Introduction
The study of economic anthropology strives to explain human economic behavior in its geographic, cultural, and historical scope. Some components of the economy such as self-interest makes many believe that economy is based on human nature. The approach follows that human nature was the main reason why economy emerged. However, a different school of thought observes that economy is based on historical development and it has cultural underpinnings. This approach observes that economy is not entirely based on human nature and can be identified through the study of history and culture. This paper will analyze the historical and cultural underpinnings of the economy by looking at the three principles of economic integration, the historical European economy, traditional societies, history of market institutions, the history of money, and culture approach to economy.
Anthropology involves the study of humanity as a whole. Anthropologists usually strive to discover the principles of organization that exist within every level of society. On the other hand, the term economy came about in the latest nineteenth century and was used to refer to the aggregate of goods and services that were sold and bought in the national territory. A term like that of the British economy was used to address the movement of money and goods throughout Great Britain. Economic anthropology is a combination of economy and anthropology as it strives to explain how the production and movement of goods and services have historical, geographical, and cultural underpinnings. Economic anthropology must thus take into account the different standards of living and address human needs and motivations.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The three basic forms of economic integration
Market and economy is not a natural phenomenon that logically came into existence. Instead, it came about through the active role of men as they strived to live together in harmony. Market came out of politics and culture and can be traced throughout history. Karl Polanyi (2001) expounded on the historical and cultural roots of the economy through his works titled The Great Transformation. He does this by posing several arguments which show that the market society is not naturally occurring but that it has political and social construct. He makes use of both historical and ethnography evidence to expound on this.
Polanyi expounds on the historical and cultural context of the market by observing the three basic forms of economic integration which include reciprocity, redistribution, and householding. Reciprocity is a form of gift exchange that occurs in sufficient economies. Redistribution occurs when resources are collected in a center that distributes and allocates them to different geographical locations. Householding involves the production for one’s own use.
Reciprocity
The concept of reciprocity refers to the process of exchanging gifts. Marcel Mauss (1967) expounds on various processes of gift exchange that took place throughout history. He notes that all societies that were most influential were less serious and less selfish compared to our current society. These societies thrived in generosity and had established structures of exchange through gifts. The exchange of gifts would take place in various ceremonies such as tribal gifts, initiation ceremonies, and ceremonies of rival clans. These groups would visit each other and had a more exaggerated form of generosity. The exchange of various goods through the use of gifts marked a significant part of traditional economics.
The traditional economies did not have a middle path or means for controlling the exchange. The exchange was done with either a complete mistrust and trust. One could lay down their arms, renounce their magic, and give everything away. The exchange could involve casual hospitality, giving away of valuables, one’s daughter, or the entirety of one’s property. These societies thus made contracts to give and repay. The societies were ruled with a high degree of uncertainty and business came about to restore peace. When two groups would move away from each other in case of defiance or mistrust, the only way that they could come to terms was through the offering of gifts. As such, business was done with foreigners and some of them could have been allies.
The giving and receiving of gifts marked the first way which society would progress and have stable economies. This was achieved through the stabilization of the contracts that ruled the processes of giving, receiving, and paying. In order for one person to trade with another, one had to first lay down their spear. After this, the two parties could succeed in the exchange of goods and persons. The parties could involve the exchange of goods between clan and clan, tribe and tribe, or nation and nation. The lowest form of exchange occurred between individuals. The giving and receiving of gifts played a significant role in assisting people to satisfy their mutual interests and to resolve their differences.
Such forms of exchange in order to create understanding and peace is clearly visible in the current economies. Countries that fail to come to a common understanding and agreement usually resolve to have sanctions on other countries. The sanctions are usually removed when countries come to agreements. Additionally, countries that have a sound relationship can offer an exchange in the form of grants and loans to other countries. This shows that the modern world has learned through the economy to solve their differences and to be able to oppose each other without necessarily going into battles and slaughtering each other. This is a mark of wisdom and solidarity that has been achieved through economic progress from history.
Redistribution
The process of redistribution can be traced in traditional economies where a signification part of all produce was delivered to village headmen and chiefs that kept the product in storage. The chief later distributes these items to everyone. The items could be distributed in various ceremonies such as feasts and islanders. Gathering of goods in a common source also allowed for the ease in the process of gift exchange from one tribe to the next. The existence of redistribution thus required to have institutional patterns that could be trustworthy. The need for institution leads to the presence of large and complex economic institutions.
