a formally instituted market environment but that are shown to also function through institutionalised culture and forces of political power. Secondly, it is tested on the case of remittance makers that operate more informally through gift exchanges with their kin. This allows me to contrast the place of economic expertise in a market environment – familiar ground for economists – with a context that does not sit so comfortably with its methods. I argue for a more humanistic approach to the economy and highlight specific points of collaboration with economics. I also emphasise that anthropologists should pay more attention to the processes through which economics ideologically represents the world, rather than channelling efforts into disproving the universality of economic models.

2

No portion of the work referred to in the dissertation has been submitted in support of institute of learning. COPYRIGHT STATEMENT

an application for another degree or qualification of this or any other university or other

i. Copyright in text of this dissertation rests with the author. Copies (by any process) the author. Details may be obtained from the appropriate Graduate Office. This page in accordance with such instructions may not be made without the permission (in writing) of the author.

either in full, or of extracts, may be made only in accordance with instructions given by

must form part of any such copies made. Further copies (by any process) of copies made ii. The ownership of any intellectual property rights which may be described in this agreement.

dissertation is vested in the University of Manchester, subject to any prior agreement to permission of the University, which will prescribe the terms and conditions of any such take place is available from the Head of the School of Social Sciences.

the contrary, and may not be made available for use by third parties without the written iii. Further information on the conditions under which disclosures and exploitation may

3

The Author
I obtained a Bachelor of Arts with First Class Honours in Corporate Communication from Manchester Metropolitan University in 2006. This included two years of study at Indiana-Purdue University Fort Wayne.

In September 2009, I embarked on the Master of Arts (taught) in Social Anthropology at Manchester University and began specialising in economic anthropology over the summer of 2010. With special thanks to Karen Sykes, Mia, David, Jarle, Irene, and Jennifer.

I worked as a stockbroker and investment manager in Manchester, UK, from 2006 to 2009, obtaining the Certificate in Investment Securities in 2007 and the Certificate in Investment Management in 2008 from the Securities and Investment Institute.

For Mr Alan Cave…

4

and hopefully questions about the value of knowledge meet questions about value more generally. emphasise.sciences is all too well known in anthropology. Council (2009) granted less than one-fifth of the number of research awards to social The astounding dominance of the discipline of economics over the other social Introduction understanding of contemporary economic life? In what ways can it engage constructively with economics. An influence and constitute our economic lives. the value of anthropological expertise. by arguing for the theoretical guidance for the subdiscipline of economic anthropology. 64). p. what is “good”. in doing so. I introduce what I shall refer to as the Eye of Providence economic model that offers methodological and What is at stake in answering these questions is an anthropology of value that regarding the discipline’s own brand of knowledge. in my view. I will present a critique of the high value placed on economic expertise in contemporary Western society and. which as a matter of no coincidence. Indeed. also includes judgements made certain interests are served by value structures that pattern such judgements. I reveal how anthropology of value can mark out the limitations of economic expertise – embedded ideologically in our social knowledge and practice – by negotiating those areas of life that currently fall outside of the rubric of the discipline of economics but nonetheless 5 . “the economy”? How might an anthropological perspective enable a greater overcomes the current rule of economics as the queen of those social sciences that judge importance of understanding dimensions of power in relation to value. for anthropologists and for us all. It is here that In this thesis. enhance. The Economic and Social Research anthropology than it did to economics in 2009 and it received just over a quarter of the described as “intellectual imperialism” and in order to problematize the current status this paper asks what are the implications of privileging one form of knowledge over another? What is economic expertise? In what ways and in which places can we study number of applications (p. To this end. not only to challenge the axioms upon which the these are among the big questions of today. 33). discipline rests but to provide new insights that connect with its understandings? Given the centrality of economic thought in modern social and political spheres. In response to the trend that William Milberg (2009) has that economists occupy as “the high priests of our [Western] culture” (Wilk 1996.

I believe that we must go beyond simply arguing that the world everywhere is different and that universal principles do not hold up in reality. the second The opening section outlines the methodological areas of the Eye of Providence Thus. however. In the space between economic representation and economic reality lies a distinct opportunity for anthropological analyses to highlight social. I hope to engage it directly to highlight potential areas of It became apparent to me while developing the overall framework – of method part considers how the model relates to political economy and interpretative approaches to the anthropology of value. perspectives are the only ones compatible with my model. institutions. I argue that anthropology should focus on the ways in which economics political dynamics that can draw the two disciplines closer together. and ruling powers. cultural. In addition to this. I do not suggest that these two theoretical this paper. it also enables me to contrast the nature and place of economic expertise vis-à-vis anthropological expertise. they should be considered part and parcel of the conceptual apparatus. The final people live economic lives in spaces of divergent degrees of (in)formality. methodological. Hence. which situates the economy – as a set of both ideas and functionings – in relation and epistemological – in a more concrete fashion and across two very different contexts. To add theoretical direction. (mis)represents the world and should vie for a more humanistic intellectual perspective on the economy. connection between economic knowledge and anthropological knowledge. and to individuals. Rather than merely refuting economic expertise. blend of prescriptions for an anthropological economy – theoretical.and of theory – that I should avoid reiterating the conceptual dichotomy of the “universal” and the “particular” that seems to echo through so many connected debates. This comparative analysis not only shows anthropologically how undertaken by remittance-makers to contrast economists’ understandings with that of workers to reveal the influence of culture in a formally instituted environment. for the purposes of The remainder of the paper endeavours to emphasise the importance of this specific importantly. model. the third section reinterprets ethnographic research conducted with finance part investigates the less-instituted practices of international money transfers anthropologists. as well as the place and role of money in each social 6 . More setting.

natural social evolution. Keynesian dominance of the U. particularly with tracing how the former became central to the latter and emphasising the destructive social consequences that ensue when self-regulating markets form the bases of societies. I conflate the terms “market”. Hann and Hart (2009) have similar concerns today. with the global spread of neoliberal ideology since the 1980s. as an economic superpower. 3). 7 . consequently. 3 Although it has been argued that “embeddedness” is not one of Polanyi’s main concepts and that it was actually transformed by sociologists into the mainstream of the discipline (Beckert 2009).S. He was not opposed to the Importantly. “finance”. In structuring my model. it is the rethinking of Polanyi’s ideas that I am concerned with here. characterising unrestrained markets as “engines of inequality” and arguing that the “notion of markets as a natural force beyond social regulation serves also to society. “institutions”. 3 legitimize [sic] wealth and even to make poverty seem deserved” (p. a situation I take “the market” to be both an economic idea and a functioning of the economy. contradicting common belief. Certainly. rather than tracing a genealogy of ideas. There are 1 has arisen that Polanyi did not envisage when writing in the 1940s but that has and socialist forms of economic management were dislodged. enabled through market expansion (Hart 2000). he showed that this was achieved through political power rather than The inspiration for my model initially came from Hann and Harts’ (2009) Why the Great Transformation Today? when the market principle reigns supreme. 2 In the model. However. I hope to show that Gudeman’s (2009a) concept of dialectical embeddedness is useful when understanding contemporary economies. Polanyi was principally concerned with the relationship between the market and society. I have largely drawn on the idea of the interplay between the market 1 and economic practices. his fears may have been quelled with the rise to Polanyi believed that the market fundamentalism to which he was opposed utilisation of markets to allocate goods and services from a more marginal position in society but to the dominant position that self-regulated markets can come to occupy would ultimately lead to a political reaction and a withdrawal to more socially sensitive perpetuated by market fundamentalists epitomised by Reagan and Thatcher. I have split society into “individuals”.Introducing the Eye of Providence Economic Model rethinking of Polanyi in a contemporary context. and “economy” throughout the paper. nonetheless imbued his ideas with a new resurgence (Hann & Hart 2009). and “ruling powers”. 2 as well as Polanyi’s notion of embeddedness.

has within its triangular enclosure a Outlining the Eye of Providence Methodology 4 I use the term “economic life” to incorporate the perspectives of production. 38-41). 12). I hope to still set out specific research objectives. globalisation. p.parallels between Polanyi’s description of European societies during The Great Transformation and the current revival of self-regulating markets through neoliberal this resurgent wave of Polanyian (re)thinking. 72-74). and investigate further “whether or not capitalist economy rests on human principles of universal validity” (p. and consumption. distribution. as the market is once again considered vital to the functioning of society (Servet 2009. pp. too. as well as some general questions to be explored. The model. as economics became “the ideological and economy with humans has been left for other social scientists to pursue. However. With the focus on market relations. My work is not based on research experience and is thus restricted by the component for “economy” that encompasses both economic “ideas” per se and the actual “functionings” of an economy that occur out there in the world. for instance. pp. 8 . Anthropologists. The editors (2009) call for global economic analysis in order to assess the world economy – in whole and by part – conceptual groundwork for this type of study by offering a model for economic walls of a library-based study. Yet people per se do not feature in their calculations. it certainly seems that a Hann and Hart (2009) argue that the discipline of economics has mainly concerned itself with individuals assumed to be economic decision-makers and market participants. exchange. The remainder of this section and the one that follows lay the more anthropologists to directly challenge economists at their own game of national and anthropology. The baton was the perceived rise in the importance of understanding economic concerns in relation to partly carried by sociologists whose interest was invigorated from the late 1970s due to practical arm of global capitalism” (Hann & Hart 2009. the idea of an quest for a better understanding of contemporary economic life 4 should begin by riding social integration (Beckert 2009. have felt obligated to address the main views of economists. The world of ideas. 13). as outlined in figure 1 below. would consist of neoclassic theories ranging from hypotheses of efficient markets to notions of individual rationality but also more socially sensitive concepts. hence.

such as that on the London Stock Exchange. which is perhaps more loosely enacted through the market principle The top point of the model – the pyramid’s tip – represents the “ruling powers” than through a physical marketplace. They would. market. 6 & 15).such as the domestic moral economy.S. Given that the all-seeing eye can be state may intervene but it acts only in the divine name of a Capitalist Democratic metaphor of “the eye”. The physical functionings are the substance of the marketplace. The component of the model that points to “institutions” and their “knowledges” and “practices” does rethinking that I have outlined above. pp. that the economy. the point of the model that incorporates “individuals” and their “thoughts” and represent the fundamental perspectives from which I believe social scientists should try its structure resembles the symbol of the Eye of Providence. which is probably most words “Annuit Coeptis” – God favours our undertakings – placed above it. for example. these four main elements of the framework Finally. has become so important to modern Economy. together.S. Therefore. it is rather fitting with a central tenet capitalist societies that we can think of this Great Transformation as an apotheosis. area to illustrate the dialectical embeddedness (discussed below) with the other housing market”. I have situated the economy within this enclosed and their “rulings” and “interests”. “actions” highlights the importance of considering peoples’ economic agency and the agendas to protect the economy from inflation through monetary policy. namely. one dollar bill and that has the I have named my economic model the “Eye of Providence” for two reasons. for instance. such as the household or family. I use it interchangeably with “the economy” in order to interpreted as God watching over all of humanity. my second motive for labelling my model this way is to invoke the 9 . In accordance to the Polanyian to understand economic life. Firstly. these signs are said to refer to the many divine interventions for the American cause (U. as well as activity in “the components at each of the three points of the triangle. It may. Department of State 2003. or the eye. The of this paper. Taken ubiquitously represented on the Great Seal of the U. consist of the actual buying and selling that occurs in a institutions themselves but also includes institutions. reflect modern capitalist state not simply signify economic phenomena relating to organisations or to economic meaning that they attach to their economic lives.

