There are numerous examples worldwide which demonstrate the displacement of a nomadic way of life and economy. New borders, reduction of pasture tenures in favour of arable farmland, industrial projects, exploitation of natural resources, nature reserves or seden- tarisation projects are among the developments which are forcing pastoralists to abandon a nomadic lifestyle. Sometimes they can respond to the changes with which they are confronted by resorting to other forms of mobile herding, but their lifestyle is no longer no- madic.(1) In some countries, however, the displacement has been fol- lowed by a revival of a nomadic lifestyle. There are records of this from both Mongolia (Humphrey & Sneath, 1999, and Müller, 1999) and from the Tibetan plateau (Goldstein & Beall, 1990, Goldstein, 1994, and Manderscheid, 1999). Nowadays, in discussions of pastoralism, the expression "mobile pastoralism" frequently replaces "nomadism", as other forms of animal breeding and management replace the nomadic lifestyle. Caroline Humphrey and David Sneath argue that "the very category of nomadism has ceased to be useful analytically" (1999:1). Mobility makes the case for the continuation of pastoralism in the twentieth century. According to them, "Mobility here is seen as a technique that is applicable in a range of institutions, rather than as a holistic life-style suggested by the word 'nomad'" (1999:16). However, in this paper I would like to discuss the revival of a 'nomadic' lifestyle. I argue that Tibetan pastoralists had been 'nomads* in the sense of the definition given below. Decisive for my argument are the fea- tures that have been revived which define nomadism as distinct from other forms of mobile animal husbandry. For example, Robert Paine writes "In respect to livestock rearing the fundamental question is whether the herd is an intrinsic value for a pastoral 1st or a market commodity" (1994:15). According to my argument, being a nomad includes: • practising mainly or solely animal husbandry as a means of subsistence; • owning the livestock; • being forced to change the space of activity according to the availability of pastures and the needs of the animals; • the animal husbandry tasks are divided among family members; • the economic production is essentially subsistence-based (after Scholz, 1994:72). Not all the features listed here reflect equally on the Tibetan nomad's own self-image. Melvyn Goldstein and Cynthia Beall point out that "their own self-image focuses primarily on being complete pastoral- ists (i.e. practising no farming) rather than on moving their herds (nomadism) or even living in tents" (1990:64). However, in addition to raising livestock, trading fishing, hunting, gathering and farming may also be practised, but animal husbandry has to be the main de- terminant of production and mobility. If the nomads engage in field- cultivation as a secondary activity we speak of semi-nomads or agro- pastoralists, expressed as Sa ma 'brog or Zhing 'brog pa in Tibetan, while those who rely exclusively on animal husbandry are 'Brog pa. This paper traces the revival of nomadism after it was displaced for more then two decades, and as it is exemplified in one region of the eastern Tibetan plateau. First, nomadic groups in the research area of Dzam thang County (xian) are introduced. The impact of politics on the pastoral production systems during the 1960s and 1970s, which led to a decline of a 'nomadic' lifestyle, are outlined. I will discuss the revitalisation of nomadism, which occurred in Dzam thang from the early 1980s on. Finally, I will reflect upon the future direction of nomadism in the area in question. 'Brog pa and Sa ma 'brog in Dzam thang In Dzam thang County, the undulating plateau of the north-east and the deeply dissected mountainous landscape of the south-west pro- vide an ecological context for diverse land use. The alpine meadows, which begin at 3,600 m, are suited for mobile animal husbandry. Winter pastures and winter houses are located between 3,600 m and 3,800 m. Above this lies the nomads summer space of activity where they set up their black tents and use the adjacent meadows up to 4,500 m as pastures. The zone between 2,650 m and 3,600 m is suit- able for arable field cultivation, and the agro-pastoralist groups have fields and houses there. For example, the Sa ma 'brog groups in the districts (xiang) of Na mda', Ka thog and Dzam thang have fields on the löss terraces of the wide Dzi chu valley (see Figures 16 and 17), and they conduct animal husbandry in the adjacent alpine pasture