Social Network of Bugis Weavers at Wajo Regency, South Sulawesi

Syukur - Muhammad

Abstract

The penetration of market economic system and the development of weaving technology within Wajo society has polarized Wajo weavers into three groups, Gedongan weaver, ATBM weaver and weaving entrepreneur. It indicates a different economic action conducted by those three groups in responding the economic market and technology development. This research aims to describe the moral basic in developing and utilizing network in weaving activities practiced by the three groups. The research uses qualitative approach with constructive paradigm. Data collection techniques used are in-depth interview method, participative observation and documentation. Data is analyzed using data reduction, presentation and conclusion. Research result indicates that production and distribution network of weavers involve social solidarity and economic interest and those networks take place in the form of horizontal and vertical relationship.Gedongan weavers use social solodarity network more than economic interest network. ATBM weavers tend to be in between solidarity and economic interest. Whereas, weaving entrepreneur use economic interest network more than solidarity network.

Keywords

social network; moral; weaver; Bugis-Wajo

Full Text:

Fulltext PDF

References

Armayani, et. al. 2008. Profil Persuteraan di Kabupaten Wajo. Sengkang: Pemda Wajo.

Biggart, N.W. 2002. Readings in Economic Sociology.Malden, Massachusetts, USA: Blackwell Publishers.

Boissevain, J. 1978. Friends of friends: Network, Manipulator and Coalition. London and Worcester Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (eds). 2000. Handbook of Qualitative Research.(Second Edition), Thousand Oaks: Sage Pul. Inc.

Geertz, C. 1989. Penjaja dan Raja.Jakarta: Yayasan Obor Indonesia.

Granovetter, M. 1985. Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology. 91:481-510.

______,.1973. The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology. 78(6):1360-1380.

Granovetter, M., & Sweddberg, R. (edit). 1992. The Sociology of Economic Life. Boulder, San Francisco, Oxford: Westview Press.

Hefner, R.W. 1983. The Problem of Preference: Economic and Ritual Change in Highlands Java. Man. New Series. 18(4):669-689.

Miles, B.M. & Haberman, A. M. 1994. Analisis Data Kualitatif. Jakarta: UI Press.

Mirajiani, et. al. 2014. Transformasi Pranata Patronase Masyarakat Nelayan: Dari Ekonomi Moralitas Menuju Ekonomi Pasar. Jurnal Komunitas. 6(1) :115-134.

Powell, W.W. &Smith-Doerr, L. 1994. Networks and Economic Life. inSmelser, N. J. and R.

Swedberg (editors). 1994. Handbook of Economic Sociology. Firts Edition. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Sadapotto, A. 2010. Penataan Institusi Untuk Peningkatan Kinerja Persuteraan Alam di Sulawesi Selatan: Studi Komparasi di Enrekang, Soppeng dan Luoding City Cina.Disertasi. SPS-IPB. Bogor: Institut Pertanian Bogor.

Scott, J. 1991. Social networking analysis. London: Sage Publications.

Smelser, N. J. & Swedberg, R.(editors). 1994. Handbook of Economic Sociology. Firts Edition. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Sitorus, M.T.F. 1999. Pembentukan Pengusaha Lokal di Indonesia: Pengusaha Tenun dalam Masyarakat Batak Toba. Disertasi. SPS-IPB. Bogor: Institut Pertanian Bogor.

Weber, M. 1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretatif Sociology. Vol. I (edited by Roth, G., and Wittich, G.). Barkeley: University of California Press.

Willer, D. (edited). 1999. Network Exchange Theory. London: Praeger Publisher.

Yin, R.K. 2002. Studi Kasus (Desain dan Metode). Edisi Revisi. Diterjemahkan oleh M. Djauzi Mudzakir. Cet. ke-3, Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada.

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.