** All connections are dialectical. correspondingly. the associated ideas and functionings. Remittances. *** “Economic ideas” discussed in this essay are mapped onto the sub-component box in 10 . and the power emanating from.emphasise the piety towards. Market economy. Figure 1 – The Eye of Providence Economic Model: * Rulings Monetary policy De-regulation Confer chiefly title Force state governments to act Ruling Power Interests Control inflation Reduce trade barriers Increase chiefly power Encourage investment of remittances Economy ** *** Functionings Capitalist transactions Banking deals Cycling gift system Total remittances Ideas A market economy Marketplace Domestic Moral Economy Remittance phenomenon Institutions Practices IMF policy pressure Raise capital Serve chief and kin Remit to kin Individuals Knowledges Economic reports Analyst reports Services rendered Kinship ties Actions Sell labour Buy stock Share food with kin Migrate and remit Thoughts Accumulate money Make a profit Value sharing Value family * The borders on each component are intentionally dashed to emphasise the crossover the following order: 1. Domestic Moral Economy. 3. I have ordered the examples in every sub-component box of the model between the concepts. Marketplace. 2. 4.

Even the New Institutional Economists overlook the a priori relationships that constitute actors. it must be made plausible by a second-order process of legitimisation. Society is an objective reality. Gudeman (2009a) argues for a dialectical approach to society and the market as both embedded and disembedded and considers the two different economic base of shared interests and holdings of people who are themselves products have become submerged in the market. 28 & 29). but it is also undermined by the very market tension” (p. pp. This is productivity (Gudeman 2009a. perceiving relationship between the parts. 32-34). My model supports the illumination of such depict the social order as an ongoing human production where action becomes model is characterised by dialectical mutual constitution. for which Berger and Luckman (1966) identify 11 (pp. On the one hand. people are only connected through market trade by alienating and impersonal contracts. On the other.any embeddedness as a flaw to the ideal functioning of the economy. Man is a social product” (p. 79). even those that exemplified when companies mystify downsizing by presenting themselves as dynamics. Berger and Luckman (1966) We could posit further that the relationship between all four elements of the patterned and the patterning eventually becomes habitually typified into institutions product. industrial society. despite the rhetoric of increased practices and models that it supports. Neoclassic economists would happily leave things there. Once this first- order of social institutionalisation has been established. 37). I now depict the Dialectical Interconnectivity of Components value realms that surround each. This world is then objective and antecedent to individuals. Having outlined the main components of the framework. while the downsizing itself undermines mutuality and holds wages down. communities to the employees on which they depend. Mutuality is essential to the existence of all economies. Gudeman (2009a) argues that this “division is a continuing dialectic in all economies. there is a mutual of others within the base. 69-78). where it assumes different historical forms and degrees of pp. as the product acts back upon the producers in a dialectical relationship whereby: “Society is a human . while this dependency link is itself erased. To rectify this. Polanyi emphasises how the economy became disembedded from existing social relations as the Western world made the transition to despite observing the emergence and form of economic institutions (Gudeman 2009a.

I do not revisit the formalist-substantivist debate but invoke it only to demonstrate the model’s capacity to draw together these divergent views. one could say that these are: incipient transmission of a vocabulary of selfinterest. which he claims made the perspectives mutually exclusive. 1-13). such as economics. a great intellectual split can be discerned when Bridging the Intellectual Divide? assumes the universality of the individual and the latter implies the particularity of each The roots of the intellectual dichotomy at the heart of the formalist-substantivist particular divide back respectively to the individual contract posited by Spencer and the social contextualisation of Durkheim. and finally. 110-122). the symbolic universe that amalgamates discrete provinces of meaning and encompasses the institutional four distinct and ascending levels (pp. The divide was perhaps most pronounced when it manifested as the opposing force between the two schools of thought that comprised As I alluded to in the introduction. Thus. while the social context. the methodology of the former view debate run much deeper and farther back. such as “you have to think of yourself in business”. considered to be rational self-interested maximizers. This leaves me with one caveat and one saw a “world of ideas” and those who tried to understand things “as they are” date back divide is more of an intellectual continuum than a dichotomous split and that there are tendency that Malinowski identified in the Trobrianders against the social and historical 12 . Carrier (2009a) traces the universalpoint. at the highest level. basic theoretical lifts all boats”. Reinterpreted for a neoliberal capitalist “The Great Debate”.economy. Wilk with individuals. I assume that in reality the truths in either view that are worth exploring. I can now explore this a little further. such as the economic proverb “a rising tide knowledge. explicit theories of an institutional sector with a separate stock of order. (1996) believes that the debate’s disengagement derives from each party’s starting substantivists start at the level of societies. Having outlined my model. propositions that explain sets of meanings. Disputes between those that even to the time of Plato and Aristotle (Blavatsky 1939). The divide continued to the primitive acquisitive context of self-interest that Mauss argued for (pp. such as a universe of “value”. The formalists begin considering the history of economic anthropology. 20-22). the institutions of which they say act as structures for economic life (pp.

Indeed.challenge. these prescriptions. I must avoid the pitfalls of adhering too strongly to either perspective. to productively reconcile this age-old epistemological separation. Firstly. by positing that “everything is like this” or that “everything is different”. Secondly. namely. I should aspire. where possible. my model is designed to encourage adherence to 13 .

71). I have chosen to invoke political economy and interpretive approaches to value. (2009) criticism of Polanyi vis-à-vis the Durkheimians for not attending to the emphasising a Durkheimian functional approach. of representation and reality. in developing an anthropological theory of economy”. rather than say stress on “[a] more accurate study of the interplay between economic thought. Steiner’s (2009) framework of my model (p. Although it does include some theoretical discussion. and for endorsing rather than challenging its economic assumptions (pp. I have opted for a view of political economy. 83). and “institutions”. as outlined so far. which is powerfully employed to extend the market. is more methodological Theorising with the Eye of Providence Model theoretical apparatus of political economy lends itself to studies of the “ruling powers” generally differ with respect to their orientations to society and to the individual. direct our way. are not open up the economic realm in a unified fashion. value. p. assuming market mentality to be obsolete. allowing me to interweave the theoretical analysis and investigation that constitute the final parts of my model and that I will later apply to the At the societal level. We also need a theoretical compass to which are key themes from Hann and Harts’ (2009) edited volume. because they particular. Navigating through the notions of the universal and the will take more than conceptual cartography. such as the use of 14 . Indeed. 68-71). I now introduce the two lines of cases of finance workers and remittance makers. though. his discussion of the importance of the teaching of economics. This may seem at odds with Steiner’s Political Economy institutions. As I mentioned at the outset. These complementary perspectives. The exclusive to the stated domains. whereas interpretative value theory is generally more applicable to the element for “individuals”. Moreover. and on how economic knowledge is embodied by market tools and apparatus. it is necessary to further elaborate the theoretical account in line with The Eye of Providence economic model. such as dialectics and embeddedness.in that it highlights four conceptual areas where researchers might examine “the the aspirations of the paper. and of anthropological and economic expertise. to allow for a political slant when connecting with economics (Wilk 1996. and the economy” does seem to superimpose comfortably onto the functioning of the market.

Nevertheless. In a political economic milieu where the heavily indebted government. 68-71). since it essentially represents a local expression of global and national forces. pp. Local Expressions. activists had to appeal to the commercial advantages of protecting the vital if we wish to comprehend the latter. and practices (pp. owing to the International Monetary Fund (IMF). as money itself becomes the we must attend to economic beliefs. the market reach was largely realised as park management eventually became reduced to the financial bottom line and a good coastal areas through an emphasis on tourism. I revisit this case briefly below but for now wish to note that it raises an to operate through extending the market principle to commodify the coastal land and local labour force. 15 . a profitable space. 240conservation in Jamaica. 83-93). motivations. Global Forces. To exemplify this.and power dimensions of economic life rather than simply observing the functional aspects of an economy. pp. thus. in order to understand these phenomena. While this approach may also fit my model. for large overseas corporations (Carrier 2009b. He argues that neoliberalism permeates many aspects of life that are not ostensibly economic. as if it were a component of something that derives from a and functionings directly. Even in situations where the connection may ostensibly be trivial. Carrier (2009b) augments this point when he measure and value of individuals. and Elite Interests economic models in contemporary financial markets. seems to link well with the dialectical interconnectivity of the model (pp. I clearly do not ignore Steiner’s (2009) concerns. power is prevalent. by dealing with economic ideas I begin with a less extreme case of political power. Nevertheless. 242-255). institutions. Carrier (2009b) discusses his research of environmental conservation. had no money for 242). that is. compares our current moment of neoliberalism to Polanyi’s notion of the self-regulating “environment” came to mean a profitable space for attracting tourists. I develop a more Marxist stance on this occasion to emphasise the political unified structure (Wilk 1996. which nonetheless shows that investigating the dynamic relationship between political powers and economic forms is market growing free and expanding to other areas of life. This was not simply a consequence of the self-regulating market model but an outcome of the way the environmental activists had important point about how ethnographers should think about engaging with political economy.

it is not sufficient to simply reveal these systems…[through] their thoroughly local definition and penetration.$240 calamitous consequences of this from the Jamaican perspective are perhaps most 5 defaulting on its debt and its inability to negotiate more socially-friendly terms would be climate over social well-being (p. The notion of a multi-sited ethnography has indeed become part of the mainstream in anthropology. The passionately communicated in Stephanie Black’s documentary Life and Debt (2001). 16 . Jamaican government accepted “stringent fiscal controls” in order to obtain a U. p. whereby it will always protect financial firms (p. as we must also consider the broader scale of political economy. these political economic forces should be the object of study for anthropology. Indeed. At the time of their writing. the precedent set by the New York fiscal crisis that favoured a good business default. even if this macrosystem perspective entails traversing multiple field sites (pp. interpreting neoliberalism – a sweeping abstraction that he invokes to for elites to accumulate capital. Combining his arguments with Carrier’s (2009b) institutions and ruling powers that shape them. 90-95). 39). those opposed to the move predicted “lower wages for country’s borders. and [that] are Marcus and Fischer (1986). this was perhaps a more innovative statement than if it were made now. 138). 5 By connecting economic forms and individuals to the forces of and how can it complement an understanding of local economic forms? David Harvey (2005) offers a particularly Marxist view of these broader research that the authors envisage.Marcus and Fischer (1986) call for ethnographic fieldwork to represent “external ethnographic subjects” (p. 73). However. But what might this type of macrosystem view be processes.S. From Harvey’s (2005) standpoint. when the million IMF loan in 1978. the unlikelihood of Jamaica simply attributed to neoliberal reforms that made the borrower take the losses on defaults (p. 48). we could posit that the neoliberal ideology forcefully circulated through the IMF allowed it to continue charging crippling interest payments to an indebted country and force the reduction of trade barriers and capital flows to allow foreign tourism corporations and investors to gain capital opportunistically within the 29). For describe a plethora of different actions – as a political project that creates the conditions research in Jamaica. and the full authority given to the IMF in cases of Jamaican workers and higher profits for multinationals” (Bolles 1983. my model notably advocates the kind of formative of the symbols and shared meanings within the most intimate life-worlds of expressions per se.

in reality. I am not suggesting that neoliberalism is the only broad systemic other financial institutions. and debtors” (p. starting-point when thinking about external influences on economic forms. he says. I have merely chosen to utilise the global spread. 131-132). by we only partially accept Harvey’s (2005) depiction of the uneven spread of external influences can forcefully shape a given locale. However. Not only are we seemingly devoid of the social controls in place to curtail force to be reckoned with. largely in order to protect the interests of creditors against abstraction because it exemplifies my point about external forces. the World Bank. it is debt but this age has also witnessed the establishment of “the first effective planetary administrative system. corporations. like “societies”. Graeber (2009) emphasises this point when he argues that drawing systems are. 131).nonetheless instructive in showing the importance of attending to the ways in which empire of debt” does seem to echo these concerns. tracing the influences of “neoliberal” ruling powers that operate through ideas themselves. especially boundaries or making models is problematic since “what we call social or economic according to completely different principles” (p. operating through the IMF. He argues that the market: credits ultimately cancel one another out” (pp. since it is usually employed to encompass notions of market fundamentalism and processes of “neoliberal” institutions – such as the World Bank and the IMF – may be a decent those that we would usually refer to as “capitalist”. it is important to look at whose interests a particular model is serving and question the types of value that 17 . nor am I ignoring alternative views of it that de-emphasise its homogenising and hegemonic character (Ong 2006). and financialisation that is increasingly detached from direct relations to commerce or While Harvey (2005) offers a rather radical perspective of political economy. an endless interweaving of dyadic relations that often operate The dynamics of political economy can also be fathomed by unpacking economic “is a model created by isolating certain principles within a complex system […] and then If “markets”. It is characterised. This is particularly crucial even if neoliberalism around the globe. creating a totalizing model within which the books all balance and all debts and production. Graeber’s (2009) depiction of our current era as “the electronic consumer transactions. national economies driven by consumer debt. 130). are ideological gestures that do not exist out there in the world but rather are a specific way in which a society represents itself.

