ArticlePDF Available

Becoming a Debtor to Eat: The Transformation of Food Sharing in Namibia

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

This article explores why people in Namibia go into debt to eat. Until recently, food sharing practices were maintained by social relationships in which everyone owed everyone else. This made sense, as needs would rotate evenly. However, in recent decades, and largely through state employment and social grants, the political economy has changed. Now, needs are distributed unequally. This article explores how the movement of resources through time and space is altered via the mechanism of credit/debt. The haves have become merchants and refer the have-nots to credit books in their recently opened village stores. This has two effects: for one, today the entire community owes only a very small number of people. Food transfers no longer crosscut groups but manifest them. Secondly, credits do not fully replace existing social relationships and enable sharing in other situations, mostly around meals, which also suggests continuity in shifting forms.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=retn20
Ethnos
Journal of Anthropology
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/retn20
Becoming a Debtor to Eat: The Transformation of
Food Sharing in Namibia
Michael Schnegg
To cite this article: Michael Schnegg (2021): Becoming a Debtor to Eat: The Transformation of
Food Sharing in Namibia, Ethnos, DOI: 10.1080/00141844.2021.1887913
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00141844.2021.1887913
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa
UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group
Published online: 16 Feb 2021.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Becoming a Debtor to Eat: The Transformation of Food
Sharing in Namibia
Michael Schnegg
Institute of Social and Cultural Anthropology, Universität Hamburg, Germany
ABSTRACT
This article explores why people in Namibia go into debt to eat. Until recently, food
sharing practices were maintained by social relationships in which everyone owed
everyone else. This made sense, as needs would rotate evenly. However, in recent
decades, and largely through state employment and social grants, the political
economy has changed. Now, needs are distributed unequally. This article explores
how the movement of resources through time and space is altered via the
mechanism of credit/debt. The haves have become merchants and refer the have-
nots to credit books in their recently opened village stores. This has two eects: for
one, today the entire community owes only a very small number of people. Food
transfers no longer crosscut groups but manifest them. Secondly, credits do not
fully replace existing social relationships and enable sharing in other situations,
mostly around meals, which also suggests continuity in shifting forms.
KEYWORDS Food sharing; debt; social networks; colonialism; Namibia
By sharing food, we pool the risk of being left with nothing, and through food we
create, reinforce, and renew social bonds. Research among hunter-gathers in sub-
Saharan Africa normally describes this in the following scene: a man comes home
from a successful hunt and joins the group of people with whom he lives. He is
expected to share the largest part of his prey with his neighbours, so he gives. Soon,
a woman returns and oers roots, fruit, and leaves. They all sit around the re, talk,
and eat. In a relatively small social group such as this, all members of the community
give and receive from time to time and their social relationships are maintained by the
willing debt everyone has with everyone else.
If we trust the ethnography of the German missionary Heinrich Vedder, food sharing
was similar among the Damara people (ǂNūkhoen) in northwestern Namibia when he
and the German colonisers arrived at the end of the nineteenth century (Vedder
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives
License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduc-
tion in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
CONTACT Michael Schnegg michael.schnegg@uni-hamburg.de
ETHNOS
https://doi.org/10.1080/00141844.2021.1887913
1923a;1923b).
1
Indeed, his ethnography served Karl Polanyi as the blueprint for the
description of redistribution, one of the three modes of exchange he introduced in
The Great Transformation (Polanyi 1944:53).
2
At the time of German colonisation,
most Damara people were hunter-gatherers and lived lives saturated with mobility in
the abundant, albeit arid environment. There was no nation-state, little or no standar-
dised money, and only selected goods were exchanged with other ethnic groups.
A couple of months ago, I arrived at one of the communities the missionary
described at the beginning of the twentieth century. I, too, sat around a re. Meat
was still important, so to honour my presence, Charles, my assistant and friend of
many years, asked me if I would like to have some.
3
Sure,I replied. Charles sent
his son to the shop next door to get one of the pre-packaged one-kilo plastic bags of
antelope meat the shop owner bought from a neighbouring hunting farm. When his
son asked if he had any money, Charles said, No. Surude-re!
Surude is a relatively new word in Fransfontein, but it is heard frequently in the
streets. Borrowed from the German Schuld, it means debt (Haacke 2002: 126). The
shop owner maintains a credit book for Charles and his wifes purchases.
4
The shop
owner, a government employee from Walvis Bay, Namibias wealthy port town,
adds the cost of the packaged meat to Charless long-account debt. While we were
still getting meat from the neighbours, in the end, only Charles and his wife were in
debt. This debt has a concrete number attached to it and must be paid back.
The aim of this article is to explore and to explain how economic resources, mostly
food, travel through time and space via the mechanism of credit/debt, which has
changed signicantly since the early colonial period. By changed, I do not mean to
say that food sharing has transformed from one form into another but that sharing
practices have become more diverse and blurred. The above situation already indicates
this. Charles sent his son to buy meat on credit (surude), which he shared with me.
These observations have led me into questioning, in this article, how food sharing
has transformed, why these changes have occurred, and what the corresponding
social consequences are. To answer these questions, I develop an analytical framework
that combines the anthropological analysis of debt and exchange with network theory.
Theorising Debt in Social Relationships
In his seminal essay Marcel Mauss argued that gift-giving is less innocent than typically
assumed (Mauss 1923). In short, he proposes that giving changes the relationship
between the two parties involved. Those that receive are expected to give back, and
therefore gifts create debt. Gifts put the receiver in a subordinate position, which,
the argument follows, might have motivated the giving in the rst place. The circula-
tion of goods initiated to reduce those debts becomes an institution, a complete social
fact, in Durkheims terms. It links actors and their futures and forms cohesiveness
in groups (Caillé 2000; Graeber 2001; Widlok 2016).
In African societies, the exchange of people (through marriage) and food both
create debt and cohesion in social groups. For sub-Saharan Africa, Kuper has shown
how marriage and bridewealth structure the exchanges of pastoral and agricultural
2M. SCHNEGG
products between wife-takers and wife-givers (Kuper 1982;2016). Since marriage pay-
ments are never made once and for all, a debt remains after the wedding celebration
ends. This creates a cycle of exchanges, which links families through time and space
and maintains the social order in and between groups (Krige & Comaro1981;
Shipton 2007; Pauli & van Dijk 2016). While agreeing that marriage creates these
relationships between groups, Meillassoux has shown that debts must not be balanced
and can result in class-like structures in the pre-capitalistic world (Meillassoux 1981).
The other signicant domain where exchange creates debt is that of food, and the
literature has shown that people give food with some expectation of receiving back
(Cashdan 1990; Schnegg 2015). While there is an agreement that food exchanges
create responsibilities, the processes are less clear. In his comparative analysis of
exchange in African hunter-gatherer societies, Woodburn has shown that debts
hardly accumulate as long as goods are returned immediately. Only delaying
giving back results in lasting debt and eventually stratication in society (Wood-
burn 1982). In subsequent works, Woodburn and others further elaborated that in
many egalitarian societies sharing is not only immediate but also on demand. After
a successful kill, the hunter has little control over who receives what. What they
seem to own and share at rst sight is actually much more a collective good (Bliege
Bird & Bird 1997; Schnegg 2016). If this is so, food sharing can hardly create lasting
debts between the parties involved (Peterson 1993; Woodburn 1998; Gregory 2012;
Widlok 2013;2016; Schnegg 2016).
In recent years, many ethnographers have pointed to the new forms that debt takes.
They show the rising importance of institutionalised money lenders, including banks,
NGOs, state agencies, private companies, and informal microlending, and the depen-
dencies they create (Peebles 2010; Shipton 2010; Bähre 2011; Graeber 2011;Han2011;
Guérin et al.2012; Guérin 2014; Villarreal 2014; James 2014b;2020; Laws 2019). In
relation to sub-Saharan Africa, the work of James stands out. In her ethnography
she shows how lower-middle-class households in South Africa became indebted
when apartheid left them without property, savings, inheritance, or adequate salaries.
With capitalism and democracy requiring monetary participation, many households
especially those that had regular wages went into debt to meet the steadily rising
needs (James 2014a;2014b).
These aspirations not only include more recent consumer goods (e.g. cars, TVs, fur-
niture, etc.) but long-standing social institutions like marriage and weddings as well
(Pauli 2019). At the same time, the new means of acquisition transforms these
goods. In the past, for example, lobola payments were made when daughters
married, and the family itself received something in exchange. Today, institutionalised
moneylenders borrow resources to nalise bridewealth payments which changes the
meaning of the institution itself (James 2014a;2017). In a similar vein, Solway has
described how marriage rituals that once continued over decades have collapsed
into a narrow time frame. The transformation from slowto fastmarriages interrupts
the slow social embedding marriage used to entail (Solway 2016).
The two ways of instigating debt social exchange and money lending dier sig-
nicantly in regard to their social formations and eects (Peebles 2010; Graeber 2011;
ETHNOS 3
James 2012). Bloch & Parry (1989: 24) have referred to the social and monetary
exchanges as short-term (amoral) and long-term (moral) transfers. Moreover, both
forms typically coexist as two related but separate transactional orderswhich
allows people to translate relationships from one regime into the other (Bloch &
Parry 1989). This is also what is happening with marriage payments, when, for
example, lobola is renanced through credits, or, when marriages are short(James
2014a; Solway 2016).
