beyond the “proper job ... - stanford university

INSTITUTE FOR POVERTY, LAND AND AGRARIAN STUDIES (PLAAS)

Beyond the “Proper Job:” Political-economic Analysis after the Century of Labouring Man

13April2018 1JamesFerguson,2TaniaMurrayLi

1DepartmentofAnthropology,StanfordUniversity2DepartmentofAnthropology,UniversityofToronto

Institute for Poverty, Land And Agrarian Studies Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences University of the Western Cape Private Bag X17 Bellville 7535 Tel: +27-(0)21-9593733 Fax: +27(0)21-9593732 Website: www.plaas.org.za Email: [email protected] Twitter: @PLAASuwc Facebook: www.facebook.com/PLAASuwc

2

PLAAS Working Paper 51: Beyond the “Proper Job:” Political-economic Analysis after the Century of Labouring Man

ThePLAASWorkingPaperSeriesisdesignedtoshareworkinprogress.Pleasesendanysuggestionsorcommentstotheauthor(s).

©InstituteforPoverty,LandandAgrarianStudies,UniversityoftheWesternCape,April2018Author:Ferguson,[email protected]@utoronto.caCopyEditingandProofreading:JamesFergusonandTaniaMurrayLiLayout:MologadiMakwela

Citeas:Ferguson,J.,Li,T.M.(2018)'Beyondthe“ProperJob:”Political-economicAnalysisaftertheCenturyofLabouringMan’,WorkingPaper51.PLAAS,UWC:CapeTown.


ABSTRACT Thisprogrammaticarticleproposesanapproachtoglobalpolitical-economicinquiryinthewakeof the failureof long-establishedtransitionnarratives,notably thenarrativecentredonauniversaltrajectoryfromfarm-basedand“traditional”livelihoodsintothe“proper jobs” of a modern industrial society. The prevalence and persistence of“informal”, “precarious”,and“non-standard”employment insomanysitesaroundtheworld, it suggests, requires a profound analytical decentering of waged and salariedemployment as a presumed norm or telos, and a consequent reorientation of ourempirical research protocols. The authors seek to further such a reorientation byidentifyingasetofspecificpolitical-economicquestionsthatareinsomesenseportable,andcanprofitablybeappliedtoadiverserangeofempiricalcontextsaroundtheworld.But it is the questions that are shared, not the answers. By generating a matrix ofdifference and similarity across cases, the paper points toward a research agendacapablebothoffindinganswerstoconcretequestionsthatariseinspecificsettings,andofgeneratingcomparativeinsightsandtheidentificationoflarge-scalepatterns.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT .................................................................................. 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................... 4

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................ 1

2. WHAT IS OR IS NOT CHANGING ABOUT WORK? ....................................... 6

3. WHAT ARE THE CHANGING USES AND MEANINGS OF LAND? .......................... 9

4. WHAT ARE THE OTHER WAYS IN WHICH PEOPLE ACCESS LIVELIHOOD RESOURCES? . 11

5. WHAT ARE THE CHANGING FORMS OF SOCIAL MEMBERSHIP?........................ 13

6. WHAT FORMS OF POLITICS EMERGE AFTER “THE CENTURY OF LABOURING MAN”? .. 16

7. CONCLUSION ......................................................................... 18

REFERENCES ................................................................................ 21

1Working paper 51 1

1. INTRODUCTION A long history of understanding matters of poverty, inequality, and global political-economy in terms of a universal developmental transition has, inevitably, left deeptraces on all of our thinking -- even after many years of sustained critique of suchteleologicalmeta-narratives.Inapreviouspaper(Li2017),oneofusmadeanextendedargumentabout the continuingpowerof such“transition” thinkingand thedamage itcontinuestodo.Here,wedonotaimtorepeatthisanalysis,buttoreflectononeaspectof it: the fact that economic progress stories promised, as a culmination of the“development” process, the universalization of waged or salaried employment -- asocietyof jobsand jobholders. That thispromisehassooftenendedupabrokenonedoesnotdiminish its attraction, as is clear in the rhetorical appealsofpoliticians theworldover: Jobs, jobs, jobs! The limitedability to thinkbeyond thepromised-landofjobsforallafflictsnotonlypoliticians,butscholarsaswell.Indeed, the “proper job” has served for so long as a presumed norm or telos of“development” thatweare toooften leftwitha stuntedand reactive setof categoriesandconcepts for thinkingaboutalltheotherways inwhichpeoplemaketheirway intheworld.Thisisperhapswhydiscussionsofso-called“precarity”oftenrelyonresidualcategories of analysis (“unemployment”, “informal economy”, “non-standardemployment,”instability,insecurity)thatrendereverythingoutsidetheworldof“jobs”akindofnegativespace,definedbythatwhichitisnot.Therewasapowerfulvision implicit in the ideaof anemerging “developed”world inwhichpaid labourmightprovidethebasisbothofastable livelihoodandofakindofsocial membership or incorporation for all. As people left their pre-industrial ruralagriculturalorpastorallivelihoods, insuchaconception, theywouldbe fitted intothemodernnewsocialorderpreciselybyhaving“a job” -- thatenchantedobject thatstillprovides thenormalanswer to thequestion “So,whatdoyoudo?”A setof genderedexpectationsaboutthebreadwinnerandthefamily;theorganizationoftimeandspace;the roleof formaleducation; respectabilityandvirtue; andcontribution to thenationwererolledintothenotionofthe“properjob”(orlesscommonly,a“properbusiness”).Weemphasizethatthiswasnotjustanacademictheorybutaverywidelysharedsocialidealandexpectation,bothintheglobalNorthand(perhapsmoresurprisingly)acrossmuchof theglobal South,wherewagedorsalaried labour (especially industrialwagelabour and salaried government employment) often attained a kind of aspirationaluniversality that it nowhere achieved in reality. Today, as that imagined universalitygraduallyrecedes in therear-viewmirror, itsonce-dominant statusbegins tobecomevisibletousasdistinctive,perhapsevenstrange.

2 Beyond the “Proper Job:” Political-economic Analysis after the Century of Labouring Man

AsGuyStanding(2002:7)oncememorablyputit,the20thcentury,inretrospect,nowappearsas“thecenturyoflabouringman,”atimewhenthelifewayofwhathadbeenasmall fraction of the population (the stabilized urban working class) became, quitesuddenly(andsomehow--formany--quiteconvincingly)projectedasthefutureofall.Andif“thecenturyoflabouringman”is,asStandingargues,atanend,itisnotbecausestablewagedandsalariedlabourisdisappearinginanyabsolutesense,butbecauseitislosing its plausibility as the universal solution, the obvious telos of a worldwidedevelopmentalprocess. Whetherduetotheglobalizationofsupplychainsand labourmarkets that undercuts established working classes, the persistent structuralunemploymentandcasualizationinducedbyneoliberalrestructuringand“austerity”,orthe recent and looming technological developments that threaten to eliminate ordrasticallyreducewholecategoriesofpaidlabour(increasinglyincluding“white-collar”officework),theoldtransitionstorynolongerconvinces.One effect of this lost conviction is the apparently worldwide contemporary anxietyaboutjobsandthesocialandeconomicstabilitytheywerelongexpectedtoanchor.Theanxietyspringsfromaperceptionthatincreasingproportionsofthepopulation,acrossmuch of theworld, can no longer rely upon (or even plausibly hope for) the sort ofstablewagedorsalariedlabourthathaslongcountedasa“properjob”.Andthisworryisnot confined topoor countrieswherewholepopulationsappearas “surplus” to theneeds of capital (manifest in durably high levels of so-called “structuralunemployment”); in rich industrialized countries, too, the loss ofmanufacturing jobsandgeneraleconomicinsecurityalsoraisethespecterofwhatMichaelDenning(2010)hastermed“wagelesslife”.Someofthisanxietyisaboutrawunemployment.Butevenmorepervasiveisthesenseof insecurity and uncertainty evoked by the now-widespread term “precarious” -- anadjective that today finds surprisingly broad application across regions and socialclasses.Theterm’swideapplicationissurelysimplymistakenifitismeanttosuggestasingle, shared set of substantive economic conditions (as if a freelance computerprogrammer in Silicon Valley and a shack-dwelling casual labourer in Lusaka aresomehow part of the same, unitary “precariat”). But, for our purposes, what issignificantabout“precarity”isthewaythatitsurfacesasetofissuesthatgofarbeyondpurely economicones. Just as jobswere never only aboutmoney, the anxietywe areidentifyinghereisnotjustaboutthelossofincomeorthethreatoffallingintoabsolutepoverty, but also about the wider implications of increasing casualization,subcontracting, freelancing, improvising -- all the “flexibility”, uncertainty, and short-termismthatsounderminesthe(realorimagined)certaintiesandtemporalitiesoftheold “breadwinner” world. The anxiety is thus not just about paychecks, but equallyaboutissuesofidentity,genderandfamily,nationalmembershipandsoonthatwehavesuggestedwerelonganchoredbythesocialidealofthe“properjob”.