regions. The groups that concentrate mostly on field cultivation live in southern Dzam thang and include Rgyal rong pa and Qiang popu- lations. In 1990, 28,300 people lived in Dzam thang County, of whom 64% were recorded as being pastoralists (data received from the county administration, 1991). On the whole animal husbandry is the prevailing sector of production, but more than half of the nomads conduct field cultivation of which the extent varies regionally (Manderscheid, 1999). Before the decline of a nomadic lifestyle occurred in Dzam thang livestock was owned by individual households. The pastures were used in common, but they were the property of and controlled by landowners (e.g. aristocrats, high lamas, monasteries) or tribal af- filiations. Some nomadic groups formed lay communities based around monasteries (lha sde). The nomads of the three main tribes (Gtsang pa, Chos rje and Tshes bcu) reported that they trace them- selves back to the Jo nang pa monastery of Dzam thang, and in the county town of Dzam thang each group has its own monastery building.(2) Other nomad groups were independent from any authority, and for the most part they relied exclusively on animal husbandry. Among them were the Mgo log and Gser thar, of whom the Mgo log groups live in northern Dzam thang. Decline of Nomadism During the 1970s and 1980s Two political developments changed the pastoral production system on the Tibetan plateau completely, just as they did in other pastoral areas of China (e.g. Inner Mongolia and Xinjiang). The first was the occupation ('liberation') of the area after 1950 by the People's Lib- eration Army, while the second was the reform policies enacted un- der Deng Xiaoping from the late 1970s on. The period between 1958 and the early 1980s will be referred to as the "Collectivisation pe- riod". Others have discussed the impact of this time on the pastoral production systems in Tibet in detail (Clarke, 1987; Goldstein, 1994; and Wu Ning, 1999). Here it will be only pointed out why the life- style of the pastoralists during the Collectivisation period cannot be termed 'nomadic'. Following 'liberation', the developmental goals of the Chinese Communist Party could not be realised over the whole of China si- multaneously, and Beijing "adopted a policy of bringing Tibet into the 'socialist line' gradually" (Goldstein, 1994:93).(3) Periods in which there were major impacts on the pastoralist's economic pat- terns were followed by consolidation periods. In remote Dzam thang the political measures characterising this period came into force only after some delay, and how far a full collectivisation of all pastoralists was achieved remains unclear.(4) The pastoralists were restructured into communes step by step, the domestic animals were collectiv- ised, the land tenure of pastures was transferred to the state, and the leaders of the centrally administrated communes decided the animal husbandry management strategy. Some units of the commune were assigned to pasture the livestock. They moved with the herd to the seasonal pastures taking along mobile housing (mobile pastoralism). Sedentary members of the collective took over the milk processing, the production of winter fodder, and so on. Graham Clarke (1987:35) has described the animal husbandry management during the Collec- tivisation period for Pemuthang, in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR), as follows: "The livestock was divided up into four herds for management under four committees, these being the same as the four traditional groups of livestock which had their traditional allocation of pasture, and were moved much as today, up and down the valley according to season. Though each household was allocated to a herd, families could be split up, especially if one member had a different function, such as driving a horse and cart". This illustrates that at least some structures of herding management remained the same as in the pre-Collectivisation period. Sedentarisation programs aimed at settling all nomads. State farms (mushan) were built as housing in the nomadic living space, usually in the winter pasture areas. Nowadays, the state farms are designed to introduce new technologies or improved breeds to the pastoralists, and agricultural students are given practical training there after graduating from a Nationalities Institute (minzu xueyuan). The state farm in Dzam thang's Dzi chu valley (see fig. 18) is run now by the County Agriculture Department as a Grassland Institute, and the seeds of an oat species (Avena sativa), which is intended to be