American Behavioral Scientist

This article assesses “Economic Sociology in the Next Decade and Beyond.” In addressing this broad thematic, as it relates to what some have called the new economic sociology , the article notes the “legacy effect” that a polemic with conventional economic conceptualizations has had on the recent reemergence and shape of this field, the relationship that the predominate schools of thought have to one another and the centrifugal tendencies they currently exhibit in this field, and the relationship this field of study currently has to general sociological theories and research streams. The article expressly argues that it is essential to the current and future relevance of the new economic sociology that it seek to bridge key concepts and ideas across methodologically and substantively distinct subfoci within its purview; enhance the theoretical continuity between its findings and theoretical insights and those that explain more generic sociological processes; and more explicitly theorize the role of agency, materiality, and the place of inequality in economic contexts, especially markets, as these are currently undertheorized in this field of study.

Starting from the objectively dominant position of the sociology of markets in economic sociology, this article suggests that markets have served as a privileged terrain for the development and application of general theoretical arguments about the shape of the social order. I offer a critical overview of the sociology of markets as it relates to our concepts of society, focusing on four main representations of what is sociologically important about markets: the social networks that sustain them, the systems of social positions that organize them, the institutionalization processes that stabilize them, and the performative techniques that bring them into existence. I then speculate about the possible future directions that such theorizing might take, calling in particular for a stronger contribution of the sociology of markets to the analysis of societies as moral orders.

Economic sociology needs more ideas, and in this article the author suggests that economic sociologists may want to explore what a rigorous interpretive economic sociology along Weberian lines would look like. One way to proceed in an enterprise of this type would be to apply the model of analysis that can be found in chapter 1 of Economy and Society to economic sociology and its problems. This means that one has to graft onto economic sociology such key ideas and key concepts in Weber's interpretive sociology as adequate causation, the need to always explore the meaning of actors, and what consequences these meanings have for the resulting action. What a concrete Weberian type of interpretive economic sociology will be like cannot, however, be determined this way. It needs instead to be worked out through concrete, empirical analysis.

Over the past few decades, economic sociology has moved from tight symbiosis with mainstream economics toward the construction of alternative explanations for economic activities. That move has allied economic sociologists increasingly with both innovative work inside economics and new analytic enterprises outside. Cumulatively, these developments have created a much more social interpretation of money and markets.

The rebirth of economic sociology in the last decades of the 20th century was largely about intellectual identity formation and developing theoretical foundations. The authors argue that economic sociology is poised to make a contribution to the understanding and solution of social problems. They use the example of energy inefficiency in the commercial buildings industry to suggest that economic sociology offers useful alternatives to current economic-based policy analyses.