DOCSLIB.ORG

Economic Sociology and Capitalism 2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Economic Sociology and Capitalism 2 economic sociology_ the european electronic newsletter Vol ume 18, N umber 1 | November 20 16 18.1 Editor Sascha Münnich, University of Göttingen Book Reviews Editor Lisa Suckert, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies Editorial Board Patrik Aspers, Uppsala University Jens Beckert, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, Cologne Johan Heilbron, Centre de Sociologie Européenne, Paris Richard Swedberg, Cornell University, Ithaca Table of Contents Note from the editor: Economic Sociology and capitalism _2 Understanding the ‘Economic’ in New Economic Sociology by Jan Sparsam_6 Sociology and capitalism research by Klaus Kraemer_18 Interview: Economic Sociology and capitalism Christoph Deutschmann interviewed by Sascha Münnich _29 Book Reviews_ 38 http://econsoc.mpifg.de Note from the editor 2 Note from the editor Economic Sociology and capitalism not been fostered by a society-wide ‘sudden love’ for capi- talism or radical liberalism, but depended, as it had always The tides of economic sociology are intimately linked to done, on capitalism’s capacity to promise and secure stabil- the fate of the market in modern societies, particularly its ity, growth and a high standard of living, at least for those impact as a dominant blueprint for the formation of eco- groups (of employers and workers alike) who could stand nomic relations. In one of the founding scripts of New the test of global free trade. The financial crisis reminded Economic Sociology, Swedberg claimed that sociology had everybody of capitalism’s resilient habit to not care about lost interest in markets as social arenas after the age of the stability of the whole system if that comes into conflict classical sociologists (Swedberg 2003: 266). After Weber, with private profit interests. As Klaus Kraemer shows in his Simmel, Marshall and Durkheim had passed on the torch – article in this issue, mainstream sociology as well as eco- all of whom had had a self-evident interest in ”socio- nomic sociologists had over the course of the Golden Era economics” and markets – Parsonian thinking became become reluctant to even use the concept of capitalism. dominant post 1950s. Here, the economy was treated as a subsystem that functions in its inner (market) core very Today, it seems that speaking of ‘capitalism’ as the correct much like economists describe it (Krippner 2001), while concept to label the contemporary economic order is high- around it cultural and political action and system logics ly favored again among social scientists. Since the onset of define individual preferences and principles of institutional the Greek sovereign debt crisis in 2010/11, many political regulation. Historically, this understanding of markets as economists in Europe and North America have been en- framed or governed by society paralleled political thought gaging in intense debates about the relation between in the “Golden Era” of macroeconomic governance and capitalism and democracy in the face of European austerity welfare state expansion in Europe and North America. measures and the widespread ascendance of right-wing populism (Streeck 2014; Crouch 2011; Woodruff 2016). In the 1980s and 1990s, however, markets were re- This raises the question which insights economic sociolo- discovered on both levels simultaneously: the global tri- gists can contribute to understanding contemporary capi- umph of free trade and competition-friendly economic and talism and its precarious stability as a social order. Specifi- social policies co-evolved with sociologists’ renewed inter- cally speaking, the question is which particular social rela- est in what sorts of social formations emerge in markets if tions make markets capitalist, and what how do the social, and after they are freed from state and law regulation. In political, cultural and cognitive embeddedness of markets their many empirical studies on how markets develop and (Zukin, DiMaggio 1990) contribute to the functions and function, a new generation of economic sociologists dynamics of capitalism. These questions define the topic of showed how far from reality all economic – and at the the first issue of the 2016/17 volume of the EESN. time most political – perspectives were that assumed that stability, cooperation and efficiency emerged in markets. It is my impression that there are four major fields of eco- Instead, they showed that if free competition is opened up nomic sociological research that provide important insights for market actors, habits, routines, norms, networks and for the analysis of contemporary capitalism. These are (1) conventions take over, spark all different forms of social the construction of calculation and future expectations as exclusion and create power imbalances. calculative devices for investment, entrepreneurial innova- tion and strategies of production and marketing, (2) the While the faith in free markets started diminishing after social structuring of resource and revenue distribution in the problematic consequences of globalization and welfare markets, (3) the cultural and political legitimation of the state privatization became visible in the late 1990s, the core institutions of capitalism, such as private property, financial turmoil of 2008 with its unavoidable full-frontal firm control or contract law, and (4) the social formation of interventionist stabilization of national economies remind- consumer demand. ed societies – and sociologists – of the fact that they live in a capitalist market order. Contrary to what many left-wing (1) Joseph Schumpeter has stressed that if we accept the politicians today still believe, the turn to deregulation had equilibrium model of the fully competitive market, the core economic sociology_the