striving to make capital do
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
1/21
Striving to make capital do economic things for the impoverished:
On the issue of capitalization in rural microenterprises
Magdalena Villarreal
Published in: Kontinen Tiina (ed) (2004)Development Intervention:
Actor and Activity Perspectives. University of Helsinki. Finlandpp. 67 to 81.
Following the concern to transcend social compensation strategies, charity and welfare, it has
now become commonplace for development planners to set part of their goals on the
establishment of small enterprises in the hands of the poor. Microenterprises constitute
appealing mechanisms for poverty alleviation, allowing low- income producers, manufacturers
and merchants to involve themselves actively in seeking ways out of their precarious situation.
The underlying assumption is that, with the provision of seed capital, the poor can be
introduced into the market. Well nurtured, the enterprise will expand, capital will grow, and
the poor will be able to pull themselves out of poverty. Capital is expected to multiply itself
and produce profit.
But many small enterprises do not survive more than a couple of years and most fail to expand.
The seed resources that are injected are often diverted, disappear into everyday
consumption, or are turned into what Hernando de Soto (2000) labels dead capital, which he
claims is unable to do economic things for the impoverished.
In this chapter, my aim is to explore the nature of these economic things that capital is
expected to trigger. This requires a critical unpacking of the notion of capital itself and looking
into the different kinds of assets and resources that are involved in microentrepreneurial
activity. I will draw upon the cases of individual, family and group resources such as pigs,
chickens, bees and cows to discuss the nature of capital in the everyday operation of micro-
enterprises as poverty alleviation measures in Western Mexico, exploring transactions within
different types of markets that include money markets for development projects and
commodity markets.
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
2/21
This inevitably takes us to the analysis of processes of valuation that are brought into play in
these contexts. It is important to consider the complex webs of meanings and actions that are
activated in the calculation of value, as well as the ways in which those involved interact with
money and other resources. I have thus resorted to an actor- oriented approach, which allows
us to take situated actors practices and transactions as the main focus. It is with reference to
these actions that resources be they land, labour, knowledge or cash acquire value. I
contend that a specific resource monetary or non- monetary can only become capital when
it is mobilized and leveraged within particular circuits of signification where its value is
assessed and negotiated according to particular standards, rules and expectations. This has
important implications to the issues of poverty and capitalization.
The Mystery of Capital
I will start with Hernando De Sotos depiction of capital, since his points of view seem to be
shared by many development agents and have been acclaimed by some governments
including the Mexican one as providing the key to poverty alleviation. In his bookThe
mystery of capital, he claims that a large percentage of the poor already posses the assets they
need to make a success of capitalism. Based on a 5 year study with a team of 100 researchers
from six different nations, he concludes that, at the end of the millennium, the value of savings
among the poor was forty times all the foreign aid received throughout the world since 1945
(2000: 5).
And, according to his teams calculations, the total value of the real estate held but not legally
owned by the poor of the Third World and former communist nations was at least 9.3 trillion
dollars. That is, ninety- three times as much as all development assistance from all advanced
countries to the Third World in the past three decades! (2000: 35). However, he says, they
hold these resources in defective forms they are dead capital. Because the poors economic
and social assets are not fixed in a formal property system that can homogenize their qualities
and values in such a way that they are broadly recognizable, they are extremely hard to move
in the market and cannot be used as collateral to start enterprises. He concludes that in order to
make their assets do economic things for them, these must be represented in a title, a
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
3/21
contract and other similar legal documents, which will allow them to be combined, divided,
mobilized and used in commercial transactions. In this way the poor will be able to convert
dead capital into an active one that is widely transferable and fungible.
And here he has a point. Those identified as poor hold or have access to a host of resources
that are not activated within capitalist circuits of profit making. Not only do many
impoverished sectors of the world population own houses and urban plots, but they possess
agricultural land and have access to mineral resources and forests. They also have skills,
knowledge, networks, and rich cultural heritages that could become valuable assets in
economic transactions. However, the fact that these are not gainfully articulated with
commodity or financial markets has less to do with a lack of proper titles or legal documents to
prove legitimate property than with the social relations involved in capitalization, particularly
the processes of valuation, including assessments of people that is, the identity attributed to
property owners and dealers themselves.
It would appear that De Soto recognizes some of these forms of valuation and assessment as
central, since his arguments are based on the postulation that active capital is mobilized on
the basis of formal representations of a good that do not represent the good itself, but our
concept of it, the economic qualities we attribute to it in order to produce value. Hence, the
mystery of capital has to do with human actors depictions of an asset or good.
