What is digitisation?

What have been some of the main

consequences of the digital revolution for money?
The Somalian Experience

DV 451

1! von ! 15

25153

1. Introduction: Digitalisation, Society and Money

Like most value creation, it started with our own hands, with ten fingers. Where it brought us to,
is an 'almost reality' that seems to unravel all forms of social organisation (Hart 2004, p. 33). The
phenomenon I am talking about and which will be this papers object of study is the so-called 'digitalisation'. Of course, the digital revolution rather tarted with bits, data and electronic information.
But it has been the ten fingers (latin 'digitus') of the inhabitants of the 15th century who counted
with them and so gave the revolution its name.
Much has been written about the dynamics digitalisation has set free, little however agreed upon
what digitalisation is and what it means for society. For example, Daniel Bell (1089), who published
one of the early scholars researching digitalisation, has been excited about digitalisations opportunities to overcome the cultural contradictions of capitalism. Almost 30 years later and rather differently, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) describes digitalisation as the increasing concentration on the IT sector and the penetration of computer technology
towards other industries (2015, pp. 15-71). Yet, The terminology confusion is one of the reasons
why the debate about the consequences of digitalisation varies from the prediction of an emerging
gift economy (Barbrook 1998) over the commodification of information (DOC 1998) to the rise of a
global society (Hart 2001).
The aim of my paper is twofold: I attempt to elaborate a generic definition of digitalisation, before
I continue discussing the main consequences of digitalisation for society. Now because money is
perhaps the single bridge that connects state, market and society (Hart 2001), I shall answer the second research question throughout a monetary lens. I argue that if digitalisation creatures a communication infrastructure where all economic, political and social activities are linked to one another,
money renders plural and serves everybodys multiple identities. The term 'money' is thereby based
on Dodds generic definition, stating that money is a concept that enables 'to transform qualitative
relations between values into quantitative ones' (2005, p. 409, based on Simmel 1907, trans. 1987).
It is the generic definition of Dodd that allows greatest insights into the debate about digitalisation
and money since it accounts for all types of digital and non-digital money1.
The argument of an identity reinstating digitalisation is developed throughout two sections. In the
first, I carefully assess the literature on digitalisation. I look into the words origins in order to provide the reader with an initial understand, before I identify the main characteristics of digitalisation.
1In

this paper, digital money is defined all types of money that bases on digital data, or in other words, which
does not have a physical object as its medium (see also Cohen 2001: 197). Non-digital money is therefore
defined as digital moneys opposition.

DV 451

2! von ! 15

25153

In the second section, I ask myself what does digitalisation do with money proper and money of
account. For the theoretical debate about the future of money has been booming (Dodd 2005, p.
387), I attempt to clarify via a case study. I have chosen Somalia for several reasons: First, Somalias 'statelessness' reveals very openly moneys role within the 'market versus state' struggle in
times of digitalisation. Secondly, Somalia is cut off from foreign banking, leaving people searching
for alternatives. And lastly, Somalia has one of the cheapest communication infrastructures worldwide, including a mobile phone coverage of 61 subscribers per 1000 people (Alsoswa et al. 2009, p.
258). The case study of Somalia starts of with a short literature review on the future of money, including all mainstream theories (the commodity theory, state and debt theory as well as sociological
theories). I continue by conducting a macro-analysis that sheds light on the currency competition
between state and market. I finish with a link to the micro-level where I use an anthropological approach to reevaluate the findings. And I conclude with an appeal to manipulate the opportunities
digitalisation provides for the benefit of the people.

2. What Does Digitalisation Mean?

Rather conceptual clarity, the definition of digitalisation seems surrounded by diffusion: either
scholars work with underdeveloped definitions, pretending its obviousness, but then describing different dynamics; or the other way around, similar phenomenas are summarised within different
terms. Taking the photography literature as example, digitalisation is referred to as a shift in processing pictures, from chemical to computational procedures (Sarvas & Frohlich 2011, p. 10). Differently, economists refer to digitalisation as the focussing and expansion of the IT sector (OECD
2015, pp. 83-84). Yet, the social sciences overall offer a variety of terms for phenomenas that seem
closely related. Hart (2004), for instance, calls digital revolution what Porat (1977) describes as information society. So what does digitalisation mean?

