Pub Date : 2023-10-27DOI: 10.1080/00664677.2023.2271674
Jan Ketil Simonsen
Different types of rituals to contract marriage have developed in urban Zambia that combine customary girl’s initiation and marriage rituals with novel forms of ritual performances. The participants bring into being in symbolic forms different ‘tribes’ and traditions, which they compare, contrast, and connect. They construe a virtual reality of multiplicity of traditions; categories for interaction on which actual relations may be formed. These ritual practices are analysed within perspectives on cosmopolitanism as processes of meaning-making and is an attempt to connect pluralist perspectives on cosmopolitanism as relations between diverse cultures with universalist perspectives that search for forms of interaction between humans that do not entail prior classifications such as tribe, nation, or class.
{"title":"Migration, Marriage Rituals and Contemporary Cosmopolitanism in Urban Zambia","authors":"Jan Ketil Simonsen","doi":"10.1080/00664677.2023.2271674","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2023.2271674","url":null,"abstract":"Different types of rituals to contract marriage have developed in urban Zambia that combine customary girl’s initiation and marriage rituals with novel forms of ritual performances. The participants bring into being in symbolic forms different ‘tribes’ and traditions, which they compare, contrast, and connect. They construe a virtual reality of multiplicity of traditions; categories for interaction on which actual relations may be formed. These ritual practices are analysed within perspectives on cosmopolitanism as processes of meaning-making and is an attempt to connect pluralist perspectives on cosmopolitanism as relations between diverse cultures with universalist perspectives that search for forms of interaction between humans that do not entail prior classifications such as tribe, nation, or class.","PeriodicalId":45505,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Forum","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136262078","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-26DOI: 10.1080/00664677.2023.2271671
Christa Mylin
{"title":"Embodying the Call: ‘Call Narratives’ and the Importance of Encouragement for Progressive Mennonite Pastors","authors":"Christa Mylin","doi":"10.1080/00664677.2023.2271671","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2023.2271671","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45505,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Forum","volume":"17 06","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134908947","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-25DOI: 10.1080/00664677.2023.2271672
Antonio A. R. Ioris
This paper presents an analysis of the politico-economic and ethnic-social basis of difference, paying special attention to the anti-difference violence suffered by indigenous peoples and the concrete experience of the Gurani-Kaiowa in Brazil. Ethnic-social differences and commonalities are here examined through a social sciences reinterpretation of Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit. In this magistral book, Hegel problematises and gradually resolves many questions about human perception, the shortcomings of reason, and the incremental evolution of reason that can only happen through mediation and interaction. The unique features of each social group can consequently expand into ethnoclass commonalities shared with other, unique populations. That is particularly relevant to understand the many pressures to reduce the Guarani-Kaiowa to an indeterminate proletarian condition (generic members of the working class or the peasantry), which has nonetheless revitalised their sense of indigeneity. The Guarani-Kaiowa are different from other segments of the working class, but the more they see, and are seen, as different, the more immersed they become in the subalternity of the rest of the dispossessed population. The identification of the indigenous population as both members of the working class and of unique ethnical groups has major political consequences (the negation of the negation) in terms of poor-poor alliances that can challenge politico-economic trends and, particularly, the illegitimate concessions to agribusiness farmers.
