Cooperation in Economy and Society edited by Robert C.Marshall, ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman and...

BOOK AND VIDEO REVIEWS

Anthropology, Economics, and Choice. MichaelChibnik. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2011.

Richard Wilk, Indiana [email protected]

Economic anthropology has always had a dividednature. On one hand, it seeks to empirically identifyand discuss the kinds of “economic” practices ofdifferent cultures: their trading, saving, gifting,and decision-making. On the other hand, economicanthropologists have been conducting a runningquarrel with economists about human nature and theadequacy of economic theory, the self-professed pre-dictive mathematical science of behavior. For the mostpart, economists have not paid much attention toanthropological gadflies; they have been too busyrunning the world economy and collecting largepaychecks. Only in the last few years, following thespectacular failure of conventional economists tounderstand or predict the housing-bubble crisis of2007 to 2008 (and its continuance in contemporaryEurope), has academic economics become vulnerable.There are even a few anthropologists, like GillianTett and David Graeber, among the chorus of publicvoices that are now questioning the hegemony andpower of neoclassical microeconomics founded inutilitarianism.

To some extent, a critique of economics is implicitin the concept of culture deployed by most sociocul-tural anthropologists; unless some kinds of economicthinking are hardwired into our brains, we expect anyeconomy to be culturally constructed.Take somethingthat seems as concrete as the value of gold or diamonds,and an anthropologist can show you how magic andfetishism lurk behind the jeweler’s door. This is whythe two-dimensional rational-maximizing individualdecision-maker that makes an appearance in intro-ductory economics textbooks has been anathema toanthropologists since the time of Malinowski. Butamong economic anthropologists, there has alwaysbeen a minority of “formalists” who have argued thatsome of the tools of economic analysis should be used byanthropologists, because human beings often do actlike rational maximizers. Many anthropologists, par-ticularly those who do applied work in policy, areregularly called upon to produce numbers,models, andmore rigorous predictions and estimates of benefits,and formal economics sometimes provides at least a

starting point in thinking through the material conse-quences of different actions or programs.

The early hardcore formalists like HaroldSchneider used fairly basic tools of microeconomics,ideas such as diminishing marginal returns and indif-ference curves. Archaeologists and bioanthropologistswere the largest users of formal mathematical methodslike cost/benefit analysis, optimal foraging theory, andlocational analysis. But more recently, cultural anthro-pologists have shown a new interest in agent-basedmodeling, game theory, experimental economics,formal analysis of household budgeting, migrationdecision-making, and the management of common-pool resources.We might call this a “new formalism” todistinguish it from the old; it is often heavily funded bygovernment agencies and NGOs and depends on com-puters, modeling, and tools like geographic informa-tion systems (GIS) and remote sensing.

Michael Chibnik has had extensive experience inexactly the kinds of settings where formal economicmethods might be expected to be the most useful:among mixed subsistence-farming and cash-croppinghouseholds in Belize, floodplain farmers in the Peru-vian Amazon, and handicraft-producing communitiesin Oaxaca. In each setting, people face complex choicesamong a wide array of possibilities – the classicaleconomic problem of allocating limited time to manyactivities.These choices often involve the allocation oflabor and the expectation of different returns, as well asthe calculation of both risk and uncertainty, a distinc-tion that Chibnik emphasizes. Chibnik explains thatBelizean farmers faced with complex and often unfath-omable calculations of the costs and benefits of wagelabor, subsistence farming, and cash cropping oftenended up poor, no matter what they did. His work onOaxacan wood carvers shows that caution and riskaversion are often wise; many people resisted becomingfull-time carvers because they recognized that themarket was easily flooded,and eventually the tourist artboom would end.

The book takes the reader on a kind of intellec-tual expedition through many of the key sites wherenew formalist economic anthropology is being done,using Chibnik’s own ethnographic work as a criticalmirror. In the process, Chibnik provides an excellentcritical guide to a literature that is widely scattered butbound together by shared assumptions about the pre-dictability of human action and an implicit notion thatall people share some innate reasoning powers.

bs_bs_banner

Volume XXXIV, Number 1 © 2013 by the American Anthropological Association. All rights reserved. 52

In each chapter, Chibnik reviews a different kindof formalist analysis. He gives some intellectual historyand probes for logical inconsistencies and contradic-tions with the ethnographic record. He often takes hisown earlier work to task and shows how his own evi-dence could be interpreted in other ways. He is highlycritical of evolutionary psychology, particularly as it isloosely used in cross-cultural experimental economics,where people from different cultures play varieties ofthe “dictator” and “ultimatum” games to reveal how“altruistic” they are. Chibnik is skeptical that thesestudies are revealing anything about human nature oreven something novel about variation between cul-tures. Chibnik also finds serious problems with formaltheories of how people cope with risk and make house-hold and individual decisions. He is a bit more positivewhen it comes to common property theory, whereanthropologists have made major contributions andformal predictive modeling is less common.

Chibnik does not see literary “interpretive” eth-nography as a viable alternative to formalism andprofesses dislike for highly theorized critical anthro-pology. In places, it seems like he is trying to steer anintermediate course, sympathetic to the goals of formalmethods but not to the methods themselves. It is not,he says, that formal approaches are impossible, but thatin practice they are always oversimplified, ignoringimportant cultural and historical contexts. His solu-tion is not to develop more complex and realisticformal analysis or models but instead to use ethnog-raphy to describe the diverse beliefs, actions, andthoughts of real people. Most chapters, and the bookitself, conclude with statements to the effect that life isalways much more complex than formal models canpredict, so ethnography is the only legitimate way tounderstand human action. In the real world, behaviordoes not fall into categories like “altruistic” and“selfish” but is ambiguous and difficult to pin down,and people often work hard to maintain that ambigu-ity. Things that look altruistic in the short term mayend up being selfish in the long term and vice versa.Even in retrospect, people have trouble explainingtheir own actions and the decisions taken by others.

Therefore, rather than the lawlike statements thatwould allow us to model or predict people’s actions andbehavior, Chibnik pursues the more modest goal ofshowing how people can be understood as reasonable.This is a very traditional anthropological standard: usethe anthropologist’s knowledge of culture, history, andenvironment, along with peoples’ own statements andbehavior, to show how their actions make sense.This isa feature of classics like Evans-Pritchard’s “WitchcraftExplains Unfortunate Events,” featured in many intro-ductory anthropology textbooks, through Sahlins’explanation for why the Hawaiians suddenly killedCaptain Cook (Sahlins 1981).

