Making futures in Oaxaca: Remittances in the diverse economies of social reproduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this article, I analyse intermingling economically productive and reproductive work at the global and local scale through the lens of how remittances are folded into the communal social relations of one Indigenous community in Oaxaca. Scholars have illustrated the many ways that social reproduction is reconfigured through transnational labour migration, and troubled the categorisation of economically productive and socially reproductive labour. Expanding on their work, I engage with scholarship about Indigenous communal governance in Guatemala and Mexico, particularly the theories of Gladys Tzul Tzul on reproduction, in order to present new insights into feminist geographical knowledge of diverse economies and social reproduction. Drawing on ethnographic methods, I present three empirical examples, which illustrate how the intermingling of economic production and reproduction of communal life make Indigenous futures. I argue that large‐scale reproductive activities, such as those deployed by the community, produce values beyond capitalist circuits of production and that it is how remittances are inserted into the local communal economies that render the money valuable for reproducing life and securing a future.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".