Learn more about the KHK/Centre for Global Cooperation Research, the IAQ, and the DIFIS
Conference Theme Overview
The Covid-19 pandemic challenges all kinds of taken-for-granted assumptions, within and between contemporary capitalist societies. Not only is the Covid-19 pandemic predicted by the IMF to lead to the most severe global economic downturn since the Great Depression, likely to overshadow the recession following the financial crisis of 2008. The pandemic has also disrupted and overturned deep-seated practices in our everyday life worlds; it has shaken long-established ways of organizing in companies, industries and global supply chains; and it has provoked a questioning of established growth models and sparked a return of the state, at least in some parts of the world. One might even argue that the “less is more” logic of social distancing and stay-at-home policy, together with the high uncertainty about future development, is threatening ideational core beliefs of neoliberal capitalism, ranging from global free movement, free play of markets, and unlimited exploitation of nature, together with the imaginaries and expectations built on them.
At the same time, the pandemic has exposed the fact that contemporary societies are always as vulnerable as their most vulnerable groups. While the socio-economic impact of the pandemic varies from country to country, it has struck the weakest groups disproportionately and is likely to increase poverty and inequality within countries and at a global scale. Not only have people of color and slum dwellers been exposed to higher rates of infection and death; in many societies, workers in essential services such as care, retail, transport and others, belong to the weakest, often discriminated groups with low incomes and feeble or no social protection. But the pandemic has also made visible the mutual interdependence, obligations and need for recognition between members of societies, generating broad societal resonance for the protests of the most vulnerable against long-enshrined inequalities, discrimination and racism.
On these grounds, the Covid-19 pandemic represents a critical conjuncture of historical dimensions, which demands scholarly investigation of its causes, dynamics and consequences. While we have some knowledge of how the pandemic came about and who is immediately affected by it, we still know little about the broader pathways that may lead out of the crisis. Are we witnessing a series of events at the confluence of structural forces that limit future possibilities and shape future action? Or are we in the midst of a historical opening of possibilities for far-reaching transformation and change in which collective expressions of everyday life experiences and social mobilization within and across groups will foster creative organizational and technological breakthroughs, generate significant policy change or even push (varieties of) capitalism onto a different, and perhaps more sustainable pathway of socio-economic development? Comparing the current conjuncture with previous ones, such as the Spanish flu, the great depression or the global financial crisis, also raises questions about the depths of its effects. Will the organization of work and family life, patterns of production and consumption, regimes of discrimination and recognition, environmental footprints, and global division of labor just snap back once Covid-19 has been overcome? Or will the pandemic have set in motion processes of gradual but transformative change at the level of the economy, group and inter- group relations, forms of organization, institutional configurations, and national and global policy?
Because the pandemic has cut so broadly and drastically into everyday practices, its analysis calls for scholarly inquiry into the intersection and reciprocal influence of different levels of experience and action that have often been considered in isolation: individual and collective life worlds; social mobilization and inter-group relations; organizational and network dynamics; and the evolution of national, sectoral, and global institutions. For example, how have the redrawing of boundaries between work and family life, or the experience of suddenly being recognized as an “essential” occupation, shaped the way in which people collectively think about possible change, and if so, how does this translate into organizational, institutional and policy transformations? How has the pandemic refracted and amplified the resonance of longstanding protest movements, such as Black Lives Matter, and through which channels and with what consequences is this enhanced resonance feeding back into institutional and policy change?
The SASE conference to be held virtually on 2-5 July 2021, will feature as usual papers on all issues of concern for socio-economics. But we especially welcome contributions that explore the ways in which the pandemic challenges key features of contemporary capitalist societies; the variety of pathways of socio-economic development emerging from the crisis; and the multidimensional, cross-cutting patterns of transformation or restoration resulting from critical conjunctures, past and present. SASE’s current members are uniquely positioned to offer a broad range of disciplinary and methodological perspectives on these themes, but we hope to also attract new scholars to join our conversation.
Established in 1989, SASE owes its remarkable success to its determination to provide a platform for creative research addressing important social problems. Throughout its three decades, SASE has encouraged and hosted rigorous work of any methodological or theoretical bent from around the world, based on the principle that innovative research emerges from paying attention to wider context and connecting knowledge developed in different fields. SASE is committed to a diverse membership and lively intellectual debates and encourages panels that include or are likely to include a diverse group of participants.
President: Sigrid Quack (sigrid.quack@uni-due.de)
Each mini-conference will consist of 3 to 6 panels, which will be featured as a separate stream in the program. Each panel will have a discussant, meaning that selected participants must submit a completed paper in advance, by 1 June 2021. Submissions for panels will be open to all scholars on the basis of an extended abstract. If a paper proposal cannot be accommodated within a mini-conference, organizers will forward it to the most appropriate research network as a regular submission.
Kathryn Ibata-Arens is Vincent de Paul Professor of Political Economy, DePaul University. A scholar of innovation and entrepreneurship, science and technology policy, and economic development, her award-winning 2021 book Pandemic Medicine: Why the Global Innovation System is Broken and How We Can Fix It analyzes international competition in new drug discovery and access to essential medicines. Ibata-Arens is also researching the moral economy of patents over living matter, particularly that taken from indigenous communities. Her 2019 book Beyond Technonationalism: Biomedical Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Asia uses the lens of venture start-up firms in China, India, Japan, and Singapore, finding a new “networked techno-nationalism” guiding national policy and firm-level strategy supporting competitive growth in frontier technologies. In her journal articles, blogs, policy briefings, podcasts, and books, Ibata-Arens employs such methods as historical-institutional, policy and social network analysis, and original fieldwork-based case studies, contextualized within global politics and markets.
Etienne Nouguez is a CNRS researcher at the Center for the Sociology of Organizations (CNRS – Sciences Po Paris). At the crossroads of economic sociology and health sociology, his research focuses on health markets. These markets are approached as complex social organizations combining regulatory agencies, experts, pharmaceutical companies, health professionals and consumers. But they are also analyzed as spaces for valuation in which plural and potentially contradictory conceptions of the value of these products are articulated. After a PhD dissertation on the French markets for generic medicines, he studied the politics of medicines prices setting in France. His current research focuses on how European markets are formed for boundary products between food and drugs, with a particular focus on probiotics. He is also involved in a collective research on the management of the Covid-19 pandemic by local public health authorities and infrastructures. Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches, these researches shed light on the different processes linking health, political and market values.
The Covid19 pandemic disrupted the global status quo, creating an opening for transformative approaches to improving human health and the health of communities, healthcare provision, governance over the use and pricing of drugs and medicines, and medical innovations in biotechnology. For example, open innovation systems and sharing in the commons have introduced healing medicines and medical innovations (e.g. current national and institutional boundary-spanning Covid19 vaccine collaborations). The pandemic has however, exacerbated inequality in who gets access to medical care and medicines, and at what price.
In the global race to launch a Covid19 vaccine, millions of people suffering from other equally devastating (non-communicable epidemics of) chronic conditions and acute illness have been neglected. We have yet to reckon with this untold impact on human health. Further, market competition has in part led to human subjects abuses in developing countries in the race to develop new drugs (including Covid19 treatments and vaccines), and a decline in the discovery of radical new innovations in medicines for poor populations. The pandemic also revealed supply shortages in many markets and the struggles between states to get access to medicines and medical devices (masks, tests, ventilation devices…), revealing the inequalities between and within countries in access to health.
Finally, the numerous uncertainties and controversies about the efficacy of some treatments (such as hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, yet-to-come vaccines…) of Covid-19 and the value of peer-reviewed publications or expert regulation have revealed the scientific but also political and social dimensions of medicines valuation, opening new fields of investigation for scholars working on valuation, expertise and regulatory capture.
This mini-conference aims to convene a group of related panels around issues in global health and medicines, to facilitate useful critical discussion and reflection on participants’ works-in-progress. Driving questions include:
Our mini-conference encourages submissions of papers exploring emerging frameworks and theories, as well as empirically rich original data from the developed and developing world and at various levels of analysis (e.g. local community, firm, state, multilateral institution). Scholars at all levels are welcome. In the spirit of innovation and creativity, the panels will have an interactive workshop format around discussant feedback and moderated audience participation.
Zophia Edwards‘ research examines the impacts of colonialism and multiracial labor movements on state formation and human development in the Global South, with a particular focus on resource-rich countries. She has published in International Journal of Comparative Sociology, Studies in International Comparative Development, Political Power and Social Theory, among others.
Julian Go‘s research explores the social logics, forms and impact of empires and colonialism; postcolonial/decolonial thought and related questions of social theory, epistemology, and knowledge; and global historical sociology. Much of Go’s work has focused on the US empire, resulting in articles and books such as The American Colonial State in the Philippines: Global Perspectives (co-edited with Anne Foster, Duke University Press, 2003), American Empire and the Politics of Meaning (Duke University Press, 2008) and Patterns of Empire: the British and American Empires, 1688 to Present (Cambridge University Press, 2011). His other work is on postcolonial thought and social theory, culminating in his book Postcolonial Thought and Social Theory, Oxford, 2016; and global historical sociology and transnational field theory: Fielding Transnationalism (co-edited
This mini-conference, building upon last year’s mini-conference of the same name, welcomes papers investigating the legacies of colonialism, racism and slavery upon capitalist expansion and global development. While critical theories and studies of development have existed for decades, starting with Dependency/World-Systems theories and continuing through the “postdevelopment” approaches – manifested in the work of Escobar (1984) and Ferguson (1990) among others – newer “decolonial”, “postcolonial” and “Southern” approaches have emerged in their wake. These paradigms have surfaced in a variety of fields and subfields, including comparative-historical sociology, social theory, political theory and comparative politics. Together they make explicit the Eurocentric, imperial/colonial and often racialized bases of Northern social science and seek critical alternatives, either by reconstructing historical narratives as “entangled” and “connected” or by discovering and critically deploying the knowledge, concepts and theories of postcolonial/Southern thinkers and social movements.
