What are the alternatives?

"The mainstream or neoclassical economics story is not specific in time or place. It is told as a universal tale of all humanity. Regardless of our class, race, gender or culture, say the economists, we can all identify with it" (Sharp 1994, p26).

Neo-classical economists believe theirs is a factual representation of the way the world "really is" but there are other economic stories. Sharp (1994) outlines an argument that the traditional assumptions of neo-classical economists exclude women’s economic stories because it tends to concentrate on its tools of analysis, rather than the issues it is analysing. Neo-classical economics therefore refuses to evaluate the equity of particular policies because it assumes that all people make decisions in the same, predictable, way regardless of class, gender or race.

Sharp (1994) is concerned with developing a form of economics that includes women’s stories, however the criticisms she levels at mainstream economic theory can also be applied to cultural issues.

In Australia, this is highlighted particularly in mainstream interactions with people from an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander background. As noted in "what is at stake", Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures have a kinship-based, rather than mathematically-based, culture that conceptualises the world as an inter-connected mesh of relationships. Keen (2004) describes the centrality of kin relations to Aboriginal economic systems in various Aboriginal groups all over Australia: "everywhere kin relations extended to the whole social universe, structured social roles and incorporated certain common features of kin classification and avoidance relations" (p392).

Keen (2004) describes his approach to studying the economy and society of Aboriginal people at the "threshold of civilisation" as a substantivist rather than formalist approach. In the formalist approach, says Keen (2004), the economy is about the choices people make in the allocation of scarce resources; an approach he argues that is most appropriate for market economies. Analysing indigenous economies requires a substantivist approach because the economy is embedded in other institutions (p4).

This embeddedness is an aspect of most indigenous knowledge systems and is what distinguishes it from Western scientific knowledges Indigenous knowledges are also local and practical concerned with ‘doing’ rather than simply ‘knowing’. (Peat 1996).

Bourke (1994) outlines the economic system of Aboriginal people before the arrival of the Europeans. He says that this life was distinguished by: sharing and co-operation; mobility within the boundaries of their ancestral lands; and significant diversity in economic life between groups in different geographical areas. Keen (2004) describes this as being the antithesis of capitalism because the goods exchanged or shared in gift economies are not commodified but retain their links to the giver (p5).

This reciprocity, as defined by Schwab (2006) is not the kind of ‘primitive communism’ misconception, where ownership is vague or non-existent and sharing is the prescribed mode of interaction (p2). Rather, reciprocity based on kinship is a mode of economic exchange, where an exchange involves an obligation to repay (Keen 2004, p336).

Keen (2004) notes that the type of relationship between individuals determined the type of gifts that were exchanged. Certain relationships, such as wife’s mother-daughter’s husband, required certain gifts (p337).

Schwab calls this reciprocity a kind of "demand sharing". Kin can demand generosity and refusal is punished through shame. This ethos is expressed by: the distribution of food in traditional society based on kinship to everyone but the hunter; the obligation to offer shelter to any relative who asks; borrowing of money by kin as soon as it becomes available; and complex strategic behaviour to avoid sharing such as hiding money.

According to Peterson (1993) demand sharing is characteristic of small-scale societies for good reason - by its nature, the hunting and gathering life involves risk and uncertainty and under such conditions, sharing appears to make good economic sense (p865) - and has only been neglected because of the different conception that the mainstream ontology places on generosity: that of outwardly unsolicited and altruistic giving (p861). Peterson (1993) uses the example of the Yolgnu practice of wamarrkane to demonstrate that reciprocity is far from altruistic: a Yolgnu person who compliments another may then make a substantial demand of the person they have complimented.

Apart from the collectivism inherent in a society that practices extensive demand-sharing, Keen (2004) outlines the Australian aboriginal economy has having the following characteristics: land tenure determined by kin relations with senior residents having control of the means of production through controlling access to Country; specialised organisation of production itself by particularly gender and age, with men hunting large game and women gathering vegetable matter and hunting smaller game; and the distribution and consumption of the produced goods being determined by kin through complex reciprocity arrangements.

Introduction

What is at stake?

What is the status quo?

What are the alternatives?

What happens when different knowledges speak to each other?

References