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


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


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.


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.


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


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…


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 . discipline rests but to provide new insights that connect with its understandings? Given the centrality of economic thought in modern social and political spheres. I will present a critique of the high value placed on economic expertise in contemporary Western society and. 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. p. emphasise. in doing so. the value of anthropological expertise. which as a matter of no coincidence. enhance. for anthropologists and for us all. 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. what is “good”. also includes judgements made certain interests are served by value structures that pattern such judgements. In response to the trend that William Milberg (2009) has that economists occupy as “the high priests of our [Western] culture” (Wilk 1996. “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. and hopefully questions about the value of knowledge meet questions about value more generally. To this end.sciences is all too well known in anthropology. It is here that In this thesis. An influence and constitute our economic lives. in my view. not only to challenge the axioms upon which the these are among the big questions of today. 33). 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. by arguing for the theoretical guidance for the subdiscipline of economic anthropology. Indeed. 64).

and to individuals. the third section reinterprets ethnographic research conducted with finance part investigates the less-instituted practices of international money transfers anthropologists. In the space between economic representation and economic reality lies a distinct opportunity for anthropological analyses to highlight social. they should be considered part and parcel of the conceptual apparatus. as well as the place and role of money in each social 6 . To add theoretical direction. 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. I do not suggest that these two theoretical this paper. (mis)represents the world and should vie for a more humanistic intellectual perspective on the economy. model. it also enables me to contrast the nature and place of economic expertise vis-à-vis anthropological expertise. The final people live economic lives in spaces of divergent degrees of (in)formality. 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. Hence. 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. connection between economic knowledge and anthropological knowledge. however. 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. for the purposes of The remainder of the paper endeavours to emphasise the importance of this specific importantly. blend of prescriptions for an anthropological economy – theoretical. the second The opening section outlines the methodological areas of the Eye of Providence Thus. Rather than merely refuting economic expertise. More setting. cultural. methodological. and ruling powers. institutions. perspectives are the only ones compatible with my model.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. In addition to this. I argue that anthropology should focus on the ways in which economics political dynamics that can draw the two disciplines closer together.

However. I have largely drawn on the idea of the interplay between the market 1 and economic practices. In structuring my model. Hann and Hart (2009) have similar concerns today. 7 . Polanyi was principally concerned with the relationship between the market and society. it is the rethinking of Polanyi’s ideas that I am concerned with here. contradicting common belief. 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. with the global spread of neoliberal ideology since the 1980s.S. 3 legitimize [sic] wealth and even to make poverty seem deserved” (p. rather than tracing a genealogy of ideas. 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. as an economic superpower. Certainly. 2 as well as Polanyi’s notion of embeddedness. 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. and “economy” throughout the paper. 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. enabled through market expansion (Hart 2000). I hope to show that Gudeman’s (2009a) concept of dialectical embeddedness is useful when understanding contemporary economies.Introducing the Eye of Providence Economic Model rethinking of Polanyi in a contemporary context. nonetheless imbued his ideas with a new resurgence (Hann & Hart 2009). I conflate the terms “market”. Keynesian dominance of the U. consequently. He was not opposed to the Importantly. 2 In the model. I have split society into “individuals”. 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). a situation I take “the market” to be both an economic idea and a functioning of the economy. and “ruling powers”. 3). natural social evolution. “institutions”. 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. “finance”.

the idea of an quest for a better understanding of contemporary economic life 4 should begin by riding social integration (Beckert 2009. p. pp. and investigate further “whether or not capitalist economy rests on human principles of universal validity” (p. 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. 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. 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. Anthropologists. 38-41). too. as outlined in figure 1 below. 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. With the focus on market relations. 72-74). 8 . pp.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. as well as some general questions to be explored. and consumption. Yet people per se do not feature in their calculations. as economics became “the ideological and economy with humans has been left for other social scientists to pursue. would consist of neoclassic theories ranging from hypotheses of efficient markets to notions of individual rationality but also more socially sensitive concepts. The model. hence. 12). as the market is once again considered vital to the functioning of society (Servet 2009. globalisation. distribution. 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. for instance. I hope to still set out specific research objectives. have felt obligated to address the main views of economists. 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. However. The world of ideas. 13). exchange.

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

emphasise the piety towards. correspondingly. ** All connections are dialectical. Market economy. the associated ideas and functionings. 2. 3. Domestic Moral Economy. and the power emanating from. Remittances. *** “Economic ideas” discussed in this essay are mapped onto the sub-component box in 10 . 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. I have ordered the examples in every sub-component box of the model between the concepts. Marketplace. 4.

