Evolution, institutions, and human well-being: perspectives from a critical social anthropology

Abstract

The work of Elinor Ostrom is important for those who deplore the fact that the rise of ethnographic methods has led mainstream socio-cultural anthropologists to lose interest in evolution. This trend in anthropology is illustrated with reference to research on property, where Ostrom herself made notable contributions. However, it is argued that her mature work on the evolution of rules and her privileging of low-level institutions do not pay sufficient attention to local cultural notions and reflect the bias of a powerful Western ideology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Acheson, J. (Ed.). (1994). Anthropology and institutional economics. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Elinor, O. (Ed.). (1990). Governing the commons. The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Engels, F. 1972 [1884]. The origin of the family, private property, and the state. New York: Pathfinder Press.

  4. Ensminger, J. (1992). Making a market. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Frazer, J. G. (1909). Psyche’s task: A discourse concerning the influence of superstition on the growth of institutions. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gluckman, M. (1965). The ideas in Barotse jurisprudence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gudeman, S. (2008). Economy’s tension. The dialectics of community and market. New York: Berghahn.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Humphrey, C. (1983). Karl Marx collective: Economy, society and religion in a Siberian collective farm. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lewis, D. (2005). Anthropology and development: The uneasy relationship. In J. G. Carrier (Ed.), A handbook of economic anthropology (pp. 472–486). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lewis Henry Morgan, H. (1877). Ancient society, or researches in the lines of human progress from savagery through barbarism to civilisation. Chicago: C. H. Kerr.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Malinowski, B. (1935). Coral gardens and their magic: A study of the methods of tilling the soil and of agricultural rites in the Trobriand Islands (2 Vols.). London: Allen & Unwin.

  12. Maurer, B., & Schwab, G. (Eds.). (2006). Accelerating possession. Global futures of property and personhood. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Mosse, D. (2003). The making and marketing of participatory development. In P. Q. van Ufford & A. K. Giri (Eds.), A moral critique of development: In search of global responsibilities (pp. 43–75). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Strang, V., & Busse, M. (Eds.). (2011). Ownership and appropriation. Oxford: Berg.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Strathern, M. (1999). Property, substance and effect. Anthropological essays on persons and things. London: Athlone Press.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Verdery, K., & Humphrey, C. (Eds.). (2004). Property in question: Value transformation in the global economy. Oxford: Berg.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chris Hann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hann, C. Evolution, institutions, and human well-being: perspectives from a critical social anthropology. J Bioecon 16, 61–69 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10818-013-9168-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Frazer
  • Hayek
  • Institutions
  • Neoliberalism
  • Property
  • Socio-cultural anthropology