The interdependence of relational and material wealth inequality in Pemba, Zanzibar

Abstract

The extent of inequality in material wealth across different types of societies is well established. Less clear, however, is how material wealth is associated with relational wealth, and the implications of such associations for material wealth inequality. Theory and evidence suggest that material wealth both guides, and is patterned by, relational wealth. While existing comparative studies typically assume complementarity between different types of wealth, such associations may differ for distinct kinds of relational wealth. Here, we first review the literature to identify how and why different forms of relational wealth may align. We then turn to an analysis of household-level social networks (food sharing, gender-specific friendship and gender-specific co-working networks) and material wealth data from a rural community in Pemba, Zanzibar. We find that (i) the materially wealthy have most relational ties, (ii) the associations between relational and material wealth—as well as relational wealth more generally—are patterned by gender differences, and (iii) different forms of relational wealth have similar structural properties and are closely aligned. More broadly, we show how examining the patterning of distinct types of relational wealth provides insights into how and why inequality in material wealth remains muted in a community undergoing rapid economic change. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Evolutionary ecology of inequality’.

Toward an evolutionary ecology of (in)equality

“…Although any of the three forms of wealth noted above can be transmitted to descendants, material forms are generally more successfully inherited. These can include arable land, livestock, durable goods, resource patches, burrows, food caches, nesting sites and the like, as discussed in several papers in this issue [12][13][14]20,27,28]. However, embodied wealth such as skills or knowledge passed down from parents [27] or parental investment in offspring condition [29,30] can be important as well, contributing to developmental origins of inequality [30].…”

“…Although human populations do certainly exhibit reproductive skew [50], extreme forms of reproductive suppression and altruism such as in mole rats [20] and social insects [51] have little human counterpart. One key difference in the human case is attributed to enhanced paternity certainty and resultant paternal investment, resulting in a major expansion of kinship ties and the option of patrilineal as well as matrilineal networks and inheritance pathways [27,28,52,53]. In addition, ecological changes in the hominin lineage may have favoured paternal provisioning [54].…”

“…This differential access early in life can impose lifetime consequences for individuals [ 31 ]. Likewise, relational wealth such as social support from kin or allies can play critical roles in some cases [ 7 , 21 , 28 , 32 ].…”

“…Differences in both material and relational wealth impact social influence, although effects can clearly flow in both directions [ 21 , 32 ]. Effects of unequal wealth and power according to gender can be quite complex in both humans [ 27 , 28 ] and other species [ 20 , 87 , 88 ]. The uniquely developed degree of paternal investment and kinship reckoning in humans noted above creates its own set of variations involving matrilineal versus patrilineal inheritance of wealth and social status.…”