european electronic newsletter Volume 18, Number 1 (November 2016) Note from the editor 3 capitalist elements of growth and profit cannot be ex- ture all potential distributive effects of markets, if markets plained (Schumpeter 2012). Instead, innovation that are understood as organizational patterns for group inter- ‘dares’ to try new combinations of production factors de- est and collective action. The long lasting and extensive pends on entrepreneurial action. Sociological perspectives debate about different “varieties of capitalism” (Hall, have turned Schumpeter’s classical celebration of the indi- Soskice 2001) in comparative and international political vidual genius from ‘its head to its feet’ and pointed to- economy has also been taken up by economic sociologists wards the importance of social structures that foster en- in this context. Researchers who have studied structural trepreneurial behavior (Stark, Beunza 2009; Deutschmann affinities between market organization and political institu- 2010). Particularly in the uncertain context of market rela- tion-building show that institutionalized production re- tions, in which double contingency is ubiquitous, gimes do not only create complementary group organiza- knowledge and cognitions become important facilitators tion among firms and trade-unions that may facilitate or for rational planning into the future (MacKenzie 2006; hinder corporatist coordination for policy-making. Moreo- Caliskan, Callon 2009; MacKenzie 2011). In this context, ver, these national production regimes will, vice versa, also some authors describe the role of narratives and imagina- be supported and defended by distributional alliances tions for making calculative economic action possible in an within markets, intensifying and reproducing existing struc- uncertain market environment (Beckert 2016; Castoriadis, tures of resource and power inequality (Beyer 2010; Mills Curtis 1997: 213ff.). This is even more so for the analysis et al. 2008; Hollingsworth, Streeck 1994). Economic soci- of financial markets in which future expectations are trad- ologists such as Harrison White have examined such inner- ed at present values (Esposito 2011). For the analysis of market power coalitions and organizational patterns, and contemporary capitalism, it is important to study how explained how producer networks form niches and coali- social patterns of knowledge shape the direction of in- tions (White 2002). These networks may eventually use vestment and innovation into the future, therefore foster- their power to guard their market positions by institutions. ing (or potentially blocking) a growing marketization and However, a more encompassing answer to the distribu- opening (or closing) opportunities for profit. An important tional effects of market embeddedness depends on how part of economic sociology research has always been the the double layer of distributional principles in markets – influence of economic knowledge on real economic prac- networks on the one hand and institutions on the other – tices, the ‘performativity’ of economics, and this begs the can be integrated into one framework. A broader sociolo- question how the rational, calculative habitus of ‘capital- gy of market distribution would be needed that integrates ists’ is inserted into economic relations and organizations primary market distribution through networks and second- as a form of dominant knowledge or a measurement tool, ary re-distribution through social institutions. This will help and how it is able to drive out other action orientations. to understand better the multiple distributional effects of capitalist economies as well as the socio-structural dimen- (2) Possibly due to market sociology’s early, and maybe its sions of capital accumulation. Elementaries of such
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Revival of Economic Sociology
    Chapter 1 The Revival of Economic Sociology MAURO F. G UILLEN´ , RANDALL COLLINS, PAULA ENGLAND, AND MARSHALL MEYER conomic sociology is staging a comeback after decades of rela- tive obscurity. Many of the issues explored by scholars today E mirror the original concerns of the discipline: sociology emerged in the first place as a science geared toward providing an institutionally informed and culturally rich understanding of eco- nomic life. Confronted with the profound social transformations of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the founders of so- ciological thought—Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, Max Weber, Georg Simmel—explored the relationship between the economy and the larger society (Swedberg and Granovetter 1992). They examined the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services through the lenses of domination and power, solidarity and inequal- ity, structure and agency, and ideology and culture. The classics thus planted the seeds for the systematic study of social classes, gender, race, complex organizations, work and occupations, economic devel- opment, and culture as part of a unified sociological approach to eco- nomic life. Subsequent theoretical developments led scholars away from this originally unified approach. In the 1930s, Talcott Parsons rein- terpreted the classical heritage of economic sociology, clearly distin- guishing between economics (focused on the means of economic ac- tion, or what he called “the adaptive subsystem”) and sociology (focused on the value orientations underpinning economic action). Thus, sociologists were theoretically discouraged from participating 1 2 The New Economic Sociology in the economics-sociology dialogue—an exchange that, in any case, was not sought by economists. It was only when Parsons’s theory was challenged by the reality of the contentious 1960s (specifically, its emphasis on value consensus and system equilibration; see Granovet- ter 1990, and Zelizer, ch.