32-34). On the other. communities to the employees on which they depend. This is productivity (Gudeman 2009a. On the one hand. 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. while the downsizing itself undermines mutuality and holds wages down. Having outlined the main components of the framework. people are only connected through market trade by alienating and impersonal contracts. as the product acts back upon the producers in a dialectical relationship whereby: “Society is a human . To rectify this. 28 & 29). industrial society. perceiving relationship between the parts. Mutuality is essential to the existence of all economies. there is a mutual of others within the base. 69-78). despite the rhetoric of increased practices and models that it supports. pp. while this dependency link is itself erased. Neoclassic economists would happily leave things there. where it assumes different historical forms and degrees of pp. I now depict the Dialectical Interconnectivity of Components value realms that surround each. 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. 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. 37). 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. Society is an objective reality. This world is then objective and antecedent to individuals. 79). even those that exemplified when companies mystify downsizing by presenting themselves as dynamics. 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. Once this first- order of social institutionalisation has been established. but it is also undermined by the very market tension” (p. for which Berger and Luckman (1966) identify 11 (pp. Man is a social product” (p.any embeddedness as a flaw to the ideal functioning of the economy. Gudeman (2009a) argues that this “division is a continuing dialectic in all economies.

the symbolic universe that amalgamates discrete provinces of meaning and encompasses the institutional four distinct and ascending levels (pp. The divide continued to the primitive acquisitive context of self-interest that Mauss argued for (pp. propositions that explain sets of meanings. such as economics. The formalists begin considering the history of economic anthropology. Reinterpreted for a neoliberal capitalist “The Great Debate”. and finally. the institutions of which they say act as structures for economic life (pp. such as the economic proverb “a rising tide knowledge. which he claims made the perspectives mutually exclusive. such as a universe of “value”. the methodology of the former view debate run much deeper and farther back.economy. considered to be rational self-interested maximizers. explicit theories of an institutional sector with a separate stock of order. 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. 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 . while the social context. Carrier (2009a) traces the universalpoint. at the highest level. (1996) believes that the debate’s disengagement derives from each party’s starting substantivists start at the level of societies. Having outlined my model. basic theoretical lifts all boats”. 1-13). I do not revisit the formalist-substantivist debate but invoke it only to demonstrate the model’s capacity to draw together these divergent views. Thus. I assume that in reality the truths in either view that are worth exploring. such as “you have to think of yourself in business”. 20-22). Disputes between those that even to the time of Plato and Aristotle (Blavatsky 1939). 110-122). 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. I can now explore this a little further. Wilk with individuals. one could say that these are: incipient transmission of a vocabulary of selfinterest.

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

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

Global Forces. as money itself becomes the we must attend to economic beliefs. Carrier (2009b) augments this point when he measure and value of individuals. 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. and practices (pp. thus. Local Expressions. While this approach may also fit my model. To exemplify this. pp. 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. 83-93). I clearly do not ignore Steiner’s (2009) concerns. for large overseas corporations (Carrier 2009b. seems to link well with the dialectical interconnectivity of the model (pp. motivations. activists had to appeal to the commercial advantages of protecting the vital if we wish to comprehend the latter. 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. and Elite Interests economic models in contemporary financial markets. 15 . since it essentially represents a local expression of global and national forces. owing to the International Monetary Fund (IMF). He argues that neoliberalism permeates many aspects of life that are not ostensibly economic. power is prevalent. Carrier (2009b) discusses his research of environmental conservation. in order to understand these phenomena. institutions. that is.and power dimensions of economic life rather than simply observing the functional aspects of an economy. Nevertheless. compares our current moment of neoliberalism to Polanyi’s notion of the self-regulating “environment” came to mean a profitable space for attracting tourists. 242-255). I develop a more Marxist stance on this occasion to emphasise the political unified structure (Wilk 1996. had no money for 242). In a political economic milieu where the heavily indebted government. 240conservation in Jamaica. 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. 68-71). pp. a profitable space. Even in situations where the connection may ostensibly be trivial. as if it were a component of something that derives from a and functionings directly. Nevertheless. by dealing with economic ideas I begin with a less extreme case of political power.

the precedent set by the New York fiscal crisis that favoured a good business default.S. and the full authority given to the IMF in cases of Jamaican workers and higher profits for multinationals” (Bolles 1983. For describe a plethora of different actions – as a political project that creates the conditions research in Jamaica. At the time of their writing. Indeed. and [that] are Marcus and Fischer (1986). 39). interpreting neoliberalism – a sweeping abstraction that he invokes to for elites to accumulate capital. whereby it will always protect financial firms (p. these political economic forces should be the object of study for anthropology. as we must also consider the broader scale of political economy. even if this macrosystem perspective entails traversing multiple field sites (pp.Marcus and Fischer (1986) call for ethnographic fieldwork to represent “external ethnographic subjects” (p. my model notably advocates the kind of formative of the symbols and shared meanings within the most intimate life-worlds of expressions per se. 16 . the unlikelihood of Jamaica simply attributed to neoliberal reforms that made the borrower take the losses on defaults (p. From Harvey’s (2005) standpoint. The passionately communicated in Stephanie Black’s documentary Life and Debt (2001). 138).$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. 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). But what might this type of macrosystem view be processes. The notion of a multi-sited ethnography has indeed become part of the mainstream in anthropology. 48). when the million IMF loan in 1978. However. 73). those opposed to the move predicted “lower wages for country’s borders. it is not sufficient to simply reveal these systems…[through] their thoroughly local definition and penetration. Combining his arguments with Carrier’s (2009b) institutions and ruling powers that shape them. this was perhaps a more innovative statement than if it were made now. 90-95). p. 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. Jamaican government accepted “stringent fiscal controls” in order to obtain a U.