2.1 A Short Overview of Digitals Origins

'Digitalisation' is a derivative of the word 'digital' that first had been used in the 15th century to
express the 'designation of a whole number smaller than ten' (OED Online 2012, p. 1). 'Digital' originates from 'digitus', which is Latin for 'finger, toe'. Together, it abridges the act of counting with
fingers. Hence, already long time before the first computer had been invented, the word 'digital' had
described the processing of information.

DV 451

3! von ! 15

25153

Over time, the term 'digitalisation' however had been generalised. Its term broadened especially in
the 1930/40s where 'digital' had been stood in opposition to analogue measurement procedures
(OED Online 2012, p. 1). A second generalisation came with the invention of the Electronic Numerical Integrator and Computer (ENIAC) including the penetration of private households with cheap
computer technology in the 1970/80s (DOC 1998, p. 3). While at the beginning, only computing
machines had processed information via a binary signal (0,1), other objects such as music CDs have
got a digital equivalent, too. Therefore, the Oxford English Dictionary added another definition referring digital to the designation of 'a virtual, computer-mediated counterpart of an object that exists
in the real world' (2012, p. 1). Moreover, the invention of the Internet in the 1990s has expanded the
use of digitals, adding the exchange of information via digital technologies. Taken all together, the
term 'digitalisation' summarises an ongoing transformation that extends the reach and speeds up the
process of sending and receiving information. Briefly said, it alters the way of how individuals
communicate.

2.2 Digitalisationss Main Criteria: From Information to Globalisation

Digitalisation is a relatively young phenomenon, which however fits into a series of previous machine revolutions. According to Hart (2001, 2004) and the US Department of Commerce (1998) it
took off in the late 1960s with the invention of the electronic machine accounting. This machine has
been the first computer that had been designed for private purposes, precisely, to handle the overwhelming number of cheques (DOC 1998, pp. 3-4). Hence, digitalisation automises the processing
of information as the Industrial Revolution had automatised manual labour. Digitalisation as part of
a greater revolution and overall term for several small revolutions (Mewman and Zysman 2004). the
dynamics of which are captured within the following four criteria: the dematerialisation of goods
and services, the unification of individual memory within networks, the personalisation of the impersonal sphere and lastly, the globalisation and hyper-mobility of information. Generally speaking,
digitalisation summarises the transformation towards a communication infrastructure that not only
connects people with one another but also all their activities.

The Dematerialisation of Goods and Services

With the processing of all kinds of things into sequences of '0s' and '1s', digitalisation de-materialises goods and services into digital information. The US Department of Commerce observes that
trend, stating the increased selling of intangible goods, the value of which do not lie in their physi-

DV 451

4! von ! 15

25153

cal form (DOC 1998, p. 24).The best example perhaps is the rising entertainment industry. The anthropologist Diaz, who studied the consequences of digitalisation for live music in cape verde, has
found that people increasingly listen to digital stored music, as a stream, mp3-file or a CD, rather
than live concerts (2014, pp. 130-132). Therefore, many objects render intangible and so partly substitute and partly complement certain tangible goods and services (varies from good to good).
Moreover, digitalisation seems to commodify information. Because in many cases digitalisation
abstracts information from its economic and social context (Malecki & Moriset 2008, p. 13), people
started buying and selling it. For example, advertisement companies pay great amounts of money to
obtain personal information about potential costumers to optimise their marketing strategy (Economist 2014). This is one of the reasons why sharing platforms like Twitter and Facebook have been
worth several billions of US Dollars. Yet, Barbrook's (1998) critique on the misleading idea of
commodified information carries some value: 'In the absence of states or markets to mediate social
bonds, network communities are instead formed through the mutual obligations created by gifts of
time and ideas' (Barbrook 1998: 135). Nevertheless, this gift economy might describe the early
stages of the Internet and some non-commodified domain, which are shrinking ever since. Couchsurfing and Coursera are marginal services relative to Netflix and co.

