Embeddedness :Divergence and controversy

本文辨析了波兰尼和格兰诺维特的嵌入性思想,指出他们在市场与社会关系问题上代表两种不同的学术取向:社会构件论的市场观与社会建构论的市场观。前者系市场的实体嵌入,未给隔离于社会的自主性市场留下任何可能性;后者系市场的形式嵌入,在一定程度上给市场保留了社会因素无法进入、依自身逻辑运作的硬核。批评者眼中波兰尼的"市场悖论"建基于市场的形式嵌入,而在波兰尼那里实无真正意义上的"脱嵌的市场"存在,这一悖论不过是由其分析技艺所造成的假象。格兰诺维特取向的经济社会学研究带回了经济学所缺失的"背景"分析,虽然更具分析力和解释力,但其针对经济学所试图做出的替代性解释却不够彻底。而波兰尼取向的经济社会学研究尽管可被赋予厚望,但也还面临着相当艰难的理论与实践困境。 

Polanyi and Granovetter' s idea of embeddedness represents two academic orientations on the relationship of market and society , while one is taking market as a social component, the other is taking market as social constructed.The former refers to the substantive embeddedness of markets, which leaves no possibility for the autonomous market isolated from society , while the latter refers to the formal embeddedness of markets, which keeps a core where social factors are absent .Criticism on Polanyi' s paradox is mostly based on formal embeddedness of markets, while there is everlasting embeddedness and no true disembeddedness phenomenon in Polanyi' s thought .However, it is not clear that in which direction Polanyi provides another possible academic praxis for the market study of sociology.The Granovetter-orientation brings back “ background” analysis which is missing in economics, and makes great contribution to empirical research , yet it fails to provide a substitutive sociological approach .

符平

国家社科基金青年项目“市场秩序中的‘惯例’问题研究”的阶段性成果(批准号:09CSH027)

欢迎阅读《社会学研究》！您是该文第3595位读者！