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

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. as well as the internal agenda that promoted less regulation. This may If we accept Graeber’s (2009) argument. for instance. say. Economic life would simply be a socio-political product and the An Interpretative Theory of Value . it is a step towards a for interdisciplinary dialogue. such as the commodification of Jamaica or of humans and nature more broadly. This is a holistic ambition external political influences on economic actors and institutions. 110). and the state’s neoliberal means asking why this is happening.market” justifies capitalist principles (p. If the previous section brought the individual into the picture as an activist within a Jamaican political economic system. 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. In our “empire of debt”. however. We also require a better comprehension of the positioning of different actors in such practices. rather than just what is going on. In sum. this part tries to reveal the picture as seen from “the individual”. 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. I probe the meaning of economics as something that is embedded deeply in culture and belief. it indicates that anthropologists must are being realised. it was quite acceptable it back. it and interests of political powers and their effects on that facet of the economy. versa with a Marxist take (Wilk 1996. This allows us to enter have depicted above. In short. As Graeber (2009) illustrates. to argue abstractly that defaults on subprime mortgages can be understood as what Stuart Kirsch (2006) might refer to as “unrequited reciprocity” rather than. 132). “a market” sells a house. My point is that it that may not be truly achievable in modern ethnography. p. failed market exchange. where as “the would be insufficient. rather than vice18 the world of minds and presents the possibility of revealing a more Weberian view of inherent meanings would be left unexamined. To achieve this.

Economic theories of value were developed through the myth of value Polanyi made explicit. This conflicts with the notion of humanity as having the potential for solidarity. 87-89). 89-90).thus. scarcity. it becomes apparent that there are alternatives to our current world configuration. By meshing symbolic anthropology with the dynamics of political instead how value is determined through relations between different groups. and being obligated to future societies. For instance. questions of value. pp. what kinds of preferences. 89). have been sidelined and left for anthropologists and other To understand the problems surrounding past and current theories of value(s). could not resolve this problem. and considers Developing a symbolic theory of value takes us far beyond thinking about “value” theories were: another. consequently. 86). 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. which we must venture much deeper than these logics of exchange. extending the concept of an anthropological theory of value and its connection to economy. positing their world of self-interest. and have the ability to act with full rationality. The Problem of “Economic” Value forms of economic life. 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. Classical economists. which were central to economics at the 19 . 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. This is something that I hope an anthropological theory of value will achieve. interdependence as a community. so. which was manufactured by economists and based on relations of self-interest (Servet in the purely rational economic terms of labour. In doing as natural and isolated from politics and where exchange counterparts in the market could have complete freedom to make choices. and utility. of recognising both the needs of the individual and of society (pp. p. Servet (2009) argues that these “objective [since] they rationalized the relationship between a person (conceived of as 2009.

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

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

can only constitute part of the market price of crude from the view benefactors seem to be investment banks. which itself created further incentives to invest in oil. Risk management and consulting costs.determined to be the impetus behind the rise. However. motivations. are diffusely hidden (pp. cultural. and indeed the great resulting profits made from investment banks. 208-210). 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. Guyer’s (2009) analysis may be useful here not only because it suggests that presented to consumers. from which the great values are composite and allows us to investigate them as such. driving up the price. If numbers cannot simply be taken at economic face “value”. So 22 . and forces that are masked by these public ideologies of price. Furthermore. this presents a clear point-of-entry for anthropology to interpret their associated social. these factors. into them. 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. was the composite component that was eventually retailers. 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 interests. It also portrays a case proportions of the retail price that was itself based on market actors from producers to contracts.

