Engaging with Capitalism: Cases from Oceania: Volume 33

This project emerged from a conversation on the e-mail listserv of the Association for Social Anthropology in Oceania (ASAO). Kate Barclay and several other participants on the list were debating about the role of business in contemporary Pacific Islander societies, and wondering about people who have managed to make their engagements with capitalism work for them while also managing to retain the material and cultural benefits of their noncapitalist social lives. How might people manage to gain some of what they want from capitalism – greater wealth, access to health and education services, and wider life opportunities – without losing the valued aspects of their culture and social relationships? Fiona McCormack galvanized Kate into proposing the topic for a working session at the next ASAO conference, at Honolulu in early 2011. The large room was full of people interested in the topic, some of whom then committed to produce papers for a joint publication. The discussion was wide ranging and intense, covering topics from development and the complexities of making projects work, to notions of personhood and sociality, and how these change in the presence of capitalism. We worked on our papers for a year and came together again with drafts at the 2012 ASAO meeting in Portland, Oregon. This time the discussion was even more penetrating as we worked through the ideas in more depth, and by the end of the day the participants were much in need of some of the excellent local beer and oysters. Once we had the drafts together Donald Wood, the Research in Economic Anthropology series editor for Emerald, came on board and we started working toward this publication.

Purpose – The authors introduce the chapters of Engaging with Capitalism with a discussion of anthropological and other social theory about peoples’ approaches to capitalism, especially peoples with vibrant noncapitalist social systems, such as are found in Oceania.Approach – The introduction is in the form of a review of anthropological and other social theory about interactions between capitalism and noncapitalist social systems.Findings – The theoretical literature has tended to dichotomize capitalist and noncapitalist societies. While heuristically it is useful to contrast capitalist and noncapitalist social systems, in practice once societies come into the orbit of capitalism people adapt elements of capitalism to suit their aims. Furthermore, societies generally considered thoroughly capitalist also include noncapitalist features. So it is more accurate to think of societies as involving a mix of capitalism and noncapitalism, and the nature of that mix is part of what makes each society distinct.Social implications – The theoretical dichotomization of societies as capitalist or not, with capitalism understood as being universal, and noncapitalism understood in general terms such as gift economy, is prevalent in public imaginaries. Domestic social policy and international development assistance are often based on this dualistic understanding. Such programs could work better if they were based instead on an understanding that each group of people has a dynamic economic system, which includes capitalist and noncapitalist elements that interact in ways influenced by their history and locality.Value of paper – The chapter provides a conceptual scaffold for thinking about the ways people engage with capitalism.

Purpose − In the 1990s, the New Zealand government began returning land and other natural resources to Maori ownership in compensation for their dispossession in the nineteenth century. This chapter examines the impact of the settlement of the Waikato-Tainui claim on the socioeconomic development of the tribe since the compensation agreement was signed in 1995.Design/methodology/approach − The ethnographic analysis is focused on the tribal debate that seeks to balance the corporate demand to maximize profits of commercial investments and the increasing demand of tribal beneficiaries for social services. This debate is situated within the broader discussion about the balance between ownership and (re)distribution, and between historical justice and social justice.Findings − The analysis demonstrates that the restoration of land to Maori ownership does not automatically result in an improvement of socioeconomic conditions for most Maori. Instead, it seems to facilitate a gradual transformation of tribal hierarchies into class distinctions.Research limitations/implications − Further research is required as this chapter shows that the settlement of Maori grievances does not immediately resolve all socioeconomic problems as was originally expected.Practical implications − The settlement of colonial grievances is inherently complex since each solution seems to create new problems, also because the sociopolitical organization of indigenous societies has changed fundamentally since the beginning of colonization.Social implications − It will be necessary to continue to negotiate historical and social justice in postcolonial societies.Originality/value − Ownership of natural resources does not automatically entail socioeconomic developments or improvements. Additional policy strategies are required to obtain the socioeconomic outcomes that people desire from their engagements with capitalism.