It is suprising, then, that he should turn a blind eye to the power laden contexts in which
negotiations over the concepts and values attributed to particular goods is made. He reduces
the problem of poverty to bureaucratic procedures and legal documents that can guarantee
private property which will easily perform in a free market. The myth of a free market has
been strongly challenged by social scientists, who stress the forms of exclusion that prevail.
The market is discriminatory and excluding. De Soto overlooks the fact that those he labels
poor already participate actively in the market, albeit in highly disadvantaged ways.
Claims to possession must, of course, be backed by trustworthy institututions, but which
institutions are to be considered dependable and how the rules of the game are established
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
4/21
cannot be ignored. It is important to take into account the fact that, in seeking to influence the
processes of valuation and representation of goods, entrepreneurs draw upon stereotyped
notions of the identity different players involved in order to exclude or out-compete their
rivals. Thus social relations, power and human interpretation play big roles in the democratic
process of supply and demand.
On the other hand, in De Sotos conceptualization, the big market operates in one universal
language: money. Money is the measure of equivalence, the universal language that everyone
can understand. In profitable economic processes, according to his reasoning, the differential
value that buyer and seller might attribute to a particular good is irrelevant, as long as they
agree on a fixed price. The calculations as to what a fair price would amount to are settled in a
democratic way: supply and demand. If I desperately need a roof over my head, I will pay
the price you ask for your house. Why you are asking such a price is irrelevant, as long as there
is someone who is willing to pay. And you are more likely to get the price you want if you
have a legal document, which gives me security, since it guarantees that you will not sell it
twice or take it away from me in two months. Economic qualities include, of course, non-
monetary resources that are difficult to measure such such as security and status. What I am
buying is not so much a building, but the security of having a permanent roof over my head,
perhaps status, or I might be considering it an investment for the future. But for De Soto, this
is not an issue, since what counts in the big market is the agreed upon value established in
monetary terms between those involved in the transaction.
However, the agreed upon value is an issue, particularly since it implies differential costs for
those concerned. The freedom you acquired by selling or mortgaging your house and thus
being able to invest elsewhere is conditioned by the degree to which you are able to forego the
security of a roof, what this entails for your family, how much you gain or lose in terms of
social relations, etc. Here political, ethical and cognitive dimensions come to the fore, and as
Long (1984, 2001) argues, these do not depend on, nor can they be reduced to, market
rationalities.
The issue of value from an actor- oriented perspective
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
5/21
From an actor oriented perspective, one has to consider the multiple realities that are
constructed and confirmed in peoples everyday lives. Long has, for some time, been pointing
out the mistake of giving analytical priority to the capitalist side of the equation in economic
transactions, thus failing to appreciate the theoretical importance of non- commoditised
relationships (1977, 1984, 2001). This has two important implications:
On the one hand, it warns against the reduction of peoples livelihoods to the pursuit of
economic goals, particularly those related to their involvement in a capitalist economy (Arce
2003, Long and Villarreal 1998, 2001). The extended use of economic metaphors to address
livelihood issues tends to obcure the complexity of issues entailed. Individuals, families, social
groups, institutions and communities are involved in a range of activities including, for
example, entertainment and building relationships which cannot be packaged into market
concerns. As Wallman (1982) writes: Livelihood is never just a matter of finding or making
shelter, transacting money, getting food to put on the family table or to exchange on the market
place. It is equally a matter of ownership and circulation of information, the management of
skills and relationships, and the affirmation of personal significance [involving issues of self-
esteem] and group identity. The tasks of meeting obligations, of security, identity and status,
and organising time are as crucial to livelihood as bread and shelter. Such relationships my or
may not affect, or be affected by, economic activity, and one cannot attribute them market
value a priori.
On the other hand, it calls for the need to consider a wide array of values and institutions
involved in market interaction, including social and cultural concerns and patterns of
interdependencies between the needs, interests and values of particular groups of individuals.
Political issues, welfare considerations and ethical matters are often brought into what appear
to be purely economic or financial criteria. Transactions in commodity and other markets are
sustained by values and non-commodity relations that vary according to the field of activity
and the interests that are played out (Long and Villarreal 1998, 2001, Hutchinson 1996, de
Haan 1994, Arce and Marsden 1993 and Arce 1997). They must be viewed as the outcome of
the series of interlocking encounters and relationships that take place between the various
exchange actors who endeavour to defend and reproduce their own enterprises, livelihoods,
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
6/21
and cultural repertoires (Long and Villarreal 2001). Therefore, in exploring the issue of capital
in microenterprises, a crucial concern is how assets are weighed and measured and how their
perceived virtues and attributes are made relevant in the context of economic transactions and
their evaluation. One cannot assume that exchange value is determined by the utility value of
buyers and consumers. (Long 2001).
