Search

Sociologists and social scientists' low professional status looms large when looking at the rapidly changing professional hierarchy based on the prominent role of technology and of scientific applications for peoples' lives. The paper seeks to unveil the inadequate professionalization of sociology in Greece and to relate this situation to the increase in the employment precariousness of sociologists over the years of the economic crisis. Moreover, the dominant economy-centric ideological/ governance model which promotes the 'utilitarianism' of the social sciences has played a significant role in sociology's residual position. The paper is structured along three axes: First of all, the low professional status of sociologists is related to the delayed academic institutionalization of sociology. Secondly, there is brief discussion of the relevant literature on graduate supply and demand in the labour market and the expansion of higher education. Thirdly, a more focused discussion is developed which portrays the opportunities and challenges faced by sociologists and other social scientists in the labour market, giving particular emphasis to the current situation in the wake of the financial crisis. Finally, it is concluded that the vicious circle of low professionalization and high precariousness facing sociologists demands institutional action aimed at reformulating the public agenda. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This editorial discusses the sociological perspective of innovation, starting with a critical overview of the situation of sociology in current innovation studies. An outline of several key challenges to understanding innovation in society is followed by an interpretation of the characteristics of a sociology of innovation based on the core assumptions of the discipline. The editorial concludes with a summary of the papers of the special issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of these issue of 'International Review of Sociology' is to present some reflections, which, starting from the analysis of several mediterranean countries, highlight the overall employment context of graduates in Sociology, characterised by widespread underemployment (or over-education) and difficulties in accessing the labour market. In particular, the papers highlight the need for a greater connection between academic sociology and professionals and the university's responsibility to establish adequate training paths and provide both specific and transversal skills, which are fundamental in the work of the sociology professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper I outline a framework for a relational sociology of culture. I begin by briefly defining relational sociology and contrasting it with both individualistic and holistic alternatives. Culture, I suggest, is an inherently relational concept and needs to be theorised and analysed as such. This argument is briefly elaborated through a discussion of the generation and diffusion of culture by way of interaction and social networks. The respective contributions of Tarde, Durkheim, Merleau-Ponty, and Wittgenstein are given particular attention. In the final part of the paper I introduce and discuss Howard Becker's notion of ‘art worlds’, drawing out and elaborating upon its relational foundations whilst also further developing it through a more sustained reflection upon both the facilitative potential of social networks and their shaping, as hypothesised by Peter Blau (and developed by Miller McPherson and Noah Mark), by way of homophilic attraction in ‘social space’. The paper covers a lot of ground and is intended as a sketch which subsequent work will fill out. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This paper makes a critical appraisal of the contemporary sociological conceptualisations around the study of social transformations and youth transitions. It is argued that new theoretical positions, mnemonically indicated by the prefixespost,reflexive,late, andliquid, tend to challenge the adequacy of classical notions about ‘youth’ as a transitional phase of life, and life-course as a series of stages, linear, cumulative, and non-reversible. Conversely, the post/late variety theories draw upon flexibility, diversity and communication, decentralisation, internationalisation, and de-traditionalisation, reflexivity and individualisation. By repercussion, the ‘take-off’ from childhood to adulthood is increasingly understood as non-linear and heterogeneous. Indeed, youth is conceptualised as one identity amongst many, which may be adopted or dropped at will – something highly contested and fluid, rather than static and given. This paper is divided into seven sections. It begins by considering the literature on classical conceptions of youth transition, and then moves on to post-modern social theory and youth identity. The third section examines reflexive/late-modernisation and transition to adulthood. The fourth section explores the socio-economic terrain of contemporary young people through the lens of global perspective. The fifth section analyses a tendency of returning to a classical sociological toolbox in youth research. The sixth section takes on Bourdieu's key arguments on habitus and social reproduction, and the last section develops the concluding arguments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to demonstrate to what extent an academic approach that borrows from economics and sociology is heuristic in terms of fully understanding monetary issues. Contrary to authors that consider money to be neutral, this article emphasizes that money is a ‘total social fact’. Hence, it focuses on three meanings of money through the theoretical framework of Schumpeter and various French institutionalists. It also focuses on the Swiss case, which is particularly relevant because money plays a significant role in order for such a country to foster prosperity and create social links. Finally, there is clearly a high usefulness of a pluralistic approach on the monetary issue for heterodox economists. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The purpose of this paper is to advance some theoretical-methodological propositions about analyzing official statistics in the contemporary world: it is going to underline how the category of ambivalence is important in order to improve our comprehension of official statistics. In the second section, we will give a brief overview on contemporary sociology of official statistics. In the third and fourth sections, the focus will be on the ‘French theory’ – probably, the hegemonic current now – starting from Pierre Bourdieu’s analysis of the State, one of the most important issues in order to better understand this perspective. This analysis points out as French theory considers just rationalization processes. Control, dominion as well as alienation are the main subjects, a set of ideas based on a structuralist point of view which does not actually consider the possibility of social change. The ambivalence (or social contradiction in Marxism terms) of every sociopolitical process – including the making and using of official statistics – is systematically underestimated. Beyond the dominion there is the subject and the conflict in a shared field of historicity: ethic and social claims need official statistics too. Eventually, the fifth section will focus on our theoretical-methodological proposal based on re-embedding the category of the statistical system in a more complex vision where ambivalence is essential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses the strong criticism by Elias against the nation-state paradigm in sociology. Elias pointed his attention on sociologists of the twentieth century but particularly criticizes the analytical model of Parsons (AGIL), which seems to him an abstract combinatory of variables (pattern variables) without any references in social contexts. The sociology in the twentieth century is an apologetic of nation-state and, in Parsons, of the hegemonic role of the United States in the world. In fact, during the twentieth century many authors (historians and sociologists) tried to overcome the nation-state paradigm in the social sciences. The author of the paper analyses the contribution of Toynbee, Braudel, C. Schmitt, Huntington, Wallerstein and Hard-Negri. These attempts are based on different unit analysis: the civilization and its clash in the case of Toynbee and Huntington, the world economy in the case of Braudel and Wallerstein, and power in the case of C. Schmitt and Negri-Hardt. The author appreciates these attempts but his conclusion is that the concept of global society can better serve as unit analysis for a construction of a new paradigm in the social sciences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

By using forms of conservatism as criteria, this paper advances a novel conceptualization and typology of comparative-historical social systems. The paper attempts to do justice to the crucial complexities involved in the relations between a free-market economy, a democratic polity and a free society overall on the one hand and varieties of conservatism on the other. Such attempts are all the more indispensable in light of various simplifications and conflations committed by the conventional wisdom, especially in the USA, in this realm. One of these simplifications is the spurious (American) equation of economic conservatism or the laissez-faire economy with a free society. Another is the broader but also dubious equivalence of the admixture of economic conservatism and formal political democracy, with a free social system. It is the purpose of this article to redress these popular misconceptions. Special emphasis is placed on a peculiar social system denoted authoritarian conservatism or conservative authoritarianism in light of its increasing salience in the USA since the 1980–1990s sequel of its permanent ‘Conservative Revolution’. Given that few endeavors exist to establish a coherent taxonomy of comparative-historical social systems on the basis of these criteria, this paper contributes to filling in a gap in the literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper highlights the juridical Genetic Modified Organisms statu artis and its legal definition in Italy, Europe and in the rest of the world in order to compare different cultural approaches to needs, interests, fears and precautions against a not scientifically certain innovation. It also stresses the legislative processes towards an extended participation that unifies economic interests, political goals, customer satisfaction, collective safety, and human construction for a sustainable future, a new form of governance. The paper ends with a sociological and comparative analysis of needs, fears, interests and responsibilities related to GMO in Italy and Europe, with the aim of defining some possible evolutions of ruling uncertainty today.