The opening vignette already indicates that something comparable is occurring
with food. For one thing, people go into debt to eat; furthermore, Charles also uses
the food acquired also to share with me. Through food, we can further explore the
transformation of debt in African societies and grasp the wider social consequences
this development creates.
Conceptual Approach, the Social Structure of Debt
To facilitate my comparison of debt over time, I extend Mausss analysis conceptually
and methodologically. Mauss contrasted the ethnographic evidence he could nd with
Malinowski, Boas, Krämer, Thurnwald, and many more (Mauss 1923). While this
allowed him to contrast cases, it did not provide a rigid methodological framework
to compare debt in social relationships across space and time (Schnegg & Lowe
2020). To facilitate the development of such a comparative approach, I mobilise
network thinking as a conceptual guide.
Over the last few decades, social network analysis has grown into a theoretical and
methodological eld to analyse social relationships and the networks they form (Gran-
ovetter 1985; Wasserman & Faust 1994; Schnegg 2018). For the case of food sharing
this means exploring who gives to whom, and what larger structures the resulting net-
works form (Ziker & Schnegg 2005). From these networks of giving and taking we will
be able to see how debt, inscribed in relationships, is distributed across society.
To study the social structure of debt comparatively, two aspects of debt are
especially important. First, with Mauss, we will want to know whether debt is balanced
out or not. I refer to this structural principle as the symmetry of debt. Second, I propose
to explore how debt is distributed among all social actors in the community. I refer to
this as the degree of centralisation of debt. Network theory provides straightforward
concepts with which to assess both. A relationship is symmetrical if it goes both
ways, or, if you will, if a debt that was created through one transaction is balanced
out at a later stage. It is asymmetrical if it goes only one way.
5
The centralisation of
a network refers to the degree to which the ties of a network concentrate on only a
few creditors. Empirically this entails exploring whether all the people involved owe
each other in similar ways, or whether all owe a few actors who in return give to
the rest of the community.
Combined with my ethnography, the network perspective provides a framework to
show how the transformation in the larger economy changes the modes of exchange.
However, before proceeding with the analysis, some words on the political economy
and the ethnography are in order.
4M. SCHNEGG
Money from the Namibian State
Since the early twentieth century, when Vedder observed the sharing of meat and veld
fruits in the eld, Namibias economy and the role of the state has changed drastically.
Three developments are particularly important for food sharing. First, money and
markets have become part of the everyday. Second, the state has become the most
important employer in the national economy. Third, inequality within Namibian
society has drastically increased. Let me briey explain all three.
Beginning in the late nineteenth century, the German colonial state forced the indi-
genous population into its growing capitalist economy. In doing so it signicantly
restricted the amount of land available to indigenous groups (Schnegg et al. 2013; Sul-
livan & Ganuses 2020). The best farmland was given to settlers of European descent,
and the indigenous population was forced to live in areas much too small for survival
using their extensive livelihood strategies such as hunting and gathering and pastoral-
ism. Because people could hardly make a living from their established livelihoods
anymore, they were forced to buy the sugar, maize meal, and other goods the
German traders brought. To survive in the changing economy, money became a neces-
sity, and selling ones labour became a means to access it. Furthermore, the colonial
state introduced a set of seemingly absurd taxes in the hinterlands such as taxes for
grazing and taxes for dogs, to name but two (Gordon 2007). These levies further
obliged indigenous people to sell their labour or the product of their work (e.g.
milk, meat, vegetables) in the growing capitalistic economy. The colonial capitalist
economy and the entire political system was built on commercial cattle farms. As in
other parts of the world, both policies creating resource scarcity, and taxation
assured the necessary indigenous workforce for the farms.
Almost a century and a half later, global markets and money permeate economic
behaviour in Fransfontein in manifold ways. Ellerines, a South African furnishing
company, brings sofas and cupboards by pickup trucks to middle-class homes
almost every week (for similar observations see, Laws 2019). Cellphones produced
in Asia are for sale in Khorixas, the nearby town. And the small shops in Fransfontein
provide groceries that include maize meal from the US, cooking oil from Malaysia, and
sugar from Germany, to name a few of many connections to the global economy. To
pay for those goods, people work on commercial farms or, more recently, teach in local
schools or work elsewhere in the growing government sector. Moreover, as in other
countries in this part of the world, signicant state transfers and social grants fuel
the local economy (Bähre 2011; Ferguson 2015).
The second major transformation in the political economy concerns the role of the
state in the national economy. Starting during the South African occupation, the gov-
ernment has become the most important employer in Namibia. Government employ-
ees were mostly teachers, or worked in hospitals, school hostels, or the ministries. With
Namibias independence in 1990 the public sector again grew signicantly. This led to
a number of developments that are not unique to Namibia but which characterise
several newly independent countries on the continent. In South-Africa, for example,
employees in the government sector soon formed a signicant part of the emerging
ETHNOS 5
black middle class (Southall 2004). The same state employment also providing the col-
lateral for loans that James describes (James 2014b). In Malawi, civil servants in urban
and peri-urban areas deeply intertwine the state and local society through their salaries
and the economic opportunities this creates (Anders 2009). In Namibia, with indepen-
dence the state removed the racial criteria from the old age pension payments, a dis-
criminatory scheme that began during South African colonial (Bähre 2011: 381). Since
then, all men and women aged 60 and above, regardless of race, get a xed amount of
cash every month. The pension payments are only sucient to maintain the house-
holds basic needs. However, they have, as Bähre (2011: 382) argues convincingly,
led to a situation in which many households now rely on the elderly to generate
income. In addition to that, through the employment of teachers and other govern-
ment employees and by raising their salaries, the state created a local economic elite
(Pauli 2019). Often, they became hubs around which many households revolve for
their cash needs.
The third transformation is partly a result of the rst two and concerns the distri-
bution of wealth in rural communities. The ǂNūkhoen used to be a largely egalitarian
society in which economic dierences were small, but in recent decades, wealth
inequality has increased signicantly (Pauli 2019). At a funeral I attended in Fransfon-
tein a few months ago, some of the attendants arrived in 50,000 euro SUVs, while
others parked their donkey carts next to them. Some people take vacations in
Europe and the US, but the majority in Fransfontein have never paid to stay overnight
anywhere.
Being in Fransfontein
Fransfontein is a community of roughly 250 households in arid northwestern Namibia.
The communal lands surrounding Fransfontein are dotted with small settlements in
which people live pastoral lives in the arid environment (Schnegg 2019). Most inhabi-
tants of the area consider themselves ǂNūkhoen (also called Damara in the literature
and by other social groups).
In Fransfontein, only the emerging middle class mostly teachers and public ser-
vants can count on steady income. In addition to those incomes from wage
labour, the old age pension paymentincreased from 130 Namibian dollars (N$) to
N$1,300 during the past 15 years (20042019).
6
On the day of the month when
wages and old age pensions are paid, people purchase the most basic staples maize
meal, tea, and sugar in quantities expected to last for the next month. For a household
of ve, a typical rst shopping trip would include 50 kg of maize, 5 kg of sugar, and a
box of tea. After the basic supplies are purchased, the remaining money is used to buy
other basic goods, including tobacco, soap, and deodorant. In addition, school fees are
paid, the health clinic may be visited, and people engage in other activities as their
nancial resources allow. Those purchases can be made in 14 small stores in Fransfon-
tein, each of which oer between 20 and 100 products the most basic daily supplies.
7
In Fransfontein, approximately two-thirds of the households have at least one
member who receives a pension payment. This is not because the population is so
6M. SCHNEGG
old but because households group around pensioners and the money they provide.
8
On the day pensioners receive their pay, referred to as Kairakhoen pais (old peoples
pay), the atmosphere in Fransfontein turns festive. People living in the hinterlands
hitch their donkeys to their carts. In Fransfontein, where the money is paid out, the
donkey carts linger in the shade of trees, waiting for people to nish their errands.
After money has been received, the outstanding debts have been paid, and shopping
is complete, the local bars are often bustling. There are few distractions in the sparsely
populated area, so people enjoy spending time with a beer among their kith and kin.
However, this spending is short-lived. Even those who receive regular pension pay-
ments and wages or salaries often spend their money within the rst few days after
receiving it. After that, other means are needed if cash is short.
Irst experienced the festive atmosphere around payday in 2003 when I lived with
my wife and colleague, Julia Pauli, and our 2-year-old daughter for over a year in
Fransfontein. Some of the data and the experiences I report in this article were col-
lected then. From then on, I continued to return to Fransfontein regularly and for
shorter visits. Now I own a small hut and some livestock myself and am not perceived
simply as an outsider anymore. Over those years, I have also learned the language
spoken by the people, Khoekhoegowab, and manage daily conversations quite well.
As a neighbour and member of the community, I take part in many of the practices
I describe here.
In addition to participant observation, I have conducted interviews about the mean-
ings and practices of food sharing since our rst stay in 2003. Besides informal talks, I
have tackled a wide range of themes in semi-structured interviews, including the origin
and history of sharing, the rules and taboos that apply, the ways sharing is remembered
as an experience from early childhood, and the general circumstances under which
sharing takes place.
To better understand the social structures that emerge from sharing food, in 2004 I
conducted a survey of 62 households. During 10 days in March, we interviewed 43
households in Fransfontein and 19 in two farming communities of the surrounding
hinterland.
