Search results

This paper discusses whether subcultural activism can play a role in the delegitimation of mainstream markets.

The authors conducted a content analysis of press articles on the subject using FactivaTM database and searching the three most read newspapers in Brazil (Ertimur & Coskuner-Balli, 2015; Humphreys, 2010a, 2010b). Data was collected both retrospectively and concurrently. Analysis used open and theoretical coding, moving up from the emic meanings extracted from the texts to an etic account of the phenomena (Cherrier, H., & Murray, J. B. (2007). Reflexive dispossession and the self: Constructing a processual theory of identity. Consumption Markets & Culture, 10(1), 1–29; Thompson, C. J. (1997). Interpreting consumers: A hermeneutical framework for deriving marketing insights from the texts of consumers’ consumption stories. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(4), 438–455; Thompson, C. J., & Haytko, D. L. (1997). Speaking of fashion: Consumers’ uses of fashion discourses and the appropriation of countervailing cultural meanings. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(1), 15–42.).

The authors seek to explain in what way the relationship that Brazilians had with the 2014 FIFA World Cup reflects how the soccer industry has entered a delegitimation process.

We sustain that regulatory legitimacy is less relevant than normative, cognitive, and pragmatic legitimacy in the context of an evolving society. In fact, further studying the long-term consequences of this evolution in the market-system would shed light on whether or not social movements can have a lasting impact on society (Zizek, 2014).

We contribute to the literature on market systems by studying an often-neglected aspect of market systems literature, the delegitimation of a mainstream market.

We introduce critical regionalities and the archipelago metaphor as an analytic lens for interrogating and redrawing regional borders while preserving the benefits of a regional approach.

Using secondary data from Latin America, we interrogate the mode by which regions are adopted in marketing and consumer research, raising a discussion of the analytical scales and boundaries of regional cultures, considering regional interdependencies and their common sociohistorical backgrounds.

We use the critical regionalities approach to examine the rise of gated-communities in Latin America and demonstrate how a regional approach can reveal connections between meso-level sociohistorical processes and cultural values.

The critical regionalities approach transforms assumptions of national or global scales into tools of inquiry: both the nation and the globe become possible scales to contrast with regional archipelagos and enhance researchers’ reflexivity of the how’s and why’s of consumer phenomena.

The method prompts cultural researchers to adopt scales of analysis that more closely reflect the social phenomena being studied, which is especially useful for understanding emerging markets and marginalized areas. We also emphasize the importance of attending to consumer cultural phenomena and processes in non-Western contexts.

The paper offers a solution for the conundrum of how to write about regions without essentializing them. Marketers and policy makers can use the concept of cultural archipelagos to define new segments and understand new markets, without the need to conform to preestablished geographic or political borders.

Igba-Boi model of entrepreneurship incubation among the Igbos in south-eastern Nigeria records outstanding and robust successes in producing entrepreneurs with global impact. Therefore, the need to understand its nature, process, driving force, challenges and make suggestions to reinvigorate it has become urgent and valid. Also, with the persisting overbearing influence of Western and lately Asian philosophies in the development of business theories and practice, it is long overdue to mainstream Africa's entrepreneurial philosophy into extant discourse; this chapter contributes to this effort. Such an attempt follows the belief that Africans with their indigenous systems hold higher hope for the development of the continent. Since the rest of the world had at some point in history leveraged on Africa's civilisation to forge ahead, this chapter argues that Africa stands to contribute to the global search for efficient incubation of entrepreneurs using the Igba-Boi model. The chapter is guided by and framed with reviewed publications, philosophies and theories that explain Igbos' construction of social realities and worldview. Structural functionalism and conflict theories offer in-depth insight in explaining the success story of the Igba-Boi institution. The chapter, in particular, adopts the Igbos' interpretation of their cosmos, its eschatological implications in explaining their tenacity and doggedness in successfully meeting all the requirements for graduating from Igba-Boi incubation system. By discussing Igba-Boi as a socioeconomic institution, this chapter draws attention to areas of neglect for improvement in order to harness its high potentials for enhancing its contribution to business practice in Africa and development of the continent.

