Search results

The purpose of this paper is to seek to apply Polanyi's theory of the double movement as a response to the effects of economic liberalization and globalization to the pre‐2007 American economy. In so doing, it seeks to ascertain the reasons why this assumed double movement did not materialize until after the post‐2007 global economic crisis.

This paper is structured as a theoretical and historical analysis, building upon Polanyi's nineteenth century observations and applying them to contemporary policy economic and social experience in the USA in the late twentieth century. The argument proposes a correlation between the missing and/or delayed movement and the role of access to debt and participation in equity markets.

This paper argues that Polanyi's concept of a societal countermovement has been absent from the post‐1970 period of economic liberalism and globalization until just recently due to an explicit attempt by the forces of capital to circumvent its role in lessening the harmful effects of American capitalism. In particular, the double movement that should have sought to lessen income inequality, unemployment and wage stagnation was instead replaced by access to cheap credit and the democratization of market investments that spurred consumer purchases and a false belief that what was good for the markets was good for working class Americans.

This paper highlights the need for ongoing research into the sociotropic nature of trade and of economic policy, and its evolution throughout the contemporary period of economic uncertainty and economic transition.

The paper proposes several policy implications arising from the contemporary application of Polanyi's double movement, notably related to international trade and public and political support for ongoing trade liberalization.

This paper highlights important connections in the relationship between economic policy and the day‐to‐day lives of those who are governed by it. Building on “everyday political economy”, it provides a foundation for arguments that a new balance must be found between economic globalization and transnational capital interests and domestic stability.

This paper promotes a novel approach to understanding the political economy of pre‐2007 America, in particular the reflexive nature of economic policy and societal perceptions.

This article argues that social scientists should reconsider the analytic value of the term “capitalism.” The paper argues that the two most coherent definitions of capitalism are those derived from classical Marxism and from the World System theory of Immanuel Wallerstein. Marx and Engels’ formulation was basically a genetic theory in which the structure of a mode of production is determined by the mode of surplus extraction. During the course of the 20th century, however, Marxist theorists had to modify this framework and the result has been an uncomfortable hybrid. Wallerstein resolved these tensions by redefining capitalism in terms of the logic of a world system. However, his argument has difficulty in explaining the consequential variations over time in the specific rules and institutional structures that operate at the global level. The article goes on to argue in favor of Karl Polanyi's concept of market society because it focuses attention on the political governance of market societies at both the national and the global levels.

This study contends that the various forms of archaic trade that anthropologists have reconstructed on the Northwest Coast of America are explanatory of plot-construction and characterization in Conrad's South-American novel. My thesis is that Nostromo is a figure defined by the practice of potlatch, and that his key presence in the plot entails the representation of a culturally dislocating transition from archaic transactions to modern commerce. The theoretical framework of this chapter hinges on the insights of Marcel Mauss, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Karl Polanyi, and Georges Bataille.

The paper aims to examine Karl Polanyi's view of market evolution in the context of the emergence of a national grain market in China's transition economy.

The dataset used includes information about inter‐provincial grain trade on China's grain market from November 1999 to October 2000. A priori blockmodelling method is used for hypothesis testing.

This paper finds that a partially integrated national grain market had emerged at the beginning of the twenty‐first century in China in spite of local protectionism. Additionally, the emergence of this market is found to be partly a result of the reform‐oriented state's attempt to create national wholesale grain markets.

The findings of the paper might have implications for market development in both China and other transition economies.

Although Research in Economic Anthropology (REA) actually hit the quarter-century mark in 2003 with the publication of Volume 22, the series has now done so also in terms of the number of volumes. Twenty-five seems like an important milestone, and perhaps this edition can be noted for passing that, but it also marks the third editorial change in the history of REA. When a new editor takes over, it seems prudent to offer a summary of the book series’ evolution to date. As many know, George Dalton was the original editor – beginning in 1978 (REA was then published by JAI Press). Dalton subsequently handed the reins to Barry Isaac, who produced Volumes 6 through 20, along with a number of supplemental publications that focused on specific topics or regions and contained only chapters of an archeological or ethnohistorical nature. In fact, Isaac is still recognized for his efforts at granting archeology an equal footing with ethnology in the study of human economic behavior.¹ While Dalton included previously published material in the pages of REA and welcomed works by non-anthropologists, Isaac considered only original manuscripts and generally limited his selection of chapters to those written by anthropologists. Since Volume 20, REA has been published by Elsevier.

