Reciprocity as a Principle of Exclusion: Gift giving in the Netherlands

In this paper the sociological significance of informal giving in the Netherlands is addressed. Does informal giving in any way compensate for the failing efficacy of official politics to counteract social inequality? Empirical results are presented from a study about informal giving in the Netherlands. Material as well as immaterial gifts were distinguished: presents, money gifts, food, shelter, care or help, and blood and organs. The data showed informal giving to be ruled by reciprocity: gifts are followed by return gifts in most cases. However, reciprocity appeared to have a positive as well as a negative side: those who give many gifts, receive many gifts in return, but those who do not give much - often because their social and material conditions do not allow them to do so - are also the poorest receivers: the unemployed and the elderly in our sample. It is concluded that informal giving does not compensate for existing social inequality. Informal giving mainly benefits those who already receive much; those who need it most, receive the least. Reciprocity, then, may be considered `a principle of exclusion'.

[1]  M. Douglas,et al.  The World of Goods , 2021 .

[2]  B. Schwartz,et al.  The Social Psychology of the Gift , 1967, American Journal of Sociology.

[3]  B. Cocroft,et al.  Book reviewStructures of social life: the four elementary forms of human relations: Alan Page Fiske New York: Macmillan Inc., 1991, 480 pp., $29.95 (cloth) , 1994 .

[4]  D. Cheal,et al.  The Social Dimensions of Gift Behaviour , 1986 .

[5]  T. Caplow.  Christmas Gifts and Kin Networks , 1982 .

[6]  Ray Pahl,et al.  Divisions of Labour. , 1988 .

[7]  D. Cheal.  ‘Showing Them You Love Them’: Gift Giving and the Dialectic of Intimacy , 1987 .

[8]  Alan Wolfe,et al.  Whose Keeper?: Social Science and Moral Obligation , 1989 .

[9]  Theodore Caplow,et al.  Rule Enforcement Without Visible Means: Christmas Gift Giving in Middletown , 1984, American Journal of Sociology.

[10]  Claude Lévi-Strauss,et al.  Les Structures Élémentaires de la Parenté , 1949 .

[11]  A. Gouldner,et al.  For sociology: renewal and critique in sociology today , 1974 .

[12]  P. Bourdieu.  Le sens pratique , 1976 .

[13]  Robert J. Wuthnow.  Acts of Compassion: Caring for Others and Helping Ourselves , 1992 .

[14]  J. Finch,et al.  Negotiating Family Responsibilities , 1992 .

[15]  A. Komter,et al.  HIDDEN POWER IN MARRIAGE , 1989 .

[16]  E. Goffman.  Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order , 1971 .

[17]  M. Sahlins.  Stone Age Economics , 2020 .

[18]  D. Cheal.  The Gift Economy , 1988 .

[19]  G. Simmel.  The sociology of Georg Simmel , 1950 .

[20]  R. Chambers,et al.  Family and social network , 1964 .

[21]  J. Finch.  Family obligations and social change , 1989 .

[22]  R. Merton.  The Matthew Effect in Science , 1968, Science.

[23]  Richard M. Titmuss,et al.  The Gift Relationship: From Human Blood to Social Policy. , 1971 .