    [Show full text]
  • Capitalism and Labor Has Become a Standard Work on This Subject
    Social theory has largely abandoned a focus on ›labor‹ and with it its empirical foundation, while Klaus Dörre, Nicole Mayer-Ahuja, Dieter Sauer, the sociology of work has neglected the produc- Volker Wittke (eds.) tion of theory more generally. It is for precise- ly this reason that Capitalism and Labor has become a standard work on this subject. Labor and employment relations have become and LaborCapitalism both increasingly diverse as well as less secure Capitalism and Labor while, at the same time, labor and distribution- al struggles are being waged ever more fierce- Towards Critical Perspectives ly. Adequately grasping these changes requires innovative impulses emerging from the analysis of capitalism, just as the sociology of work has a lot to contribute to the former. In this translated and updated edition the authors discuss current theoretical approaches in an attempt to once again conceive capitalism and labor together. Dörre, Mayer-Ahuja, Sauer, Wittke Sauer, Dörre, Mayer-Ahuja, ISBN 978-3-593-50897-9 ] D [ 39,95 € Internationale Arbeitsstudien International Labour Studies Capitalism and Labor International Labour Studies – Internationale Arbeitsstudien Edited by Klaus Dörre und Stephan Lessenich Volume 16 Klaus Dörre, Dr., is Professor for the Sociology of Work at the Friedrich Schiller University, Jena. Nicole Mayer-Ahuja, Dr., is Professor of Sociology and Director of the Sociolgical Research Institute (SOFI) at the Georg August University, Göttingen. Dieter Sauer, Dr., is a senior researcher at the Institute for Social Science Research (ISF), München. Volker Wittke (1957–2012), Dr., was Professor at the Sociolgical Research Insti- tute (SOFI) at the Georg August University, Göttingen.
    [Show full text]
  • Commentary Concepts of Work in Marx, Durkheim, and Weber
    Nordic journal of working life studies Volume 7 ❚ Number 2 ❚ June 2017 Commentary Concepts of Work in Marx, Durkheim, and Weber ❚❚ Jan Ch. Karlsson1 Professor of Organization, Department of Business, Languages and Social Sciences, Østfold University College, Norway ❚❚ Per Månson Professor Emeritus of Sociology, Department of Sociology and Work Science, Gothenburg University, Sweden DOI To be announced he extremely dramatic social transformation – called ‘the great transformation’ by Polanyi (1985) – that the full emergence of capitalism and industrialism meant in TEurope led to the birth of modern social theory. The attention of the classics of the studies was taken up by trying to describe, understand, and explain this social change: What is actually going on? What does it mean to people and society? What does the development depend on? And what can be done about all social problems that this new society creates? Changes in working life are at the center of the analyses of social science from the start. Even when the analyses concern religion, culture, music, and the family, the emergence of a labor market, capitalist wage labor, and the concentration of production in large industries provide the reference point. Working life is the central arena of the classics of social theory. There is, however, no common definition of the key concept ‘work’ or ‘labor’ among the classical social scientists – as little as among current ones. Why is that? We discuss the differences between Marx, Durkheim, and Weber, although we concentrate on the development of Marx’s conceptualization of work, as he is the one among them to elaborate the analysis the most.