Working paper 51 3

Ourquestionhere iswhat comesafter thedemiseof this compelling “worldpicture”?Howcanwedevelopanalyticalunderstandingsthatattendbothtothereallarge-scalechanges that the old grand narratives accounted for (or pretended to) and to thepersistently divergent pathways of labour and livelihoods that empirical researchdocumentsfordifferentsitesandregionswithinacomprehensivelyinter-connectedbuthighlydifferentiatedglobalpolitical-economy?Whiletheoldtransitionnarrativeswereright that massive disruptions have fundamentally altered the relations of ruralcommunitiestotheland,theresultsofthatdisruptionaremuchlesslinearandsingularthan such narratives imply. Those expelled from the land do indeed sometimes getrecruited into industrial employment, but others remain in the countryside pursuingmixedlivelihoodswhichmayhavelittletodowithagriculture,whileotherscometothecity not as labourers but to join themassive populationswho eke out livelihoods byimprovising in the so-called “informal economy” and levying distributive claims onbetter-resourcedothers.Similarly, urbanization has indeed swept across the globe and has now rendered themajorityof theworld’spopulationcity-dwellers,as thetransitionnarrativesexpected.Butthishasnotinvolvedanyneatconvergencewith“firstworld”industrialcities--onthe contrary, strikingly divergent trajectories in different parts of the world haveyielded fundamentally different types of cities that require to be understood assomethingquiteotherthanstagesonthewaytobecomingParisorNewYork. And ifsome local and particular social identities have indeed lost their grip, as bothmodernizationtheoryandMarxismpredicted,theprofusionof identitiesandformsofsocial membership that has emerged far exceeds the orderly categories of nationalcitizenshiporclassidentitythatthosetheoreticalframeworkspreparedustoexpect.To captureboth the scaleandglobal sweepof someof these changesand the crucialsocial and historical differences that result in them taking such different form indifferent sites across theworld, itwill not do to trade a grand progress story for anequally grand narrative of dystopian failure. Things are bothmore complicated, and(sometimes)morehopeful,thanthat.Itistrue,forinstance,thatrapidly-growingnewspontaneousurbansettlements in theglobalSoutharesometimessitesofmiseryanddestitution, as Mike Davis (2006) suggests. But they are also often sites of socialadvance, places where assertive new urbanites demand their “right to the city” byconstructing homes and neighborhoods, and then press the state for services such aswater and electrification, sometimes with the support of social movements anddemocraticpoliticalmobilization(discussedbelow).Indeed,agreatmanyofthepeoplethat accounts like Davis’s render as pitiful precarious masses, or as symptoms of apathologicalsocialorder,actuallyseemtothinktheirlivesareimproving.1 Infact,wedonotneedtochoosebetweenonevisionthatstillanticipatesthatcapitalismwill(ifwejustwait)bringjobsforall,andanotherthatinsistsonitsfailuretodoso.Bothaccounts1 See the Pew Research Center survey on optimism (2014).


arestillsofixatedontheoldstory-lineofever-expandingwageemploymentthattheygetinthewayofseeingtheemergentrealitiesweneedtounderstand.Instead,weofferadifferentanalyticpath:notasingleunfoldingstory-line,butratheraset of political-economic questions that are in some sense portable, and can beprofitably applied to the analysis of a diverse range of empirical contexts around theworld. We emphasize that it is the questions that are shared, not the answers. Bygenerating amatrix of difference and similarity across cases,we aim to give central place toempirical specificities. But in interrogating those specificities via a set of categories andquestions that travel across cases and regions, we also hope to advance the project ofidentifyinglarge-scalepatternsandarrivingatcomparativeinsights(weofferafewillustrativeexamplesofthekindsofpatternsandinsightswehaveinmindintheConclusion,below).Thequestionsweposebelowarepreliminaryand subject to revision and improvement.Weofferthemhereasaprovocation, inhopes thatresearchersacrossarangeofdisciplinesandusingdifferent methodologies may take them both as a spur to empirical research, and as aninvitationtoproposemoreandbetterquestions.1.1 Notes and queries for political-economic analysis The hyphen inpolitical-economic draws attention to the inseparability of access toresourcesandunequalpowers.Thekindof inquiry that follows from thisperspectiveidentifies theresourcespeopledependon for their livelihoods (e.g. land, capital, jobs,enterprises, state transfers, remittances, public services); the social and politicalrelationsthroughwhich theymayaccess those resources,orbeexcluded fromaccess(e.g. ownership, work, kinship, national membership); and the outcomes for health,wealth,wellbeing,andsecurity,amongothers.Notethattheoutcomesareasmuchsocialandaffectiveastheyarematerialandthisisakeypoint.Togiveanexample:ifincomeswereallthatmattered,everyoneinlow-wageeconomieswould try tomigrate to sitesofhighwages; yet thegreatmajority stay inplaceforreasonsthatincludesocialmembership(kin,community,ornational)andthesenseofwellbeingthatmembershipsupplies.Asweillustratefurtherbelow,accesstoland or a salaried job often confersmembership and holdsmeanings that cannot bereduced tomaterial value. Hence political-economic, in our use of the term, includessocialandculturalconsiderationsofmeaningasanintegralcomponent.Theanalyticalstrategyweadvocateisbothglobalanddifferentiated.Byglobalwedonot intend to counterpose global to local: all localities are formed through processesthatworkacrossspatialscales,andtakeshapeoverdifferentspansoftime.Rather,weusethetermglobaltoflagbothconnectionandtrafficsacrossregionsandlocalities(e.g.of capital, labour, commodities, images), and the increasing portability of analyticconceptsacrossnorth/south,andrural/urbandivides.Thereareofcoursedifferencesbetween the young, educated, unemployed men standing on street corners in India,

Working paper 51 5

SouthAfricaorSpain,buttheirpredicamentshavealotincommon.Themixed,flexible,livelihoodstrategiesofurbanandruralhouseholdsincreasinglyconverge.Differentiation highlights the multiple ways resources and relations are combinedacross spaces to enable or limit livelihoods for different social groups (classed, aged,gendered,racialized),andtheirvariedtrajectoriesandoutcomes.Whendetachedfromgrandnarratives ofprogress or immiseration, there is no reason to expect one trend(e.g. improved income)to lineupwithothers.Forexample,nationalhealth indicatorsmaybe improvingevenwhile jobsarescarce;povertymaybereducedwhile incomesbecome more unequal; incomes may increase even as a community experiencesecological ruin, or insecurity deriving from the absence of familymemberswho havemigrated; land rightsmaybe secure,whileeconomic stagnation leavespeople feelingleftoutofthemarchofprogress.Themostimportantpolitical-economicquestionconcernshowdifferentiatedoutcomesarise–theprocessesandpowersthatbringthemabout. Weproposetoapproachthisquestion inductively,without presuming to identify key processes in advance.Wedonot assume, for example, that theglobal expansion of capitalism, or neoliberalism,ortechnologicaladvancearethekeyelementsconfiguring livesbeyondthe“proper job.”These processes may or may not be key, and even if they are, they take on highlydifferentiated forms as they intersect with other processes and powers shapingparticularconjunctures.Politicaleconomy,inourconception,foregroundsadomainofinquirywhichcanbeusedtoanchoraresearchagendawhichengageswithhistoricalprocesses,withoutsmugglinga telosback into itscore. Itprovidesthesub-text to thequestions we want to pose, but does not prefigure the answers. In this spirit, andwithout aiming to be comprehensive, the following sections pose questions that offerpointsofentryforunderstandinglivesandlivelihoods,membershipandmeaningminusthetelos(thoughnotthespectre)ofthe“properjob.”Wedonotseektoanswerthesequestionshere.Ourfocus,instead,isontryingtoasktherightquestions.Inthatspirit,we propose not an argument with a conclusion, but a series of productive lines ofinquiry, which we present as lightly annotated lists, on the model of the oldanthropologyfieldmanual,“NotesandQueries”.2“NotesandQueries”wasnotanassemblyofresearchfindings,orareviewofascholarlyliterature;itwasalistofusefulquestions.Inthesamespirit,andduetoconstraintsofspace,wedonotattempt to citeorsummarize the richandextensivebodiesofworkthatalreadyexplorethequestionswepose.Wecertainlydonotimaginethatwearethefirsttoposeanyofthesequestions,norareweignorantoftheimpressiveworkthathasbeen done to address them, throughmany decades and across a range ofdisciplines.But the aim of our exercise is neither to review a literature nor to come up with