The Collective Mind: Networks

If the way information moves is what shapes society (Newsman & Zysman 2004, p. 8), then digitalisation creates new forms of social organisation. One crucial novelty represents the network:
businesses embrace e-commerce as cheaper, more vertical and direct channel of communication
(Kelly 1999); private life is more and more lived throughout social online networks (Arnaldi et al.
2010) and even politics adjust to digitalisation, opining twitter accounts and new instruments of egovernance (OECD 2015). In other words, the process of digitalisation ties digital technologies and
communication together (DOC 1998: 4) and so re-organises capital and labour.
Digitalisation re-shapes capitalism by empowering individuals brains as being part of a collective
memory. According to Tapscott (1996) and Levys (1997) workers obtain their own means of production with the rising economic value of social capital. The 'production' of information as a commodity is something that does not necessarily require high amounts of financial or physical capital.
Its potential however is limited as digital technologies require electricity, which is often not given in
wide parts of the developing world (Morelli 2002). Overall, it opens a window of opportunity that is
most powerful in interconnection. Therefore, the Internet as the 'network of networks' (Hart 2004)

DV 451

5! von ! 15

25153

seems the perfect place to collect societys thoughts and know-how. It is often said that Facebook et
al. know more about their costumers than they do by themselves (Economist 2014). While it has
great advantages for value creation (Levy 1997) the disadvantage lies in its problem to forget. Once
information is provided it is hard to delete. In that sense, the Internet defeats our human memory in
light of durability.

Personalisation of the Impersonal Sphere

The dualism between the impersonal sphere, where money is earned, and the personal sphere,
where money is spent, is a feature of capitalism that is likely to be prised by digitalisation. With the
brain as new means of production (Levys 1996) and the network as facilitator of 'distance-free'
communication (Malecki & Moriset 2008), work can be done anytime at any place. The limits lie of
course within the production of digital goods and services. Thinking about 'home office' or 'supplementing work' the dissolving division renders apparent. The same works also vice versa: unpaid
work, like the creation of a youtube video, can suddenly receive an economic value. But also private property is increasingly used for making money in the digital age. People can share for example their apartment or room via the online platform Airbnb. This type of doing business is often
framed by the term 'sharing economy' (Kelly 1999, p. 47). Overall, Terranova sums it up precisely,
saying, digitalisation undermines the distinction between production and consumption, work and
leisure (2003: 35).

Globalisation and Hyper-Mobility

Sent as fast as light throughout networks, information transcends national borders and so expends
the market and society to the global level: 'From virtually everywhere on earth, at any time, every
economic agent can have access to digitalized information, []' (Malecki & Moriset 2008, p. 34).
Since the virtual world is hitherto relatively unregulated and allows information transmission within
milliseconds (OECD 2015: 15), capital flows at high speed over the world 24 hours a day (Strange
1998). As a consequence, states national sovereignty has started to erode (Hart 2001). Yet, Helleiner (2002) warns from overestimating the effects of global capital flows and 'distance-free' communication. States, as any elite in power, will defend their status quo and respond to their challenges.
Who will go out as winner, is yet hard to predict.

DV 451

6! von ! 15

25153

3. Money at its Extremes: Cash and Digital Money in Somalia

Digitalisation changes the way people communicate and so reshapes money as part of the language. What the consequences are when money renders digital information or examined in the following for the case of Somalia2. Somalia is rather special as its state collapsed with the ousting of
the Barre regime in 1991. In the North, elders declared the Republic of Somaliland as independent
state. In the Northeast, clans established a central administration under the name Puntland, whereas
Central and Southern Somalia3 remain within a state of infinite power struggle (a transitional government set up in exile competing with Al-Shabab, a terrorist organisation). Although with the state
the Somalias economy had also been lying in ruins, several mobile phone businesses have established themselves. Operators adept rapidly to the dysfunctional electricity supply by expanding the
'microcellular network in a box' (Hesse 2010: 343). Due to missing market regulations, Telesom et
al. could expand their market shares quickly and so fill the gap of non-existing commercial banks.
Now, to shed light on how digitalisation has affected money within a stateless but well connected
society, I shall start with a short literature review on the future of money within the digital age. The
sections after contain a macro and a micro level analysis about cash and digital money in Somalia.
Whereas the macro-analysis shows how money increases in its plurality, the micro-analysis reveals
the multiple usage and value of money for private Somalis. For this purpose, I have studied policy
papers, NGO reports, newspaper and research articles. Before taking off, I want to stress that my
analysis does not claim wholeness. Rather, I aim to take a snapshot of Somalias current society
amidst digitalisation.