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. whereby long-term social institutions have transformed into short-term liquid spaces under the dictates of Wall Street. Wall Street.Ho (2009) offers a unique view of Wall Street. Thus. 23 . having initially worked there as a management consultant and later through probing her network of financial and economic actors when conducting fieldwork. Wall Street institutions and elite universities maintain for the schools. For Ho (2009). Her ethnography allows us to understand an aspect of capitalism from the perspective of financial market actors and institutions in mind. The Economy. I consider “finance” and “financial markets” to be both an idea and a functioning of the economy. The Whitehouse. As Ho (2009) shows. the divorce of what capitalism. 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. 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. 6 remunerative and prestigious places in today’s society. whereas candidates from other universities lack As with “the market”. and High Financiers economy and in the structure of corporate America. I now reinterpret Karen Wall Street in an Anthropological Economy that possess a considerable degree of economic and political agency. however. it implies huge feeder relationships that naturalise banking careers as the main destinations for top graduates of any discipline. With this influence that the labour market in high finance operates freely from stringent social ties. with a huge bias to recruiting students from Harvard and Princeton. 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. 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. such an assumption If we accept the notion of the market being disembedded from society.

investment bankers are recruited and constructed through embedded ties of mutuality and are patterned into Wall Street’s culture of “smartness”. 39-72). The labour relations and institutions. thus “in China. 61 & 62). these connections also influence the On the one side. Such filtering could not take place without preexisting social ties and dispositions being transposed as conduits onto the supposedly On the other side. 225). 106-121). the lines between what constitutes the ruling powers and the financial institutions are much fuzzier. 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. you cannot look at economics without looking at politics” (p. In Ho’s (2009) book. once operational. Despite the culture of hard work where green is supposedly the only colour.the socio-cultural capital and must prove themselves otherwise. Peoples’ way on the Street is largely already paved by social that can afford an elite education. Moreover. Ho (2009) shows how ethnicity greatly determines career harder work. 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. success that one may have once hired. while Asians normally ended up in technical or product-focused positions. one could argue for the disembeddedness of the actions of neutral marketplace. This is exemplified by the case of a talented black woman who left banking because she felt alienated for having paths. The market is more overtly embedded in the rulings and interests of the ruling power. 24 . never mind helping to engender a global recession. Ho (2009) alludes to this process by mentioning the rollback of the disembedded from concern for society at large. 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. white upper-class males (pp. as there are better opportunities to meet with hard work. Furthermore. Meanwhile. 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. 26). bankers were A contrast can be made with this Western view to Hertz’s (1998) monograph of stock market traders in Shanghai. 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. directors who themselves graduated from these elite schools. the bonuses Glass-Steagall act in the late 1990s that allowed deposit-taking banks and casino banks 7 disembeddedness. and compensation.

markets. In this case. 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. and effect. 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 . 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.much about disembedding as it is about power relations” (p. through her focus on employment. 247). 227). and economies (pp. She also mentions how the takeover movement of the 1980s could only occur through deregulation and favouring of private ownership (p. 229). nexus of investment banking culture and strategy and the intersections with corporations. and shareholder value movements than other corporations (p. 293). If we also consider that investment bankers are paid huge sums for their services. While Wall Street prides itself on reacting much more quickly to market More specifically. 136). 34). Whatever the case. but do not mirror. employment (p. an image of decisions bear a relation to. as the political power through institutions. as shifts and busts (p. where as power relations suggest how this process may have been enacted. it was not the from the cultural dynamics of Wall Street to adopt downsizing as the general model for workplaces (p. discerned from Ho’s (2009) monograph. the stock market. 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. 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. Ho (2009) analyses the realign social relations throughout the country. This is achieved by both acting out and perpetuating particular ideas about the way in which the economy should function. 213-215). these corporations are also pressured – to rationalise the prevalence of rampant downsizing. On the one side. disembedding describes a process. I would note that in the dialectical embeddedness. 7).

Ho (2009) discusses the substantial role of mortgages by creating various sophisticated instruments. and institutional standards. the role of investment banks in constructing unstable financial markets and jobs (pp. perhaps to protect the bonus pools of elites (p. “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. short-termism. In addition to past crises. 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. The high 26 .the institutional culture and individual beliefs of bankers. 234 & 235). not reification of market dominance” (p. to wit. 260). and dually transforming. 297-302). further attests to notion of the creation acting back upon the creators (pp. emotions. Future ideas about work life. the other side of the dialectic. hyping them. Hence. 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. Wall Street eventually created “a those acting within. that investment banks actually get enrolled in during boom times. She re-imagines the market as a practices as opposed to an abstract concept. italics in original). 321). the institution of investment banking. In this case. Wall Street has not simply reconstructed the banker’s cultural model of themselves as coeval and identified with the market” (p. and the market trends that they help to engender. Like some sort of religious their own hype. 242). and rampant-insecurity. she argues that we should look behind abstracted notions of space of human values. Through generating a global market for doctrine. 233). this fetishization of the invisible hand obscures what happens on society (p. 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. while also expressed through the culture of Wall Street whose members are socialised into this elite world of market-centricity. bankers are For Ho (2009). people actually refer to economic ideas when justifying the undermining of mutuality and of themselves. 318-324). Moreover. and peddling them around the globe to investors (pp. 240). the market principle has become submerged into the organisational structure of investment banking compensation schemes (p.

