Actor-Network-Theory of B. Latour and Culture Factor in the Analysis of Economic Processes

Orekhovsky, Petr

Home

Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost

Issue 3

“Actor-Network-Theory” of B. Latour and “Culture Factor” in the Analysis of Economic Processes

Annotation
Reviews
References

“Actor-Network-Theory” of B. Latour and “Culture Factor” in the Analysis of Economic Processes

PII

S086904990011531-6-1

Publication type

Article

Status

Published

Authors

Petr Orekhovsky

Occupation: Chief Research Fellow, Professor
Affiliation:
Institute of economics of the Russian Academy of sciences
Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia
Address: 32, Nachimovsky av., Moscow, 117218, Russian Federation

Journal name

Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost

Edition

Issue 3

Pages

157-167

Abstract

B. Latour distinguishes between “sociology of social” and “sociology of associations”. Similarly, we can speak of “economic economy” (economic theory) and the economy of cities, regions, countries, sectors. Constructivism is intended to include a network of researchers in the relationships with other actors and actants, the reconstruction of this situation. In contrast to this neo-Kantian scheme in the traditional discourse of the behavior of the subject assumes relatively independent in relation to the object. The “culture man” model can significantly contradict the “economic man”. Culture suggests that individuals are included in a certain context, politics, religion, technology, landscape. However, the attempt to view culture as a purely exogenous-determining factor of economic behavior is doomed to failure. Culture – part of the knowing subject, and the researcher should revise the base of their own thinking to understand the impact of culture on others. Refusal of such review often leads to errors.

Keywords

constructivism, institutions, economic man, culture

Received

14.09.2020

Publication date

17.06.2017

Number of characters

1080

Cite Download pdf To download PDF you should sign in

GOST	Orekhovsky P. “Actor-Network-Theory” of B. Latour and “Culture Factor” in the Analysis of Economic Processes // Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost – 2017. – Issue 3 C. 157-167 [Electronic resource]. URL: https://ons-journal.ru/S086904990011531-6-1 (circulation date: 19.04.2024).
MLA	Orekhovsky, Petr "“Actor-Network-Theory” of B. Latour and “Culture Factor” in the Analysis of Economic Processes." Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost 3 (2017):157-167.
APA	Orekhovsky P. (2017). “Actor-Network-Theory” of B. Latour and “Culture Factor” in the Analysis of Economic Processes. Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost (3), pp.157-167

Размещенный ниже текст является ознакомительной версией и может не соответствовать печатной

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Auzan A. A. (2006) Pereuchrezhdenie gosudarstva: obshhestvennyj dogovor. [Being re-state: the social contract]. Moscow: Evropa.

2. Jacobs J. (2006) Zakat Ameriki. Vperedi Srednevekove. [Dark Age Ahead]. Moscow: Evropa.

3. Gladwell M. (2010) Genii i autsajdery: Pochemu odnim vsjo, a drugim nichego? [Outliers. The Story of Success]. Moscow: Junajted Press.

4. The Global Competitiveness Report 20092010 (published by the World Economic Forum within the framework of the Global Competitiveness Network). World Economic Forum. Geneva. 2.

5. Gurevich A. (2014) Istoricheskij sintez i Shkola Annalov [Historical synthesis and School Annals]. Moscow; St.-Petersburg: Centr gumanitarnyh iniciativ; Universitetskaja kniga.

6. Hofstede G. (1991) Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: McGraw-Hill.

7. Inglehart R., Welzel C. (2006) Modernization, Cultural Change and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.

8. Kuzminov Y., Radaev V., Yakovlev A.A., Yasin E.G. (2005) Instituty: Ot zaimstvovanija k vyrashchivaniju. Opyt rossijskikh reform i vozmozhnoe kultivirovanie institucionalnykh izmenenij [Institutions: From adoption to grow. Åxperience of Russian reforms and the possible cultivation of institutional changes]. Moscow: HSE (https://www.hse.ru/pubs/share/direct/document/70846461).

9. Latour B. (2014) Peresborka socialnogo: vvedenie v aktorno-setevuju teoriju [Reassembling The Social. An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory]. Moscow: ID HSE.

10. Luman N. (2004) Obshhestvo kak socialnaja sistema [Society as a Social System]. Moscow: Logos.

11. McCloskey D. (2015) Ritorika ekonomicheskoj nauki [The Rhetoric of Economics]. Moscow, St.-Petersburg: Izd-vo Instituta Gajdara, Izdatelstvo Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija, Fakultet svobodnyh iskusstv i nauk SPbGU.

12. Ortega y Gasset J. (2016) Vosstanie mass [Rise of the Masses]. Moscow: AST.

13. Rodrik D. (2016) Ekonomika reshaet: sila i slabost mrachnoj nauki [Economics Rules. The Right and Wrongs of the Dismal Science]. Moscow: Izdatelstvo Instituta Gajdara.

14. Tambovtsev V.L. (2016) Mif o kulturnom kode v nauchnykh issledovanijakh. Nauchnyj doklad [The myth of the cultural code in scientific research. Scientific report]. Moscow: IE RAN.

15. Thurow L. (1999) Budushhee kapitalizma. Kak segodnjashnie jekonomicheskie sily formirujut zavtrashnij den [The Future of Capitalism. How Today?s Economic Forces Shape Tomorrow?s World]. Novosibirsk: Sibirskiy hronograf.

16. Vakhshtajn V. (2011) Sociologija povsednevnosti i teorija frejmov [Sociology of everyday life and the theory of frames]. St.-Petersburg: Izdatelstvo Evropejskogo universiteta v SPb.

17. Veblen T. (2006) Pochemu ekonomicheskaja nauka ne yavlyaetsya evoljucionnoy disciplinoy? [Why is Economics not an Evolutionary Sciences?]. Istoki: iz opyta izuchenija ekonomiki kak struktury i processa [Roots: From the Studying the Economy as a Structure and Process]. Moscow: ID HSE.