This essay charts an intellectual journey. Geoffrey M. Hodgson became an institutional economist in the 1980s. He explains how he discovered institutional economics and what strains of institutional thought were attractive for him. Another issue raised in this essay is how institutional researchers organize and move forward. Hodgson argues for an interdisciplinary approach, but this is not without its problems.

This 30th volume of “Research in Economic Anthropology” (REA) consists of 13 original chapters focusing on various aspects of economic organization and behavior, most of which are based on empirical fieldwork conducted by the respective authors themselves. The volume has three parts. Chapters in Part I focus on development and inequalities – common and important themes in economic anthropology. Part II, in concentrating on market expansion and marketing in general, continues the theme of Part II of Volume 25 in the REA series (Wood, 2007, pp. 4–7). The final section – Part III – consists of three chapters that are concerned with economic activities and group or individual identity. The volume ends with a review by James R. Stanfield of a new book about the continuing relevance of Karl Polanyi's famous 1944 book, The Great Transformation, edited by Chris Hann and Keith Hart.

Focuses on the basic concepts and principles of alternative economics; a new doctrine of economic thought centred around human communities and their natural environments. The ideas of Karl Polanyi, Ernst F. Schumacher, and Herman E. Daly are presented as the most important antecedents. Considering the economy as multiple interplay among natural ecosystems, economic organizations and human communities, alternative economics tries to find ways in which economies could have been made more ecologically benign and humane. Demonstrates the practical relevance of alternative economics to two fields: first, the responsibility problematics of economizing and, second, the question of how to form economic policies which serve real development.

This chapter responds to Fred Block's article about the weaknesses of the concept of capitalism because of its close association with Marxism, and his proposal for a Polanyian analysis of political economy. In this chapter, I interrogate what may be the commonalities as opposed to divergences between Marx and Polanyi, and I question whether the concept of capitalism is really so wedded to Marxism so as to loose its analytic value, and be better replaced by notions such as market society, or political economy, as used by Polanyi. I agree with Block that a Polanyian analysis importantly widens our view beyond economic reductionism to an understanding of economy and society as co-constitutive. However, I see utility in adding the qualifier “capitalist” to “political economy” to differentiate between socialist and capitalist political economies, for instance, and to properly characterize a system based on private property rights, guided by pursuit of material gain, which advantages some strata in society more than others, leading to endemic social inequality. I propose that a Polanyian focus on society and economy as co-constitutive is more effectively coupled with an analysis that considers capitalism not as a self-driven system of surplus extraction and accumulation, but as an institutional order dependent on political choices. Such a perspective would advance a Polanyian analysis of capitalism.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the debate on the consequences of globalization, in particular the increasing disparity between the wealth of nations and individuals in society. It discusses mechanisms which lead to perpetuation and reinforcement of the situation in which, despite being characterized by inequalities and fragmentation, societies remain by and large cohesive and stable.

This article engages with the so‐called “Polanyi problem” and with Polanyi's and other authors’ responses to it. In the discussion, the analytical approach is adopted by reference to Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, in particular his concept of soma.

Using the metaphor of soma, developed into four interrelated dimensions, illustrations of social and organizational processes, which ensure sustainability of, and cohesion within, a society based on inequality and fragmentation, are indicated. It is argued that the existence of stratified societies, and inequalities of wealth within and between them, is accompanied by phenomena which support and sustain them.

Drawing upon literary fiction can offer valuable insights into issues pertinent to contemporary academic debate.

Engagement with Huxley's work provides an alternative way of contributing to the globalization debate and, in particular, to the literature addressing the so‐called “Polanyi problem”.