Purpose – The chapter compares gift and market exchange in Hawaiian and New Zealand fisheries.Methodology/approach – The chapter draws upon a combination of original ethnographic fieldwork and literature pertaining to fisheries in both New Zealand and Hawaii.Findings – The privatization of fishing rights in New Zealand, in conjunction with a social policy directed toward Maori addressing colonial dispossession, has resulted in the dominance of market exchange, the creation of a purified version of indigenous gift exchange, and the attempted elimination of any hybrid activities. This has not been a positive outcome for the majority of coastal Maori. Fisheries development in Hawai’i has taken a different path. The flexibility that inheres in Hawaiian fisheries enables ongoing participation in both gift and cash economies.Originality/value – Over the last few decades western economies have witnessed a rapid extension of market approaches to many commonly owned environmental goods, a movement which has been entrenched as global policy orthodoxy. The social consequences of this development have been under researched. This chapter challenges the neoliberal model of using market mechanisms and property rights as “the way to do” natural resource management.

Purpose – The chapter looks at the way a group of Cook Islands women in South Auckland used neoliberal-inspired community funding to fulfil the criteria of the funders as well as their own noncapitalist aims.Methodology/approach – The chapter draws upon a combination of original ethnographic fieldwork and literature pertaining to the production and use of tivaivai in South Auckland and neoliberal policy in New Zealand.Findings – The chapter analyzes the cultural context of value creation that the production and use of tivaivai constitutes for Cook Islanders in South Auckland. The production of tivaivai as a “commercial” derivative of these elite social textiles saw the group of Cook Islands women operating in a “human economy” (Graeber, 2012), despite the neoliberal agenda of the funding.Originality/value – As a group, Cook Islanders are marginalized in New Zealand, but the outcome of this funding in the details of how the women recipients managed the use of the money, and how and what they produced, tells a different story about how Cook Islanders engage with capitalism via the “human economy.” Such an analysis adds considerable complexity to the understandings of the way women make and use tivaivai in New Zealand, as well as the ways Cook Islanders do economics in an expanded notion of economy. This sheds light on the subaltern strategies that Cook Islanders create in response to the opportunities and hegemonic forces that exist in the global capitalist economy, and the way they engage with capitalism in the context of the New Zealand political economy.

Purpose – To critically assess engagements with capitalism in coastal fisheries development, considering their success or otherwise for coastal villagers.Approach – Using field research and written reports of projects and the concept of “social embeddedness” we analyze two fisheries development projects as local instances of capitalism.Findings – Coastal peoples in the Pacific have been selling marine products for cash since the earliest days of contact with both Europeans and Asians. Since the 1970s, there have also been fisheries development projects. Both types of engagement with capitalism have had problems with commercial viability and ecological sustainability. One way to understand these issues is to view global capitalist markets as penetrating into localities through the lens of local cultures. We find, however, that local cultures are only one factor among several needed to explain the outcomes of these instances of capitalism. Other explanations include nature, national political and economic contexts, and transnational development assistance frameworks. The defining features of “local capitalisms” thus arise from configurations of human and nonhuman, local and outside influences.Social implications – Development project design should account for local conditions including: (1) village-based socioeconomic approaches, (2) national political economic contexts, (3) frameworks that donors bring to projects, and (4) (in)effective resource management.Originality/value of paper – The chapter builds on the experience of the authors over 15 years across multiple projects. The analysis provides a framework for understanding problems people have encountered in trying to get what they want from capitalism, and is applicable outside the fisheries sector.

Purpose – This chapter analyzes landowner business development and economic sustainability in the context of large-scale mining in Papua New Guinea with a focus on the Lihir gold mine. It pays particular attention to the social implications of success or failure of business development in mining contexts.Methodology/approach – This chapter is based upon ethnographic research and social impact monitoring studies conducted by the authors in Lihir between 1994 and 2012, as consultants and employees of the Lihir mining operation and as independent researchers. This chapter is also based upon broader research and consulting work undertaken by the authors at other mining locations throughout Papua New Guinea. The research is intended to explore the social changes generated by large-scale mining and related forms of business development, and the factors and strategies which constrain or enable landowners to get what they want from capitalism.Findings – Business development in resource extraction enclaves is structurally different from other nonresource development contexts and produces a more dependent and client-based approach to capitalism. In Lihir, research and ethnographic observations indicate that landowner business development is highly territorialized, which is captured by the landowner catch cry “My land, my work.” Ultimately, mining has provided significant economic opportunities for the local community, but these economic changes, especially through the distribution of mine-derived benefits and opportunities for business development, have involved processes that have divided people and entrenched inequalities.Practical implications – In Papua New Guinea, the close relationship between property ownership, landed interests, and capitalist engagement creates steep challenges for sustainable business development in resource enclaves. This research provides a strong foundation for exploring alternative strategies for economic development.Originality/value – Provides detailed insights into the social, economic, and political factors which influence sustainable business development in Papua New Guinean mining enclaves.

