A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Aspers, Patrik; Darr, Asaf; Kohl, Sebastian Article An economic sociological look at economic anthropology economic sociology_the european electronic newsletter Provided in Cooperation with: Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies (MPIfG), Cologne Suggested Citation: Aspers, Patrik; Darr, Asaf; Kohl, Sebastian (2007) : An economic sociological look at economic anthropology, economic sociology_the european electronic newsletter, ISSN 1871-3351, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies (MPIfG), Cologne, Vol. 9, Iss. 1, pp. 3-10 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/155897 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu An Economic Sociological Look at Economic Anthropology 3 An Economic Sociological Look at Economic Anthropology Patrik Aspers, Asaf Darr, and Sebastian Kohl1 thropologists, as among sociologists, one can identify [email protected] , [email protected], those who stress social structures or social institutions.2 [email protected] Other anthropological streams focus on cultural forms, and stress the symbolic expression and interpretation of cul- tures. The two notions of “social” and “cultural” anthro- Introduction pology, to some extent, reflect the distinction between the structural and interpretive emphasis. This short article is an introduction and an overview of the field of economic anthropology from a sociological per- Anthropology emerged as a study of what was called spective. In the following issues of the Newsletter we will primitive societies, in contrast to economics and sociology, focus on other disciplines that also study the economy. whose emergence directly corresponds with the develop- After all, the economy has been the focus of attention of ment of modern societies. For an outside observer, anthro- several disciplines, and we believe that there are many pology is also characterized by its distinct research meth- opportunities for cross-fertilization among disciplines. ods. Thus, the long-term fieldwork, including direct obser- Given the vast amount of scholarly writings about econ- vation, participant observation, and learning the language omy and society, our goal is modest: to introduce the of those studied, has become a defining feature of the foundation of economic anthropology, to highlight some discipline. Theoretical questions and research methods of the main debates within this field and to sketch out a often inform one another, so it should come as little sur- few fruitful encounters between economic sociology and prise that anthropologists have a great interest in what anthropology. people do, and not just in what they say. The sociological system of meaning will guide our interpre- Economic anthropology is a sub-field of anthropology, but tation of economic anthropology. This means that we, as what is its distinct nature? One way of addressing this observers, may to some extent impose coherence, where question is by identifying the disciplines’ core set of theo- the “natives” may in fact see tensions. Moreover, our work retical questions. A central question, not only in economic is nothing but a preface to a larger undertaking. The text is anthropology, but also in economic sociology, is defining written for an audience with little or no previous exposure what the economy is. Sociology, with its heritage of mod- to anthropological thinking, and it starts with a short in- ernity and differentiation of spheres of life (Weber 1946), troduction of what anthropology is. sees the economy as a rather autonomous part of a larger whole, and consequently speaks of economic actions (We- ber 1978), embedded in social processes and institutions Anthropology and Economic (Granovetter 1985). In economic anthropology, this em- Anthropology beddedness can be regarded as the analytical starting point. Thus, the object of study could in the broadest sense Anthropology can be defined as the study of human be- be defined as economic life, i.e., all activities through ings, in the widest sense. What is called “anthropology” is which people produce, circulate and consume things (Car- sometimes also called social anthropology (Great Britain), rier 2005). More concretely, the field typically deals with cultural anthropology (US), or ethnology (Germany); the topics such as human nature, methodological questions, notion is broad enough to include a natural science per- different forms of circulation (commodities, barter, gifts), spective on the evolution of humankind as well as archae- consumption, money, and the constitution of cultural val- ology (e.g. physical anthropology in the US). Among an- ues, to present a few examples. economic sociology_the european electronic newsletter Volume 9, Number 1 (November 2007) An Economic Sociological Look at Economic Anthropology 4 The Emergence of Modern Economic explain the duration of the intellectual conflict between Anthropology them and its meagre outcome. The field of economic anthropology was formed in part The debate between substantivists and formalists should through a fruitful dialogue with other fields, which also be seen in relation to the process of modernization around focused on the economy, above all, economics. This influ- the globe. Global modernization meant that anthropolo- ence is apparent in the work of Malinowski, the founding gists had to re-examine their theoretical tools. Anthropol- father of modern economic anthropology, and perhaps ogy had been initiated within the colonial systems and also of anthropology in general. His (Malinowski 1922) sometimes seen as serving its interests. Yet, anthropology classical study, in what today is Papua New Guinea, is was once again called upon to understand the tremendous essential to anyone who wants to understand the economy ruptures within the developing countries in the post colo- in traditional societies. Malinowski refers to concepts and nial era. The search for theoretical explanations of the terms developed within the field of economics, such as the ongoing process of modernization was also the reason for market. He shows how the conditions of life and economic going beyond the single-case-character of earlier ethno- transactions are intertwined, and cannot be analyzed sepa- graphic research. rately. His work is also important because it deals with basic categories such as property, time and social relations, Many anthropological studies addressed the transition which are also central to sociology, and more specifically from a traditional form of society to a more modern one for the understanding of a “primitive economy”. Mali- (Dalton 1969:64). Some of the studies have been done nowski has also deeply influenced the methodological with a policy orientation (Wilk and Cligget 2007:15). Eco- association between anthropology and fieldwork. nomic anthropologists during this phase directed their attention to the investigation of developing economies and Marcel Mauss (2002) is another founding father of eco- their relation to the developed world, which later became nomic anthropology, with his influential study of gifts a central idea in analyses of global relations. which he originally published in 1925, though it relies on secondary data and not on field work. Mauss juxtaposed When the international dependencies between people and gift and commodity exchange, and created an implicit countries began to be more obvious approaches, theories association between capitalist societies and the commodity like the Marxist influenced world-system-theory (Waller- form, and between pre-industrial societies and the gift stein 1974) were developed in response. In the seventies a form (see Bird-David [1997] for a review). Mauss also dem- few French Marxists discovered the anthropological field onstrated how gifting produces and reproduces social (Godelier 1973; Meillassoux 1972), and they pointed out relations and statuses among donors and recipients. that one can view pre-modern societies and the relations of production and their development through the theory The second stage in the development of economic anthro- outlined by Marx. pology dates from about the end of World War II to the mid seventies. This period is characterized by a methodo- Since the mid 1980s, anthropologists have begun to study logical debate between a historically and empirically ori- their own societies. The thematic focus of more recent ented school,