The miniconference will take stock of these recent critical turns and their implications for the study of development. Compared to earlier critical approaches, what if any is the added value of these approaches for understanding social, political and economic development? What are the limits? What theories, concepts and research follow from the recognition of the decolonial/postcolonial critique of knowledge? Revisiting these questions has become particularly urgent as the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated racial inequalities and called into question current hegemonic models of “development.” Theoretical, programmatic, or empirical papers are welcomed. Topics might include but are not restricted to:
Muyang Chen is an Assistant Professor of International Development at Peking University’s School of International Studies. Her research focuses on understanding the role of the state in development, and addresses the question of how China’s development finance affects global order. She also studies the role of public financial agencies in facilitating development assistance, export finance, and industrialization. Muyang’s research is published in New Political Economy, Studies in Comparative International Development, Development Policy Review, and Oxford Handbook of Industrial Policy. She holds a Ph.D. in International Studies from University of Washington, an M.A. in Asian Studies from University of California, Berkeley, and dual bachelor’s degrees from Peking University and Waseda University. Prior to joining Peking University, she was a JSPS-funded Visiting Scholar at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies (2017) and a Pre-Doctoral Fellow at the Global Development Policy Center (2018). A native speaker of Chinese, she is also fluent in Japanese and Korean and speaks basic German.
Yixian Sun is a Lecturer (Assistant Professor) in International Development at the University of Bath. He studies transnational governance, environmental politics, and sustainable development. His research seeks to explain whether and how different types of governance initiatives can help emerging economies and developing countries achieve sustainability transitions. He has also worked on the global food system transition and designed large-scale surveys in multiple countries to investigate public opinion on sustainable food consumption. Yixian’s recent work focuses on the sustainability impacts of China’s development finance and overseas investment in the Global South, including in the energy and mining sectors. Yixian’s work appeared in major academic journals including Ecological Economics, Global Environmental Politics, Global Food Security, International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Nature Food, and the Review of International Political Economy. Originally from China, Yixian hols a PhD in International Relations/Political Science from the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies and was a postdoctoral fellow at Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies.
Matthias Thiemann is an Associate Professor of European Public Policy at Sciences Po Paris. His work focuses on two areas. On the one hand, he analyzes the role of public development banks in attempts by the European Union to develop infrastructural power in the realm of economic policy, on the other hand he analyzes the regulation of financial markets, seeking to bring ideational and political economy accounts together. Prior to Sciences Po, he was an Assistant Professor at Goethe University Frankfurt am Main and a Postdoctoral Fellow at ESSEC Business School. His work has been published in the American Journal of Sociology, the Journal of European Public Policy, Regulation and Governance, the Review of International Political Economy and New Political Economy. In 2018, he published a monograph at Cambridge University Press on the regulation of shadow banking, and a new monograph is forthcoming at CUP entitled “Taming the Cycles of Finance? Central Banks and the rise of macroprudential regulation”.
Jiajun Xu is an Assistant Professor and the Executive Deputy Dean of the Institute of New Structural Economics at Peking University. Xu worked in the United Nations and World Bank and currently acts as the General Secretary of the Global Research Consortium on Economic Structural Transformation (GReCEST), and the Researcher at the Public Policy Research Center of the Counsellors’ Office of the State Council of the People’s Republic of China. Her research focuses on development financing and global economic governance. She has published in top academic journals in the field of international development. Her academic monograph Beyond US Hegemony in International Development was published by Cambridge University Press in 2017. She has led a team to build a pilot database on Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) worldwide and pioneered research in the field of development finance. As the co-coordinator, she has initiated the International Research Initiative on DFI Working Groups where leading scholars and experts are brought together to foster academically rigorous research on development financing, and enhance its policy impact through the joint effort with such platforms as International Development Finance Club (IDFC) and association of Development Finance Institutions. Xu holds a DPhil (PhD) from the University of Oxford.
Despite the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, our world has faced a tremendous financing gap—up to $2.5 trillion per year—to implement the Sustainable Development Goals. COVID-19 has further increased burdens of most countries in the Global South. As the pandemic unfolds, multilateral development banks and donor countries began to provide emergency funding around the world. In this time of crisis and the forthcoming recovery era, it is crucial to reconsider the role of development finance in supporting socio-economic development at the global, regional, national, and local levels. In fact, the system of global development cooperation has experienced significant changes since the United Nation’s Monterrey conference in 2002, as demonstrated by the rise of many new actors and funds such as China’s development finance institutions and their instruments to support the Belt and Road Initiative. Accordingly, we have seen a burgeoning literature investigating these changes and their implications. This mini-conference aims to further advance this research agenda while taking into account the impact of the COVID-19 crisis and the resultant economic and political environments.
We welcome contributions examining development finance and its impact through different theoretical and methodological lenses. We adopt a broad definition of ‘development finance’, which encompasses the mobilization of various types of resources—domestic and international, public and private—for development. While the mini-conference pays particular attention to the post-COVID era, it does not exclude research taking historical perspectives. Key questions include, but are not limited to:
Through an interdisciplinary conversation, we hope to build a global network of researchers studying changing dynamics of development finance and its impacts on socio-economics across the globe. We welcome contributions presenting robust empirical evidence on continuous and evolving challenges in development finance, but also encourage participants to take a forward-looking perspective in exploring solutions to addressing financing gaps at different levels. We support diversity and decolonization of knowledge: scholars from different backgrounds and at different career stages are invited to submit their work and we will give more opportunities to researchers based in or from the Global South.
Kathleen Griesbach is a postdoctoral researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies. She recently received her PhD in Sociology from Columbia University. Her research draws on economic and cultural sociology, the sociology of time, and critical geography to examine work experiences in light of ongoing economic transformations and enduring inequality in the labor process. Her current book project examines how contingent agricultural, oil and gas, academic and delivery workers navigate uncertain work schedules, earnings, and landscapes in Texas and New York City. Her work has recently appeared in Ethnography and Socius.
Mateusz Halawa is an ethnographic researcher at the Max Planck Partner Group for the Sociology of Economic Life at the Institute of Philosophy and Sociology of the Polish Academy of Sciences. He is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Anthropology at the New School for Social Research. His recent work was published in Cultural Studies, the Journal of Cultural Economy, and Food, Culture & Society.
Lisa Suckert is a Senior Researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in Cologne, Germany. She currently investigates the dynamics of future expectations and temporal orders in moments of economic and political crisis. Her work is theoretically inspired by field theory and économie des conventions and focuses on economic and political sociology, sociology of time and research on capitalism. Recent articles include: “The Future as a Social Fact. The Analysis of Perceptions of the Future in Sociology” (with Jens Beckert: Poetics, forthcoming) “Temporality in Discourse: Methodological Challenges and a Suggestion for a Quantified Qualitative Approach” (with Julian Hamann, Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 2/2018) and “Unravelling Ambivalence: A Field-Theoretical Approach to Moralised Markets” (Current Sociology, 5/2018).
Marcin Serafin is an economic sociologist and the head of the Max Planck Partner Group for the Sociology of Economic Life at the Institute of Philosophy and Sociology of the Polish Academy of Sciences. His research interests include sociological theory, temporal order of markets, digital platforms, and human ecology. His recent articles include “Cabdrivers and Their Fares: Temporal Structures of a Linking Ecology” in Sociological Theory and “Contesting the Digital Economy: Struggles Over Uber in Poland.”
This mini-conference takes up the empirical phenomenon and the theoretical concept of crisis, but investigates it through the vantage points of temporality and the capitalist time regime. We are interested in research that relates the economic causes and consequences of crises and similar disruptive events to concepts of time, speed, rhythms, durations, and time horizons.
We particularly invite contributions from the following four areas of interest, but we are open to other, related topics.
a) Disrupted time horizons
Crises are temporal ruptures: their unexpected emergence marks the difference between “before” and “after,” profoundly disturbing perceptions of continuity. How does capitalism, as an economic order oriented towards the future, cope with the disrupted time horizons of crisis? When do crises narrow the horizon down to surviving the present and when can crises become “critical junctures,” opening the future for new developments? How are future oriented economic practices like innovation, entrepreneurship, and investment affected by crises?
b) Desynchronized temporalities and the rhythms of crisis
Crises and similar ruptures, including revolutions, catastrophes, and epidemics, challenge established temporal orders. We invite contributions that analyze how crises exacerbate or mitigate the frictions between the temporalities of capitalism and those of social spheres, e.g. the state, politics, home, care work, sleep or religion. How do crises redistribute time budgets, forcing actors to wait or to speed up? How do they interfere with established timelines such as “just in time” production, working time arrangements, and business plans? Resolving crises may require an approach to time that differs from the dominant capitalist time regime. For instance, how does the short-term profit imperative of financialized capitalism conflict with the long-term horizons required to make sense of the climate crisis? How can we slow down when capitalism requires acceleration?
c) The temporal inequalities of crisis
We are looking for papers that examine profit and inequality in times of crisis from a temporal perspective. How do people differ in their ability to sustain periods of waiting, speeding up or buying back time?
When crises disrupt time horizons, rhythms, and regimes, some actors are able to leverage those disruptions, while many others lose out. For example, some digital and platform companies are benefitting from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, while others are having their economic futures immobilized and their livelihoods eliminated. What do these temporal processes look like, and what are their short- and long-term consequences for inequality at different scales?
d) Toward new time regimes
We are interested in contributions that explore how the disruption of existing time regimes gives way to new approaches to time. For example, have experiences of prior crises incentivized companies to prepare for the unexpected or to reconsider the role of economic slack? What devices, digital technologies, and social techniques are used to manage new temporal conflicts? Can crisis lead to an increase in temporal autonomy?
In situations of crisis, state interventions are often geared toward stepping in and “bridging” the way to a more stable economic future. How do states enable actors to remain patient or incentivize them to speed up and become active? Can economic interventionism mitigate the tensions of capitalist time regimes?
Moisés Balestro holds a PhD in Social Sciences from the University of Brasília. He is an Associate Professor at the University of Brasilia in the Graduate Program of Comparative Studies on the Americas at the Department of Latin American Studies. He was a visiting scholar at the Institute of Political Science at Goethe Universität (2014-2015). As a researcher in the area of economic sociology and political economy, he leads a Comparative Studies of Economic Sociology research group at the Brazilian National Research Council. His areas of interest are diversities of capitalism with special emphasis on the Global South, innovation and development, and social construction of markets. He has articles in journals and book chapters on state and development, innovation, political economy of agribusiness and rural development. He is also a researcher at the National Institute of Science and Technology in Public Policy, Strategy and Development (INCT/PPED), and is linked to the line State, Varieties of Capitalism and Development Policies in Emerging Countries, especially the BRICS. Recently, he carried out a project funded by the Brazilian CAPES together with the German DAAD on the lessons from Germany to the institutional determinants of the Brazilian technological learning and another on the role of ideas in the coordination of industrial policies in Brazil.