Irene Tinker (1995) points out that women entrepreneurs work within the frame of a human
economy which addresses social, cultural and familial angles of peoples livelihoods, and that
these dimensions are not considered in contemporary paradigms used in the evaluation of
microenterprises. Her point is well taken, but it would be misleading to categorize womens
work a priori as pertaining to a different economy, which can take us to separating off
analytically the world of the poor and marginalized from the world of the wealthy and
dominant with its consequent mystification. We have to consider the ways in which a
capitalist economy inhabits and survives on human and social resources and categories as well
as financial ones. And financial concerns have by now become very important for the social
groups involved in development enterprises.
To be sure, human dimensions are taken into account in the now trendy notion of social
capital, which is used to address social resources that yield benefits such as improved material
conditions, increased income and social status. This is not difficult to conceptualize in todays
world, where everyday parlance strongly incorporates economic markers to address growth
and investment in human, intellectual and organizational resources, not only within
businesses and coroporations, but also in universities, governments, and social clubs. Notions
of social, environmental and cultural capital have eagerly been taken up in the development
scenario, where projects and enterprises depend on the good will of donors and other stake
holders who are keen to measure the cost- benefit ratio of their investments.
To think of social, environmental, kin, friendship and other resources as capital is to recognize
their potential to produce profit in terms that can in some way be made equivalent to financial
gain. But the relevant issue is how such equivalences are defined, weighed and attributed
value. As De Soto contends, our conceptualization of their economic qualities (or the
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
7/21
conceptualization we are able to impose on others) is crucial, because such resources need to
be mobilized and leveraged. However, one has to take into account that this can only be done
within fields where their value is acknowledged and can be negotiated in accordance to
recognized standards, rules and expectations.
Here, money does not always function as the standard measure of exchange value. Differential
profits are assessed by reference to a combination of what we prefer to call social currencies
whose value is gauged within particular fields of signification. Social currencies refer us to
different frameworks of calculation that co-exist and interrelate in the definition of value
equivalences. This allows us to analyze the ongoing struggles and negotiations over value
between different sets of actors involved. In such processes one finds that similar monetary
denominations can be valued differently, and dissimilar ones might be judged equivalent. 1
In what follows, I aim to identify the processes that come into play in the attribution of value
to resources of peasant women in Western Mexico such that they are converted or not into
active capital in the framework of social policies and processes of planned intervention.
Seed capital
The women that formed part of a beekeeping group in a small town of Western Mexico were
not the poorest in the community, although their family income was then on or slightly
below what would be considered the poverty line. The government programme offered the
group seed money to establish an enterprise, following federal stipulations that rural women
should be provided the opportunity to become entrepreneurs. They had been invited to join by
the local authority, and accepted, although most would have preferred to stay at home and look
after their children and husbands, or carry out small income earning jobs they engaged in, such
as sewing, peddling Avon and Tupperware, or cooking meals to sell in the evening.
They attended their monthly meetings smelling of soap and shampoo, wearing clean, ironed
dresses, and at times jeans, but their situation was by no means ideal. Their husbands, a
number of whom possessed land, worked in the fields all day and their income was never quite
1 Long and Villarreal 1998, 2001
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
8/21
enough to cover all their basic needs, including sending their children to school, clothing them,
covering transportation costs, etc. None had bank accounts and only two had reached
secondary schooling, although all but one could read and write.
Regional officers were particularly interested in the consolidation of this group. Their reports
needed to show gender related activities. Many such groups had been formed in the country, a
number of which included women in less advantageous conditions, but most of these groups
dissolved, since the members needed to work for a daily wage. And obtaining profit, or at least
payment for their work was, in the best of cases, only possible after a couple of years when the
enterprise took off.
But Socorro, one of the eldest members of the beekeeping group, laughingly narrated her
groups decision to choose honey production
... the woman officer asked us whether we wanted chickens, or pigs or goats, or a sewing
group. We said bees because we thought we could just leave them and they would work on
their own. All we had to do was harvest the honey! Sewing? No, the material is too expensive,
and then we would have to go out and sell garments. Chickens, we would have to work hard
every day, and if the price of the feed went up, we would go down. Goats would have been
nice, then maybe we could have divided them up between ourselves, instead of having to work
as a group, but no, goats are very destructive, they jump fences and get into the men's fields,
and we didnt want problems with them. So we chose bees, but now we regret it, because we
constantly get stung!
