Group 3

Group 3

• Conflict

  • The anthropology of conflict offers a thought-provoking tool for students who aim to explore and understand the complexity of power relations from an anthropological and ethnographic viewpoint. One very important angle on conflict is the tension between the state and those under the power of the state. This is a sub-section of political anthropology. It is a core and ongoing field of research that has taken the discipline from the study of the origin of the state in remote and 'simple' or 'exotic' societies (Beattie 1960) at the turn of the 19th century to contemporary ethnographies on the current configuration of power relations in a globalized and transnational world (Eller 1999). Another possible angle on conflict focuses on tensions emerging from everyday social relations between individuals, groups and institutions, in public and private spaces and in rituals of resistance or exaltation (Varzi 2006). Power is expressed practically and symbolically in ideas, values, emotions and actions of individuals and groups. The interweaving of the cultural, both symbolic and moral, with determinations of social position (class, age, gender) and the forms in which power relations are expressed (institutions, ideologies, dominations, resistances) make for complex and diverse levels of analysis.

  • A new and productive topic in political anthropology is the study of the modern state. Studying 'us' is a challenging anthropological endeavour; that is, to study the state is usually complicated by the tendency to essentialize or reify culture and society. The state appears as 'natural' or 'given'. To combat these cultural assumptions, contemporary anthropologists are studying modern nation-states ethnographically, in terms of their social and historical character. They focus on the actors' perspectives, which reveal multiple levels of meanings. These studies frequently shed light on the micro-level, less obvious relations of power and domination within our current political orders.

  • Possible topics of study in this area of inquiry include: the constitution of political communities; the relationship between order and conflict; the association between power, authority and legitimacy; the role of social and indigenous movements; questions of inequality; perceptions and modes of violence; and concerns about human rights and citizenship. Anthropologists reflect on these topics drawing from classic readings such as Marxist understandings of exploitation and domination; Weberian concepts of state and bureaucracies; the concept of hegemony in the works of Gramsci; and the more recent work of Foucault including his concepts of governmentality, discipline and biopolitics, as well as other contributions from feminist and post-colonial studies.

  • In teaching this area of inquiry, the following questions may be helpful frames for exploring ethnographic data and anthropological thinking. What are different sources of conflict? Why is the same issue a source of conflict in one setting, but not in another setting? What does it mean to resolve conflict? Is the state the solution to, or the cause of, conflict? Is conflict a natural result of our tendency to 'other'? What are the different ways in which conflict is manifest in one's life and in society? This area of inquiry requires a balance between conceptual understandings, which serve as analytical frameworks, and topic-based exploration. One approach to the teaching of this might be to explore, for example, the issue of domestic violence in society, beginning with analysis of news stories, documentaries and print/electronic media articles (particularly prevalent during the global annual White Ribbon Day campaign). Discussion and debate can then be informed and supported by more sophisticated reading and analysis of anthropological text and ethnography, especially feminist writings.

• Development

  • Tradition and change collide as power relations play out in the fascinating, often contentious, interface between developed and developing societies and segments of societies. The concept of development refers to more economically developed societies providing assistance and resources to less economically developed societies, either directly through bilateral aid or indirectly via other agencies. Development also refers to self-directed industrial, technological and economic improvement. Anthropologists are active in this field as advisers to governments or agencies (such as non-government organizations (NGOs), United Nations agencies, or the World Bank) that wish to include knowledge and understanding of local cultures in their decision-making process. In particular, valuable understanding of indigenous knowledge systems can be shared with providers. Anthropologists may also conduct fieldwork, analysing the social impact of development on specific communities.

  • Of particular interest to anthropologists is the western assumption by providers that development means improvement in people's lives when in reality this may not be the case. Neo-colonialism emerges as a topic in the discourse on development; has the hegemony previously associated with colonial rule merely taken on a different form? Development anthropologists are not only committed to making a positive contribution to the lives of the recipients of aid, often through involving marginalized people in the decision-making process, but are also obliged to evaluate the effectiveness of aid projects. In some cases it may be clear that the negative social impact of development programmes, projects and policies outweighs the perceived benefits.

  • The topic of development is contentious, as it may seem that the philosophy and aims of anthropology are somewhat at odds with the realities of providing aid to communities in developing societies. An ethnocentric evaluation of what 'progress' means may dominate. Some of the first critical reactions to the dialogue about development came during the 1970s from dependence theorists such as Immanuel Wallerstein (1979), whose ideas drew from neo-Marxist thinking and who argued that the world was divided into core and peripheral regions where inequality was perpetuated through unequal exchange within the international world order. To follow the debate on development anthropology it is worthwhile exploring the work of anthropologists such as Katy Gardner and David Lewis (1996), whose work includes a consideration of the role of multinationals and the competing narratives of 'development' and 'un-development'; Arturo Escobar (1995), who compares development and colonialism as mechanisms of control and governmentality; David Mosse (2005), whose emphasis on the importance of a relational approach questions the dominant and normative role of economists in development policy and practice; and other current anthropological writings that may be pertinent.