The process of redistribution can be seen in the current society through the use of taxes. Redistribution forms an integral part of our society as it facilitates the division of labor, taxation for public purposes, foreign trading, and defense programs. The modern world has developed a government that collects taxes from different individuals and business institutions. The government then distributes the resources that have been collected by budgeting for the resources in different parts of the economy. The resources can be used for defense purposes or development purposes through the building of infrastructure. The institution of the government plays a big role in the success of these programs.
Householding
Householding is the third principle that has played a big role in economics throughout history. It involves the production of goods and services for one’s own use. Householding is a more ancient form of economy compared to other principles like reciprocity and redistribution. The process did not occur from ancient times but only existed as the start of economies. The individualistic salvage could hardly collect food and gather for his family. The practice of hunting for one’s own family only came into existence after the emergence of economic life (Polanyi, 2001). This led to the basic formation of family institution and facilitate further exchange through reciprocity and redistribution.
Hann and Kart (2011) describe economy as the process of putting one’s household in order. They note that the centrality of markets came about after the centrality of kinship in the society. One of the ways to cope up with the world is that people should be highly self-reliant. People thus become household members based on intimate and long-term strategies. Social structures are thus reproduced through ordinary human outcomes of birth. Households dimensions thus create a more significant form of the economic order.
Evidence from Western Europe Economy
An analysis of the Western Europe economy can be used to show the cultural and historical roots of the economy. Polanyi (2001) notes that one of the concepts of economic rationality is a specific historical construct which emerged in Western Europe throughout the early modern period. Market behavior started to replace other forms of motivation that were existent in the European society. Individuals started to act more and more on the basis of self-interest. Polanyi notes that such an emergence had a very specific time and place showing that it has historical roots. The model of action of self-interest cannot be stated as a natural human feature. Instead, it can be traced to a specific time and place showing its historical significance.
Polanyi further notes that it would be difficult for any society to exist without forming proper economic structures. No society could have existed naturally for any length of time unless it possessed a form of economy. He notes this by stating “Gain and profit made on exchange never played an important in the human economy “(Polanyi, 2001). However, the modern economy has never existed in the past. The emergence of the modern economic came about only after certain historical events.
Evidence from traditional societies
The Kula is a form of exchange that provides evidence of cultural, historical, and geographical economies in traditional societies. The Kula was a form of exchange that took place between different tribes and was carried out by communities that lived in different islands. The entire exchange can be traced geographically through a map that connects the North and East parts of New Guinea. It involved the receiving of goods from another island and holding it for some time and passing it on. A limited number of men participated in the tradition. They would receive several arm-shells and necklace of red shell discs. They would hand one of the commodities to another partner who would pass another commodity marking the process of exchange. No man thus ever kept any of the items for a particular length of time (Malinowski, 2013).
The side by side exchange from one tribe to another created trade where one island would exchange one good with another depending on their number of utilities. The Kula was thus a big and complex institution. It was created through a form of understanding with one tribe and another. The exchange brought several tribes together where they would embrace complex activities. They were inter-connected and form a larger organic whole. The current economy of monetary exchange can be traced to those practices.
Market Institutions
Economic history involves the process where households become more absorbed into more inclusive social units such as cities, kingdoms, nations, and the entire globe. Hann and Kart note that the principles of economy start applying and have new meaning when applied to large-scale systems. Various institutions such as temples, palaces, and Manorial estates were created as ways to extend the various principles used in households to the larger society. Human nature strives to put things in the natural order and these institutions play a big role in putting various items in order. The growing of these institutions has led to the eventual formation of the world economy. The world economy involves dynamic forces that push the boundary of other institutions.
The growth and development of economic institutions can be traced in history after the second world war. Political movements and for decolonization took effect and various countries started striving for economic development. The global focus shifted toward capitalism and European economies. While this created a challenge of distinguishing various economic systems and institutions, many other economies responded by developing non-European institutions that had similarities to those European economies.
