Kaisa Torkkeli, Kristiina Janhonen & Johanna Mäkelä (2021)

In: Food, Culture & Society 24(3), pp. 368-389.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15528014.2021.1882167

ABSTRACT
“The article analyses engagements in home cooking from a practice theoretical perspective. The focus on engagements reveals what people regard as worthy of doing and as appropriate cooking performances in specific everyday situations. For producing a more nuanced account of situationally appropriate cooking, the theoretical perspective is complemented by Thévenot’s regimes – familiarity, planning and justification. The data consist of videos and video-stimulated recall (SR) interviews: five Finnish families with children video-recorded their dinner-cooking for one week using wearable cameras and described their performances in the SR interviews. We applied an abductive theory-based and data-driven analysis. The results show that the regime of familiarity sustains cooking performances and that the regime of justification addresses negotiations of common good. However, the regime of planning appeared to be the most crucial: through flexible planning, the participants strived for a balance between maintaining familiarity and negotiating justification to achieve satisfaction. Planning was enacted in different time spans: in action, tentatively and anticipatorily. The variations of planning may offer new insights into promoting changes in families’ food practices. Overall, we suggest that an analysis of engagements by this method combination enables understanding of how families navigate through everyday life to perform situationally appropriate cooking.”

Der Verkauf ikonischer Meisterwerke als NFTs geht Hand in Hand mit dem Milliardengeschäft der Songrechte in der Musikindustrie

NFT paintings and song rights: the new business with old art.
The sale of iconic masterpieces as NFTs goes hand in hand with the billion-dollar business of son-g rights in the music industry

Stefan Weiss (2022)

Der Standard 11 März 2022

Auszug: “Zusammengenommen sind NFT- und Songrechtehandel die aktuellsten Belege für eine neue Form des Kulturkapitalismus, die die Soziologen Luc Boltanski und Arnaud Esquerre in ihrem 2018 erschienenen Buch Bereicherung (Suhrkamp) mit Blick auf die analoge Welt beschrieben: eine Ökonomie, die “sich nicht in erster Linie auf die Produktion von neuen Objekten, sondern vor allem auf die Aufwertung bereits vorhandener Objekte” stützt.”

Excerpt: “Taken together, NFT and song rights trades are the most recent evidence of a new form of cultural capitalism described by sociologists Luc Boltanski and Arnaud Esquerre in their 2018 book Bereicherung (Suhrkamp), which looks at the analog world: an economy that “relies not primarily on the production of new objects, but primarily on the valorization of existing objects.”

Lien / Link

The governance of the company of tomorrow will be shared!

Benoît Halgand, Frédérique Lellouche & Pierre Victoria (2022)

Paris: Fondation Jean Jaurès

À la suite du rapprochement entre Veolia et Suez, quel rôle pour les administrateurs salariés ? Quels enseignements pour la gouvernance de l’entreprise ? Benoît Halgand, collaborateur de la CFDT, Frédérique Lellouche, secrétaire confédérale de la CFDT en charge de la RSE et de la gouvernance, et Pierre Victoria, expert associé à la Fondation et ancien directeur du développement durable de Veolia, évoquent dans cette note en partenariat avec la CFDT ce que devrait être la gouvernance dans les entreprises futures.

Extrait: “On peut se demander s’il faut des administrateurs référents sur la question écologique, ou plus largement des représentants des différentes parties prenantes au sein du conseil d’administration. Comme l’explique Olivier Favereau, économiste, ‘supposer que l’on puisse aller vers l’entreprise à mission sans modifier la gouvernance interne de l’entreprise, c’est absolument ingérable’. Cependant, il faut distinguer les parties constituantes de l’entreprise – que sont les actionnaires et les salariés – et les parties prenantes. Les premières ont pris des risques, en investissant leur capital ou leur temps de travail dans le projet collectif qu’est l’entreprise, et doivent donc être intégrées pleinement à sa gouvernance.
En revanche, les questions de développement durable doivent être pleinement intégrées dans les réflexions stratégiques du conseil et les administrateurs salariés doivent y être particulièrement vigilants. À l’heure où les salariés sont de plus en plus volontaires pour être acteurs de la transition écologique, leurs représentants doivent être pleinement intégrés à la gouvernance pour en être les porte-voix. C’est l’avis d’Olivier Favereau qui ajoute : ‘l n’y aura pas de transition écologique sans passer à la codétermination. Les intérêts financiers doivent avoir un contrepoids fort dans la gouvernance de l’entreprise et les personnes qui ont le plus intérêt à ce qu’une entreprise ne saccage pas son environnement sont les salariés. » Ils doivent pour ce faire, mais c’est aussi le cas de l’ensemble du conseil d’administration, être formés aux enjeux de la transition écologique et solidaire.’” (p. 14)