  • In teaching this area of inquiry, the following questions may be useful in framing discussions. When does development become 'non-development'? To what extent is development the other side of the coin to 'under-development'? How might development anthropologists resolve ethical issues? Who decides whose 'needs' are to be provided for? Is development the new colonialism? To what extent is indigenous knowledge relevant to development policymaking? This area of inquiry requires a balance between conceptual understandings, which serve as analytical frameworks, and topic-based exploration. One approach to the teaching of this might be to explore, for example, the relationship between a developed nation and a developing nation that were formerly connected as the colonizer and the colonized. To begin with, the nature of the relationship can be analysed through investigating data available on government and NGOs' websites and also examining contrasting viewpoints expressed in print/electronic media. An anthropological framework can then be applied to evaluate the current relationship in terms of development and the notion of neo-colonialism, using specific ethnography and other writings. Also of interest will be the critical evaluation of the role of an anthropologist (particularly any ethical considerations) in advising a government or an NGO regarding a development project that affects a specific community in the developing nation being studied.

• Production, exchange and consumption

  • The capitalist system is global in our world today. Under its hegemony, economies are tightly interwoven in a complex interrelated world. In this global arena, there are tensions and conflicts, inclusions and exclusions, and economic inequalities that affect many different groups in dramatic ways. Can the complexities of these phenomena be fully explained by economics? Or should these processes be understood using a wider anthropological framework?

  • This area of inquiry aims to address these exciting issues. The field of economic anthropology involves both the comparative study of economic systems, and the social and cultural nature of economic activity. It explores the ways in which societies construct, interact with, and transform the social and cultural environment in the production, distribution, and consumption of material and symbolic goods.

  • This field has a long tradition in anthropology and constitutes one of its core areas of research. Using the concept of 'habitus' in their study of non-capitalist societies, anthropologists began to challenge economists' assumptions about human behaviour by disputing the universality of economic laws. That is, they discovered that not all people behave according to the same canons of economic rationality (Sahlins 1972; Bourdieu 2005). Economic anthropologists maintain that the economy has to be understood within its social and cultural contexts.

  • The problem of exchange was one of the earliest topics of anthropological reflection. At the turn of the 20th century, Malinowski (1922) and Boas (1888) began to question and reject evolutionist abstractions. From well-known ethnographic cases like the Kula system or the potlatch as examples of alternative forms of the circulation and distribution of goods, anthropologists started to think about the place of social reciprocity in the allocation of resources. Continuing in the tradition of Mauss's seminal work The Gift (1925), reflections on commodity and gift exchange remain an ongoing area of research engaging many anthropologists from different theoretical perspectives and approaches.

  • The focus on production entered the academic debate in the 1970s. As Wolf pointed out in his classic work Europe and the People Without History (1982), it was difficult for the social sciences, and anthropology in particular, to understand an interconnected world. Mintz (1985) demonstrated the multiple connections that accounted for the emergence of modern capitalism. In line with this, anthropologists have researched the interactions between large processes of capitalist expansion and local cultural responses. Work and labour have been studied at length, particularly focusing on proletarianization, poverty, gender roles, peasantry, and migration.

  • Studies on consumption enrich the debate from multiple approaches. Douglas and Isherwood (1979) and Sahlins (1976) represent turning points in the study of material culture, discussing how the essence of consumption is communication and the exchange of meanings through goods. More recently, Miller (1995) has reflected on the impact of consumer goods on cultural values, while Bourdieu (1984) has analysed how consumption expresses power relations and introduced the concept of 'habitus' - the embodiment of the material conditions of existence.

  • In teaching this area of inquiry, the following questions may be useful in framing discussions. How do anthropologists understand the relationship between culture and economy? Is there one universal form of economic behaviour and rationality? How do anthropologists explain poverty and inequality? What do anthropologists say about work and labour? What is reciprocity and how is it relevant in a capitalist society? In what ways is capitalism considered a global phenomenon? How does the capitalist system expand and relate to other economic systems? Why do people want goods? What is the process of commodification? This area of inquiry can be explored in a number of contexts and through a range of inquiry-specific concepts and varied analytical frameworks, considering a balance between classic and more contemporary readings. For example, a full-length ethnography focusing on one topic within studies of capitalism and shorter articles dealing with other related issues may be included in the area of inquiry. Some of these articles may lead to more theoretical discussions that will deepen the students' understandings of the problems posed in this area.