Most of Chibnik’s examples in this book take thisform, in the process showing how a formal analysismisses crucial, and often unexpected, contextual infor-mation. As Chibnik well recognizes, this is exactly thekind of approach that makes economists andother development specialists roll their eyes when theanthropologist starts speaking, as the first wordsare usually something like “It is really very compli-cated. . . .” It is also hard to verify – another anthro-pologist might come up with an entirely differentresult.And anthropologists’ arguments and predictionsare rarely tested empirically – their veracity and author-ity depend on the credibility of the anthropologist.

Stylistically, the book is skillfully crafted and wellwritten and moves at a steady pace. A student willcome away with a very good knowledge of recenteconomic anthropology, and the book should provokerevealing debates in a seminar on economic, ecologi-cal, or development anthropology. Some parts of thebook seem to be written as this kind of text, but inother places the argument is pitched more towardexperienced colleagues. I would have liked to hearwhat Chibnik thinks of other formal approaches likeagent-based modeling, GIS and remote sensing, orthe analysis of resilience – all currently popularresearch areas that are providing jobs for anthropologygraduates. The existence of these new openings foranthropologists suggests that formalism is never goingto die, nor will it leave an interpretive anthropologybehind. In a strange way, the formal and explanatory,scientific and expressive, are very deeply connected toone another; and, as this book shows, they provide acontinuing source of inspiration for creative minds.As neoliberal philosophy continues to advance thethesis that everything should become a commodityexchanged in free markets, Chibnik is there to remindus that quality matters, that not everything can bereduced to costs or benefits, and that skillful ethnog-raphy and anthropological analysis are becoming evermore important and valuable.

ReferenceSahlins, Marshall. 1981. Historical Metaphors andMythical Realities. Ann Arbor: University of MichiganPress.

Cooperation in Economy and Society. RobertC. Marshall, ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman andLittlefield, 2010.

John Frank Burgess, University of [email protected]

The contributors to Cooperation in Economy andSociety, a collection of articles based on paperspresented at an annual meeting of the Society for

Anthropology of Work Review


Economic Anthropology, consider ways in whichhuman beings come to organize themselves beyondcompetition and government controls. This bookbrings together 12 ethnographic studies produced byscholars from a range of backgrounds – coveringanthropology, economics, social work, and environ-mental studies – which is appropriate for a conceptthat has no official home in any one discipline. Fromthese diverse perspectives, the authors demonstratethat cooperation, in practice at least, takes shape inmany facets of human group life, even in places whereit is commonly thought that competition reignssupreme. They reject the marginalization of thisconcept and its subordination to “competition.”

In the editor’s introduction, Robert Marshallchallenges the reader to consider cooperation not justas a supplement to competition, operating on thefringes of modernity, but as central to economic orga-nization and social life more generally. The challengeis not dissimilar to the one made by Marcel Mauss inhis 1923 essay The Gift, where he theorized the centralimportance of gift exchange in all societies, includingthose that emphasize formal commercial exchange.Marshall argues that a sharper focus on cooperationwill enable a better understanding of how particulargroups and society at large operate in the present, evenif they are assumed to operate according to a competi-tive model. He states that we need to think beyond thestandard concept of rationality in approaching theways people organize themselves through their inter-dependence, but he does not want us to lose sight ofthe strategic nature of sociality. The case studies fore-front the dynamic elements of relationships, which aresometimes neglected in studies of decision-making.Such is not the case here.The studies in this collectiondeal with the complexities of cooperation in a varietyof ways, from the formal modeling of Rahul Oka andAgustin Fuentes (chapter 1), who relate “cooperativeinfrastructures” to “socioeconomic evolution,” to thedenser ethnographic descriptions that comprise themajority of these works. Cooperation and competitionare each presented as having different and variablerequirements for their emergence, sustainability, andsuitability – all of which hinge on the context in whichthe mode of organization is based.

This book champions research on cooperation,but it refrains from idealizing it and indeed demon-strates that cooperation has its negative side. Coop-eration can lead to exploitation, a criticism oftenleveled, albeit often with justification, at competitivemodels and practices. Ronald Rich analyzes the rela-tionship between contractors and contractees in theIllinois hog farming industry (chapter 5).The industryis now characterized by contractors who own hogs andeffectively employ contractees to feed and raise thehogs through their life cycle, before they are sold.This

arrangement forces contractees to sell their labor,rather than their products as they had previously done,which Rich asserts is the source of their exploitation.He focuses on the structure of the agreement, whichcannot be strictly enforced by either side becauseneither has the ability to monitor the other’s prac-tices. However, manipulation is minimal, as he findscontractors personalizing their relationship with con-tractees. Participants valorize characteristics such as“honesty” and “trust,” which leads to greater coopera-tion in a hierarchical system in which the two partiesare effectively in conflict. Rich concludes that whilethe participants hold these cooperative practices inhigh regard, they also reinforce the exploitation of therelatively powerless contractees.

The authors are realistic about the place of coop-eration in modern society, suggesting that it is not thesolution to all problems of group life. Their findingsshow that neither cooperative nor competitive prac-tices can lay claim to being the default state of humanrelations, as the more appropriate mode of interactiondepends upon the circumstances under which theyoccur. Carolyn Lesorogol gives a history of grazingrights in Siambu, a pastoralist community in northernKenya (chapter 11).Traditionally based on a commu-nal management system, which controlled access tonatural resources, the mid-20th century broughtvarious pressures, particularly through colonization,to divide and privatize the land among pastoralists.More recently, and despite recognition of individualproperty rights and certain benefits of privatization,communal land rules are reemerging and reestablish-ing communal influence and control. Lesorogol pointsout that this resurgence of cooperation is not an ideo-logical revolt against a colonial history, nor has aneconomic decline necessitated it. Cooperation hasreemerged because it suits the wealthier pastoralistswith larger herds, who benefit from sharing semiaridrangelands, which are prone to drought, making theirprivate parcels inadequate for their holdings of live-stock. Not inconsistent with Rich’s argument aboutcooperation being a tool of exploitation, Lesorogoloffers a history whereby cooperation and competitionmodels can both be functional, with neither being aninherently superior mode of organization.