Following the merger between Veolia and Suez, what role for employee directors? What lessons can be learned for corporate governance? Benoît Halgand, a CFDT employee, Frédérique Lellouche, CFDT Confederal Secretary in charge of CSR and governance, and Pierre Victoria, an expert associated with the Foundation and former Director of Sustainable Development at Veolia, discuss in this note in partnership with the CFDT what governance should be in future companies.

Excerpt: “One might ask whether there is a need for directors with a focus on ecological issues, or more broadly, for representatives of the various stakeholders on the board of directors. As economist Olivier Favereau explains, ‘assuming that we can move towards a company with a mission without changing the internal governance of the company is absolutely unmanageable’. However, a distinction must be made between the constituent parts of the company – shareholders and employees – and the stakeholders. The former have taken risks, by investing their capital or their working time in the collective project that is the company, and must therefore be fully integrated into its governance.
On the other hand, sustainable development issues must be fully integrated into the Board’s strategic thinking, and employee directors must be particularly vigilant. At a time when employees are increasingly willing to take part in the ecological transition, their representatives must be fully integrated into governance in order to be its spokespersons. This is the opinion of Olivier Favereau, who adds: ‘There will be no ecological transition without moving to co-determination. Financial interests must have a strong counterweight in corporate governance, and the people who have the greatest interest in a company not trashing its environment are the employees. In order to do this, but this is also the case for the entire board of directors, they must be trained in the challenges of the ecological and solidarity transition.’” (p. 14)

Lien de téléchargement / Download link

Reinhold Hedtke (2022)

AB 9 Social Science Education, Working Papers No. 13
Bielefeld: University of Bielefeld.

Contents
Introduction
1 Économie des conventions and the concept of situation
2 The conditions of citizenship education and the multiple citizen
3 The school as a compromising device
4 Methodological situationalism and interlinked situations
5 International comparison as inter-situational comparison
Conclusion

Lien / Link

Data intermediaries as fairness actors in the data economy

Markus Uhlmann, Jonathan Kropf & Jörn Lamla (2022)

Vortrag 15 der Reihe „Zu treuen Händen“ / Lecture 15 of the series “In Faithful Hands”
Düsseldorf: Verbraucherzentrale NRW.

Abstract. Herausforderungen der Datenökonomie werden zunehmend unter Gesichtspunkten der Fairness diskutiert. Zentral ist dabei die Einsicht, dass neben Problemen der missbräuchlichen Verwendung personenbezogener Daten verstärkt Fragen nach der gerechten Verteilung datenökonomischer Erlöse oder der Manipulation und Diskriminierung durch Algorithmen relevant werden. Dabei kann die Frage der Fairness als Frage der fairen Vermittlung verschiedener Werte verstanden werden, bei der auch Trade-offs und Grenzen von Modellen der Wertvermittlung reflektiert werden müssen. Datentreu-händer verstehen wir in diesem Zusammenhang als Instanzen, die genau diese Ver-mittlung leisten wollen und sich insofern als „Fairness-Akteure“ positionieren.
Zur Konzeptualisierung datenökonomischer Fairness unterscheiden wir drei Ebenen: Erstens wird sondiert, inwiefern sich unterschiedliche Werte in eine übergreifende ökonomische Sprache der Preise übersetzen und darin fair verrechnen lassen (Verrechnung). Zweitens wird ausgelotet, inwiefern durch ökonomische Gestaltungsmacht mit technischen Mitteln eine faire Koexistenz verschiedener Wertordnungen realisiert wer-den kann (Design). Drittens wird geprüft, inwiefern durch Prozesse der Konfliktmediation seitens der Datenintermediäre eine Kultur der Fairness befördert werden kann, die eine Aushandlung von Wertkonflikten durch Beteiligte und Betroffene ermöglicht (Kultivierung). Im Artikel wird diese Perspektive auf datenökonomische Fairness, die wir im interdisziplinären BMBF-Verbundprojekt „Faire digitale Dienste: Ko-Valuation in der Gestaltung datenökonomischer Geschäftsmodelle (FAIRDIENSTE)“ ausloten, exemplarisch auf Ansätze und Projekte der Datentreuhänderschaft bezogen. Inwiefern können Datenintermediäre als Fairness-Akteure in der Datenökonomie auftreten und wirken? Welche Fairnesskonzepte zeigen sich in ihren Lösungsmodellen und wie sind diese mit Blick auf Aspekte einer fairen Wertvermittlung und der zugehörigen (theoretischen) Diskussion über Fairness in der Datenökonomie einzuschätzen?