Purpose – To provide an update on recent intensifications of commoditization among the North (Amoamo) Mekeo (Central Province, PNG) and to assess the extent to which in this context contemporary villagers qualify as “dividuals,” “individuals,” or “possessive individuals.”Methodology/approach – The empirical data presented in this chapter were collected by means of participant observation techniques conducted over a 40-year period. Here those materials are analyzed through a juxtaposition of the “partible” or “dividual” type of personhood foregrounded in the “New Melanesian Ethnography” (Strathern, 1988; Wagner, 1991) and models of the “individual” and “possessive individual” in Macpherson’s (1962) formulation of “possessive market societies.”Findings – Contrary to the canonical assumptions of “individualism” and “possessive individualism” which underpin most social-scientific theories of modernization, globalization, development, etc. in the non-Western world, North Mekeo villagers’ most recent intensive post-contact engagements with capitalism have tended to reproduce indigenous “dividual” patterns of partible personhood and sociality which incorporate seemingly “individualist” practices as momentary parts of overall, total “dividual” persons and processes.Research implications – Explanations of the globalizing spread of capitalism among non-Western peoples must pay heed to indigenous notions of personhood agency if they are to avoid ethnocentric distortions arising from presuppositions of the ubiquity of Western notions of individualism.Originality/value of chapter – This chapter demonstrates the analytical benefits of the New Melanesian Ethnography – particularly its key notion of partible personhood – and the advantage of focused long-term ethnographic fieldwork in accounting for processes of social change.

Purpose – This chapter aims to understand how the Bugkalot, or the Ilongot, as they are known in the previous anthropological literature, engage with capitalism in ways that are deeply shaped by their indigenous idioms of personhood and emotion.Methodology/approach – Long-term intensive fieldwork including five weeks of pilot visits to Bugkalot land in 2004 and 2005, and fifteen months of residence from 2006 to 2008.Findings – The development of capitalism in the Bugkalot area is closely linked with the arrival of extractive industry and the entry of Igorot, Ilocano, and Ifugao settlers. Settlers claim that they have played a centrally important role in developing and “uplifting” the Bugkalot, and that before their arrival the Bugkalot were uncivilized and didn’ t know how to plant (irrigated) rice and cash crops. However, the Bugkalot deny that they are at the receiving end of the settlers’ tutelage. Rather, they perceive the acquisition of new knowledge and technology as initiated by themselves. Envy and desire are identified by the Bugkalot as the driving force behind their pursuit of a capitalist economy. While the continuing significance of emotional idioms is conducive to the reproduction of a traditional concept of personhood, in the Bugkalot’s responses to capitalism a new notion of self also emerges.Originality/value of chapter – Different notions of personhood are intertwined with local ideas of kinship and economic rationality. The Bugkalot’ s attempt to counter the politics of development with their own interpretation of economic change highlights the importance of indigenous agency.

Purpose – This chapter examines the interactions among wholesale betel nut traders within Papua New Guinea’s (PNG’s) flourishing, contemporary, and indigenous betel nut trade. It explores the nature of the “social embeddedness” of the trade and how particular “place-based” practices and ideas shape people’s engagements with markets.Methodology/approach – Multisited ethnographic research focused on betel nut traders.Findings – This chapter highlights how local ideas about sociality and exchange shape the copresent rivalry and companionship that characterize interactions among Mt. Hagen’s betel nut traders. Traders travel long distances and take great risks to buy betel nut. They travel together, share resources, and trade in the same places, and through this they become part of one another’s social networks. This creates the expectation that traders will cooperate, consider other traders in their actions, contribute to each other’s safe-keeping, and act collectively in their interactions with producers. This does not preclude competition, however. Traders compete for profits, but the competiveness of their interactions is also influenced by a concern for status. This copresence of companionship and rivalry, which pervades Hagen sociality more broadly, is central to shaping the trade as a whole.Originality/value of the chapter – Betel nut is the most important domestic cash crop in PNG, and selling betel nut is a prominent livelihood activity for rural and urban people. This chapter reports some of the findings of the first detailed study of the betel nut trade in PNG.