The authors also demonstrate that mutually ben-eficial cooperative practices can arise in the mostunlikely of places. Kathleen Millar analyses the infor-mal economy of catadores, collectors of recyclablematerial from the dumpsites of Rio de Janeiro(chapter 8), seeing those who work on the dump asautonomous individuals who operate according totheir own schedules. In one sense, the catadores are indirect competition with each other, as the collection ofmaterial by one makes it unavailable to another.However, the work’s (lack of) structure affords them



opportunities to socialize, leading to a group identity.This is the basis, according to Millar, of sustainedcooperative efforts to repel external threats to theirlivelihoods. Like several of the other authors, shefinds that cooperation can exist within competition,showing how both can only be properly understood inrelation to each other. The repeated demonstrationthat competition and cooperation are not mutuallyexclusive and can occupy the same space is a greatstrength of this book.

The final section, “Cooperation Rising,” includestwo chapters, one of which is Lesorogol’s. In theother, James Acheson discusses the cooperative effortsmade to conserve natural resources in the Mainelobster industry (chapter 12), where fishermen resistopportunities to serve their self-interest at the expenseof others. As such, both authors consider the emer-gence of cooperative practices in situations seeminglydominated by competition. However, concluding thebook with a section focused on the rise of cooperationamid competition also affirms the larger message thatthe concept of cooperation is becoming more impor-tant to scholars, something Marshall alluded to in hisintroduction. Although it never left us in practice,social thinkers are increasingly realizing cooperationdoes not belong on the sidelines, used only to helppick up the pieces where competition fails. It is start-ing to take its rightful place alongside competition inthe center of the field. Cooperation in Economy andSociety is part of this realization.

Transforming Culture: Creating and Sustaininga Better Manufacturing Organization. ElizabethK. Briody, Robert T. Trotter II, and Tracy L.Meerwarth. New York: Palgrave Macmillan,2010.

Ann Jordan, University of North [email protected]

The increased number of books published aboutwork organizations in the last decade suggests agrowing following for the field of organizationalanthropology. A significant contribution to that lit-erature is Transforming Culture: Creating and Sustaininga Better Manufacturing Organization by ElizabethBriody, Robert Trotter, and Tracy Meerwarth. Itrecounts the story of General Motors (GM), a greatinstitution of 20th-century American life, as itstruggles to stay relevant and profitable in the newmillennium. The authors, two of whom are practitio-ners, aim to provide guidelines that those embroiled inorganizational change will find useful, even if the orga-nization in question is not a manufacturing plant.

Specifically, the book describes the Ideal PlantCulture project, a 6-year, multisited project involvingover 400 GM employees. The book also delves intolarger issues as it provides an account of automobilemanufacturing in the United States. The authorsdescribe the early history of the automotive industryin the United States, the advent of Henry Ford’s massproduction process, the introduction of Toyota’s flex-ible and lean production system, and the adaptationsmade at General Motors for over a century.The bookbenefits from the experience of its authors, especiallyElizabeth Briody, who worked for decades as aresearcher at GM.With the inclusion of Briody’s first-hand ethnographic description of GM plant culturesince the 1980s, this book is one of few based ondetailed and purposeful fieldwork in a single organi-zation over such a long time span.

Published in 2010, the book was finalized duringthe fury of GM’s bankruptcy and restructuring in2009. While the authors rightly suggest a “corestrength of the book is that it is an ethnographic caseof a company that represents American culture andAmerican cultural transformation at a critical time inhistory,” it is also a chilling description of what wentawry in American manufacturing (13). They describehow, at the close of the 20th century, GM’s “customerbase continued to slip due to cost disadvantages andlagging customer perception of their product quality”at the same time that the corporation was “overstaffed,lacking a strategic plan and making decisions consis-tent with its parochial Midwestern mindset ratherthan a global orientation” (3).

Their Ideal Plant Culture project came aboutbecause an innovative and globally aware senior GMexecutive wondered, “How can we transfer the highlysuccessful organizational and work culture we experi-ence in Mexico to the United States?” (6). Beyondtelling the story of GM and the dream and decline ofAmerican manufacturing, the authors’ purpose is toexplain organizational culture, describe the processesneeded to change culture, and provide tools for orga-nizational culture change. They define culture as“assumptions, expectations, beliefs, social structures,and values guiding behavior” (2). Using culturechange and evolutionary theories, they develop twomodels. The first is the Cultural TransformationModel, which explains the connections betweenadaptiveness and responsiveness in cultural problemsolving to achieve cultural transformation. Next, theydevelop the Bridge Model of Transformation, whichbuilds on the Cultural Transformation Model byadding a focus on cultural and environmental condi-tions, obstacles to change, and enablers of change.Thefinal section of the book is devoted to a toolkit theydeveloped to help GM plants transition to a newculture of collaboration.



The authors build their findings about ideal plantculture around Hall’s concepts of low and high context(Hall and Hall 1987, 1989). They describe how GMand other U.S. organizations emphasize tasks and pro-cesses and rely on written directives (low-contextbehavior) rather than building relationships amongemployees where social rules and verbal interaction arevalued (high-context behavior). They suggest that thereasonToyota has outperformed GM is at least partiallydue to the strong Toyota emphasis on relationships,which in turn encourages organizational learning andthe diffusion of new ideas. By contrast, at GM, employ-ees described the culture as one characterized by an“authoritarian” management style and rigid status dis-tinctions where employees were not allowed to giveopinions. One employee explained the result: “Youreally took ownership away from the people and madethem feel like a number [back then]. Everybody hasideas, and who knows better than the team who’sactually doing the work?” (89).Weakness in GM plantculture centers on a lack of cooperative workplaceinteractions and collaborative problem solving. Briody,Trotter, and Meerwarth’s ideal plant culture requiresthe development of collaboration throughout the plant,a change that would be marked by high-context char-acteristics. The use of Hall’s work makes sense here,especially with the contrast between U.S. and Japanesemanufacturing styles so salient to the automobileindustry. However, the use of the high and low contextdistinction does raise concern about essentializingnational difference, and the importance of collabora-tion could readily be made without this framing.

