Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation aimed to understand formal and informal ayurvedic knowledge and practice through the framework of commodification, in the context of the recent emergence of global ayurvedic tourism in Kerala, India. The objective was to understand how commodification, both old and new, have affected knowledges and livelihoods of actors constituting the ayurvedic commodity chain, with a focus on `social lives' of ayurvedic pharmaceuticals and select herb-ingredients. I argue that the trajectory of commodification in Kerala provides a stark contrast to the national mainstream with its focus on classical vis-à-vis proprietary medicines. This therapy-centric business model maintained the integrity of traditional ayurvedic practice by keeping the ayurvedic doctor within the loop. I suggest that the new wave of multi-faceted tourism-inspired commodification draws on this strength. This in turn has created a paradigmatic shift in the way ayurveda is commodified locally and globally, by switching focus from `pharmaceuticals' to `services', and `illness' to `wellness'. I suggest that conceptualizing classical medicines as `open-source commodities', brings attention to the significance of background knowledge processes. While distinct stakeholder characteristics and historic State patronage are significant factors, at the root of the commercial viability of open-source-ayurveda, I argue, is the continuity of a cultural practice, the robustness of it I attribute to its historical evolution in Kerala as a mass commodity in contrast to its elitist status elsewhere. However, industrialization threatens the traditional role of knowledge-intensive actors: doctors, consumers, raw drug shops and medicinal plant collectors. I argue that the industry's role is contributory rather than causal; more significant in endangering ayurvedic metis are effects of modern institutionalization shaped by goals of homogenization and scientization. Discussing the nature of deskilling each node has undergone, I demonstrate the significance of `cultural stakes' in the conservation of common property resources that are more often that not at loggerheads with `economic stakes'. The arguments in this dissertation are built over and contribute to three bodies of anthropological research: economic anthropology engaged in the study of commodities and commodification processes, ecological anthropology concerned with conservation of common property resources, and medical anthropology concerned with study of medical systems and pharmaceuticals.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".