cultivated as winter fodder by the nomads, are grown by paid workers. Another form of collective settlement is where houses are concentrated near a district or county centre, e.g. the Hongyuan set- tlement adjacent to Mdzod dge district centre. In such cases the sur- rounding pastures were the collective's winter pastures. During the Collectivisation period animal husbandry remained mobile, just as other structures of the herding management continued as before. However, the pastoralists did not own the livestock they herded, the herding management was not decided by the individual households, the animal husbandry tasks were not divided among the family members, and most lived a sedentary lifestyle year-round. The pastoralists were no longer nomads, Reform Policies Since the Early 1980s In the late 1970s Chinese agrarian policy attempted to reform the agri- cultural and animal husbandry sector, leading to de-collectivisation and development of a market-oriented economy. The communes were dissolved and the livestock was divided among the former nomads. Central planning was replaced by a state controlled economy on the household level. The families again became responsible for livestock management and the marketing of their products-the so-called "household responsibility system". The pasture tenures remain as state property, but are contracted to the households on a leasing base. This measure implements the assumption that 'private' land will be tended better then public land (Hardin, 1968). The reallocation of pasture, which began during this reform period is still ongoing in eastern Tibet, and its result differs regionally. In Mdzod dge County, for example, I observed in 2000 that all allocated winter pastures are already fenced, while summer pastures are often in common use. These reforms build the socio-political context for the revival of a nomadic lifestyle. The Revived Nomadic Lifestyle in Dzam thang I began my research in Dzam thang in 1990 expecting to study a case of displaced nomadism. I was surprised to find that the life and eco- nomic patterns of Dzam thang's nomads presented themselves as I imagined them to have been before the Collectivisation period. I assumed that either: • this first impression of the pastoralist's lifestyle was wrong, and that it would be corrected during the research; • or that the directives of the Collectivisation period had no im- pact in the research area; • or that the nomads had returned to traditional forms of animal husbandry. As was noted above, mobile pastoralism, rather than nomadism, was conducted on the Tibetan plateau during the Collectivisation period. After responsibility for livestock management was returned to the individual household, the animal husbandry tasks were divided again among the family members. The division of labour is once again obviously gender specific: The duties of women arc milking, milk- processing and all other tasks in and around the tent. Men carry out the work that leads away from the tent, including the pasturing of the livestock, trade, and grain milling in the district or settlement cen- tres. In cases were the family engages in field cultivation in addition to animal husbandry, women take over harvesting. Men and women sow together, while usually only men plough the fields. In Dzam thang during the early 1990s most children lived mobile with them, and took over animal husbandry tasks. The majority did not attend a school, though many families had one boy ordained as a monk. Older daughters assist in milking, and centrifuge the milk, and boys take over the herding. Ail family members migrate once again with the livestock to the seasonal pastures, Their material culture is adapted to mobility, e.g. by taking the dwelling and most of the be- longings along. From spring to autumn the family lives in a 'black tent'. The seasonal migrations of the entire family, as well as the division of labour among family members, are features of a nomadic lifestyle, and are presently revived in Dzam thang. The amount of yak in the herd composition, which had decreased to 60% in 1975, again reached 80% in 1985, the same as it as it had been before the 1950s (Ao Chepu, 1988:928). The pastoralists of Dzam thang are proud to be yak breeders and despise small animals. Administrative directives during Collectivisation times aimed to increase the amount of small animals in the herd composition. Ac- cording to the opinion of the state planners, small animals were and are considered more productive then yak. During de-collectivisation, the existing stock of