 |
Introduction 19. A Concluding Note. 20 Smelser/Swedberg
|
|
|
|
Introduction 19
also add the studies of Frйdйric Lebaron on French economists, Emmanuel Lazeaga on work in a law firm, and Philippe Steiner on different types of economic knowledge (Lebaron 2000; Lazega 2000; Steiner 1998, 2001, 2004). There is considerable research in economic sociology in other European countries as well. Sociology of money and finance has, for example, several skillful practitioners in England and Spain (e. g., Dodd 1994; Ingham 1998, 2004; Izquierdo 2001). An innovative study of inheritance has just been published in Germany, where the sociology of finance is also very strong (Beckert, forthcoming; see also Beckert 2002; Knorr Cetina and Preda, forthcoming; cf. Zuckerman 1999). Industrial districts are being studied in Italy (e. g., Trigilia 2001). Finally, Knorr Cetina in Germany and Aspers in Sweden have independendy of one another embarked on the project of applying phenomenology to economic sociology (Knorr Cetina and Brugger 2002; Aspers 2001b). A few general introductions to economic sociology have been published in Europe; there also is a newsletter exclusively devoted to economic sociology in Europe (Steiner 1999; Trigilia 2002; see Economic Sociology. European Electronic Newsletter; 1999-; see http: //econsoc. mfipg. de).
A Concluding Note
Space has constricted our review of both historical developments and contemporary highlights (the latter are amply covered in the chapters that follow). We have seen enough, however, to permit a few, equally brief, evaluative comments on the field of economic sociology today, and more particularly on the relations between economics and sociology.
What is unique about the situation, as it has developed through the 1990s, is that for the first time since the nineteenth century, mainstream economics has begun to analyze economic institutions again. This has already led to a number of interesting developments within economics proper as well as to a tentative dialogue with sociology and other social sciences, such as psychology and history. It is important that efforts be made, by sociologists as well as by economists, to deepen this dialogue since both disciplines are needed to fill the void created by nearly a century of neglect of economic institutions. As an example of cooperation between the economic and the sociological approach that has occurred since the first edition of the Handbook, we cite the important work of Avner Greif (e. g., 1994, forthcoming).
20 Smelser/Swedberg
The " imperialistic" mode, whether in its sociological form or in its economic form, seems unpromising as a way of dealing with either economic behavior or economic institutions (or for that matter, behavior and institutions in general). The complexity of determinants bearing on every kind of behavior suggests the greater scientific utility of approaches that are less monolithic. It is true that " imperialistic" works have greatly stimulated the debate over economy and society. Eventually, however, this approach becomes counterproductive scientifically, tending to excite territorial battles rather than dispassionate inquiry.
|
|
|
Correspondingly, it is, in our opinion, more fruitful to pursue the kind of approach to economic sociology taken by Weber and Schumpeter in their social economics, or Sozialokonomik. Such an approach is broad-based and multidisciplinary. Economic sociology, in other words, should have its own distinct profile as well as cooperate and coexist with economic theory, economic history, and economic anthropology. We also hope that departments of economics will include economic sociology among their courses and hire economic sociologists, as business schools currently do in the United States.
While die current pluralistic approach has given economic sociology richness and vitality, the bolder, creatively synthesizing efforts of the classics are notably missing. Without that complementary line of theorizing, the field of economic sociology— like any area of inquiry that specializes and subspecializes—tends to sprawl. Continuing efforts to sharpen the theoretical focus of economic sociology and to work toward synthetic interpretations of its findings are essential.
One promising model of relating the fields of economics and sociology might be termed " complementary articulation. " Of necessity, any line of disciplined inquiry focuses on certain operative variables and determinants, and " freezes" others into parametric assumptions. Often the ground thus frozen is that very territory which is problematical from the standpoint of some other line of social science inquiry. This dialogue about the precise role of operative variables and the conceptual status of parameters holds out the promise for communication and theoretical development in both economics and sociology. This strategy appears much more engaging than several others we have identified in this overview—imperialism, polemical hostility, mutual separation and toleration, or shapeless eclecticism.
Given the void after a century's neglect of eco
nomic institutions, we also expect that new questions will be raised that cut across the conventional boundaries between economics and sociology. For this reason it is essential that economists as well as sociologists be willing to entertain new and unfamiliar ideas. An opportunity, such as the current one, to pull economics and sociology closer to each other is rare and should not be neglected.
Notes
1. While this chapter covers much of the same ground as our chapter in the first edition of the Handbook (" The Sociological Perspective on die Economy" ), it has been completely rewritten and revised for the current edition. We have also introduced a new theme: the need to pay more attention to interests in economic sociology. For helpful comments we would like to thank Fred Block, Robyn Dawes, Frank Dobbin, and Viviana Zelizer.
2. The field has been called " the sociology of economic life, " as in Smelser 1976 and in Granovetter and Swedberg 1992, 2001; Fred Block's (1990) preferred term is sociology of economies. We find little if any difference in denotation between these terms and economic sociology. For convenience we stay with the term that emerged in die classical literature. As a term for all social science analysis of the economy—economic theory plus economic history, economic sociology, and so on—we agree with Weber, Schumpeter, and Etzioni (1988) that social economics (Sozialokonomik) is an appropriate term.
|
|
|
3. The term economic sociology has also been used to denote a rational choice perspective as applied to social behavior in general (see Becker 1990). This usage is, to us, too broad since it encompasses practically all of sociology (minus the analysis of the economy proper).
References
Abolafia, Mitchel. 1998. " Markets as CAilture: An Ethnographic Approach. " Pp. 69-85 in The Laws of the Markets, cd. Michel Gallon. Oxford: Blackwell. Akcrlof, George. 1984. " A Theory of Social Custom, of Which Unemployment May Be One Consequence. " Qiiarterly Journal of Economics 44: 749-75.