The group had been prompted to select an economic activity and join the credit scheme. They
had weighed their options carefully, considering the implications of their decision for
themselves in their relations to their families and the community. They wanted a money-
earning enterprise, but did not want to jeopardize the time they needed to spend on family
commitments, nor did they want to trigger conflicts with other people in the village.
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
9/21
For the government officers involved, as is the case with many development workers around
the world, it did not matter too much whether the women chose bees, chickens or goats. In
encouraging them to engage in economic activities, their aims were to help the women help
themselves out of poverty, providing the seeds for what should become a sound economic
enterprise. Pigs, chickens, cows or goats were generally classified in a standardized way as
initial capital, as resources that would reproduce themselves with a bit of enthusiasm and
hard work. Their value resided in their potential for rendering incremental monetary benefits.
However, this was an inaccuracy that could have serious economic and social consequences.
While the prices of inputs entailed, the amount of work involved and the possible price they
would acquire in the market were definitely crucial, value was not only measured in monetary
terms. The makeup of capital associated with chickens was different from that of cows, bees or
goats.
Cows, chickens and piggy- banks
I expect we will all agree that it is better for rural women to own cows than to simply have
chickens, but I was truly disappointed when, during an evaluation- for- planning meeting with
government officers in the region, one of the local leaders proudly stated that a large
percentage of the (largely male) groups in his municipality had dutifully paid the loans they
had acquired to buy cattle some of them ahead of time, even if it had meant that they sold
their wives chickens to raise the money! His statement was applauded by all of those present
except for myself.
Paying loans in time was assessed as an achievement, considering that many of the producers
involved had come to lag in their reimbursements to previous government loans. It was
generally accepted that this had to do with a lack of financial culture among the rural
population. They had become used to receiving charitable funds and they needed to enhance
their entrepreneurial skills and operate in the real world meaning learning to work for the
market and paying for money at market value.
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
10/21
While I agreed that producers must pay their loans, I could not accept the fact that this should
be done with womens chickens. Having worked in that region for an extended period of time,
I knew that chickens were an important element in sustaining the livelihoods of rural families.
Eggs and poultry were one of the most important sources of protein and were also crucial in
sustaining social relations. It was generally embarrassing for a Mexican family to have no food
to offer visiting relatives, and a fried egg was often the solution. Moreover, poultry were
resources in the womens domain. They generally decided when to slaughter or sell a chicken
and which one to get rid of: whether it was a particular hen that no longer laid eggs or one
that was not good for looking after her chicks and also decided on the destiny of the money
obtained. And eggs were borrowed and sold between neighbours, thus strengthening social
links and feelings of solidarity.
In turn, cows tended to be thrust into the mens domain. Although women might have them
registered to their name, and might even look after them, taking them out to graze and bringing
them home in the evening, milking them, and curing their illnesses, they would most often
consult their husbands, sons or male relatives before selling a calf. And if no other urgent need
was at stake, men would be allowed a degree of freedom as to how to spend the money. At
times this could mean investing in a vehicle, paying for a son or daughters schooling, fixing
the house, or going off to drink with friends. They could also be slaughtered for a special
occasion this would be a demonstration of status for the family. Too often, however, calves
were sold before they had the desirable weight in order to pay hospital fees, medicine, or a
debt.
On the other hand, pigs were the common stereotype for saving. Like in many places around
the world, small money- boxes have been modeled on pigs. Piggy banks symbolized the ways
in which families saved pesos until they became a significant amount of hard currency.
Rural families frequently raised pigs on scraps of leftover food, weeds and, if possible, maize,
and, when full grown, would either slaughter the hog to keep the lard thus saving money in
the near future, since they would not have to buy it ate and shared part of the meat with
friends and neighbours and sold meat and crackling. Or they would sell the hogs to pay debts,
acquire a piece of furniture or cover other important expenses.
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
11/21
While chickens were generally classified as short- term capital, pigs tended to be placed in the
category of mid- term. They provided a small savings account, a security set aside for relevant
expenditure. However, unless a family possessed a pig or chicken farm, they were not
considered capitalized. It was generally expected that the proceeds from small numbers of
chickens and hogs would go down the drain of daily consumption. They might provide
better standards of living, but would rarely constitute sound capital.
