Archive for the ‘Economic sociology’ Category

Tardy Tarde revival

17 July 2010

finally getting under way… A nice post from the Understanding Society blog on the rediscovery of Gabriel Tarde.

After Markets recordings

19 May 2010

The organisers of the 23 April 2010 “After Markets: Researching Hybrid Arrangements” workshop at Saïd Business School, University of Oxford, have now posted the recordings of the event as well as a report summarising the talks. You could characterise this event as “Economic Sociology Meets Science and Technology Studies” (to borrow the subtitle of Pinch and Swedberg’s Living in a Material World book, some of whose contributors were also present), although there were plenty of people there from the wider reaches of sociology and anthropology, as well as business school academics. See photos here. This event followed in the now well-established tradition of stimulating inter- or cross-disciplinary encounters organised by the Oxford STS group (see e.g. Scalography, A Turn to Ontology, and the Does STS Mean Business workshops).

If you want to get to grips with this event, I suggest you start with reading the Provocation Piece [PDF] first, then read the Report [PDF], and then listen to the talks. I found particularly interesting Will Davies’ talk, who used the example of the change of the UK “sick note” form to a “fit note” to illustrate how the boundaries between the “economic” and the “social” get reconstituted; Fabian Muniesa’s talk on how marketplaces can be described in terms of “trials of explicitness”, drawing on Sloterdijk, Deleuze and ANT; Emmanuel Didier’s talk on the mechanics of how assemblages decompose, suggesting that the STS tradition in its focus on innovation neglected the issue of decay; and Linsey McGoey and Noortje Marres’ paper in which – similarly to Didier – they focused on “experimental failure,” presenting a typology of the ways in which experiments can fail.

Illuminating and infuriating

8 May 2010

In today’s “The Interview” on the BBC Word Service, Michael Lewis, author of Liar’s Poker, gave an insightful and comprehensive overview of the possible causes of the financial crisis, discussing among others how the nature of both the product (sub-prime mortgage) and the customer (the borrower) has been redefined, the cosy relationship between regulators and investment banks, the stories of the few investors who actually made money, and also the role of Goldman Sachs. Listen to it on the BBC website (28 min).

New books on Gabriel Tarde

15 March 2010

Latour, B. and V. A. Lépinay (2009). The Science of Passionate Interests: An Introduction to Gabriel Tarde’s Economic Anthropology. Chicago, Prickly Paradigm Press : Distributed by the University of Chicago Press.

Candea, M. ed. (2010). The Social after Gabriel Tarde: Debates and Assessments. London, Routledge.

Market studies explosion?

11 March 2010

Looking at the list of accepted papers (RTF file) at the 1st Interdisciplinary Market Studies Workshop coming up in Sweden in June this year, I’m wondering if “explosion” is too hyperbolic a term or just right to describe what seems to be a dramatic increase of interest in the social study of markets these days. Many of the titles appear to be referring to the concept of market devices introduced in the volume edited by Callon, Millo & Muniesa in 2007, who draw on the insights of science and technology studies and actor-network theory for the study of economic phenomena, especially markets.

P.S. And there is also of course the After Markets event coming up in Oxford in April, along similar lines, in the tradition of their excellent “Does STS Means Business” series. Check out the provocation piece for this event here (PDF).

Governance, Accountability and Innovation

8 January 2010

InSIS at Oxford University’s Saïd Business School is launching a seminar series in 2010 on the topic of “Governance, Accountability and Innovation,” exploring markets, infrastructures, devices and governance. Here is the schedule so far:

Tuesday 19 January 2010 – 4:00-5:30pm
Yuval Millo, Department of Accounting, London School of Economics
“Accounting for liquidity supply: The constitution of the options market maker”

Tuesday 26 January 2010 – 4:00-5:30pm
TBC

Tuesday 2 February 2010 – 4:00-5:30pm
Dariusz Wojcik, Department of Geography, University of Oxford
Securitisation and its footprint: an economic geography of financial markets

Tuesday 9 February 2010 – 4:00-5:30pm
Peter Karnøe, Copenhagen Business School
TBC

Tuesday 16 February 2010 – 4:00-5:30pm
Barbara Harriss-White, Department of International Development, University of Oxford
“Rural capitalism in a democratically elected communist state: how to study markets for basic wage goods – the case of food in West Bengal”

Tuesday 23 February 2010 – 4:00-5:30pm
Gisa Weszkalnys, Department of Sociology and Philosophy, University of Exeter
TBC

Tuesday 2 March 2010 – 4:00-5:30pm
Eve Chiapello, HEC, Paris
“Accounting at the heart of the performativity of Economics”

Tuesday 9 March 2010 – 4:00-5:30pm
Jonathan Michie, Department of Continuing Education, University of Oxford
“Markets and corporate ownership structures”

Market Studies Workshop

21 December 2009

See this call for papers for EIASM’s 1st Interdisciplinary Market Studies Workshop to be held near Stockholm on 3-4 June 2010. The announcement gives a good summary of the recent surge of interest in the nature of markets and the contributions actor-network theory driven approaches and science and technology studies (STS) have made to this area in recent years. The workshop aims to be interdisciplinary and calls for contributions from all areas that have an interest in markets, such as business studies, marketing, STS, economic sociology, economics, economic geography, consumer research, cultural studies and anthropology.