Antonio José Junqueira Botelho is Full Professor of the Graduate Program in Political Sociology at IUPERJ Universidade Candido Mendes, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. He is a co-organizer for Network B: Globalization and Socio-Economic Development and a member of the SASE Network Organizer Forum. During the Covid-19 pandemic, he was a co-organizer of the Comparative Political Economy Webinar Series 2020/2022: Asia, which held a dozen events to engage the dialogue between Latin America and Asia.
Research interests include comparative political economy; collaborative upgrading, and innovation in emerging country supply chains; upgrading for energy transition in the global O&G industry supply chain industry; technological entrepreneurship; and human resources and innovation program monitoring and evaluation. He is a PI in the projects “The politics of green transition in electric transport and energy in Brazil and Mexico: State, institutional arrangements and coalitions,” funded by CNPq (Brazil) and “Evaluation, Monitoring and Training under the PDDE and Aggregate Actions,” funded by the FNDE (Brazil). He was a co-coordinator of “Floating the Energy Value Chain in East Asia: Collaboration for Innovation in the Adaptation of the Oil and Gas Supply Chain to Zero Carbon” and “Creating Value in the Ocean Industry: State Roles in Development, Innovation and Upgrading of Offshore Oil and Gas and Shipbuilding (Maritime Engineering and Construction) Supply Chains in East Asia,” both funded by IDE-JETRO (Japan); and PI of “The Norwegian oil and gas supply industry in hard times: Innovation in global supply chains” funded by PETROMAKS2-National Research Council (Norway) and “Institutional determinants of the industrial innovation process in Brazil and lessons from the German experience,” funded by CAPES (Brazil)/DAAD (Germany).” Other completed projects include: “The developmental State reloaded: Brazilian industrial policy in the 21st century” and “Evaluation of Market Strategies of Semiconductor Design Houses.”
Recent publications include “Dreaming of Moonshots and the middle-income trap,” Socio-Economic Review, v. 30, p. 1507-1509, 2022; Germany’s Innovation Manufacturing: A Path to Knowledge-Intensive Economy” (co-authors M.V. Balestro and J. De Toni), Revista Pós-Ciencias Sociais, v. 18, p. 333-353, 2021; “In search of developmental capitalism institutions” (co-author M.V. Balestro), Revista Brasileira de Sociologia, v. 9, p. 45-74, 2021; “Global Interdependence, Energy Security and Domestic Industrial Development: Japan Foreign Oil Relations with Brazil,” Latin America Ronshu, v. 53, p. 1-28, 2020; “Ideas, leadership, and the crafting of alternative industrial policies: Local content requirements for the Brazilian oil and gas sector” (co-author Yuri Kasahara), Comparative Politics, v. 51, p. 385-405, 2019; “Business Modeling and Public Policy in High-Tech Industries: Exploratory Evidences from Two Brazilian Semiconductor Support Programs (co-author Alex da Silva Alves), International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management 15 (4), 2018 (DOI: 10.1142/S0219877018500311); “Governing the Urban Commons: Experimentalist Governance for Resilient Climate Co-Benefits Regime in Asian Mega Cities” in Farzaneh, H., editor, Devising a Clean Energy Strategy for Asian Cities. Singapore: Springer Nature, 2018; and “Norwegian suppliers in Brazil” (co-authors Helge Ryggvik, Ole Andreas Engen) in Thune, T., Engen, O.A. & Wicken, O., editors, Petroleum Industry Transformations: Lessons from Norway and Beyond. Routledge, 2018.
He holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from MIT, where he was associated with the Program in Science, Technology & Society; graduate degrees from Cornell University and Université Paris IV and was a National Science Foundation (US) Postdoctoral Minority Fellow at the Johns Hopkins University. He sits on the Editorial Board of Green and Low-Carbon Economy, The Journal of Information Technologies and International Development, Perspectives on Global Development and Technology, and Science, Technology and Society.
Bruno Gandlgruber is a Professor for Economics at the Department of Institutional Studies at the Cuajimalpa Campus of the Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana in Mexico-City. His current academic activities are related to the comparative institutional analysis of development processes, particularly the emergence and transformation of economic models and the role of informality and firm governance in economic development. He has been invited as a visiting scholar to Ruhr-University Bochum, Passau University, Turkish-German University (Istanbul, Turkey) and Technical University Berlin (Campus El Gouna, Egypt). As a consultant for the ECLAC/UN he has developed projects on market governance in Central America. His research has been published by Palgrave and other international publishers and reviews. He is also an associate editor of the newly founded Review of Evolutionary Political Economy.
Michelle Hsieh is an Associate Research Fellow in the Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan. She received her PhD (in Sociology) from McGill University, Montreal, Canada, and was a Shorenstein Postdoctoral Fellow at the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford University. Her research interests include economic sociology, sociology of development, comparative political economy, and East Asian societies. Her ongoing research explores the variations and consequences of industrial upgrading among the East Asian latecomers. She has done empirical analysis of the different configurations of the state-society linkages for innovation through comparative industry studies on Taiwan and South Korea. Her investigations focus on how technology learning and adaptation take place in a decentralized system of SME network production and the institutional arrangements that can facilitate or hinder coordination and collaboration. Other research interests are the origins of the East Asian developmental state and the connection between technological development and Cold War geopolitics in the latter half of the twentieth century.
Further details about her research and publications can be found on her homepage.
Arie Krampf is senior lecturer at the School for Government and Society at the Academic College of Tel Aviv Yaffo and a lecturer at Hebrew University. Arie holds a PhD. from Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science, Tel Aviv University. He was a postdoc at “The KFG The Transformative Power of Europe” at Free University Berlin, the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin, and the Davis Institute for International Studies at the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Arie has published in top-ranked journals such as International Studies Quarterly, Journal of Institutional Economics, Journal of European Integration, Israel Studies, Israel Affairs, Science in context and others. Arie is a member in the board of the Israeli Association for International Studies (IAIS) and a member of the board the Israeli Association for the Study of European Integration (IASEI).
Andrei Vernikov is a Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow).From 2006 to 2016 he taught as a Professor of Banking at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow. Prior to that, he held executive positions in banking and finance, including Black Sea Trade and Development Bank (Thessaloniki, Greece), ABN AMRO Bank (Moscow), International Monetary Fund (Washington DC), and Central Bank of Russia(Moscow). He also has served as a non-executive Director in 7 banks and companies. His research interests include institutional economics, development economics, banking, and corporate governance. Andrei is a citizen of the Russian Federation, born in Sevastopol in 1960. He received his diploma in International Economics from the Moscow Institute of International Relations (now MGIMO-University) in 1981 and his doctoral degree from the Russian Academy of Sciencesin 2006. Andrei speaks Russian, English, Spanish, Portuguese, French and Czech.
Increasing uncertainty produced by the dual economic and health crisis set renewed political constraints on socio-economic policymaking. This mini-conference claims the need for an analytic framework that combines the growth model approach with economic nationalism. The purpose is to shed new light on the political and ideational components in the conflicts of distribution, class dynamics, and state-nation conflicts over economic and geopolitical preferences. It builds upon Hirschman’s premise that ideas are the binding agents of economic development and that national visions encourage economic development. Such unprecedented developments call for a conceptual framework combining the growth model approach in comparative capitalism with a renewed economic nationalism discussion to make sense of capitalism’s reconfigurations.
It aims to identify the nexus and under what conditions economic nationalism reconfigures the possibilities and conditions the participants of social blocs and shapes the content and the form of the growth regime under existing national institutional arrangements. Economic nationalism re-orders the interests and recast the discourses of actors, creating seeds of institutional change. Thus, it enlarges the repertoire of our political understanding of varieties of capitalism.
Economic nationalism undergirds the societal legitimacy of economic development goals. Social cohesion around the nation-state provides political stability. It galvanizes economic actors and civil society around a development strategy as in the techno-nationalism or strengthening the country’s geo-economic position. Differently from protectionism or statism in response to globalization, it influences national identities and nationalism as a developmental rationale on economic policy, institutions, and strategies (Helleiner 2002). It pulls the state and the nation together, alongside fuelling a pragmatic realism in economic disputes over national interests in global affairs (Pillar, 2013).
The growth model recasts the nation-state’s role.
As an extension of VoC, it purports to shift the analysis from the supply to the demand side and include the national capitalism coalitions. A growth regime is built and sustained by a social bloc, composed of a cross-class alliance held together by a dominant discourse (Baccaro 2019), which, in turn, sustains the institutional arrangement supporting a VoC.
By stressing the need to go beyond the black or white labels of statism or liberalization, the contributions should attempt to grasp the reconfiguration of contemporary capitalism in the complex and uncertain impact of the economic, political, environmental, and health crises on the politics and content of growth models. It thus invites papers on the topics:
Stéphanie Barral is a sociologist at the French National Institute for Agronomic and Environmental Research, with expertise in economic sociology and political sociology. Her work focuses on the contemporary transformation of environmental and agricultural policies. Her first book (Capitalismes Agraires, Presses de Sciences Po, 2015) analyzes the hegemonic development of capitalist palm oil plantations in South East Asia against social and environmental criticism. Her on-going research deals with carbon and biodiversity offsets as well as payments for environmental services in France and in the USA, in particular as they highlight trade-offs between scientific knowledge, economic constraints and institutional normativity and as they constitute a trend of agricultural policies privatization.
Patrick Bigger is an economic geographer at the Lancaster Environment Centre (UK) exploring how nature is made investable and to what ends. His work on financial-environmental entanglements spans settings, types of investment, and market structure from California’s cap-and-trade carbon market to the global green bonds market to for-profit biodiversity entrepreneurs in Kenya to World Bank green infrastructure finance. His other research project deals with the political economy and ecology of the US military, which has been covered extensively in the global press. His work appears in journals such as Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, Environment and Planning: E: Nature and Space, and The Journal of Environmental Investing.