cattle and small animals was divided evenly among the families. Due to their traditional value system, the no- mads aimed to own only few small animals, and sold the surplus into the neighbouring farming areas south of Dzam thang. Thus, families based their revived herding management system on the traditional high yak herd composition. Another revival according to old values recorded from the TAR is the re-emergence of the traditional taboo on slaughtering of ones' own livestock (Goldstein, 1994:1105). Furthermore, the Dzam thang nomads returned to a subsistence- based economy, a feature that also appeared in Russia and Mongolia after de-collectivisation there (Humphrey & Sneath, 1999:4 and Muller, 1999:36). "In China rapid economic differentiation among herders has meant that some are able to use opportunities to their advantage, while others are only subject to market vagaries and de- pend largely on subsistence production" (Humphrey & Sneath, 1999:57). A local differentiation among those who could use the marketing opportunities, and those who revived a self-sufficient production, matches what has been found to occur in Inner Mongolia and pastoral areas of the Tibetan plateau that offer markets for no- madic products. In Hongyuan County, for instance, the nomads are eager to sell milk to the established milk powder factory there. In Dzam thang, however, there existed very few marketing possibilities in the early 1990s, and nomads did not have much choice in reviving a subsistence-based economy. An average family in Dzam thang which owns between 30-60 animals, slaughter only one yak per year for their own consumption, and sell or trade 5 or 6 yak. The income generated is used to procure barley, tea, clothes, and so on. Second in importance is the sale of butter. A part of the annual butter pro- duction is stored as a hidden reserve, and larger amounts are sold when unplanned expenses arise, e.g. to pay a hospital bill or to buy a horse. Milk and small animals play no role in trade. On the other hand, the increased the collection of medicinal herbs (e.g. Fritillaria cirrhosa or padma) and mushrooms (e.g. Tricholoma matsukate) during recent years is driven by market forces. The pine mushroom, which is mainly exported to Japan, is known as 'white gold', and 1 jin sold for US$120 during autumn 2000 in Bde chen County to the south (Page, 2000). It indicates the nomads' interest in, and need for, a cash income and market production. Adaptations of the Revived Lifestyle to Changed Conditions The revitalisation of the nomadic form oflife and production is not a mere copy of the 'old' lifestyle. The nomads adapted features of the revived lifestyle to changed ecological, political and economic con- ditions. This can be illustrated with some further examples. Unlike Sa ma ' brog, the ' Brog pa groups in Dzam thang did not live in winter houses before Collectivisation. However, with the revival of a nomadic lifestyle the 'Brog pa did not give up their win- ter houses. According to governmental directives all families must have a winter house. But quite apart from this, some pastoralists also stated they appreciate the comfort of stable housing during winter- time. Before the Collectivisation period, the head of the nomadic group or the landowner fixed the dates for the seasonal pasture migrations. Nowadays the dates are set and controlled by state institutions, like the Animal Husbandry Bureau at the district level. The latest date at which the pastoralists should have left the winter pasture, and the earliest date of return are announced to the families by the head of the settlement. This measure aims to allow the meadow vegetation to recover sufficiently, which in Dzam thang is of special importance in the case of the winter pastures, the area of which is quite limited. Some nomadic groups resisted the control of seasonal pasture use, and did not follow the governmental directives. Until the mid-1990s, grain requirements in Dzam thang were pro- cured by 'Brog pa with subsidised grain vouchers (liang piao) from the State Grain Bureau.