In this article, I discuss two roles of documents in the creation and enforcement of public health laws in early colonial Vanuatu and their implication in colonial attempts to transform ni-Vanuatu societies and subjectivities. Colonial officials of the British-French Condominium based their projects on their admittedly partial knowledge in reports generated by experts studying depopulation. This knowledge, I argue, produced a ‘population’ by categorizing people according to their relationship with a reified notion of culture. The Condominium enforced health laws by sending letters to people categorized as Christian who would, the Condominium hoped, adhere to the regulations as self governing subjects. Officials would engage in persuasive conversations when they enforced the regulations in ‘bush’ villages. I conclude by reflecting on ni- Vanuatu knowledge of well-being and illness that could not be represented or documented and its centrality for subjectivities that might elude, if not subvert, the modern subject presumed by colonial strategies of governance.
Census, Health Laws and Inconsistently Modern Subjects in Early Colonial Vanuatu
Susy Monica Lelli
The tables presented in this final part of the present volume offer a
general picture of the demographic, economic, social, and political
situation in the country. This year, given the opportunity of using the
first results of the fourteenth population census (October 2001), some
tables offer a comparison with results from the two previous censuses
(1981 and 1991) with regard to some of the demographic and social
indicators; for other indicators, tables portray their evolution over the
last decade (1991–2001).
Susy Monica Lelli
The data presented in the appendix provide the broad outlines of the
demographic, economic, social, and political conditions in Italy. Some
of the demographic and social data in this year’s volume are from
2002, along with that from the last three censuses (1981, 1991, and
2001); for the remaining data, the contrast is over the decade from
1992 to 2002.
John P. Ziker and David G. Anderson
This special issue of Sibirica features a selection of recent research on the demography of Siberians with a special emphasis on what Russian scholars call the etnodemografiia of the “sparse” (malochislennye) peoples of Siberia. Demographic analysis has occupied a privileged place in the study of Siberia serving interests that go well beyond the tallying of souls that one usually associates with this exercise. The very first Imperial-era surveys of Siberia, aside from providing a description of the geography, described the character and qualities of the people encountered (Castrén 1853–1858; Fisher 1774; Georgi 1799; Middendorf 1860–1869). Early scholars of Siberian peoples thought that they needed to understand both the size and social structure of local societies in order to tax them efficiently. Early registers of indigenous peoples in the seventeenth century tended to focus on the numbers of male hunters likely to provision the furs coveted by the Russian state (Bakhrushin 1955). However, by a very early date in the nineteenth century, the Russian state created regular tribute quotas matched to the “level of civilization” of specific nations (Raeff 1956). By contrast, what one today might recognize as a modern type of population survey based on the interviews of individual men and women came relatively late with the 1897 All-Russian Census and arguably was only implemented completely for the first time with the Soviet population census of 1926. The latter census incorporated an especially intensive survey of the “polar” and indigenous (tuzemnoe) population (Anderson 2006). The state curiosity in the populousness and professional structure of all of the discrete peoples in Russia continued as a constant concern throughout the Soviet period, and with a brief post- Soviet hiatus, is continuing in the Russian Federation. How can these three hundred years of surveying be best understood?
Les ambivalences de l’identité juive de Durkheim
This is based on research that has discovered crucial, hitherto unknown biographical information. First, I review the theories of authors who helped to generate the whole 'affair' of Durkheim's two pre-names, most often in seeing it as a way to interrogate his relation with Judaism. Next, I discuss how the issue comes with elements that are incomplete or inexact. It is then to present new evidence of Durkheim's ambivalence and changing attitude towards his first, identifiably Jewish pre-name. The census records during his time at Bordeaux show that he registered himself as 'David' in 1891 and 1896, but abandoned this and switched to 'Émile' in 1901. Accordingly, I examine possible interpretations of the change, in terms of the political context of the Dreyfus Affair, events in his family life, his institutional position, his growing reputation, and a programme of research in which he resolved on a scientific treatment of religion.
An American scholar is often struck by the absence of race in France as a category of analysis or the absence of discussions of race in its historical or sociological dimensions. After all, “race” on this side of the Atlantic, for reasons having to do with the peculiar history of the United States, has long been a focus of discussion. The notion of race has shaped scholarly analysis for decades, in history, sociology, and political science. Race also constitutes a category regularly employed by the state, in the census, in electoral districting, and in affirmative action. In France, on the contrary, race hardly seems acknowledged, in spite of both scholarly and governmental preoccupation with racism and immigration.
Despite decades of official denial, modern Germany has always been a
country of immigration. From Poles migrating to the Ruhr in the late nineteenth
century, to German refugees and expellees after World War II, to
Italians and Greeks in the 1950s, to ethnic Germans from the former
Soviet Union and refugees from Bosnia in the 1990s, the country has a
long history of attracting newcomers. In fact, according to the recently
released 2011 census data, approximately 19 percent of the Federal Republic’s
population of around 80 million has a “migration background.”1 Of
course, this national average masks substantial variation at the state or city
level—places like Hamburg, Berlin and Baden-Württemberg have shares of
residents with such a background of a quarter or more, whereas the eastern
Länder have proportions under 5 percent. This sizeable population is
also very different than a generation ago—increasingly rooted and diverse:
60 percent of this group has German citizenship and about half of this subgroup
was born in Germany. Regarding countries of origin or ancestry,
17.9 percent have origins in Turkey, 13.1 percent in Poland, and about 8.7
percent in both Russia and Kazakhstan.
Kira Erwin and Gerhard Maré
This special issue emerges from a concern with academic practice around researching and theorising race, racialism and racism; particularly within the current theoretical climate in which race is, in the majority, accepted as a social construct. In public thinking and discourse, however, acceptance of the biological existence of races continues to dominate in many societies. Racial classification also continues in many state practices in South Africa such as the collection of racial demographics though the national census, and through countless private and public officials reporting towards government-stipulated race-based employment acts. These classification practices raise contradictions for the constitutional goal of non-racialism in South Africa. South Africa has also signed and ratified the International Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Professional Interest/Pages/CERD.aspx), which aims to eliminate racial discrimination in member states. The convention, to which member states are legally bound, raises a number of pressing issues that, to date, are not present in a wider national debate on the continued use of race in South African state policy. For example, there is little recognition by the state of the difficulties associated with identifying a targeted group based on race, nor clarity as to whether these groups are identified through markers based on phenotype, or socio-economic or cultural differences. Nor is there open discussion on the use of terms such as fair and unfair discrimination and how they relate to terms such as distinction and differentiation (see Bossuyt 2000), and the legal consequences of using such terms.
COVID-19, Sex and the Transformation of Singledom
and ageing as key elements, both being highly evident in Australia as well as in the United Kingdom, where their research is focussed. In the past 25 years, there has been a modest rise in the proportion of Australians living alone, and the 2016 Census
Competing varieties of fiscal citizenship in tax- and spending-related direct democracy
Sandra Morgen and Jennifer Erickson
States Census Bureau) . 1970 . Censuses of Population Income Surveys . Washington, DC : US Department of Commerce . USCB (United States Census Bureau) . 1980 . Censuses of Population Income Surveys . Washington, DC : US Department of Commerce