2 Notes and Queries on Anthropology: For the Use of Travellers and Visitors was commissioned by the British Academy of Sciences. It was first published in 1874, and updated until the 1950s as a practical guide for field-based research. While these dated texts betray their colonial origins in a number of ways, the idea of posing a common set of empirical questions across diverse contexts still seems useful.


questionsneverbeforeaskedortopicsneverbeforeresearched.Rather,inthespiritofthe original “Notes and Queries,” we aim to offer suggestions that might helpresearchers bemore explicit and systematic aboutwhat questions areworth asking,where,andwhy.Wehopethatsomeexplicitdeliberationaboutthesortsofquestionsthatcanusefullybeasked acrossmany different research locations (and not only in one’sown field site)might enable a productive cross-over of questions that have proven useful andproductiveinonesettingorregiontoothers.When the same question gives rise to interesting but different answers in differentcases,opportunitiesemerge for inductive thinking,newcategorizationsandconcepts,and comparative insights. Given thesemethodological aims, we concentrate here onexplicating the questions themselves, and will cite empirical findings only wherenecessary to clarify a conceptual point or to illustrate something about the analyticalapproachweareproposing.

2. WHAT IS OR IS NOT CHANGING ABOUT WORK? Thewaysthatthingsarechangingwithrespecttoworkandhowwethinkaboutitcanbeseen intheterminologieswithwhichwediscuss it. TheILO, for instance,has longdistinguisheda categoryof employment termed “non-standard”. Non-standard is “anumbrellaterm”forworksuchas“temporaryemployment;part-timeandon-callwork;temporary agencywork…; disguised employment and dependent self-employment”.3What is striking in this definition is the shadow cast by the notion of “standardemployment,” a presumed norm that renders everything outside it a kind ofmiscellaneous“other.”Today,inmuchoftheworld,the“non-standard”isinfactthestandard,andaresidualterm for what was imagined as a residual category seems wholly inadequate to therealitiesitseekstocapture.Indeed,inrecentyears,theILOitselfhasbeenmovingawayfromtheattempttorigidlyclassifytypesofwork,worker,orsector,andnowoffersthebroadcategoryof “vulnerableemployment” to capture thehugenumbersofpeople --50%ofthegloballabourforce,bytheILO’sestimate--whodonotemployothers(i.e.have a “proper business”) or have a “proper job.”4 Sowhat, then, do they do? If, asMunck(2013:756)argues,labourrelationstodayarenotcharacterizedbyasingletrendbut rather by “a radical global heterogeneity,” getting a grip on this heterogeneityrequiresaskingtherightquestions.

3 International Labour Office, “Non-standard Forms of Employment”. http://ilo.org/global/topics/non-standard-employment/lang--en/index.htm, accessed on April 25, 2017. 4 Vulnerable employment includes “own account” workers (e.g. micro-entreprepreneurs who sell goods, services, or labour as and when they can) together with their labour-contributing family members. The number so employed is around 1.5 billion, with a range from 10% of workers in the OECD to around 80% in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa (ILO 2013:143, 145).

Working paper 51 7

One set of questions thatmight be asked of any setting refers to changing types andpatternsofwork.Whichsectorsofthe(global,national,orlocal)economyaresheddingor hiring formally-employedworkers?Who has access to these jobs?Which kinds ofpaidworkareoutsourced,contractualised,temporaryorparttime?Conversely,whichkinds of worker are subject to bonding, capture or indenture? How are returns todifferentkindsofworkrisingor falling inrelationtoprices?Whodoeswhatkindsof“informal” or “own account” work (e.g. money lending, petty retail, cottagemanufacturing, intermittent wage labour, home repair, services), and what are thereturnsandbarrierstoentry?Howiscompetitionmitigated?Whatkindsofworkhavebecomecommodified(i.e.shiftedfromunpaidtopaid)ordecommodified(frompaidtounpaid)?Howhastechnologyfiguredintheeliminationofsomekindsofwork,andthecreationofothers? Is the timespecific groupsofpeople spendworking increasingordecreasing?Equallyimportantquestionspertaintothechangingmeaningsofwork.Whilewehaveargued that stablewaged or salariedwork becamewidely viewed as desirable in theglobalNorthandSouth,andthatimportantlegalrightsandsocialstatuswerepeggedtoit,thistooneedstobecheckedempiricallyindifferentcontexts.Lookingbackintime,whereandwhendidmanualworkbecomeculturallyrecognized for its“usefulnesstotheworld”(Castel,1996)?Whichtypesofworkand(gendered,racialized)workerweresorecognized,andwhichtypeswereexcluded?5Whatkindsofmoraljudgementwerepassed on peoplewhose forms ofworkwere illegible or hard to discipline? Keepingsuch histories in view, for whom is present-day instability in work and income analarmingshift,newanddifferentenough,asStandingsuggests,toproduceadistinctive“precariat”consciousnessoflossandrelativedeprivation?Forwhomisprecariousnessnotjustroutine,butunremarkable?Genderandgenerationarelikelytobecentraltodifferentexpectationsaboutwork,andabout what itmeans to have or to lack a “proper job.”. Has the massive increase inaccess to secondary and post-secondary education in the global South made youngpeoplereluctant to followtheirparents’paths,workingonthe landorhustling in the“informal economy”? Do they fear disappointing parents who expected schooling toyield upward social mobility? Do they see themselves as waiting for work - or aspermanently locked out from the future work seemed to promise? Does lack of a“proper job” produce delayed adulthood, a crisis ofmasculinity, and nostalgia for thevanishing “breadwinner” role?Howdowomen’s expectations aboutwork differ fromthoseofmen?Dotheyseekrecognitionfortheirpaidandunpaidwork,includingthehuge component labelled “domestic,” and work done to sustain social relations (seesection3)?Ifso,wouldsuchrecognitionmirror,insomeway,therecognitiongivento5 For studies of the emergence of what Kathi Weeks (2011) calls the “work society” in the global North and South, see Roderik, 2015; Cooper, 1996; Barchiesi, 2011; and Lordon, 2014. For a range of perspectives on contemporary forms of labour see the special issue of the Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute on "Dislocating Labour" (March 2018), and the Development and Change Forum on "The 'Labour Question' in Contemporary Capitalism 2014 (45:5).


