Since 1980, studies of the wage labor process have been centered mostly on three topics: the new international division of labor, control over the labor process, and “flexibilization” of production. Anthropologists have contributed rich studies about modes of control and about how these modes are linked to social relations within the work place and workers’ communities of origin. They have explained how and why market segmentation can be a powerful tool of control some of the time, whereas at other times it can enhance tensions. Anthropologists have also contributed by transforming stylized models into models centered on actors with social and class identities and with ambivalent expectations and aspirations. However, they have neglected to integrate their findings with those from the literature on labor migrations and job search. They also have neglected to consistently examine contracts and hiring practices, two major tools of labor control. Although anthropologists have been attentive to paradigms about global restructuring of industries, they have often disregarded an intermediate level of analysis: the relationship of producers and industries to relevant actors in their respective regional labor markets, and how producers and industries structure local labor markets. A spatial portrayal of labor markets will facilitate comparative studies about the impact of industrial restructuring and correct possible biases.