{"title":"Difference, Indigeneity and Ethnoclass Convergence","authors":"Antonio A. R. Ioris","doi":"10.1080/00664677.2023.2271672","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2023.2271672","url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents an analysis of the politico-economic and ethnic-social basis of difference, paying special attention to the anti-difference violence suffered by indigenous peoples and the concrete experience of the Gurani-Kaiowa in Brazil. Ethnic-social differences and commonalities are here examined through a social sciences reinterpretation of Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit. In this magistral book, Hegel problematises and gradually resolves many questions about human perception, the shortcomings of reason, and the incremental evolution of reason that can only happen through mediation and interaction. The unique features of each social group can consequently expand into ethnoclass commonalities shared with other, unique populations. That is particularly relevant to understand the many pressures to reduce the Guarani-Kaiowa to an indeterminate proletarian condition (generic members of the working class or the peasantry), which has nonetheless revitalised their sense of indigeneity. The Guarani-Kaiowa are different from other segments of the working class, but the more they see, and are seen, as different, the more immersed they become in the subalternity of the rest of the dispossessed population. The identification of the indigenous population as both members of the working class and of unique ethnical groups has major political consequences (the negation of the negation) in terms of poor-poor alliances that can challenge politico-economic trends and, particularly, the illegitimate concessions to agribusiness farmers.","PeriodicalId":45505,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Forum","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135111336","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-12DOI: 10.1080/00664677.2023.2257898
Rusaslina Idrus
ABSTRACTThe use of litigation has become an important strategy for customary land claims for the Orang Asli, the aboriginal people of Peninsular Malaysia. Increasing displacement from their customary territories, and having exhausted other official avenues, the Orang Asli are resorting to legal measures to protect their rights. Several landmark cases in the Malaysian courts favouring Orang Asli rights have given the Indigenous People hope in the legal system. However, lawsuits are risky, require an enormous amount of time and resources, and take a toll on the communities and others involved in the process. Relying on the court process risks reifying state power, reinscribing unequal power dynamics, and reinforcing essentialised notions of indigenous ‘culture’ and ‘tradition’. In this article, I draw upon my long-term research on Orang Asli activism and my experience serving as an expert witness in several Orang Asli customary land claims to discuss the limits and possibilities of social anthropological knowledge in the legal arena. Focusing on the Malaysian context, I reflect upon the challenges of speaking across different fields, translating social anthropological research into a form legible to the legal process, and the dilemma of being complicit in reifying hierarchies of knowledge. I consider how social anthropologists in their cultural expertise role might use the legal space to centre Indigenous knowledge, and challenge the more static understanding of indigenous culture and tradition.KEYWORDS: Expert witnesscultural expertisecultural translationcustomary land claimscustomary territory AcknowledgementsI extend my sincere thanks to Dr. James Rose, Dr. Miriam Shakow, Dr. Yogeswaran Subramaniam, Mr. Hon Kai Ping and Mr. Saha Deva A. Arunasalam for their expertise and valuable comments. I am grateful to the anonymous reviewers and the journal editors for their insightful feedback, which significantly improved this article. My appreciation also goes to the legal counsels, judicial authorities, and the Bar Council Committee on Orang Asli Rights. I am indebted to the Orang Asli villagers who generously shared their time, space, and insights, and to whom I am grateful for their kind hospitality throughout my inquiries. Thank you to the Gender Studies Programme and the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences at Universiti Malaya for their institutional support that made this work possible.Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 Sagong bin Tasi & Ors v. Kerajaan Negeri Selangor & Ors [2002] 2 MLJ 591.2 The 2018 election saw a change in government for the first time since Malaysia’s independence in 1957.3 Some examples, Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Hal Ehwal Ehwal Orang Asli & Anor v Mohamad Bin Nohing (Batin Kampung Bukit Rok) & Ors and another appeal [2015] 6 MLJ 527 (Court of Appeal, Malaysia), Yebet bt Saman & Ors v Foong Kwai Long & Ors [2015] 2 MLJ 498 (Court of Appeal, Malaysia), Eddy Salim & Ors v Isk