9
The households in Fransfontein were chosen on the basis of almost one
year of ethnographic work with the aim of capturing variation in and heterogeneity
of sharing in the population. For the two communal settlements surrounding Frans-
fontein, all households were interviewed. Each morning we visited the households
and questioned the female head about the transfers the household had engaged in
during the last 24 h.
As I came to Fransfontein again and again, I began to realise how things were
changing. On the one hand, I noticed that people seldom came to ask at each others
houses anymore to express the demand for food, a practice that had been so widespread
in the past. Moreover, many people complained that they had a debt at one of the
stores, a debt that placed additional economic burdens on them. Taking note of both
changes, I began wondering whether and how those two processes were related.
To capture this, in 2019 I replicated the study we had done in 2004. Once again, I
sampled 44 households in Fransfontein and 17 on the neighbouring farms. By now, the
community had grown signicantly and I decided to interview all households in a
ETHNOS 7
particular neighbourhood. The neighbourhoods were selected to be ethnically and
economically heterogeneous so as to represent the larger community rather well. In
contrast to the initial survey in 2004, I repeated the data collection only on three con-
secutive days.
10
This was much easier logistically. In addition, the analysis of the 2004
data had shown that sharing patterns remained stable over the days. All in all, I am
condent that my long-term participation in the community combined with the quan-
titative surveys and open-ended interviews facilitated an adequately complex picture of
the social changes that took place.
Demanding a Share
It was late morning when we came to Olgas hut. Olga, an elder pastoralist, had just
released her small stock to graze in the open pastures that surrounded her home.
She kindled the re to prepare some maize meal (called porridge in this part of the
world) and tea. When she saw me, she smiled. You again, Michael. Did I still not
answer all the questions you have?’‘No, there is something else,I replied. We sat
down to talk. The water in the kettle started simmering, indicating that it was about
to boil. Olga went into the hut and came back with two cups for tea. There is no
sugar,she said. She called her grandson, who lived with her in the rural hinterlands.
Here, take this cup!she said, sending him to the neighbours house to ask for some
sugar. Soon, the boy returned and put the cup full of sugar in front of us. She
poured some out, and then poured the tea. What we could not see was that he had
approached the neighbours house demanding, Au te re sugur-e,give me some
sugar. When they gave him the sugar, he did not say thanks.
When I started working in Fransfontein in 2003, people distinguished three major
food transactions: augu,māgu, and |goragu.
11
The most common, augu, describes situ-
ations like the one above. The word au derives from the Afrikaans word ou, which
means to give. As with a number of Afrikaans and German words, it was introduced
into Khoekhoegowab during colonial rule, and its meaning changed.
12
Today, the
usage in Khoekhoegowab entails the assumption that a transaction is initiated by
the one who wants and who is therefore likely to receive. Augu ts very well with
what Peterson has referred to as demand sharing more generally (Peterson 1993)
and with what Widlok and Laws describe among the Haiǁom and Ju|hoansi in
Namibia (Widlok 1999;2013;2016; Laws 2019).
Augu is only practiced with certain goods and in certain situations. Most impor-
tantly, if one needs or sees a basic good like sugar or maize meal, one has the right
to demand a fair share. Fair here implies enough to meet ones immediate pleasure
or need. Access to the good is regulated through group membership and not
through private ownership. Although at some point the good was bought in a shop,
it is much better conceived as a collective property to which members of the social
group have access rights. In short, if you have something, you must share it with
those who belong. The only way to avoid an augu demand is to hide. If it is known
that one has some good that others need, the social costs of not giving would be
much too high (Schnegg 2016).
8M. SCHNEGG
In 2004, 62 people in Fransfontein engaged in 1,087 augu transactions during the
10-day period, which means almost two transactions a day. The list of the food
items transferred (Table 1) makes very clear that people exchange basic food goods,
mostly sugar, maize meal, and tea.
Being members of the community ourselves, my family and I were asked almost
every day if we could give some sugar, tea, or other goods from Table 1. I initially
understood this to be the localsattitude towards the rich anthropologists from the
North, but I soon learned that it actually applied to anyone in the community. Learn-
ing to give was easier for me. It took much longer to learn how to demand. For
example, seeing someone with dried meat (biltong), anyone would demand a share.
How could one not want a piece of something delicious and rare? I like biltong too.
And yet in the beginning, I often thought that unlike others, I could go to the super-
market to buy some. Why should I demand a share of something that is worth much
more for those who do not have access to this alternative? It took me time to learn that
demanding a share as the rich white man is not rude, but the opposite. By asking, I
expressed that I wanted to belong. This behaviour, which took me some time to
learn, is commonplace among the local middle class and the elite. Like me at a later
stage, they ask their share if the poor occasionally have some desirable good.
All in all, the demand sharing I observed in the beginning of the millennium shows
marked dierences from the redistribution Vedder described as a model case about a
hundred years before. Three changes are signicant for my argument: rst, the trans-
action is now initiated by those who are in need. Second, the group in which sharing
takes place is larger than before and includes immediate neighbours and people from
adjunct communities. And third, the demand for increasingly diverse food now refers
to goods that were initially bought and which were part of the market economy
(Schnegg 2015;2016). How can this be explained?
Table 1. Distribution of goods transacted over a period of 10 days in 2004 (N= 1087).
Items Frequency Percentage
Milk 125 11.9
Sugar 124 11.8
Coee/Tea 109 10.4
Tobacco 93 8.8
Firewood 81 7.7
Meat 75 7.1
Maize meal 52 4.9
Spices 41 3.9
Bread 35 3.3
Vegetables 33 3.1
Money 32 3.0
Salt 31 2.9
Snu30 2.9
Cooking oil 28 2.7
Medicine 26 2.5
Tools/Repair 26 2.5
Other food items 23 2.2
Others 123
Total 1,087 100
ETHNOS 9
In the second half of the nineteenth century, the German colonisers began forcefully
taking most of the land from indigenous communities. With much less land to use,
indigenous people could not so easily maintain their livelihoods (Schnegg et al.
2013; Sullivan & Ganuses 2020). At the same time, and to compensate for this, the
colonial system introduced new goods including sugar, maize meal, and tea in north-
western Namibia. Many of the goods listed in Table 1 share this history. To obtain
those, people needed to sell their products or, more importantly, their labour in the
colonial capitalist economy. This created needs and aspirations for consumer goods,
including maize meal, sugar, and tea, which began to substitute for meat and fruits
as the staple foods. Increasingly, money became necessary to access food. At the
same time, people often found themselves with insucient cash and hence could
not provide themselves with those staples in the short term. They started to make
demands of those who had those goods. Iron, a man born around 1920, explained
this to me as we talked about the transition from redistribution to demand sharing
in 2005.
When we were young, this was dierent. There was none of this au te re, au te re, (give me this,
give me that). The people would just give. If my grandfather would come home at the end of the
day, he would bring something for the family. We would share. Things changed when money
came in. Now the people would have all these things and their friends would seethis. They also
wanted to have. This is when things changed.
Whereas the transformation from redistribution to demand sharing changed some
aspects of the social institution, others remained similar or the same. In the introduc-
tion I referred to symmetry and centralisation as two central aspects of how debt is
located in social networks and relationships. Let us turn to symmetry rst. As with
redistribution, all people in Fransfontein are still givers and receivers at some point
in time. So, while demanding creates a debt, those debts remain more or less symmetri-
cal. You demand today, I demand tomorrow. Looking at all relationships over the 10-
day period, about 44 per cent were reciprocated; that is, they went both ways. As I have
shown elsewhere, this level of symmetry is much higher than expected by chance and
thus refers to a salient characteristic of the social network itself (Schnegg 2015).
Moreover, augu relationships are embedded in other exchanges including the
sharing of labour, kinship, land, and water which balances out the relationship
between any two people. Therefore, while all giving and taking creates some form of
debt, an exact measurement is often neither considered nor applied. Whereas people
might refer to someone as a person who owes something to them, no one knows
exactly how much this is. The balance is deliberately kept fuzzy and open, and it main-
tains the relationship.
Let us turn to centralisation. The degree of centralisation in a network describes the
number of ties that concentrate on only a few individuals. In the case of demand
sharing, we can distinguish between networks in which most members of the commu-
nity turn to the few who are better o, and networks in which all members turn to one
another with similar frequencies. In the former case, the centralisation of debt would
be very high; in the latter it would be very low. The analysis of the distribution for all
10 M. SCHNEGG
augu transaction in 2004 shows that the level of centralisation is very low compared to
similar networks of this type (Schnegg 2006). This indicates that all members of the
community owe each other, not just the few who are wealthier. However, this is begin-
ning to change.
Becoming a Debtor to Eat
Almost 15 years after the visit I reported above, I approached Olgas house again. Her
hut had been renewed every year after each rainy season. Even though the materials
had been replaced gradually, it still looked the same: walls made of sticks and mud,
a simple cement oor, and corrugated irons as a roof. You are still around,Olga
said while she rose from the shadow in which she had rested. No, I am back. Can
we chat?’‘Of course, let me get something to drink.She called the girl playing in
the back. Go to the shop to get some Coke.I realised that it was already the
middle of the month, when people typically have used up all their cash. I wanted to
be polite. Do you have money or shall I go with her?I asked. Do not worry, I will
pay later,she replied, while the girl went to the shop her neighbour maintains.
