♪
[African music]
♪
(female narrator)
Today, we're gonna talk
about the first of our
major social institutions.
And a social institution
is simply a structure
of relationship, obligation,
role, and function.
What this means is
that it's kind of this entity
that has been developed
by people
to meet
their perceived needs,
and some
of the social institutions
are political systems;
economic systems;
religion; education;
the aesthetics--
and there, we're talking
about the arts; and family.
So these are just some
of the examples.
And today, what we're gonna talk
about is economics.
So economy
is a system
of production, distribution,
and consumption.
So here, we have some graphics
to illustrate this.
The first one, the actual
construction of planes,
so that's
our production.
The next one, we have production
of energy occurring
and then distributing it out
to houses.
And then consumption
is what people themselves
or individuals
or groups consume.
The mode of production,
there are two basic kinds.
There's the capitalist,
and there's the nonindustrial.
And the capitalist is
the money to buy labor.
Nonindustrial is generally labor
or production
through some kind
of social obligation,
and generally,
that's a kin-based obligation.
So here, we have a Navajo woman
who is handweaving textiles,
and that's an example
of the nonindustrial type
of production.
Now, the means of production,
here, we're talking primarily
about labor, technology,
and land, and who owns the land.
So labor, is it
human versus machine?
With the technology,
is it handmade tools
or is it machine-made?
And the anthropology
sometimes refer to that
as simple versus complex.
And that is not
a qualitative term,
so we're not tryin' to say
that handmade tools are worse,
and machine-made tools better.
It's just a way
to describe them--
one being you
simply make them by hand,
and one, you have machines
that make them.
But I want to talk
a little bit more
about land
and the ownership itself.
Who owns it?
Is it collectively owned?
Is it individually owned?
Or does the government
ownership?
And this changes with the type
of subsistence strategy,
and we're gonna talk about those
more in our next lecture.
So with foragers,
there's no private ownership.
People need to be able to use
all and any of the resources
that are available
within that particular area.
Resource availability
isn't predictable,
so they actually have to have
a pretty large land area
to be able to exploit things
as they come into season.
And if one area seems
to be having drought,
maybe another microclimate
is doing okay.
The exception to this happens
to be river-based foragers,
who generally have
a more communal idea
about land
and/or individual ownership.
And some people think
this is because fish
is a more predictable resource.
I'm not totally convinced
of that argument yet,
but that is
the primary one.
Horticulturalists have
communal ownership of land,
and plots are allocated
to families.
And this is because
as soil fertility decreases,
it's necessary
to let land lie fallow,
which means
it's unworked.
And you have to be able to move
your field to a new area,
so that means
a lot of land.
Pastoralists are kind
of a combination
of both
a foraging strategy there
and the horticultural one
in that they need
a large land area
to be able
to move their herds.
So everybody has free access
to pastureland,
and the land
is communally held.
But the animals themselves
are private property,
so we are starting
to see that concept
of private property emerge.
As with most groups,
there is some variability.
The Baluch, who live in Iran,
Pakistan, and Afghanistan,
claim territory
and actually defend it.
So it is important
to keep in mind
that there's
always going to be
some group
that is the exception
to the generalities
that we're talking about.
Intensive agriculture,
private property rules.
Individual ownership
of land
and all of its resources
is a given.
They...most people who practice
intensive agriculture...
and this primarily
was some of the reasons
that there were
so many problems
between European colonialists
and indigenous peoples
is because of this concept
of communally holding land
or not owning it at all
and private ownership.
But most people that practice
intensive agriculture
believe that communal ownership
leads to overexploitation.
When in fact,
most of the evidence
suggests quite the contrary.
So the Borana,
who live in Ethiopia,
produce more animal protein
at a lower cost
than Australian
cattle ranchers.
And you might ask,
why are we comparing
Ethiopia and Australia?
Well, the climates
are actually fairly similar.
Groups with communal land
usually monitor their resources
more carefully,
and they move
before they're overexploited.
Now, the means
of distribution,
there are a couple
of different ways
that goods resources
get out to all the people.
And we are going to talk
about reciprocity.
We're going to talk
about redistribution,
and we're gonna talk
about the market principle.
And we're gonna talk
about reciprocity first,
and this is the exchange
between social equals.
And this usually is kinship,
marriage, friendship,
something along that lines.
And we have two types
of reciprocity.
We have
generalized reciprocity,
and we have
balanced reciprocity.
Generalized reciprocity
is you give to someone
without the expectation
of immediate return.
So here, we have
some !Kung hunters,
and whoever gets the kill
will share it with the others
with no expectation
of, like, hey, I'm gonna give
you some meat.
You're gonna give me a yam,
or something like that.
Or a family pulling of resources
is another example
of this
generalized reciprocity.
Now, balanced reciprocity
is where the giver
expects something
of equal value in return,
and that value is determined
by the parties involved.
So here, we have an example
of, like, a baby shower,
where the mother-to-be
is receiving gifts,
and everybody
that's there
actually has it
in the back of their mind
that if...when it's their turn
to have a baby,
they'll be getting gifts
in return,
and something
of equal value.
So gift-giving
in the U.S.
is sometimes considered
balanced reciprocity.
So we have
gift obligations.
You're obliged to give...
to extend social ties
to other persons
or groups,
um...to...refuse as a rejection
of that offered relationship
and can lead to some bad
feelings or even hostilities.
Um...the obligation to repay
is implied with every gift,
so that we expect
to get a future gift.
And if we
don't get one,
then people are often considered
cheap or unappreciative.
Now, both generalized
and balanced reciprocity
are based on trust
and some type of social tie.
But we do also have
negative reciprocity.
And negative reciprocity
is where one party
tries to get the better
of the other party,
and this could be
through hard bargaining.
It could be
through deception.
Some examples
would be horse raiding,
selling prepared foods
to a captive market,
so street vendors
are considered
an example
of negative reciprocity.
Now, redistribution.
This is when goods and services
move to a central authority.
This could be a king.
It could be a chief.
It could be a government.
And these goods
are then sorted, allocated,
and redistributed out
to the people.
Now, one of the best examples
of this actually occurred here
in the Pacific Northwest,
and that's the Potlatch,
which is the picture you
can see here on the left.
And the Potlatch
is where the chief
would be collecting goods
from people--
usually in some kind
of a tribute--
for even up to a year,
maybe more,
and then, they would hold
this massive feast
and give everything away.
And the more they
could give away,
the higher status they had
in the community,
so their wealth was actually
in giving things away.
Now, the market principle,
of course,
most of us
are familiar with,
because that's what we live in
on a day-to-day basis.
And this is where items
are bought and sold,
either directly--
could be through barter--
or indirectly, which is
through money and pricing.
And the goal here is
to maximize profit.
Value is determined
by supply and demand,
and we're free to spend as much
or as little as we choose.
Now, the one thing
about supply and demand,
which was supposed to regulate
prices and keep it competitive,
so that consumers
could actually afford things,
is easily manipulated.
So if you think about the
toy market at Christmas.
They'll only produce
a limited supply of something
that's a highly prized toy.
That they've marketed
to be a highly prized toy.
And that way,
they can up the prices,
because of the low supply.
Um...but supermarkets
and open-air markets
are both examples
of the market principle
but on different scales.
So that's it for economics.
Of course, it's much more
complicated than this,
but due to the time constraints
we have in the quarter,
we're just gonna get
some real basic ideas here
of what
an economic system is.