This was not the case of cattle, which, in Mexico, have almost constituted a synonym for
wealth. If we dont have a cow or two to our name said a farmer I feel dispossessed, as
if we have nothing. Cattle were a longer- term security as well as an investment that could
render more profits. While male calves could be sold to cover expenses, a family would aim at
using the profits gained to buy more cattle, particularly female calves, which were set aside for
reproduction. This was capital that would multiply and expand.
But the mechanisms of operation some of these cattle raising enterprises engaged in did not
differ markedly from that of piggy banks since funds were slowly and painfully saved to
increase the kitty except that this kitty was larger and it provided more status. And it
tended to be tighter. While the tendency with hogs was to break the piggy bank within a
medium term to use the funds in one way or another, cattle in these more traditional
enterprises was a money box that was only opened for big occasions or urgent needs. Quite
frequently, families would forgo daily consumption needs in order to maintain their cows.
More than a few women complained that all they obtained from their herds of cattle was the
milk they manage to salvage if the cows grazed near the village and perhaps some cheese they
themselves fabricated on the milk that was not sold. But their children went without shoes and
they hardly ever tasted the meat, since their husbands one aim was to increase the herd. This
was understandable, since a large herd could provide the basis for power and authority in the
local scenario, which was quite attractive for someone who resented having always been under
someone elses foot.
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
12/21
Although capital invested in cattle could be fungible owners did sometimes sell cows to buy
vehicles or invest in building their homes, and the status cattle owners acquired was useful to
access credit in local shops as well as larger institutions such as banks this was not quite the
fungibility required in todays entrepreneurial scenarios, where the flexibility to move quickly
between one product and the other, to translate one kind of capital to another, is the key to
success. In this sense, their cattle was to a large degree dead capital to use De Sotos (2000)
way of describing many of the resources possessed by the poor.
What I am trying to say is not that development programmes should be oriented to chickens
rather than cows, but that they constitute different forms of capital, they move within different
circuits and render differential benefits. The economic things they are expected to produce
include social, cultural and symbolic benefits.
Local currencies
A range of social values were intertwined with, and to a degree determined, the monetary
value that was accorded to a particular good. Hence, 50 pesos earned from a chicken, which
were esteemed high, were not the same as 50 pesos that were extracted from the sale of a cow.
One was considered a large chunk of petty money, to be used for food and basic
consumption, and the other, a small fringe of big money, perhaps a leftover after covering
important payments which could be destined why not? to give the money holder a small
break, a bit of pampering to compensate for hard work and sacrifices.
There were, to be sure, several categories to be taken into account in the case of cows and
chickens. Milk from cows was frequently stashed for daily expenses. Squandering milk money
on drink could be judged severely, while the sale of a calf could be set aside for partying. This
was most clearly the case with the profits from special breeds of chickens, such as fighting
cocks. Fighting cocks were a gamble, a lottery ticket which, when won, was worth a
celebration. And these were classified within mens domain. Although women were frequently
expected to feed and look after them, they would rarely include the proceeds these might
generate as part of the family income.
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
13/21
It was not at all infrequent to hear peasant women complaining about having to tend fighting
cocks or look after cattle, yet they continued doing it. Such submissiveness, however, was not
always straight- forward subordination. Keeping a husband happy and looking after his
interests could, in certain contexts, render social profits in terms of consolidation of kin
networks and solidarity grids. It could entail a form of social collateral, safeguarding the mans
honor and dignity, which in turn produced status for the family, which was useful in procuring
loans, keeping clients, and receiving gifts, for example. Having a husband was itself important
for the upkeep of social networks and status. It was generally signified as security for the
family, the woman could increase her solidarity networks and there was a degree to which it
made the woman less vulnerable to malicious gossip. Thus social links including marital and
kin relationships were an important asset.
But although assets (be they social, cultural or financial) might generate added worth, they
could also reduce it. For example, money coming from a person linked to a family associated
to withcraft tainted the reputation of the bearer; having social connections to drug traffickers
aroused fear in some groups, and womens submissiveness to their husbands was not
considered a positive trait within development enterprises. This, of course, had to do with
differential currencies in processes of valuation.
Economic things
Socorro stated that, as a group, they would have liked to raise goats. Goats do not require a
great deal of attention, they feed on practically anything grass from the hillside, leaves and
bushes. They could be easily divided among the members of the group, each of whom could
use child labour to look after them. Also, goats reproduce quickly, and goat meat is highly
valued in the region, so they could obtain good profits. But goats are problematic because they
generate conflicts with farmers. They jump fences quite easily, and gobble valuable crops.
