Does investing in identity work? An examination of the ethnocentric social capital theory from an oriental perspective

The central thrust of this paper questions the notion of ‘investing in identity’ in the current approach to social capital, and challenges the assumption that the poor can draw upon their identities as productive resources to alleviate poverty. This paper argues that the mainstream social capital model is largely based on the economic model of rationality, which assumes that individuals are rational, and consciously construct social identities with purposive reasons. This perspective, however, neglects agency, subjectivity and the power dimension in the process of identity building. This paper also questions the ethnocentric nature of social capital thinking which plays down the influences of culture and context. Drawing upon the structuration theory of Anthony Giddens, and based on my ethnographic research on Chinese migrants in Hong Kong, I challenge the ‘Hong Kong-derived Chinese identity model’ by Gregory Guldin. Using the concept of ‘acknowledgeable agents’, I argue that the construction of ethnic identity amongst migrants is far more complicated, and agents may use their hyphenated identities to seek room for manoeuvre. I also highlight the transformative, fluid and fragile nature of identity to suggest that he notion of ‘investing in identity’ is problematic because which and what identities, and where and how to invest, are not properly addressed. Taking agents’ subjectivity into account, disinvestment, rather than investment, in identity may be a more desirable livelihood strategy adopted by migrants. Finally, I draw attention to the dark sides of identity, and point out that without a clear understanding of the existing structures of interaction, investing in identity may result in poverty aggravation and further exclusion of the poor.The writer is currently an assistant lecturer at the University of Bradford, UK.