Purpose – The chapter examines Leopold Pospisil’s claim that the precolonial way of life of the Me, who live in the central highlands of west New Guinea, in many ways resembled capitalism. Pospisil based his claim on his field work among a group of Me, from 1954.Approach – Formulating a characterization of “capitalism” and using it as a yardstick while scrutinizing the available, early ethnographic literature discussing the Me.Findings – The late precolonial life of the Me appears to have been a hybrid one. It contained capitalist elements: such as a currency, accumulation, and unequal division of capital. But in other respects social reproduction, a noncapitalist element, was primary.Research limitations – An important source of information on the Me are the extensive writings of Sibbele Hylkema who worked among the Me from 1969 to 1994. They are for the most unpublished and consist in part of notes. The Me live in an inaccessible area so there is no other contemporary ethnography by which to update or compare and contrast Hylkema’s findings.Originality/value – This chapter is a Literature Review.

Purpose – The chapter discusses the importance of remittances for the way rural people in Manus Province, Papua New Guinea, engage with capitalism in the form of development, wage labor, and the modern consumer economy.Methodology/approach – The chapter draws upon a combination of original ethnographic fieldwork conducted between 2002 and 2008 and readings of previous anthropological research about Manus.Findings – The chapter shows how the remittances of goods and money are part of the maintenance of long-term exchange relationships between emigrants and their rural kin, and how remittances are regarded as crucial in fostering local development. The remittances comprise a large proportion of the flow of money into Manus. They also form social ties between migrants and villagers, and may facilitate the return of migrants to their home village. The moral conflicts and evaluations of status and leadership tied into the remittance practices and the strategies employed by returning migrants are explained as the articulation of different values rather than one system supplanting the other.Originality/value – The aspect of remittances related to return migration is particularly under-theorized in anthropology. In this way the chapter has value to both researchers specializing in remittance-economies or local-level politics and development planners and practitioners.

Purpose – Present a history of interaction (1947–1996) between a remote nonmarket rural economy in the Papua New Guinea (PNG) highlands and capitalism, first via colonialism and then in the post-Independence period. The Irakia Awa sought to create an alternative local version of modernity in a context of limited opportunities for participation in the monetized market economy.Design/methodology/approach – Ethnographic, multi-temporal field research, totaling two years in residence, focused on sociocultural changes associated with reallocations of land and labor to cash-cropping (coffee), wage labor migration, and new place-based cash-generating initiatives.Findings – After more than three decades of intensive participation in labor migration, the most lucrative option available for earning cash, Irakians deemed it futile, as well as detrimental to the overall well-being of their home community. They dramatically reduced labor migration levels, increased smallholder coffee production, and set about creating a more modern and inviting village lifestyle.Research limitations/implications – This is the historical experience of one rural community in the remote PNG highlands up to the mid-1990s, but is framed around ongoing issues confronting many rural communities engaging with capitalism in PNG.Originality/value – This account presents original field research and contributes to the growing literature on PNG rural peoples with limited opportunities to participate in the cash market economy within a larger context of government policies and malfeasance that have rendered many rural communities largely “invisible.” It suggests substantial reforms are needed before all citizens can enjoy benefits from engaging with capitalism.

Purpose – The authors conclude the “Engaging with Capitalism” volume with a discussion of social theory focusing on the implications of the volume for practices in international and community development.Approach – This chapter draws together some of the key themes in this collection to identify the development implications of the efforts of local communities to socially embed their engagement with capitalism and markets to better serve their socioeconomic and cultural needs. Discussion is informed by the literature on social embeddedness of economies, critical development theory, and the authors’ ongoing empirical research in rural Papua New Guinea.Findings – There is growing recognition within anthropology and geography of the enduring influence of indigenous social and economic practices and values and their capacity to condition the introduced market economy and capitalist economic practices. The chapters in this collection, from the “Engaging with Capitalism” sessions of the 2011 and 2012 ASAO conferences, speak to this issue directly by exploring how indigenous forms of socioeconomy interact with introduced capitalist and market processes to influence sociocultural and economic change at the local level.Research and social implications – The challenge for development researchers is how to conceptualize local engagements with capitalism, and to identify how such concepts and concerns might be applied in development practice to better serve the needs of local communities. We outline some key principles that could be incorporated into development planning to make development projects more sustainable and better tailored to the needs of recipient communities.