In local currencies, the social price of raising goats was too high for the women to take a risk.
Their links with much needed solidarity networks would be at stake, as would their political
space in terms of relations with local authorities. They would likely have problems with their
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
14/21
own husbands, who had their crops in the adjacent fields, and who would not want to have
their women involved in conflicts.
In settling on bees, however, the women also had to consider local currencies. With the arrival
of the so called African bee, which was much more aggressive, they were forced to move
their apiaries to distant places so as to not risk the possibility that the bees attack farmers or
farm animals. But more than that, honey from bees is largely considered an act of providence.
It depends on whether and how wild flowers blossom, whether it rains and whether not too
many predators such as ants and toads reproduce. And if it is an act of providence, they
must be thankful and show it with generosity to neighbours and friends. Hence, the women
gave away jars of honey and pieces of honeycomb to government officers, local authorities,
kin and fellow citizens at least in the initial stages. When in later seasons the produce was
not so good, more than a few blamed it on the womens greed and lack of generosity.
In this case, as in many other development projects, other values should also be taken into
account. Government officers expected the women to develop organizational skills and gender
consciousness. It was hoped that the activity would help the women reconceptualize their role
as women and thus change power relations at home and in the village. It was not just an
economic enterprise, but a social one, where the seeds to be cultivated were not simply of a
monetary nature. Based on the conviction that such values can only grow within a collective
enterprise, they should organize as a group, follow democratic procedures and overcome petty
conflicts amongst the members. The latter was perhaps the most difficult, since the women
belonged to different kin groupings in the village, where long- held quarrels were latent, but
the group did develop democratic skills, they came to value their identity as women in a
different way, and to move in the world of government offices and beekeepers organizations
instead of only the village, though, after more than 10 years, they have hardly earned money
from the beekeeping enterprise.
Thus, the range of resources and assets brought into the beekeepers everyday life endeavors is
vast. As I have mentioned, it would be a mistake to package them all in the label of capital,
assuming that they are introduced as an investment, with the expectation of profit. Yet, we
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
15/21
cannot ignore the fact that many social, cultural and experiential elements are important
contributing factors to make an enterprise profitable. The beekeeping venture did not turn out
to be a model of profitability in monetary terms, but the women did resort to contacts with
other beekeepers in the region when they could not solve a problem, which helped them keep
the enterprise afloat. They expanded their networks, gained experience, and learned that they
have the right to access government credit schemes, as well as other programmes for
improving their homes, and scholarships for their sons and daughters schooling, some of
which they have taken up.
There was, however, one activity that did not surface for external eyes. This was constructed
on the basis of their needs, capabilities, experience and information. They had two harvests a
year, which geneally yielded almost the equivalent to the amount due to the bank for that
period. But their payments were to be made on a two year basis, so they had to hold on to the
harvest money for relatively long periods. Quietly, the group decided to lend themselves the
money with a very low interest rate. In this way, individual members were able to access funds
under better conditions than with local moneylenders, and, when payment was due, they had
slightly increased the amount to pay the bank. Although the amounts they borrowed were
small, the value of having access to funds when families needed them was significant. The
economic things they obtained from their enterprise cannot only be measured in monetary
terms.
A few years later the women abandoned beekeeping, but they continued participating in local
credit and savings associations and investing in chickens and pigs at home.
The issue of capitalization
In retrospect, one can see that there was another important resource being negotiated in the
case of the beekeepers. This has to do with their identity as poor rural women. Such
identification proved useful to access government funds for the enterprise. Although the
beekeepers did not seek out this particular programme, on several occasions they did
purposefuly portay an image of poor women (which they were, of course) to obtain support for
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
16/21
their enterprise. This is nothing out of the ordinary. Successful entrepreneurs capitalise on their
identities and prestige (or the prestige of their product). They build an image and profit from it.
In development practice such stereotyped image of the poor is important. It fuels motivation
for practitioners as well as donors. The poor are portrayed as those who do not have: lacking is
the quintessence of their identity, the definition of their being. Poverty is about deficit of
resources, unfulfilment of needs, exclusion, lack of access, of control and of power. And
deficit calls for provision. From this viewpoint, financial resources, education, technology,
access, discernment and empowerment must be conferred to the poor.
The problem is that the notion of poor dooms the bearer to a subordinate, powerless status,
and the notion of provider predestines the bearer to a higher status, where power and control
are accessible. Dearth is thus woven discursively into particular relations of power,
subordination and status.
