Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Verena La Mela
(University of Heidelberg)
Edward Schatz (University of Toronto)
Send message to Convenors
- Format:
- Panel
- Theme:
- Anthropology & Archaeology
Abstract:
What means giving in a Central Asian context? How do individuals and communities in Central Asia, along with those connected to the region, engage in the giving economy? What are the motivations behind giving, as well as its social, political, and cultural implications? Which concepts of community emerge through giving?
In this panel, we consider the multifaceted concept of giving within Central Asia. Our discussion will cover a broad spectrum of perspectives, considering the spaces and times in which giving occurs. We will analyze the impact of significant transformations, such as marketization, migration, digitization, and authoritarian rule, on these spaces. Additionally, we will address how the increased perceived religiosity and natural disasters are reshaping the landscape of giving in Central Asia.
These factors collectively influence the evolving dynamics and challenges of the giving economy, affecting patterns of philanthropy, donation, community support, and resource distribution. The panel will also explore shifting forms of sociality and morality in the face of these changes.
Our objective is to provide a comprehensive understanding of what giving means i Central Asia today, considering how value emerges through these acts for different stakeholders and in varying contexts.
Accepted papers:
Abstract:
In spring 2024, northern Kazakhstan experienced extraordinary spring flooding (pavodki), with extensive damage and massive displacement of local populations, especially in the Ural River basin. Across the border in Orenburg, Russia, the same pavodki caused similar damage and similar displacement of local populations. In Kazakhstan, a huge upswell of philantropic and volunteer efforts ensued to help those recovering from the flooding. In Russia, no such upswell occurred; reports were that affected populations hoped to rely on the government for assistance.
Why did the same calamity produce very different responses from society in Kazakhstan and in Russia? Not only was the calamity similar in the two cases; both cases exhibit similar institutions, have a similar macro-economic profile, enjoy similar levels of overall wealth, and have broadly similar demographic characteristics.
In this paper, I argue that the varied responses tell us much about the variety of authoritarian regimes. Whereas classic treatments of authoritarian rule emphasize the institutions of repression, such a lens cannot help us to appreciate the various ways that the authoritarian regime relates to society. I suggest that the Kazakhstani response was conditioned by factors largely absent in the Russian case: a) notions of kinship, b) an acute awareness of socio-economy inequality and injustice, and c) a recognition of the frailties of authoritarian rule.
Abstract:
Increasing marketization has been a double-edged transformation in Kazakhstan’s single-industry towns. Whereas it has created opportunities for a some (entrepreneurial) inhabitants, many residents of single-industry towns have been struggling in the face of privatization and de-industrialization accompanying marketization after the collapse of the Soviet Union. In spite of all odds, some of these towns have recently been regenerating. One of them is the former mining town Tekeli in Kazakhstan’s Southeast. Based on long-term ethnographic fieldwork, I argue in this presentation that ingrained everyday practices of giving – particularly home-grown food – have played a significant role in (post)industrial communities’ ability to endure and recover. Unlike other common types of transactions in Central Asia such as those related to the "economy of favors”, I suggest, (food) giving practices are not driven by utilitarian calculations and an obligation to return. Rather, it is the enjoyment arising from making a valued and abundant good available to a broader circle of people that motivates these practices. In Tekeli, sharing home-grown food helps the urban residents carve out niches of enjoyable sociality in the context of rapid marketization that is perceived by many as being characterized by insecurity, precarity and moral degradation.
Abstract:
Gift giving is a common practice in the social and economic life of Kazakhstan and, more broadly, Central Asia. However, giving is not limitless. In spring 2024, extensive flooding hit large parts of Northern Kazakhstan, prompting calls for donations to support the affected population. Despite the appeals, scepticism arose: Residents in south-eastern Kazakhstan expressed concerns that significant portions of the donated funds were misappropriated. They revealed a reluctance to donate money under such circumstances.
This paper, drawing on exploratory field research on foundations in Kazakhstan and long-term ethnographic field research on trade across the Sino-Kazakh border, examines local alternatives for pooling funds and investing in charitable activities. The study investigates the channels through which donations are managed and identifies key administrators, including heads of local neighbourhoods (zhigit beshi) and welfare bloggers. These local charity practices provide insights into the organization of communities based on gift giving and the critical roles of trust and transparency. Moreover, they shed light on the significance of scale in donation practices.
Empirically, this paper shows how practices of giving in Kazakhstan are facilitated by locally recognized individuals. Conceptually, it advances our understanding of the mechanisms through which local charity practices operate, thereby contributing to the broader discourse on community organization and the socio-economic dynamics of gift giving in Central Asia.
Abstract:
Civil society organizations have the potential to play an important role in challenging government in authoritarian regimes. The state, on the other hand, can react through repressive measures or use civil society to legitimize and consolidate the status quo.
This paper therefore examines the impact of a change in political leadership on CSOs in two states, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. Using data gathered from a range of stakeholders including civil society representatives, international donors and independent mass media, we argue that Kazakhstan, under President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, has created a liberal façade of cooperation with CSOs when, in reality, there is covert repression and manipulation. This is an attempt to create legitimization of the state in the eyes of the international community. By contrast, Kyrgyzstan, under President Sadyr Japarov, has shifted towards overt subjugation of CSOs, seeing them as a threat to his leadership. We use the broader term CSO (civil society organisation) to incorporate NGOs, or non-governmental organizations, which are typically non-profits entities independent of government control. A change in political leadership within Central Asia radically changed state-civil society relations.