In examining the social organisation of production and consumption in Palokhi—through the examples of various households as well as general arrangements, both contractual and non-contractual—I wish to establish the importance of four considerations.

First, the operative socio-economic units in Palokhi are households. As we have seen in the last chapter, this follows from the fact that households are constituted according to the operation of the kinship system and, specifically, marriage and customs on residence.

Second, given that the household is the fundamental unit of production and consumption in Palokhi, there are nevertheless a variety of possible socio-economic arrangements within and between households. The significance of this is that kinship does not necessarily provide all the guiding principles in social organisation especially in the area of subsistence production in Palokhi.

Third, the variety of possible socio-economic arrangements show that there is considerable flexibility, in terms of available options, in the organisation of subsistence production in Palokhi. Indeed, adaptability might better describe this essential feature of production and consumption in the community. It is this flexibility or adaptability which allows the Palokhi Karen to maintain a certain level of subsistence production, in the agricultural and non-agricultural sectors of their economy, by which they attempt to meet either part or all of their basic needs.^[10]

Fourth, it will be noticed that despite the variety and flexibility in socio-economic arrangements none of these includes an institutionalised system of redistribution. Apart from the contractual arrangements described earlier, most if not all socio-economic arrangements have an ad hoc character and they do not, strictly speaking, constitute redistributive mechanisms. This has a direct bearing on the central theme of this study. Domestic groups or households which do not produce enough for their subsistence needs cannot make up these deficits by relying on the “internal” economy of Palokhi. They must seek recourse in an “external” cash or market economy which, for all practical purposes, firmly anchors Palokhi within a network of economic links in the Pa Pae hills which, in turn, is linked to the lowland economy of Chiang Mai. And they do so as independent households.

In sum, therefore, kinship provides the basic organising framework for social organisation. Within this framework, various possibilities are provided for on the basis of kinship relations in some cases, and non-kin relations in others, which enable the Palokhi Karen to organise themselves in subsistence production and consumption. We might say, then, that while kinship structures social organisation in certain ways, it also does not preclude the interplay of other factors through which households seek to meet their basic needs. In Palokhi therefore, social organisation in general, and the organisation of production and consumption in particular, are constituted through the operation of the kinship system and practical social relations among households.

In terms of the cultural ideology of the Palokhi Karen, however, there is a specific set of behaviour which links— in the sense of a “relation between relations”—the operation of the kinship system, the household as the fundamental socio-economic unit in the community and the practical relations associated with it, as well as the larger organisation of the community. The behaviour in question is the actual consumption of food, eating, which functions as an operative, symbolic activity that establishes these links through the symbolic meanings it expresses in the contexts of day-to-day household routines and community rituals.