Impoverishment can be brought about by lack of employment, by having to invest their meagre
profits in health, for example, due to the propagation of sickness and an insufficiency of
clinics, or in transport due to lack of proper roads. It has been brought about through processes
of colonisation, monopolisation of resources and seizing, as well as the workings of financial
and commodity markets. And it continues to be reinforced by biased economic policies, bad
planning and mismanagement. But it has also been brought about by distrust towards those
considered poor: poverty is all too frequently associated to ignorance, filth, dishonesty and
violence, and such associations close up possibilities of access to information and decision
making circles. It has been made possible by lack of legal frameworks to protect their rights,
by processes of corruption which foster twisted leaderships at local level, and by the peoples
diminished capacity for political agency, whose organisations have not been able to represent
the interests of their groups in defence of their resources. Political agency has been limited due
to lack of information, discrimination processes and lack of technological and market options.
To be sure, the beekeepers were not passive victims of such power inequalities. They managed
to use their image as vulnerable women to a degree of advantage. However, there was a limit
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
17/21
as to how far they could go with the profits obtained from this identity. Such practices tend to
reproduce, rather than change the conditions that one would like to see transformed. But the
point is that stereotypical models of poverty gloss over the complex interweaving of haves and
have-nots, the ways in which people gamble with their assets and liabilities, which are of
utmost relevance for the reproduction of poverty as well as for the construction of alternatives
to it. An analysis of the issue of poverty requires stepping back from stereotypical notions of
the poor and examining the ways in which those identified as destitute deploy resources and
act in pursuing their livelihoods. Resources here include material assets such as land and other
possessions, but also immaterial ones like social identity.
In this scenario, we are less interested in capital itself, and should be more concerned with
processes of capitalization. Gaining economic control is not about stockpiling resources, or
about proper registration in accountancy books, but entails the use of material and immaterial
resources (including social, cultural and symbolic aspects). Until recently, it was believed that
savings were the key to capitalisation. However, the relevance of intangibles such as
knowledge, clientele, image and prestige have come to occupy many pages in management
books and are the topic of conferences for entrepreneurs. It is clear that it is not only the
amount of resources that makes for wealth or poverty, but the possibility of usufruct, of
transforming them into a steady source of food and other indispensable goods.
It is also clear that capitalization is not reduced to accumulation. It has to do with profiting
from the value attributed to a particular resource. Hence, a crucial issue that we have
underlined above is how assets and identities are weighed and measured and how their
perceived virtues and attributes are made relevant.
And in todays world, the range of what can be identified as an asset yielding monetary
benefits seems to have increased, or at least, diverse resources are quite explicitly priced and
allocated in ways that were previously un- thought of. This compels social scientists to
reassess the notions of ownership and entitlements, particularly the ways in which these
provide the basis upon which poverty is defined.
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
18/21
Bees, chickens, pigs, cows ... and social relations. How can they become capital and
produce economic things?
In De Sotos view, the difference between dead and active capital is quite clear. One circulates
in the market and produces profit, and the other does not engage and therefore does not
produce gain.
But I hope to have shown that
1.- Gain is not always measured in monetary terms. The makeup of capital is more complex, as
De Soto himself recognizes. The material base in terms of direct cash is no longer the main
currency in international markets, which, with the turn towards a more virtual existence,
recognize pre-existing and new currencies framed in terms of information and trust (Hart 2001,
Weatherford 1997, Forrester 2000). Activating capital, in this scenario, involves the
manipulation of symbols, the imposition of interpretations and anticipation of the future.
In the same way, active capital, in rural Mexico, involves different currencies other than
solely the monetary. As long as cattle continues to be a marker of status, men will continue
preferring this alternative to other, perhaps more profitable, ones. And women will tend to
weigh the costs and benefits of goats, pigs and chickens, calculating in local currencies. It is
not that they are not interested in money, or in becoming modern entrepreneurs, but
anticipation of risks and possible conflicts are strong considerations.
2.- Not all of peoples resources are or can be visualized as capital, and , although there are
many intangibles that can be articulated into market circuits into producing gain, they do not
automatically do so. Hence, the idea that social capital can be injected from the outside is not
only misplaced, but can be dangerous, triggering processes in unwanted directions.
3.- It is clear that capital is not a build up of assets, but their mobilization. To accumulate is not
to capitalize. Actually, the same goes for social assets. It is not the number of social ties that
count, but the way these are signified and used. Here calculations and predictions vis a vis the
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
19/21
future structure of opportunities (where processes of construction of image and identification
are crucial) enter into the equation.