In sum. this part tries to reveal the picture as seen from “the individual”. it was quite acceptable it back.market” justifies capitalist principles (p. and the state’s neoliberal means asking why this is happening. to argue abstractly that defaults on subprime mortgages can be understood as what Stuart Kirsch (2006) might refer to as “unrequited reciprocity” rather than. say. In our “empire of debt”. This may If we accept Graeber’s (2009) argument. In short. “a market” sells a house. however. such as the commodification of Jamaica or of humans and nature more broadly. 110). To achieve this. where as “the would be insufficient. As Graeber (2009) illustrates. the institutional context that enabled the loans to take place. attempt to understand more than the functioning of a market and probe the influences even entail challenging the raison d'être of existing ideas about the latter. Economic life would simply be a socio-political product and the An Interpretative Theory of Value . as well as the internal agenda that promoted less regulation. versa with a Marxist take (Wilk 1996. I probe the meaning of economics as something that is embedded deeply in culture and belief. for instance. we must aspire to interpret the interplay between the local and the for greedy opportunistic creditors to loan money to people who could not afford to pay “value(s)” in different contexts to effectively map out a symbolic structure of meaning. failed market exchange. it is a step towards a for interdisciplinary dialogue. better understanding of the forces that shape economic life and a further opportunity Leaving things there would do no justice to the dialectical relationships that I political dynamics that constitute economic ideas themselves. We also require a better comprehension of the positioning of different actors in such practices. This is a holistic ambition external political influences on economic actors and institutions. it and interests of political powers and their effects on that facet of the economy. This allows us to enter have depicted above. 132). p. rather than just what is going on. it indicates that anthropologists must are being realised. My point is that it that may not be truly achievable in modern ethnography. rather than vice18 the world of minds and presents the possibility of revealing a more Weberian view of inherent meanings would be left unexamined. If the previous section brought the individual into the picture as an activist within a Jamaican political economic system.

Classical economists. The Problem of “Economic” Value forms of economic life. In doing as natural and isolated from politics and where exchange counterparts in the market could have complete freedom to make choices. interdependence as a community.thus. and utility. so. p. consequently. maintain an equal standing to one by nature an egotistical individual) and a world of things where others exist only through competition for access to those things” (pp. the Eye of Providence model should hopefully encourage “[a]n interpretative anthropology [that is] fully accountable to its historical and political-economy implications” (Marcus & Fischer 1986. 87-89). and considers Developing a symbolic theory of value takes us far beyond thinking about “value” theories were: another. have been sidelined and left for anthropologists and other To understand the problems surrounding past and current theories of value(s). By meshing symbolic anthropology with the dynamics of political instead how value is determined through relations between different groups. Servet (2009) argues that these “objective [since] they rationalized the relationship between a person (conceived of as 2009. 86). extending the concept of an anthropological theory of value and its connection to economy. questions of value. pp. which were central to economics at the 19 . 89-90). positing their world of self-interest. 89). could not resolve this problem. which was manufactured by economists and based on relations of self-interest (Servet in the purely rational economic terms of labour. For instance. what kinds of preferences. This conflicts with the notion of humanity as having the potential for solidarity. it becomes apparent that there are alternatives to our current world configuration. and have the ability to act with full rationality. scarcity. and being obligated to future societies. This is something that I hope an anthropological theory of value will achieve. Economic theories of value were developed through the myth of value Polanyi made explicit. which we must venture much deeper than these logics of exchange. of recognising both the needs of the individual and of society (pp. expertise do we miss by assuming a narrow view of value? Graeber (2005) maintains that contemporary economists have limited the focus of their discipline to the production of mathematical models of resource allocation for profit or consumer birth of the discipline.

one that followed on historical changes in the economic ideas change vis-à-vis economic functionings. Graeber (2005) outlines three uses of the term: system of value “that defines the world in terms of what is important. p. In the sections below. so too is the state of the present would usually refer to as “economics”. I will “values” in the socio-philosophical sense. aesthetic and symbolic the Saussurean linguistic sense. Moreover. 439). as the meaning of value (p. 441-443). 453). From here on. and “value” in of the same thing. as one may recognise that I am characterising it as destructive of all that is worthwhile and meaningful. an anthropological theory of value. I kindly ask for the reader’s patience here. Significantly. Marx critiqued the wage system. While the underlying dynamics of the change are important because they allow us to see how away from the theorists mentioned above. that is. If one considers these terms to essentially be instances 20 . the movement from mid-nineteenth situation. Was this shift in economic expertise simply down to myopia? I suspect probably not. p. economics as a discipline devoted to studying the formation of price (pp. that there was a fundamental change. he highlights that it was questions of value that set neoclassic economists apart from their predecessors. the price and value of objects became increasingly “transcended the physical altogether. this kind of intellectual insight was swept aside by the marginalist revolution that redefined however. that makes this whole process work. traversing material to which some scholars dedicate an entire career. My point is. a symbolic So how else can we theorise about value(s)? When questioning the existence of century U. Adam Smith developed the labour theory of value to explain the difference between the exchange value and use value of objects. and became simply a subjective measure of desire” indistinguishable from one another. However. meaningful. a paradigm shift perhaps.K. 440). “value” in the economic usage. desirable or worthwhile in it” (Graeber 2005. Grasping the particular is not a calculative act but judging the universal is. Maybe it can be better viewed as a constructive distinction that was produced – largely through political power – when making the shift in perspective key economic activities of men and women.scholars to explore. it implies a common foundation for the three meanings. “for it leads us into moral. a contemporary study of value would typically surpass what we territory that is very hard to reduce to rational calculation and science” (Graeber 2005. Ricardo identified the problem of depressed wages. production to consumption at the turn of the following century.

thus. and distribution 21 . which nevertheless retain the mystery of their components” (p. Graeber (2005) able to become inverted at different levels. which made costs of finance imperceptible. She shows how. This may be especially pertinent to this not because Westerners value equality but because the supreme value is now the become the highest sphere (pp. there was a steady proportional return and they and marketing. the public representation of price was as Guyer (2009) demonstrates this through a case where the price of gasoline in the distinguished between crude oil costs. 447-50). taxes. Forced to explain the rise. They did not include profit on capital as a composite category. rose sharply by a dollar and rocked the projections of budgets from households to assuming prices to be singular wholes. 205). “is a moral economy of transparently composite prices. as a sphere of individual self-realisation. Moreover. Guyer’s (2009) work on increasingly aware that composite elements constitute prices. rather than simply amalgamates an expanded notion of value with an awareness of the concealment of the fabrications of prices. paper since. corporations. The hidden amongst the traditional elements (pp. Guyer (2009) claims. we are now reminded of outcome. invokes Dumont’s notion of classic structuralist ideas as values that are hierarchical and individual. economic actors are processes behind them and popular understandings of them. refining costs and profits. the Saussauran approach to value as meaningful mediate understandings between individuals and systems.S. Dumont believed Western society is no longer hierarchical. 203-205). as he argues. she argues that we should investigate the components encompassed by prices that are diffusely U. which has allowed the market. I specifically investigate Graeber’s (2005) claim that it may be able to regards to the latter of the three usages. With difference. petroleum companies claimed that despite the rise in the nominal price of oil. to If value is conflated with price in our current economic world. As shrewd consumers. Thus. then perhaps it The Values of Price will pay to also scratch below the surface of commodity prices to reveal the social price provides a suitable account with which to close this section because it political power. such as those encompassed by currency exchanges. in the twenty-first century.attempt to delineate such a system by analysing different usages of “value(s)”.

these factors. If numbers cannot simply be taken at economic face “value”. motivations. driving up the price. cultural. can only constitute part of the market price of crude from the view benefactors seem to be investment banks. It also portrays a case proportions of the retail price that was itself based on market actors from producers to contracts. However. into them. and interests. are diffusely hidden (pp. If our composite structure and how it is negotiated is crucial if we are to probe the concealed it is not just economic models that we must unpack but also the numbers that are fed political aspects. and forces that are masked by these public ideologies of price. So 22 . Risk management and consulting costs. this presents a clear point-of-entry for anthropology to interpret their associated social. Beyond the singular numerical task involves working with economic numbers – or with theories that imply that numbers are wholes – then Guyer (2009) shows that an understanding of their aspects of numbers lies an array of social dynamics that affect their composition.determined to be the impetus behind the rise. and indeed the great resulting profits made from investment banks. financial speculation on the commodity through futures where companies produced socially important economic expertise by (mis)representing the very factors that they were supposed to explain. Guyer’s (2009) analysis may be useful here not only because it suggests that presented to consumers. which itself created further incentives to invest in oil. Furthermore. was the composite component that was eventually retailers. 208-210). from which the great values are composite and allows us to investigate them as such.

Wall Street institutions and elite universities maintain for the schools. Wall Street. I consider “finance” and “financial markets” to be both an idea and a functioning of the economy. As Ho (2009) shows. having initially worked there as a management consultant and later through probing her network of financial and economic actors when conducting fieldwork. with a huge bias to recruiting students from Harvard and Princeton. Thus. however. Ho’s (2009) monograph of high finance 6 on Wall Street through the lens of the Eye of Having set out the conceptual framework of this paper. the divorce of what capitalism. whereby long-term social institutions have transformed into short-term liquid spaces under the dictates of Wall Street. 23 . Her ethnography allows us to understand an aspect of capitalism from the perspective of financial market actors and institutions in mind.Ho (2009) offers a unique view of Wall Street. The investment banks actually operate a quota system Candidates are actively poached from these two schools regardless of whether they can demonstrate technical banking ability. such an assumption If we accept the notion of the market being disembedded from society. The Whitehouse. 6 remunerative and prestigious places in today’s society. For Ho (2009). With this influence that the labour market in high finance operates freely from stringent social ties. a meritocracy that is based on individuals competing fairly and equally for such highly would amount to a grave neglect of the organisational mutuality that governs this process. we can investigate how people actually use and produce economic ideas and functionings not only on-the-ground but Providence model and pursue the theoretical approaches of value and political economy. I now reinterpret Karen Wall Street in an Anthropological Economy that possess a considerable degree of economic and political agency. it implies huge feeder relationships that naturalise banking careers as the main destinations for top graduates of any discipline. whereas candidates from other universities lack As with “the market”. and High Financiers economy and in the structure of corporate America. a broader view can also be attained of the effects on both the trends in the is in the best interests of corporations from that of employees is a new feature of on a Street that is a well-instituted environment and an icon of modern market capitalism. The Economy.

investment bankers are recruited and constructed through embedded ties of mutuality and are patterned into Wall Street’s culture of “smartness”. She shows that the traders interpret the market in political terms. although it does seem that money can still buy status for those latest crisis. success that one may have once hired. The labour relations and institutions. while Asians normally ended up in technical or product-focused positions. Ho (2009) alludes to this process by mentioning the rollback of the disembedded from concern for society at large. This was largely enabled through acts of deregulation by the ruling power 7 that instantiated a greater degree of only able to accrue such high levels of risk and large amounts of wealth by functioning as force might recruit through strong ties of mutuality but. Such filtering could not take place without preexisting social ties and dispositions being transposed as conduits onto the supposedly On the other side. the bonuses Glass-Steagall act in the late 1990s that allowed deposit-taking banks and casino banks 7 disembeddedness. 61 & 62). Meanwhile. 26). The market is more overtly embedded in the rulings and interests of the ruling power. the lines between what constitutes the ruling powers and the financial institutions are much fuzzier. thus “in China. Moreover. In Ho’s (2009) book. Ho (2009) shows how ethnicity greatly determines career harder work. Peoples’ way on the Street is largely already paved by social that can afford an elite education. 225). these connections also influence the On the one side. white upper-class males (pp. This is exemplified by the case of a talented black woman who left banking because she felt alienated for having paths. and compensation. 39-72). Despite the culture of hard work where green is supposedly the only colour. one could argue for the disembeddedness of the actions of neutral marketplace. 106-121). once operational. Furthermore.the socio-cultural capital and must prove themselves otherwise. directors who themselves graduated from these elite schools. that intelligence is not considered a quality of a person but a currency that proves a person’s worth attests to the mutual ties that underlie the dealings in this currency (pp. bankers were A contrast can be made with this Western view to Hertz’s (1998) monograph of stock market traders in Shanghai. 24 . never mind helping to engender a global recession. as there are better opportunities to meet with hard work. you cannot look at economics without looking at politics” (p. these market actors’ given that their greed almost reduced the Street to rubble in the that bankers collected were still astronomically large and unfair (p. African-Americans generally assumed roles that required less networking and The privileged client-facing roles with the large bonuses were mostly earmarked for attended a non-elite school (pp.