Auszug: “III. FAIRNESS IN DER DATENÖKONOMIE: ÖKONOMIE DER KONVENTIONEN UND ANSÄTZE DER KO-VALUATION
Die für die Frage datenökonomischer Fairness zentrale Auseinandersetzung mit unter-schiedlichen Gerechtigkeitsvorstellungen und ihrer Vermittlung spielt insbesondere in Über die Rechtfertigung von Luc Boltanski und Laurent Thévenot (2007) eine Schlüs-selrolle. Ausgangspunkt sind hier sogenannte „kritische Momente“ (Boltanski und Thévenot 2011, 43), in denen Akteur:innen Probleme in der Koordination ihres gemein-samen Handelns identifizieren und Kritik üben.” (S. 6)

Abstract. The challenges of the data economy are increasingly being discussed from the point of view of fairness. The central insight here is that, in addition to problems of misuse of personal data, questions about the fair distribution of data-economic proceeds or manipulation and discrimination by algorithms are becoming increasingly relevant. In this context, the question of fairness can be understood as a question of the fair mediation of different values, in which trade-offs and limits of models of value mediation must also be reflected. In this context, we understand data fiduciaries as entities that want to provide exactly this mediation and thus position themselves as “fairness actors”.
To conceptualize data-economic fairness, we distinguish three levels: First, we explore the extent to which different values can be translated into an overarching economic language of prices and fairly accounted for therein (accounting). Second, we explore the extent to which economic design power can realize a fair coexistence of different value systems by technical means (design). Third, we examine the extent to which a culture of fairness can be promoted through processes of conflict mediation on the part of data intermediaries, enabling the negotiation of value conflicts by those involved and those affected (cultivation). In the article, this perspective on data-economic fairness, which we are exploring in the interdisciplinary BMBF joint project “Fair digital services: co-evaluation in the design of data-economic business models (FAIRDIENSTE)”, is related to data trusteeship approaches and projects as an example. To what extent can data intermediaries act and function as fairness actors in the data economy? Which fairness concepts are revealed in their solution models and how are these to be assessed with regard to aspects of fair value mediation and the related (theoretical) discussion about fairness in the data economy?

Extract: “III. FAIRNESS IN DATA ECONOMICS: ECONOMICS OF CONVENTIONS AND APPROACHES TO CO-EVALUATION
The discussion of different notions of fairness and their mediation, which is central to the question of data economic fairness, plays a key role in particular in On Justification by Luc Boltanski and Laurent Thévenot (2007). The starting point here are so-called “critical moments” (Boltanski and Thévenot 2011, 43), in which actors identify problems in the coordination of their collective action and criticize them.” (p. 6)

Lien / Link

Philippe Batifoulier & Anne-Sophie Ginon (2022)

HAL archive (preprint). Open access.

Abstract. In France, there are two types of health insurance: compulsory public health insurance and voluntary private health insurance which is organized as a market. This paper deals with private health insurance. We define the market place (position and scope) according to two criteria. On the one hand, the standardization or differentiation strategies of the insurance companies, which structure competition through quality and innovation. Secondly, the type of pooling (or mutualisation) at work in insurance contracts, distinguishing between commercial pooling and solidarity-based pooling. We draw up a typology of four “ideal-type” market configurations: residual market, educated market, polarized market and autonomous market.

Lien / Link

State, Quantification and Agency: A Genealogical Analysis

Alexandre de Paiva Rio Camargo (2022)

Dados, 65(3), pp. 1-39. Open access.