(5) Since this grain procurement system have ceased, the pastoralists now buy grain from the markets, and direct trade with farmers has been revived. Following the harvest in 1991, I met a pastoralist who had rented a truck with which he transported grain to neighbouring Gser thar County. He had revived the old grain trade between Dzam thang and Gser thar. In Mdzod dge County, it was reported by some households that they reserve dried cheese ("chura") to exchange it for grain with farmers. One could assume that the cessation of the subsidised grain voucher system might have lead to greater activity in field cultivation among the Sa ma 'brog groups, however this has not been the case. Sa ma 'brog Emphasis on Animal Husbandry As discussed above, in the research area there occurred a revival of a nomadic lifestyle adapted to changed political and economic con- texts. However, most remarkable is that the specific feature that most determines the nomadic lifestyle, animal husbandry or more pre- cisely yak-breeding, expanded significantly in the research area. Several indicators suggest this. First, the increased number of live- stock depicted in official statistics(6) should be discussed. The number of yak in Dzam thang increased permanently between 1950 and 1985. This trend was interrupted only between 1957 and 1962, and between 1965 and 1970 (Ao Chepu, 1988:928). The decline after 1957 goes along with an overall decrease in China's economy. The second decrease is due to incompetent planning during the Cultural Revolution period (Pfenning, 1983:59). In spite of these declines, the number of yak doubled in 13 years (between 1972 and 1985). Even if we view the raised animal numbers in relation to an increase in population, it can be stated that statistically each family has a larger stock of yak, The data valid for the entire Rnga ba Tibetan and Qiang Autonomous Prefecture (Sichuan Statistical Bureau, 1992) suggests that the nomads continued to accumulate livestock in the 1990s. An increase is reported from other Inner Asian pastoral areas as well. "The aim of most households in all sites appeared to be to increase the number of their animals by consuming or selling as few as possible" (Humphrey & Sneath, 1999:275). The accumulation is motivated by the pastoral strategy that having high numbers of live- stock guarantees the survival of a sufficient number of animals in bad times, e.g. if natural hazards occur, and wealth on the hoof has a high status value for pastoralists worldwide. Further, Tibetan no- mads are reluctant to sell animals due to cultural-religious and prac- tical reasons (Levine, 1999:2). In the case of Dzam thang, the lack of local marketing possibilities also plays a decisive role. The increased livestock numbers forced the herders to open up additional pastures, which, as it happened, were available in Dzam thang. The nomads were quite optimistic concerning the possibilities for grazing their domestic animals. One grazing unit even came every year from Qinghai with its flock of sheep, and lived during summer in northern Dzam thang. Supposedly it had 'old' pasturing rights. The stay was not welcomed by the local officials but some- how accepted. In the presentation of the trend in livestock growth rates by dis- trict (see fig. 19), the districts of Rdo stod, Rka mda, Na mda' and Ka thog are most significant. The nomads of these districts combine animal husbandry with field-cultivation, although animal husbandry predominates. It is noteworthy that the pastoralists, and especially the women, often complained about too much work in autumn. This is when the lactation of livestock is at its highest point, and the field harvest must also be brought in. Both the milk production and har- vesting are women's work. Some households could not handle the entire workload, and then they neglected field cultivation in favour of animal husbandry. While prior to 1958, the Sa ma 'brog occupied only the pastures close to the farming areas, the current enlarged herds make the migration to more and more remote rangelands necessary, so that the distances from there to the farming areas in- creases significantly. The effect is that these families do not migrate regularly any more from the high altitude summer pastures to the fields for weeding, and they let the fields lay fallow every second year instead of cultivating peas as a rotation crop. It even happens that families did not bring in the harvest at all. This suggests that the nomadic families had decided to expand animal husbandry at the expense of their secondary form of production, field cultivation Increases of livestock numbers are also recorded from the districts that are located in the southern part of Dzam thang County as well, but they are not so dramatic. The field-cultivation there always played a more important role in the economic activity of the Sa ma 'brog. A shift to animal husbandry with all the implications, such as changed migration patterns, was not observed. The dynamics in the districts of Shang Dzam thang and Dzam thang can be explained