I would note that in the dialectical embeddedness. disembedding describes a process. Whatever the case. 247). nexus of investment banking culture and strategy and the intersections with corporations. In this case. This is perhaps most evident in her illustration downsizing and realigning them to the short-term. Any tension deriving from bankers’ self-concern or concern for company intentionally promoting itself as a community that mystified downsizing but others was reconciled by them resorting to market externalisations – as economic ideas 25 . 34).much about disembedding as it is about power relations” (p. This does not engender productive growth but short-term mortgaged productivity that leads to broader economic booms of the interplay between economic ideas and functionings and institutions’ knowledge and practices. through her focus on employment. it was not the from the cultural dynamics of Wall Street to adopt downsizing as the general model for workplaces (p. 136). my model clearly highlights the need to The dialectical mutual constitution of the elements of the model can also be While Ho (2009) purports that “a finance capital-led version of capitalism…is not so to operate as one (p. markets. these corporations are also pressured – to rationalise the prevalence of rampant downsizing. and effect. and economies (pp. 7). an image of decisions bear a relation to. A major theme of her book is how the institutions of Wall Street have incredible influence over those of corporate America through encouraging their attend to both the cause. 229). On the one side. discerned from Ho’s (2009) monograph. as the political power through institutions. While Wall Street prides itself on reacting much more quickly to market More specifically. employment (p. the stock market. as shifts and busts (p. 293). 213-215). 227). This is achieved by both acting out and perpetuating particular ideas about the way in which the economy should function. but do not mirror. and shareholder value movements than other corporations (p. She also mentions how the takeover movement of the 1980s could only occur through deregulation and favouring of private ownership (p. where as power relations suggest how this process may have been enacted. Economic and financial expertise is used by one group in society to economic expertise as a prized asset that can be exchanged for wealth – usually in the money form – begins to emerge. If we also consider that investment bankers are paid huge sums for their services. Ho (2009) analyses the realign social relations throughout the country.

the other side of the dialectic. short-termism. she argues that we should look behind abstracted notions of space of human values. italics in original). The high 26 . to wit. Threatened with job cuts even compelled to extract whatever they can out of the present regardless of the cost to investment banks in engendering the subprime boom and the disastrous social consequences that came with the bust. 318-324). bankers are For Ho (2009). and institutional standards. the role of investment banks in constructing unstable financial markets and jobs (pp. 242). Wall Street eventually created “a those acting within. 240). Wall Street has not simply reconstructed the banker’s cultural model of themselves as coeval and identified with the market” (p. Ho (2009) discusses the substantial role of mortgages by creating various sophisticated instruments. perhaps to protect the bonus pools of elites (p. 260). Hence. the world to its image of shareholder value but has actualised a model that “is [in fact] understood as particular cultural self-representations borne out of everyday Wall Street 252. and peddling them around the globe to investors (pp. emotions. hyping them. not reification of market dominance” (p. Like some sort of religious their own hype. and dually transforming. In this case. further attests to notion of the creation acting back upon the creators (pp. the market principle has become submerged into the organisational structure of investment banking compensation schemes (p. 321). while also expressed through the culture of Wall Street whose members are socialised into this elite world of market-centricity. a site of everyday Ho’s (2009) ethnography is intriguing because it shows that the economic actors global web of risk that they themselves could not decipher” (p. the institution of investment banking. Through generating a global market for doctrine. She re-imagines the market as a practices as opposed to an abstract concept. this fetishization of the invisible hand obscures what happens on society (p. In addition to past crises. Future ideas about work life. people actually refer to economic ideas when justifying the undermining of mutuality and of themselves. “the market” since bankers’ “appeals to naturalized market cycles must also be economies and present functionings of economies are shaped by the collective agency of within the well-instituted hub of the world’s financial markets actually operate largely through culture.the institutional culture and individual beliefs of bankers. Moreover. and the market trends that they help to engender. and rampant-insecurity. 234 & 235). that investment banks actually get enrolled in during boom times. 233). 297-302).

economics. Asking investments bankers what they thought about the relationship between the actions of Wall Street and the economy at large could have yielded interesting results. Langager. When I became qualified as a stockbroker and investment manager. I was taught how to conduct a combination of watch for the excesses of Wall Street culture. I can now turn to the first of the theoretical approaches. as I mentioned above. since there is no place in them for the “human factor”. not just machines with calculators. 27 . Ho technical and fundamental analysis 8 but was never shown where to look on the graph to ignored the actions of Wall Street that allegedly caused the whole market to bottom out. I read Ho’s between the ideal of shareholder value and the particular version of it that investment (2009) ethnography as an account of financial hegemony and competition over access to interests that are being served. Ho (2009) does not explore the huge implications of her argument for the fascinating if she had elicited their take on her theory by perhaps asking whether they considered economic and financial market models and formulas to be relevant. could also be said for their views on the notion of a jobless recovery. The distance bankers perform reiterates the need to look beyond the models themselves to the 8 keeping with the Marxist stance that I have highlighted for political economy. It would have been perspectives of the model. and Murphy 2010). fascinating to also consider that she did not decide to pursue this research. Nonetheless. The same Having discussed the ethnography from the different methodological The Politics of Shareholder Value in a Finance-led Economy economy and for economics from the perspective of her informants. the notion of economic cycles being produced by Wall Street would not fit into any of the economic models of market cycles that I have come across. Ho (2009) unpacks the notion of shareholder value to show that it is part of a wider scheme on Wall Street to promote its For an accurate and accessible explanation of these two financial strategies see (Janssen. In the new modes of production in the age of neoliberal financialisation. In fact. I spent three years looking at charts of share prices and share indexes to try and establish where the prices were going but This cultural understanding is clearly beyond the repertoire of neoclassical financiers of Wall Street are humans with culture.(2009) emphasises the importance of anthropological insight in examining these forces.

and the condition of the U.S. now measured by efficiency. I am referring to the contrast of “values” that can be discerned between the stakeholder economies of Japan and Western Europe. who in turn U. This loyalty is reciprocated from the companies. with the shareholder economies of the rewards for loyalty and the latter for individual gain. liquidity. (pp.benefits to the economy at large. where profits go to the owners of the companies’ shares. The shift was from the old concept of the firm as a social institution. economy at large. which surpasses a mere I would suspect that bankers would instead perceive this unfortunate scenario as company profits go to long-serving employees. Thus. this entailed supplanting existing values – in During her fieldwork.S. perpetuated by an origin myth where investment banks provided the capital to allow corporate America to grow. the championing of shareholder value was mission-driven and considered economically and morally the correct thing to do. culture as the central reasoning and explanation for the restructuring of manner that promotes inequality and prevents a more democratic approach to business firms. valued for its permanency and role in the community. There is a greater inherent valuation for 28 . the tension is averted because the company has become a necessary evolutionary progression from stakeholder value-orientations to market to society is rendered imperceptible. which leads her to the takeover movement in the 1980s when Wall Street hardened its the plural sociological sense – and establishing values that are more market-oriented. 26-30). shifting concepts of inequality and wealth. to engulf U. as Gudeman (2009a) might posit. These self-serving narratives (discussed in more detail below) re-signify the business landscape in a in the U. and short-term profits.S. grip over corporate America.. where stakeholder economies create social attachments to firms. The dependency link of the shareholder value-orientations. and U. Essentially. Ho (2009) unpacks the ethnographic present. 122-129). To understand this phenomenon.S.K. While one could interpret this as an instance of the market undermining the value means cutting jobs. for Ho’s (2009) network of liquid investors. The institutional loyalties of the economic relationship. to the new notion of the corporation as a mutuality upon which it rests. Even when increasing shareholder defined by its owners and not its employees (pp. Ho (2009) maintains that shareholder value was beginning informants. the former offer more than simply a market rate wage.

pp. managers were made into shareholders through LBOs so that the interests of These revolutions in the name of shareholder value often. 314-316). such as these. 29 . Ho in capital improvement plans. To counter the perceived inefficiencies of managerial long term decline in the value of the target company. The company had been operating competitively with plans for growth while the company itself was saddled with a monumental amount of debt. the economists economic usage of the term – as a market valued share price – that ignores and conceals calls forth the case of Safeway to show the real purpose of creating shareholder value in these contexts. as rewards are given for occupancy and role within the firm. individual achievement and ability (Blim 2005. The benefits of this configuration for the few can be discerned when Ho (2009) and financiers of today have learned well from their counterparts of the marginalist revolution. Contrary to the worldview of her informants. Thus.group ties. 129-153). and the private equity firm. Moreover. she argues that shareholder value must be viewed as a political tactic to monopolise control over corporations and to support power of economic ideas and their utility as political tools. downsizing. as Ho (2009) illustrates with the capitalising on the downturn of the previous decade to align corporate values to those of capitalism. were abandoned for price back then. caused a example of Daimler-Benz and Chrysler. paradoxically. Just as values. highlights the representational were more hesitant over the benefits of shareholder value. the way that her informants none robustly challenged their assumptions and resorted instead to neoclassic explain this tension. Hence. Ho (2009) argues that the takeover movement of the 1980s and the the stock market and Wall Street. as advocates of shareholder value. this enacted a significant transfer of wealth (2009) argues that takeovers should be understood as power struggles over cultural mergers and acquisitions prevalent in the 1990s were really about high financiers the firm became their interests (pp. values and practices that are hierarchical and diverging. investment banks. lower wages. Although some informants the demands of short-term financial profiteering. and “efficiency”. Ostensibly. Essentially. today the until a leveraged buyout (LBO) led to massive downsizing. and a reduction from the firm to top company executives. who believed that Wall Street unlocked value and improved efficiency in corporate America. rather than composites of shareholder value were packaged together and represented in one any conflicting values.

flexible representations and 38). were the minds of the masses won over or coerced into allowing such unequal accumulations of wealth? Combining these transformations with an interpretative control and ownership of firms. Ho (2009) purports that part of the discursive power of the market derives from these abstract. As she argues. justifies global financial influence. powers and institutions have cultivated the market economy to their benefit. and investors. 35- package their values into a single number and fight for elite interests by forcing market- naturalizes imperialist practices. we also begin to see why economic expertise is perhaps such a valued service. brewed its own stock of knowledge to support shareholder value through what Ho (2009) shows to be stock market. Wall Street also maintains its own hegemony through “[t]he culture of smartness [which] begets global spread. contributions to these unequal transfers of wealth. in this case comprised of economists and financiers. In this view. 72). but also on decontexualized extrapolations (and new “a crude reinterpretation of the historical relationships between corporate America. This interpretation of events sits rather comfortably with amount of wealth to be transferred to those who access it. the 30 . shareholder value enables investment bankers to allows Wall Street to maintain its current position as producer of U.the Marxist analysis of political economy changes that I outlined above. 153-168). Here. since it allows an enormous primary measure of a company was about restoring the “correct” harmony between centric short-term decisions on corporations. hegemony (pp. then how of the human economic mind. Elites created the conditions for financial accumulation through the financialisation of corporate America and by perpetuating neoclassic ideologies that became so pervasive that the very actors who currently carry the flag for shareholder value do not recognise their From the standpoint of investment bankers.S. the use of the share price as the rationalisations (pp. and produces financial dominance” (p. If the ruling theory of value may throw light upon these questions. The explicit theories of an institutional sector. as we travel deeper into the realm The manner in which investment banks and their worldview of shareholder value Masters of a Symbolic Universe of Value became institutionalised and then legitimated resonates clearly with the levels of legitimacy that Berger and Luckman (1966) outline.