Sharing had changed. While Olga still shared the drink with me in the same hospi-
table and amicable manner she had shared the tea in 2003, she got the Coke from a
neighboursshop where she had credit not, as with the sugar few years ago, from
her neighbour with whom she reciprocated. In Fransfontein and beyond, this form of
buying on credit in local shops is called surude. As mentioned above, surude is a
direct borrowing from the German word Schuld (debt). Borrowing a German word to
express owing someone something materially in a debt that needs to be paid pack in
an agreed amount and at an agreed time indicates that the concept has not existed for
too long. To better understand whether and how sharing has changed and if buying
on credit (surude) is replacing demand sharing (augu) systematically, I interviewed 61
households that listed 134 transactions which were referred to as surude or augu.
The distribution of transactions in Table 2 makes two things clear. First, the impor-
tance of augu has drastically decreased. While people engaged in almost two augu trans-
actions every day in 2004, 15 years later this number had dropped to one transaction
every two days.
13
Moreover, the types of goods shared did not drastically change.
To the extent that augu has decreased, surude has gained salience. More than half as
many goods are bought on credit as are shared on demand. Importantly, those are the
same goods. And, as I will show in detail below, it is not only that the same things are
now exchanged dierently. The exchanges also take place with the same people
neighbours, kin, and friends from the community. If the same relationships are
bearing a very dierent sort of transaction (surude), if is likely that these new trans-
actions are reconguring the social structure of the community.
But who are the people who give out goods today? There are 14 shops in Fransfon-
tein. Some of them operate out of the owners house, often literally through the
window, and sell the most salient everyday items: basic food, tobacco, soap, toiletries,
writing materials, and the like rarely more than 50 items or so. Others are shacks,
roughly assembled in the yards of those who operate them from zinc plates bought
ETHNOS 11
when the money was there and business spirits were high. Still others are more stable
structures of brick and cement that reect more detailed plans. All shops are owned by
the better-o. Their owners need not only access to capital to buy stocking, but also
access to a car to supply them regularly. In the vast majority of cases, more than 70
per cent, the part-time merchants receive a paycheck from the government. They
work for the public school, the Namibian post, the Namibian water supply, the tra-
ditional authorities, the town council, the health clinic and so forth.
Of the 14 shops in Fransfontein, 11 oer credit. They keep credit books to note the
exact amounts their customers have not paid. They document by hand how much a
customer owes in standard school notebooks, the same ones used for almost all
writing in the community. Shop owners typically keep one book for each customer,
and each item they take on credit is noted accurately. In Fransfontein, trust is low.
Once a customer pays back an amount, it is scratched out: paid.
To better understand the amount and the structure of debt in the community, I
asked the owners for permission to inspect their credit books. Fortunately, all 11
shops agreed, which enabled me to reconstruct the complete network of debt relation-
ships. These books reveal that the people in Fransfontein owe in total about N$122,000
for food. Because some shop owners give out credit more readily than others, the debt
relationships tend to concentrate on specic individuals. Roughly 30 per cent of this
debt is to one the merchants. An additional 20 per cent goes to the next largest creditor.
In both cases, the owner and their families are well-respected people in the community.
And, they both work for the government. In total they maintain more than 100 credi-
tor relationships. That is, one-third of the households in the community have become
their debtors to eat.
Table 2. Distribution of goods transacted over a period of 3 days in 2019 (N= 134).
Transaction augu surude Total
Sugar 26 13 39
Maize meal 17 8 25
Cooking oil 7 5 12
Cool drink 1 1
Meat 2 9 11
Tea 8 3 11
Soup 4 3 7
Bread 1 1
Salt 10 10
Onion 2 1 3
Spice 1 1
Fish can 1 1
Butter 2 2
Yeast 1 1 2
Mayonnaise 1 1
Coee 1 1
Jabula (alcoholic drink) 1 1
Potatoes 1 1 2
Rice 1 1
Baking powder 1 1
Oros (cookies) 1 1
Total 85 49 134
12 M. SCHNEGG
According to the community council, Fransfontein has 250 households with 600
adults living there. If we consider the N$122,000 as total debt, this would come to
roughly N$200 of debt per capita. By law, a day labourer must be paid about N
$70 per day in Namibia, although it is often much less in reality. Thus, the
amount each household of the community owes equals about three daysworth of
work.HowdoesthiscomparetocountrieslikeEuropeortheU.S.?InGermany,
for example, households owe on average 2,300 euro in consumer credit and make
about 4,500 Euro a month before taxes and hence on average owe about 10
daysworth of work.
14
So, while the debt in Fransfontein is still comparably low,
one has to keep in mind that most people there do not have a steady income
when comparing the two. Thus, it may take a labourer a month or so to get three
days of paid work.
I have introduced the symmetry and the centralisation of relationships as two con-
cepts that reveal how the location and distribution of debt in the community has
changed. Augu, which balances out quickly and is decentralised, remains a factor in
social life. Surude creates a dierent structure of debt. For one thing, all relationships
are asymmetrical. One household gives and the other owes. At least within this
domain, the relationship will never be reciprocal. Moreover, the quality of the relation-
ship has changed. While the debt was deliberately open and fuzzy in the past, it must
now have an amount that can be paid back. Once the debt is paid, the debtorcreditor
relationship comes to an end. Another dierence in the structure of the debt is that
with surude, the network of debt is highly centralised. As I have shown, two of the
14 shops in the community lend money in the form of food credit to more than
one-third of the community. Before I discuss how this has changed the social structure
of the community, I will briey explore how surude emerged.
Making Markets for Money
During the last 15 years, the amount of cash in the economy has signicantly increased.
On the one hand, the number of people who are employed in the public sector has
grown and so have their salaries. While a teacher made about N$2,500 a month in
the beginning of the year 2000, the salaries are about N$10,000 a month today.
During the past 15 years, the prices of the most basic goods like sugar, maize, and
tea have increased by a factor of two. Even if we factor this out, the salaries have
still doubled. The same can be said about the pension payments. In 2004 a pensioner
would get N$130; in 2019, N$1,300. If we consider the same ination rate again, the
pensioners buying power has also increased by a factor of ve.
Those numbers show to what extent the amount of money circulating in the local
economy has increased. Since the nearest town with a supermarket and a clothing store
is about 25 kilometres away, a signicant part of residentsearnings is spent in Frans-
fontein. There is no public transportation and those without cars have to wait for a lift,
which they have to pay for. This adds N$50 to the cost of the trip to any shopping
outside of Fransfontein. This geographical isolation supports the increase in the
number of shops in Fransfontein.
ETHNOS 13
In Fransfontein, money is a volatile resource and most people spend cash in the rst
few days after receiving it. This is not only true for the farm workers and pensioners
who make less than N$1,500 a month, but also for teachers and other governmental
employees who earn up to 10 times as much. I know many who do not have a
single cent left a week after they get paid. When cash is short, shops also compete
for customers, as Rosalia explained to me. Rosalia is a relatively new shop owner
who operates a store from her yard. In the past few years, she has become the most
important creditor in the community. When her husband became head of an impor-
tant government institution in a nearby town, they both thought about how they could
invest some of the additional income. And Rosalia was also looking for a new project
and a new social role. Like all shops in Fransfontein, Rosalia oers credit for free. This
diers from what Laws report for another areas in Namibia, Tsumkwe, where up to 100
per cent interest is charged, and this largely contributes in establishing social categories
and groups (Laws 2019). In Fransfontein, customers do not pay any interest for buying
food on credit; however, they do if they borrow money. When I asked why, Rosalia
explained: Well, we do this because otherwise people cannot buy.When I asked
her how she made sure they would actually pay her back, and if it was dicult to
run after kith and kin for the owed money, she said, No, not at all. This is business.
You must be able to separate.Even though their shop has relatively few products
(around 50 or so), Rosalia consistently carries more than N$40,000 in credit to
people in the community. As her credit books indicate, many of them have not paid
for years. So, is it really that easy to separate personal relationship from business trans-
action? And, is it only an economic transaction being made? On both sides? As we will
see below, this embeddedness of relationships has consequences for the social structure
of the community, far beyond the economic domain.
While those who give credit compete for customers and for ways to prot from the
money they have, there is also another side to the relationship: those who seek. Why do
they no longer demand from their neighbours? Why dont they reciprocate without
money involved, as they did in the past? When this topic came up with Magdalena,
a woman in her mid-40s who maintains her family with occasional jobs, she replied,
Today, it is not like in the past anymore. Then, everyone had to ask. We were all poor. Today,
many people can just go to the shops. They buy their things there. Then you feel bad if you ask
them all the time. This is why this is going down.
As her answer indicates, the availability of regular income to some leads to the (self-
)stigmatisation of those without regular access to cash.
The availability of money, increasing stratication, and rising aspirations explain
the salience credits have obtained, but what are the consequences of credits increased
salience?
Reconguring Relationships
As we have seen, surude workswiththesamegoodsandamongthesamepeopleas
other types of exchange. Because of this, surude is reconguring relationships and
14 M. SCHNEGG
likely to change the social structure of the community. Where could this lead?
When I asked Tina about the debt she had and the extent to which surude had
changed her relationships, she replied, Youalwaysaskthosepeoplewhereyou
feel comfortable where you have a good communication to start with. Then
you know that they will accept it and you do not feel bad.When I probed
further and asked her how it feels to meet such a person in the street or in
church, she explained,
If it is the rst time, you feel ne. The people know that you do not have employment and they
are aware of how dicult it is to pay back. They knew this when they gave credit to you. Only
when you cannot pay over longer periods of time do you start feeling bad. Then, you sneak out,
you try to hide. You try not to meet on the streets to avoid being ashamed.