because until 1963 they both constituted one district. In 1963 the eastern part was declared as national pasture (Guo ying mushan) and came under the direct administration of the Sichuan provincial gov- ernment in Chengdu. It was returned back to the county administra- tion in 1985, and became Shang Dzam thang district with additional land tenure from the district of Dzam thang. The increased importance of mobile animal husbandry in the eco- nomic activity of the Sa ma 'brog population is further suggested by many permanent houses being left vacant throughout the year in the farming areas (see Figures 17 and 20). Before Collectivisation, the houses were the home base of the Sa ma 'brog families. Now they live exclusively in tents and in winter houses like 'Brog pa. The farmhouses are visited by the male head of the household and his wife only for short periods, e.g., in autumn to bring the harvest in and in spring for sowing grain. The head of the household spends some time there when he has the barley ground at the mill in the district centre (Manderscheid, 1998:66). Older family members who no longer engage in animal husbandry might live in the completely furnished houses. However, the Sa ma 'brog families do not want to give up the houses, and young couples build new permanent houses even if their present form of production requires them to live in tents and winter houses. Changed conditions allowed this shift towards animal husbandry to occur, but what motivated Sa ma 'brog to seek it in Dzam thang? Being a 'Brog pa and owning much livestock had a high prestige in the old Tibetan society.(7) J.F. Downs reconstructed the traditional relationship between 'Brog pa and Sa ma 'brog in a community now located in the TAR, as it existed before his informants went into exile. "All our Tibetan informants gave the impression that the no- mad life was prestigious and their accounts of semi-nomad families suggested that these people attempt in every way possible to imitate nomads in dress and manner". (Downs, 1964:1118). An additional impact on the positive image of 'Brog pa was that in eastern Tibet the 'Brog pa groups were often independent tribes. With their reallo- cated livestock and less state control, the Sa ma 'brog can concen- trate on animal breeding, and work towards the traditionally valued 'Brog pa status. In the Mongolia the attraction of animal husbandry is reflected in the emergence of the so-called "new nomads" Follow- ing de-colletivisation, this group fled a sedentary lifestyle in the cities or on state farms and started to conduct mobile animal hus- bandry (Muller, 1999:36). Furthermore, economic reasons motivated the Sa ma 'brog groups in question to decrease field cultivation in favour of animal hus- bandry. In 1985, with the introduction of the "contract grain pro- curements system", the selling price for contracted grains decreased and grain production was no longer attractive (Schwarz, 1998:154). "Despite price adjustments and subsidies, grain production during the reform ear remains a poor investment for household labour and capital". (Veek & Shaohua, 2000:78). The returns for livestock sales are better than for grain over the whole of China. This had a signifi- cant impact upon the behaviour of agro-pastoralists for whom field cultivation traditionally played only aminor role. As we have seen, the nomads of Dzam thang accumulated yak, and shifted their economic production further towards animal hus- bandry. However, the higher numbers of animals did not result in a market-oriented production. This was intended to change with the establishment of a new meat-processing factory in Dzam thang in 1995. I was told that the factory meanwhile had to cease production due to a lack of meat supplies. The example of Hongyuan County, with both a milk powder and a meat-processing factory, illustrates the possible local shift to market oriented production. In Hongyuan the pastoralists rarely revived a nomadic lifestyle, and consider their animals as a market commodity. The animal husbandry is mobile, with the root family living sedentary in a permanent house. Although Hongyuan is a 'model' case for Chinese state development policy intentions in Tibetan pastoral areas, it shows that the revival of a nomadic lifestyle is not homogeneous throughout all parts of the Tibetan plateau. Conclusions If we compare the revival of nomadism with the revival of religion, literature and art in A mdo, or across Tibet as a whole, it becomes clear that the revival of a specific form of production is in certain aspects different