A House of One’s Own: The Moral Economy of Post-Disaster Aid in El Salvador by Alicia Sliwinski
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: A House of One’s Own: The Moral Economy of Post-Disaster Aid in El Salvador by Alicia Sliwinski Julie Cupples Alicia Sliwinski A House of One’s Own: The Moral Economy of Post-Disaster Aid in El Salvador. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2018. x + 251 pp. Illustrations, tables and index. $32.95 paper (ISBN 978-0-7735-5292-0); $110 cloth (ISBN 978-0-7735-5291-3); $32.95 electronic (ISBN 978-0-7735-5294-4) Alicia sliwinski’s book is a detailed and reflexive ethnographic account of the contradictory and difficult dynamics that underpin humanitarian assistance, especially food aid and housing provision, in the aftermath of disaster. It is based on in-depth and long-term fieldwork with a small group of survivors of the 2001 earthquakes in El Salvador who were enrolled in a self-help housing project in which they were expected to provide their labour in return for a house. The author aims to understand the social relations of power, the forms of identity construction and modes of humanitarianism that emerge in this context. She does so by mobilizing and developing two key concepts. The first is that of moral economy – the question of what the right thing is to do in this situation – and the second is that of the gift, focused here on the tension between what is a right to which one is entitled and what is a gift for which one should be grateful. In combination, these two concepts have substantial analytical purchase for understanding the post-disaster landscape. In exploring these issues, Sliwinski traverses a great deal of terrain, including the spiralling lack of trust, disaster-related forms of social categorisation, the complexities of community participation, the role of NGOs and religious organizations, and gender relations, themes that will be of interest to both disaster scholars and aid agencies engaged in disaster response and reconstruction initiatives. The key strength of the book is its analysis of the kinds of social dynamics engendered by the gift-giving and reconstruction process, in which survivors are also constructed as [End Page 294] victims, beneficiaries and unpaid labourers and must therefore assume or resist these identities. Rather than replicate tropes of suffering or victimhood, Sliwinski focuses on the (limited) agency of survivors to negotiate the situation in which they found themselves, as they encountered both the aid industry in situ and each other. The book poignantly captures the substantial challenges of living and working in such conditions and underscores how well-intentioned aid projects and aid workers often humiliate those they are supposed to help and thus contribute to the generation of feelings of mistrust. She also pays close attention to the gendered dynamics of disaster, in a way that avoids the simplification, essentialism, and reification of much work on the intersections of gender and disaster, and as such the book is an extremely useful addition to that literature. Sliwinksi raises important issues that have arisen in my own disaster research in Central America. As she recognizes, the legacies of conflict and civil war complicate the Central American region’s hazard and disaster susceptibility, and we must not divorce a disaster event from the longer-term political and structural conditions that produce vulnerabilities. But this book also encouraged me to reflect anew on work I did two decades ago on a post-Hurricane Mitch housing project in Nicaragua, where the situation was similarly dominated by community conflicts, mistrust, and the frequent absence of gratitude, which the NGOs working there struggled to accept. Women and men worked alongside each other on the building site and there was a clear gendered division of labour at work there, but unlike Sliwinski, I did not pay adequate attention to the gendered interactions that unfolded there. I found Sliwinski’s accounts of flirting between men and women on the building site and the divisions this created between single mothers and partnered mothers extremely interesting. This book also provides timely insights that I will seek to take into my current project working with survivors of the eruption of the Fuego Volcano in Guatemala, where communities are fragmented and fragmenting partly as a result...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».