Ritwick Ghosh is an Assistant Professor in Forestry and Environmental Resources at North Carolina State University. Ritwick studies and teaches environmental governance, with expertise in the role of markets in advancing sustainable land practices. Ritwick is a deeply interdisciplinary scholar and contributes to debates in ecological economics, sociology, and science and technology studies. His research has a global focus, with projects in India, the US, Europe, and Indonesia. Ritwick has held positions and fellowships at New York University, Arizona State University, and the University of Denver. Ritwick received his Masters and PhD from Cornell University.
Ian Gray is a postdoctoral scholar at the French Institute for Research and Innovation in Society, based in Paris. His research draws on a mix of economic sociology, political sociology, and science and technology studies, and focuses on how concerns about global environmental change are understood and managed as economic concerns. This work includes empirical studies of efforts to price climate risk within American insurance markets, the role state bureaucrats play in managing competing logics of efficiency in water-stressed river systems in France, and the constraints current models of public finance face in promoting equitable forms of climate adaptation. Gray received his PhD in sociology from the University of California, Los Angeles, and was a visiting doctoral fellow in the Anthropocene Formations group at the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science in Berlin.
Hanna Lierse is a political economist at the Research Center on Inequality and Social Policy at the University of Bremen. Her main research interest pivots around the transforming role of states and how they intervene to address the market inequalities created by capitalist societies. She has published papers on the historical rise of the tax and the welfare state and on how contemporary challenges have shaped the redistributive capacity of the state. In one of her more recent projects she investigates the transition to green public finances, particularly green taxes and subsides. Although her main research area has been on the transformation of the state in Western Europe, she has also studied the role of the state in the Global South.
Mi Ah Schøyen is a researcher in comparative social policy at NOVA Norwegian Social Research, Oslo Metropolitan University.Core research interests include questions about the social and political drivers and consequences of welfare state reforms, intergenerational solidarity and the interplay between climate change and social policy. In her publications she has addressed, inter alia, topics such as the Nordic welfare state model, the eco-social agenda in Europe and early job insecurity.
Before the global COVID-19 outbreak, climate change was emerging on the political agenda as perhaps the greatest contemporary global policy challenge. Addressing climate change and other environmental challenges will require restructuring economic systems, and the pandemic has demonstrated such opportunities – from restrictions on economic activities to massive economic rescue packages. Potentially, these may be designed in a way to address the twin eco-social challenges of the Anthropocene: Accelerate the shift away from environmentally destructive modes of production and consumption while simultaneously reducing human vulnerability from an increasingly hostile environment. This transition is known broadly under the heading of the “green economy”, a reference to the various ways economic and financial tools are used to advance environmental ends. Policy examples include carbon trading, payments for ecosystem services, financial products like green bonds, and public spending on infrastructure, resilience, and risk reduction. As green economic ideas gain momentum, it is worth pausing and taking note of what goes on under the name of green transitions, particularly implications for inequality and capitalism.
This mini-conference aims to advance an interdisciplinary dialogue to grapple with green economic transitions. While the environmental risks of climate change are well understood, there is still very little knowledge about the structural and institutional factors that shape governance trajectories towards net zero carbon and environmentally resilient economies. Conversely, it is little researched how green transitions affect societies at large as well as the social challenges and inequalities they might produce. In this mini-conference we welcome theoretical as well as empirical contributions from micro or macro level perspectives that study the green transition from four analytically distinct, but empirically overlapping angles:
First, we welcome comparative or single-case contributions that discuss the theoretical-normative dimension of green transitions. How do green economic solutions relate to ideas of justice, fairness as well as well-being and inequality? Are there limits or incompatibilities between environmental and equity goals? And how is the green transition legitimized?
Second, we encourage papers that examine the varieties of expert knowledge, such as accounting, metrification and modelling that have emerged as influential brokers in the effort to achieve “greener” economic outcomes. How do we situate the role these different forms of expertise play within these processes of transition?
Third, we invite papers analysing empirical patterns of the various theories of change. Questions include but are not limited to: Which policies are at the forefront of the transformation? How can we explain institutional arrangements and practices of greening? Possible approaches might look into the role of various actors including partnerships between multilateral institutions, states and NGOs as well as different institutional configurations and pressures as triggers or obstacles of change.
Fourth, we invite contributions that shed light on patterns of societal perceptions and attitudes towards different aspects of climate change and policies of mitigation and adaptation. How can we, for instance, explain variation in preferences towards sustainable consumption patterns across cohorts or societal groups? From this perspective we are also interested in which societal groups are benefitting from the eco-social transformation and which ones are falling behind.
Lotta Björklund Larsen‘s research is broadly based in economic, legal and moral anthropology with a particular focus on taxation. “Why we pay tax, why we avoid doing so and how we are made to pay tax” are questions that bring to fore people’s relation to state, market and fellow citizens. Lotta is currently Research Fellow at the Tax Administration Research Centre, University of Exeter Business School, Associate Fellow at World Academy of Arts and Science and co-organize the Anthropology of Tax network.
Through her research she has engaged with various actors at the tax arena. She has addressed citizens justifications purchasing informal work, conducted three years of fieldwork at the Swedish Tax Agency, interviewed MNE’s on cooperative compliance projects and addressed the failure of a tax lottery in Georgia (Caucasus). Through her research she takes interest in knowledge that shapes people’s lives, collaborative anthropologies, quantification of society, and the digitization of society.
The methodological assumptions across disciplines for addressing taxation issues are of particular interest for her. If we are to understand the obscenely complex issue that taxation is, she is convinced of the need for a multi-disciplinary approach.
Anna-Riikka Kauppinen is a Research Associate in the Department of Social Anthropology at the University of Cambridge, where she is part of Max Planck Cambridge Centre for Ethics, Economy and Social Change. Her doctoral research (London School of Economics, 2018) was a study of professionalism, career pursuits, and emerging audit cultures in Ghana’s capital Accra. She has previously written about Ghanaian middle-class attitudes to taxation and state efforts to ‘widen the tax-net’ to the urban informal sector. As a post-doctoral Research Associate in Cambridge, she is currently researching Ghana’s 2017-2019 banking crisis with a focus on the moral debates of accountability and economic sovereignty. Anna-Riikka also sustains a broader interest in the economic influence of Charismatic Pentecostal churches in West Africa and their role in the urban financial eco-system.
The corona pandemic is both a health and economic crisis, among other things, with the World Bank predicting a 5.2% contraction of global GDP in 2020. In response, fiscal rescue packages have been devised on local, national and international levels with the aim of mitigating the devastating socio-economic impacts. These rescue packages involve large and often radical new tax proposals, with the OECD recommending a ‘gloves off’ approach where all options should be explored (2020). Discussions around fiscal policies trigger both hopes and fears about alternative economic futures, fire up discussions about the rights and the capabilities of states to tax, and expose existing narratives about how fiscal flows shape the society and public at large. Furthermore, current and future fiscal packages capitalize on dependencies between the state, private sector, and taxpayer citizens, generating new kinds of divisions, inequalities and benefactors.We are in a moment where taxes are seen as a tool for managing the looming economic crisis, which raises questions about what taxes ‘do’, what they should do, and how.
This mini-conference aims to bring together participants from a wide range of disciplines, involving a broad spectrum of methodological approaches and diverse geographical locations, for the study of fiscal relations in the face of pandemics, and beyond. We invite papers that engage and expand on the following topics:
Jens Beckert is the director of the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in Cologne, Germany. His main research field is economic sociology, particularly the correlation between economic processes and the social and cultural structures in which economic action is embedded. In recent years his work has focused on the role of expectations in economic decision-making and for capitalist development. In coming years this focus will shift to research on wealth and social inequality, building upon my earlier work on inheritance law. He is the author of numerous and influential articles and books in the field, including Imagined Futures. Fictional Expectations and Capitalist Dynamics (Harvard University Press 2016) and Uncertain Futures: Imaginaries, Narratives, and Calculation in the Economy (edited with Richard Bronk) (Oxford University Press, 2016).
Felipe González-López is associate professor at the Universidad Central de Chile, where he leads since 2020 the Max Planck Partner Group for the Study of the Economy and the Public. He got his PhD in Sociology from the Max Plank Institute for the Study of Societies, in Cologne, where he researched the financialization of households. During his postdoctoral research funded by the National Council of Science and Technology in Chile, he investigated the conditions that lead to the politicization of debt and the rise of social movements of debtors. His most current area of research bridges economic sociology to communication studies, in order to understand the way in which both conventional and social media contribute to the formation of economic expectations in the public sphere.
Aldo Madariaga is Assistant Professor at the Universidad Diego Portales and associate researcher at the Center for Social Conflict and Cohesion Studies (COES), both in Santiago, Chile. He obtained his PhD from the University of Cologne and the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, where he investigated the political and institutional underpinnings of neoliberalism’s continuity. Based on this research, he published Neoliberal Resilience. Lessons in Democracy and Development from Latin America and Eastern Europe (Princeton University Press, 2020) which received two honorary mentions for the 2020 best book, the Alice Amsden award by SASE, and by the IPE section of the international Studies Association. His current research interests focus on the political economy of economic policy and development, with a particular emphasis on the role of business in diverse policy fields including monetary and industrial policy, skills formation, and environmental policy. He is the principal investigator of the Observatory of Socioeconomic Transformations, a joint ANID (Chilean Research and Development Agency) and Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies project investigating the politics of ongoing capitalist transformations.
Guadalupe Moreno is a postdoctoral researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in Cologne. She obtained her Ph.D. in 2020 from the University of Cologne. In her dissertation “Working fictions of money: the making of currency (dis)trust in Argentina (1880-2020)”, she combined political economy and economic sociology approaches to the study of contemporary money and studied the socio-political and institutional processes that underpin trust in contemporary fiat money. In particular, she analyzed the mechanisms through which crises destroyed trust in money and stressed the importance of a successful politics of expectations to ensure monetary governability and foster trust. Guadalupe’s broader research interests include economic sociology and political economy approaches to money, studies of financial crises, central bank policies; social inequality; and qualitative and mixed methods.