3.1 A Brief Literature Review: Plural monies, Plural values?

The debate about the future of money has been controversial, especially along the lines of the different theories of money. The three main streams, the commodity theory, the state and credit theory
and the sociological theories all apply different approaches about what money is and where it originates. Thus, the best way to study the consequences of money lies in Dodds 'two axes' approach
(2005, p. 406): the medium (money proper) and the denomination (money of account) axe of money. What it shows is that while Simmels theory (1907, trans. 1978) encompasses also some shortcomings, the commodity as well as the state and credit theory arrive even quicker to their limits.

Due to little or no information on digital money and mobile banking, Puntland is excluded from the following analysis.
2

For simplicity reasons I will call this area Southern Somalia.

DV 451

7! von ! 15

25153

While the commodity theory has difficulties to explaining digital moneys value, the state and credit
theory reaches its limits with individuals and companies issuing digital money.

The Medium of Money

Perhaps the most common prediction about proper moneys future is the end of all cash. Soon,
people wont pay anymore with paper money, but with cryptocurrencies and mobile phones (e.g.
Birch 2002, Hart 2001, Wolman 2012). Digitalisation creates two new types of money, both of
which consists of sequences of bits, or even more abstract, of identity (Birch 2010). The first type
are cryptocurrencies, most famously the Bitcoin, which are privately issued currencies mined and
send via the Internet. The second type is the mobile money, where persons can buy and sell airtime
and so can send money via text messages. Digital money is attractive because it decreases the costs
of transactions,4 and so lowers the barriers for the masses to access financial services (Wolman
2012). Birchs idea of money as identity goes even further: where people 'pay' with trust and social
capital, there is no need anymore for a medium of exchange (2010, p. 15). But as the case of Somalia will show, cash is something hard to get rid off. Relative to digital money, cash has the advantage of being anonymous, simple and universally accepted (Bank of England 2015: 10). That objection is legitimate to the extent that any type of money serves a different purpose. Cash will exist as
long as individuals give value to it. Instead of substituting one form by another, digitalisation seems
to increase monies' plurality (Hart 2001).
Despite the advantage of being cheap, digital money copes with the problem of trust and security.
Speaking with Simmel (1907, trans. 1987), money is paradox: It is socially constructed, an abstraction; yet, it functions as stabilisation factor of society. Regardless rather the metal coin or the paper
money backed by the government, people had a constructed value to believe in. The already abstract world rendered somehow a bit more tangible. With moneys physical form disappearing, the
last grasp dissolves, too. The question raised by people most frequently (Wolman 2012, p. 212),
'when money goes electronic who assures that it continues to exist? Is it the telecommunication
company, the state, or who? That people nevertheless started using digital money shows that it is
possible to overcome that obstacle. For instance Mogadishu, the capital of Somalia, after the introduction of mobile money 70% of mobile phone subscribers use airtime to send and receive money
(Mohamed 2013: 2).

Digital money is less costly for its users despite the fact that the cryptocurrency Bitcoin requires great
amounts of energy and its services are relatively slow (Maurer 2011: 7).
4

DV 451

8! von ! 15

25153

Moneys Denomination
When money de-materialises into bits, where does its economic value originates? The answer
varies among the three mainstream theories commodity theory, state and debt theory and sociological theories.
Starting with the commodity theory, its assumptions fall short explaining the de-materialisation of
money. Digital moneys intrinsic value equals the energy required to process some small number of
kilobytes. But when money of account is defined by the intrinsic value of its substance (Monroe
2001: 6-8), then digital money has a value of almost zero. However, if we understand the cryptocurrency Bitcoin for example as something existing in an 'almost reality', another word of which is 'virtual' (Hart 2004, p. 32), the picture alters. Bitcoin can find its intrinsic value in the digital gold coin.
Maurer et al. calls that the practical materiality of Bitcoin, or the re-materialisation of money in the
digital age (2013).
The state and debt theory on the other hand does not have any issue with the de-materialisation of
money per se but with the denominator. According to Ingham, money has no material significance;
money is debt, an abstract measure of value, a claim against goods (Ingham 2004, p. 40). Now, as
Bitcoins blockchain technology and telecommunication balances records all undertaken money
transactions, they replicate the old paper version of debt records. Yet differently, the standard of
value is not set by a political authority, as Knapps state theory suggests (1924), but by private individuals or corporates. As a result, the states monopoly of money denomination is broken up (Cohen
2001).
Dodds generic definition, which is based on Simmels 'money as idea' approach, takes hold of
both digital and non-digital types of money because it allows for multiple standards of value. Quantifying social relations is highly subjective. Consider the meaning of money for only a single individual, then there is money such as for vacations, for student fees or for simply for food. Zelitzer
(1994) calls that process of personalising money 'earmarking'. Digitalisation increases the visibility
of 'earmarking' due to higher competition among monies. The same single person has now Tesco
points to do grocery shopping with, air miles to pay for flights or time denominated currencies to
pay for the babysitter.

DV 451

9! von ! 15

25153

3.2 Macro-level Analysis: The Plurality of Monies

A look at Somalias digitalisation reveals two direct consequences for money: On the one hand, it
introduces new types of money (here especially mobile money) and on the other hand, it challenges
the non-digital forms, which in Somalia is mainly cash. In 2009, Telesom launched the mobile
money service ZAAD in Somaliland, which has been followed by Hormuuds introduction of EVC
Plus for Southern Somalia in 2011. Before, both in the north and the south of Somalia people relied
upon hard currencies for paying bills, exchanging goods or storing wealth. Yet, the Somaliland/Somali Shilling has not been the only currency in circuit. It is specially the US Dollar that has been
used for buying commodity of higher value, such as cars, houses or computers. Somaliland/Somali
Shillings on the other hand are used for daily, small transactions, such as buying milk or fruits. For
longer distances, Somali citizens transferred money via informal hawala arrangement. For example,
people, who wanted to send money from the US to Somalia, had to go to a hawala agent. The agent
buys goods in the amount of money taken. The goods are send off to Somalia, where another agent
sells the goods and transmits the money to the intended receiver. But instead of replacing Dollar,
Shilling and hawala systems, ZAAD and EVC Plus complemented the traditional money types and
financial services.

Digital Money: The New Medium of Exchange and Payment

The ZAAD and EVC Plus services do not only digitalise cash; moreover, they introduce an alternative currency. In the literature it is often argued that mobile money represents a virtual form of
cash. Also the ZAAD and EVC Plus mobile wallet solely offers US Dollars in its menu (Pnicaud &
McGrath 2013, pp. 12-14) and so seem to support that argument. However, it contrasts how Somalians use and refer to their mobile money. As Iazzolino reports after several interviews with hawala
agents in Hagaisha, mobile money is not an electronic dollar but 'ZAAD money' (2015, p. 32).
Hawala agents 'cash in' and 'cash out' mobile money, i.e., they exchange US Dollars or Somaliland/
Somali Shillings with 'ZAAD money'. Said differently, people buy their goods and pay their bills
with the 'airtime' currency. For Somalians it seems only secondary that these airtime is denominated
in US Dollars.
People have overcome initial trust issues and started using 'ZAAD money' to buy goods and pay
their bills, for ZAAD is easily accessible and reduces the costs of transactions. Iazzolino (2015) and
Hesse (2010) have observed a rapidly expansion of the service within Somalias big cities and a
rather slow adoption at the countryside. For the ZAAD service in Somaliland this development is

DV 451

! von 15
10
!

25153

due to Telesoms strategy of establishing public trust in the service. What Telesom did is to approach businesses in the city, asking rather to pay their workers with ZAAD than with cash (Iazzolino 2015, p. 25). From here on, people got familiar with the system which lead to a 'trust domino
effect'. Since residents of the countryside are often self-employed (Reno 2003), scepticism remained
relatively high.
Moreover, all telecommunication operators who have been running a mobile money service
agreed upon an identity check. Before Telesom or Hormuud subscribers could open an account they
had to prove their identity (Economist 2015). Given the reality of a 'statelessness' this is a rather difficult task. For this reason, clan elders had often been asked to identify a person (Economist 2015).
Yet, not every Somali citizen had been member of a clan network (Reno 2003). Therefore, it is possible that money circulated mostly within wider clan networks. This on the other hand supports
Birchs idea of money as identity because people exchanged money and goods only among those
they trust.

Non-Digital Money: Competition

In Somiland and Southern Somalia, digital money seems not to replace cash and the informal
hawala system but rather complement it. Although the number of people using ZAAD and EVC
Plus expands quickly (Hesse 2013, pp. 343-344), its rise is restricted by political issues that keep
cash as an important medium. One of the biggest obstacles remains in the 'political borders'. For
example in Mogadishu and other parts of Southern Somalia, Hormuud could only introduce mobile
money after Al-Shabab had been driven out in 2011 (BBC News 2010). As a result, cash is still
needed not only to pay taxes (Somaliland), but also to transfer money over longer distances.
Yet, digitalisation increases the competition among currencies within Somaliland and Southern
Somalia. In Somaliland it is the governments central bank that sets the Shillings standard of value
(Luther & White 2011). Yet, the 'ZAAD money' undermines the central banks power as it strengthens the dollarisation of the country. Iazzolino, for example, discloses a growing inflation rate due to
the expansion of ZAAD users (2015, p. 36). When Somalis use 'ZAAD money' then they pay in US
Dollars, which increases the costs of living, according to the Minister of National Planning and Development (Iazzolino 2015, p. 36). Hence, digitalisation shifts the power of denominating the value
of money towards the market.
Overall, it looks as Harts hope for a peoples money is far from coming true, at least within the
territories of Somaliland and Southern Somalia. Even so the state and its Shilling are currently chal-

DV 451

! von 15
11
!

25153

lenged by 'ZAAD money', it is to the advantage of big telecommunications rather than the people.
What digitalisation did, at least from a macro-perspective, is to intensify the competition between
currencies by adding another alternative. As for the moment, it appears that the US Dollar goes out
as the winner of digitalisation by growing its territory of influence.

3.3 Micro-level Analysis: Multiple Identities

The previous section could show how digitalisation has multiplied money by introducing a new
medium: that is mobile money. What this means for a single individual in Somaliland and Southern
Somalia represents the focal point of this chapter. Drawing from the experiences of a jewellery shop
owner and a pastor retailer, I argue that the emergence of multiple money helps individuals to cope
with their multiple identities. A multiple identity in the sense that a man is for example at the same
time a father as he is Muslim and civil servant.

Multiple Money, Multiple Identities

Telling first the story of a pastor retailer (Iazzolino 2015, p. 34) that lives in the countryside and
sells her products in Hagaisha, the idea of purpose money renders apparent. Early in the mornings
truck drivers arrive with several cans of milk, all from a different local farmer, to the vendors store.
During the day, she sells cups of that milk to costumers who pay her in ZAAD money. At the end of
a day she cash out her revenues in Shillings at a store close by, saves a quarter to herself, pays with
another quarter the truck drivers from the morning and uses the rest to cancel her debts to the local
farmers (Iazzolino 2015, p. 34). Because ZAAD carries the values of the city, where it circuits as
common currency, the retailer accepts it as payment in her store. Therefore, all her relations with
urban occupants are most likely to be expressed through ZAAD. On the other hand, she uses Somaliland shillings to pay the rural farmers with whom she is maintains closer relations. One possible
explanation could be the use of US Dollars for longer-distance transfers (Hesse 2013) in opposition
to the conduction of daily, local activities in Somalian Shilling.
The story of Muuse M. (Iazzolino 2015: 30), the owner of a jewellery shop in Hargeisa, is similar
in regard of him using different forms of money for different purposes. But it differs in the point
about the moneys function. When he opens his shop, costumers pay to 70% with ZAAD money.
However, the first way after closing his shop is the way to the money retail store. There, Muuse M.
exchanges airtime into US Dollar notes which he deposits in his wallet (Iazzolino 2015: 30). The
jeweller hence uses ZAAD to receive payment but falls back on US Dollar notes for the storage of

DV 451

! von 15
12
!

25153

wealth. This habit supports the findings of Pnicaud and Mcgrath who find that on average ZAAD
users store about $37 on their accounts (2013, pp. 13-14). Hence, the US Dollar is a more general
purpose money than its mobile competitor, the functions of which are limited to it as being a medium of exchange and payment but not as storage of wealth.

4. Conclusion
Digitalisation sounds the bell for unraveling capitalism in its dualistic form. However, it is upon
the people to be aware and snatch that opportunity. Since the era of digitalisation started in the
1960s and altered step by step the way people communicate with each other, capitalist classes are
challenged by social networks and the emergence of more equally distributed means of production.
Moreover, the computerisation of all kinds of objects, the establishment of a collective mind and the
hyper mobility of capital, goods and labour cleared the path towards multiple identities lived within
personal unity. Hoping for the best, money wont be anymore something that we are stuck with, as
Dodd often has criticised non-digital money for (2001). With new forms and freer currency competition people could use money as an expression of the relations they uphold.
As Maurer observed, these are crazy times for money (2011: 6), too. The de-materialisation targets the very materiality of monies, leveraging the purity of its abstraction. But with the introduction of digital money both medium and denomination have changed. As a sequence of '0s and 1s'
within the relatively unregulated virtual world, digital money does left the realm of state control.
Corporations, in the case of Somalia especially telecommunication operators, started filling the
power vacuum. Nevertheless, also individuals and communities (e.g. community currencies such as
the Bristol pound, which have not been discussed here due to their hitherto non-digital form) participate in the competition over the biggest share. As a result we experience what Hart describes as the
pluralism of money (2001). Until now it seems as the Dollar has gained most of the benefits from
that plurality, expanding its territory of influence to Somalia and above. Yet, we did not have faced
the end of the revolution. In this regard, I shall finish with Maurers call: 'Lets join in the drumming and see where it takes us!' (2011, p. 11).

5. Bibliography
Alsoswa, A., Abdel-Fadil, M. & Abdul Hadi, L., 2009. Arab Human Development Report 2009,
Available at: http://www.arab-hdr.org/ contents/index.aspx?rid5.

DV 451

! von 15
13
!

25153

Arnaldi, S., Boscolo, F. & Stamm, J., 2010. Living the digital revolution: explorations into the futures of the european society. European Review, 18, pp.399416.
Barbrook, R., 1998. The high-tech gift cconomy. First Monday, 3(12).
Birch, D., 2002. The future of money. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/audio_video/programmes/analysis/transcripts/future_money.txt.
Bell, D., 1989. Las contradicciones culturales de capialismo, Madrid: Alianza Universidad.
Birch, D., 2010. Why identity is the new money. Speed, 5(13-15).
Castells, M., 1996. The rise of the network society, Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell.
Cohen, B.J., 2001. Electronic Money: New Day or False Dawn? Review of International Political
Economy, 8(2), pp.197225.
Dias, J.B., 2014. Live music in the age of digital reproduction. In K. Hart & J. Sharp, eds. People,
Money and power in the economic crisis: perspectives from the global south. New York: Berhaan
Books.
Dicken, P., 2007. Global shift: mapping the changing contours of the world economy, London:
Sage.
Dodd, N., 2005. Laundering money: on the need for conceptual clarity in the sociology of money. Archives Europeennes de sociologie, 46(3), pp.387411.
Dodd, N., 2014. The social life of money. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Economist, 2014. Getting to know you. Available at: http://www.economist.com/node/21615871/
print [Accessed January 4, 2013].
Economist, 2015. How hawala money-transfer schemes are changing. Economist. Available at:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2015/10/economist-explains-12?
zid=304&ah=e5690753dc78ce91909083042ad12e30) [Accessed January 5, 2016].
Fish, T. & Whymark, R., 2015. How has cash usage evolved in recent decades? What might drive
demand in the future? Bank of Englands Quarterly Bulletin, (Q3), pp.112.
Hart, K., 2001. Money in an unequal world, Texere.
Hart, K., 2014. Notes towards an anthropology of the internet. Horizontes Antropologicos, 10(21),
pp.1540.

DV 451

! von 15
14
!

25153

Harvey, D., 2006. Spaces of global capitalism: towards a theory of uneven geographical development, London: Verso.
Helleiner, E., 2002. The making of the national money: territorial currecneis in historical perspective, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Hesse, B., 2010. Where Somalia works. Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 28(3), pp.343
362. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02589001.2010.499234.
Ingham, G., 2004. The nature of money, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Kelly, K., 1999. New rules of the new economy, Nw York City: Penguin Books.
Knapp, G.F., 1924. The state theory of money, London: Macmillan.
Levy, P., 1997. The collevtive intelligence: mankinds emerging world in cyperspace, New York,
London: Plenum Press.
Luther, W.J. & White, L.H., 2011. Positively Valued Fiat Money after the Sovereign Disappears :
The Case of Somalia. GMU Working Paper in Economics. Available at: http://ssrn.com/
abstract=1801563\nhttp://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1801563.
Malecki, E. & Moriset, B., 2008. The digital economy: business organisation, production processes and regional developments, London and New Yprk: Routledge.
Maurer, B., 2011. Money Nutters. Economic Sociology - The European Electronic Newsletter,
12(3), pp.512.
Maurer, Bi., Nelms, T.C. & Swartz, L., 2013. When perhaps the real problem is money itself!
the practical mareriality of Bitcoin. Social Semiotics, 23(2), pp.261277.
Mohamed, H., 2013. Electronic transfers improve Somalia economy. Aljazeera. Available at:
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/08/2013831141614925682.html. [Accessed January 5, 2016].
Monroe, A.E., 2001. Monetary theory before Adam Smith, Ontario: Batoche Books.
Murelli, E. & Okot-Uma, R.W., 2002. Breaking the digital divide: implications for developing
countries, London: Commonwealth Secretariat.
Newman, A. & Zysman, J., 2004. How revolutionary is the revolution: will there be a political
economy of the digital Era? IDEAS Working Paper Series from RePEc, (104).
OECD, 2015. OECD Digital Economy Outlook 2015, Paris: OECD Publishing.

DV 451

! von 15
15
!

25153

OED Online, 2012. digital. Available at: http://public.oed.com/aspects-of-english/word-stories/

digital/ [Accessed January 3, 2016].
OED Online, 2010. Digitalization, N.2. Available at: http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/242061?
rskey=bqXWk2&result=2&isAdvanced=false#eid [Accessed January 3, 2016].
Pnicaud, C. & Mcgrath, F., 2013. How telesom ZAAD brought mobile money to somaliland,
Porat, M.U., 1977. The information economy: definition and measurement. OT Special Publication, 77(12).
Reno, W., 2003. Somalia and survival in the shadow of the global economy. QEH Working Paper
Series, (100), pp.146. Available at: http://www.somali-jna.org/downloads/ACF358F.pdf.
Sarvas, R. & Frohlich, D.M., 2011. From Snapshots to Social Media - The Changing Picture of
Domestic Photography, London: Springer Science & Business Media.
Simmel, G., The Philosophy of Money T. Bottomore & D. Frisby, eds., London and Boston: Routledge and Keegan Paul.
Stranger, S., 1998. Mad Money, Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Tapscott, D., 1996. The Digital Economy, New York: McGraw-Hill.
US Department of Commerce, 2000. The Emerging Digital Economy. , p.259.
Wolman, D., 2012. The end of money: counterfeiters, preachers, techies, dreamers - and the coming cashless society, New York City: Da Capo Press.
Zelizer, V.A., 1994. The social meaning of money: pin money, paychecks, poor relief, and other
currencies, New York: Basic Books.