To this reviewer, the most compelling singlechapter is the one on seven obstacles to organizationalculture change. For example, one of the obstacles is“cultural dilemmas,” which the authors explain arecreated when opposing cultural themes, such as hier-archy and empowerment, seem to clash and causetension.They provide the following employee quote asan example: “You can be creative and make thingswork for the long haul, but there is also a rigidness.You have to do it this way” (99). Double binds like thisone between creativity and rigidity are common inorganizations undergoing culture change. Anotherobstacle discussed is “cultural drift,” which is the ten-dency to revert back to the old ways of doing thingswhen there is stress at work. One employee told theauthors, “We’ll see some slippage. I am not sure howyou guard against it. We will have new people” (101).The list of obstacles and the accompanying explana-tions and employee quotes are useful to anyonedealing with culture change.

The following chapter is about enablers,meaning “processes within the existing culture thatsupport cultural transformation” (117). These, theauthors say, are specific to the organization but share

a set of six identifiable characteristics. The enablersinclude physical changes that would help employeestransition, as well as a list of behaviors that wouldmake it easier to be more collaborative.

The succeeding chapter describes the 10 toolsthe team developed for GM employees to help themmove to the new collaborative culture, four for under-standing collaboration and six for practicing and mea-suring collaboration. The last tool, based on anincident the research team witnessed involving thebreakdown of a stud gun on a manufacturing line, is avideo game employees can play to better understandthe repercussions of decisions on the plant floor.Unfortunately, the short descriptions of each tool arenot sufficient for the reader to grasp what these toolslook like and how they are used. It would have beenhelpful if the authors had included the actual materi-als from at least one of these tools. Understanding thetools is central to their argument about the value oftheir project.

The authors planned to put these tools to use inGM plants and did so in one (new) plant but failed intwo attempts to convince the leaders of existing plantsto use the tools, despite clear enthusiasm amongGM’s top leaders. The authors explain that this ispartially a consequence of external events, as GM wasabout to begin its 2007 national labor negotiationswith the United Auto Workers. The reader is leftfeeling unsure about the success of the project and,given the lack of specifics about the tools, unsure howhelpful the tools would be.

There is much in this volume of value for schol-ars of the anthropology of work. We have few workorganization studies with such thick description over a2-decade period. Additionally, it adds to our under-standing of work culture, manufacturing, organiza-tional culture, and culture change. The two culturemodels the authors present are useful as well. Beyondits relevance in the anthropology of work, the study isimportant as a commentary on the broader theme ofindustry in the United States over a 100-year period.The analysis of GM’s successes and failures and thedescription of practices on the shop floor are reasonsenough to read this book and also to consider it forclass adoption. In a larger and possibly more impor-tant context, the book is a cautionary tale about thedeath and hopeful rebirth of manufacturing in theUnited States and provides important social commen-tary on the American dream at the beginning of a newmillennium.

ReferencesHall, EdwardTwitchell, and Mildred Reed Hall. 1987.Hidden Differences: Doing Business with the Japa-nese. Garden City, NY: Anchor/Doubleday.



Hall, E. T., and M. R. Hall. 1989. UnderstandingCultural Differences: Germans, French and Ameri-cans.Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural.

Advances in Speech Recognition: Mobile Envi-ronments, Call Centers and Clinics. AmyNeustein, ed. New York: Springer Science andBusiness Media, 2010.

Jessica [email protected]

In this edited volume, Amy Neustein bringstogether a collection of intriguing studies of the devel-opment and use of speech recognition (SR) technol-ogy in different workplaces. Cultural, linguistic, andmedical anthropologists who study communication atwork will be intrigued but perhaps overwhelmed bythe ways engineers, linguists, and information tech-nology specialists are increasingly placing computersbetween people in their speech acts with one another.Advances in Speech Recognition is more readable thanmany other collections about SR technology. Themajority of the tables and figures are simple. Mostimportantly, each essay contains a clear introductionand conclusion that can be tied to research in socialscience. Anthropologists can use the book to teachthemselves and their students about the world of SRtechnology research and the variety of SR technologyresearchers. It explains common abbreviations, suchas GUI (graphic user interface), AIML (artificial intel-ligence markup language), and IVR (interactive voiceresponse [systems]).The book also explains abbrevia-tions for less well-known phrases, such as WIMP:“windows, icon, mouse, and pointer (WIMP)-basedmachine” (Selouani 2010:109).

The chapters are divided into three groups – thefirst concerning the use of mobile technology, thesecond concerning the creation of automated cus-tomer service in call centers, and the third concerningthe use of SR technology in medical settings, parti-cularly with regard to building electronic medicalrecords. Some representative topics are a history ofthe development of Google Search by Voice, the evo-lution of studies to create satisfying experiences withautomated verbal responses, and a discussion of howcomputers analyze the communication patterns ofindividuals with medical conditions such as autismspectrum disorders.

The research reported in this book empha-sizes advantages of SR technology, pointing out, forinstance, that computers equipped in this way cost lessthan human workers and also noting that it saveshuman workers from having to engage in repetitiveand challenging tasks, such as data entry in medical

transcription. Regrettably, the accounts do not quan-tify the number of jobs lost due to the use of SRtechnology and rarely touch on how human commu-nication patterns of customers and workers are chang-ing in response to SR technology.

Anthropologists can use this collection tounderstand how SR technology is affecting differentpopulations. It can help them design studies tocollect data about the changes in language, culture,and personality that occur when people come intocontact with SR technology. Two of the essays in par-ticular showcase research that could benefit fromfuture analysis. “ ‘For Heaven’s Sake, Gimme a LivePerson!’ Designing Emotion-Detection CustomerCare Voice Applications in Automated Call Centers”concerns customers’ frustration with automatedresponses. “ ‘You’re as Sick as You Sound’: UsingComputational Approaches for Modeling SpeakerState to Gauge Illness and Recovery” explains howindividuals with different disorders sound to peoplewithout these disorders.