Historical sociology is also based on institutions. Polanyi (2001) notes that ethnography and history provide a variety of critical social and economic institutions. Market institutions are historically specific since there are historical periods that exist in human history where market institutions were not present. There were later periods where the institutions emerged and they became widely available. Polanyi notes that market institutions show a significant variation in the place and time which these institutions emerged.
Some of the aspects of the economy such as trade commodities, production, and artisanship are activities that have their roots in human societies. These kinds of activities are historically documented in the ancient periods of China, Europe, and America. These documentations provide an understanding of the various ways which economies emerged through human interactions and activity. Polanyi thus maintains that market institutions are historical creations. The growth of market institutions can be traced and understood through accumulation, consumption, and profit (Polanyi, 2001).
Money can be traced through history
The modern economy is built on the basis of exchange of money which facilitates the flow of goods from one institution to another. The growth of money can be traced to early institutions of money that were known as special purpose monies. They included various forms of currency exchange such as wampum and shell money. The special purpose monies were primarily used to facilitate trade. They had a slight different from the current universal monies which are based on market economies (Zelizer, 1989).
Special purpose monies were restricted in their use and were limited to a specific form of exchange and use. One example is the brass rods that were used in Nigeria by the Tiv during the early twentieth century. Other documentation of monies in history usually refer to special purpose monies. It was only until they were used on a large scale that they became universal monies. Universal monies were used to weaken the boundaries of exchange of different institutions. Universal monies grew to become a medium of exchange which facilitated trade. The became a unit of account for abstract measurement and were able to store value. Their popularity largely grew as they became a standard preferred means of exchange.
The culturist approach
The emergence of economies in various societies could have occurred largely as a result of culture. Stephen Gudeman (1986) notes that people constructed their own mental maps of economics in various aspects. He describes a peasant community in Panama where the locals did not take part in exchange in order to make a profit. Instead, they viewed it as a cultural exchange of equivalents. The exchange value of a good was defined by the expenses that were used in its production. It was only until the outside merchants that engaged in the dealings with the community that they started to make a profit. The way people make their livelihood was thus culturally constructed. The models of livelihood such as money, exchange, and profit were all as a result of the construction of culture. The understanding of these models and the emergence of economies can all thus be attributed to cultural progression.
Arguments against economic anthropology
Those that oppose the fact that economies are built on historical and cultural entities note that economy is based on self-interest. Human nature is self-centered and thus economies can be said to be as a result of natural occurrences. Marxism analyzes various historical processes based on individual self-interest and the material well-being of one individual. The theory asserts that the motives of human individuals are usually exceptionally determined by the needs of materials and the requirements of self-satisfaction.
While human society is usually built around self-interest, historical economic growth has not been entirely built on self-interest. The emergences of economies came about as a result of social interest. Polanyi notes that the economy did not come about only as a result of human motivation and self-interest. He notes that there were different social motivations that caused economies to grow. Polanyi notes that social motivations played a bigger role in driving economies than self-interest. However, he notes that various human factors like becoming goal-oriented, prudent, and paying close attention to costs are not historical accidents. They are more permanent features about the human species.
A proper understanding of critical historical events can create new information about the emergence of world economies. One of the major historical events was the breakdown of international relations during the first half of the twentieth century leading to world wars. One cannot neglect the fact that economies have accumulated over many centuries. These accumulations have influenced how events took place throughout the different centuries.
Conclusion
The economy is not a natural phenomenon but is one that has historical and cultural underpinnings. This can be observed through the three principles of economies by Karl Polanyi of reciprocity, redistribution, and householding. Reciprocity involves the exchange of gifts between communities. Redistribution and householding all led to the creation of institutions that have historical underpinnings. Market institutions can also be traced historically and the specific times which they emerged can be known.
References
Chris, H., & Hart, K. (2011). Economic anthropology: history, ethnography, critique.
Gudeman, S. (1986). Economics as culture: models and metaphors of livelihood . Routledge.
Malinowski, B. (2013). Argonauts of the Western Pacific: An Account of Native Enterprise and Adventure in the Archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea [1922/1994] . Routledge.
Mauss, M. (1967). The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies . WW Norton.
Polanyi, K. (2001). The great transformation . Boston: Beacon Press.
Zelizer, V. A. (1989). The social meaning of money:" special monies". American journal of sociology , 95 (2), 342-377.