    [Show full text]
  • The Classics in Economic Sociology
    I The Classics in Economic Sociology There exists a rich and colorful tradition of economic sociology, which roughly began around the turn of the twentieth century and continues till today. This tradition has generated a number of helpful concepts and ideas as well as interesting research results, which this and the following chapter seek to briefly present and set in perspective. Economic soci- ology has peaked twice since its birth: in 1890–1920, with the founders of sociology (who were all interested in and wrote on the economy), and today, from the early 1980s and onward. (For the history of economic sociology, see Swedberg 1987, 1997; Gislain and Steiner 1995). A small number of important works in economic sociology—by economists as well as sociologists—was produced during the time between these two periods, from 1920 to the mid-1980s. The main thesis of this chapter, and of this book as a whole, is as follows: in order to produce a powerful economic sociology we have to combine the analysis of economic interests with an analysis of social relations. From this perspective, institutions can be understood as dis- tinct configurations of interests and social relations, which are typically of such importance that they are enforced by law. Many of the classic works in economic sociology, as I shall also try to show, hold a similar view of the need to use the concept of interest in analyzing the economy. Since my suggestion about the need to combine interests and social relations deviates from the existing paradigm in economic sociology, a few words will be said in the next section about the concept of interest as it has been used in social theory.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Economic Sociology and Should Any Economists Care?
    What Is Economic Sociology and Should Any Economists Care? Robert Gibbons* Robert Gibbons is Sloan Distinguished Professor of Organizational Economics and Strategy, Sloan School of Management and Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts. * I am grateful to Tim Taylor for helpful comments and to Jim Baron, Roberto Fernandez, Jim March, Joel Podolny, Jesper Sorensen, and Ezra Zuckerman for patient tutoring. 1 A couple years ago, two of my colleagues independently proposed approximately the same title for their respective contributions to a series of lunchtime talks: “Why Erving Goffman Is My Hero (and Should Be Yours, Too).” I emerged from these two lunches mightily impressed – both by Goffman’s (1959) insights into The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life and by the potential for Goffman’s micro-sociological research to inspire a major new research stream in behavioral game theory. In a similar spirit, I considered titling this introduction “Why Robert Merton Is My Hero,” but this approach seemed prone to at least two problems. First, explaining hero worship in a short space would probably require poetry, which is not my forte. Second, I feared that the title would be opaque to those economists who would immediately think of Robert C. Merton, the Nobel Laureate in financial economics, rather than his father Robert K. Merton, one of the great sociologists in the history of that discipline. I take the ideas in these papers and their underlying sociological literatures quite seriously. In fact, one sociologist friend recently declared that I have an “economist’s eye for the sociological guy.” More precisely, my interest is in economic sociology, which I will define as the sociology of economic actors and institutions; see the two Handbooks of Economic Sociology by Smelser and Swedberg (1994, forthcoming) for volumes of detail.
    [Show full text]
  • Capitalism Ln Transformation Movements and Countermovements in the 21St Century
    Capitalism ln Transformation Movements and Countermovements in the 21st Century Edited by Roland Atzmüller Johannes Kepler University, Austria Brigitte Aulenbacher Johannes Kepler Univers ity, Aus tria Ulrich Brand University of Vienna, Austria Fabienne Döcieux Johannes Kepler University, Austria Karin Fischer Johannes Kepler Univers ity, Aus tria Birgit Sauer University of Vienn,a, Austria EE H$X*l* Ergar Cheltenham, UK. Northampton, MA, USA Contents Gr Roland Atzmüiler, Brigitte Aulenbacher, ulrich Brand, Fabienne Döcieux, Karin Fischer and Birgit Sauer 2019 List of contributors vlll All rights reserved. No part ofthis publication may be reproduced, stored in a 1 Polanyian perspectives on the movements and mechanical or retrieial system or tranimitted in any form or by any means' electronic, countennovements of "our time": an introduction or otherwise without the prior permission ofthe publisher. photocopying, recording, Roland Atzmüller, Brigitte Aulenbacher, Ulrich Brand, Döcieux, Karin Fischer and Birgit Sauer Published by Fabienne Edward Elgar Publishing Limited The Lypiatts PART I HISTORICAL AND THEORETICAL l5 Lansdown Road REFLECTIONS: KARL POLANYI' Cheltenham CAPITALISM AND SOCIETY Glos GL50 2JA UK 2 A life-long search for freedom. From Budapest to journey through Karl Polanyi's life 22 Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc. America and back: a William Pratt House Kari Polanyi-Levitt, interviewed by Michael Brie and 9 Dewey Court Claus Thomasberger Northampton Massachusetts 01060 3 "Plunges into utter destruction" and the limits ofhistorical