【摘要】诉讼的运用已成为马来西亚半岛原住民原住民(Orang Asli)习惯性土地主张的重要策略。越来越多的人被迫离开他们的习惯领土,并且已经用尽了其他官方途径,土著人民正在诉诸法律措施来保护他们的权利。马来西亚法院审理的几起有利于原住民权利的里程碑式案件给了土著人民在法律体系中的希望。然而,诉讼是有风险的,需要大量的时间和资源,并对社区和其他参与过程的人造成损害。依赖法院程序可能会使国家权力具体化,重新确立不平等的权力动态,并强化本土“文化”和“传统”的本质概念。在这篇文章中,我利用我对阿斯利原住民行动主义的长期研究,以及我在几个阿斯利原住民传统土地索赔中担任专家证人的经验,来讨论社会人类学知识在法律领域的局限性和可能性。专注于马来西亚的背景,我反思了在不同领域说话的挑战,将社会人类学研究转化为法律程序可读的形式,以及在物化知识等级方面共谋的困境。我考虑社会人类学家在他们的文化专业角色中如何利用法律空间来集中土著知识,并挑战对土著文化和传统的更静态的理解。我衷心感谢James Rose博士、Miriam Shakow博士、Yogeswaran Subramaniam博士、Hon Kai Ping先生和Saha Deva A. Arunasalam先生的专业知识和宝贵意见。我非常感谢匿名审稿人和期刊编辑提供的有见地的反馈,这些反馈极大地改进了这篇文章。我还要感谢法律顾问、司法当局和律师协会原住民权利委员会。我要感谢阿斯利村的村民们,他们慷慨地分享了他们的时间、空间和见解,我也要感谢他们在我问询期间的盛情款待。感谢马来亚大学性别研究方案和艺术与社会科学学院的体制支持,使这项工作成为可能。披露声明作者未报告潜在的利益冲突。Notes1 Sagong本Tasi指数和口服补液盐诉‧Negeri雪兰莪州和口服补液盐[2002]2 MLJ 591.2在2018年大选后改变了政府1957.3年马来西亚独立以来首次一些例子,Ketua Pengarah Jabatan哈尔Ehwal Ehwal原始人&携带者v穆罕默德·本·能剧(乡下来Batin Bukit韩国)和口服补液盐和另一个吸引[2015]6 MLJ 527(上诉法院、马来西亚),口服补液盐Yebet bt萨曼& v Foong葵长和口服补液盐[2015]2 MLJ 498(上诉法院、马来西亚)3 . Eddy Salim & Ors诉依斯干达地区发展局& Ors [2017] 1 LNS 122(高等法院,新山,马来西亚)Kamal Solhami博士是另一位社会人类学家,近年来在奥朗阿斯利法庭案件中担任专家证人土著权利倡导者科林·尼古拉斯博士编写了早期关于土著居民习惯土地案件的专家报告。他是关注原住民权利的非政府组织“原住民关注中心”(COAC)的协调员。他的专业知识在几起原住民土地索赔案件中发挥了至关重要的作用Gajah Batu是一个笔名。
{"title":"Engaged Social Anthropology and Indigenous Land Claims in Malaysia","authors":"Rusaslina Idrus","doi":"10.1080/00664677.2023.2257898","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2023.2257898","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTThe use of litigation has become an important strategy for customary land claims for the Orang Asli, the aboriginal people of Peninsular Malaysia. Increasing displacement from their customary territories, and having exhausted other official avenues, the Orang Asli are resorting to legal measures to protect their rights. Several landmark cases in the Malaysian courts favouring Orang Asli rights have given the Indigenous People hope in the legal system. However, lawsuits are risky, require an enormous amount of time and resources, and take a toll on the communities and others involved in the process. Relying on the court process risks reifying state power, reinscribing unequal power dynamics, and reinforcing essentialised notions of indigenous ‘culture’ and ‘tradition’. In this article, I draw upon my long-term research on Orang Asli activism and my experience serving as an expert witness in several Orang Asli customary land claims to discuss the limits and possibilities of social anthropological knowledge in the legal arena. Focusing on the Malaysian context, I reflect upon the challenges of speaking across different fields, translating social anthropological research into a form legible to the legal process, and the dilemma of being complicit in reifying hierarchies of knowledge. I consider how social anthropologists in their cultural expertise role might use the legal space to centre Indigenous knowledge, and challenge the more static understanding of indigenous culture and tradition.KEYWORDS: Expert witnesscultural expertisecultural translationcustomary land claimscustomary territory AcknowledgementsI extend my sincere thanks to Dr. James Rose, Dr. Miriam Shakow, Dr. Yogeswaran Subramaniam, Mr. Hon Kai Ping and Mr. Saha Deva A. Arunasalam for their expertise and valuable comments. I am grateful to the anonymous reviewers and the journal editors for their insightful feedback, which significantly improved this article. My appreciation also goes to the legal counsels, judicial authorities, and the Bar Council Committee on Orang Asli Rights. I am indebted to the Orang Asli villagers who generously shared their time, space, and insights, and to whom I am grateful for their kind hospitality throughout my inquiries. Thank you to the Gender Studies Programme and the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences at Universiti Malaya for their institutional support that made this work possible.Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 Sagong bin Tasi & Ors v. Kerajaan Negeri Selangor & Ors [2002] 2 MLJ 591.2 The 2018 election saw a change in government for the first time since Malaysia’s independence in 1957.3 Some examples, Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Hal Ehwal Ehwal Orang Asli & Anor v Mohamad Bin Nohing (Batin Kampung Bukit Rok) & Ors and another appeal [2015] 6 MLJ 527 (Court of Appeal, Malaysia), Yebet bt Saman & Ors v Foong Kwai Long & Ors [2015] 2 MLJ 498 (Court of Appeal, Malaysia), Eddy Salim & Ors v Isk","PeriodicalId":45505,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Forum","volume":"108 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136012977","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-09DOI: 10.1080/00664677.2023.2264519