adaptations) from neoclassic and classic economic thought” (p. and liquidity is preferred to high level of legitimacy. She points out that corporations raised early 1970s (pp. bankers are superior to the average worker. to denaturalise bankers’ worldview of shareholder value. Ho (2009) offers us a vignette of these realms when she shows that the stock market was historically constructed to reality never had it. 343). As Ho (2009) points out. hierarchy. Firstly. the manner in which bankers selected symbolic universe of value. represented on the stock exchange. 243-248). There are numerous indications that such a phenomenon exists. the hierarchy above implies that there are different segregations or 31 . in spite of the single number power that my discussion in the previous section crystallised. This notably contains and conceals the dimensions of illiquidity (pp. this implies a value loyalty are abandoned for shareholder value that. this universe is characterised by Dumontian Her informant describes Wall Street as a fighter plane when making decisions in comparison to other corporations. a fourth level of legitimacy that also suggests the existence of a system of meaning that Graeber (2005) alludes to. hierarchy where Wall Street’s quick adaptation and flexibility are favoured over slow and rigid firms. while it was actually corporations that financed the growth axioms to fit their worldview indicates how it was able to reach and maintain such a None of these changes could have taken place if they did not occur within a funded the vast majority of their capital expenditure from internal resources up until the constructed justification for institutional practice. This contradicts general beliefs about corporate history that saw control returned to the shareholder. 179 & 202). Ho (2009) contests the myth funds predominantly through bonds issues for most of the twentieth-century and of the stock market (p. is a composite that includes notions of liquidity. 169). spheres of value encompassed by the modern universe. and Secondly. and short-termism. Accordingly. who in flexibility. The values – in a sociological sense – of trust. Ho (2009) finds this alarming since the stock price is used as a separate control from ownership in order to create liquidity. Although shareholder value is in reality a socially upon which its legitimacy rests whereby the shareholder was situated as the original fund provider and controller of corporations. which is perhaps best exemplified when Ho (2009) recounts an interview with an analyst that moved from investment bank Morgan Stanley to Pepsi Corporation. commitment.

measure of corporate success and value yet the value realm of liquidity – which affects not historically or culturally connected to the practices of the company. At that over left or right. 249). Applying this to shareholder value suggests the possibility of alternative configurations. to directly realign and then justify what should be considered “moral”. 183-188). then Ho’s (2009) informants have used the scientific. Finally. the scientific is replacing the moral in our ideology – if indeed it has not already – “the previous hierarchical universe…[becomes] “shareholder value”. For instance. “valued shareholders”. Whatever the context. contemporary consciousness. It makes the inversion. Rather than determining share price based charitable causes or the level of carbon emissions. we do not even make the value judgement Fourthly. social construction that functions apart from corporations (pp. these segmented hierarchies of value may be imagined to have varying degrees of attachment to a broader social order. In the modern view. if as Dumont (1986) argues. fanned out into a collection of flat views of this kind” (Dumont 1986. 248-250). which clearly denotes the superiority of the shareholder by placing 32 . the values of the right hand and left hand – which he invokes to exemplify modern formation that has arisen from the break between the element and the whole. or the economic. such as contributions to modern view. which might lead to downsizing. Dumont (1986) claims that in the nonan idea and a pair of values – is rooted in relation to the whole body or a higher level of existence (pp. we need not look beyond the very structure of the phrase point. Against Wall retail company could be making lots of sales and performing well but this would not Street’s claims. market mechanisms could be established that increase Certainly. Dumont’s (1986) claim that “[t]he whole has become a heap” resonates with The more that shareholder value gains legitimacy and begins to take on the form of an against share price. there is no inversion of values at different levels since everything is measured the word first. This may be a step to fixing the our current economic crisis (pp. stocks are not merely representations since they belong to a divergent the share price – is ill suited to the operations of the firm. conceptually harder to solely on cash flows and the like. while the share price itself is prevent general market fear – operating in a different value sphere – from depressing the price and attracting pressure from investors. determining the values of the pair would only entail a look at each of the hands. 262 & 263). a Thirdly. p. share value in relation to some broader social measure.

On the other. these elements of the framework cannot be left economic expertise that has essentially liquidated social relations – both individual and Whether or not one chooses to accept the hegemonic view of the institutions and crafting these values. I have verified that interpretive value theory can speak of both individuals and of societies in the same breath. out there informing bankers’ decisions and guiding their preferences towards appear to assume endless forms. This is all made possible through the rendering of instituted financial and unattended. money is central to peoples’ being on the Street and is also the key product that the financial institutions are structured to institutional – on the Street and far beyond. Summary universe”. Wall Street is a place framework. there can be no value in who the shareholders are. While the universal-particular debate dynamics that motivate them. The concept of value that I have been developing appears to have universal applicability – ostensibly due to its interpretive flexibility – yet the manifestations of it shareholder value. it is hard to doubt that they play a significant role in perpetuating the worldview of shareholder value. long-term or shortterm. Institutional and political influences played an instrumental role in out of universal self-interested rationality. existing ethnographic research on powerful market actors and institutions. Hence. nurturing or predatory. while political economy unearths the 33 . It seems that “the masters of the that best suit their financial and monetary interests. forgiving or relentless. On the one hand. as the name implies. one could argue that all bankers are really just acting continues into the section below. This has enabled me to think through the key perspectives of this paper in where people go to make money as individuals. there appears to be a realm of value the ruling powers. thus. are capable of manipulating and oscillating these value structures – by asserting a particular type of economic expertise – into configurations examine a single ethnography in significant detail because it largely conforms to my specific relation to the economic lives of investment bankers. I chose to I have tried to show how the Eye of Providence model is useful when interpreting manufacture.imagine.

investment banking is very much an institutionalised I began this paper by drawing on theories about the relation of the market to transfers that are sent by migrant workers to recipients who have remained in their of “the market economy”. The migrant-remittance phenomenon is perhaps the most significant 9 institutionalised economic function. Investment bankers were shown to largely talk in its “the market” itself. I turn the optic to the case of international cash arena for economic rationality. Mohapatra & Silwal 2010. The authors recognise 34 . 11 The work was prepared for an independent non-profit organisation that researches labour and was later published in a handbook for economics. See Rapoport and Docquier (2006). there has been increasing acknowledgement in microeconomics of the familial and strategic motives behind remittances. the authors I begin with a summary and critique of Rapoport and Docquiers’ (2005) What the Economists Say… their long-run role in development and reducing inequality (p.Migrant Remittances in an Anthropological Economy society and later critiqued an ethnography that offers a view of this relationship from language and think in its logic. 10 Given the development potential of $316 billion+. since it framework of this paper. I first examine how economists try to build expert knowledge about the remittance phenomenon. 11 To introduce remittances. or at least from the perspective of very influential market actors. But what happens when we step away from market institutions and toward economic life that flourishes in an entirely different social sphere? To address this question. entails dealing with peoples’ actions that operate outside the discipline’s comfort zone. Thus. even just the recorded transfers were estimated to be only second to Foreign Direct Investment and were much more resilient during the global downturn (Ratha. p. I point out that since the 1980s. 4). 3). while in 9 Against other international flows. Assuming that remittances are less of a formally and – for some –potentially the most important 10 example of economic activity that origin country. macroeconomics there has been a shift of focus from the short-run effects of transfers to discussion of migrant-remittance economics. In addition to the cultural influences. I suspect that the transferring agents are much then contrast this with an anthropological perspective through the conceptual operates to principles other than those that we might consider to come under the rubric more distant from the discipline of economics than financiers.

they present a corresponding set of predicted outcomes that would allegedly 35 . a variety of services” (p. authors proceed to present their “theory”. 8 & 9). 11-36). and constitute a remittances as an important source of income (p. and exchange of individual rationality. an insurance component. or cultural forces that might In spite of the recognition of these composite structures. which underlies every motive that they inspect. political. In this view. This is essentially a series of complex formulas abstracted for each of the motivations to remit. a repayment-of predicated on the characteristics of remitters (pp. 5). They reference a comparative and statistical study from the 1980s that showed migration and remittance decisions to be interrelated but determined by different factors. Moreover. However. they still assume a complex mixture of motives that “combine an altruistic component. suggesting that transfers are not Rapoport and Docquier (2005) begin their analysis by attempting to understand economics is located in individuals’ minds – or more specifically the psyche – of men and values are packaged into single numbers and played off against one another when the materialise if the motivations were combined with different variables (pp. Remittances are claimed to be remittances from a microeconomic perspective. they emphasise that the method of conducting household surveys from study more challenging. often significantly increase GNP. they argue for further investigation since remittances various countries has revealed that a significant percentage of households rely on improve the material well-being of family members in the recipient countries. 10).that poor data quality circumscribes the macro analyses of remittances and that the difficulty in discriminating between competing microeconomic theories makes their Moreover. Rapoport and Docquier (2005) seem to recognise that the money transfers are a composite of categories. From this and for each women but with no consideration of the social. thus. while the authors acknowledge more than self-interest. are a major source of foreign exchange. an inheritance component. Remittances and Microeconomics large portion of GDP in many of the developing countries to which they are sent (p. whole collections of motivation. as with Guyer’s (2009) oil prices. 6). however. money is used to loans component. determine and shape the impetus to remit.

and/or moving costs…[and should] increase with the migrant’s education and with …should…be related to the amounts invested by the family in the migrant’s education Here. 39). Rapoport and Docquier (2005) offer a précis of the However. The first drew on empirical studies that publicised the “proofs” for the motivations and variables used to anthropological material by taking into account the social prestige that is gained for a migrant’s clan when remitting and how this makes insurance contracts – a form of remittance – enforceable. pp. Might “theory” section by noting that “working with a limited data set makes it impossible to reach any decisive conclusion regarding the underlying motives for remittances” (p. The solid form of the argument – its simple causeeffect statements – replaces the woolly content. cracks in the woodwork begin to appear when the authors conclude the persuasive power (Gudeman 2009b). remittances geographic distance” (pp. the size of remittances should be negatively related to these two variables in the altruistic case.Several claims and hypotheses that are “testable” and relatively straight-forward are contrasted. 40-48). we may as well economists argued that the study was unable to determine the factors that operated at & Docquier 2005. In the section that follows. in which case. The second study analysed remittances in four different anthropological expertise have a greater use value in this context? It is even more astounding that a later review of the second study by other Mexican communities and returned intriguing findings when “dummy variables” for community membership actually explained much of the variance in the study. neglects social determinants of the propensity to remit and underscore two exceptions burn the vast majority of anthropology books published since Malinowski (1922) determine that which operates at the level of community. the form of the argument is transmitting a considerable part of its meaning and case the hypotheses are proven wrong in the future. Interestingly. while the disclaimer acts as a caveat in develop their theories. the authors note that the empirical evidence where community characteristics were not overlooked. such as: “pure altruism can be singled out as a motivation…[A]ssuming that altruism decreases with time and familial distance. This implies that single-site research is unable to community levels because they only have information from four communities (Rapoport 36 . [U]nder the investment motive. 37-38).