from a cultural revival. The cultural revival brings with it a strengthening of Tibetan identity, and has a potentially uni- fying social force (Germano, 1998:89). The revival of nomadism in the case discussed here is a response to changed conditions and a strategy to survive in the mid-term. The common condition for both types of revival is that they were enabled under the policy reforms of the Deng Xiaoping era. Melvyn Goldstein writes of the revitalisation of Tibetan religion that "Some individual cultural traits have reemerged identical with the past, but others have reappeared somewhat changed, and still others have not reemerged at all". (1998:11). The same has happened in the case of nomadism. Some features of the revived nomadic lifestyle are iden- tical to the lifestyle before Collectivisation, e.g., the pastoralists choose the same herd composition as in the pro-1960 period. Other revived features are adaptations to changed conditions, like the in- tensified collection of medicinal herbs and mushrooms as a response to an increased demand in markets. In Dzam thang, the revival of a nomadic lifestyle has a different impact on 'Brog pa and Sa ma 'brog groups. Both groups accumulate livestock, which is motivated by an animal husbandry management strategy, the high prestige of being a nomad, and a traditional reluc- tance to sell animals. Sa ma 'brog groups even decreased the impor- tance of field cultivation in their economic activities in favour of animal husbandry. The shift is suggested by reports of increased domestic workload especially in autumn, neglected or totally aban- doned fields, and the uninhabited houses in the farming areas. The focus on animal husbandry demands a change of migration and set- tlement patterns from the Sa ma 'brog. One changed condition which allowed this shift is that the households can now largely decide their form of production themselves, this being determined by the land- owners before the 1950s, and in the Collective period by the central planning of the state. The revival of a nomadic lifeslyle is not homogeneous throughout all areas of the Tibetan plateau, but has occurred in those regions where the nomads had little other choice after the state withdraw from closely organising their lives. A revival of an earlier, reliable form of production is obvious, and it has worked out for the Dzam thang nomads. In Hongyuan County, on the other hand, the pastor- alists have for the most part not returned to a nomadic lifestyle. The animal husbandry management there is mainly directed by a market- oriented production. A nomadic lifestyle and the value accorded wealth on the hoof stands in contradiction to a market economy, and to a society in which cash is needed to pay for basic needs like grain, hospital bills and to pay taxes. Even though factories have been established in many places that purchase the animal products of the Tibetan nomads, the total de- mand for their output in China and on the world market is small, although increasing. Further, the surplus of animals threatens the condition of pastureland, and recent governmental directives which attempt to improve animal husbandry in Sichuan, such as allocation of pasture tenure on private leasing contracts, fencing of seasonal pastures for each household, limiting animal numbers according to carrying capacity, and sedentarisation are inconsistent with no- madism. It is possible that the revival of nomadism is only a mid- term strategy among Tibetans. When questioned, many young no- mads were not very eager to continue to live as nomads. They were more interested in jobs outside the pastoral sector, especially in trade. This and the governmental directives might result in a longer- term shift to other forms of animal husbandry which could replace the revived nomadism in Dzam thang. Footnotes (1) For example, in Lapland, from northern Fennoscandia to northwest Russia, tra- ditional nomadic reindeer herding has been replaced with a husbandry management regime in which the reindeer roam freely nearly all year round while the pastoralists are sedentary. (2) Each of the three tribes relates to different students of the founder of the nang pa school. Dol po pa Shes rab Rgyal mtshan (1292-1361/2). The individial monasteries in Dzam thang district are: Gtsang pa dgon with 1,200 monks, Chos rje dgon with 250 monks, and Tshes bcu dgon with 80 monks (data for 1991, infonna in Dzam thang). (3) What Goldstein describes for the TAR matches the cases of other minority ar- eas as well. (4) During the initial field research in the early 1990s, both nomads and officials did not give much information about it. (5) The liang piao system ceased in Dzam thang much later then in other pastorall areas. In Inner Mongolia it ended in 1992; Humphrey & Sneath (1999:99). (6) I use the statistical data with an underlying scepticism. The absolute numbers are less important then the trend. (7) In the context discussed here, it does not matter whether the high approval of the nomadic lifestyle is based on "the romantic belief in the nomadic origin oof the Tibetan people"; Upton (1996:99).