This paper makes a case for sociological institutionalism, particularly its Veblenian variant or connection. This is attempted against a background of the surge of renewed interest in analyzing institutions within modern social science, especially economics and sociology. This is indicated by the emergence of the new institutional economics as the (modified) neoclassical approach to institutions and the revival of economic sociology with its conception of the institutional embeddedness of the economy, respectively. Still, many pertinent differences between economic and sociological institutionalism are overlooked or minimized in the current literature. By exploring such differences, the paper helps span a gap in the literature in which comparative analyses of economic and sociological approaches to institutions are rare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the relationship between crime and the hegemony of states on territories that had previously not belonged or been under the influence of those states. Although this process predates the Greek invasions of the Classic Era, the emphasis here will be upon post-Columbian expansion. The contention of the paper is that colonialization, the occupation of foreign lands and the imposition of political, economic and social domination, created social conditions that are fundamental to the understanding of modern crime, particularly among Indigenous Peoples. The term colonialization is used synonymously with the terms immigration, invasion and settlement used by other authors. Colonialization emphasizes political, economic and cultural imposition by a colonial nation rather than the mere introduction of immigrants, that is, colonization, to occupied territory. Colonists refer to immigrants, temporary or permanent, to the colonialized territory. Colonization includes mass migrations of newcomers setting up colonies as the primary demographic entities of the territory and the token representatives of the colonial power. The observations in this paper are solely those of the author. They do not reflect beliefs or policies of any institutions with which the author is affiliated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Relying on a review of recent literature (and, sometimes, older publications), this paper attempts to highlight issues relating to the ‘spatial turn’ in religious studies. It outlines a series of developments in the study of religions related to issues in space, location and territory that have been enhanced by the intellectual framework of globalism and the empirical context of globalization. The challenges of such a geographic focus on religions are epistemological, theoretical and methodological. An examination of new and not-so-new issues in geographic approaches to religion shows how topical the perspective is, and how necessary it is to think the geography of religion beyond the boundaries of geography. In what ways do these new regimes of territoriality, these new concepts of religious space, and these new methods to understand the changes of material and cultural expressions of religion, whether wide-scale or local, partake on a paradigmatic shift? And how promising is it? [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In recent years, many different versions of relational sociology have appeared. In this paper, I present a critical realist version developed since 1983, which is also called ‘relational theory of society’ (CRRS). It shares with the other relational sociologies the idea of avoiding both methodological individualism and holism. The main differences lie in the way social relations are defined, the kind of reality that is attributed to them, how they configure social formations, and the way in which their changes are conceived (morphogenesis and emergence). In particular, this approach is suitable to understand how the morphogenesis of society comes about through social relations, which are the connectors that mediate between agency and social structure. The generative mechanism that feeds social morphogenesis resides in the dynamic (that is, in their ways of operating) of the social relations networks that alter the social molecule constituting structures already in place. Social morphogenesis is a form of surplus of society with respect to itself. Society increases (or decreases) its potential for surplus depending on processes of valorization (or devalorization) of social relations. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In this paper I present and summarize the theoretical proposals of four leading scholars of the so-called ‘relational sociology’. First of all I try to contextualize its emergence and developments in the increasingly globalized scientific system. From this particular (and international) point of view, relational sociology seems to develop through a peculiar scientific path opened and charted by well-identified actors and competitors, their invisible colleges, their global connections, cleavages, and coalitions. Whatever the structuring of this field, it accomplishes the criticism of classical individualistic and collectivistic sociological theories, a task strongly facilitated by the development of new methods and techniques of empirical research, and by the increasingly powerful computing capabilities. After this brief historical reconstruction, and following very strictly the contributions of the four scholars, I try to synthetize their theoretical designs, focusing the analysis on two scientific issues of great significance for the future of relational sociology: the specific ontology of ‘social relations’ and the methodologies used to observe it adequately. Finally, I wonder if we are facing a new sociological paradigm, already well structured and internationally established, or rather a ‘relational turn’ that probably will develop into a new ‘sociological field’ internally very differentiated and articulated. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Based on a sample of general textbooks in sociology, this article proposes a heuristic, four-sided paradigm of the extant literature on ethnicity, gender and race and highlights their empirical referents: (1) order-integrative, which emphasizes the progressive adaptation of ethnic and racial groups to a dominant, Anglo-Saxonic, Eurocentric culture; (2) pluralist-multiculturalist, which emphasizes markers of social differentiation between ethnic and racial groups that are compatible with social diversity; (3) power-conflict-stratification, which frames successive generations of minority ethnics in contentious power relations amongst themselves relative to the perceived or actual mainstream white powerbrokers in society; and (4) gender-feminist, which critically analyses the white, male, heterosexual bias and hegemony built into the structures and practices of social institutions and social discourse. The paper concludes by suggesting further research on cross-national perspectives as developed countries become more diverse and, as a result, more culturally divisive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay's aim is to explore the potential for relieving suffering with which clinical sociology can provide social actors. The author carries out a theoretical reflection of culture's function in human societies. Culture is an instrument for social actors, to give a meaning to what is happening at each moment. If culture does not grant an effective interpretation of reality, phenomena of disease can arise. This can happen for many different reasons, such as incoherent cultural representations or conflicts between different cultural issues. The paper outlines the kinds of cultural disease that can occur, as well as the possible causes of each. It also sets a link between cultural disease and the contemporary, general lack of cognitive references, due to historical changes - such as globalization - that have been happening too fast to be fully accepted by all. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Attachment to community is a central component of identities in the modern world, and community attachment can be expressed at different levels within national states. Most classical perspectives on modern societies have taken for granted that national states have long been the most important locus of citizen attachment and loyalty in the contemporary world system. More recently, many influential perspectives on globalization have suggested that national states are becoming less important, because of the rise of subnational units on the one hand, and supranational entities on the other. What is the relative importance of national, subnational, local, and supranational attachments in the contemporary world system? Is the structure of attitudes similar across national settings? What is the relative strength of attachment to the nation versus attachment to other levels of community? How willing are people to move to a different community to improve their economic condition? This exploratory paper will investigate these questions by examining the 1995 International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) data on national identities in 24 countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is to furnish elements both theoretical and empirical useful for the formulation of a theory of place attachment and socio-territorial belonging, two dimensions that are analytically distinct but empirically co-present and interrelated. After delineating a frame of reference which accounts for the distinction and interrelation between place attachment and socio-territorial belonging, the structure of social belonging, of socio-territorial belonging and its relations with other components of human action, and of dynamics of socio-territorial belonging, consideration is made of results from surveys conducted in diverse geographical and social contexts, comparing them with those of surveys carried out in Italy in recent years (1985–2000). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There have been comparative discussions about Thorstein Veblen and Max Weber before, but not quite from the most appropriate viewpoint. The present paper treats them as theorists of action, in social and economic analysis, and this perspective yields some interesting new findings. Both theorists are to be taken as participants in the great Methodenstreit in economics, 100 years ago, and it is Veblen who suggests a more radical solution to this dispute, he suggests its final abolishment. The main difference between Veblen and Weber is in their respective appreciations of the role of psychology in social analysis. Weber does not think it important, but in so thinking he misses the viewpoint of evolutionary psychology that Veblen endorses. Accordingly, both of these classical thinkers are to be considered as theorists of action, but so that it is Veblen who proffers a more general theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper looks at how far women's access to positions of power in the labor market is independent of class background, looking at the case of Japanese women in professional and managerial employment. It questions both the conventional approach to the class analysis of women, as well as the dismissal of the concept of class in understanding women and power. Using three different indicators of social origin, based on father's employment position, mother's work status and employment position, and parent's cultural capital, it argues that women's access to positions of power in employment is not independent of social origin. On the contrary, a privileged class background is more important for women that it is for men in gaining entry into professional and managerial employment. The study also looks at how the inclusion of women in the analysis affects the understanding of class, and proposes the use of both conventional and alternative theoretical and methodological approaches to understand the complex relationships between gender, class, and power.