Riccardo Mazzola
ABSTRACTThis article presents and discusses two different ways through which the Ganalbingu people (Australia) addressed cultural differences in the normative conceptualisation of artworks in a judicial setting. The analysis focuses on linguistic conduct held by the plaintiffs, their representatives, and expert witnesses in two cases discussed before the Australian Federal Court (Northern Territory): Bulun Bulun v Nejlam Pty Ltd (1989) and Bulun Bulun v R & T Textiles Pty Ltd (1998). In both cases, Ganalbingu artist Johnny Bulun Bulun lamented a violation of his copyright in two paintings. This article mostly relies on affidavits and judicial documentation, and aims to show and attempts to explain the existence of two opposed tendencies in the judicial narrative on copyright law: namely, an enforced (attempt to) assimilation of Ganalbingu culture to the Western legal categories of (intellectual) property and copyright law, however simultaneously 'insisting on difference', that is emphasising the fundamental distinctions between Ganalbingu and Western normative conception of artworks. The article particularly enlightens the impact on the Ganalbingu judicial narrative of anthropological accounts rendered through affidavits, especially in one of the two cases in which Bulun Bulun was involved. After investigating the nature and function of those accounts, it concludes that several factors can explain the seemingly ambivalent nature of Ganalbingu linguistic conduct, ranging from a ‘spurious’ nature of misappropriated artworks to forms of resistance to an unbalance of power potentially leading to unwanted colonisation.KEYWORDS: Traditional cultural expressionsintellectual propertycopyrightinterlegalityYolngu people Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 ‘Indigenous’ (and ‘Indigenous Australians’) is used here with the awareness of the existing debate on the appropriateness of this word to designate a wide variety of peoples and cultures around the world, but with no intention to comment on the said debate. Occasionally, the judicial documents quoted in this article refer to Indigenous Australians as ‘Aboriginal people’ and ‘Aborigines’.2 The same approach characterised former works of the author on the same topic (Mazzola Citation2018, 115–134; Citation2020). Some of those works quoted excerpts of affidavits also reported in this article. However, the present study offers a deeper analysis of the two cases in which Bulun Bulun was involved and additional materials. The main sources for the judicial documentation reproduced in this article are Colin Golvan’s website (section ‘Indigenous documents’) and the Indigenous Law Resources database of the Indigenous Law Centre (UNSW) and AustLII.3 Specifically: Colin Golvan (in 2016), Martin Hardie (in 2019), Frances and Howard Morphy (in 2016 and 2019).4 After the agreement, Milpurrurru continued the lawsuit lamenting that R & T Textiles’ conduct violated Gan
{"title":"Addressing Cultural Difference in Indigenous Copyright Cases","authors":"Riccardo Mazzola","doi":"10.1080/00664677.2023.2264519","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2023.2264519","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTThis article presents and discusses two different ways through which the Ganalbingu people (Australia) addressed cultural differences in the normative conceptualisation of artworks in a judicial setting. The analysis focuses on linguistic conduct held by the plaintiffs, their representatives, and expert witnesses in two cases discussed before the Australian Federal Court (Northern Territory): Bulun Bulun v Nejlam Pty Ltd (1989) and Bulun Bulun v R & T Textiles Pty Ltd (1998). In both cases, Ganalbingu artist Johnny Bulun Bulun lamented a violation of his copyright in two paintings. This article mostly relies on affidavits and judicial documentation, and aims to show and attempts to explain the existence of two opposed