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. 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. 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. 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. as I mentioned above. 27 . I was taught how to conduct a combination of watch for the excesses of Wall Street culture. In fact. It would have been perspectives of the model. could also be said for their views on the notion of a jobless recovery. and Murphy 2010). Nonetheless. 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. fascinating to also consider that she did not decide to pursue this research. I can now turn to the first of the theoretical approaches. 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. 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.(2009) emphasises the importance of anthropological insight in examining these forces. 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. economics. since there is no place in them for the “human factor”. not just machines with calculators. In the new modes of production in the age of neoliberal financialisation. Langager. 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. When I became qualified as a stockbroker and investment manager.

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

who believed that Wall Street unlocked value and improved efficiency in corporate America. 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. were abandoned for price back then. values and practices that are hierarchical and diverging. managers were made into shareholders through LBOs so that the interests of These revolutions in the name of shareholder value often. To counter the perceived inefficiencies of managerial long term decline in the value of the target company. Contrary to the worldview of her informants. 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. paradoxically. today the until a leveraged buyout (LBO) led to massive downsizing. Ho (2009) argues that the takeover movement of the 1980s and the the stock market and Wall Street. lower wages. and a reduction from the firm to top company executives.group ties. Just as values. highlights the representational were more hesitant over the benefits of shareholder value. 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. Moreover. and “efficiency”. Hence. as advocates of shareholder value. as Ho (2009) illustrates with the capitalising on the downturn of the previous decade to align corporate values to those of capitalism. individual achievement and ability (Blim 2005. caused a example of Daimler-Benz and Chrysler. Essentially. 29 . downsizing. investment banks. Ostensibly. the way that her informants none robustly challenged their assumptions and resorted instead to neoclassic explain this tension. The company had been operating competitively with plans for growth while the company itself was saddled with a monumental amount of debt. Thus. such as these. 129-153). Ho in capital improvement plans. 314-316). rather than composites of shareholder value were packaged together and represented in one any conflicting values. 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. pp. Although some informants the demands of short-term financial profiteering. as rewards are given for occupancy and role within the firm. and the private equity firm.

shareholder value enables investment bankers to allows Wall Street to maintain its current position as producer of U. Ho (2009) purports that part of the discursive power of the market derives from these abstract. flexible representations and 38). and investors. 153-168). 72). If the ruling theory of value may throw light upon these questions. 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. Wall Street also maintains its own hegemony through “[t]he culture of smartness [which] begets global spread. in this case comprised of economists and financiers. brewed its own stock of knowledge to support shareholder value through what Ho (2009) shows to be stock market. then how of the human economic mind. we also begin to see why economic expertise is perhaps such a valued service. 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. the 30 . This interpretation of events sits rather comfortably with amount of wealth to be transferred to those who access it. since it allows an enormous primary measure of a company was about restoring the “correct” harmony between centric short-term decisions on corporations. The explicit theories of an institutional sector. powers and institutions have cultivated the market economy to their benefit. 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. Here. 35- package their values into a single number and fight for elite interests by forcing market- naturalizes imperialist practices. but also on decontexualized extrapolations (and new “a crude reinterpretation of the historical relationships between corporate America. contributions to these unequal transfers of wealth. and produces financial dominance” (p. justifies global financial influence.the Marxist analysis of political economy changes that I outlined above. As she argues. hegemony (pp.S. the use of the share price as the rationalisations (pp. In this view.

Ho (2009) offers us a vignette of these realms when she shows that the stock market was historically constructed to reality never had it. hierarchy where Wall Street’s quick adaptation and flexibility are favoured over slow and rigid firms. Accordingly. 179 & 202). commitment. 169). spheres of value encompassed by the modern universe. Ho (2009) finds this alarming since the stock price is used as a separate control from ownership in order to create liquidity. The values – in a sociological sense – of trust. represented on the stock exchange. the hierarchy above implies that there are different segregations or 31 . 243-248). 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. is a composite that includes notions of liquidity. this implies a value loyalty are abandoned for shareholder value that. This notably contains and conceals the dimensions of illiquidity (pp. As Ho (2009) points out. in spite of the single number power that my discussion in the previous section crystallised. She points out that corporations raised early 1970s (pp. bankers are superior to the average worker. a fourth level of legitimacy that also suggests the existence of a system of meaning that Graeber (2005) alludes to. hierarchy. 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. and short-termism. and Secondly. who in flexibility. There are numerous indications that such a phenomenon exists.adaptations) from neoclassic and classic economic thought” (p. Ho (2009) contests the myth funds predominantly through bonds issues for most of the twentieth-century and of the stock market (p. Firstly. and liquidity is preferred to high level of legitimacy. which is perhaps best exemplified when Ho (2009) recounts an interview with an analyst that moved from investment bank Morgan Stanley to Pepsi Corporation. to denaturalise bankers’ worldview of shareholder value. 343). the manner in which bankers selected symbolic universe of value. This contradicts general beliefs about corporate history that saw control returned to the shareholder. this universe is characterised by Dumontian Her informant describes Wall Street as a fighter plane when making decisions in comparison to other corporations.