The reconguration she describes is less drastic than what Laws reports for Tsumkwe,
where creditordebtor relationships are often conict-laden, even violent. One impor-
tant dierence, however, seems to be that for Ju|hoansi informal credits contribute to
making social groups that have an ethnic dimension too (in trueand otherpeople)
(Laws 2019). This is not yet the case in Fransfontein, where the reconguration con-
cerns individual relationships.
Let us shift sides again. While some shop owners complained to me about how
dicult it was to literally chase after their money,theyalsorealisedthattheir
lending transformed their position in the community. As Sarah explained, So
many people are poor. What can I do? I have to support them so that they also
have something to eat.In doing so, she became a patron in the communitys
network of relationships. At the same time, she also expresses that they are still
one community. In the end, however, these dynamics are likely to lead to a situation
where the emerging class dierences, signicantly fuelled by the state, are manifested
socially, probably comparable to what Laws observes (Laws 2019). Through surude,
people borrow resources from their own futures (Peebles 2010). To the extent that
thisisso,somepeopleinFransfonteinarebeginningtoaccumulatethefutureof
the community.
However, surude not only replaces existing social forms, including augu; at the same
time it also enables other types of sharing. In the interview situations I report, my
interlocutors shared meat or a coke with me. I have previously referred to this practice
as |goragu.|Goragu describes situations when food is prepared, typically on the open
re, and then jointly consumed. Sometimes this happens by invitation, but most
often it results from people roaming around and looking (and smelling) where there
might be something in the pot (for similar observations see, Widlok 1999; Laws
2019). This is especially prevalent in the community of Fransfontein itself, where
the walking distances are short and it is easy to know what others have, do, and
prepare. Since many ingredients are bought on credit today, monetary dept maintains
these sharing relationships as well. To some extent, the same can be said for augu. Even
through people demand much less than in the past, what they eventually get has often
been bought on credit. Through credit, then, sharing practices are not only replaced
but also maintained, albeit in new ways.
ETHNOS 15
Conclusion
When the German missionary Vedder wrote the ethnographic reports that found their
way into PolanyisThe Great Transformation, sharing meant redistributing goods,
including meat and fruits. Sharing established a relationship in which the amount
owed was not dened. This made it impossible to end a relationship that is, to
pay othe balance,as some would say in nancial terms today. Since then, food
sharing has changed.
In the rst stage, the colonial state created scarcity. In the local economy, goods like
sugar and tea were new. And they were rare. Unlike fruit from the eld, only money
could buy them, and in order to get money, people needed to sell their labour rst. In a
social environment, where basic goods like food and water are perceived as belonging
to all, people transferred this sharing norm to the newgoods and demanded their
share. Augu emerged.
It is not known under what conditions this kind of demand sharing, rst described
by Peterson (1993), developed comparatively. To my knowledge, almost all well-
known examples refer to societies in which people used to live primarily as hunters
and gatherers and who were then to some degree drawn into the capitalist market
economy. In societies in which equality was highly valued, demanding became a
social form after capitalism established inequality and scarcity (Peterson 1993;
Gregory 2012; Widlok 2013;2016; Schnegg 2016; Laws 2019). Thus, the case I
report might represent a larger development in which markets transform redistribu-
tion into demand sharing.
In Fransfontein, demand sharing, augu, persists in the community; most people
were still givers and receivers concurrently. Thus, while the ways people related to
one another became dierent in network terms, the social structure of debt had only
slightly changed. The network ties were still symmetrical, and the centralisation of
debt was low everyone owed everyone else pretty much the same on reciprocal terms.
With the progress of the colonial project, social dierentiation continued to
increase and people started owning more and more dierent things depending on
their access to governmental salaries. As a consequence, some people today have a
lot while others do not know how they will get their next meal. Because the few
haves are not willing to share all the time, the majority of the community are going
into monetary debt to eat. With this, the quality of the debt that has always been
part of social relationships has changed. Debt is now quantied with a number and
a date. It has become conscious to both sides, and it structures the relationship
beyond the obvious economic dependency: on one side of the tie is patronage; on
the other, shame. When people meet in the street, they see not only their neighbour
or their aunt with the associated feelings but their lender as well. Moreover, the
social structure of debt has changed signicantly. A few households have become
the hubs in centralised network of relationships. They own not only cars, but the
debt (i.e. future?) of the community as well. Food sharing, the indispensable com-
ponent of the past egalitarian society, no longer crosscuts social groups. On the con-
trary, in some respects, food sharing manifests them.
16 M. SCHNEGG
Creditordebtor relationships have emerged in many parts of the world, and in
many epochs (Guérin 2014; Guérin & Venkatasubramanian 2020). For example,
research on the emergence of credit markets in European countries in the nineteenth
century has shown that credit is often established between the wealthier urban popu-
lation and peasants in the rural hinterlands (Pster 2017). Moreover, the relationships
rarely span distances greater than 20 kilometres (Homan et al. 1992). Both have to do
with the fact that stratication occurred largely between the urban and the rural world.
While these creditordebtor relationships underpin this uneven divide, they eect the
internal structure of rural communities to a much lesser degree.
The situation is dierent in Namibia today. A signicant amount of stratication
has developed within rural communities. Anthropologists generally agree that the
introduction of money and markets causes this (Gudeman 2001; Hann & Hart
2011). I agree that markets played a key role in this change, too, but I have also
shown that the role of the state is much more important for the recent transformation
we observe in Namibia, and beyond. Across Southern Africa, the state provides salaries
and welfare in the hinterlands, and largely fuelled the economic stratication we
observe (Southall 2004; Anders 2009; James 2014b; Ferguson 2015).
Because some members of the community are now doing suciently well, they have
a little something to invest. Instead of meeting the demands of their kith and kin
through augu, the haves now refer the have-nots to the credit books in their recently
built shops. While this has led to an overall decline in demand sharing, it also enables
sharing situations too. When food is shared at meals, the ingredients are often bought
on credit in the village shops. Through this, surude not only replaces existing social
forms but also enables others. While some congurations are new, there is also conti-
nuity, albeit in shifting forms.
Notes
1. ǂNūkhoen translates literally as black people. The people gave this name to themselves in their
language, Khoekhoegowab.Khoekhoegowab is a language of the Khoe-Kwadi family with four
(primary) click sounds (ǂ,palatal; ǁ, lateral; ǀ, dental; !, alveolar) that function like other conso-
nants. Khoe-Kwadi languages belong to the southern African non-Bantu languages with click
phonemes that, although not forming a single linguistic unit, are conventionally subsumed
under a cover term Khoisan(Güldemann and Fehn 2014: 2pp).
2. Polanyi took the description from the summary Thurnwald provided in his comparative
volume on economic anthropology (Thurnwald 1932). In this, Thurnwald referred to the
work of the German missionary Vedder, who had lived among the Bergdamain Deutsch Süd-
westafrika (Namibia) since the beginning of the twentieth century (Vedder 1923a;1923b).
3. Names are pseudonyms.
4. Laws reports comparable practices of buying food on credit among Ju|hoansi communities,
and I will contrast them with my observations in later sections (Laws 2019).
5. Put more formally, the symmetry indicates the proportion of relationships that are reciprocal,
i.e. Num(X
ij
> 0 and X
ji
> 0)/Num(X
ij
>0 or X
ji
> 0).
6. In 2019 one euro exchanged for N$16.5, in 2004 for N$8.1 (https://www.oanda.com). I will
show later on how the local ination rate developed during the same time.
7. Over the past 15 years, the number of vendors has increased signicantly from ve to fourteen,
indicating some of the changes on which I report.
ETHNOS 17
8. For comparable observations in South Afrika see Bähre (2011: 382)
9. Our research team consisted of myself, Julia Pauli (as co-principal investigator), Francois
Dawids, Valery Somses, and Jorries Seibeb.
10. The data were collected by myself and Melitta Ortner.
11. Māgu ts much better into the exchange model that dominated the anthropological literature
for so long. Giving is an intentional act in which the item exchanged changes status from the
property of the giver to the property of the receiver. |gora means to put apart. |goragu typically
describes a situation in which something prepared at the house is shared, as with tea made or
food cooked.
12. Unfortunately, I lack the data to provide a detailed analysis whether and how the borrowing of
au and Schuld (in surude) indicates the kind of colonization of consciousnessthat Comaro
and Comarohave shown so convincingly in relation to work(e.g. as bereka and tiro) among
the Tshidi Tswana in South Africa (Comaro& Comaro1987;1989).
13. Over the period of three days, the 61 households exchanged 85 goods through augu, that is, .46
transactions a day.
14. Assuming that people work 20 days per month. Sources: Statistisches Bundesamt, https://www.
destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Einkommen-Konsum-Lebensbedingungen/
Einkommen-Einnahmen-Ausgaben/Tabellen/deutschland-lwr.html
Acknowledgement
Without the continuous support of numerous people and communities in Kunene, this research
would not have been possible. I thank all of them for being-in-their-world with me. Julia Pauli,
Patrick Neveling, Christian Strümpell, Inga Sievert, and Coral OBrian have oered critical and extre-
mely constructive comments to earlier drafts of this article. The results presented here are a product of
the LINGS research projects (Local Institutions in Globalized Societies, http://lings-net.de/). I am also
grateful to the DFG (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) for their continuous and generous nancial
support.