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on Market Design and Economic Sociology
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Ossandón, José Article Notes on market design and economic sociology economic sociology_the european electronic newsletter Provided in Cooperation with: Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies (MPIfG), Cologne Suggested Citation: Ossandón, José (2019) : Notes on market design and economic sociology, economic sociology_the european electronic newsletter, ISSN 1871-3351, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies (MPIfG), Cologne, Vol. 20, Iss. 2, pp. 31-39 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/200967 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu 31 more sustainable. In order to increase the use of re- Notes on newable sources such as wind, the electricity grid of the future must be more “flexible.” This project tests a way of creating flexibility by means of a complicated market design intervention that integrates activities at three levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Sociology in a Nutshell
    Introduction History Comparison Old Theories New Theories Embeddedness Economic Sociology in a Nutshell ChangHwan Kim Introduction History Comparison Old Theories New Theories Embeddedness What is Economic Sociology? the sociological perspective applied to economic phenomena (Weber; Durkheim) the application of the frames of reference, variables, and explanatory models of sociology to that complex of activities concerned with the production, distribution, exchange, and consumption of scarce goods and services. (Smelser & Swedberg) Then, what defines sociological perspectives? how it is different from other perspectives? Introduction History Comparison Old Theories New Theories Embeddedness Why people start to study economic sociology? One should not assume that certain topics are inherently \economic" (as in: why does something cost as much as it does?) while others are inherently \social" (as in: why do people vote as they do?). Rather, the division between economics and other social sciences are less clear. new economic sociology rational choice theory new institutional economics economic imperialism behavioral economics Introduction History Comparison Old Theories New Theories Embeddedness Basic Principle of Economic Sociology How does social structure shape economic action? Economic action as social action Economic action as socially situated Economic institutions as social constructions social construction of reality path dependence social networks Introduction History Comparison Old Theories New Theories Embeddedness Mainstream Economics: Ten principles by Menkiw Video: Principles of economics, translated 1 People Face Tradeoffs. 2 The Cost of Something is What You Give Up to Get It. 3 Rational People Think at the Margin. 4 People Respond to Incentives. 5 Trade Can Make Everyone Better Off. 6 Markets Are Usually a Good Way to Organize Economic Activity.
    [Show full text]
  • Karl Polanyi and the New Economic Sociology: Notes on the Concept of (Dis)Embeddedness
    RCCS Annual Review A selection from the Portuguese journal Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais 3 | 2011 Issue no. 3 Karl Polanyi and the New Economic Sociology: Notes on the Concept of (Dis)embeddedness Nuno Miguel Cardoso Machado Translator: João Paulo Moreira Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/rccsar/309 DOI: 10.4000/rccsar.309 ISSN: 1647-3175 Publisher Centro de Estudos Sociais da Universidade de Coimbra Electronic reference Nuno Miguel Cardoso Machado, « Karl Polanyi and the New Economic Sociology: Notes on the Concept of (Dis)embeddedness », RCCS Annual Review [Online], 3 | 2011, Online since 01 October 2011, connection on 21 December 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/rccsar/309 ; DOI : https:// doi.org/10.4000/rccsar.309 © CES RCCS Annual Review, 3, October 2011: 119-140 Nuno Miguel Cardoso Machado Research Centre in Economic and Organizational Sociology, School of Economics and Management (SOCIUs- ISEG), Technical University of Lisbon Karl Polanyi and the New Economic Sociology: Notes on the Concept of (Dis)embeddedness* Within the context of the New Economic Sociology, Karl Polanyi is almost universally osideed the fathe of the oept of eeddedess. However, this concept has been subject to selective appropriation by this discipline and its relationship to the remaining theoretical edifice constructed by Polanyi has been neglected. It is, in fact, possible to refer to the geat tasfoatio to hich the concept of embeddedness has been subjected: heeas i Polais ok it is assoiated ith the aoeooi leel ad is used as evidence of the exceptional nature of the capitalist market economy – disembedded from society – in NES, it is normally associated with the meso (and even micro) level, on the assumption that all economies – including capitalist economies – are embedded.