tendencies in the judicial narrative on copyright law: namely, an enforced (attempt to) assimilation of Ganalbingu culture to the Western legal categories of (intellectual) property and copyright law, however simultaneously 'insisting on difference', that is emphasising the fundamental distinctions between Ganalbingu and Western normative conception of artworks. The article particularly enlightens the impact on the Ganalbingu judicial narrative of anthropological accounts rendered through affidavits, especially in one of the two cases in which Bulun Bulun was involved. After investigating the nature and function of those accounts, it concludes that several factors can explain the seemingly ambivalent nature of Ganalbingu linguistic conduct, ranging from a ‘spurious’ nature of misappropriated artworks to forms of resistance to an unbalance of power potentially leading to unwanted colonisation.KEYWORDS: Traditional cultural expressionsintellectual propertycopyrightinterlegalityYolngu people Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 ‘Indigenous’ (and ‘Indigenous Australians’) is used here with the awareness of the existing debate on the appropriateness of this word to designate a wide variety of peoples and cultures around the world, but with no intention to comment on the said debate. Occasionally, the judicial documents quoted in this article refer to Indigenous Australians as ‘Aboriginal people’ and ‘Aborigines’.2 The same approach characterised former works of the author on the same topic (Mazzola Citation2018, 115–134; Citation2020). Some of those works quoted excerpts of affidavits also reported in this article. However, the present study offers a deeper analysis of the two cases in which Bulun Bulun was involved and additional materials. The main sources for the judicial documentation reproduced in this article are Colin Golvan’s website (section ‘Indigenous documents’) and the Indigenous Law Resources database of the Indigenous Law Centre (UNSW) and AustLII.3 Specifically: Colin Golvan (in 2016), Martin Hardie (in 2019), Frances and Howard Morphy (in 2016 and 2019).4 After the agreement, Milpurrurru continued the lawsuit lamenting that R & T Textiles’ conduct violated Gan","PeriodicalId":45505,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Forum","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135095259","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-25DOI: 10.1080/00664677.2023.2258452
Elodie Fache, Annette Breckwoldt
ABSTRACTFiji’s iTaukei (Indigenous) women contribute significantly to small-scale coastal fisheries, and are therefore integral to successful fisheries (co-)management, yet their role still remains underestimated. This paper explores an original pathway to highlight iTaukei women’s role in Fiji’s small-scale coastal fisheries; a pathway that, through a ‘dwelling perspective’, emphasises the socialities that are inseparable from this role. It is based on data collected during two distinct fieldwork periods, 2003–2004 and 2016–2018, in a village located on Gau, Fiji’s fifth biggest island, in Lomaiviti Province. An overview of the fishing practices of the iTaukei women living in this village shows that fishing can be seen as both a gender-differentiated and a more-than-human, dynamic field of sociality. Furthermore, we argue that fishing is these women’s main mode of active engagement with their marine environment, conceived as inseparable from land, and all its sentient constituents. This mode of engagement reflects the relational ontology inherent in the iTaukei all-encompassing concept of vanua, which includes a sense of environmental responsibility and stewardship. This mode of engagement and its ‘procurement’ dimension are adjusted over time through ‘friction’ with conservation regulations and ideas that are both internal and external to the fishing community. These conservation regulations and ideas are related to community-based marine resource initiatives, as well as to national fisheries management concerns and measures (including species-specific fishing bans). They give a supplemental dimension to women’s interactions and engagement with the sea and its sentient constituents, far from reducing those to a mere divide between ‘nature’ and society/sociality.KEYWORDS: FijifishingOceaniasmall-scale fisherieswomen AcknowledgementsThis article was co-written as part of the research project ‘A Sea of Connections: Contextualizing Fisheries in the South Pacific Region’ (SOCPacific; https://socpacific.net/), supported by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (under grant number ANR-17-FRAL-0001-01) and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (under grant number 389654580). This work contributes to Future Earth Coasts, a Global Research Project of Future Earth.Our deepest thanks go to Joeli Veitayaki for generously providing us with ongoing support across the oceans, and to the people of Gau Island, Fiji, especially the people of Malawai who so warmly and generously welcomed us, worked with us through day and night, and shared with us their knowledge and critical perspectives.Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Ethics Approval and Informed ConsentFor the 2016–2018 research period on which this paper is based, two human ethics applications were successively submitted to, and approved by, the Research Office of the USP, as confirmed by respective clearance letters from the Deputy Vice Chancellor Research and
{"title":"Women’s Active Engagement with the Sea Through Fishing in Fiji","authors":"Elodie Fache, Annette Breckwoldt","doi":"10.1080/00664677.2023.2258452","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2023.2258452","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTFiji’s iTaukei (Indigenous) women contribute significantly to small-scale coastal fisheries, and are therefore integral to successful fisheries (co-)management, yet their role still remains underestimated. This paper explores an original pathway to highlight iTaukei women’s role in Fiji’s small-scale coastal fisheries; a pathway that, through a ‘dwelling perspective’, emphasises the socialities that are inseparable from this role. It is based on data collected during two distinct fieldwork periods, 2003–2004 and 2016–2018, in a village located on Gau, Fiji’s fifth biggest island, in Lomaiviti Province. An overview of the fishing practices of the iTaukei women living in this village shows that fishing can be seen as both a gender-differentiated and a more-than-human, dynamic field of sociality. Furthermore, we argue that fishing is these women’s main mode of active engagement with their marine environment, conceived as inseparable from land, and all its sentient constituents. This mode of engagement reflects the relational ontology inherent in the iTaukei all-encompassing concept of vanua, which includes a sense of environmental responsibility and stewardship. This mode of engagement and its ‘procurement’ dimension are adjusted over time through ‘friction’ with conservation regulations and ideas that are both internal and external to the fishing community. These conservation regulations and ideas are related to community-based marine resource initiatives, as well as to national fisheries management concerns and measures (including species-specific fishing bans). They give a supplemental dimension to women’s interactions and engagement with the sea and its sentient constituents, far from reducing those to a mere divide between ‘nature’ and society/sociality.KEYWORDS: FijifishingOceaniasmall-scale fisherieswomen AcknowledgementsThis article was co-written as part of the research project ‘A Sea of Connections: Contextualizing Fisheries in the South Pacific Region’ (SOCPacific; https://socpacific.net/), supported by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (under grant number ANR-17-FRAL-0001-01) and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (under grant number 389654580). This work contributes to Future Earth Coasts, a Global Research Project of Future Earth.Our deepest thanks go to Joeli Veitayaki for generously providing us with ongoing support across the oceans, and to the people of Gau Island, Fiji, especially the people of Malawai who so warmly and generously welcomed us, worked with us through day and night, and shared with us their knowledge and critical perspectives.Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Ethics Approval and Informed ConsentFor the 2016–2018 research period on which this paper is based, two human ethics applications were successively submitted to, and approved by, the Research Office of the USP, as confirmed by respective clearance letters from the Deputy Vice Chancellor Research and ","PeriodicalId":45505,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Forum","volume":"117 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135816146","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-30DOI: 10.1080/00664677.2023.2247177
Dominik Schieder, Sina Emde, Geir Henning Presterudstuen