Disclosure Statement
No potential conict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Funding
This work was supported by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [grant number SCHN 1103].
References
Anders, Gerhard. 2009.In the Shadow of Good Governance: An Ethnography of Civil Service Reform in
Africa. Leiden: Brill.
Bähre, Erik. 2011. Liberation and Redistribution: Social Grants, Commercial Insurance, and Religious
Riches in South Africa. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 53(2):371392.
Bliege Bird, Rebecca L. & Douglas W. Bird. 1997. Delayed Reciprocity and Tolerated Theft: The
Behavioral Ecology of Food-Sharing Strategies. Current Anthropology, 38(1):4978.
Bloch, Maurice & Jonathan Parry. 1989. Introduction: Money and the Morality of Exchange. In Money
and the Morality of Exchange, edited by Jonathan Parry and Maurice Bloch, 132. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Caillé, Alain. 2000.Anthropologie du don. Paris: La Découverte.
18 M. SCHNEGG
Cashdan, Elizabeth A. 1990.Risk and Uncertainty in Tribal and Peasant Economies. Boulder, CO:
Westview Press.
Comaro, Jean & John L. Comaro.1987. The Madman and the Migrant: Work and Labor in the
Historical Consciousness of a South African People. American Ethnologist, 14(2):191209.
——— .1989. The Colonization of Consciousness in South Africa. Economy and Society, 18(3):267
296. doi:10.1080/03085148900000013.
Ferguson, James. 2015.Give a Man a Fish: Reections on the New Politics of Distribution. Durham, NC:
Duke University Press.
Gordon, Robert J. 2007. Fido: Dog Tales of Colonialism in Namibia. In Canis Africanis: A Dog History
of Southern Africa, edited by Sandra Swart & Lance Van Sittert, 173-192. Leiden: Brill.
Graeber, David. 2001.Toward an Anthropological Theory of Value: The False Coin of Our Own Dreams
(1st ed.). New York: Palgrave.
——— .2011.Debt: The First 5,000 Years. Brooklyn, NY: Melville House.
Granovetter, Mark. 1985. Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness.
American Journal of Sociology, 91(3):481510.
Gregory, Chris A. 2012. On Money Debt and Morality: Some Reections on the Contributions of
Economic Anthropology. Social Anthropology, 20(4):380396.
Gudeman, Stephen. 2001.The Anthropology of Economy: Community, Market, and Culture. Oxford
[u.a.]: Wiley-Blackwell.
Guérin, Isabelle. 2014. Juggling with Debt. Social Ties, and Values: The Everyday Use of Mircocredit
in Rural South India. Current Anthropology, 55(S9):40S50.
Guérin, Isabelle, Marc Roesch, Govidan Venkatasubramanian & Bert DEspallier. 2012. Credit from
Whom and for What? The Diversity of Borrowing Sources and Uses in Rural Southern India.
Journal of International Development, 24(S1):122137. doi:10.1002/jid.1785.
Guérin, Isabelle & Govindan Venkatasubramanian. 2020. The Socio-Economy of Debt: Revisiting
Debt Bondage in Times of Financialization. Geoforum. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.05.020.
Güldemann, Tom & Anne-Maria Fehn. 2014.Beyond Khoisan: Historical Relations in the Kalahari
Basin. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Haacke, Wilfrid. 2002.A Khoekhoegowab Dictionary with an English-Khoekhoegowab Index.
Windhoek: Gamsberg Macmillan.
Han, Clara. 2011. Symptoms of Another Life: Time, Possibility, and Domestic Relations in Chiles
Credit Economy. Cultural Anthropology, 26(1):732. doi:10.1111/j.1548-1360.2010.01078.x.
Hann, Chris & Keith Hart. 2011.Economic Anthropology: History, Ethnography, Critique. Cambridge:
Cambridge Polity Press.
Homan, Philip T., Gilles Postel-Vinay & Jean-Laurent Rosenthal. 1992. Private Credit Markets in
Paris, 16901840. The Journal of Economic History, 52(2):293306.
James, Deborah. 2012. Money-Go-Round: Personal Economies of Wealth, Aspiration and
Indebtedness. Africa, 82(1):2040. doi:10.1017/S0001972011000714.
——— .2014a.Deeper into a Hole?Borrowing and Lending in South Africa. Current Anthropology,55
(S9):S17S29. doi:10.1086/676123.
——— .2014b.Money from Nothing: Indebtedness and Aspiration in South Africa. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
——— .2017. Not Marrying in South Africa: Consumption, Aspiration and the New Middle Class.
Anthropology Southern Africa, 40(1):114. doi:10.1080/23323256.2016.1237295.
——— .2020. Owing Everyone: Debt Advice in the UKs Time of Austerity. Ethnos 119. doi:10.1080/
00141844.2019.1687544.
Krige, Eileen J. & John L. Comaro.1981.Essays on African Marriage in Southern Africa. Cape Town:
Juta.
Kuper, Adam. 1982.Wives for Cattle: Bridewealth and Marriage in Southern Africa. London [u.a.]:
Routledge & Kegan Paul Books.
——— .2016. Traditions of Kinship, Marriage and Bridewealth in Southern Africa. Anthropology
Southern Africa, 39(4):267280. doi:10.1080/23323256.2016.1243447.
ETHNOS 19
Laws, Megan. 2019. All Things Being Equal: Uncertainty, Ambivalence and Trust in a Namibian
Conservancy. Dissertation: Department of Anthropology at the London School of Economics
and Political Science. http://etheses.lse.ac.uk/3918/.
Mauss, Marcel. 1923. Essai sur le don forme et raison de léchange dans les sociétés archaïques.
LAnnée sociologique (1896/1897-1924/1925), 1:30186.
Meillassoux, Claude. 1981.Maidens, Meal and Money: Capitalism and the Domestic Community.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pauli, Julia. 2019.The Decline of Marriage in Namibia: Kinship and Social Class in a Rural Community.
Bielefeld: Transcript.
Pauli, Julia & Rijk van Dijk. 2016. Marriage as an End or the End of Marriage? Change and Continuity
in Southern African Marriages. Anthropology Southern Africa, 39(4):257266. doi:10.1080/
23323256.2016.1243451.
Peebles, Gustav. 2010. The Anthropology of Credit and Debt. Annual Review of Anthropology, 39:225
240.
Peterson, Nicolas. 1993. Demand Sharing: Reciprocity and Pressure for Generosity among Foragers.
American Anthropologist, 95(4):860874.
Pster, Ulrich. 2017. Le Petit Crédit Rural en Suisse aux XVIeXVIIIe Siècles. Annales. Histoire,
Sciences Sociales, 49(6):13391357. doi:10.3406/ahess.1994.279332.
Polanyi, Karl. 1944.The Great Transformation. Boston, MA: Beacon.
Schnegg, Michael. 2006. Reciprocity and the Emergence of Power Laws in Social Networks.
International Journal of Modern Physics C, 17(7):10671076. doi:10.1142/S0129183106009473.
——— .2015. Reciprocity on Demand: Sharing and Exchanging Food in Northwestern Namibia.
Human Nature, 26(3):313330. doi:10.1007/s12110-015-9236-5.
——— .2016. Collective Foods: Situating Food on the Continuum of Private-Common Property
Regimes. Current Anthropology, 57(5):683689. doi:10.1086/688051.
——— .2018. Institutional Multiplexity: Social Networks and Community-Based Natural Resource
Management. Sustainability Science, 13(4):10171030. doi:10.1007/s11625-018-0549-2.
——— .2019. The Life of Winds: Knowing the Namibian Weather from Someplace and from Noplace.
American Anthropologist, 121(4):830844. doi:10.1111/aman.13274.
Schnegg, Michael & Edward D. Lowe. eds. 2020.Comparing Cultures: Innovations in Comparative
Ethnography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schnegg, Michael, Julia Pauli & Clemens Greiner. 2013. Pastoral Belonging: Causes and Consequences
of Part-Time Pastoralism in Northwestern Namibia. In Pastoralism in Africa: Past, Present and
Future, edited by Michael Bollig, Michael Schnegg and Hans-Peter Wotzka, 341362. Oxford:
Berghahn.
Shipton, Parker M. 2007.The Nature of Entrustment: Intimacy, Exchange, and the Sacred in Africa..
New Haven, CT [u.a.]: Yale University Press.
——— .2010.Credit Between Cultures: Credit Between Cultures: Farmers, Financiers, and
Misunderstanding in Africa. New Haven, CT [u.a.]: Yale University Press.
Solway, Jacqueline. 2016.Slow Marriage,’‘Fast Bogadi: Change and Continuity in Marriage in
Botswana. Anthropology Southern Africa, 39(4):309322. doi:10.1080/23323256.2016.1235980.
Southall, Roger. 2004. Political Change and the Black Middle Class in Democratic South Africa.
Canadian Journal of African Studies/La Revue canadienne des études africaines, 38(3):521542.