This paper discusses methodological and theoretical issues that arise in contemporary analyses of cultural consumption. First, I review measures of cultural consumption that receive attention in the literature and I put forward several others that broaden the definition and measurement of this concept. I propose the inclusion of a variety of consumption realms and consumption publics, and advocate the use of integrated and flexible measures. I discuss the comparability of consumption indicators in the context of cross-national, crosscultural, and longitudinal research, and submit that it is important to have standardized measures for the sake of their reliability and validity, but also that it is important to have case-specific measures in order to prevent blurred cultural distinctions. Second, I suggest that consumer culture research further develop a series of theoretical questions that stand at the core of the field, particularly those that acknowledge the significant social consequences of cultural consumption: the transition from production to consumption; cultural consumption and the social matrix; cultural consumption as a generative concept; multiple consumer identities; and cultural consumption and cultural policy. The shared emphasis of these theoretical questions is on locating the position of individuals on multidimensional hierarchies of consumption, thus facilitating conceptualization of lifestyle tribes, status groups, or taste communities as generators of values, attitudes, and behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Kari Polanyi Levitt has commented that her father's writing was met with a 'deafening silence' in England, a silence which she suggests is 'yet to be explained'. Given The Great Transformation was purposefully, situated in England Polanyi Levitt's point is an interesting one, and one which still deserves attention. But the last two decades have witnessed an intensification of interest in Karl Polanyi's methodological approach and theoretical insights, from England as well as elsewhere, and representing a range of disciplines. This raises a string of associated questions: interest from who? Why now? And how? Further we could ask: Does this new interest have the potential to redress the Polanyi Levitt charge without falling prey to an opposite one of misusing or abusing the Polanyi legacy? This paper contributes to the much larger agenda of examining in a serious way the usefulness and applicability of Polanyi's key ideas and methods, particularly as they apply to the burgeoning interest in markets and exchange within New Economic Sociology (NES). A sub-set of this agenda is to explore whether Polanyian insights provide a more nuanced and critical understanding of competitive processes and innovation than is currently available within Economics, Sociology or indeed Economic Sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Are sociologists in danger of losing, or perhaps we have already lost, political sociology to economists attempting to reduce it to political economy? In recent years, various proposals have been advanced for altering classical political sociology and its sub-disciplines into the "new" political economy or public choice theory. Thus, some sociologists propose what is called a nascent rational choice research program in political sociology to illustrate an alternative methodology, to be applied to all political phenomena, including power and ideology. The rationale for advancing a "new" political economy as an alternative to classical political sociology is found in that this latter has not supposedly developed a consistent theoretical framework but only a "set of tacit agreements about certain areas of inquiry, including social order, legitimacy and consensus." In general, "homo politicus" or the autonomous political actor is subsumed under "homo economicus," with most political economists being disinclined to see any major differences between the two. As an illustration, some political economists complain that even modern neoclassical economists do not go far enough in conceiving political and other social actors, especially in new democracies, as equivalent to rational economic agents. The above argument on the affinity between classical political sociology and the "new" political economy is elaborated in the remainder of this paper as follows. In the first section, the subject-matter and method of classical political sociology are re-defined, especially in relation to those of the "new" political economy.

The sociological intervention into the everlasting quarrel between poetry and philosophy that this paper attempts might be considered as illegitimate from the point of view of certain sciences, who may have the feeling that their disciplinary boundaries have been violated. Furthermore, because this intervention is interested in the social circumstances of the emergence of the quarrel and is not based on an analysis of its current status, it may well be accused of falling outside the field of sociological competence altogether. Sociology aspired for recognition as a "modern science" that came into existence as a response to the need for self-understanding and an appropriate cognitive approach on the part of modernity. However, with its actual rejection of the distinction between high scientific and low popular language, its actual state of fragmentation or as a postmodernist might put it, its drive for liberation from the claustrophobic embrace of fixed systems of belief, its often manifested `bad' taste for eclectic theoretical mixtures and approaches and its abandonment of the divine pretension for truth-attainment implicit in the function characteristic of science as a social system.