Possible topics:

  • the various forms markets may assume
  • the processes through which markets are realized
  • the import of economic theories at large on markets (economics, marketing, strategy)
  • the role of devices and metrics in shaping markets
  • the role of “market professionals” in the organizing of markets
  • how regulators act in and on markets
  • how representations of markets contribute to shape the markets they depict
  • how market agencies are equipped
  • how markets produce values

To apply, submit a 3-page abstract by 29 January 2010. The organising committee consists of Hans Kjellberg (Stockholm School of Economics), Debbie Harrison (Norwegian School of Management), Claes-Fredrik Helgesson (Linköping University), and Susi Geiger (University College Dublin). Guest speakers include Bernard Cova (Euromed Marseille), Barbara Czarniawska (Gothenburg School of Economics), and Steve Woolgar (Saïd Business School, Oxford).

Translation and Charles Péguy

24 November 2009

“Everything is external to everything else, and it takes difficult work to link any two things” – thus summarises Graham Harman one of Bruno Latour’s metaphysical points (Prince of Networks, pp. 104-105). The blog medium makes linking unrelated things rather easy, so hopefully it is not an entirely frivolous act to link transaction-cost economics with actor-network theory through the figure of Charles Péguy. The Organizations and Markets blog has just highlighted that the following Péguy quote is evoked at a crucial moment in Oliver E. Williamson’s (yes, this year’s economics Nobel Laureate) 1996 book, The Mechanisms of Governance, in support of  the ” microanalytic program” of TCE:

“The longer I live, citizen. . .” — this is the way the great passage in Peguy begins, words I once loved to say (I had them almost memorized) — “The longer I live, citizen, the less I believe in the efficiency of sudden illuminations that are not accompanied or supported by serious work, the less I believe in the efficiency of conversion, extraordinary, sudden and serious, in the efficiency of sudden passions, and the more I believe in the efficiency of modest, slow, molecular, definitive work. The longer I live the less I believe in the efficiency of an extraordinary sudden social revolution, improvised, marvelous, with or without guns and impersonal dictatorship — and the more I believe in the efficiency of modest, slow, molecular, definitive work.” (pp. 13-14)

(more…)

The interactive diagram

4 November 2009

Here is how Callon defines homo economicus 2.0 in terms of Barry’s notion of the “interactive diagram:”

The interactive diagram is a socio-technical agencement configured in such a way that at the center of the collective action we find an individual who is capable of developing projects and is endowed with a will to accomplish them, and who holds herself (because she is held) responsible for her acts and their effects. This diagram constitutes a particular answer to questions concerning the modalities of action. To the question “Who is at the source of the action?” the diagram answers “The individual and her projects.” To the question “What is the status of the different participants in the action?” it answers “On the one hand the individual defining and undertaking projects, whose identity changes and adjusts in relation to feedback and results, and on the other hand the technical devices with which she interacts and which constantly suggest original courses of action.” To the question “What does the action produce?” it answers “The discovery of possible new worlds, the unexpected, constant experimentation.” (p. 39)

Homo economicus 2.0

3 November 2009

In the June 2004 issue of the Economic Sociology Newsletter [PDF] the following exchange took place between the interviewer (Søren Jagd) and Laurent Thévenot (“The French Convention School and the Coordination of Economic Action,” p.  13):

Question:

Michel Callon argues that the model of economic man could be useful for people engaging in economic activities. And that the interesting thing about this model is if it is actually used by economic actors. Do you agree with that argument?

Answer:

If Callon says that I would say: Why do they use it? I would ask: What kind of properties should this variety of models have? This is not the kind of question he can answer. He would just answer that they do use it. I think that the problem with this answer is that it will lack a reflection on this architecture of regimes and on the path to the public. This is the main problem for me with this overwhelming notion of network. It doesn’t give any specification of the link, of the social link, of the social action. And again I think a good specification would require this specification both of the good and of the reality as it is used as a test. Instead of that the network modelling in general terms is, I would say, flat, so it cannot give you a good picture of what is needed to go from proximity to the public and to come back from there.

Callon’s essay, “Economic Markets and the Rise of Interactive Agencements” in Pinch and Swedberg’s 2008 book, Living In a Material World, reads like a reply to this challenge, as he develops exactly what Thévenot seems to be asking for. Callon defends his notion of homo economicus 2.0 (also discussed elsewhere) by developing a conceptual framework that allows him not only to describe the conditions for the emergence of such calculative individual agency and its characteristics but also to present some normative considerations for political action. In the process he also manages to revitalise actor-network theory for the study of economic phenomena.

(more…)


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 65 other followers