Search results

This chapter examines Karl Polanyi's critique of formalism in economics and his case for a more institutional economics based upon a reconstitution of the facts of economic life on as wide an historical basis as possible. The argument below reviews Polanyi's argument with regard to the relation between economic anthropology and comparative economics, the contrast between the formalist and substantive approaches to economic analysis, the notion of an economistic fallacy, the most important limitations of the conventional formalist economics approach, and the nature and import of the new departure that Polanyi envisioned.

This introduction unpacks the key question that informs the articles in this special issue. How does a social sphere inform regulation and, more specifically, how can the regulatory capacity of a social sphere be harnessed, as an alternative or significant complementary force to state regulation and reliance on the self-regulatory capacity of markets? This question is salient and topical also in light of the search for new regulatory strategies and perspectives in the aftermath of the 2007 financial and subsequent EU sovereign debt crises, which have led to a major realignment of economy and society in a number of countries.

This introduction argues that economic sociology is a crucial reference point for understanding more about the social practices that constitute business behavior. It enables to explore the scope and significance of often interlinked social and legal norms for regulating various transnational risks that economic activity can give rise to. The introduction therefore locates the quest for understanding more about the regulatory capacity of a social sphere in debates that draw on Karl Polanyi’s analysis of the embedding, disembedding, and re-embedding of economic activity into social norms. The introduction highlights one of the key themes developed in this special issue, the idea of society within economy which questions an assumed conceptual distinction between economy and society.

This introduction concludes by specifying how the accounts of risk regulation developed in this special issue chart a path that is different from recent explorations of the role of a social sphere in regulation, which were conducted under the banner of “the sociological citizen,” “regulatory sociability,” and “collaborative governance.”

This article looks at corporate social responsibility (CSR) as a discursive social practice that attempts to interrogate the global market economy and its neoliberal underpinnings and that reflects as well as frames and shapes domestic and global politics and institutions. Drawing upon Karl Polanyi’s notions of reciprocity and redistribution while also emphasizing the normative content of the concept, the article inquires into the position that the CSR discourse occupies in addressing the corporate transnational risks derived from social tensions and conflicts and more generally, in answering social expectations for justice. The Polanyian perspective highlights the CSR discursive quest for a missing conceptual consistency and implicitly, for a constructive “critical” core. From this perspective, the article shows CSR to reside within controversial conceptual boundaries; a discursive social practice that engages with the social aspiration of embedding market economy in society while it is also in need of reclaiming its critical core and its potential for social change.

In today’s “market society” almost every aspect of the everyday lives is shaped by market forces. In this essay, the purpose of this paper is to focus on the potential role of social enterprise as one means of re-embedding the economy into society to ensure the economy works for people, rather than the other way around.

This is primarily a conceptual paper: a provocation.

The authors argue that to work as an embedding force, social enterprise needs to ensure both reciprocity and market exchange while acting in a way that attempts to compensate for the retreat of the state through providing public services and promoting collective decision-making and public deliberation.

Drawing upon the work of Karl Polanyi to conceptualise social enterprise as an “alternative” economic actor within a plural economic system, the authors contribute to on-going debates about social enterprise as an alternative way of organising markets and society. The authors highlight the challenges involved in achieving such a vision and suggest ways these might be overcome.

This study aims to focus on the understanding corporate social responsibility (CSR), this “novel” form of corporate engagement, and evaluating its capacity to regulate capitalism. The authors advance the following thesis: CSR constitutes a new variety of regulation of capitalism which, to work efficiently, must be built on collective institutions (through both collective agreements and forms of coercion), instead of strictly contractual forms (based on inter-individual relations and voluntary commitments).

To support this thesis, the authors use Karl Polanyi’s theory, in particular his concept of “fictitious commodities”. Like Polanyi, we contend that CSR is a necessary reaction to the new “great transformation” brought about by the financialisation of our economy which is currently in crisis. Polanyi agrees that this kind of regulation can yield results only when based on collective institutions. In the last section of the study, the authors attempt to determine how a “conventionalist analysis” of CSR could help us to precisely describe this phenomenon and how it could be institutionalised by actors (both inside and outside companies).

This paper theoretically demonstrates the role of institutions in CSR processes and the need to weigh them theoretically. In this sense, the paper demonstrates the aporia of a strictly contractualist framework, not only for the understanding of the phenomenon, but for its deployment.

This study proposes a theoretical framework, which is yet to be consolidated by empirical research.

The paper proposes salient elements of a public policy of responsibility.

The paper proposes a methodological framework to go beyond a bilateral representation of the institutional framework and to produce a collective representation of the negotiation.

This is an original paper in its theoretical positioning and the implications it suggests for economic policy.

The thesis that the institutional arrangements, social organizations, and ideology in Eastern Europe are not conducive to the establishment of capitalism, and certainly not the laissez‐faire variety, with Poland cited as the illustrative case. Karl Polanyi′s necessary conditions for laissez‐faire capitalism in the nineteenth century represent the point of origin for the analysis, i.e. the maintenance of rules to permit the self‐regulating market. The focus is on the ongoing process of privatization, citing the primary institutional shortcomings. Also examines governmental structural problems in addition to historical institutional developments. Considers the history of property rights from legal and cultural perspectives. The final concern is to offer a different interpretation of markets, i.e. markets as cultural and political institutions.

This paper explores the links between economic and social structures and ethical norms for economic life. As such, the essay is a contribution to the more general philosophical discussions on the relation between fact and value in the social sciences. I begin with a brief discussion of ethics which highlights the social character of ethical “value” and draws upon the work of the Canadian philosopher, Bernard Lonergan, to introduce a novel way of understanding social structures. The analyses show how economic structures can be understood as cooperative meaning schemes, how such schemes are embedded within a wider ecology of social meaning schemes, and how the dynimic relations among such schemes reveal ethical goals and make ethical demands upon participants who depend upon them for their living. I illustrate these linkages in a discussion of three examples drawn from economic life: a consumer purchase transaction, an ancient trade scheme drawn from the work of Karl Polanyi, and a rather novel approach to economic development proposed by Jane Jacobs.

Income and wealth in Brazil is distributed as unequally and unjustly as in any other nation or region of the world. This chapter examines how wealth and income has been, is, or might be made available to the population. Using the conceptual framework of the substantive economics developed by Karl Polanyi, Conrad Arensberg, and their colleagues, the distribution of goods and services is analyzed as a socially “instituted process,” separate from production and other factors generally included in studies of economics. Four approaches are presented as they were elaborated in the thinking of authors who wrote at different times in history: The Infante Dom Pedro of Portugal in the early 15th century, Adam Smith in the late 18th century, Karl Marx in the 19th century, and Louis Kelso in the mid-20th century. Each approach, three of which have been, and one which might be instituted, is explored in terms of its potential for reducing poverty and correcting distributive injustice.

Explains that Michael Polanyi was an internationally reputed philosopher who may be remembered as the greatest epistemologist of the twentieth century. The one aspect of his philosophy which has been neglected is his philosophy of history. Sets out to explicate Polanyi’s interpretation of the history of the late modern period. He emphasized the historical importance of three revolutions: the French Revolution; the Bolshevik Revolution; and the Hungarian Revolution. Polanyi called for a return to traditional moral values, such as truth, justice, and love. Presents a clarification of Polanyi’s interpretation of late modern history which it is hoped will contribute to the resolution of the crisis which threatens contemporary civilization.