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

forgiving or relentless. while political economy unearths the 33 . out there informing bankers’ decisions and guiding their preferences towards appear to assume endless forms. 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. While the universal-particular debate dynamics that motivate them. On the other. thus. On the one hand.imagine. 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. there appears to be a realm of value the ruling powers. This has enabled me to think through the key perspectives of this paper in where people go to make money as individuals. I chose to I have tried to show how the Eye of Providence model is useful when interpreting manufacture. Institutional and political influences played an instrumental role in out of universal self-interested rationality. Summary universe”. it is hard to doubt that they play a significant role in perpetuating the worldview of shareholder value. nurturing or predatory. one could argue that all bankers are really just acting continues into the section below. existing ethnographic research on powerful market actors and institutions. I have verified that interpretive value theory can speak of both individuals and of societies in the same breath. as the name implies. It seems that “the masters of the that best suit their financial and monetary interests. 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. 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. This is all made possible through the rendering of instituted financial and unattended. long-term or shortterm. there can be no value in who the shareholders are. Hence. Wall Street is a place framework.

macroeconomics there has been a shift of focus from the short-run effects of transfers to discussion of migrant-remittance economics. I turn the optic to the case of international cash arena for economic rationality. 3). Thus. since it framework of this paper. 11 The work was prepared for an independent non-profit organisation that researches labour and was later published in a handbook for economics. p. In addition to the cultural influences. 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 authors recognise 34 . 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. 10 Given the development potential of $316 billion+. while in 9 Against other international flows. or at least from the perspective of very influential market actors. I point out that since the 1980s. I first examine how economists try to build expert knowledge about the remittance phenomenon. See Rapoport and Docquier (2006). 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. Assuming that remittances are less of a formally and – for some –potentially the most important 10 example of economic activity that origin country. 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. 4).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. Mohapatra & Silwal 2010. entails dealing with peoples’ actions that operate outside the discipline’s comfort zone. 11 To introduce remittances. 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. 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. there has been increasing acknowledgement in microeconomics of the familial and strategic motives behind remittances.

From this and for each women but with no consideration of the social. 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. while the authors acknowledge more than self-interest. a repayment-of predicated on the characteristics of remitters (pp. Moreover. money is used to loans component.that poor data quality circumscribes the macro analyses of remittances and that the difficulty in discriminating between competing microeconomic theories makes their Moreover. and exchange of individual rationality. political. 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. are a major source of foreign exchange. a variety of services” (p. 10). and constitute a remittances as an important source of income (p. 8 & 9). 6). In this view. 11-36). Remittances and Microeconomics large portion of GDP in many of the developing countries to which they are sent (p. however. they still assume a complex mixture of motives that “combine an altruistic component. 5). determine and shape the impetus to remit. whole collections of motivation. often significantly increase GNP. an inheritance component. However. as with Guyer’s (2009) oil prices. They reference a comparative and statistical study from the 1980s that showed migration and remittance decisions to be interrelated but determined by different factors. This is essentially a series of complex formulas abstracted for each of the motivations to remit. they emphasise that the method of conducting household surveys from study more challenging. which underlies every motive that they inspect. an insurance component. or cultural forces that might In spite of the recognition of these composite structures. Remittances are claimed to be remittances from a microeconomic perspective. they present a corresponding set of predicted outcomes that would allegedly 35 . thus. Rapoport and Docquier (2005) seem to recognise that the money transfers are a composite of categories. authors proceed to present their “theory”.

39). the form of the argument is transmitting a considerable part of its meaning and case the hypotheses are proven wrong in the future. 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. 37-38). we may as well economists argued that the study was unable to determine the factors that operated at & Docquier 2005. 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. in which case. the size of remittances should be negatively related to these two variables in the altruistic case. 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.Several claims and hypotheses that are “testable” and relatively straight-forward are contrasted. Interestingly. [U]nder the investment motive. 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. while the disclaimer acts as a caveat in develop their theories. 40-48). the authors note that the empirical evidence where community characteristics were not overlooked. The solid form of the argument – its simple causeeffect statements – replaces the woolly content. 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. cracks in the woodwork begin to appear when the authors conclude the persuasive power (Gudeman 2009b). pp. Rapoport and Docquier (2005) offer a précis of the However. In the section that follows. remittances geographic distance” (pp. 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 .

