Translated most often as ‘relationships’ or ‘connections,’ guanxi is a sacrosanct concept for Westerners interested in China – I’ve never found it to have much applicability. The other day I wandered into the Hubei Provincial Intellectual Property Rights Bureau and immediately set up several interviews. This has sort of become the modus operandi of research* – approach stranger and gather information (of potentially dubious quality, albeit).

This isn’t to say relationships and introductions aren’t important, but rather that we (as foreigners interested in China) place far too much emphasis on the exoticism of guanxi, a concept that would otherwise simply be called social capital. Within the China context sociologists seem to have caught on – but in the business community this type of exoticism is used as a shield – why bother learning the language and cultural norms when you’ve convinced yourself it’s necessary that you need an “in” to accomplish anything?

continue reading

Tony’s update on his research has reminded me that I had originally intended my blogs to be about my research.  What an idea.  I’ve completed one land restitution case study, which is the Makuleke claim in Kruger National Park.  Right now I’m finishing up a draft of a similar land restitution case north of Durban.  I’m more excited about this second case because I’m trying to address what restitution really means, what expectations exist, and what it can accomplish.  The ANC has promoted land reform as a poverty alleviation tool, but restitution (the idea of “making things right” by addressing individual instances of dispossion under apartheid) is different from redistribution and land tenure reform.  Former Land Claims Commissioner, Cherryl Walker, has written about these questions and cautioned that land restitution should not be evaluated simply by the amount of land transferred, but by how the community is able to use the land, and hopefully, benefit from it.  I agree with her analysis, and I think the difficult part is that government can’t ensure that communities are “uplifted” by the restitution.  If a community is awarded 10,000 hectares of land in a rural area, semi-arid climate, where are community members supposed to work?  In what town?  Farming is difficult, particularly small scale farming for market.  What about water?  Transporting crops?  After this land restitution case, I’m starting work on land tenure issues in Jo’burg as part of an FMF study.

The original proposal for my grant was to ‘investigate mechanisms in place for dispute resolution in extralegal contexts. The lack of enforceable property regimes in China would seem to stand in staunch opposition to prevailing growth theories that emphasize institutional stability and rule of law.’

Well, turns out it doesn’t really work, and that rule of law is still developing. This may seem obvious; let’s remember that I’m both young and naive. The past month has been spent establishing contacts, finding spots to return to (for verbal interviews), and trying to assess the feasibility of gathering information about different aspects of migration and growth, broadly between: 1) development of institutions (labor disputes, primarily over garnished wages or industrial accidents); 2) rural land reform (as it encourages even more urbanization); and 3) impacts of population movements on ’soft’ infrastructure in cities (schools, hospitals, legal system). 

I’ll probably focus on the third for the time – it will afford a strong reason to volunteer at a migrant school. This has myriad benefits: not only can I fulfill my dream of being like Edward James Olmos*; I need to strengthen the warm and fuzzy portion of the resume now that they’re in charge. Furthermore, English is my only real skill, and I’ve heard it could make the difference for some migrants between a job as a laborer and a service person; so there’s a definite chance of some realized benefit.

continue reading