Researchers in the social sciences have studied the process by which new ideas are adopted (implemented) and how acceptance is generated among those charged with accepting and implementing an innovation. Sociology, in particular, has developed an extensive literature on diffusion analysis which examines how innovations are diffused (see Coleman, Katz, & Menzel, 1966; Leagans & Loomis, 1971; Rogers, 1971; Rogers & Shoemaker, 1971). While many of these studies dealt with the adoption and diffusion of a new product, for example, seed corn or drugs, the same analysis has been applied to process innovations, that is, system and organizational change.

In the era of financial capitalism, how to manage and hold global corporations accountable has become too multifarious a topic for a solitary focus of one theme, to sufficiently outline the whole gamut and implications of their activities. Capitalism is characterized by several well-organized antinomies and contrasts, with reflections of critical dualities that bear a resemblance to the primeval paradoxes of Hellenic philosophy. The challenge of governance of capitalism to be effectual entails breaking out of the entrenched precincts of habitual academic silos. Various standpoints while reasonably informative falls short to explain fully the complex interlinkages between the concept of global governance and the state’s capacity to put into effect its will on corporate power.

Spotlighting on assessing the praxis of political economy at global and national level and the corporate reality, this chapter aims to provide a renewed thrust for the focused recalibration of global regulatory regime. In this chapter, the inquiries take the regulation as the main explanandum for elucidation of the shifting governance framework.

As the cognitive sciences – particularly neuroscience, cognitive psychology, and a rejuvenated artificial intelligence movement that has largely abandoned the model of the mind as a formal machine – have seen major development over the past quarter-century, it is inevitable that the findings thrown up by this ‘cognitive revolution’ should be examined for their relevance to the understanding of economic behavior. This ongoing examination has tended to emphasize those characteristics of human cognitive capabilities that call into question the descriptive adequacy of the rational-choice model, focusing on departures from individual rationality that may have economic consequences at the market level.¹ Such a move may be the obvious one for an economist confronted with this interdisciplinary challenge, but it is not the only one. The new insights into the functioning of the brain can also be deployed in the understanding of complex systems in general – and of specific social arrangements in particular – and that is the direction taken here. By critically examining the systemic similarities and differences between the social arrangements of science and market, the aim is to show how a complex systems approach, inspired by developments in cognitive psychology but applying these at the level of the system rather than of the individual, can provide a new and useful way of understanding social systems.

This article starts from the assumption that economic sociology, including Karl Polanyi’s work, can contribute fresh perspectives to regulation debates because it opens up new understandings of the nature of economic activity, a key target of legal regulation. In particular this article examines Polanyi’s idea that society drives regulation. For Polanyi the “regulatory counter-movement” is society’s response to the disembedding – in particular through the proliferation of markets – of economic out of social relationships. Section One of the article identifies three key challenges that arise from this Polanyian take on regulation for contemporary regulation researchers. First, Polanyi focuses on social norms restraining business behavior, but neglects social norms embedded in law as also shaping regulation. Second, he seems to imply a clear-cut conceptual distinction between “economy” and “society.” Third, his analysis sidelines the role of interest politics in the development of regulation.

Addressing the first of these three key challenges, Section Two of this article therefore argues that a Polanyian vision of “socialized” legal regulation should build on contemporary accounts of responsive law and regulation, which focus attention on social norms informing legal regulation. Section Three of this article tackles the second key challenge raised by Polanyi’s work for contemporary regulation researchers, that is, how to transcend a modernist perspective of “economy” and “society” as clearly demarcated, distinct fields of social action. It argues that discourse theory is an important alternative theoretical resource. Drawing on Laclau and Mouffe, the article suggests that understanding “economy” and “society” as performed by open and relationally constructed discourses helps to capture interconnections between “economy” and “society” that become particularly visible when we analyze how specific regulatory regimes work at a medium- and small-scale level. These points are further brought to life in Section Four through a discussion of the European Union (EU) regulatory regime for trade in risky, transgenic agricultural products, and in particular the current reform debates about the consideration of the “socioeconomic impacts” of such products.