Resumo. O artigo investiga o papel das práticas de quantificação na construção do Estado e das rotinas sociais, nas formas de governar a população através dos números, nas modalidades de crítica estatística da realidade e nos processos de mudança social. Procuramos contribuir com uma síntese original de duas matrizes interpretativas: de um lado, os estudos anglo-foucaultianos sobre a governamentalidade, que relacionam as formas de quantificação a outras tecnologias de indução das condutas, no liberalismo e no neoliberalismo – “regimes de governo” que produzem e consomem liberdades. De outro lado, a sociologia pragmática francesa, em particular o conceito de “convenções de equivalência” e a ideia de pluralidade das lógicas de ação, que permitem compreender a dupla natureza da estatística como “instrumento de prova” e como “instrumento de governo”, formulada por Alain Desrosières, que prioriza a ciência dos números e seu papel na coordenação da vida social. Propomos um uso crítico desses modelos, ensaiando uma genealogia dos níveis da agência e da vida social que foram construídos progressivamente como domínios de mensuração. Tal opção permite explicitar a singularidade das práticas de quantificação no mundo contemporâneo, examinadas em seus quatro gêneros principais: o benchmarking, o ativismo estatístico, o autorrastreamento e a política dos algoritmos.

Abstract. This article investigates the role of quantification practices in the construction of the State and social routines, in the ways of governing the population through numbers, in the modalities of statistical criticism of reality, and in the processes of social change. We seek to contribute with an original synthesis of two interpretative matrices: on the one hand, Anglo-Foucauldian studies on governmentality, which relate the forms of quantification to other technologies of induction of conduct, in liberalism and neoliberalism, “government regimes” that produce and consume freedoms. On the other hand, French pragmatic sociology, in particular the concept of “equivalence conventions” and the idea of ​​a plurality of logics of action, allow us to understand the dual nature of statistics as an “instrument of proof” and as an “instrument of government”, formulated by Alain Desrosières, which prioritizes the science of numbers and its role in the coordination of social life. We propose a critical use of these models, rehearsing a genealogy of levels of agency and social life progressively constructed as measurement domains. This choice makes it possible to explain the singularity of quantification practices in the contemporary world, examined in its four main categories: benchmarking, statistical activism, self-tracking, and the politics of algorithms.

Lien / Link

Diana Treviño-Eberhard & Katrin Kaufmann-Kuchta (2022)

Education Sciences, 12(2), 132, pp. 1-24. Open access.

Abstract. In this research, we compare interrelations between institutional settings and regional provision structures of continuing higher education (CHE) in England and Spain. The aim of the qualitative analysis is to identify and to compare country-specific linkages between national and regional policies, legal and financial regulations and their impact on providers, types of provision and target groups of CHE at the regional level. Theoretical assumptions of educational governance, environmental neo-institutionalism, and the sociology of conventions guide the analysis, based on expert interviews in England and Spain. Our research questions are: What modes of coordination of action to provide CHE are caused by national and regional regulations in England and Spain? How are these actions justified, and how do they influence regional CHE provision types and target groups in both countries? Interview-based findings show that national and regional regulations embrace hybrid modes of coordination of action regarding CHE provision in both countries. Specifically, centralised national policies in England and a mixture of centralised and decentralised legal frameworks in Spain impact regional CHE provision by universities, as does the scope of university autonomy in both countries. However, national frameworks only explain regional disparities in CHE provision to a limited extent. Less formal normative dimensions and social orders of university orientations and labour market demands also influence regional types of provision, concepts, provider cooperation, and adult CHE learners.

Lien / Link

Walter Bartl (2022)

Education Sciences, 12(3), 167, pp. 1-23. Open access.

Abstract. Given that education infrastructure has been a crucial element of the infrastructural power of the welfare state, surprisingly little is known about how spatial disparities in school infrastructure have been governed. While emphasis has recently been placed on the role of numbers in governing the education system, there have been contradictory results on the use of numbers for measuring spatial disparities in schooling on the one hand and on allocating school infrastructure by numbers on the other. What role have indicators played in the governance of regional disparities in education and how can we explain changes to this role? Assuming that indicators typically fulfil two functions in decision making processes (information gathering and allocation of resources), this article develops an ideal–typical distinction between four ways of (not) using numbers for governance purposes. This typology is applied to a historical case study of indicators as a device for governing spatial disparities in education in Germany. Cognitive investments in indicators for observing spatial disparities in education and for administering schools have been made in Germany since the early 19th century. However, conceptual flaws and conservative education policies have kept them from being put to effective practice in school infrastructure policies. It was not until the 1970s that demographic and administrative indicators became institutionalized as part of decentralized but fairly standardized school planning practices. While the use of indicators in the spatial allocation of education resources seemed to work well during periods of educational expansion, this calculative practice produced tension with the civic idea of spatial justice when enrolments declined.

