Editorial: The politics of financialization (2013) (original) (raw)
The politics of financialization as a focus of academic study arguably has become more important in the context of recent public debates about the contribution of the financial sector to economic well-being, particularly in the United Kingdom. Whereas financial deepening has been widely seen as an option for enhancing economic growth and competitiveness pre-2007, this stance has become much more controversial over the last few of years. While processes of financialization in the past have been rather seen as a technocratic issue, they have more recently become much more a topic of public debate. In this context, highlighting the political origins of financialization contributes to the point that financialization is a human-made phenomenon, not a force of nature, and thus can also be made undone by political action. Based on these considerations, this paper follows two major avenues of research in order to analyze the politics of financialization. A first, obvious take is on the political projects and processes that have led to the emergence of financialization. Whereas we are already broadly familiar with the politics involved in the globalization of financial markets, much less is known about the political determinants of the processes that have led to the spread of financialization outside the financial sector and the incorporation of new assets, such as natural resources, into the process of financialization. Second, we are witnessing intense political conflicts about the future role of the financial sector in our economies after the financial crisis. Although this conflict is far from being concluded, it provides us with a political agenda that demands exploration and explanation, thereby opening up a second avenue of research.
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
Related papers
How Financialization is Reproduced Politically
2020
This handbook offers the first comprehensive survey of the scholarship on financialization, connecting finance with changes in politics, technology, culture, society and the economy.
Revista Internacional De Sociologia, 2020
Financialisation is a structural and incomplete process of change in contemporary economies. The growth of the financial system in last few decades has been accompanied by an increasingly complex relationship between socio-economic actors and financial markets. In this paper we analyse the causes and consequences of financialisation regarding: an erosion of the capital-labour relationship; the rise of labour income inequality; and the marketization of daily life and social rights. We review the main conceptualizations of financialisation on various research sites corresponding to the main economic actors, that is: non-financial corporations; the state and individuals; and their complex relationship with financial markets. Our primary objective is to evaluate the contributions and limitations of financialisation studies in these research sites and to identify the main methodological challenges in conceptualising financialisation.
Financialisation: continuity and change— introduction to the special issue
Review of Evolutionary Political Economy
, a great deal of studies have been published with a view to making sense of the many issues surrounding this topic. Admittedly, a lot of ground has been covered. We have learned that financialisation is about the 'macro', the institutional, structural and systemic processes that are associated with it, as well as the 'micro', the agencies that are affected by and shape these historical processes through financial practices and innovations that transform not only economies and societies, but also cultures, subjectivities, geographies and more (van der Zwan 2014). Today, the field of financialisation studies cuts across several disciplines and indeed challenges many disciplinary boundaries (Ertürk et al 2008, Mader et al. 2020). Therefore we should not be surprised that the concept of financialisation remains disputed and that perhaps no final agreement will ever be reached on the nature, history and significance of its phenomenon. Opinions will continue to range from viewing financialisation as a ubiquitous force, synonymous with deeply fractured capitalism, to something very specific, linked, but not confined to, a central role of the financial system and risk calculations in everyday life. At this point, a devil's advocate might ask: whither financialisation? This special issue is organised around the themes of continuity and change in financialisation, and it showcases new research on the frontiers of financialisation and the broader debates surrounding its evolution. It also illustrates the vitality of the debate and the usefulness of concept. In this introduction, we highlight some of the most interesting findings from this special issue, contextualise their contribution and comment on the state of the financialisation debate-its shifting boundaries, (in)coherencies and (dis)continuities in the twenty-first century.
Politics, power and contemporary financilisation
Within the social sciences, the concept of financialisation has come to refer to a diverse range of transformations which have taken place within the global economy over the last three decades. As such, it is a phenomena which is intrinsically tied up with both the concepts of globalisation and neoliberalism, although the exact relationship between these concepts is highly contested (See Kotz 2010). Similar to the term 'globalisation', it has been resistant to any strict agreement of definition among researchers, but nevertheless, a rapid proliferation of studies over the last few decades have deployed the term in analyses of shared observations, indicating the very real necessity felt by scholars to develop new theoretical ground which accounts for distinctive changes within the global financial industry and its relation to the world economy (Engelen 2008: 112). The purpose of this paper is to situate the contemporary political power of finance within these broader historical developments related to processes of financialisation. In so doing, the chapter charts the growing centrality of financial activity within the global economy and unpacks several of the implications this holds for the political power of finance. The paper is divided in two parts. First, I begin by reviewing a selective portion of the financialisation literature which outlines some key strands of thinking and highlights the historic specificity of contemporary financialisation by contrasting it with the financial expansion that occurred in the late 19 th /early 20 th century. In this regard, I closely link the contemporary development of financialisation with shifting socio-economic power configurations that began to take shape as a result of the 1970's stagflation crisis. In the second part of the paper, I extend the discussion to individual processes of financialisation and examine how each of these relates to the growing capacity for political influence by the financial industry. While the focus of the analysis is very much centred on the evolution of the global financial system in advanced economies generally, most of the developments under review emerged primarily from the US financial system -unsurprisingly, given that country's centrifugal economic role and its leading development of a liberalised financial industry.
Competition and Change, 2008
The tempestuous rise of finance in contemporary capitalism has incited a frantic search for new conceptual tools to make empirical and theoretical sense of it. Financialization and the theoretical connotations it carries, is one such new conceptual tool. Although a growing number of scholars are using the concept, its dispersal over the disciplines and relevant research communities -as a brief analysis of the ISI database and other databases suggests -, is still rather limited. On the basis of a constructive reading of the older debate over 'conceptual stretching' in the political sciences, the author presents three conditions for conceptual success, to wit: stay focused on the empirical content, look for the conceptual value added, keep causal mechanisms in mind. Combined with the hard but mundane work of organizing workshops, special issues, setting up professional charters, that might just do the trick.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.