Contemporary capitalism is facing momentous transformations. Global scale processes like financialization, automatization and robotics, climate change, and rising inequalities are significantly altering the way capitalism functions, even spurring discussions about its eventual demise. The Covid-19 pandemic has accelerated these trends and reflections. Ultimately, the answers that societies will give to these formidable challenges in the next decades will significantly shape the future of the capitalist economy.
Imaginaries of capitalist transformation are both constructed and contested in public discourses. How are these transformations eroding deep-seated images of capitalist development? What images of the future are emerging as part of these interconnected transformations? We are interested in how these “politics of expectations” unfold. How do economic elites, entrepreneurs, civil society, political parties, experts or journalists disseminate their interpretation of the future? What economic, political, normative or institutional resources enable them to promote dystopic or utopic ideas and increase their capacity to shape ongoing transformative efforts?
This mini-conference invites contributions that analyze capitalism’s contemporary transformations and respective imaginaries from the vantage point of three core arenas affecting the future economy: the economic public sphere where expectations about economic processes are formed, economic policymaking where public interventions in the economy are decided, and the state as a key economic actor in modern economies.
Among the main threats to social order are the growing devastation of the environment, rising authoritarianism, and the COVID-19 pandemic. While capitalism has played a central role in generating these crises, these looming disasters entertain an ambiguous relationship with the accumulation process. They disturb “business as usual”, but they also generate new profit opportunities for capitalist actors (Klein 2007). This opens a new field of investigation for socio-economic research, as it becomes crucial to understand changes in the organisation of capitalism during times of disasters. The mini conference will address several interrelated themes that will help explore this issue; across all themes, we particularly invite diverse global perspectives:
References upon request.
Soledad Álvarez Velasco is a postdoctoral fellow researcher in the Department of Comparative Cultural Studies at the University of Houston and the general coordinator of the regional research project (Im)Mobility in the Americas and COVID-19. Her research investigates the nexus between undocumented transit migration, border regime and the capitalist state, particularly in the case of the Andean Region, Central America, Mexico extended migratory corridor used by a global diaspora of African, Middle Eastern, South American and Caribbean undocumented migrants to reach the U.S. Her work also analyzes how the externalization of U.S. border enforcement policies impacts the South American region, the movement of unaccompanied migrant children across that extended corridor, the role of transnational smuggling networks and of social and digital infrastructures of mobility enabling migrants’mobilities. She is the author of Frontera sur chiapaneca: El muro humano de la violencia: Análisis de la normalización de la violencia hacia los migrantes indocumentados en tránsito (2016), and co-author of Entre la violencia y la invisibilidad: niños, niñas y adolescentes ecuatorianos no acompañados en tránsito a Estados Unidos (2012).
Nicholas De Genova is Professor and Chair of the Department of Comparative Cultural Studies at the University of Houston. He previously held teaching appointments in urban and political geography at King’s College London, and in anthropology at Stanford, Columbia, and Goldsmiths, University of London, as well as visiting professorships or research positions at the Universities of Warwick, Bern, and Amsterdam. He is the author of Working the Boundaries: Race, Space, and “Illegality” in Mexican Chicago (2005), co-author of Latino Crossings: Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and the Politics of Race and Citizenship (2003), editor of Racial Transformations: Latinos and Asians Remaking the United States (2006), co-editor of The Deportation Regime: Sovereignty, Space, and the Freedom of Movement (2010), editor of The Borders of “Europe”: Autonomy of Migration, Tactics of Bordering (2017), and co-editor of Roma Migrants in the European Union: Un/Free Mobility(2019).
This mini-conference attends to the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on international migration, the reconfiguration of mobility regimes and related processes of rebordering. Since the onset of the COVID-19 crisis in spring 2020, governments around the world have responded to the pandemic with the closure of national and regional borders, (selective) travel bans and so-called ‘lock-downs’. These mobility restrictions have variously obstructed circular migration patterns, family reunification, refugee resettlement schemes and transnational networks, while spurring a proliferation of spaces of confinement and processes of rebordering. Hence, migrants and refugees belong, for sure, to the people that have been most affected by the pandemic and related mobility restrictions. In this context it is important to stress that border closures, travel bans and other forms of mobility restriction have not always been informed by a purely epidemiological logic. In many instances, they also carry – more or less explicitly – nationalist agendas and racist imaginaries. Infamous examples include talk about the ‘Chinese virus’ and related racist attacks against people read as Asian, or the coercive confinement of refugees in overcrowded, unsanitary detention centres in Europe and elsewhere.
At the same time, the pandemic has exposed the dependency of many economies on migrant labour or the remittances migrants send to support communities of origin in Africa, Asia or Latin America. Likewise, the harsh working conditions migrant workers have to endure in many industries have been exposed by the pandemic. Examples include thousands of seamen stranded on cruise ships, undocumented migrants working without any protection in the so-called gig-economy via Uber and other digital platforms, or the scandal about the cramped accommodation units of migrant workers in the German and U.S. meat industry, which became hotspots for the spread of the virus.
To study how the COVID-19 pandemic affects international migration and the reconfiguration of contemporary border and mobility regimes, this mini-conference therefore invites paper proposals that engage with questions related to the theme of migration, bordering and capitalist restructuring in pandemic times. In particular, we welcome submissions that engage with one of the following questions:
We welcome submissions from scholars at all career stages. To facilitate a truly transnational dialogue across continents and academic language barriers the mini-conference organizers welcome submissions in both English and Spanish. You find a Spanish version of the cfp below.
Esta mini-conferencia analiza los impactos de la crisis del COVID-19 en la migración internacional, la reconfiguración de los regímenes de movilidad y el control fronterizo. Desde el inicio de la crisis de COVID-19 en la primavera de 2020, los gobiernos de todo el mundo han respondido a la pandemia con el cierre de las fronteras nacionales y regionales, prohibiciones (selectivas) de viajes y la imposición de cuarentenas. Estas restricciones a la movilidad han obstaculizado de diversas maneras los patrones de migración circular, la reunificación familiar, los planes de reasentamiento de refugiados y las redes transnacionales, al tiempo que han estimulado la proliferación de espacios de confinamiento y el redoblamiento del control fronterizo. Así, migrantes y refugiados, indudablemente, son parte de los colectivos que se han visto más afectados por la pandemia y las restricciones a la movilidad. En este contexto es importante subrayar que los cierres de fronteras, las prohibiciones de viajes y otras formas de restricción a la movilidad no siempre se han basado en una lógica puramente epidemiológica. En muchos casos, también ha conllevado – más o menos explícitamente- a programas nacionalistas e imaginarios racistas. Entre los ejemplos infames cabe citar la discusión sobre el “virus chino” y los ataques racistas conexos contra personas que se leen como asiáticas, o el confinamiento coercitivo de refugiados en centros de detención superpoblados e insalubres en Europa y otros lugares de las Américas.
Al mismo tiempo, la pandemia ha puesto de manifiesto la dependencia de muchas economías de la mano de obra migrante o de las remesas que los migrantes envían para apoyar a las comunidades de origen en África, Asia o América Latina. Las extremas condiciones de trabajo que deben soportar los trabajadores migrantes en muchas industrias han quedado asimismo expuestas por la pandemia. Entre los ejemplos figuran miles de marineros varados en cruceros; migrantes indocumentados que trabajan sin ninguna protección en economía informalizada y terciariazada a través de Uber y otras plataformas digitales; en campos agrícolas; o en la industria alimenticia, sobre todo en la de la carne, en condiciones inhumanas, por ejemplo en Alemania o Estados Unidos, que se convirtieron en focos de propagación del virus.
Para estudiar la forma en que la pandemia de COVID-19 afecta a la migración internacional y la reconfiguración de los regímenes contemporáneos de fronteras y movilidad, esta mini-conferencia invita a presentar ponencias que aborden las cuestiones relacionadas con la migración, el redoblamiento del control fronterizo y la re-estructuración capitalista en tiempos de pandemia. En particular, acogemos propuestas que aborden una o algunas de las siguientes preguntas:
Aceptamos propuestas de investigadorxs en todas las etapas de sus carreras. Para facilitar un diálogo verdaderamente transnacional a través de los continentes y superar las barreras del lenguaje académico, los organizadores de la mini-conferencia acogen con agrado propuestas de ponencias y presentaciones en inglés y en español.
Adriana Mica is Assistant Professor and head of the Research Unit on Action and Consequences at the Institute of Social Prevention and Resocialisation, University of Warsaw. Her research interests include sociology of possibility and ignorance, critical failure studies, theory of randomness, unintended consequences, and crisis management. She is the co-author of Ignorance and Change: Anticipatory Knowledge and the European Union Crisis (Routledge, 2021) and author of Sociology as Analysis of the Unintended: From the Problem of Ignorance to the Discovery of the Possible (Routledge, 2018). She is currently working on a co-authored book – The Imaginary of Failure: Coming to Terms with Contingency and Inequality in Policymaking (with Mikołaj Pawlak and Paweł Kubicki). As well as co-editing Routledge International Handbook of Failure: Critical Perspectives from Sociology and other Social Sciences (with Anna Horolets, Mikołaj Pawlak, and Paweł Kubicki, Routledge, forthcoming).
Social action, entrepreneurship, decision-making and even contemporary crises generate and are generated by contexts of opportunity, possibility, and alternatives.
The expectation, projection and reification of possible futures frame contexts of preparation and response to crises – such as the global financial crisis, the European crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic. Hence, exploring the generation of (and experimentation with) the possible can be a tool to reduce or, at least, challenge social inequalities. At the same time, visions of the possible can generate disappointment regarding less advantageous or unexpected developments, as when, for example, we collectively fail to anticipate episodes of crisis (financial, migratory etc.) or do not act in response to crises (ecological, public health etc.). These developments and pitfalls infuse the exploration and transformation of the possible with urgency, pressing policymakers, scientists and citizens to imagine yet more alternative scenarios and push the boundaries of what people consider to be plausible and desirable futures.