Sullivan, Sian & Welhemina Ganuses. 2020. Understanding Damara / Nūkhoen and ǁUbun
Indigeneity and Marginalisation in Namibia. In Neither Here Nor There: Indigeneity,
Marginalisation and Land Rights in Post-Independence Namibia, edited by Willem Odendaal and
Wolfgang Werner, 283324. Windhoek: Legal Assistance Centre Windhoek.
Thurnwald, Richard. 1932.Economics in Primitive Communities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Vedder, Heinrich. 1923a.Die Bergdama. 1. Teil. Hamburg: Friederichsen.
——— .1923b.Die Bergdama. 2. Teil. Hamburg: Friederichsen.
Villarreal, Magdalena. 2014. Regimes of Value in Mexican Household Financial Practices. Current
Anthropology, 55(S9):S30S39. doi:10.1086/676665.
20 M. SCHNEGG
Wasserman, Stanley & Katherine Faust. 1994.Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Widlok, Thomas. 1999.Living on Mangetti: BushmanAutonomy and Namibian Independence.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
——— .2013. Sharing: Allowing Others to Take What Is Valued. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory,
3(2):1131.
——— .2016.Anthropology and the Economy of Sharing. London: Routledge.
Woodburn, James. 1982. Egalitarian Societies. Man, New Series, 17(3):431451. doi:10.2307/2801707.
——— .1998.Sharing Is Not a Form of Exchange: An Analysis of Property-Sharing in Immediate-
Return Hunter-Gatherer Societies. In Property Relations, edited by C. M. Hunn, 48-
63. Cambridge: Cambriudge University Press.
Ziker, John P. & Michael Schnegg. 2005. Food Sharing at Meals Kinship, Reciprocity, and Clustering
in the Taimyr Autonomous Okrug, Northern Russia. Human Nature, 16(2):178210.
ETHNOS 21
... This is one of the strongest ethical claims made by the Damara people living in this insecure ecological environment. Sharing, therefore, is imperative (Schnegg, 2015(Schnegg, , 2023d. Hearing the plane makes Pete aware that some people have so much money and land that they can go shopping to a fresh delicatessen by plane, while he has to walk 10 km to buy maize meal, all of which challenges this basic order. ...
Article
Full-text available
To explain cultural diversity, many theories refer to the social construction of reality. In this telling, we frame the world to make it meaningful. In my analysis of what people in Namibia and Germany know about “SARS‐Cov‐2” and “climate change,” I propose an anti‐constructivist alternative. Drawing on the work of the phenomenologist Bernhard Waldenfels, I argue that experience comes first and exceeds language and the conceptual and symbolic orders we use to describe it. Waldenfels refers to this excess as “the alien” ( das Fremde ). This alienness calls us and demands a response. Only by responding, do we make the world meaningful. Since the alien is the excess to a particular order it becomes important to explore how orders are applied in situations. To explain this, I draw on recent developments in “4E” cognition that describe the mind‐world relation as fourfold intertwined: embedded, embodied, extended , and enacted . Combining Waldenfels’ responsive phenomenology and “4E” cognition thus allows it to be shown how knowledge emerges as an enactive response to the demands situations create. I conclude by showing how this opens up new possibilities for addressing the plurality and situatedness of knowledge in anthropology.
... In addition, in the case of coastal western Anatolia, some households were turned into metalworking workshops and, consequently, the seats of chiefs (Kouka 2002;. In comparison, the spatial arrangement of household assemblage at Çukuriçi points towards a decentralized network of reciprocal sharing of metals and crafting knowledge and even meat between households, possibly based on the principle of symmetry of debt (see Schnegg 2021). 4 For an artistic reconstruction of metalworking as a gender inclusive craft at the EBA 1 at Çukuriçi, see Figure 6. ...
Article
This article questions the cross-cultural ethnographic insight of metalworking as a male craft, commonly performed in male spaces (workshops) away from female members of society, through the analysis of archaeological evidence for the household-based metal production within multi-gendered and multi-generational households and corresponding but rare ethnographic examples.
... They do not hire other Ju/'hoansi as household workers because of the lack of institutions to enforce accountability of workers or payment by employers. The Ju/'hoansi also do not put other Ju/'hoansi into debt, as do other populations in Namibia (71). Fewer than 6.7% of debts were to other Ju/'hoansi, because repayment to other Ju/'hoansi cannot be enforced. ...
Article
Full-text available
Money has been portrayed by major theorists as an agent of individualism, an instrument of freedom, a currency that removes personal values attached to things, and a generator of avarice. Regardless, the impact of money varies greatly with the cultural turf of the recipient societies. For traditional subsistence economies based on gifting and sharing, surplus perishable resources foraged from the environment carry low costs to the giver compared with the benefits to the receiver. With cash, costs to the giver are usually the same as benefits to the receiver, making sharing expensive and introducing new choices. Using quantitative data on possessions and expenditures collected over a 44-y period from 1974 to 2018 among the Ju/’hoansi (!Kung) in southern Africa, former hunter-gatherers, we look at how individuals spend monetary income, how a partial monetary economy alters traditional norms and institutions (egalitarianism, gifting, and sharing), and how institutions from the past steer change. Results show that gifting declines as cash is spent to increase the well-being of individual families and that gifting and sharing decrease and networks narrow. The sharing of meals and casual gifting hold fast. Substantial material inequalities develop, even between neighbors, but social, gender, and political equalities persist. A strong tradition for individual autonomy combined with monetary income allows individuals to spend their money as they choose, adapt to modern conditions, and pursue new options. However, new challenges are emerging to develop greater community cooperation and build substantial and sustainable economies in the face of such centrifugal forces.
Article
Environmental mega conferences have become the format of choice in environmental governance. Conferences of the Parties (COPs) under the climate change and biodiversity conventions in particular attract global media attention and an ever-growing number of increasingly diverse actors, including scholars of global environmental politics. They are arenas for interstate negotiation, but also temporary interfaces that constitute and represent world society, and they focalise global struggles over just and sustainable futures. Collaborative event ethnography (CEE) as a research methodology emerged as a response to these developments. This volume retraces its genealogy, explains its conceptual and methodological foundations and presents insights into its practice. It is meant as an introduction for students, an overview for curious newcomers to the field, and an invitation for experienced researchers wishing to experiment with a new method. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.
Article
Full-text available
This article asks why Namibians complain that rural communities have become ǀowesa (boring) and why they describe a feeling of pointlessness. After Namibia gained independence in 1990, those who migrated to the towns often progressed economically, while those who remained in the rural hinterlands became the spectators of their success. At the same time, they experienced their efforts as having been ‘blocked’ ( ǁkhaehe ) not only by the economy, as the literature suggests, but also by the harsh arid environment, the state, others, and their own bodies. To theorize the shared affectivity these experiences create, I mobilize phenomenological theories that take emotions out of the ‘box’ of the psyche and consider them as atmospheres that hover in situations where they transcend people, things, and activities, creating rural boredom. ǀOweb rides on your back, people say. Turning emotions inside out allows them to be politicized by demonstrating how boredom grows in the gap created by promising a different future while at the same time preventing it. While people strive, and sometimes manage, to get ǀoweb off their backs, theorizing boredom as an atmosphere makes it clear that it will return unless these conditions change.
Chapter
Full-text available
Emotionen, Gefühle, affektive Dynamiken: Die Anthropologie der Emotionen hat sich als ein Forschungsfeld etabliert, in dem interdisziplinär gearbeitet wird und das transnational verankert ist. 27 Autor:innen aus Sozial- und Kulturanthropologie, Philosophie, Psychologie, Soziologie, den Neurowissenschaften und der Theaterwissenschaft skizzieren die Genese sowie gegenwärtige Entwicklungen dieser Forschung. Dieses Buch ist eine Einladung an Sozial- und Kulturanthropolog:innen, affine und affizierte Kolleg:innen, sich weiterhin im Zentrum der interdisziplinären Emotions- und Affektforschung zu positionieren. Die hier versammelten Beiträge stellen disziplinäre Trennungen in Frage: insbesondere den gefu?hlten Gegensatz zwischen gesellschaftlich hegemonialen Disziplinen (Psychologie, Psychiatrie, Neurowissenschaften, Biologie) und den eher performativen, diskursiven und narrativen Affect Studies an den kritischen Rändern der Wissenschaft (Sozial- und Kulturanthropologie, Kulturwissenschaften, Literaturwissenschaft, Linguistik, Performance Studies, Philosophie, Soziologie). Dieses Buch positioniert die Sozial- und Kulturanthropologie als interdisziplinäres Paradigma, das auf Sozial-, Geistes- und Kunstwissenschaften zuru?ckgreift und Naturwissenschaften nicht per se ausschließt. Die Autor:innen Christoph Antweiler, Marium Javaid Bajwa, Kathrin Bauer, Klaus Behnam Shad, Michael J. Casimir, Hansjörg Dilger, Eva-Maria Engelen, Leberecht Funk, Eric Anton Heuser, Manfred Holodynski, Heidi Keller, Doris Kolesch, Edward D. Lowe, Hans J. Markowitsch, Sighard Neckel, Julia Pauli, Martin Rössler, Victoria K. Sakti, Christian von Scheve, Michael Schnegg, Franziska Seise, Jan Slaby, Achim Stephan, Rosalie Stolz, Ferdiansyah Thajib, Mechthild von Vacano, Edda Willamowski
Book
Full-text available
Emotionen, Gefühle, affektive Dynamiken: Die Anthropologie der Emotionen hat sich als ein Forschungsfeld etabliert, in dem interdisziplinär gearbeitet wird und das transnational verankert ist. 27 Autor:innen aus Sozial- und Kulturanthropologie, Philosophie, Psychologie, Soziologie, den Neurowissenschaften und der Theaterwissenschaft skizzieren die Genese sowie gegenwärtige Entwicklungen dieser Forschung – im Dialog mit Birgitt Röttger-Rösslers Werk und anhand der Themenfelder Perspektiven, Sozialisation, Mobilität und Politik. So entsteht ein neuer Zugang zu der Welt der Emotionen.
