Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology Report 1999 - 2001
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology Report 1999 - 2001 Halle/S. Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology Report 1999 – 2001 Halle/Saale Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology Preface The decision to establish the Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropol- ogy, located in the east German city of Halle, was taken by the Senate of the Max Planck Society in June 1998. Prof. Dr. Günther Schlee, formerly Professor of Social Anthropology at the University of Bielefeld, and Prof. Christopher Hann, Professor of Social Anthropology at the University of Kent, were appointed founding Directors. The Institute began its work in May 1999. Housed initially in offices in the city centre, the Institute moved to its permanent buildings in December 2001, which marks the end of the period covered in this first Report. It was hoped that the research agenda would generate synergies be- tween the various units. Department I, “Integration and Conflict”, headed by Günther Schlee, tries to gain new insights into processes of conflict and integration by examining the question of who sides or coop- erates with whom and why. In this perspective conflict and integration translate into questions of identity and difference. The focus is on strate- gies of inclusion and exclusion, both from the perspective of their discur- sive “logic” and from that of their societal consequences. Department II, “Property Relations”, headed by Chris Hann, adopts a broad approach to property in society. It is particularly concerned with changes in the social entitlements of citizens and groups in the “postsocialist” countries of Eurasia, and the main ethnographic focus is on decollectivisation. As a precursor to the creation of a third Department, “Legal Pluralism”, a Project Group was established in July 2001 by Profs. Franz and Keebet von Benda-Beckmann. This group became fully operative in May 2001. It is concerned with the emergence and maintenance of plural legal sys- tems, and how they change over time. Particular attention is paid to two neglected topics in legal anthropology: the significance of religion and religious law, and the trans-national dimensions of legal pluralism. These research programmes and a good deal more besides are coordi- nated by Bettina Mann, who has also played the leading role in the com- pilation of this Report. Our warm thanks to her and her team. FvB-B KvB-B CH GS Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology Table of Contents Preface I. Structure and Organisation of the Institute 3 II. Research Programmes - Department I: Integration and Conflict 7 - Department II: Property Relations 75 - Project Group: Legal Pluralism 129 III. Services and Facilities - Library Report 169 - IT Group Report 171 IV. Conferences, Workshops, Colloquia 177 V. Other Academic Activities - Memberships 195 - Professorships, Editorships 199 - Teaching Activities 200 - Cooperation 202 - Lectures 203 - Presentations at Conferences and Workshops 207 - Outreach/Public Talks 216 - Visiting Scholars and Guests 218 VI. Publications 223 I. Structure and Organisation of the Institute Structure and Organisation of the Institute 3 Structure and Organisation of the Institute Scientific Advisory Board Prof. Dr. Caroline Humphrey, University of Cambridge Prof. Dr. Frans Hüsken, University of Nijmegen Prof. Dr. Zdzislaw Mach, Uniwersytetu Jagiellonski Prof. Dr. Sally Engle Merry, Wellesley College Prof. Dr. Bernhard Streck, Universität Leipzig Prof. Dr. Serge Tornay, Musée de l’Homme Prof. Dr. Andreas Wimmer, Universität Bonn Scientists and Support Staff at the MPI Directors Prof. Dr. Günther Schlee (managing director): Integration and Conflict Prof. Dr. Chris Hann: Property Relations Heads of the Project Group Legal Pluralism Prof. Dr. Franz von Benda-Beckmann Prof. Dr. Keebet von Benda-Beckmann Research Scientists Dr. Andrea Behrends Dr. Deema Kaneff Dr. Susanne Brandtstädter Dr. Erich Kasten Dr. Barbara Cellarius Dr. Alexander King Dr. Andreas Dafinger Prof. Dr. Stephen R. Reyna Dr. Youssouf Diallo Dr. Nikolai Ssorin-Chaikov Dr. Julia Eckert (until 31.12.00) Dr. John Eidson Dr. Tadesse, Wolde Gossa Dr. Peter Finke Dr. Bertram Turner Dr. Tilo Grätz Dr. Thomas Widlok Dr. Patty Gray Dr. John C. Wood (temporary) Dr. Martine Guichard Dr. Lale Yalçin-Heckmann (until 30.09.01) Dr. John Ziker Dr. Patrick Heady (half-time) 4 Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology Doctoral Students Associated Projects (externally funded) Dereje Feyissa Christiane Falge Georg Haneke (doctoral student, Cusanus Werk) Carolin Leutloff Prof. Dr. Nina Glick Schiller Andrea Nicolas (visiting professor) Gordon Milligan Boris Nieswand Michaela Pelican Meltem Sancak Florian Stammler