_____. 1990. " Interview. " Pp. 61-78 in Economics and
Sociology, ed. Richard Swedberg. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Arrow, Kenneth. 1990. " Interview: Kenneth
Arrow. " Pp. 133-51 in Economics and Sociology, ed. Richard Swedberg. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Aspers, Patrik. 1999. " The Economic Sociology of Alfred Marshall: An Overview. " American Journal of Economics and Sociology 58: 651-67.
_____. 2001a. " Crossing the Boundary of Economics
and Sociology: The Case of Vilfredo Pareto. " American Journal of Economics and Sociology 60: 519—46.
_____. 2001b. A Market in Vogue: A Study of Fashion
Photography in Sweden. Stockholm: City Universit Press.
Babb, Sarah. 2001. Managing Mexico: Economists from:
Nationalism to Neoltbrralism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Baker, \Va\-ne. 1984. " The Social Structure of a National Securities Market. 1" American Journal of Sociology 89: 775-811.
Bates, Robert, Avner Greif, Margaret Levi, and Jean- Laurent Rosenthal. 1998. Analytic Narratives. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Becker, Gary. 1990. " Interview: Gary Becker. " Pp. 27-46 in Economics and Sociology, ed. Richard Swedberg. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Beckert, Jens, 2002. Beyond the Market: The Social Foundations of Economic Efficiency. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
_____. Forthcoming. Unearned Wealth: Inheritance in
France, Germany, and the United States since 1800.
Berger, Peter, and Thomas Luckmann. 1967. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Doubleday.
Biggart, Nicole Woolsey. 1989. Charismatic Capitalism: Direct Selling Organizations in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
_____, ed. 2002. Readings in Economic Sociology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Block, Fred. 1990. " Economic Sociology. " Pp. 21-45 in Post-industrial Possibilities: A Critique of Economic Discourse. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
_____. 2001. Introduction. Pp. xviii-xxxviii in The
Great Transformation, by Karl Polanyi. Boston: Beacon Press.
_____. 2003. " Karl Polanyi and the Writing of The Great
Theory and Society 32: 275-306.
Boltanski, Luc, and Eve Chiapello. 1999. Le nouvel esprit du capitalisme. Paris: Gallimard. Boltanski, Luc, and Laurent Thйvenot. [1987] 1991. De la justification. Les economies de la grandeur. Paris: Gallimard.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1963. " Travail et travailleurs en Algйrie: Йtude sociologique. " Pp. 257-389 in Travail et traveilleurs en Algйrie, by Pierre Bourdieu et al. Paris: Mouton.
_____. 1979. " The Disenchantment of the World. " Pp.
1-91 in Algeria, 1960. Trans. Richard Nice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
_____. [1979] 1986. Distinction: A Social Critique of
the Judgment of Taste. Trans. Richard Nice. London: Routledge.
|
|
|
_____. [1983] 1986. " The Forms of Capital: " Pp.
241-58 in Handbook of Theory and Research in Education, ed. John Richardson. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.
_____. 1997. " Le champ йconomique. " Actes de la
recherche en sciences sociales 119: 48-66.
_____. 1998a. " Is a Disinterested Act Possible? " Pp.
75-91 in Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action. Trans. Richard Nice, et al. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
_____. 1998b. Acts of Resistance: Against the Tyranny
Introduction 21
of the Market. Trans. Richard Nice. New York: New Press.
_____. 2000a. " Principes d'une anthropologie йconomique. " Pp. 233-70 in Les structures sociales de l'йconomie. Paris: Seuil.
_____. 2000b. Les structures sociales de l'йconomie. Paris:
Seuil.
_____. 2002. Interventions, 1961-2001. Science sociale
& action politique. Marseille: Agone.
Bourdieu, Pierre, and Loпc Wacquant. 1992. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre, et al. 1999. The Weight of the World: Social Suffering in Contemporary Society. Trans. Priscilla Parkhurst Ferguson. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Burawoy, Michael, 1977. Manufacturing Consent: Changes in the Labor Process under Monopoly Capitalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Burt, Ronald. 1983. Corporate Profits and Cooptation: Networks of Market Constraints and Directorate Ties in the American Economy. New York: Academic Press.
_____. 1992. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of
Competition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Braverman, Harry. 1974. Labor and Monopology Capital: The Degradation of Work in the Twentieth Century. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Gallon, Michel, ed. 1998. The Laws of the Markets. Oxford: Blackwell.
Camerer, Colin, George Loewenstein, and Matthew Rabin, eds. 2004. Advances in Behavioral Economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Camic, Charles. 1991. " Introduction: Talcott Parsons before The Structure of Social Action. " Pp. ix-lxix in The Early Essays, by Talcott Parssons. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cardoso, Fernando H., and E. Faletto. 1979. Dependency and Development in Latin America. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Carroll, Glenn, and Michael Harm an, eds. 1995. Organizations in Industry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carroll, Glenn, R., and Michael T. Hannan. 2000. The Demography of Corporations and Industries. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Carruthers, Bruce. 1996. City of Capital: Politics and Markets in the English Financial Revolution. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Carruthers, Bruce, and Sarah Babb. 2000. Economy/ Society: Markets, Meanings, and Social Structure. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Pine Forge Press.
Coleman, James. 1974. Power and the Structure of Society. New York: W. W. Norton.
______. 1985. " Introducing Social Structure into Economic Analysis. " American Economic Review 74(2): 84-88.
_____. 1990. Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
_____. 1994. " A Rational Choice Perspective on Economic Sociology. " Pp. 166-80 in The Handbook of
|
|
|