ABSTRACTFiji Islander sociality has long been characterised by high levels of diversity as well as interwoven categories of (self-)inclusion and (self-)exclusion and is increasingly shaped by urbanism and transborder mobility. This article focuses on how Fijians in town and abroad constitute self and belonging between vanua, ‘land’, and vakavanua, ‘tradition’, on the one hand, and the urban and migrant life worlds they inhabit, on the other. Being conceptually framed as a discussion piece and drawing on ethnographic research in urban Fiji as well as among the Fiji diaspora in Japan and Australia, this article takes a cross-comparative approach. It sheds light on the ongoing engagement among Fijian professionals with (vaka)vanua despite its relative absence as a tangible factor in their daily lives. Focusing on the dynamic undercurrents of (vaka)vanua and its social and political meanings from the perspective of three different research trajectories and settings, the discussion reveals that being Fijian in today's world engenders new engagements with ‘land’ and ‘tradition’ in manifold and challenging ways.KEYWORDS: FijiFiji diasporasocialityurbanismmobility AcknowledgementsWe would like to express our gratitude to our interlocutors in Fiji, Australia and Japan who are too numerous to be mentioned by name. We thank the two anonymous reviewers for helpful suggestions.Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 For our discussion on (vaka)vanua we find anthropological approaches towards ‘sociality’ useful. While the popularity of this term has wavered in anthropology (Carrithers Citation1990; Long and Moore Citation2013a; Sillander, Herrmans and Lounela Citation2021; cf. Long and Moore Citation2013b; Long Citation2015 and Sillander Citation2021 for overviews), it has had a thorough grounding in the Anthropology of Oceania and, more particularly, scholarship on Melanesia (Hoëm and Roalkvam Citation2003; Strathern Citation1988). Sociality, in its broadest sense, is ‘the capacity for complex social behaviour’ (Carrithers Citation1990, 189) and ‘fundamentally dynamic and dialectical’ (Sillander Citation2021, 1). We follow Toren, who writes that sociality ‘denote[s] dynamic social processes in which any person is inevitably engaged, rather than a set of rules or customs or structures or even meanings that exists as a system independently of the individual who is to be socialized’ (Citation1996, 61-62, emphasis in original). Elsewhere, Long explains that what humans do and say as part of their agentive capacities illustrates ‘how any given human being can participate with others in the world in multiple ways (some circumscribed, and others less so), and very often in multiple ways at the same time’ (Long Citation2015, 854). This, as Long and Moore explain, is possible because ‘sociality is open to manipulation and transformation on the part of social actors’ (Long and Moore Citation2013b, 3). Discussing the wa
作者二曾于1990年代、2000 - 2001年和2004年在苏瓦进行人种学研究,内容涉及性别、种族、民族和国家,主要与1987年政变后游说制定新宪法的学生和非政府组织活动人士合作,并在2000年政治危机期间反对劫持斐济议会人质和种族民族主义。自2009年以来,作者三在斐济西部进行了长期的民族志田野调查,主要关注人们在道德村或亲属经济之间移动并越来越多地参与市场经济时发生的社会变化。近年来,这项工作已扩展到与澳大利亚的斐济侨民社区和大洋洲的社会活动家合作。4在这里,我们借鉴了Pigliasco和Tomlinson几年前提出的大洋洲社会人类学协会(ASAO)题为“未被提出的问题和错失的机会:来自斐济的案例”的工作会议摘要。第一作者感谢Matt Tomlinson(个人通信,2017年12月17日)分享摘要并鼓励使用它例如,参见Becker Citation1995;Katz Citation1993;Nabobo-Baba Citation2006;Ravuvu Citation1983;Tomlinson Citation2009和Tuwere Citation2002为斐济和Hulkenberg Citation2015a, Citation2015b;5月Citation2020和Scott Citation2003为斐济侨民海洋研究中心于1997年由太平洋最杰出的学者之一埃佩利·豪奥法(Epeli Hau’ofa)创立。中心推广视觉及表演艺术。Epeli Hau ' ofa试图将他对大洋洲的看法变成“岛屿之海”(另见Hau ' ofa Citation2008)。他承认地方在大洋洲哲学和历史中的重要性,并强调大洋洲的人们一直在跨洋和跨地迁徙、迁移和混合。因此,海洋文化从来都不是一成不变的、一成不变的,而是在混合和交融的过程中不断变化和转化的在殖民政策之后,所有声称属于斐济原住民的土地都必须在Vola ni Kawa Bula (VKB)中以mataqali(通常翻译为“部落”)的名义登记。1987年军事政变后制定的1990年宪法规定,只有在VKB登记的人才被视为斐济人,有资格在斐济名册上投票,并有权享受平权行动计划(Robertson Citation2000, 271)。即使1990年的宪法被1997年的宪法所取代,废除了这一规则,但VKB仍然被使用,并作为土地和身份主张的基准在最新的澳大利亚人口普查(Citation2021)中,这一类别由根据31个特定的预先确定的海洋祖先之一自我认同的人组成安德鲁一度提到他从未去过卡达武。然而,他和他的家人同时前往斐济,将他的孩子介绍给他的父母和近亲。dominik Schieder在日本的研究得到了日本科学促进会(Japan Society for the Promotion of Science)的资助[资助号PE11043]。Sina Emde的研究得到了澳大利亚国立大学的资助。Geir Henning presterudstudent的研究是在西悉尼大学(以前的西悉尼大学)社会科学学院的研究基金的帮助下进行的。
{"title":"(Vaka)Vanua as Weakness, (Vaka)Vanua as Strength: Reflections on Fijian Sociality in Urban and Migrant Environments","authors":"Dominik Schieder, Sina Emde, Geir Henning Presterudstuen","doi":"10.1080/00664677.2023.2247177","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2023.2247177","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTFiji Islander sociality has long been characterised by high levels of diversity as well as interwoven categories of (self-)inclusion and (self-)exclusion and is increasingly shaped by urbanism and transborder mobility. This article focuses on how Fijians in town and abroad constitute self and belonging between vanua, ‘land’, and vakavanua, ‘tradition’, on the one hand, and the urban and migrant life worlds they inhabit, on the other. Being conceptually framed as a discussion piece and drawing on ethnographic research in urban Fiji as well as among the Fiji diaspora in Japan and Australia, this article takes a cross-comparative approach. It sheds light on the ongoing engagement among Fijian professionals with (vaka)vanua despite its relative absence as a tangible factor in their daily lives. Focusing on the dynamic undercurrents of (vaka)vanua and its social and political meanings from the perspective of three different research trajectories and settings, the discussion reveals that being Fijian in today's world engenders new engagements with ‘land’ and ‘tradition’ in manifold and challenging ways.KEYWORDS: FijiFiji diasporasocialityurbanismmobility AcknowledgementsWe would like to express our gratitude to our interlocutors in Fiji, Australia and Japan who are too numerous to be mentioned by name. We thank the two anonymous reviewers for helpful suggestions.Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 For our discussion on (vaka)vanua we find anthropological approaches towards ‘sociality’ useful. While the popularity of this term has wavered in anthropology (Carrithers Citation1990; Long and Moore Citation2013a; Sillander, Herrmans and Lounela Citation2021; cf. Long and Moore Citation2013b; Long Citation2015 and Sillander Citation2021 for overviews), it has had a thorough grounding in the Anthropology of Oceania and, more particularly, scholarship on Melanesia (Hoëm and Roalkvam Citation2003; Strathern Citation1988). Sociality, in its broadest sense, is ‘the capacity for complex social behaviour’ (Carrithers Citation1990, 189) and ‘fundamentally dynamic and dialectical’ (Sillander Citation2021, 1). We follow Toren, who writes that sociality ‘denote[s] dynamic social processes in which any person is inevitably engaged, rather than a set of rules or customs or structures or even meanings that exists as a system independently of the individual who is to be socialized’ (Citation1996, 61-62, emphasis in original). Elsewhere, Long explains that what humans do and say as part of their agentive capacities illustrates ‘how any given human being can participate with others in the world in multiple ways (some circumscribed, and others less so), and very often in multiple ways at the same time’ (Long Citation2015, 854). This, as Long and Moore explain, is possible because ‘sociality is open to manipulation and transformation on the part of social actors’ (Long and Moore Citation2013b, 3). Discussing the wa","PeriodicalId":45505,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Forum","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136119360","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-23DOI: 10.1080/00664677.2023.2247174
T. Schwoerer
{"title":"Large-Scale Land Transformations and Changing Sociality among the Wampar in Papua New Guinea","authors":"T. Schwoerer","doi":"10.1080/00664677.2023.2247174","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2023.2247174","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45505,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Forum","volume":"101 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72858296","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-16DOI: 10.1080/00664677.2023.2236312
N. Rapport
{"title":"‘Life is Individual’: Outline of a Cosmopolitan Civility and its Anthropology","authors":"N. Rapport","doi":"10.1080/00664677.2023.2236312","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2023.2236312","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45505,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Forum","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82259880","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-13DOI: 10.1080/00664677.2023.2218583
Daniel M. Knight
{"title":"The Death of Vernacular Cosmopolitanism","authors":"Daniel M. Knight","doi":"10.1080/00664677.2023.2218583","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2023.2218583","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45505,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Forum","volume":"93 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75362987","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}