As an example, researchers in the study in“ ‘Gimme a Live Person!’ ” determined that certainqualities of human speech, including pitch and loud-ness, indicate anger. They attempted to measurechanges in these qualities to understand whether cus-tomers were becoming angry when interacting withautomated response systems. It would be relevant forfuture investigations to determine the meaning of suchqualities in human speech across cultures. Anthro-pologists might be able to discover whether peoplefrom different national and ethnic groups changedthese qualities in their speech, and to the same degree,when frustrated with call center systems. Such workmight help industry professionals design culturallysensitive software, which would be responsive to datasuggesting that an American customer’s change inpitch tends to mean something different than aChinese customer’s change in pitch.

Although the field may seem highly technical andspecialized, anthropologists studying workplacesshould be aware of the devices and coded programsthat are replacing speech acts with exchanges of data.Advances in cloud computing and near field commu-nication (NFC) will soon allow individuals and groupsto send each other data packets that reduce the needfor verbal communication. Cellular phones enabledwith NFC technology are already able to read data onskin patches and blister packages. Software programsin the phones can determine whether a patient hastaken a prescribed medication and how the patient’sbody is processing that medication. Patients can sendthe data directly to a medical professional, eliminatingthe need to go to the hospital to be assessed or even tocall and update a medical professional about theircondition.



These essays may also become critical in under-standing how individuals and groups come to perceivespeech acts as stressful. A passage from StephenSpringer’s “ ‘Great Expectations’: Making Use ofCallers’ Experiences from Everyday Life to Design aSatisfying Speech-only Interface for the Call Center”illustrates a frustrated customer’s attempt to escapethe stress he was experiencing. Responding to a verbalcommand in a software program, the caller exclaimed:“Lady, if you can understand English, you can under-stand what I’m sayin’ – I want to speak to a livingbody, please” (182).

In “ ‘Life on-the-Go’: The Role of Speech Tech-nology in Mobile Applications,” William Meiselstates that speaking on a “voice channel” maybecome an important way for people to use serviceson smartphones, adding that the number of “voicesites” supported by advertising is likely to increase.If individuals are asked to listen and speakextensively to automated systems as well as realpeople, they may become fatigued and reluctant tocommunicate.

The research reported here should help anthro-pologists design studies that will chronicle the devel-opment and impacts of different SR applications anddocument the changing significance of speech acts inthe workplace and beyond. James Larson remarks inthe epilogue that speech and text may come to beseen as equal and interchangeable. Imagining anInternet and communications network on whichuser comments on websites can be heard, withunique, identifiable voices, reveals that the anonym-ity of text may soon disappear. If speech and text areconflated, privacy is likely to be defined far morenarrowly than it is today. As Stephen Swigart(2008:93) reminds us in reference to the insights ofPierre Bourdieu, “every linguistic exchange, nomatter how seemingly insignificant, carries within ittraces of the social structure it both expresses andhelps to reproduce.”

ReferencesSelouani, Sid-Ahmed. 2010. “Well Adjusted”:Using Robust and Flexible Speech Recognition Capa-bilities in Clean to Noisy Mobile Environments. InAdvances in Speech Recognition: Mobile Environ-ments, Call Centers and Clinics. Amy Neustein, ed.Pp. 91–114. New York: Springer Science + BusinessMedia,.

Swigart, Leigh. 2008. The Limits of Legitimacy:Language Ideology and Shift in ContemporarySenegal. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology10(1):90–130.

Emotions in the Field: The Psychology andAnthropology of Fieldwork Experience. JamesDavies and Dimitrina Spencer, eds. Stanford,CA: Stanford University Press, 2010.

Richard Zimmer, Sonoma State [email protected]

Anyone who has had fieldwork experienceshould read this book. It begins with an excellentreview of recent developments in the ways we under-stand and utilize our emotional reactions to what welive through in the field. Ten essays follow, written byresearchers addressing specific fieldwork reactions inrelation to the topics they studied. The essays raiseinteresting questions and offer insights for under-standing our data and ourselves better. In the simplestterms, such reactions provide glimpses into the lives ofinformants and their communities. By being human –that is, by reacting to what people are saying anddoing, by making mistakes, by understanding that wehave been swallowed up in the otherness and mustpresent that otherness to our peers and the outsideworld – we illuminate our mutual humanness.

I do not want to spoil your spontaneous pleasurein reading the book, so I will use examples from myown fieldwork to illustrate the point. When Iresearched a Catholic parish, I once made the mistakeof being a bit too casual with one of the nuns withwhom I was working. I asked how she was doingspiritually and, thankfully, was not reprimanded.Rather, we got into a long theological discussion aboutmeaningful work, which turned out to be crucial formy fieldwork. Another time, I was researching first-time parents. I made sure that our own children wereattended to – bathed and read to – before I went outto my informant couples. I asked them how they weredealing with their newborns. Then I shared our owndifficulties when our kids were younger and gave themtips. The data I already had collected were notaffected, and our discussions enhanced my under-standing of their subjectivity in caring for theirinfants.

As we read each essay, we can ask ourselves: DidI experience this? How did I handle it? How could Ihave handled it better? How did it affect my datacollection, outcomes, and conclusions? How have Ichanged? The essays range from a person becoming amonastic practitioner and writing about her reactionsboth as anthropologist and initiate to a person being“hit on” by an attractive informant to another personlearning to be somewhat of an adept in the world ofpeople actually claiming to practice magic.To revert tosome old-fashioned jargon, reading these essays feels“head trippy,” “processing” one’s reaction to theoutside and the inside.



A person’s reactions are a normal part of anywork experience. Anthropological field experience,with its emphasis on engaging the other without losingthe self, may be fundamentally different from otherwork. As both an anthropologist and a practicing psy-chologist, I recognize similarities and differencesbetween the two disciplines. In future assessments ofthis sort, I would like to see a more systematic com-parison of anthropologists with other practitionerswho have similar experiences. These might includePeace Corps volunteers, missionaries, colonial admin-istrators, in-country consultants, and so on.

A sociology of fieldwork analysis is suggested bythis book. One might be able to examine not just theage, class background, gender, upbringing, academic,and personality traits of the anthropologist going intothe field but also see how they correlate and contrib-ute to explanations of her or his results. One mightalso explore whether it makes a difference if theanthropologist goes to a highly different culture versusa similar one or stays “at home,” whether one is cut offalmost or completely from sources of personalsupport, or whether one is accompanied by one’spartner or spouse, as well as considering livingarrangements and how long one stays in the field.