    [Show full text]
  • The Economic Sociology of Capitalism
    1 THE ECONOMIC SOCIOLOGY OF CAPITALISM: AN INTRODUCTION AND AGENDA by Richard Swedberg Cornell University [email protected] revised version July 27, 2003 2 Capitalism is the dominant economic system in today’s world, and there appears to be no alternatives in sight.1 Socialism, its main competitor, has been weakened immeasurably by the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. Where socialism still prevails, such as in the People’s Republic of China, serious attempts are made to turn the whole economic system in a capitalist direction so that it will operate in a more efficient manner. “It doesn’t matter if the cat is white or black as long as it catches mice”, to cite Deng Xiaping (e.g. Becker 2000:52-3). While the superiority of capitalism as an economic system and growth machine has fascinated economists for centuries, this has not been the case with sociologists. For sociologists capitalism has mainly been of interest for its social effects – how it has led to class struggle, anomie, inequality and social problems in general. Capitalism as an economic system in its own right has been of much less interest. Some of this reaction has probably to do with the unfortunate division of labor that developed between economists and sociologists in the 19th century: economists studied the economy, and the sociologists society minus the economy. In this respect, as in so many others, sociology has essentially been a “left-over science” (Wirth 1948). 1 For inspiration to write this chapter I thank Victor Nee and for comments and help with information Mabel Berezin, Patrik Aspers, Filippo Barbera, Mark Chavez, Philippe Steiner and two anonymous reviewers.
    [Show full text]
  • Capitalism As a System of Fictional Expectations1 Toward a Sociological Microfoundation of Political Economy Jens Beckert Max Pl
    Capitalism as a System of Fictional Expectations1 Toward a Sociological Microfoundation of Political Economy Jens Beckert Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies Paulstr. 3, 50367 Köln, Germany [email protected] Abstract Political economy and economic sociology have developed in relative isolation from each other. While political economy focuses largely on macro phenomena, economic sociology focuses on the embeddedness of economic action. The article argues that economic sociology can provide a microfoundation of political economy beyond rational actor theory and behavioral economics from which to explain the dynamics of capitalism. At the same time political economy offers a unifying research framework to economic sociology with its focus on the explanation of capitalist dynamics. Based on a discussion of what I call the four Cs of capitalism (credit, commodification, creativity, and competition), I argue that under conditions of uncertainty expectations should be understood as “fictional expectations.” The capability of humans to imagine future states of the world that can be different from the present is the central basis for a sociological microfoundation of economic macro-phenomena. Macroeconomic dynamics depend on these “fictional expectations” which create motifs for engaging in potentially profitable but incalculable outcomes. This shifts attention to the “management of expectations” as a crucial element of economic activity and to the institutional, political and cultural foundations of expectations. The reproduction of capitalism is precarious also because of the contingency of expectations conducive to its growth. Biographical sketch Jens Beckert is Director of the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in Cologne and Professor of Sociology at the University of Cologne.
    [Show full text]
  • The Society of Economic Sociology
    THE SOCIETY OF ECONOMIC SOCIOLOGY 1. Objectives of the Society The Society of Economic Sociology will celebrate its 30th anniversary in 1996. Economic sociology is an interdisciplinary subject by nature. Hence, the scope of the objectives of the society has been, roughly speaking, a kind of mixture of economic and sociological studies since its foundation. This characteristic of economic sociology as a discipline bears, as a matter of fact, both the strength and the weakness for the organizational activities of the society. The Society of Economic Sociology flourished in its early years. Successors of Yasuma TAKATA (Kyoto University), a distinguished Japanese sociologist as well as economist, were enthusiastic for the establishment of a new discipline. They firmly cooperated in advocating their principles through the unified activity of the society. They were so ambitious and optimistic as to believe in the possibility of success in defining general concepts of “economic sociology.” The activity of the society was thus led by quixotic motives for expanding frontiers toward all related areas of studies. One might perhaps summarize the then movement of the society as a speculative integration of ideas that seemed to be subordinated to economic sociology. But the thought of the founding fathers was too obstinate and strict, so that it did not permit young blood to join the society for certain periods. Though there had been some minor surges of activity, the infertile atmosphere lasted until the 1980s, when Yoichi ITAGAKI (Yachiyo International University) re-vitalized the society. Kenichi TOMINAGA (Keio University), the present president of the society, pursued the same course of development.
    [Show full text]