Ao Chepo ed. (1988). Si chuan shao shu min zu di qu she hui jing ji fa zhan li shi tong ji nian jian (Statistics of social economy and social development in the minority areas of Sichuan province, 1945-85). Chengdu: Statistical Bureau of Sichuan Province. Clarke, Graham E. (1987). China's reforms of Tibet, and their effects on pastoral- ism. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies. Downs, J.F. (1964). "Livestock, production, and social mobility in high altitude Tibet", American Anthropoiogist, 66:5, 1115-18. Ekvall, Robert B. (1968). Fields on the Hoof: Nexus of Tibetan Nomadic Pastoral- ism. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Germano, David. (1998). "Re-membering the dismembered body of Tibet", in Melvyn C. Goldstein & Matthew T. Kapstein eds., Buddhism in Contempo- rary Tibet. Berkeley: University of California Press, 53-94. Goldstein, Melvyn C. (1994). "Change, Conflict and Continuity among a Commu- nity of Nomadic Pastoralists: A Case Study from Western Tibet, 1950-1990", in Robert Barnett & Shirin Akiner eds., Resistance and Reform in Tibet. Bloominglon: Indiana University Press, 76-111. ---(1998). "Introduction", in Melvyn C. Goldstein & Matthew T. Kapstein eds., Buddhism in Contemporary Tibet. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1-14. --- & Cynthia M. Beall (1990). Nomads of Western Tibet. London: Serindia Publications. Hardin, G. (1968). "The tragedy of the commons", Science, 16, 1243-48. Humphrey, Caroline, & David Sneath (1999). The End of Nomadism? Society, state and the environment in Inner Asia. Durham: Duke University Press. Levine, Nancy E. (1999). "Cattle and the cash economy: responses to change among Tibetan nomadic pastoralists in Sichuan. China", Human Organization, 58, 161-72. Manderscheid, Angela (1998). "Life and economic patterns of nomads on the east- ern Tibet plateau. 'Brog Pa and Sa Ma 'Brog in 'Dzam-thang", in Graham E. Clarke ed., Development, Society and Environment in Tibet. Wien: Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 59-67. Manderscheid, Angela (1999). Lebens- und Wirtschaftsformen von Nomaden im Osten des Tibetischen Hochlandes. Berlin: Reimer Verlag. Manderscheid, Angela (2001). "The black tent in its most eastern distribution: The case of the Tibetan plateau", Mountain Research and Development, 21, 154-60. Marshall, Steven D., & Susette Ternent-Cooke (1997). Tibet. Outside the TAR. CD- ROM. Muller, Franz-Volker (1999). "Die Wiederkehr des mongolischen Nomadismus. Raumliche Mobilitat und Existenzsicherung in einem Transformationsland", in JOrg Janzen ed., Raumliche Mobilitat und Existenzsicherung. Berlin: Reimer Verlag, 1-46. Paine, Robert (1994). Herds of the Tundra. A portrait of Saami Reindeer Pastoral- ism. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press. Page, Jeremy (2000). "A Mushrooming Economy", Washington Post, 23.11.2000. Pfennig, W., H. Franz & E. Barthel (1983). Volksrepublik China. Berlin. Scholz, Fred (1994). "Nomadismus-Mobile Tierhaltung", Geographische Rundschau. 46, 72-78. Schwarz, Ronald D. (1998). "The reforms revisited: Grain procurement in Tibet", in Graham E. Clarke ed., Development, Society and Environment in Tibet. Wien: Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 153-66. Sichuan Statistical Bureau ed. (1992). Socio-economic statistic data in the ethnic areas of Sichuan Province, 1985-1990. Chengdu. Upton, Janet T, (1996). "Home on the grasslands? Tradition, modernity, and the negotiation of identity by Tibetan intellectuals in the PRC", in Melissa J. Brown ed., Negotiating ethnicities in China and Taiwan. Berkeley: Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, 98-112. Veek, Geogory, & Wang Shaohua (2000). "Challenges to family farming In China" The Geographical Review, 90, 57-82. Wu Ning (1999). "Developments in Tibetan pastoral society in the last four decades and their impact on pastoral mobility in north-western Sichuan, China", in Jorg Janzen ed., Raumliche Mobilitat und Existenzsicherung. Berlin: Reimer Verlag, 153-67.