As a psychologist, I applaud the various writerswho argue for a self-examination, including under-standing countertransference. I have experienced thatreaction in my fieldwork and in my clinical practice.I think exploring it with knowledgeable others isthe best way to proceed. I also think it can serve as abeginning guide for training in the field and collegialdiscussions afterwards. I have often been able to usemy emotional reactions to understand why I had dif-ficulties with a certain person or issue.

I suggest that this book first be read for enjoy-ment – to see what others have experienced. That iswhy I have avoided detailed discussion of the substan-tive contents of the book: we can use it as a mirror forourselves first. It then can be read as part of theaforementioned anthropology of fieldwork from a per-sonal perspective.

Indelible Inequalities in Latin America: Insightsfrom History, Politics, and Culture. PaulGootenberg and Luis Reygadas, eds. Durham,NC: Duke University Press, 2010.

Mariano Perelman, University of Buenos [email protected]

In “Funes and the Toolbox of Inequality,” theafterword to this book, Javier Auyero recalls a story bythe Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges in which theprotagonist Funes forgets absolutely nothing. Borgeswrites that “he was not very good at thinking” because

to think is “to ignore (or forget) differences, to gener-alize, to abstract” (193). The story reinforces a coreargument of the book about the power of ideas: indel-ible inequalities are institutionalized categories. Theelaboration of this insight adds to a long anthropologi-cal tradition of research on modes of classification andhow they organize the social world. Auyero and theother authors also draw from Charles Tilly’s DurableInequalities (1998) in specifying the relation betweencategorization and social inequality. Rather than set-tling for empirical “measurements” of inequality, theyexplore complexities in the production and reproduc-tion of inequalities and develop a vision of inequalityas relational, multicausal, and multiprocessual.

Contributors to the volume, representing variousdisciplines, participated in an exploratory projectcalled “Durable Inequalities in Latin America,”carried out from 2003 to 2006 at the Latin Americanand Caribbean Studies Center at Stony BrookUniversity. The first of three parts offers “NewApproaches, Old Disciplines” in two theoreticaland methodological chapters by the editors. In “LatinAmerican Inequalities: New Perspectives fromHistory, Politics and Culture,” Paul Gootenberg char-acterizes Latin America as the most unequal worldregion, although neither the poorest nor the mostdivided culturally. He contends that

Latin American inequality is certainly durable inTilly’s sense, as well as being historically, socially,and culturally “constructed,” which suggests theunnatural origins of hierarchy and subordination.But we prefer in this volume the guiding term“indelible inequalities,” which underscores thehuman agency and culture at play in their creationand perseverance, their complexity and camou-flage beyond stark categorical divides, their fluidand peopled possibilities of change. (5)

Gootenberg reviews the approaches of anthro-pology, political science, economics, history, and soci-ology in defining his position on the need for thinkingin relational and historical terms, anchored in culturalprocesses. He summarizes some of the themes thatappear throughout the book: the historical long term,hybridity and difference, transitions and metamor-phosis, agency and resistance, transnational flows ofideas and people, inequality as culture, and qualitativeequalities and revolutionizing inequalities.

Luis Reygadas’s chapter on the “Constructionof Latin American Inequality” complements Gooten-berg’s. For him, the problem can be attributed neitherto a “lone gunman” (isolatable cause) nor some his-torical “original sin” (primordial cause). Inequalityresults from the connection and accumulation ofmany processes in conjunction in a variety of contexts.Areas of overlap between social class and racial and



ethnic divides are reinforced by social barriers. Theexistence of categories is not as important as the socialprocesses that form and weaken them, the boundariesthat separate them, and the flows of resources chan-neled by these divisions. Since persistent inequalitiesrequire the persistence of elites, relevant researchfocuses not only on subalterns but also on those whodominate them.

The second part of the book, “History, Sub-jectivity, and Politics,” contains three chapters. In“Health Policy and Inequality in Peru,” ChristinaEwig investigates how policy formation institutional-izes class, race, and gender inequalities in healthcare. She distinguishes the social security system forworkers from the public health system that serves thepoor. Historically, shifting power relations replacedthe dichotomy of “indigenous” and “white” with athird category of mestizo workers between the indig-enous poor and the white elite. Ewig centers heranalysis on the discourse that favored and co-optedthese workers as well as middle-class professionals.Through union organization and participation inpolitical parties, both groups obtained governmenthealth insurance programs and gained access toadvances in health care. Meanwhile, public health careservices were stigmatized as a “welfare” benefit forthose categorized as poor. How these processes andcategories are appropriated and lived by the socialactors is not articulated in this account.

The other two chapters in this section are lessrelevant for the anthropology of work. Another Peru-vian case study examines survival strategies andself-improvement projects of people categorized as“poor” in the shantytowns of Lima. Householdsdeploying all their able-bodied members in the labormarket are threatened with “meltdowns” because,among other causes, they are trapped in limitedoccupational niches prone to economic downturns.The third chapter shows how deficiencies of politicalinformation in poor neighborhoods deprived thepoor of their voice in the Brazilian executive and leg-islative election of 2002. This reinforced inequalitiesby increasing the gap between the rich and the poor.Questions remain, however, about the differencesmore knowledge about candidates would have madeand about other possible means of political partici-pation beyond voting.

The last part of the book is called “Culturesacross Borders.” In “Between Orishas and Revolution:The Expression of Racial Inequalities in Post-SovietCuba,” Odette Casamayor examines “the indelibleinequality between whites and blacks under anethical-aesthetic lens, one that approaches racismfrom the intimacy of being, one rejecting determinismyet incorporating the suggestion of economic, politicalsocial, and historical analysis” (140). In the work of a

painter and multimedia artist, she shows how artistsdenounce racism in Cuba and try to make it visible.Despite attempts to efface ethnic differences as alegacy of the Cuban Revolution, the deep roots ofracism are revealed in stereotypes about black peoplethat limit their access to jobs in the post-Soviet era.Song lyrics and other artistic forms express such valo-rizations, which reinforce the reproduction ofinequalities. Thus, artists are engaged in resistancework.

