Exchange theory Video1 Introduction to Social Exchange Theory 1
Exchange theory - are mistakenEcologically Unequal Exchange Author : R. The theory of ecologically unequal exchange posits that core or northern consumption and capital accumulation is based on peripheral or southern environmental degradation and extraction. In other words, structures of social and environmental inequality between the Global North and Global South are founded in the extraction of materials from, as well as displacement of waste to, the South. This volume represents a set of tightly interlinked papers with the aim to assess ecologically unequal exchange and to move it forward. Chapters are organised into three main sections: theoretical foundations and critical reflections on ecologically unequal exchange; empirical research on mining, deforestation, fisheries, and the like; and strategies for responding to the adverse consequences associated with unequal ecological exchange. exchange theory.
A gift economy or gift culture is a mode of exchange where valuables are not sold, but rather given without an explicit agreement for immediate or future rewards. The nature of gift economies is the subject of a foundational debate exchange theory anthropology. Malinowski's debate with the French anthropologist Marcel Mauss quickly established the complexity of "gift exchange" and introduced a series of technical terms such as reciprocityexchange theory possessionsand presentation to distinguish between the different forms of exchange.
According to anthropologists Maurice Bloch and Jonathan Parry, it is the unsettled relationship between market and non-market exchange that attracts the most attention. Some authors argue that gift economies build community,  while markets harm community relationships. exchange theory
Gift exchange is distinguished from other forms of exchange by a number of principles, such as the form of property rights governing the articles exchanged; whether gifting forms a distinct "sphere of exchange" that can be characterized as an "economic system"; and the character of the social relationship that continue reading gift exchange establishes. Gift ideology in highly commercialized societies differs from the "prestations" typical of non-market societies.
Gift economies also differ from related phenomena, such as common property regimes and the exchange of non-commodified labour. According exchange theory anthropologist Jonathan Parry, discussion on the nature exchange theory gifts, and of a separate sphere of gift exchange that would constitute an economic system, has been plagued by the ethnocentric use of modern, western, market society-based conception of the gift applied as if it were a cross-cultural, pan-historical universal. However, he claims that anthropologists, through analysis of a variety of cultural and historical forms of exchange, have established that no universal practice exists. Gift-giving is a form of transfer of property rights over particular objects.
The nature of those property rights varies from society to society, from culture to culture, and are not universal. The nature of gift-giving is thus altered by the type of property regime in place. Property is not a thingbut a relationship amongst people about things. Anthropologists analyze these relationships in terms of a variety of actors' individual or corporate " bundle of rights " over objects. Although the book is a commodity, bought and sold, it has not been completely "alienated" from exchange theory creator who maintains a hold over it; the owner of the book is limited exchange theory what he can do with the book by the rights of the creator. The gifts given in Kula exchange still remain, in some respects, the property of the giver.
In the example used exchange theory, "copyright" is one of those bundled rights that regulate the exchange theory and disposition of a book. When many people hold rights over the same objects gifting has very different implications than the gifting of private property; only some of the rights in that object may be transferred, leaving that object still tied to its corporate owners.
Anthropologist Annette Weiner http://rectoria.unal.edu.co/uploads/tx_felogin/benjamin-franklin-s-theory-of-life-and/dystopian-characteristics.php to these types of objects as " inalienable possessions " and to the process as "keeping while giving".
Malinowski's study of the Kula ring  became the subject of debate with the French anthropologist, Marcel Mauss, author of " The Gift " "Essai sur le don", Malinowski argued exchang reciprocity is an exchange theory part of gifting, and there is no "free gift" without expectation. In contrast, Mauss emphasized that the gifts were not between individuals, someone who is monotheistic between representatives of larger collectives. These gifts were a "total prestation", a service provided out of obligation, like "community service". Given the stakes, Mauss asked "why anyone would give them away?
Parry believes that much of the confusion and resulting debate was due to a bad translation. Mauss appeared to be arguing that a return gift is given to maintain the relationship between givers; a failure to return a gift ends the relationship and the promise of any future exchange theory.
Mauss' concept of "total prestations" was further developed thheory Annette Weiner, who revisited Malinowski's fieldsite in the Trobriand Islands. Her critique was twofold: first, Trobriand Island society is matrilineal, and women hold much economic and political power, but their exchange theory were ignored by Malinowski.
Secondly, she developed Mauss' argument about reciprocity and the "spirit of the gift" in terms of " inalienable possessions : the paradox of keeping while giving".]