On the short-run side. Outside of their hammers and chisels to chip away at the surface and reveal the hidden treasures of cultural forces. 12 showing that…[receivers and non-receivers of remittances] may be better off with higher migration rates if lump-sum transfers between residents are available” them with each other in bulk transfers. if there are lots of remittances and the recipients share I interpret this as showing that there is less inequality with higher migration.underlying motives that Rapoport and Docquier (2005) search for. they endogenous determination of wages and prices…[but that] there is no study on the point out that modern econometric research is “based on a systematic exploration of the short-run effects of remittances” that apply these techniques. I predict that a traditional long stint of participant-observation to the necessity of this kind of study but seem incapable of suggesting it. Remittances and Macroeconomics amounts to. welfare in relation to international transfers. 54. effects of remittances on welfare together with the factors that determine migration. we can turn to their macroeconomic analysis. (p. The economic researchers allude tape measures and spirit levels when what we really need are good old-fashioned familiar institutional environment. The short-run analysis concludes by referencing a study of the 12 37 . if competent anthropologists had conducted a comparative extended-case study of the four Mexican communities. They attribute this to the lack of necessary data. it seems that economists struggle to formulate economic ideas from economic functionings. In short. They have a toolbox full of sophisticated in one community would shine a much brighter light upon the cultural determinants and established our method. 50-53). and the potential bias in developing countries (p. 50). relative prices. they criticise the research for only which found that “the high-migration equilibrium Pareto dominates the low migration analysing remittances for a certain level of migration and treating this variable as exogenous (pp. I doubt that they would have returned with little explanation. even if it were to be only applicable to those communities. footnote added). the immeasurability of data. After outlining some general theories about trade. there is less inequality. Further. and Now that we know what Rapoport and Docquiers’ (2005) “native point-of-view” equilibrium.

With the social now rendered workable. The authors conclude that “remittances tend to have an overall positive effect on origin countries’ long-run economic performance” and suggest two “modest” policy issues (p. 55). 66). so obvious. pp. It seems that. but rather in statistics and econometrics” (p. as they seek to are not. which was no longer rooted in rational choice. this has “established a new type of beachhead for economic research across the social sciences. 64 & 65). although economics is aware of its past anthropology to prove its worth in collaboration with economists. the 76). an economist by trade. in my opinion. 38 . 55). They argue that these reveal that “the growth potential of remittances depends on their impact on productivity and inequality in the origin communities” but concede that the evidence is based on micro data due to the poverty of macro data available (p. 75). Secondly. investment of remittances should be encouraged rather than consumption (p. This appears to be a case of economists “cascading” their market models to convert the exogenous socially shared (2005) outline two models that demonstrate that remittances promote investment in physical and human capital and then extend their investment model from the 2009b. Rapoport and Docquier Rapoport and Docquiers’ (2005) long-run examination begins with a disclaimer benefits of remittances to endogenous and calculable market transactions (Gudeman microeconomic section to analyse the effects of inequality.(2009) depiction of the methodological shifts in economics where he argues that the discipline has moved away from the hypothetico-deductivism of the general equilibrium the 70s – to a more inductive methodology. Perhaps that states: “it is only very recently that the long-run impact of remittances has been this will lead us to new avenues of exploration and allow us to arrive at conclusions that reformulated in an endogenous growth framework” (p. it does not currently have the capability to apply the necessary a posteriori techniques. For Milberg (2009). Firstly. This presents a distinct opportunity for develop more contextualised models for the short-run effects of remittances. era – the problems of applying this to the real world have purportedly been known since The problems that the researchers encountered appear to be related to Milberg’s shortcomings in perpetuating universal models. financial services industry should be developed to better accommodate remittances.

The real question research was notably undertaken by two of the authors of this very IMF paper. The paper’s findings are said to confirm the main benefit referenced in microeconomic literature: that “remittances improve shocks” (p. This is researchers are further abstracting from the evidence – representing and manipulating seemingly how their arguments are constructed. the simplicity of the form of economic arguments is “potent rhetoric” in itself (p. although this should apparently be considered with caution. rather than like opportunistic transfers such as capital flows” (p. The recommended far short” due to a lack of data and theoretical and empirical consensus. To advance the notion of compensatory remittances. the it – in order to establish a degree of supposed correlation between variables. Hence. 27). The authors initially appear to have similar concerns to Rapoport and “to establish a useful basis for classifying and distinguishing among theories of are more directly linked to the interests and rulings of the ruling powers. Essentially. 1). The authors then reference work that shows the “best evidence” for this question and the results of a regression analysis that shows that “workers’ remittances decrease in significant determinant of remittance flows until after 2001”. they seek more useful for thinking about remittances’ economic impacts” (p. Moreover. All this apparently points to “a strong for Chami et al (2008) is whether or not remittances are compensatory or opportunistic. 25). “interest rate differentials are not a indication that remittances behave like compensatory transfers such as insurance. and that “income differentials are a highly significant determinant of remittances”.25).policymakers who may wish to manage the macroeconomic effects of remittances or harness their potential for development. When doing so. they later criticise the categories of motivation that Rapoport and Docquier (2005) use and propose “to reconsider the literature on remittance determination and recharacterize it in a way that renders it that allegedly proves the case of the former parameter (p. Writing for the IMF. 39 . Chami et al (2008) maintain that their ultimate aim is to outline implications for It is intriguing to compare this academic research with that of economists who households’ welfare by lifting families out of poverty and insuring them against income Docquier (2005) as they warn that “literature on the causes and uses of remittances falls remittance determination” (p. Chami et al (2008) present response to [recipients’] currency depreciations”. as James Carrier (2009b) argues. 21).

governments around the globe have so far seemed largely incapable of curtailing the (2008) fear that remittances might reduce the political will to make these improvements and suggest that governments may need to be reformed through outside influences (p. State arriving at the same conclusion as Rapoport and Docquier (2005). In this case. or at least under our name. effectively Even with their self-confessed partial knowledge. as closely as possible. Chami et al (2008) are able to remittances operate from the perspective of the migrants? Unfortunately. 40 . 81). Given the weak foundations upon which Chami et als’ (2008) policy 13 simply reiterating Marx’s (1867) concern that “[o]ne capitalist always kills many” (p. I am not 384). 143). the diversity of life is cropped into convincing and calculable categories that leave the un-captured elements for other social scientists to discover. However. However. This is an incredibly precarious suggestion for poverty reduction. irrespective of the “depth and realism [that anthropology can add] to the more abstract and formal analyses characteristic of aggregative economics”(p. 6). “follows a cohort of migrants and their families over time as they face migration. of remittances while preserving poverty reduction. With the intention of improving the long-run development potential countries more investable. such as through improvements in infrastructure. Nonetheless. 30). Chami et al The International Monetary Fund (2010) offers only careers in “Economics”. in this grand neoliberal stalwart.15). the department where its knowledge is produced. how decisions about migration the “anthropology” word. cross-country longitudinal research must be conducted that: and remittances are actually made” (p. it appears that poverty and inequality that has historically followed the advancement of markets and the uneven accumulations of wealth they bring (Harvey 2005). 13 Geertz’s (1963) ideal of the two disciplines being “joined in a single framework” still seems some way off (p. the study concedes that the current literature is insufficient and that remittance. and repatriation issues…and must involve conducting interviews of migrants and family members to determine. Could anthropologists not be situated in various communities The case for participant-observation is confirmed yet they dare not blasphemously utter through extended-cases in an attempt to understand the value universes within which there is no room for knowledge of our kind. which are mainly its operational roles. they suggest making the recipient offer policy advice. and “Other Fields”.

I restrict my scope to the case of remittances in the Pacific. continuing through the conceptual that economics cannot seem to capture with its blurry view of remittances and the implications that this might have.recommendation is based. tries to storm through the streets. The economic researchers are suggesting that the existing overwhelmingly used for consumption due to the absence of established property rights. whereby the supreme value would become the individual entrepreneur. They should not be considered as formal exchanges 41 . they do imply that a system of private property rights be established. though. which makes it practically impossible to invest in production (Hughes & Sodhi 2006. A whole gift economy practically fades into analytical depth. Yet the economic reports discussed above mention nothing of private property being an obstacle. To address this and to allow for economic functionings are actually part of a moral economy of informal transactions that meet and establish obligations. As Carrier’s (2009b) case illustrates. pp. The imperial march of economic expertise descends from the ivory towers and probe the various ways in which economic knowledge is constructed by economists. These that operate within a market economy. to be transnational corporations that will opportunistically exploit the local labour force. By recommending that entrepreneurial activity be encouraged through intervention. allowing them to venture much further into the The previous section has demonstrated how an anthropological perspective can Remittances and the Eye of Providence Model insignificance in the world as represented by economics. the purpose of this section is to reveal the type of knowledge are not restricted by the same frontiers. Instead. yet they framework of this paper. social domain. Anthropologists can carefully traverse the uneven ground that economists lay. Thus. rather than the kin group. as economists might prefer. the big winners are most likely Nevertheless. a very different picture emerges to that which economists depict. I interpret it as a neoliberal ideological gesture to extend the al (2008). It is probably out of their remit to directly recommend political changes. Remittances in the Pacific – a case which I discuss in more detail below – are reach of the market. the gesture is made in a notably de-politicised manner by Chami et 21 & 22). they target values. With an anthropological view of remittances. values of the domestic moral economy be realigned to those of the market economy.

pp. assuming that they do not operate on a purely arbitrary individual basis. p. Transnational Dynamics of Remittances rule. remittances must logically be guided greatly submerged in a galaxy of socially institutionalised constellations of kinship and chieftainship. 8). 13) . As I will show. it seems that there is neoclassic economic models or shareholder value. This indicates that we must think twenty-five years (Lee 2009. What do remittances do? Indeed.formally embedded in institutions – cannot help us here. as the first source. between those at home and rapid expansion of Fijian migration that followed three political coups over the last overseas. we must also investigate the political elements of the phenomenon intrinsically. p. ideas and so on. there appears to be no Thus. Thus. Nevertheless. Whereas in the case of investment banking. distinct sources of significant influence. 5). in fact. The former is exemplified by the The political economy of remittances is inherently complex. money. due to the informal nature of remittances. and across the diaspora” (Lee 2009. the “economic transaction is only one element… in which the passing of wealth is by either some ruling power or institutionalised practice. goods. Shareholder powerful representations of remittances that we could compare to the notions of value increases market price. Remittances occur transnationally as part of the “ongoing flow of people. The state influences of the origin and destination countries can be considered external forces that act upon migrants and remitters. however. 9-12). An example of the latter form of influence are the about the interests and rulings of the powers of the origin countries. the notion of the market – as as strongly related to any market. Australia. or market institution. As Mauss (1990) would remind us. and the U. and of the destination countries. where exchange-through-gift is the only one feature of a much more general and enduring contract” (p. the acts of remittance cannot really been seen a lot less consensus in economics over what these transfers actually are. as the second source. the state policies of New Zealand. Moreover.S. interpreting the institutional culture was central to understanding how that aspect of the market operated. One could even argue that it was a blend of these two expansion of wage labour. they are. I can identify three sources of political force that brought migrant-remittances into being through the Pacific migrants – that are shown to have greatly shaped the patterns of migration and remittance (Lee 2009. – as the three main destinations for 42 .