4.- Hence one has to focus on the processes of capitalization. We have detailed the complexity
involved in the micro entrepreneurial activities of a group of women. To operate a small
enterprise they must bring into play a host of resources, weighed and assessed in terms of
different currencies. Such resources are not lifeless, and, although they are signified and
weighed with heterogeneous dimensions in mind, they must not be separated off as pertaining
to a different system. What must be clear is that social, cultural, human, ethical and other
dimensions also enter into the equation in profit-making. They are not only brought into play
as assets, but also as deterrants to the posibility of capitalizing.
5.- While one has to acknowledge that power relations lead to forms of exclusion and make
capitalization almost impossible for the poor, it is equally important to recognize that power is
commonly based on reified forms of categorization that are credited with a quantification of
forces and resources, and this is closely related to the ways in which social and symbolic
resources are deployed and made significant .
In closing, let us say that poverty as is depicted in thousands of pages of academic and non-
academic literature is linked to mechanisms of distribution, exclusion and access. If one
concentrates primarily on the final picture, the obvious concern is the allocation of resources
themselves. The question concerns who owns what: whether the poor possess land, cattle or
other forms of capital that can produce food and satisfy their basic needs, and if they have
technology and other means to make that production viable. A great deal of emphasis tends to
be placed on the need to provide the missing resources (i.e through land redistribution,
education, technological training, credit schemes, etc).
To come to an understanding of poverty, we need to delve into the underlying processes
by which resources including land, labour, credit and aid, water and cash, but also
knowledge, skills, social networks, organisation and moral entitlements are accessed,
organized and negotiated, recognizing the range of social and cultural currencies that enter into
play in economic transactions. Analyzing their mechanisms of operation helps us understand
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
20/21
the ways in which people juggle with diverse assets and liabilities and the forms of social
compensation they devise to cope with uncertainty, so crucial to the workings of their
economic life.
References
Arce, Alberto (1997) globalization and food objects in H. De Haan and N.Long (eds) Images
and realities of rural life. Wageningen Perspectives on Rural Transformations. Assen:
Van Gorcum.
Arce, Alberto (2003) Value contestations in development interventions: Community
development and sustainable livelihoods approaches in Community Development
Journal Vol 38 No. 3. July. Pp. 199- 212
Arce, A. and Marsden, T. (1993) the Social Construction of International Food: A new
research agendaEconomic Geography, 69: 293 - 311
De Haan, H.J. (1994)In the Shadow of the tree: Kinship, Property and Inheritance among
Farm Families. Amsterdam. Het Spinhuis.
De Soto, Hernando (2000) The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and
fails everywhere else. New York. Basic Books
Forrester, Viviane (2000)El Horror Econmico. Mxico. Fondo de Cultura Econmica.
Hart, Keith (2001)Money in an unequal world. Texere. 1- 58799 -075- X
Hutchinson, S.E. (1996) Blood, Cattle and Cash; the commodification of Nuer values in S.E.
HutchinsonNuer Dilemmas: Coping with Woney, War and the State. Berkeley, LosAngeles and London. University of California Press.
Long, N (1977)An introduction to the sociology of rural development. London. Tavistock
- (1984) (ed) Family and Work in Rural Societies. Perspectives on non-wage labour.
London. Tavistock.
- (2001)Development Sociology. Actor Perspectives. London. Routledge
Long, N. and Villarreal, M. (1998) Small product, big issues: value contestations and culturalidentities in cross-border commodity networks inDevelopment and Change 29 (4)
October 1998: 725 50.
-
7/31/2019 Striving to Make Capital Do
21/21
Long and Villarreal (2001) Webs of commitments and debt: the significance of money and social
currencies in commodity networks in Long: Development Sociology. London, Routledge
Reich Robert: Lconomie mondialise, Paris, Dunod. 1993.
Soros, George (1999)La Crisis del Capitalismo Global: La sociedad abierta en peligro. Mxico.Plaza y Jans.
Tinker, Irene (1995) The human economy of microentrepreneurs in Dignard Louise and Havet,Jose: Women in Micro- and Small- Scale enterprise Development. London, Westview.
Wallman, S. and associates (1982)Living in South London: Perspectives on Battersea 1871
1981. Aldershot: Grower, for the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Weatherford, Jack (1997) The History of Money. Three Rivers Press. 0-609-80172-4
Zelizer, Viviana (1997) The Social Meaning of Money. New Jersey, Princeton.