Conspicuous Consumption in Central Asia: Tajikistan’s Law on Traditions, Celebrations & Ceremonies

Abstract

This study is concerned with Tajikistan’s "Law on Regulation of Traditions, Celebrations and Ceremonies" (hereafter 'Law on Ceremonies'), which corresponds to Thorsten Veblen’s concept of "conspicuous consumption," i.e. extravagant and non-utilitarian purchases. Since 2007, the Law has regulated weddings, funerals, circumcision parties and bans on public celebrations of birthdays and returns from performing the Hajj. The goals of this study were to determine the government’s aims and objectives behind adopting the Law on Ceremonies, to see it's compatibility with freedoms and human rights, to determine the attitudes of different groups of people about the Law, and evaluate its outcomes on the ground. As data collection, this study used in-depth interviews with three target groups: i) government-hired lawyers who originally drafted the Law; ii) experts and intellectuals, including human rights lawyers; and iii) married couples and their relatives who had organized events before and after adoption of the Law. Tajikistan’s Law on Ceremonies is of high importance for its government and possesses a large state and local implementation system. Social pressure practiced among the population, i.e. overwhelming influence of neighbors in organization of events, tendency to outdo one another and emulate after wealthier people were suggested as likely mechanisms for conspicuous consumption in Tajikistan. The study determined that an attempt to entice reallocation of household budgets in favor of utilitarianism rather than extravagance is the primary reason behind the adoption of Law. Other reasonings cited by the draftees of the Law behind its adoption included erasing of supposedly ‘non-Tajik’ traditions, limiting the scope of work of Muslim clergy and setting the proper timing of ceremonies (so as to not coincide with the working day). Even though the Law on Ceremonies goes in contradiction to international conventions and norms, interviewed intellectuals favored the Law. Similar trend was seen from responses of married couples. Based on the same data, however, the effectiveness of the Law can be easily questioned. Possible reasons for its potential non-effectiveness is lack of understanding of the goals of the Law, but also the unwillingness and desire to abide by its objectives on the part of the population, thus leading to expenditure of resources in other non-utilitarian and non-monitored purchases, including those related to newly invented costly traditions.