43 . thus. migrants have elaborated traditional ceremonies. migrants started to One could argue that the ruling power has itself become instituted. expanding the sphere of political economic obligations (Macpherson & Macpherson transnationalism. as I mentioned when outlining the model. p.third source of remittance patterning can derive from the internal political economy of a person’s community. communities that transfer money to their homeland. Samoan remittances are embedded in kinship relations just as investment banking is submerged in the marketplace and Wall Street culture. Samoan transnationalism would actually not be what it is without kinship. 14 kinship as an institution. as relations are transforming to meet changing needs. By the 1980s. I consider I now briefly discuss the case of Samoa from the perspective of the migrant chieftainship to be a traditional form of ruling power. 15 The institution of kinship has itself survived because it is crucial to kinship as the basis. increasing the size and cost of them to compete for social prestige. The commitment to kinship is changing in the migrant enclaves. Testing the Eye of Providence model in Samoa would return some curious similarities and differences. kinship and chieftainship structure social organisation production were not significantly transformed by the monetary system in Samoa. I still believe that it is necessary to differentiate ruling powers from other institutions. land access. money is not just a medium social relations are maintained and expressed (Strathern 1975). In Samoa. however. social and political statuses. In this context. that became the reason and vehicle for 2009. 61). such as those held for graduation. and conferring chiefly titles. With through which individuals gain wealth for themselves but an “operator” through which There have been substantial changes to these configurations recently that have demonstrations of wealth by chiefs and extended kin. 15 This notably counters any assumption that kinship is always fraught by transnationalism. They have also created new ceremonies. Lilomaiava-Doktor 2009. however. Economic “expertise” of the investment banking variety does not feature here. the lines between the elements are blurry. wagework was still the most powerful dynamic for social change. which is something that I hope the political focus of this paper has emphasised. an aspect of the broader external and. mobilise and shape economic practices. Although land tenure and the lineage mode of rather than individual profit maximisation. as well as system of capitalism. it was kinship. However. which were also used as sites for 14 altered the way in which remittances function. and wage labour as an economic idea and functioning.

while nonthat there will be fewer transactions and remittances between Samoa and the migrant destinations (Macpherson & Macpherson 2009). which increases demand for remittances back home through the transnational interplay simply cash transfers motivated by a variety of individual drives. People are using this chiefly institution of personal status. enhance their close family kin group. This can lead to Strathern (1975) also identified in her study of Hagen migrants in Port Moresby. pp. which causes some the aiga system and began to feel more obligated to kin within the enclaves.feel the social and financial pressure of these demands. This transnational accurately described by the dichotomy of “receiving” and “sending” countries. Many community has cultivated indigenous notions of “home” and “reach” that are not On the Samoan island community of Savai’i. The matai system has itself been effectively bought (Lilomaiava-Doktor 2009. as was evident in an investiture ceremony where chiefly titles were for honours” exemplifies how an indigenous institution is being transformed by titles. are the tautua services that people are not simply uprooted but operate as transmigrants. Money in urban areas is spent on subsisting and maintaining an urban lifestyle. people assessed the costs and benefits of migrants looked after obligations in their homeland. redefined the matai chiefly system and the tautua service system. They are dialectically constituted and embedded in the politics of matai and the institution of kinship. This 44 . remittances are much more than migrants’ access to new forms of wealth. There has been increased they contribute to in order to acquire chiefly standings. Most gifts in the matai ceremony are now cash. As an integral part of this process. and enrich their commodified. In the case of Samoa. while financial expectations from kin continued to grow (Macpherson & Macpherson 2009). where migrants’ kin making demands on them that they struggle to meet. then. it is likely interest in matai recently as overseas transmigrants obtain power and desire chiefly power to accumulate wealth. 345-362). transnationalism has actually migrants to feel trapped in town because they have not made enough money to return home with and others to feel resentment towards those from home that make such demands (pp. This Samoan version of “cash of ideas. thus adding weight to the matai status. If this process continues. then. This is something that money acts as a trickster that lures people to the town with an expansionist ideal but then turns out to be a limited good. A significant aspect of remittances. where as in rural areas it is an extra. 61-64).

obligatorily and out of self-interest” (Mauss 1990. as it embodies some co-efficient of sociability. p. The study of remittances makes explicit the notion that “every exchange. transfers are still part of the broader gift economy. given the The examples that I have listed thus far are relatively broad. cultural. It divergent meanings that money assumes in different contexts (Bloch & Parry 1989). I do not suggest that that there will be a multitude of different ways that peoples engage with wage labour. cash is King. accepted. while money only reciprocated. While money can make things more manageable. economic. 43-55). Moreover. p. While cash is being used increasingly in ritual exchanges. It is hard to imagine where the practice of koloa would fit into the inequality. as traditional forms of wealth are rendered valueless. while some remittances may be altruistic and others self-interested. shells are shells. cloth regenerates people culturally. state currency income is the index for all remittances in the Pacific function this way but emphasise general trends that begin to show the social. even if we were to limit our scope to the material world. Another consequence of this is that traditional wealth is not try to understand the principles of a gift economy. a system of processes that are “marked by a continuous flow in all directions of presents given. remittance instance. pp. Koloa cloth can be overlooked. The incredible diversity of Pacific communities indicates cannot just be assumed that modernity is homogenous or homogenising. In Tonga. 23). Cloth is cloth. the contra-flows may as well not used as either a gift or a commodity and comprises a substantial amount of the contraflows. cannot be understood in its material terms apart from its social terms” (p. yet since economics does way from replacing cloth. for aesthetically. and However. 29). money still needs to be accompanied by cloth to be gifted economic analyses described above that only see the value of cloth as its market operates for individuals. it is still a long occur (Lee 2009. as 45 . 183). almost all are bi-directional.reiterates Sahlins (1972) point that economics is a cultural category rather than simply individual motivation or behaviour. From their perspective. and political complexity of remittances that escape economists’ analyses. which it ranks below in Tongan society. Articulations of Value Realms 2009. We cannot just assume teleologically that money will replace cloth (Addo exchange value or price. These contra-flows have significant value.

In this and fame. To hypothesise about what such research might yield and to emphasise the strength of ethnographic accounts. the value of an act is determined by its potency. the economic within a hierarchical realm of value. Although her fieldwork began in of traditional values and capitalist values. I suspect that the current situation is an articulation Pacific Island community of Ponam (Carrier & Carrier 1989). there is a need for theoretically-informed ethnography to account of how value is created and destroyed in Gawa. it is reasonable to assume that. a migrant externalises his self by leaving the person even after being abandoned.interpret the local definitions and understand remittances from the perspective of economic actors in the origin communities and in the migrant enclaves. 11 & 12). 117) – of individuals and the community. might the act (p. Nancy Munn (1986) offers an be to apply and expand a theory of value at the level of community to comprehend what well as the resilience that Melanesian communities have shown to state money (Akin & Robbins 1999). the “thing received is not inactive” because it still possesses something of How might Gawans that stay at home experience long-term migration that then leads to estrangement? Such cases can be considered to generate negative value for the 46 . Just as food-giving entails island’s resources – and transacting them across the inter-island community (p. transmission. it is highly unlikely that the Gawan value system has since been completely of remittance mean to Gawans in this milieu? As Munn (1986) shows. operate externalising the island’s internal resources. I Writing from the view of symbolic anthropology. for Gawans. What. outside of the kula trade ring and into a transnational monetary space. Fame is thus produced by externalising the internal elements of Gawa – the activities of Gawans are geared towards increasing the fame – as a virtuality of influence context. As Mauss (1990) would argue. migration and remittance mean to the current inhabitants. its capacity to expand relations the island and offering part of this self back in the form of remittance. Therefore. where consumption is subordinated to eradicated by money and markets. as well as the fame of Gawa. for instance. 6). migration and remittance expand the web of relations and obligations. One tactic would now invoke a monograph from an inter-island Pacific community. Exchanges of food. as the former creates negative value and the latter positive value. then. “Through it the giver has a hold over the beneficiary” (pp. Clearly. as has been shown to be the case on the the 1970s.

which are nonetheless produces to fit both state agendas and its own institutional environment. as Lee (2009) since it has its own social system. by suggesting that researchers incorporate value theory with the Eye of Providence model. Given the transnational flows of wealth and ideas measures that rely on the notion of a nation-state – such as GNP or GDP – can be brought and institutions stretch beyond national borders. Therefore. When constructing micro and macro expertise for remittances. it is to confuse the elements of a synthesis with the synthesis itself” (p. They use empirical data from communities in different nations to develop a patchwork quilt of theoretical propositions and models. I hope that Geertz (1963) once wrote that a nation is not simply “the small town writ large”. problems. to generalise from the village-level to the country-level “is to commit the fallacy of composition in an egregious manner. 30). 142). economists appear to take this flagrant myth to the next level. which are then used to justify policy that I have highlighted. witchery is experienced as encroaching from the wider island world” (p. If. whereby “the positive potentialities of inter-island relations have been subverted into negatives. 28 & 29).modernity and markets as seductive forms of witchcraft that destroy value by claiming second-generation migrants who choose not to return to the island? One may be they will not “lose touch with the hard surfaces of life” (Geertz 1973a. p. then would Gawans perceive community. dynamics. 220). even the practice of calculating economic functionings through under considerable scrutiny (Lee 2009. However. 15). If a complex network of people. what is the use of “national” statistics? Under my model. and purposes. prescriptions for nations and villages. characteristics. much like when there is suspicion of witchcraft. p. anthropology can help to illuminate the hidden interests of the ruling shadowed by the rhetoric and dominance of economics and the representations that it But more importantly. the younger generations of migrants are expected to receive the messages of self-interest and economic individualism (pp. suggests. Summary concerned that this kind of analysis risks becoming too abstract and could increasingly take on the form of a production of the ethnographer’s mind. the main point that I have tried to communicate here is that in order to theorise about remittances or about how their patterns might change in 47 . groups powers that may explain the prevalence of such measures.

in groupings that give meaning to peoples’ lives (Milberg 2009. begin to tie it more firmly to the actions and thoughts of the peoples that it work constructively with economics to provide a better representation of the social to community. claims to represent. It has missed the social transnational gift economy at large. as well as the 2009b). In societies where money occupies a more social role. and included the role of institutions in its analyses. expertise 48 .the future. it has predominantly focused on those institutions that enforce property rights. 59 & 60). This presents doing so. Perhaps guided by the framework of the Eye of Providence model. whilst also interpreting the inherent values that shape economic that is more socially-minded is perhaps a more appropriate service to summon. a comparative anthropology that aims to build general theory through ethnography can institutions and internal political dynamics that structure remittances from community behaviour in each locale. however small this step might be (Gudeman a marked opportunity for anthropology to contribute to economic expertise and. Although the New Institutional Economics has taken a step away from models of rational choice. we must locate individuals’ thoughts and actions within the context of the associated socio-political knowledges and practices that frame them. pp.

I do not claim that all economics is purposefully adverse. the four functionings should begin by examining the dialectically embedded and constitutive relationships shared with economies. economics appears to be the discipline most at fault of either losing touch or being unable to grasp much of the seem to appear when particular representations become more important to society than economic world and it is anthropologists who constantly try. However. Paradoxically. It has been demonstrated that an investigation into economic ideas and to feed off one another as they mediate between. with little effect. Conclusion methodological areas. are institutionalised with all the necessary 49 Economics tries to institutionalise economic functionings through perpetuating . The theoretical approaches of political economy and interpretative value have been shown value helps us understand the meaning of economic life from the perspective of economic actors. institutions. I have argued for a greater anthropological understanding of the economy and. Thus. to reel what is actually going on out there in the real world. and rotate around. the discipline appears to be attempting to change its methods and epistemologies. The more prescribed functionings of the market that I have discussed. have developed a methodological and theoretical framework to assist this venture. such as investment banking and transactions for shareholder value. economic ideas but it is far from doing this in the case of remittances. history of intellectual disputes appears to be characterised by struggles over representation as economic ideas and reality as economic functionings. and individuals. which at the very least shows a postmodern sensibility. Yet this is more than a crusade against abstraction. Social problems recoveries can been seen as socially good. the To highlight the implications of favouring economic knowledge over other forms. ruling powers. Indeed.accordingly. such as that downsizing and jobless them in and guide them. it is a battle against a particular kind of institutionalisation of knowledge and practice. a broader anthropological theory of value must seek to incorporate these factors if it is itself to produce contextual and meaningful representations of “the economy”. A symbolic theory of I revealed indications that economics has been used ideologically and politically to serve the interests of ruling powers. Political economy unearths the dynamics of power that structure economic actors through social institutions and for ruling powers.

general. This should draw economic expertise more closely to social reality. But through unpacking economic expertise. a model that engages with economic expertise – universal. clouded by tradition and non-market principles. and what is actually being represented in this process. such as those perpetuated by high finance. Besides. This Anthropology may never represent the Wealth of Nations as comprehensively as and calculability over social reality. it still must be channelled through a diversity of contexts. That is. even if we assume that rational selfthrough Wall Street’s institutional culture or the plethora of Pacific kinship patterns. or to institutionalise remittances brings us back to the polarised epistemologies of the kinship and ceremonial exchange. whether focus our efforts on proving or disproving the universality of the underlying motivations economics does. My comparative analysis has allowed me to see that the 50 . such as however. Misquoting Durkheim. Therefore. This knowledge can then be cross-referenced with the perspectives of the economic individuals whose actions are being narrated. This difference may seemingly continue to divide scholars. we could think “rationally” in a hierarchical universe of values that or on improving the hierarchy? universal and the particular. The tension that economics encounters when trying particular – avoids echoing past debates. interest is universal. unless economics to aspire to a “mechanical simultaneity” in this unfamiliar territory and privilege control familiar environment. it can offer a better understanding of how nations represent their wealth. The more informal phenomenon of migrantremittance transfers is yet to reach the status of formal institutionalisation in economics. who these representations serve. are socially unfair. should we Perhaps the pertinent question is not whether homo economicus is the natural human condition.associated levels of economic legitimacy. although it is still enacted through its own existing institutions. It will attempt to cultivate Pacific peoples’ thoughts and actions upon principles of a market economy. I predict that economics will continue strongly evidences the power of the discipline of economics in a well-instituted and economy of the Eye of Providence has reached such celestial heights on Wall Street that investment bankers even interpret their actions in classically economic fashion. of course. nor should it endeavour to. In the Pacific. Indeed. while their actual undertakings are shown to be predominantly culturally patterned. the economic eye is trying drastically to grasp a retinal image of the remittance phenomenon but the vision is foggy.

Just as the of the particulars. to make the case for our expertise. Only then will our economic lives be human once again. Perhaps we should concentrate our efforts more on illustrating how the particular is made to act as though it is universal or general. namely. how that some have argued for the particularity of universals and others for the universality However. then a further implication of worshipping economists’ then becomes embedded in society. Over generations. more than highlight areas for collaboration. We must find ways to counter what Keith Hart (2009) calls “a of our humanity is being able to recognise the structural similarity between models of dehumanized expert ideology remote from people’s practical concerns and from their ability to understand” and aspire to more socially-minded representations of the economy. in the Eye of Providence. anthropologists clearly need to do human eye provides the brain with a representation of reality. as I have above. it seems contemporary economics represents the world in order to manipulate it. expertise – construing it to be an apt view of reality – is that we deny the human aspect 51 . If we believe with Geertz (1973b) that the essence of our economic lives.collaborates more closely with other social scientists and begins to change its theoretical and methodological orientations. the discipline of economics – with sacred symbols – formulates its own image which reality and the reality itself.

Women Men and The International Division of Labour. in Stephen Gudeman (ed. in Hann. California: University of California Press. viewed July 12 2010. Cheltenham. 11. “Chapter 2: Forms of Transnationalism. Maurice and Jonathon Parry (1989). Form and Substance”. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. “Chapter 3: The great transformation of embeddedness: Karl Polanyi and the new economic sociology”. Helen and Steven Francis (eds. Beckert. 52 . Migration and Transnationalism: Pacific Perspectives.Addo. James (2009a). in James Carrier (ed. Canberra: Australian National University Press. Lynn (1983). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. References List Blavatsky. Wage. Forms of Tradition: Cloth and Cash as Ritual Exchange Valuables in the Tongan Diaspora”. Chris and Keith Hart (eds. P. Peter and Thomas Luckman (1966). James & Achsah Carrier (1989). “Ancient Landmarks: Plato and Aristotle”. A Handbook for Economic Anthropology. “Chapter 2: Simplicity in Economic Anthropology: Persuasion. Helena (1939). The Market and Society: The Great Transformation Today. Money and Modernity: State and Local Currencies in Melanesia. 27. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books.). Akin. UK and Massachusetts: Edward Elgar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. Theosophy.) (1999).). Money and the Morality of Exchange.). Chris and Keith Hart (eds. Fernandez Kelly (eds.net/magazine/theosophy/ww/additional/ancientlandma rks/PlatoAndAristotle. in Hann. The Market and Society: The Great Transformation Today. “Chapter 13: Market and economy in environmental conservation in Jamaica”. Carrier. New York: Doubleday and Company. “Chapter 6: Kitchens Hit by Priorities: Employed Working Class Jamaican Women Confront the IMF”. Albany: University of New York Press.blavatsky. Trade and Exchange in Melanesia: A Manus Society in the Modern State. June and M. no. http://www.). David and Joel Robbins (eds.html Bloch. Jens (2009). Berger. “Chapter 19: Culture and economy”. Blim. Economic Persuasions: Studies in Rhetoric and Culture. Ping-Ann (2009). in Nash.). A. Bolles. Carrier. vol. 483-491. Michael (2005).). James (2009b). in Lee. Carrier.

occasional paper 259. and risk: toward an ethnography of price”. Graeber.co. “Chapter 4: Religion as a Cultural System”. “Chapter 7: Debt. “Chapter 2: Necessity or contingency: Mutuality and market”.) (2009b). New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books. Chris and Keith Hart (eds.). Modern and Nonmodern”. Essays on Individualism. in The Interpretation of Cultures. viewed Jul 21 2010. C. The Memory Bank. Guyer. Economic and Social Research Council (2009). Chris and Keith Hart (eds. R. Barajas. http://www.imf. http://thememorybank.) (2009). Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Geertz. A Handbook for Economic Anthropology.uk/book/chapter-5 Gudeman. Keith (2000). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. David (2009). and impersonal markets: Polanyian meditations”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. in Hann. fictions. Clifford (1963). Hart. viewed 1 May 2010. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. The Market and Society: The Great Transformation Today. in James Carrier (ed. Clifford (1973b). viewed July 19 2008.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. International Monetary Fund. The Market and Society: The Great Transformation Today. Hann. Macro Economic Consequences of Remittances.pdf Dumont. Cosimano. “Chapter 1: Thick Description: Toward and interpretative theory of culture”. Chris and Keith Hart (eds. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. UK and Massachusetts: Edward Elgar. P (2008).esrcsocietytoday. T. M. Fullenkamp. The Market and Society: The Great Transformation Today. New York: Basic Books. Louis (1986).ac. Economic Persuasions: Studies in Rhetoric and Culture. Chris and Keith Hart (eds. Cheltenham. Gapen. Geertz. The Market and Society: The Great Transformation Today. “Chapter 27: Value: anthropological theories of value”. Gudeman. “Chapter 9: On Value.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/about/CI/accounts Geertz. A.). in The Interpretation of Cultures.). & Montiel. in Hann. New York: Basic Books. Stephen (ed. in Hann. Jane (2009). David (2005). Annual Report and Accounts 2008-2009. “Chapter 5: The Market From a Humanist Point of View”. Stephen (2009a).Chami.org/external/pubs/ft/op/259/op259. violence. Peddlers and Princes: Social Development and Economic Change in Two Indonesian Towns. “Chapter 11: Composites. http://www. Clifford (1973a). 53 . Graeber.

Helen and Steven Francis (eds. Bronislaw (1922). Duke University Press. Miami. Argonauts of The Western Pacific: An Account of Native Enterprise and Adventure in the Archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea. International Monetary Fund (2010). Kingston. Helen and Steven Francis (eds.htm Hughes.com/university/technical/techanalysis2. Stuart (2006). Ho. Tuff Gong Pictures. “Careers at the IMF”. “Chapter 4: Kinship and Transnationalism”. viewed July 21 2010.asp Lee.investopedia. and Murphy. Karen (2009). Helen (2009). Helen and Steven Francis (eds.org/external/np/adm/rec/job/careers. “Chapter 1: Pacific Migration and Transnationalism: Historical Perspectives”. Lilomaiava-Doktor. C. Canberra: Australian National University Press.). 3rd ed. The Trading Crowd: An Ethnography of the Shanghai Stock Market. Migration and Transnationalism: Pacific Perspectives. Kirsch. Janssen. Investopedia ULC. Macpherson. Malinowski. “Technical Analysis: Fundamental Vs. viewed 22 July 2010. http://www. 54 .Hart. Canberra: Australian National University Press. Reverse Anthropology: Indigenous Analysis of Social and Environmental Relations in New Guinea. Helen and Gaurav Sodhi (2006). Migration and Transnationalism: Pacific Perspectives. preface by Sir James Frazer. http://www. 7-26. A Brief History of Neoliberalism.imf. “Chapter 3: Samoan Transnationalism: Cultivating ‘Home’ and ‘Reach’”. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.). http://www. “After the Crash : A Human Economy for the 21st Century”. Sa’iliemanu (2009). Migration and Transnationalism: Pacific Perspectives. David (2005).journaldumauss. Revue du MAUSS permanente. video recording. in Lee. Hertz. C (2010). Cluny and La’avasa Macpherson (2009). Centre for Independent Studies. Technical Analysis”. “Should Australia and New Zealand Open Their Doors to Guest Workers from the Pacific? Costs and Benefits”. and New York. California: Stanford University Press. Life and Debt (2001). Oxford: Oxford University Press. C. pp. Liquidated: An Ethnography of Wall Street. in Lee. Canberra: Australian National University Press. in Lee.. Langager. Ellen (1998).net/spip. Durham and London. viewed August 12 2010. Keith (2009).).php?article604 Harvey. CIS Policy Monograph 72.

2. London: Routledge. in Stephen Gudeman (ed. Chicago & New York: Aldine-Atherton Inc. Hillel and Frédéric Docquier (2005). S and Silwal. Stone Age Economics. http://siteresources.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Capital-VolumeI. Servet. Ratha. “The Economics of Migrants’ Remittances”. : Duke University Press. http://www. Marx. Giving. “Chapter 5: Toward an alternative economy: Reconsidering the market. New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books. in S.pdf Ong. 1531. George E and Michael M J Fischer ([1986]1999).pdf Milberg. The Gift: the Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies. D. 55 .). Mauss. Munn. Durham. Rapoport. “Chapter 17: The Economics of Migrants’ Remittances”. Nancy (1986). money. viewed July 20 2010.marxists. Capital: A Critique of Political Economy Volume I. Karl ([1867] 1887). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.org/dp1531. 2nd ed. in Hann. Handbook on the Economics of Reciprocity. and value”. C. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. A (2010). Mohapatra. viewed 19 July 2010 http://ftp. Hillel and Frédéric Docquier (2006). Jean-Michel (2009). N. Aihwa (2006).iza. World Bank. Chris and Keith Hart (eds. Neoliberalism as Exception: Mutations in Citizenship and Sovereignty.C. “Outlook for Remittance Flows 2010-11”. The Fame of Gawa: A Symbolic Study of Value Transformation in a Massim (Papua New Guinea) Society.worldbank. Kolm and J.). London: Cambridge University Press. and Altruism. Anthropology As Cultural Critique: An Experimental Moment in the Human Science. Institute for the Study of Labor (Germany). Marcel (1990). William (2009). Moscow: Progress Publishers. The Market and Society: The Great Transformation Today. “Chapter 4: The New Social Science Imperialism and the Problem of Knowledge in Contemporary Economics”.Marcus. Mercier-Ythier (eds. Rapoport. Marshall (1972). Economic Persuasions: Studies in Rhetoric and Culture. Book One: The Process of Production of Capital.pdf Sahlins.). Discussion Paper No. Vol.org/INTPROSPECTS/Resources/3349341110315015165/MigrationAndDevelopmentBrief12. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

Chris and Keith Hart (eds. Marilyn (1975).gov/documents/organization/27807. pp. 61.Steiner. Port Moresby: New Guinea Research Unit. Department of State (2003). Australian National University. viewed 24 June 2010. The Great Seal of the United States. Richard (1996). Economies & Cultures: Foundations of Economic Anthropology. http://www. U.pdf Strathern. No Money on Our Skins: Hagen Migrants in Port Moresby. The Market and Society: The Great Transformation Today. New Guinea research bulletin no. Wilk. Colorado: Westview Press.state. in Hann. Philippe (2009).). 56 . “Chapter 4: The critique of the economic point of view: Karl Polanyi and the Durkheimians”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. “Chapter 7: Money: operator and trickster”. 300-362.S.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.