Lien / Link

Stefania Capogna (2022)

Quality and Quantity,
Online first

Abstract. The paper focuses on the challenges posed within sociology and social research by the transformations created by the “data society”. To this end, the paper outlines some of the most significant elements for new frontier research which sociology is forced to confront also in relation to the challenges for educational policies and skills. While leading literature decries the need to promote alphabetising data, otherwise defined as data literacy, the idea proposed here is that it is necessary to work towards understanding data. An understanding that highlights the role sociology has firmly set itself since its foundation, that of studying and explaining the complexity of the relationships that characterize social life in every context and period.

Extract: “Desrosières (2015, 2016) explores the theme by suggesting the need to distinguish between measurement and quantification. In his opinion, quantification comes first and indicates the defining process that leads to the elaboration of univocal, standard concepts, the elaboration of classification and measurement procedures. The defining process develops along a continuous pathway of negotiation, coordination and critical review which involves different actors, belonging to different disciplinary and professional fields and which leads to the construction of a system of shared theoretical-methodological conventions. This means that quantification is anchored to a specific justification logic that legitimises the system of detection and measurement of the phenomenon under consideration. These conventional logics are guided by value principles that direct the different perspectives, through which it is possible to problematise the social world. […]. Considering measurement and quantification in this way allows us to penetrate the black-box of big data, to reflect on: what moves behind the conventions of measurement (Salais 2016); the processes and rationalities underlying the construction of automatic detection systems; the logic of open data; the internal coherence of the theoretical-methodological structure; the methods of data communication and consultation; the limits and approximations that are inevitably connected to the numerical language, just as to the alphabetic language; the values that inform the platform; the stakes of the actors who contribute to the design, implementation, management, supply of the data sets and their related release.” (p. 9-10)

Lien / Link

16-18 June 2022, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany.

Deadline: 18.04.2022

The three states of “native advertising”. Social uses and circulation regimes of a terminological innovation

Vincent Bullich (2021)

Communication and Management, 18(2), pp. 115-133.

Résumé. Le « native advertising » s’est imposé comme incontournable dans le paysage médiatique en ligne. Polymorphe, il a investi de nombreuses entreprises de presse, de production de contenus ou d’agences-conseils. Cet article se propose de retracer l’histoire de cette « innovation », plus terminologique que technique, au prisme de la question de l’autonomie de fonctionnement des industries culturelles. Trois états de cette innovation ont ainsi été distingués en fonction des usages sociaux et des régimes de circulation du syntagme, afin de soutenir l’hypothèse d’une subordination progressive de ces industries aux exigences des marques-annonceurs.

Abstract. Native advertising has established itself as a must in the online media landscape. Polymorphic, it has invested a significant number of media companies, content production companies and consulting agencies. This article aims to retrace the history of this “innovation”, which is more terminological than technical, through the prism of the question of the autonomy of cultural industries. Three states of this innovation have thus been distinguished according to social uses and circulation regimes of the terms, in order to support the hypothesis of a gradual subordination of these industries to the demands of brand-advertisers.

Lien / Link

Stefano Ponte (2021)

In: Palpacuer, Florence/Smith, Alistair (eds.), Rethinking Value Chains. Tackling the Challenges of Global Capitalism. Bristol: Bristol University Press, pp. 56-79. Open access.

Extract: “Demonstrative power (dyadic, indirect) operates through informal transmission mechanisms along GVCs between individual actors (such as buyers and suppliers or aspiring suppliers) and is shaped by conventions and best practices, including those on sustainability management, that are implicitly accepted by the parties of a dyadic transaction. Institutional power (collective, direct) operates through government regulation and/ or multistakeholder sustainability initiatives or other institutionalised forms, and can be leveraged through collective standards or codified ‘best practices’. Constitutive power (collective, indirect) is based on broadly accepted norms, conventions, expectations and best practices (financialisation, just-in-time supply chain management, environmental stewardship) and shapes what is systemically acceptable and desirable (green capital accumulation, sustainability-based value extraction from suppliers) (Dallas et al, 2019).“ (59-60)

Lien / Link