and the potential bias in developing countries (p. 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. 50-53). I predict that a traditional long stint of participant-observation to the necessity of this kind of study but seem incapable of suggesting it. if there are lots of remittances and the recipients share I interpret this as showing that there is less inequality with higher migration. footnote added). 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. relative prices.underlying motives that Rapoport and Docquier (2005) search for. we can turn to their macroeconomic analysis. 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. (p. On the short-run side. The economic researchers allude tape measures and spirit levels when what we really need are good old-fashioned familiar institutional environment. Further. 50). Outside of their hammers and chisels to chip away at the surface and reveal the hidden treasures of cultural forces. welfare in relation to international transfers. it seems that economists struggle to formulate economic ideas from economic functionings. I doubt that they would have returned with little explanation. The short-run analysis concludes by referencing a study of the 12 37 . 54. the immeasurability of data. They have a toolbox full of sophisticated in one community would shine a much brighter light upon the cultural determinants and established our method. In short. They attribute this to the lack of necessary data. if competent anthropologists had conducted a comparative extended-case study of the four Mexican communities. there is less inequality. After outlining some general theories about trade. Remittances and Macroeconomics amounts to. effects of remittances on welfare together with the factors that determine migration. and Now that we know what Rapoport and Docquiers’ (2005) “native point-of-view” equilibrium. even if it were to be only applicable to those communities.

but rather in statistics and econometrics” (p. 55). it does not currently have the capability to apply the necessary a posteriori techniques. 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. 66). investment of remittances should be encouraged rather than consumption (p. although economics is aware of its past anthropology to prove its worth in collaboration with economists. Firstly.(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. For Milberg (2009). Secondly. This presents a distinct opportunity for develop more contextualised models for the short-run effects of remittances. as they seek to are not. in my opinion. 55). 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. which was no longer rooted in rational choice. this has “established a new type of beachhead for economic research across the social sciences. the 76). 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. pp. 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. 38 . an economist by trade. so obvious. 64 & 65). 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. With the social now rendered workable. It seems that. 75). 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.

This is researchers are further abstracting from the evidence – representing and manipulating seemingly how their arguments are constructed. 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. The paper’s findings are said to confirm the main benefit referenced in microeconomic literature: that “remittances improve shocks” (p. When doing so.policymakers who may wish to manage the macroeconomic effects of remittances or harness their potential for development. 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”. 25). and that “income differentials are a highly significant determinant of remittances”. Moreover. 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. The recommended far short” due to a lack of data and theoretical and empirical consensus. 1). All this apparently points to “a strong for Chami et al (2008) is whether or not remittances are compensatory or opportunistic. 21). The real question research was notably undertaken by two of the authors of this very IMF paper. Writing for the IMF. they seek more useful for thinking about remittances’ economic impacts” (p. Essentially. Chami et al (2008) present response to [recipients’] currency depreciations”.25). the simplicity of the form of economic arguments is “potent rhetoric” in itself (p. 27). 39 . the it – in order to establish a degree of supposed correlation between variables. 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. as James Carrier (2009b) argues. although this should apparently be considered with caution. To advance the notion of compensatory remittances. “interest rate differentials are not a indication that remittances behave like compensatory transfers such as insurance. Hence. rather than like opportunistic transfers such as capital flows” (p.

This is an incredibly precarious suggestion for poverty reduction. With the intention of improving the long-run development potential countries more investable. effectively Even with their self-confessed partial knowledge. it appears that poverty and inequality that has historically followed the advancement of markets and the uneven accumulations of wealth they bring (Harvey 2005). 30). in this grand neoliberal stalwart. and “Other Fields”. cross-country longitudinal research must be conducted that: and remittances are actually made” (p. 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. which are mainly its operational roles. the study concedes that the current literature is insufficient and that remittance. the department where its knowledge is produced. they suggest making the recipient offer policy advice. 81). as closely as possible. In this case. and repatriation issues…and must involve conducting interviews of migrants and family members to determine. 40 . 143). 6). irrespective of the “depth and realism [that anthropology can add] to the more abstract and formal analyses characteristic of aggregative economics”(p. 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. State arriving at the same conclusion as Rapoport and Docquier (2005). such as through improvements in infrastructure. Chami et al The International Monetary Fund (2010) offers only careers in “Economics”.15). 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. However. Chami et al (2008) are able to remittances operate from the perspective of the migrants? Unfortunately. I am not 384). 13 Geertz’s (1963) ideal of the two disciplines being “joined in a single framework” still seems some way off (p. how decisions about migration the “anthropology” word. or at least under our name. of remittances while preserving poverty reduction. “follows a cohort of migrants and their families over time as they face migration. Nonetheless. However. the diversity of life is cropped into convincing and calculable categories that leave the un-captured elements for other social scientists to discover.