the “proper job” of the labouring man,” or take quite different forms? Is lack of a“proper job” understood as a personal failing? Or a cultural pathology of particularsocial groups?Or the result of government failures in job creation and investment in“humancapital?”When,where,andbywhomisthelackof“properjobs”graspedasastructuralfact-onetowhicheveryonemustadaptasbesttheycan?Alongside awidespread (but variable) nostalgia and longing for the “proper jobs” ofimagined“olddays,” therehavealwaysbeenotherattitudesandaffects towardwork.“Upperclasses”inarangeofsocialcontextsoftenmarktheirstatusbynotworking,oratleastnotworkingatanythingthatlooksliketoilconductedintheserviceofothers.Isworkseenas“wageslavery,”asanunfortunatenecessity,asacurse,asavirtue,orasacalling - the locus of identity, creativity, and passion? What, in sum, are thedifferentiated (racialized, spatialized, gendered, aged) images and affects that attachpeopletoworkorrepelthemfromit,andhowaretheseaffectsproduced?Likethedesiretohavea“properjob,”adesiretohavea“properbusiness”isanaffectiveattachmentwith a traceable social history. What are themeanings andmotives thatlead people to seek their futures in business, or to be (or aspire to become)entrepreneurs? Is it a long-standing desire (like the desire to have one’s own farm,hencenottoworkasafarmlabourer),ortheassumednaturalpathforamemberofanestablished trading familyorbusiness-orientedethnicgroup?Or is it somethingnew,perhaps distinctively neoliberal, as everyone is encouraged to think of themselves ashumancapital,andtheirlivesasanenterpriseinwhichtheyneedtoinvest?Entrepreneurshipmay be understood as liberatory - away to escape control by “theman” or spending time on dirty, dangerous, or pointless jobs. Fosteringentrepreneurship is also a way governments, “philanthro-capitalists” like the GatesFoundationandothereducational,developmentandhumanitarianagenciesdownloadresponsibilitytoordinarypeople.Inthenameofempowermentanda(revised)versionof accomplishedcitizenship, it is sometimessuggested, everyone, including theyoungand the very poor, should devise their own livelihoods, and create their own jobs.Concretely, then, what are the sites and forms in which entrepreneurial futures arebeingactivelyimaginedandpromotedfordifferenttypesofpeople?Apreliminarylistwould include entrepreneurship programs for migrants to channel their remittancesinto community development; for indigenous people to commercialize their arts andcrafts; for women to engage in micro-enterprises financed by micro-credit; forengineeringstudents inuniversitiesorhighschoolstudents to“hatch” ideas forstart-ups; and for people seeking less-capitalist “alternatives” to access finance and buildnetworksofsupport.Thesequestionsareallelementsofpotentialdifferentiation.Whiletheportabilityofthequestionsspeakstobroadlysharedstructuralproblemsandchallenges,thevastrange

Working paper 51 9

of empirical answers to these questions allows us to grasp the strikingly differentresolutionsthatemergefromspecifichistoricalandculturaltrajectories.

3. WHAT ARE THE CHANGING USES AND MEANINGS OF LAND? Oldnarrativesaboutruralandurbanlandlinkedtotransitionscenariosoftensuggestedthatlandwasan“under-utilized”resourcethatneededtobeputtomoreefficientuse.These narratives continue to do powerful ideological work, and serious harms areinflicteduponagreatmanypeopleinthenameofdevelopment,efficiency,growthetc.At the same time, contemporary narratives about land-grabbing or primitiveaccumulationcouldgivetheimpressionthatthereisarisingtideofgloballandlessness.As always, the actual pattern ismoredifferentiated. In someparts of theworld, landfrontiers are still open; in others, they have closed down – some recently, somecenturiesago.The ways in which people can be excluded from access to land are also varied:regulatoryregimesforzoningandtitlingdefinewhocandowhat,where;marketpricing(thecosttobuyorrent)excludesthosewhocan’taffordtheprice;andbruteforce(e.g.evictionbygovernments,corporations,orethnicmilitias) isoften inplay(Hall,HirschandLi,2011).Nevertheless,itcontinuestoberelevanttoaskwhodoesaccessruralorurbanlandaspartoftheirlivelihoodstrategy,whatexactlytheydowithit,andwhatitmeans to them. A tiny house or rented room; an urban house-garden; a patch ofvegetables beside a railway track; or freedom to hunt and gather may be far moreimportantbothmateriallyandsociallythantheyinitiallyappear.Intheclassicagrarianstudiesliterature,thecentralfunctionoflandwasasaproductiveasset,anditsmeaningcouldbeunderstoodinclassterms:beinga“landowner”signaleda definite position in a social and cultural order. In this agrarian world the haikuformulatedbyHenryBernstein(2010)neatlycapturesthepolitical-economicquestionsthatneed tobeasked: whoownswhat,whodoeswhat,whogetswhat, andwhatdothey do with the surplus? The assumption behind the haiku is that land is the keyproductive resource, and thatmodesofworkandextractionwillbe closely tied to it.Bernstein’squestionsstillfitremarkablywellinsomeplaces,notablyinthehighlandsofSulawesidescribedbyLiinLand’sEnd(2014),wherefarmingwastheonlyproductiveactivity,wageworkonandofffarmwasveryscarce,andnoonereceivedstatetransfersorremittancestohelpsupplementincomes,managedebt,orrestartproductionafterafailed harvest.Highlanders sank or swambased on the size and productivityof theirfarms,henceowning landwaskey,andreturnstolabourandcapital (whogetswhat)dependeduponit.Inmuchoftheruralandurbanworld,incontrast,landformspartofmorecomplexlivelihoodstrategies,andisembeddedinsetsofmeaningsandrelationsthat aremore diverse. The questions that follow concernwhat rural and urban landholdingenables,andwhatitmeans.Threeclustersofquestionsstandout.


First, what is the material role of land in production: do people grow food, grazelivestock,hunt,orgather?Isthefoodfortheirownsubsistence,ortosubsidizethefood-budgets of kin (children away studying; wage-earners hard pressed to make endsmeet?)Dotheygroworcollectcommoditiesforsale?Doesland(andhousing)furnishasourceofcreditthroughmortgage,orincomethroughrent?Notethatrentingoutroomsmaybeacruciallivelihoodstrategyinurbanareas.Rentmayalsofigureinveryremoterural places, where landholders receive rent in return for allowing corporations (orsmall-scale miners) to mine their land, or in return for setting land aside forconservation or the provision of “eco-system services” and the mitigation of climatechange.Thelocationofthelandisoftenthekeytoitsproductiveuse:inruralareasthismaymeanproximitytoroadsandmarkets(ormineraldepositsandforests); incities,havingarentedhouseorroominabusylocationenablespeopletoconductpettytradeand survive on tiny incomes that would not cover commuting costs. Most socialassistanceprogramsrequiretherecipienttohaveanaddress.Second,what roledoes land (andhousing)play inpeople’s strategies for forgingandsustainingsocialrelations,andharnessingthemtocollectiveprojects?Householdswithnoassets-nolandorhouse-tendtobedenudedofmembers;youngpeopleleavewhentheir parents have nothing to offer them, and they don’t necessarily return or remit.Conversely,land(andhousing)mayserveasananchorthatdrawsinfamilymembersandencouragesthemulti-generationalpoolingofresources:carefortheelderly;aplaceto go when injured, sick or unemployed; a site to gather in remittances to invest inhouse building or a small business; a demonstration of social status and credit-worthiness, or value on the marriage-mart; and a place to bury family members,including migrants whose remittances earn them a proper, social funeral. Trulydestitutepeopleareoftenthosewhoarenotonlywithoutproductivework,butwithoutastablephysicalspaceinwhichtobuildandsustainsocialandaffectiveties.The third set of uses and meanings of land focuses on national and communitymembership. What are people struggling for, when they demand land reform, orrecognition of ethnic homelands and indigenous territories? Distributive land reformand land formalization programs serve to recognize small-scale farmers as nationalcitizens,entitledtoshareinanationalresource;andsometimestorevalorizetheformof life associated with the Via Campesina, or “peasant way.” For other kinds ofcommunity-clans,ethnicgroups,indigenouspeopleorautochthones-staterecognitionof the right to territory isboth the fulfilmentof ancestral identities, anda claimonaparticular, differentiated kind of national citizenship. What people do with land, inshort,islinkedtootherelementsoflivelihood,membership,securityandwellbeing.Themeaningsoflandlessnessvaryaswell.In India and parts of Indonesia where landlessness has been entrenched for twocenturies, landlessness is nothing new. For Chinese peasantswhowere anchored on

Working paper 51 11

collective land for the past 50 years, the government’s plan to remove 300 millionpeoplepermanently fromthecountrysideandplacethemincities is intendedtobeacompleterupture:rurallandhasbeenassignedtonewusesandnewusers,andthereisnogoingback.Forbetterorworse,“losing”land,inthiscase,meansthereconfigurationofidentities,livelihoods,andformsofbelongingtocommunitiesandthenation,aswellasaradicallynewrelationtothestate. Howthisstorywillend isanythingbutclear:watchthisspace.

4. WHAT ARE THE OTHER WAYS IN WHICH PEOPLE ACCESS LIVELIHOOD RESOURCES?

Oftenevenquitepoorpeoplereceivemoneyorotherresourcesthatdonotcomefromeitheragriculture,industry,orservice-sectorlabour.Migrantremittancesareoneofthebeststudiedexamples.Theexpansionofcreditschemestofinanceconsumptionwhilemortgagingthefuturehavealsoreceivedmuchattention.Inaddition,withthegrowthofsocialprotectionprogramsdispensing“cashtransfers,”thereisanewrecognitionoftheimportanceofstatesocialpaymentsinlow-andmiddle-incomecountrieswearenotusedtothinkingofaswelfarestates.Butthereishugevariationintheamountofthesepayments, the range of people who qualify to receive them, the extent to whichconditionality is applied (e.g., requirements for enrollment of children in school orregularvisits toclinics),andthesortofreasoningthatisconsidered(byboth“givers”and “receivers”) to warrant or justify receipt of a social transfer. In some contexts,transfer schemes are framed as investments in human capital, or linked to coerciveformsof“workfare”orjobtraining.InsouthernAfrica,theoldideaofasocialgrantasakind of “help for the helpless” charity coexists with a newer line of thinking thatidentifiesstateservices(includingsocialtransfers)asakindof“rightfulshare”paidtocitizenwhomayreckonthemselvestobeownersofthenation(anditsmineralwealth).Dorecipientsofsocialtransfersexpressasenseofentitlement?Oraretheyplaguedbyconnotationsofdependenceandshamelinkedtomoralizedideasofthevirtueofworkand the shame of “idleness” and “handouts”? As with different forms of work, theresearch imperative here is both to build a catalog of different forms of resourcetransfer,andtopursueadeeperinquiryintothemeaningsandeffectofthesetransfers.Beyondmigrantremittancesandstatetransfers,therearemanyotherpossibilitiesforaccessinglivelihoodresources.Sometaketheformofdependenceonpatronsorkin,asanthropologistshave longobserved.Thesevariousstrategies for tapping intostreamsof income controlled by others, however, are effective only where there are specificmechanisms that make them so. While romantic pictures of “moral economies” and“sharedpoverty”sometimessuggestaworldwherepoorpeoplespontaneouslylookoutfor each other, the best research shows a more complicated politico-ethical terrain,where fierce predation and profound generosity coexist. On such terrain, successful


access to the support of kin is not automatic, and simply having relatives does notnecessarilypreventdestitutionandabandonment.6Mutual assistance, such as it is, is typically built on forms of reciprocity (even ifsometimes on a miniscule scale), and solidarities are not automatic, but depend onmechanismsofenforcementandsanction.Streetsellers,forexample,may“agree”nottoundercuteachotherbothoutofsolidarityandtoavoidabeating.Withinfamilies,thereisusuallynoexpectationthatcarefortheelderlyorthesickwillbereciprocatedinkind,raising importantquestionsaboutwhere theboundaryaround“family” isdrawn, andhowitshiftsasconditionschange.Shifts inpracticemaybemaskedbycontinuities inmorallanguage(“itisourcustomtohelpourkin”),sothepotentialgapbetweenwhatissaidandwhatisdonemeritscloseattention.What this means is that when people do succeed in accessing material support bydrawing upon their social relationships, they do so only as a result of the priorformationofloyaltiesandobligations.Thisformationisbothindividualandcollective,insofar as cumulative histories ofmutual assistance open up a field of action withinwhichclaimscanbemadeongroundsofcare,love,familialduty,andsocialobligation.All the activity that goes into maintaining and massaging these relationships itselfconstitutesaparticularsortof(non-productive)workthatcanbetermed“distributivelabour” (Ferguson 2015). Understanding these typically-small (but for the recipient,vital) informal flowsofresourcesthereforerequiresattendingtoaseriesofempiricalquestionsabouthowsocialrelationsenableormotivatedistribution. Howdopeopleputthemselvesinapositionwheretheirdistributiveclaimsarelikelytobeattendedto?Whoorwhatare the targetsof these claims? What sortsof social,moral, andethicalargumentsorreasoningundergirdtheseclaims? Whatkindsof“pettyreciprocations”(du Toit and Neves 2009) are necessary to attain the forms of membership andrecognitionthatmightsupportadistributiveclaim?Onwhatgroundsmayclaimantsbeabandoned? Again, a common set of questions will yield very different answers indifferentsettings.Note that the modes of support individualsmay tap are very difficult to investigate,methodologically,andthestandardsocial-scientificsurveyisusuallynotuptothejob.Consider,forinstance,thecasewhereaperson(typically,butnotnecessarily,ayoungwoman)accesses resource flowsviaher sexual anddomestic intimacywithbetter-offothers.Thesituationisfamiliarenough,butasJenniferCole(2010)hasshown,itisnotsosimple,andthephrase“sexwork”doesnotbegintocapturewhat isentailed. HerresearchintheMalagasyporttownofTamataveshowedthatstable,formal-sectorjobsare only a memory left over from colonial and socialist eras, and little attractiveemploymentisavailableforeithersex.Henceyoungwomenhavetroublefindingeither

6 Even for those turned away by kin and community, accessing the income streams of others (by hook or by crook) may still be a crucial livelihood activity. Indeed, such access is often central to the practical art of living on the street, with its distinctive practices of hustling, stealing, collecting, and scamming.

Working paper 51 13

jobsor localyoungmenwhomightappearassuitablecandidates formarriage. Manyyoung women therefore pursue a range of different sorts of sexual and romanticrelationswithwell-to-dooldermen, especially foreignmenwhovisit the localhotels.Someofthisinvolvesactivitiesthatwouldconventionallybedescribedassexwork,butthereisusuallymoretoitthansex,andthereisoftenahope(or,indeed,aplan)thatasexual liaison may become a “relationship” and ultimately even a marriage. Thestatusesofprostitute,girlfriend,mistress,andwifearenotdiscrete,andthereismuchmovement fromonetoanother. The flowsofresourcesthatareaccessed inthiswaysupportindividualwomenandtheirkin,whohavetheirownwaysoftappingintotheincomestreamsthatenterthecommunityviathewomen’sintimateattachments.Theyoungwomenthemselvestalkoftheirpursuitsnotas“makingaliving”butrather,inCole’stranslationofaMalagasyphrase,as“makingthemselvesliving”.Thisfelicitousexpressionisausefulreminderthatsomeof themost importantsourcesofnon-wageandnon-farmlivelihoodtodayareboundupwiththeconstructionofpersonsandsocialrelations.Theseimprovisedlivelihoodsdonotsimplyreplicatetheformofthe“properjobs”ofold(asifinsteadofclockinginatthefactory,theworkernowsimplyreportstoworkat thegatesof the “informaleconomy” instead). Instead, suchwaysof “makingoneselfliving”involvethewholeperson,andcomprisethewholeofsociallife.Whatistrue of servicework in general is in Cole’s case seen in itsmost extreme form -- the“work”entailedisnotsimplyaquantumoflabour,butinsteadentailsthecultivationofrelationsofintimacyandsocialitythatarethemselvespartofone’swholepersonalandfamilial life. Suchability toaccessresources in thiswayoccurs(when itdoes)withindense networks of dependence, and is the product of all the complex, subtle, andindirectwaysinwhichpoorpeople“makethemselvesliving”.Whilesurveyscanbeveryeffective ways of assessing resources that are already in some sense sociallystandardized(likeformalsectoroccupationalcategories,theamountofamonthlypaycheck, or the size of a legally-surveyed and titled landholding), the diffuse andimproviseddistributivelabourthatunderliessomanysmall-scaleandintimateformsofdirectresourcetransferrequiresmethodologicalaccesstoawholesocialwayoflifethatonlyethnographycanprovide.