The most thorough integration of labor dynam-ics appears in the last chapter, “How Latin AmericanInequality Becomes Latino Inequality: A Case Studyof Hudson Valley Farmworkers” by Margaret Grey.Four broad processes have led to the marginalizationand powerlessness of migrant laborers in New YorkState: inequalities in their home countries, especiallyin education, that limit their opportunities; hierarchiesestablished around race, ethnicity, and class that facili-tate their exploitation; “farmworker” as a job category,which excludes them from protective labor laws; andtheir status as undocumented migrants, which exposesthem to a “constant climate of fear.” Gray conductedinterviews to discover how these conditions areexpressed in the workers’ subjectivities and repro-duced in work processes. She did not explore theconstruction of identities, but she found a dynamicemployer/farmworker relationship emerging from pre-vious racially and hierarchically paired relationships,such as white versus Latino, master versus slave, andcitizen versus undocumented person. Rather thanbecoming passive, the farmworkers generated collec-tive action to gain rights, resisting employers’ “inces-sant drive to find workers they can profit from byadopting reigning categorical pairs to their advantage”(189).

Overall, the book provides, as Auyero pointsout, a kind of “toolbox” to apply to problems of per-sistent and indelible inequalities. Its conceptualstrength corresponds to the difficulty of inquiringabout such long-term, multifaceted, and heteroge-neous phenomena. How do these categories overlapin the local production of inequalities, how can theirlocal and national meanings be generalized, and howare they intertwined and lived in local traditions?In regard to work, the case studies raise penetratingquestions. Precisely how, for example, do the expe-riences of citizen and noncitizen migrant farm-workers or black and white job seekers develop dif-ferently? At this level of analysis, we can see howlabor relations themselves reproduce the inequalities.In sum, the demonstration of complex, relational,and multicausal similarities underlying the inequali-ties in these case studies is a fundamental contribu-tion of the book. Beyond economic exploitation andgaps in income, the authors address fuller dimen-



sions of inequalities. Differential access to healthcare and political information, and other forms ofdiscrimination against individuals placed in catego-ries such as “black,” “Indian,” and “Latino,” influ-ence their access to a decent life. The possibility ofobtaining better employment or other forms of work,then, is only one component of the experience ofindelible inequality.

ReferenceTilly, Charles. 1998. Durable Inequality. Berkeley:University of California Press.

Ethnic Entrepreneurs: Identity and Develop-ment Politics in Latin America. Monica C.DeHart. Stanford, CA: Stanford UniversityPress, 2010.

Agustin Diz, London School of [email protected]

In Ethnic Entrepreneurs, Monica DeHart investi-gates the growing interplay between participatorydevelopment and ethnic identity.The book is an ambi-tious study of development discourse and practice thatcaptures the ways in which the figure of the “ethnicentrepreneur” has become commonplace in develop-ment efforts; it further demonstrates how this empha-sis on ethnicity facilitates, hinders, and modifiespolitical and economic engagements at the local level.

In the introductory chapter, the author definesethnic entrepreneurs as shape-shifting, but increas-ingly paradigmatic, development agents drawn from“indigenous community residents, working-classmigrants to the United States, and elite Latino diaspo-ras” (1). The ethnic entrepreneur embodies “values,relationships and forms of knowledge deemed par-ticularly useful for the community-based, participa-tory development paradigm applied throughout LatinAmerica” (1). In this light, the purpose of EthnicEntrepreneurs is to show how the micropolitics ofdevelopment come to constitute particular kinds ofsubjectivity, knowledge, and practices that are associ-ated with ethnic difference.

The rise of the ethnic entrepreneur, arguesDeHart, is symptomatic of changing forms of gover-nance, from welfarist to neoliberal, throughout LatinAmerica. She does a good job of demonstrating howchanging policy contexts have affected the kinds ofdevelopment strategies available to ethnic entrepre-neurs. For instance, chapter 2 discusses the ways inwhich a Mayan social enterprise in Guatemala (Coop-eración para el Desarrollo Rural de Occidente, or CDRO)embraces Mayan cultural values, such as “total

community participation, mutual support, and hori-zontality” (32), to design projects that are seen asalternatives to Western development strategies. AsDeHart rightly points out, these values are highlycompatible with the policy agendas of the Guatemalanstate and international donors, who increasingly pushfor decentralization and a smaller role for the cen-tral state. In fact, while espousing “traditional” and“authentic” Mayan culture, CDRO’s goals seem topromote “global capitalist ideals” inasmuch as theirprojects have increased market participation and fos-tered the growth of modern financial institutions (35).

Chapter 5 explores another aspect of the inter-relation between ethnicity and global capitalism. Herethe focus is on how CDRO changed the productionstrategies of its communities so that they could benefitfrom greater integration in the world market. Specifi-cally, it details how these communities stopped pro-ducing “traditional” goods for sale in local markets,such as corn or artisanal crafts, and instead reached anagreement with Wal-Mart to produce cosmetic goodsthat bore no trace of their “ethnic” origins. In thischapter, DeHart successfully captures the complexinteraction between global development and localethnic identity. She demonstrates that while these twosocial processes may often seem to be at odds, theirinterrelationship often produces new social forms thatremain grounded in traditional cultural practices. Forinstance, the author explains that, although commer-cial production for global markets represents a newsubsistence strategy for the communities, the processof production itself draws heavily on traditionalMayan ways of life, since “underlying forms of per-sonhood and place” remain intact (101).

Taking a slightly different approach, chapters 3and 4 turn to the ways in which transnational migrantshave become important ethnic entrepreneurs. Whilechapter 3 looks at the case of Guatemalan migrants tothe US and the importance of remittances for structur-ing gender relations back home, chapter 4 focuses on aUN-sponsored conference for elite members of theLatino diaspora in the United States. From the per-spective of states and donors, migrants exemplify anentrepreneurial drive, but they also maintain strongcommunal ties back home. As a result, migrantsbecome quintessential development agents, thanks totheir potential for transferring wealth, knowledge, andskills to their home communities. Of course, DeHartargues, this perspective overlooks the importance ofclass, gender, and nationality dynamics that actuallyundergird most migrant communities. Additionally,the use of migrants as development agents seems tofurther neoliberal agendas in which responsibility fordevelopment shifts away from the state and insteadbecomes the moral duty of autonomous translocalactors (79). Ultimately, these two chapters show how



states, multinational corporations, lower-class mig-rants, and Latino professionals have become comple-mentary partners in regional development efforts (93).