There are many threats and perversions involved in the process of possibility identification. Perhaps most notably, the exploration of possibility can generate cynicism about futile utopianism or “voluntarism”. Further, some preoccupations with possibility can also lead to the reification of future scenarios, and to subsequent fatigue and (ironically) to pessimism about the future. Examples include the reification of “dark” futures in relation to economic downturns, limits to growth and resources, health and environmental risks, the “invasion of migrants” in Europe, as well as the most recent projections regarding the fatal economic and social consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The common activity of “doom scrolling” shows how contemporary obsessions about the future can just as easily generate negative as positive scenarios about the future.
This highlights problems of perspective, inclusion and power in ways that help identify both the potential for destabilization and the contours of recomposition. Reification occurs via the voicing of certitude that certain risks or possibilities will materialize, without preliminary discussion of the extent to which possible worlds are in fact probable. Cynicism arises when possibilities have little substance or are too willfully detached or contentious regarding relations in the present. The study of possibility is thus extremely hazardous and easily undermined or rendered inconsequential. The generation of credible possibility is genuinely difficult as a social, political and theoretical problem. It nearly always involves destabilization in both ideas and practices.
This mini-conference aims to explore the ways in which the generation and exploration of possibility, as a social process, affects and informs developmental currents across domains in the contemporary world. We will discuss how it enables or blocks individual and collective action; how it contributes to political struggles; how it provides templates for social policy; how it re-arranges temporalities across social fields and how it legitimizes rearrangements triggered by crises of contemporary capitalism. We will also consider the conditions that lead to the exhaustion of possible futures. Finally, we will discuss the most suitable sociological theories and research methods that scholars can use to investigate possible worlds.
Markieta Domecka is a postdoctoral researcher at the Centre for Sociological Research (CESO) at KU Leuven, and works in the ERC ResPecTMe project. Her interests focus on agency-structure relations while researching work, inequality and social transformation. She has published in Gender, Place and Culture, Rassegna Italiana di Sociologia and in edited volumes by Palgrave Macmillan and Routledge.
Adam Mrozowicki is associate professor of sociology at the Institute of Sociology, University of Wrocław (Poland). His main research interests include comparative industrial relations, research on workers’ social agency and subjectivity in the context of changing labour markets and employment regimes. He is the member of editorial board of Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research and co-leads the NCN-DFG funded project PREWORK on young precarious workers in Poland and Germany. He published his work in Work, Employment and Society, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Economic and Industrial Democracy, Transfer, European Journal of Industrial Relations.
Karol Muszyński is a postdoctoral researcher at the Centre for Sociological Research (CESO) at KU Leuven, and works in the ERC Advanced Grant ResPecTMe ‘Resolving Precariousness: Advancing the Theory and Measurement of Precariousness across the paid/unpaid work continuum’. He is primarily interested in the grey zone of legal regulation of employment, in particular in the use of non-standard forms of employment, labour law violations and circumventions. He published work in Public Governance, Przegląd Socjologiczny/Sociological Review.
Valeria Pulignano is Professor of Sociology, with expertise on work, employment (industrial) relations and labor markets and Francqui Research professor of Sociology at KU Leuven. She holds a Ph.D. in Sociology and a scholarly background in socio-economic studies. She is Coordinator of the RN17 Work, Employment and Industrial Relations at the European Sociological Association (ESA) and researcher at the Inter-University Research Centre on Globalization and Work (CRIMT), research fellow at Warwick University (UK) and LISER, Luxemburg. She is Editor of Work, Employment and Society, Associate Editor of Journal of Industrial Relations and former Chief-editor of Work, Employment & Organizations (Frontiers). Valeria’s research lies in work, employment (industrial) relations and labor markets, their changing nature and implications for voice at work and inequality as differences in wages, working conditions, job quality, precarity and wellbeing across different sectors and national settings. She is Winner of the James G. Scoville Award 2015 from LERA and she holds a Chair Jacques Leclerq at UCL. She has a forthcoming book with OUP on The Politics of Unpaid Labour. How can Unpaid Labour help to address inequality in Precarious Work. Among her recent books Shifting Solidarities. (2020, Palgrave-MacMillan) with I. Van Hoyweghen and G. Meyers; Reconstructing Solidarity (2018, Oxford University Press) with V. Doellgast and N. Lillie.
While much exists on how political, technological and economic forces have yielded precarious work—work deprived of security and stability—more scholarship and debate is needed today about capitalism and the COVID-19 pandemic and its effects on the lives of workers, individuals and their families. The health and socio-economic consequences of COVID-19 have been profound, particularly for those in precarious conditions even before the outbreak of the pandemic. Thus, we need to ask how, and to explain why, the class-based contradictions and power asymmetries are experienced and ‘lived’ by the ‘precariat’ during a period of dramatic crisis. This has important implications for the study of precarity in post-COVID in two ways: the reinforcement or blurring of the boundaries of work and life as reflected through the lived experiences of pandemic; the emergence of new and/or the reinforcement and reproduction of old dualisms, cleavages and inequality(ies) by occupation, social class, age, gender, ethnicity. It is also critical to explore what political possibilities exist for rebalancing the aforementioned asymmetries while protecting democracy. Rising insecurity under austerity led to the rise of ‘populist’ political parties, which are now often major political actors in the post-COVID-democracy, accusing governments and press of lying about pandemic. Contributions will explore the four following areas:
Anne-Sophie Béliard is associate professor in sociology at the University Grenoble-Alpes (France) and researcher at Pacte (Public policies, political Action, Territories). Her research fields are media sociology and web studies. Her current research topics cover digital practices, careers of amateurs and professionalization processes. She recently published “Making Money from TV Series: From Viewer to Webmaster with Financial Reward” in S. Naulin & A. Jourdain (eds.) The Social Meaning of Extra Money. Capitalism and the Commodification of Domestic and Leisure Activities (2019).
Sidonie Naulin is associate professor in sociology at Sciences Po Grenoble and research fellow at Pacte (Public policies, political Action, Territories). Her research interest lies at the intersection of labor, professions, media and food studies. She recently co-edited The Social Meaning of Extra Money. Capitalism and the Commodification of Domestic and Leisure Activities with A. Jourdain (Palgrave Macmillan, 2019).
Victor Potier is a postdoctoral researcher in sociology at Pacte (Public policies, political Action, Territories). His research focuses on the connections between digital technology, markets and public policies, with a special interest in learning video games. He wrote a PhD thesis on the public market of pedagogical innovation, based on a sociotechnical approach from design to the use of gamified digital tools. His current research extends the study of devices designed to work pleasantly. It focuses on the manufacturing of professional events, by addressing both the socio-technical issues related to their digitalization, their marketing and the relationship of their organizers to public authorities.
The Covid-19 pandemic challenges both established and growing sectors of the economy. Its socio-economic impact varies from one industry to another and from country to country. However, one sector has been deeply disrupted all over the world: the event industry.
Until the Covid-19 pandemic, the event industry was experiencing unprecedented growth all over the world (UFI 2019, CICA 2019). This growth has been threatened by the pandemic and the worldwide adoption of sanitary measures. Events such as trade shows, congresses, festivals or sports competitions used to bring professionals together physically in a single location for a given period of time. The logic of social distancing and stay-at-home policies jeopardizes this industry. The Covid-19 pandemic weakens the economy of the event industry and impacts all the involved professionals from participants to organizers, and the various service providers associated with the events (local businesses, drivers, food catering professionals, etc.).
This Mini-Conference aims at scrutinizing the socio-economic impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the event industry. To what extent does the Covid-19 pandemic transform the practices and the organization of events? With which effects? In such a critical situation, can new technologies, such as videoconferencing, replace physical meetings?
We particularly welcome contributions that explore the following issues:
1. Rethinking the role of events for participants: from physical to digital trade shows
Trade shows usually provide structuring for economic fields (Aspers, Darr 2010) and can be seen as places dedicated to network building and market exchanges. What happens to those functions when the opportunities to meet decrease and when the formats of meetings change? Are events still attractive for professionals? How do digital meetings affect informal exchanges, conviviality, socialization and networking? The Mini-conference welcomes contributions analyzing, through the case of events, how the Covid-19 pandemic has modified intergroup relations within professional worlds.
2. Events’ organizers faced to economic and material challenges
While the health crisis reduces or even forbids physical meetings, events’ organizers need to transform deep-seated practices in their worlds. What are the costs and opportunities of the Covid-19 pandemic for organizers? How do they manage to maintain events and to protect their economic equilibrium? The Mini-conference welcomes proposals on new forms of events that are constrained by sanitary restrictions. How does digitization transform the business model of the event industry?
3. Local and geopolitical issues in a sanitary crisis
Countries, regions and cities increasingly compete in order to welcome business events on their territory. They expect both economic and symbolic benefits. The covid-19 crisis has a direct impact on the promotion of local businesses and territorial marketing linked to events. The Mini-Conference welcomes contributions dealing with the transformation of politics of events. How does the cancellation of events affect regional economies and policies?
The Mini-Conference welcomes theoretical and empirical contributions as well as diverse methodological approaches. The mini-conference strongly encourages diversity in the geographical eras studied (Europe, Latin America, Asia, the US, etc.)
Ilias Alami is a political economist. He currently holds a postdoctoral researcher position at Maastricht University, where he works on the ERC-funded SWFsEUROPE project. His research and teaching interests are in the areas of global political economy, state capitalism, racial capitalism, money and finance, North-South relations, theories of the state, and the articulations between race/class/coloniality. Some of his recent work has been published in New Political Economy, Review of African Political Economy, Review of Radical Political Economics, Geoforum, Development and Change, Human Geography, Competition and Change, and Political Geography. His new book, Money Power and Financial Capital in Emerging Markets (2019 Routledge) has been shortlisted for the 2020 British International Studies Association best book in International Political Economy award.
He tweets at @IliasAlami
Milan Babic is Associate Professor in Political Economy at the Political Science Department at the University of Amsterdam and PI of the DECARB project. His work deals with the transformations of the global political economy towards a geoeconomic global order; the political economy of decarbonization; and state-led investment. His latest book is The Rise of State Capital (Agenda 2023).