5. WHAT ARE THE CHANGING FORMS OF SOCIAL MEMBERSHIP? Throughout“thecenturyoflabouringman”,socialscientistsattendedtosomeformsofsocialmembershiporbelongingmuchmorethanothers. Thehighlighted formswerelinked to certain real or imagined stable points of reference -- whether communitiesgroundedinterritorialplace,ethnicandtribalgroupslinkedbyculture,urbanidentitiesrootedinoccupation,workplaceandneighborhood,orcitizensdefinedbynation-statemembership. The solidity often attributed to such forms of membership was alwayssomething of an illusion, but in recent years it has become increasingly difficult tounderstandmuch ofwhat happens in theworld in terms of such units of belonging.


Localidentitiesandnation-statesalikeareincreasinglyunderminedorreconfiguredbythescaleandvolumeofthemovementofpeoplewhile,aswehavenoted,theimageofasociety structured around holders of “proper jobs” has been losing its centrality andputativeuniversality. WhatdoessocialmembershiplookliketoapettySomalitraderworkingoutofashackinaSouthAfricantownshipwhileanglingforrefugeepaperstogettoAustralia?Hisplace,hisethnicaffiliation,hisjob,hisnationality--allaremovingtargets,theproductofcontinuousimprovisationandrenegotiation.Anythingbutsolidandagreedupon,theyare,inarealway,upforgrabs.Thesedecenteringssuggestarangeofquestionsabouthowsocialmembershipmaybechanging or becoming reconfigured. If it is true thatmembership is today less oftenlinkedtosuchfamiliartouchstonesaslivinginavillage,orworkinginajob,orbeingacitizenofanation,whatalternativesappear?NotethateventhosemostexcludedfrommoretraditionalarrangementsdonotsimplydissolveintoanasocialHobbesianmass,nordotheynecessarilysufferfromrootlessanomie.Sowhatelseisthere?One setofquestionsabout changing formsofmembers revolvesaround the troubledcategoryof“youth,”acontemporarykeywordthatgenerallyreferencesnotsomuchthechronologicallyyoungasthestructurallyun-placed.Whatbecomesofjob-seekerswhoare not job-finders? What place do they find in society? How do they manage thetransitiontosocialadulthood,whichhassooftenbeenlinkedtoemployment(especiallyforyoungmen)? Dotheycontinuetobedependentonparentsorotherkin?Whatisthe situation with respect to marriage? Are fewer people getting married? Or aredefinitionsofwhatmarriageis,andwhois“marriageable”adaptingtonewrealities?A related set of questions attaches to education. The old idea that education is astraight-line conduit to employment is in many places no longer viable. Theunemployedsecondary-schoolorcollegegraduateisaglobalfigure.Yetthedemandforeducationseemsundiminished. Whatmotivatesthis?Whatdoesschoolingprovide,ifnot a job? How important are the non-material payoffs, such as the superior socialstatusofbelongingtotheenlightenedclassof“modern”people? Morebroadly, in theeyesofyoungpeoplewhoareprecariouslyemployed,whatkindsofaccomplishmentordistinctionarelinkedtowhatkindsofsocialmembership?Therangeishuge,andcouldinclude anything from skills in reciting the Koran to having the right phone or afashionablehairstyle.Where work-based or land-based identities are receding in importance (or simplyunavailable),whatotheridentitiesorformsofrealorimaginedmembershipdopeoplerely upon? Some involve the ways that people are bound together in face-to-facecommunities or associations. Peer groups, gangs, and religious congregations,especially those with intense forms of sociality forged through frequent, sometimesdaily meetings seem to mimic, in some ways, the daily routines, time discipline andformsof belongingof the formalworkplace. In addition to formsof local community,

Working paper 51 15

someoftherapidlyexpandingreligiousdenominationsarelinkedtoglobalaspirationsandimaginaries(e.g.Islamasaglobalcommunity),andtoopportunities(orhopes)forinternationaltravel.Adifferentsortofmembershipinvolvesformsofidentitythatareaccessedorclaimedthroughconsumption. Withoutnecessarilymeeting face to face, adoptionof stylesofdress,musicalpreferences,andfandomaremarkersofidentity,buthowimportantarethese identities and for whom?What forms of membership and belonging do socialmedia networks offer?Howdoes this vary by gender, generation, and urban or rurallocation?Whatsortsofmassmediaareinplay,andhowdopeopleusethem(radio,TV,DVDs;featurephonesandsmartphones;computersandinternetcafes)?Finally, it is important to map how forms of membership interact with livelihoodstrategies. There is nothing new about this question, but new configurationsmay beappearingthatmakeoldreferencepointsofidentityandbelongingseemlesssolid.Forinstance, the school-teacher of-old had a professional identity more or less directlylinked to citizenship and nation-building. But today, fewer people may hold salariedstatejobs,andthepettyentrepreneurialidentitiesof“non-standardemployment”thathave replaced themmay “scale up” quite differently (e.g. to an extended family or atransnationalethnicdiaspora,ratherthantothenation-state).Doeconomicstrategiesvia out-migration link with issues of membership and identity in new ways? Forexample,inplaceswheremigrationispervasive,doesthismake“home”aplaceoflittlevalue,where“nothingishappening”,andonekillstimeuntilthenexttripabroad?Arethere new configurations linking place to social standing? A state bureaucrat inBucharest, for instance,might oncehave hada stable and highly-valued social status,butthesuddenavailabilityofmassout-migrationtoEUlabourmarketsmaydevaluehisjob, andmake his commitment to it seem a bit ridiculous. Another person from thesametownmayworkinItalycleaningtoilets,butbemakingmoremoney,andpositionhimselfaspartofadynamicandforward-looking“widerworld”.Howdointernationalhierarchiesofwagescalesintersectwithmobilitytoyieldothersortsofhierarchiesofvalueandidentity?Letusbeclear:noneoftheformsofbelongingandidentitythatweareflaggingherearenewinanyabsolutesense.Buttheywereoftenunderstoodassecondaryorperipheraltothemorecentralandfundamentalformsofbelonginggeneratedbyjob,farm,family,and nation. Today, this centrality is far less certain, and forms of membership andidentityoncethoughtofasperipheralorsupplementarymayberequiredtobearmoreweight. Inanycase, theanalyticalimperativehere is toresist thetendencytoseethedisplacementsanddisruptionsofthecontemporaryglobalpolitical-economysimplyinterms of loss and nostalgia for the past, and instead to map a richly variegatedlandscape of emerging forms of belonging and aspiration (which may well includenostalgiaandfeelingsoflossamongotherelements).


6. WHAT FORMS OF POLITICS EMERGE AFTER “THE CENTURY OF LABOURING MAN”?

Labour, consumption, taxesandvoteswerekeypillarsattaching individuals tonationstates, and points of potential political leverage and mobilization in the real-and-imagined world of the “proper job.” Industrial wage work and salaried employment,whetherinmanufacturing,mines,plantationsorgovernmentbureaucracies,producedaparticular kind of historical subject with modes of engagement that were commonacrossdiverse sites.Mostobviously,withdrawalof labour servedasapotent formofleverage.Beyond this, in theglobalNorthandSouthalike, the class-based solidaritiesthatemergedinindustrialandbureaucraticsettingslinkedworkerstomassmovementsand parties that channeled their demands through stable institutions, with variedresults(Rodrik,2015).Insomecases,organizedworkerpowerwasviciouslyrepressed.InmuchoftheOECD,political settlementswere eventually forged tomediate the contradictory interests ofcapital and labour, resulting in social insurance schemes, regulated workplaces, themalefamilywage,andstandardsofconsumptionsufficienttoenable(some)workerstoidentify themselves as “middle class.” Yet a greatmany people - variously gendered,racialized and spatialized - have always been left out of the kinds of politics thataccompaniedthereal-and-imagined“centuryoflabouringman.”Moregenerally,whenlabour is inabundantsupply,someof thepragmaticreasonsthat ledrulingclassestoinvest in the maintenance of a healthy and productive workforce evaporate.Simultaneously, global markets make the value of citizens-as-consumers much lesscertain;sotootheirvalueastaxpayers,incontextswhereastateapparatusisfinancedfromresourcerevenues,donordollars,orsovereigndebt.Today,inmanypartsoftheglobe,thebasisforasocialcontractbetweencitizens,statesandcapital is far fromobvious;yetpeoplewhoseexistenceasworkers,consumersortax-payers is “surplus” to requirements do not simply disappear. They mobilize, invaryingways,tomaketheirpresencefelt,andtomakedemands.Ourquestionsinthissectionprobethekindsofpoliticalmobilizations,strugglesandsettlementsthatemergeinthegloballydifferentiatedpolitical-economicorderwehavesketched.How,inshort,do people who cannot assert leverage as workers make - or fail to make - effectiveclaimstoeconomicdistributionsand/orpoliticalpower?Aglobalanddifferentiatedaccountwouldneedtoidentifywhomobilizes,andwhat-ifanything-givesmobilizedsubjectsleverage?Formuchofthetwentiethcentury,itwasthe spectre of socialist revolution that underlay both state violence and a range ofpoliticalsettlementsthatsoughttoincorporatecitizensandworkersintonationalandcorporateagendas. Absent the spectreof thiskindof revolution,what sectorsof thepopulationneedtobeincorporatedorrepressed,inorderforcapitaliststoflourish,andruling regimes to be secure? When do “floating” or “dangerous” classes become a

Working paper 51 17

problemofgovernance,andhowistheproblemmanaged?Ifnewclassmapsarebeingdrawn, asKasmir and Carbonella (2014) argue,what are their coordinates?Onwhatbasisareinsiders(we,theselected,included)separatedfromoutsiders(classenemies,folk devils, those to be abandoned or excluded), and how does the division shapepolitical subjectivities? Who is involved in collective mobilization of different kinds(e.g. mass marches, street violence, boycotts)? Which protests directly disruptaccumulation(e.g.labourstrikes,rentstrikes,resistancetoeviction,collectiverefusalsto pay interest on debt)? To whom are demands addressed - is it to corporations,national governments, municipalities, or non-state entities (e.g. humanitarianorganizations, or the UN)?What is the idiom of claiming: a class compact; a rightfulshareofnationalwealth;thepromisesoftherevolution;the“social”insocialdemocracythatausterity fails toerase;areligiousobligationorethicofcare;oruniversalhumanrights?Howistheenemycharacterized(e.g.the1%,themigrant,thewelfarerecipient,thecorruptpolitician,theIMForWTO)?Whathistoricalformationsmakeaparticulardemand(e.g.forjobsorhousing)plausibleinsomecontexts,butunthinkableinothers?Voting isone typeof leverage,but therearebigdifferences inwhetherornotpeopleturnouttovote(Kenya86%,SouthAfricaandIndonesiaaround75%,India66%,USA58%),andwhatpeopleindifferentnationalcontextsthinkavotecando.Thereisalsodivergence inwhoorwhatpeoplevote for:dopartiesandpoliticiansrepresentclass-basedconstituencies,orethnicblocks?Doclientelistcompactslinkpoliticianstovotersseekingaccesstospecificgoods,likecityservices,orarevotessimplypaidforincash,with no expectation of longer term commitments? Do politicians’ promises (e.g. forinfrastructure,“benefitsharing,”jobs)carrycredibility?Doesthewillingnessofcrowdstoparticipateinrallies,boycotts,orelectionsconferimportantlegitimacyonpoliticians,or is it irrelevant to them? What is the relationbetween thenation stateasa siteofdemands, and the actual capacity of particular national governments to manage a“nationaleconomy?”Protecting a population through programs of direct distribution (e.g. cash transfers,subsidized rice)may be understood as self-serving attempts to buy peace, and quietdisruptivemasses.Butdotheyactuallyproducequietism,oranescalationofdemands?Transfersintendedbystates,humanitarianorganizations,orNGOstobeshorttermorexceptional(e.g.inresponsetowarornaturaldisaster),mayberesignifiedasrightsinperpetuity.Conversely,whenpopulationsareabandonedbytheirgovernments(orbyhumanitarianandotherserviceorganizations)whatistheidiominwhichabandonmentis justified?Howdoes theorganizationofspaceenableabandonment (e.g.bykeepingpoor out of sight), or disable it (e.g. whenmigrants succeed in crossing borders andusingtheirproximitytomakeclaims)?Isthereanarrativeapplaudingselfreliance,orareference to cultures of family and community care that absolve the state ofresponsibility? How is the risk that abandoned people might mobilize assessed andmitigated?Thisisanotherfieldinwhichapocalypticscenariosofmilitarizedcitiesandembattledmineralextractionzonesmustbebalancedwithattentiontoplacesinwhich


people seldom mobilize, though they are very poor; or places where violence isdistributed in the population, mafia-style, or deflected towards differently gendered,racialized,ornationalgroups. Finally,while it isrelativelyeasytoseehowrepression,violence, themanipulationofelections, and the rise of xenophobicmovements can divide people, it is less obvioushowthespaceforinclusiveformsofmobilizationisexpanded,andcrossborder,crossclass, interethnic or multi-issue alliances are produced. What kinds of cross-cuttingalliances have tractionwithin nations and transnationally?Howdo outmigration andthe formation of diasporic communities shape mobilizations at different sites andscales? What is the role of national or transnational religious movements, socialmovements,peasantfederations,non-governmentorganizations,tradeunions,studentunions, and media? Do global rights regimes, transnational solidarity, humanitarianorganizations, and rankings systems (e.g., the Human Development Index, theTransparency International Corruption Index) have an impact on national politicalprocesses? Inviewof thehistorical formationofpolitical subjectsweoutlinedabove,and the ossification that often characterizes political life at the national scale, whatfactors have enabled long-repressed subjects (indigenous people, for example) toemergeasassertiveactorsmakingdemands?Andarethesedemandsformembership-for inclusion in the dominant order - or for autonomy from it? Are transformative,revolutionaryandutopianprogramsontheagenda,oraremodestadjustmentswithinexistingstructuresthedefaultmodeofmobilizationandalliance?

7. CONCLUSION Our goal in this article has been to reflect on the terrain of global political-economicinquirythathasopenedupwiththedemiseofthe“properjob”asthepresumednormor telos of development. We argued that transition narratives, although frequentlydebunkedinthescholarlyliterature,haveleftastubborntraceonanalyticalcategoriesand researchagendas.Toooften research is framedbyanegative,what something isnot, rather thanwhat it is, hence “non-standard” or “informal”work; “unproductive”uses of land; distribution as the inferior cousin of production; work based socialmembership and class-based political mobilization as the norm from which othermodesdeviateinapparentlyerraticorretrogradeways.In the aftermath of what is increasingly acknowledged as the failure of granddevelopmentalnarrativesthatclaimtoknowwhichwaytheworldisheaded,wehavearguedforarenewedpolitical-economicanalysisoflifebeyondthe“properjob”thatisbothglobal anddifferentiated.To illustratewhat suchananalysis could look like,wehaveposedsomekeyquestions:Whatisandisnotchangingaboutwork?Whataretheusesandmeaningsofland?Howelse--besidessellingtheirlabourorworkingtheland-- do people access livelihood resources? What are the emerging forms of social

Working paper 51 19

membership? How do people mobilize politically to make effective demands or topursue systemic change? To make these core questions more concrete, we haveelabouratedwithsub-themesina“notesandqueries”style.Thequestionsaremanybuttheyarenotrandom:theyareguidedbyapolitical-economicanalyticthatforegroundsunequal access to resources, and attends to how socially-situated subjects sustain,navigate, and transformpower-ladenmeanings and practices in diverse and dynamicways.Weofferthemasapreliminaryindicationofwhattolookfor,wheretolook,andhowtorelateoneprocesstoanother.Theyarepointsofentry intodomainsofsocial,politicalandeconomiclifethatmeritempiricalanalysisatarangeofscales,enrichedbyaspiritofcomparisonandarangeofmethodologicaltools.A few brief exampleswill perhaps help to illustrate theway thatwe understand thepowerofdisplacinganormativeanalyticalobject toopenupnewempiricalquestionsandnewanalyticalinsights.Totakeonewell-knowninstance,formuchofthetwentiethcentury, “the family” was (like the “proper job”) a heavily moralized object ofknowledge that shaped both popular and scholarly understandings of what societiesought tobeandwhere theyought tobegoing. With “the family”understoodasbothnorm and telos of a developmental process, early social research often treatedwhatwere in fact diverse and heterogeneous sets of practices and relations either asderivativesorextensionsof “proper” -- read “nuclear” -- families (e.g., the “extended”family) or as pathological deviations from it (thus the colonial discourse of the“breakdown”of families,andthedistinctionsbetween“normal”or“intact” familiesonthe onehand, and “female-headed” or “single-parent” ones on theother). When “thefamily” was decentered and historicized (in a wave of critical research inspired byfeministsocialtheory),arangeoffreshnewquestionsandresearchagendascameintoview.Togivejustoneillustrativeexample,MeganVaughan’sground-breakingworkinMalawi (1983) showed that refusing to take “the family” as a transhistoric analyticalobjectallowedothersocialrealitiestobemadevisibleandrecognizedaspowerful(inhercasedemonstratingthatconceptionsof“extended”or“brokendown”familiesinfactconcealed a range of different sorts of interactions between matrilineages andhouseholds,andanimportantformofnon-kinrelationlinkinggroupsofwomentermedchinjira).SomethingsimilarcanbeobservedindiscussionsofstatesinAfrica,wherealiteratureon “failed states” is overdetermined by the question of what such “states” are not,limitinganalysisofthediverseinstitutionalconfigurationsthatactuallyexist,howtheyareformed,andwhattheydo.AchilleMbembe(2001:9)hasdecriedsuchapproachedaspartofa largerpattern, inwhichWesternsocialsciencetellsus“nearlyeverythingthat African states, societies, and economies are not”while telling usmuch too littleaboutwhattheyare. Here,too,displacingtheimplicitfigureofthe“properstate”canhelp open up more productive analytical research agendas focused on emergentrealitiesratherthanlacks,deviations,andfailures.


AsimilardecenteringenabledausefulshiftinperspectiveinaprojectoneofusrecentlycompletedonlandrelationsinSoutheastAsia.Here,theinitialassumptionthatLimadewith her co-authors, Derek Hall and Philip Hirsch, was that the key process drivingchanging access to land was commodification: spurred by the march of capital andneoliberalpolicyagendas,theauthorsthoughtthebookwoulddocumenttheincreasingdominance of markets-markets everywhere. But there was a problem: none of theauthors, eachwith theirown empirical research base in different partsof the region,found that commodificationwas the only trend, or even the dominant trend in landrelations.Thereweremovestode-commodifylandaccess,somegeneratedfromabove,somefrombelow.Therewerepowersatwork--bruteforce,thewilltogovernspace,and arguments about proper land use -- that jangled awkwardlywithmarket forces.Andtheprocessesdrivingchanginglandaccesswerediverse,butconsistentacrosstheregion: a desire among ordinary farmers, as well as governments and investors, toformalizelandtenure;theexpansionofplantationagricultureandperi-urbanlanduse;theriseofconservation;classdifferentiationamongsmallholders;andtheemergenceofethno-territorialargumentsasabasisforclaimingland.Tobringthesepowersandprocessesintoview,theauthorshadtoletgoofwhattheyhadthoughtofasthemainstorylineandposesomeratherbasicempiricalquestions:whatarethepowersthatenablepeopletogainaccesstolandorbeexcludedfromit?And what are the processes shaping land access at different sites and scales? Theoutcomeofthisanalysiswasacomparative,syntheticaccountofchangingrelationsoflandaccessacrosstheregionthatdrewuponsite-specificexamplesbutwasnotlimitedby them. Moreover the questions generated in the context of a pan-Southeast Asianaccount-thoughnottheanswers-hadthepotentialtobeportabletoothercornersoftheglobe.Returningtoourthemehere--whatliesbeyondthe“properjob”--weenvisagethattheempirical answers that researchers find to thequestionswehaveposedwill likewisebring new patterns, similarities and disjunctures, into view. To get therewe have toabandon both grand narratives and negative or residual framings: we need to knowwhatisactuallythereandwhyisitso,notwhatislacking,orwhytheexpectedoutcomehas not yet emerged. Such an analysis can fruitfully be conducted using a range ofmethods,atavarietyofscales.Afocusontheempiricalcontoursofthepresent-whatisthere, and what is emergent - does not recreate isolated other-worlds, nor evacuatehistory,space,orrelationalitybutrathertakesthemseriouslyasformativeelementsofthe conjunctures we study. Grids of difference and similarity organized around acommonsetofquestionsare,atonelevel,descriptivedevices.But if thequestionswehave posed are the right ones, they could contribute to a renewed global political-economicanalysisoflivesand livelihoods--onemoreadequatetoourtimesthantheonethatbegins,andtoooftenends,withtheabsenceorpresenceofthe“properjob.”

Working paper 51 21

REFERENCES 1. Barchiesi, Franco. 2011. Precarious Liberation: Workers, the State, and Contested Social

CitizenshipinPost-apartheidSouthAfrica.Albany:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress.

2. Bernstein,Henry.2010.ClassDynamicsofAgrarianChange.Halifax:FernwoodPublishing.

3. Castel, Robert. 1996. Work and Usefulness to the World. International Labour Review135(6):615-622.

4. Cole, Jennifer. 2010. Sex and Salvation: Imagining the Future in Madagascar. Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

5. Cooper,Frederick.1996.DecolonizationandAfricanSociety:TheLabourQuestion inFrenchandBritishAfrica.NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.

6. Davis,Mike.2006.PlanetofSlums.NewYork:Verso.

7. Denning,Michael.2010.“WagelessLife.”NewLeftReview66:79-97.

8. DFID(DepartmentforInternationalDevelopment).2011.CashTransfers:LiteratureReview.PolicyDivision,UKDepartmentforInternationalDevelopment,April2011.

9. DuToit,AndriesandDavidNeves.2009.TradingonaGrant:IntegratingFormalandInformalSocialProtection inPost-apartheidMigrantNetworks.WorkingPaperNo.3,ProgrammeforLandandAgrarianStudies(PLAAS),UniversityoftheWesternCape,SouthAfrica.

10. Ferguson, James. 2015. Give a Man a Fish: Reflections on the New Politics of Distribution.Durham:DukeUniversityPress.

11. Hall,Derek,PhilipHirsch,andTaniaMurrayLi.2011.PowersofExclusion:LandDilemmasinSoutheast Asia. Singapore/Hawaii: National University of Singapore/University of HawaiiPress.

12. ILO.2013.GlobalEmploymentTrends2013:Recoveringfromasecondjobsdip.Geneva:ILO.13. Kasmir, Sharryn and August Carbonella eds. 2014. Blood and Fire: Toward a Global

AnthropologyofLabour.NewYork:Berghahn

14. Li, Tania Murray. 2017. After Development: Surplus Population and the Politics ofEntitlement.DevelopmentandChange48(6):1247-1261

15. Li,TaniaMurray.2014.Land'sEnd:CapitalistRelationsonan IndigenousFrontier.Durham,N.C.:DukeUniversityPress.

16. Lordon,Frédéric.2014.WillingSlavesofCapital:SpinozaandMarxonDesire.London:Verso.17. Mbembe,Achille.2001.OnthePostcolony.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.18. Munck, Ronaldo. 2013. The Precariat: A View from the South. Third World Quarterly 34

(5):747-762.

19. Rodrik,Dani.2015.PrematureDeindustrialization.InNationalBureauofEconomicResearchWorkingPaper20935.Cambridge,MA.

20. PewResearchCenter.EmergingandDevelopingEconomiesMuchMoreOptimistic thanRichCountries about the Future. http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/10/09/emerging-and-developing-economies-much-more-optimistic-than-rich-countries-about-the-future/ 2014.Accessed7May2017.

21. Standing, Guy. 2002. Beyond the New Paternalism: Basic Security as Equality. New York:Verso.

22. Vaughan,Megan.1983.“WhichFamily?ProblemsintheReconstructionoftheHistoryoftheFamilyasanEconomicandCulturalUnit.”JournalofAfricanHistory24(2):275-283.


23. Weeks, Kathi. 2011. The Problem with Work: Feminism, Marxism, Antiwork Politics, andPostworkImaginaries.Durham:DukeUniversityPress.

beyond the “proper job ... - stanford university

Documents