If other chapters show the complex interrela-tions among global markets, the state, developmentprojects, and ethnic identity, chapter 6 brings thewhole book together by examining the role of knowl-edge in defining authority at the local level. Specifi-cally, the chapter discusses the political implications ofdevelopment projects where agents are perceived asembodying different sets of knowledge – in this case,“social capital and technical knowledge” (135). Thechapter shows how different “ethnic subjects” –college-educated council members, Mayan micro-finance experts, Latino professionals, working-classmigrants, and ethnic-development organizations –draw on different kinds of knowledge to validate theirpositions of authority in the development process.Most importantly, ethnic entrepreneurs are presentedas actors who successfully wield local knowledge aswell as financial and technological expertise in waysthat are valuable for development.

One of DeHart’s main conclusions is that“ethnic authenticity and community insidership aretraits to be proven, rather than assumed” and that “theactual content of ethnic difference” is “contentiousand contingent, rather than primordial and rigid”(141). In this sense, Ethnic Entrepreneurs is successful,since it considers diverse facets of neoliberal develop-ment – from microfinance and migration to globalmarkets and the importance of knowledge – in orderto illustrate how these processes helped constructthe ethnic entrepreneur as a key mediating actor. Itfurther demonstrates how, as a result of global trends,ethnicity has become an enhancement, rather than ahindrance, to development. However, the concludingclaim that the book presents “a methodological andanalytical approach that can capture the multipleplaces and encounters in which development andidentity politics play themselves out” (144) is slightlyoverstated. Perhaps because the book attempts toproduce a multisited ethnography to describe aregional phenomenon, the reader is often left with afrustratingly thin description of the communities andsocial practices mentioned – particularly in terms ofunderlying or preexisting inequalities and conflicts.Additionally, DeHart rarely contextualizes some ofher more theoretical concepts, such as “subjectivity,”“personhood,” or “place,” and this detracts from theprecision of the broader argument and weakens thebook’s analytical framework. In spite of this, the bookwill be useful for students of development policyand indigenous politics in Latin America, especiallyGuatemala, as it captures the ways in which ethnicactors are becoming increasingly engaged in neolib-eral development discourse and practice.

Brother Towns/Pueblos Hermanos. Charles D.Thompson, director. Reading, PA: BullfrogFilms, 2010.

Liliana Goldín, NewYork [email protected]

BrotherTowns/Pueblos Hermanos is a documentaryvideo about Jupiter, Florida, and Jacaltenango, Gua-temala. Charles D. Thompson, the director, is educa-tion and curriculum director at Duke University’sCenter for Documentary Studies. Jupiter is a town ofabout 55,000 people with a median household incomeof about US$55,000. The population is mostly white(90%), with English spoken by approximately 88% ofthe population, followed by Spanish by about 7.5% ofthe population. Many wealthy snowbirds from thenortheastern United States live part of the year inJupiter. Jacaltenango is a very poor town that has seensome improvements since migrants to the UnitedStates began sending significant remittances, whichare used mainly for construction and agriculturalinputs. Most of the population of Jacaltenango fallswithin the classification of extreme poverty (about60% making less than US$2.00/day). Those house-holds that have sent migrants to the United Statestend to be above the poverty line. The video brieflynotes how 1 million Maya left Guatemala during thecivil war, migrating to Mexico and the United States.Many settled in Florida, particularly Indiantown, andfrom there moved to the nearby town of Jupiter, wherethere was plenty of work.

The video moves back and forth between the twotowns to describe the dire economic situation of manyin Jacaltenango. It shows various individuals, men andwomen alike, discussing poverty in general as well asspecific economic issues that directly impact their lives,such as low income, low profits, and the high cost offood. The documentary makes the point that out-migration to the US is an economic necessity. Peopledon’t leave for “pleasure,” says one woman; they leavebecause they want to make a better life for their fami-lies. A tailor interviewed near the beginning makes animportant point, which I paraphrase: If you were bornhere, he said, you could be like me, a tailor, or a farmer;you would also be poor. There is randomness to peo-ple’s destiny and place of birth, which can make thedifference between poverty and wealth.The video alsomakes clear that Jacaltecos are hardworking people.

In Jupiter, where a considerable number of Gua-temalans from Jacaltenango have settled, we are intro-duced to an organization called El Sol that provides aplace to assemble, obtain information about jobs,learn English, and find solace from waiting to bepicked up for work on a daily basis. In many southernFlorida towns and cities, there are certain street



corners where day laborers wait to be offered theoccasional job. They spend many hours and daysmaking themselves available, with little food and fewplaces to rest.The video relates how the mayor and thecity council, supported by segments of the town’spopulation, participated in the creation of the center.Many residents also opposed its creation, and somewho were interviewed feel strongly that undocu-mented migrants should not be given any support.Will they take the jobs of Americans? Do they bring“crime and disease”? Should not the city enforce theexisting laws instead of protecting “law breakers”? Byraising the arguments of local Floridians for andagainst the center, the video summarizes some of themain controversies in the U.S. immigration debate.

For many in the developed countries, it is diffi-cult to imagine the lives of the poor around the world.This video does a good job of portraying the poor intheir own homes and through their own words, not asvictims but agents of their own lives in difficult andcomplex national and global circumstances. Poverty,discrimination, and a history constructed on the basisof colonial and neocolonial structures have framed the

lives of so many around the world with few alternativepaths. Most relevant for the anthropology of work areportraits of some of the occupations of these mostlyagricultural populations in Guatemala and later inFlorida, which raise issues of gender and class in thecontext of poverty and migration. But it is the impli-cations for the politics of labor migration that seem tobe best addressed and that may open opportunities forproductive analysis.

The video provides an opportunity for studentsof Latin America, globalization, economics, and workto explore the various and often divisive perspectiveson the issues. To that effect, there is a web page,www.brothertowns.com, that offers study guides orga-nized around the issues covered. The documentary isinteresting and aesthetically pleasing, enhanced by astrong narration and sound track. I particularly appre-ciated the music, some of which was created especiallyfor the video by songwriter and performer SantosMontejo.

DOI:10.1111/awr.12007



Cooperation in Economy and Society edited by Robert C.Marshall, ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman and...

Documents

Transcript of Cooperation in Economy and Society edited by Robert C.Marshall, ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman and...