Adam Dixon is Associate Professor of Globalization and Development at Maastricht University in the Netherlands. He is the Principal Investigator of the research project Legitimacy, Financialization, and Varieties of Capitalism: Understanding Sovereign Wealth Funds in Europe (SWFsEUROPE) a five-year (2018-2022) funded by the European Research Council. His research focuses on globalization, development, state capitalism, and the political economy of sovereign wealth funds. He is the author of The New Frontier Investors: How Pension Funds, Sovereign Funds, and Endowments are Changing the Business of Investment Management and Long-Term Investing (Palgrave Macmillan 2016), The New Geography of Capitalism: Firms, Finance, and Society (Oxford University Press 2014) and Sovereign Wealth Funds: Legitimacy, Governance, and Global Power (Princeton University Press, 2013).
Nana de Graaff is Associate Professor in International Relations at the Department of Political Science and Public Administration at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Her main research interests are within International Relations, International Political Economy and Elite Studies (political sociology). Her particular research fields are Chinese political and economic elites, the globalization of Chinese firms and Chinese engagements with Europe; American political and economic elites and US foreign policy, US-China relations, and the politics and political economy of oil. She publishes in leading journals in International Relations, International Political Economy, and Sociology (e.g. Review of International Political Economy, European Journal of International Relations, International Affairs, Global Networks) and with publishers like Routledge and Cambridge University Press.
Nana De Graaff is currently Chair of the EU COST Action 18215 China in Europe Research Network (CHERN), a Europe-wide network aimed at pooling, exchanging, disseminating and generating research on Chinese socio-economic engagements with Europe. She is also co-Principal Investigator in an ESRC (UK) funded project Fraying Ties? Networks, Territory and Transformation in the UK oil sector, an interdisciplinary research project led by Prof. Gavin Bridge (Durham University) in collaboration with London School of Economic (LSE) and Platform. She is co-investigator in the Corporate Mapping Project, a SSHRC funded research-project aimed at systematically mapping the structure and influence of the fossil fuel industry in Canada led by Prof. William Carroll (University of Victoria). De Graaff is an advisory board member for International Affairs and The International Spectator.
Already before the current pandemic, state-led economies and development trajectories called into question core tenets of the liberal world order and its underlying (neo)liberal and coordinated economic models. After Covid-19, this trajectory will be reinforced: so-called “state capitalist” economies and state-led development strategies are projecting alternative pathways of economic success, which resonate with global demands for a stronger role of the state in economic and social matters in the face of the pandemic – also in the “liberal heartland” of the West. The rise and relevance of those alternatives is, however, not a simple return to atavistic statist development tools. The new statist practices are transnationally integrated like never before, as research on networked corporate elites, ownership and investment ties, and state-supported capital flows shows. Moreover, these developments beg for a deeper understanding of the world historical context within which they are unfolding.
The aim of this mini-conference is to further advance this research agenda, especially in the light of the Covid-19 pandemic. Calls for a stronger role of the state in coordinating, managing, and protecting economies and societies of the fallout of this crisis are perceptible all over the globe and from all political corners. We want to critically examine this acceleration of existing trends; and gather a variety of theoretical, methodological, and conceptual approaches in order to understand the dynamics shaping the new state capitalism before and after the crisis. The papers for this mini-conference will analyse concrete new configurations and practices of state capitalism – or varieties thereof – and its tools.
Taking a broad perspective on the issue of state capitalism, the contributions could address some of the following issues:
The mini-conference hence addresses the topics of alternative paths of (capitalist) development and the question of a redistribution of prosperity, power and identities in a world economy at a time of global fragility and change. Scholars from different disciplines, approaches and backgrounds are invited to explore the rise of state capitalism and statist development models, and their consequences in all areas of socio-economics. We especially encourage colleagues from the Global South to submit contributions that help us to better understand the present and future of state capitalism in a time of global crisis and change.
Bruno Bonizzi is Senior Lecturer in Finance at Hertfordshire Business School. He holds a PhD in Economics from SOAS, University of London on the subject of ‘Institutional Investors and Capital Flows to Emerging Markets’, and was involved in the EU-FP7 project FESSUD (Financialisation, Environment, Society and Sustainable development). His research focuses on financial integration and financialisation, with particular reference to institutional investors and developing and emerging economies. His work is published in several book chapters and journals such as Environment and Planning A and the Development and Change and the Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money.
Annina Kaltenbrunner is Associate Professor in the Economics of Globalization and the International Economy at Leeds University Business School. Her research focuses on financial processes and relations in emerging capitalist economies. She has published on financial integration, currency internationalization, financialization, and macroeconomic policy, among others, in the Cambridge Journal of Economics, Development & Change, Environment and Planning A, the Post Keynesian Journal of Economics, and New Political Economy. She has participated in several large externally funded projects and is currently collaborating with the Brazilian Central Bank on currency regionalization and regional payment systems.
Kai Koddenbrock is Research Group Leader at the University of Bayreuth. He holds a PhD in Political Science from the University of Bremen and a habilitation from Goethe-University Frankfurt. He is currently researching the longue durée of ‘racial capitalism’ from the times of the slave trade until today with a particular focus on the monetary and financial relations and exchanges between West Africa, Europe and the rest of the world.
Ingrid Harvold Kvangraven is a Lecturer in International Development at King’s College London. Her work is interdisciplinary, cutting across development economics, international political economy, economic history and development studies. Her research is broadly centered on the role of finance in development, structural explanations for global inequalities, the political economy of development, and critically assessing the economics field itself, in particular from an anti-colonial perspective. She is also the founder and editor of the blog Developing Economics, co-founder and Steering Group Member of Diversifying and Decolonising Economics (D-Econ), Coordinator of the Association for Heterodox Economics (AHE), among other things. She holds a PhD in Economics from The New School.
Jeff Powell is Senior Lecturer in Economics at the University of Greenwich. He is a founding member of Reteaching Economics, and a member of the Greenwich Political Economy Research Centre (GPERC). Jeff teaches macroeconomics, monetary economics, history of economic thought and economic history; his research interests relate to these, finance and development, and financialization.
Heterodox economists and political economists have long pointed to the structural subordination of developing economies in the global economy. One way in which this subordination is particularly manifest is in its monetary and financial dimension. That governments in Argentina, Ghana and Turkey are running into debt and currency problems might not just be a matter of domestic governance but might be the result of a more systemic problem. To say that the global monetary and financial system is a hierarchical system is to point to the relations of power, dependency, and violence that are the flipside of monetary and financial relations between creditors and debtors. So far, the literature has largely focused on developing economies’ monetary subordination and investigated broad structural and macroeconomics processes, with particular emphasis on moments of crises and extreme volatility. We still know very little about the specific, every-day financial relations, practices and mechanisms which reflect developing economies’ subordinate financial integration and distinctly shape the behaviour of economic agents in these countries. Economic geographers and sociologists have presented excellent work on the spatially and socially variegated financial practices, but place limited attention to the macroeconomic, monetary, and political structures underlying them. This mini-conference brings together the concerns with both macro-structure and agency to conceptualise their interaction in structured global financial markets.
Supplementing this general line of questioning, we particularly welcome contributions that explore the following issues:
Find out more about the exceptional scholars giving featured talks at our 33rd annual conference to be held online.
Nancy Folbre is Professor Emerita of Economics and Director of the Program on Gender and Care Work at the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and a Senior Fellow of the Levy Economics Institute at Bard College in the United States. Her research explores the interface between political economy and feminist theory, with a particular emphasis on the value of unpaid care work. In addition to numerous articles published in academic journals, she is the author of The Rise and Decline of Patriarchal Systems (Verso, 2021), the editor of For Love and Money: Care Work in the U.S. (Russell Sage, 2012), and the author of Greed, Lust, and Gender: A History of Economic Ideas (Oxford, 2009), Valuing Children: Rethinking the Economics of the Family (Harvard, 2008), and The Invisible Heart: Economics and Family Values (New Press, 2001). She has also written widely for a popular audience, including contributions to the New York Times Economix blog, The Nation, and the American Prospect. You can learn more about her at her website and blog, Care Talk: http://blogs.umass.edu/folbre/
Stephanie Kelton is a professor of economics and public policy at Stony Brook University and a Senior Fellow at the Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis at the New School for Social Research. She is a leading expert on Modern Monetary Theory and a former Chief Economist on the U.S. Senate Budget Committee (Democratic staff). She was named by POLITICO (2016) as one of the 50 people most influencing the policy debate in America, as one of the 50 people who defined 2019 by Bloomberg Businessweek, as one of Barron’s top 100 Women in Finance (2020), and by Prospect Magazine (2020) as one of the World’s Top 50 Thinkers. Professor Kelton advises policymakers and consults with investment banks and portfolio managers across the globe. She is a regular commentator on national radio and broadcast television. Her most recent book (June 2020), The Deficit Myth, became an instant New York Times bestseller.
Stephanie is a leading authority on Modern Monetary Theory, a new approach to economics that is taking the world by storm. She is considered one of the most important voices influencing the policy debate today. Her book, The Deficit Myth: Modern Monetary Theory and Creating an Economy for the People, shows how to break free of the flawed thinking that has hamstrung policymakers around the world.
In addition to her many academic publications, she has been a contributor at Bloomberg Opinion and has written for the New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, U.S. News & World Reports, CNN, and others.
Professor Kelton has worked in both academia and politics. She served as chief economist on the U.S. Senate Budget Committee (Democratic staff) in 2015 and as a senior economic adviser to Bernie Sanders’ 2016 and 2020 presidential campaigns. She currently works as a Professor of Economics and Public Policy at Stony Brook University, and she holds Visiting Professorships at The New School for Social Research, the University of Ljubljana, and the University of Adelaide. Prospect Magazine named her one of the 50 most influential thinkers in the world. She was previously Chair of the Department of Economics at the University of Missouri, Kansas City.
Alexandros Kentikelenis is associate professor of political economy and sociology at Bocconi University in Milan. He has written primarily on three research areas: decision-making in global governance, the development and evolution of global norms, and the social consequences of economic policies. Beyond his academic work, Alexandros is vice-president of Greece’s National Centre for Social Solidarity, one of the country’s leading social policy institutions. He has also worked as an advisor to various international, public and non-governmental organizations, including the World Health Organization, the German Ministry of International Cooperation and Development, and Oxfam.