Davide Torsello Aimar Ventsel Support and Services Research Coordinator: Bettina Mann Library: Michael Ladisch (Head librarian) Anett Kirchhof (Library assistant) Translators: Andreas Hemming Diana Quetz IT Group: Dr. Armin Pippel (Head of the IT Group) Gordon Milligan (Computer systems support/programming) Harald Nagler (System administrator) Oliver Weihmann (Multi-media assistant) Administration: Kathrin Föllner (Head of the administration) Katja Harnisch (Accounting) Janka Mathiebe (Personnel office) Kati Broeker (Buyer) Secretaries: Anke Brüning Gesine Koch Viola Stanisch Viktoria Zeng Technical Service: Ronald Kirchhof II. Research Programmes Integration and Conflict 7 Department I: Integration and Conflict Director: Günther Schlee Content: 1. Introduction 7 2. Regional Aspects 11 3. Themes of the Individual Projects 14 4. Dimensions of Comparison 43 5. Methods 68 6. Widening the Comparative Framework 70 7. References 72 1. Introduction At the time of writing most of the component projects of this research programme are still in the data-collection phase, which means that no final results can be presented yet. This is therefore the wrong place to expect an elegantly constructed new theory of integration and conflict in its final shape. Advances toward a new theory (or a refined version of old theories) of integration and conflict are, however, being made. The preliminary results of the individual projects allow for the identification of conceptual tools, which emerge in a plurality of settings. Recurrent patterns have been discovered which allow for tentative typologies of cases. Close analysis of regional cases and their comparison have led to first attempts at generali- sation. The order in which this report is presented follows the sequence of these cognitive steps. It starts with the individual projects and the re- gional clusters they form and then proceeds to the recurrent features of the preliminary findings, which offer themselves as dimensions of com- parison and thus lead to more refined research questions. 8 Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology The theoretical focus of this research programme is on processes of identification and differentiation, it is mainly on the outward signs of belonging and not belonging, on the surface through which we interact with others as social beings. This is not to deny the relevance of deeper and hidden aspects such as ‘values’ or latent ‘functions’. It is simply to compensate for the lack of attention to the surface of things in the past. Social scientists and scholars in all the arts and humanities have always had a tendency to dig deep. We may not have been superficial enough where superficiality was required. We think that on the level of outward identification, i.e. people’s claims to belong to one or the other group and their categorisations of others, insights can be made. In combination with other findings about ‘values’, ‘beliefs’, ‘norms’, and other motive forces such as material and immaterial costs and benefits (to individuals, to groups, and to individuals who identify with groups), we can throw a new light on the workings of integration and conflict. What constitutes social identities, i.e. the question of who belongs to whom and why, is a basic question of social science and remains thus far without a satisfactory answer. Or it can be answered in too many alterna- tive ways, which amounts to the same thing. To explain collective identi- fications through group interests, as is sometimes attempted, falls short of a solution since, as groups emerge, their changing composition may lead to changing perceptions of shared interests. Any attempt to manipu- late identities according to perceptions of political or economic interests has to start from pre-existing identifications. The options of those who have an influence on the formation and change of social identities at any moment of time are limited by social givens. Identity politics is the inter- face of action and structure, it is where fluidity meets rigidity and either modifies it or breaks over it. The substance of identity politics is the possible ways in which people can claim to be the same as other people or to be different from them. These are myriad. The scope of identification is one of them. Identifica- tions can be wider or narrower. Conditions can be identified under which it is advantageous for individual or collective actors to define wider identi- ties which they share with others, for example to strengthen their own group or to widen their alliances when they feel insecure, or to keep their own numbers small, when they do not wish to share their resources or when they feel strong enough to prevail against their neighbours alone in a conflict and do not want any allies who could claim a part of the loot. Successful identity politics