Article
Full-text available
Among Jú|’hoànsi in the northern Kalahari, there are differences in the way people address their suspicions about what others might be thinking or feeling – in other words, in the way people confront the opacity of other minds. Among friends, playful forms of mockery allow people to express their suspicions or ill-feelings directly, without the fear of causing harm. Among relatives, by contrast, suspicions and ill-feelings are typically concealed. While people may talk about other minds when those minds are not around, they refrain from direct confrontation. To confront one’s relatives is to make them feel ‘pain in their hearts’, and to do so is to risk losing them to sickness or damaging enduring arrangements of care. Ancestors and shamans, who can see and hear more than others, play a crucial role here in governing opacity: exposing suspicions and ill-feelings when people feel they cannot speak of them.
Article
Full-text available
In Namibia, both Damara pastoralists ( ǂNūkhoen ) and scientists agree that it rains less frequently than before. To explain their observations, however, scientists refer to carbon dioxide molecules, while the pastoralists point to social tensions, neoliberalism, and failures of the postcolonial state. To understand this discrepancy, I ask whether what scientists call precipitation and what Damara call ǀnanus are really the same thing. Engaging with phenomenological theories, I propose a worldliness continuum that reveals substantial ontological difference between the two. While precipitation occurs independently of humans, ǀnanus encompasses everything—it is life and death. If the two are different things, it is unsurprising that one needs different explanations for them. Acknowledging this creates space to navigate between the recognition of multiple ontologies and the politicization of carbon dioxide emissions. [ climate change, ontology, phenomenology, world, knowledge, environment, drought, Namibia ]
Article
Full-text available
Under UK austerity, people are obliged to pay up: either to the market (those with debt to commercial creditors) or the state (for those receiving welfare benefits – a person may owe the local council or tax office because she is in arrears or was ‘overpaid’). Seeking clarification or counsel from advisers means entering a world where payments often seem to be automated and where the state is ‘giving with one hand and taking away with the other’. Yet payments have a human, even moral/ethical aspect and must be negotiated. The adviser helps the debtor to close the flood gates through which these payments flow, or temporarily to reduce the cascade to a trickle. Under austerity, with legal aid and other funding withdrawn, the advice sector is performing the government’s work of care. Agencies must identify new wellsprings of care and concern, or intensify the demands placed upon existing ones.
Article
Full-text available
This article brings the two questions, how and what we know, into a productive dialog to explain the difference between indigenous and scientific environmental knowledge. In the case I explore, scientists and Damara pastoralists (ǂnūkhoen) both relate the arrival of the rains in arid Namibia to the interplay between two winds. However, when it comes to explaining those observations, their accounts could hardly be more different. While Indigenous people understand the arrival of the rains as a play between loving and caring winds, scientists recognize them as a consequence of a shift of the Intertropical Convergence Zone. Building on Heidegger's phenomenology, I explore the relationship between the knower and the known. My main theoretical intervention is to show that Damara people and scientists have distinct ways of encountering the world: from someplace and from noplace. In those encounters, the weather is either enmeshed in forms of use in everyday skilled activity for rural pastoralists, or enframed by technology for scientists. By encountering the weather from someplace and from noplace, the world turns into a different place for each. The engagement with these weather worlds shows how ways of knowing the environment can be multiple, but they are not mutually exclusive. [Indigenous knowledge, weather, phenomenology, ontology, Heidegger]
Book
Full-text available
In Southern Africa, marriage used to be widespread and common. However, over the past decades marriage rates have declined significantly. Julia Pauli explores the meaning of marriage when only few marry. Although marriage rates have dropped sharply, the value of weddings and marriages has not. To marry has become an indicator of upper-class status that less affluent people aspire to. Using the appropriation of marriage by a rural Namibian elite as a case study, the book tells the entwined stories of class formation and marriage decline in post-apartheid Namibia.
Book
This bidirectional dictionary contains over 24 000 Khoekhoegowab entries, including some 2700 examples of usage. The dictionary is an authoritative source of reference based on linguistic - especially tonological - research. It provides tone marking as well as the official orthography. The English-Khoekhoe Index is a computer generated selective inversion consisting of over 26 000 entries. 754p.
Book
This book brings a variety of perspectives—cultural, economic, political, and religious-philosophical—and years of field experience to this study about people who borrow and lend in the interior of Africa. It focuses on the efforts of Luo-speaking people and others in Kenya to make sense of, and cope with, foreign interventions in the form of credit. The book also reveals that contemporary financial aid programs in western Kenya are deeply rooted in colonial and early postcolonial history, and examines how credit begins to appear in the three faces of usury, charity, and fantasy. It notes the important role of women in Kenyan farming and argues that they should be “adequately represented” as recipients of training and extension. The book discusses the loan repayment under the Integrated Agricultural Development Project and the Smallholder Production Services and Credit Project, and compares the tobacco-growing project of British American Tobacco with government and international aid agencies' projects in Kenya, focusing on the subject of credit and discredit. Its conclusions challenge the conventional wisdom of the past half century (including perennial World Bank orthodoxy) about the need for credit among African farming people.
Article
This paper proposes the concept of the ‘socio-economy of debt’ to explore the ambivalence of debt, its multiple facets and its capacity to exploit, protect or emancipate. This socio-economy of debt conceives of debt as a material transaction (defined in terms of prices, modalities of repayment, and collaterals), as well as a power relationship (inseparable from an overall set of interdependencies, protection and social differentiation) and as a social and moral experience (imbued with subjectivities, felt-obligations and also aspirations). This framework sheds a new light on the issue of “debt bondage”, applied to seasonal migrants from South-India. These workers are tied to their employer through a wage advance while enjoying widened access to market debts. Paradoxically, such widened choice has reinforced their dependence on their employers and other forms of interpersonal debt. These various forms of debt, both market and interpersonal, bring about various forms of exploitation, and the dispossession of time and bodies. But these debts equally allow those workers to break with the past and imagine a new future, partially liberated not from caste hierarchies but from their local forms of expression. They offer a source of hope, confidence and courage to act. It also allows some debtors to make investments and improve their lives. Within this analytical framework, it is not the market or non-market-based quality of a debt that explain its emancipatory or alienating potential, as long argued by economic anthropology, but how a particular debt bond is articulated with other forms of interdependence and protection.
Book
A new and important contribution to the re-emergent field of comparative anthropology, this book argues that comparative ethnographic methods are essential for more contextually sophisticated accounts of a number of pressing human concerns today. The book includes expert accounts from an international team of scholars, showing how these methods can be used to illuminate important theoretical and practical projects. Illustrated with examples of successful inter-disciplinary projects, it highlights the challenges, benefits, and innovative strategies involved in working collaboratively across disciplines. Through its focus on practical methodological and logistical accounts, it will be of value to both seasoned researchers who seek practical models for conducting their own cutting-edge comparative research, and to teachers and students who are looking for first-person accounts of comparative ethnographic research.
Thesis
This thesis is about how experiences of uncertainty shape the way people share with one another. It is an ethnographic study of a rural conservancy in north-eastern Namibia, the Nyae Nyae Conservancy, and the urban town at its centre, Tsumkwe—between which people “roam in order to live”. The people at the centre of this study are the Ju|’hoansi (meaning “true people” or “people of proper custom”), known to anthropology both as hunter-gatherers and as a famously “egalitarian society”. In Namibia, they are a “traditional community” with ancestral rights to a communal land region that they now manage largely as a commercial enterprise. In doing so, they aim to perform the complementary work of conserving their ancestral way of life and the diverse fauna and flora they share it with, and enticing tourists, entrepreneurs, and trophy-hunters to provide the cash now necessary to do so. This work only goes so far in making people self-sufficient, however, giving rise to a regular push and pull between their territories and town. These movements reflect broader shifts towards informality, precariousness, and rising inequality across southern Africa, but they are also extensions of a much longer history of “roaming” that has been the subject of extensive writing within the discipline on hunter-gatherers and their fiercely egalitarian values. This writing sees roaming as a practice circumscribed by the assumption that those who have more than they can immediately use or consume will give in to the demands of roaming others without expecting repayment. In its contemporary guise, however, roaming necessitates encounters not with “true people”, like themselves, whom they expect will share without hesitation, but with “other people” who “want to refuse you”, “want to ruin you”, or who “cannot be trusted”. This thesis takes this nexus—between the values ordinarily associated with egalitarianism and the contemporary social context—as a productive space within which to explore the way that people go about sharing in the face of uncertainty and negotiating the ambivalence that emerges in the process. This thesis is based on ethnographic fieldwork carried out in the Nyae Nyae conservancy between October 2014 – December 2015. It contributes to current debates within the anthropology of value on redistributive regimes and within the anthropology of ethics on experiences of moral ambivalence, and to broader fields of research on the relationship between state processes and informal economies in southern Africa.