Title of Lecture: Challenges for Democracy in the Age of the Pandemic
Jane Mansbridge, Charles F. Adams Professor of Political Leadership and Democratic Values, is the author of Beyond Adversary Democracy, an empirical and normative study of face-to-face democracy, and the award-winning Why We Lost the ERA, a study of anti-deliberative dynamics in social movements based on organizing for an Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. She is also editor or coeditor of the volumes Beyond Self-Interest, Feminism, Oppositional Consciousness, Deliberative Systems, and Negotiating Agreement in Politics. She was President of the American Political Science Association in 2012-13. She is also the recipient of the international Johan Skytte Prize (2018), the foremost prize in the field of political science. Her current work includes studies of representation, democratic deliberation, everyday activism, and the public understanding of free-rider problems.
Hartmut Rosa is Professor of Sociology and Social Theory at Friedrich-Schiller-University in Jena, Germany and Director of the Max-Weber-Kolleg at the University of Erfurt. He also is an Affiliated Professor at the Department of Sociology, New School for Social Research, New York. In 1997, he received his PhD in Political Science from Humboldt-University in Berlin. After that, he held teaching positions at the universities of Mannheim, Jena, Augsburg and Essen and served as Vice-President and General Secretary for Research Committee 35 (COCTA) of ISA and as one of the directors of the Annual International Conference on Philosophy and the Social Sciences in Prague. In 2016, he was a visiting professor at the FMSH/EHESS in Paris. He is editor of the international journal Time and Society. His publications focus on Social Acceleration, Resonance and the Temporal Structures of Modernity as well as the Political Theory of Communitarianism.
After the Applause: Re-evaluating the Essential in a post-Covid-19 World
Chair: Diane-Gabrielle Tremblay
Discussants: Rosemary Batt, Jayati Ghosh, Nadya Araujo Guimaraes, Ute Klammer
Black Lives Matter in Historical and Transnational Context
Chair: Zophia Edwards
Discussants: Christopher Paul Harris, Melissa Nobles, Donatella Della Porta, Karen Taylor, Sabrina Zajak
Brexit
Chair: Jacqueline O’Reilly
Discussants: Hussein Kassim, L. Alan Winters
Migration during and after the Covid-19 Pandemic
Chair: Karen Shire
Discussants: Martin Ruhs, Ito Peng, Biao Xiang, Brenda Yeoh
Structural Racism, Health, and COVID-19
Chair: Zophia Edwards
Discussants: Jenny Douglas, Rossalina Latcheva, Brandi T. Summers, Alexandre White
The End of Neo-Liberalism
Chair: Olav Velthuis
Discussants: Marion Fourcade, Alfredo Saad-Filho, Saori Shibata, Quinn Slobodian
Transformative Innovation and Grand Challenges
Chair: Paola Perez-Aleman
Discussants: Joanna Chataway, Rebecca Henderson, Erika Kraemer-Mbula, Henry Wai-chung Yeung
A great selection of ‘Author meets Critics’ sessions are being organized for SASE 2021, see the growing list of books and discussants below.
FEATURED AUTHOR MEETS CRITICS SESSIONS
Les capitalismes à l’épreuve de la pandémie – Robert Boyer
|
Background
Established in November 2017 by a group of female social science scholars, the Women and Gender Forum (WAG) is an interest group of the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics (SASE). Membership is open to all female SASE members and those who identify as women in a way that is significant to them.
Our aims
WAG has three objectives: 1. to improve senior representation of women in academia, 2. to provide a networking space for female scholars, and 3. to stimulate discussions about important issues, such as “challenges of publishing,” “work-life balance,” “leadership roles,” or “career progression.” Every year we come together at the SASE Annual conference in a dedicated session to discuss research, share information, network with each other, and welcome our junior colleagues.
Last events/achievements
2018 Kyoto
SASE Diversity Committee and WAG Keynote speaker
2019 New York
2020 Virtual conference
2021 Women and Gender Forum Meeting
During this year’s event we would like to provide the opportunity to our participants to meet new people and establish support networks through small-group discussions. We are going to cover a broad range of topics including the challenges of academic career during the global pandemic, work-life balance, and networking and visibility in the workplace while working from home. We are looking forward to meeting you there.
This year’s WAG Keynote lecture will be delivered by Prof. Nancy Folbre on the topic of “Capitalism and the Care Economy” at 2pm EDT on Monday, 5 July.
WAG Committee
Founding Chair – Dorottya Sallai
Committee members –Sarah Ashwin, Chiara Benassi, Virginia L Doellgast, Jacqueline O’Reilly, and Caroline Ruiner.
Moderator: Cornelia Storz
Panelists: Doris Fischer, Ingo Liefner, and Cornelia Storz
Moderator: Cornelia Storz
Panelists: Egbert Amoncio, Cornelia Storz, and Alexander Vossen
Moderator: Matthew Allen
Panelists: Egbert Amoncio, Leo Leitzinger, and Denis Utochkin
more info
Moderators: Ben Manski and Lara Monticelli
Panelists: Kali Akuno, Marvin T. Brown, and Riane Eisler
Moderator: Shyam Sunder
Discussants: John Core, Jonathan Glover, and Sanjay Kallapur
Panelists: William M. Cready, Sanjay Kallapur, and James Ohlson
overview and related Council on Business & Society white papers
Moderator: Adrian Zicari
Panelists: Concepción Galdón and Tanusree Jain
The online program is available to be consulted here.
Download a SASE Zoom background here.
The PDF program is available below—all times indicated are in Eastern Daylight Time.
Please note that only the online program is updated regularly with last-minute changes.
The SASE virtual conference will be powered by Zoom and navigable through our long-standing online conference portal, Confex: https://sase.confex.com/sase/2021/meetingapp.cgi
Click Here to View a Tutorial Video on How to Navigate the Virtual Conference
Each session/panel is attributed a Zoom link, which you will be able to join by accessing the session information in the portal and clicking on a green “Join Live” button (which should appear approximately 20 minutes before the session begins).
For comprehensive instructions on how to use Zoom as a participant, presenter, or moderator, visit: http://sase.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/SASE-Confex-Zoom-Meeting-and-Webinar-Instructions-for-Moderators-and-Presenters-2021.pdf
(If you would like one, feel free to download a SASE Zoom background here.)
You must create an account in the meeting system in order to access the virtual conference. To do so, visit https://sase.confex.com/sase/2021/meetingapp.cgi/ModuleMeetingInfo/FAQ. Once you have logged in, you will find a toolbar on the left side of the screen (see image below). We suggest that you make use of the following options to facilitate navigation of the online program:
This year’s SASE conference will provide socializing opportunities through a platform called SpatialChat. A link to the SASE SpatialChat site will be available throughout the conference in the toolbar on the left side of the Confex portal, allowing participants to meet up informally 24/7.
In addition, several theme tracks have organized punctual socializing events that may be found by viewing the Network or Mini-Conference schedule or by clicking the “Social Events” link in the toolbar on the left side of the Confex portal.
SpatialChat basics:
For more on how to use SpatialChat, visit https://help.spatial.chat/hc/en-us/articles/360019120259-Basics-of-SpatialChat
In the lead-up to SASE’s 33rd annual conference, After Covid? Critical Conjunctures and Contingent Pathways of Contemporary Capitalism, we compiled a collection of resources on the pandemic.
Click through to view these publications, many of them from SASE members!
Social Sciences for the Real World
SS4RW – 2021 – About Time! The Commodification of Time, Labor, and Well-being in the Modern Economy
2pm-3:30pm EDT (8pm-9:30pm CEST)
Friday, July 2nd
Capitalism and time have been closely intertwined ever since the industrial revolution. As a modern mode of production par excellence, capitalism is based on the modern notion that time belongs to the individual rather than to God. Time is a resource and can be turned into a commodity. Time can be bought and sold. This understanding has driven capitalist development from its very inception: From the development of the assembly line in the late 19th century, Frank and Lilian Gilbreth’s (in)famous time and motion studies, to Ford’s conveyor belt, proponents of capitalist mass-production have taken the adage ‘time is money’ literally. The result has been ever increasing efficiency and productivity in industrial production, but arguably also alienation, fatigue, and reduced worker well-being.
While counter movements – such as the Human Relations school – have sought to shift the humanity of workers and their needs back to the centre, ‘scientific management’ and its obsession with efficiency and hence its focus on time as a resource to be optimized has not abated and indeed extended to new sectors of the economy, including professional services, hospitality, and most recently the so-called ‘platform economy.’
The commodification of time under capitalism has implications beyond the workplace: Increasing demands on employees to be productive and efficient poses new challenges on our ability to balance the amount of time we dedicate to our work and to our life outside work. Time management techniques are meant to help us achieve an acceptable work-life balance; at the same time they extend the ‘duty to be productive’ beyond the workplace into our private life.
Time and its management is also not independent of an employee’s socio-economic condition. The time spent on degraded public transportation networks due to underinvestment in public infrastructure, reduces the time at the disposal of those who already have to work overtime, double shifts, and sometimes several jobs; while more privileged groups in society have the luxury of flexible hours and home working. Similarly, the middle-classes in advanced economies are in the privileged position to claim reduced weekly working hours without significant impact on their material living standard; while the least privileged in these same societies are kept in the limbo of precarity, shackled to zero-hour contracts that transfer control of their time to the employer. As such, time is tied up in the inequalities of the modern economy like other resources.
Social Sciences 4 the Real World 2021 brings together practitioners and academics to discuss issues around time in the modern economy and their impact on employee well-being. The panelists will discuss issues of the undeniable need to manage one’s time to increase well-being, the impact of socio-economic inequalities on our ability to do so, and more fundamental issues around the commodification of time in the increasingly digitized modern economy.
About Time! The Commodification of Time, Labor, and Well-being in the Modern Economy
Speakers: Brad Aeon (Director, Time Research Institute), Ryan Hagen (Columbia University), Sonya Stokes (Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai)
Chairs: Imran Chowdhury (Wheaton College)
We would like to encourage participants to send us ahead of the session their general questions on the topic or specific points they would like to see speakers address. This will allow us to get a sense of what may be of most interest to the audience. Please e-mail them to G.Schnyder@lboro.ac.uk with SS4RW question in the subject header.