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

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

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

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

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

11 & 12). might the act (p. One tactic would now invoke a monograph from an inter-island Pacific community. transmission. for instance. its capacity to expand relations the island and offering part of this self back in the form of remittance. 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. Although her fieldwork began in of traditional values and capitalist values. for Gawans. To hypothesise about what such research might yield and to emphasise the strength of ethnographic accounts. As Mauss (1990) would argue. 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. Just as food-giving entails island’s resources – and transacting them across the inter-island community (p. Clearly. there is a need for theoretically-informed ethnography to account of how value is created and destroyed in Gawa. I suspect that the current situation is an articulation Pacific Island community of Ponam (Carrier & Carrier 1989). where consumption is subordinated to eradicated by money and markets. In this and fame. I Writing from the view of symbolic anthropology.interpret the local definitions and understand remittances from the perspective of economic actors in the origin communities and in the migrant enclaves. then. Therefore. as the former creates negative value and the latter positive value. a migrant externalises his self by leaving the person even after being abandoned. What. migration and remittance expand the web of relations and obligations. “Through it the giver has a hold over the beneficiary” (pp. it is reasonable to assume that. Exchanges of food. as has been shown to be the case on the the 1970s. the economic within a hierarchical realm of value. operate externalising the island’s internal resources. 117) – of individuals and the community. 6). migration and remittance mean to the current inhabitants. the value of an act is determined by its potency. 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 . 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). outside of the kula trade ring and into a transnational monetary space. as well as the fame of Gawa.

problems. p. 15). 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. If a complex network of people. as Lee (2009) since it has its own social system. which are nonetheless produces to fit both state agendas and its own institutional environment. 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 . characteristics. Therefore. 220). what is the use of “national” statistics? Under my model. p. 142). 28 & 29). When constructing micro and macro expertise for remittances. then would Gawans perceive community. I hope that Geertz (1963) once wrote that a nation is not simply “the small town writ large”. prescriptions for nations and villages.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. and purposes. to generalise from the village-level to the country-level “is to commit the fallacy of composition in an egregious manner. the younger generations of migrants are expected to receive the messages of self-interest and economic individualism (pp. much like when there is suspicion of witchcraft. 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. witchery is experienced as encroaching from the wider island world” (p. which are then used to justify policy that I have highlighted. suggests. dynamics. groups powers that may explain the prevalence of such measures. 30). 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. However. If. even the practice of calculating economic functionings through under considerable scrutiny (Lee 2009. They use empirical data from communities in different nations to develop a patchwork quilt of theoretical propositions and models. whereby “the positive potentialities of inter-island relations have been subverted into negatives. it is to confuse the elements of a synthesis with the synthesis itself” (p. economists appear to take this flagrant myth to the next level.

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

Yet this is more than a crusade against abstraction. However. with little effect. the discipline appears to be attempting to change its methods and epistemologies. 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. which at the very least shows a postmodern sensibility. and rotate around. 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. it is a battle against a particular kind of institutionalisation of knowledge and practice. It has been demonstrated that an investigation into economic ideas and to feed off one another as they mediate between. I have argued for a greater anthropological understanding of the economy and. The more prescribed functionings of the market that I have discussed. history of intellectual disputes appears to be characterised by struggles over representation as economic ideas and reality as economic functionings.accordingly. to reel what is actually going on out there in the real world. Social problems recoveries can been seen as socially good. Conclusion methodological areas. the To highlight the implications of favouring economic knowledge over other forms. economic ideas but it is far from doing this in the case of remittances. 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”. Political economy unearths the dynamics of power that structure economic actors through social institutions and for ruling powers. I do not claim that all economics is purposefully adverse. Indeed. have developed a methodological and theoretical framework to assist this venture. such as that downsizing and jobless them in and guide them. institutions. such as investment banking and transactions for shareholder value. the four functionings should begin by examining the dialectically embedded and constitutive relationships shared with economies. ruling powers. and individuals. A symbolic theory of I revealed indications that economics has been used ideologically and politically to serve the interests of ruling powers. Paradoxically. Thus.

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

If we believe with Geertz (1973b) that the essence of our economic lives. Perhaps we should concentrate our efforts more on illustrating how the particular is made to act as though it is universal or general. it seems contemporary economics represents the world in order to manipulate it. more than highlight areas for collaboration. as I have above. Over generations. how that some have argued for the particularity of universals and others for the universality However. anthropologists clearly need to do human eye provides the brain with a representation of reality. in the Eye of Providence. namely. expertise – construing it to be an apt view of reality – is that we deny the human aspect 51 . 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. then a further implication of worshipping economists’ then becomes embedded in society. to make the case for our expertise. Just as the of the particulars. Only then will our economic lives be human once again. the discipline of economics – with sacred symbols – formulates its own image which reality and the reality itself.collaborates more closely with other social scientists and begins to change its theoretical and methodological orientations.

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

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

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

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

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

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful