Show simple item record

hal.structure.identifierDauphine Recherches en Management [DRM]
dc.contributor.authorDéjean, Frédérique*
hal.structure.identifier
dc.contributor.authorGond, Jean-Pascal*
hal.structure.identifier
dc.contributor.authorGiamporcaro, Stéphanie*
hal.structure.identifierInstitut de Recherche Interdisciplinaire en Sciences Sociales [IRISSO]
dc.contributor.authorPenalva-Icher, Elise*
hal.structure.identifier
dc.contributor.authorLeca, Bernard*
dc.date.accessioned2012-03-05T14:40:20Z
dc.date.available2012-03-05T14:40:20Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.identifier.issn0167-4544
dc.identifier.urihttps://basepub.dauphine.fr/handle/123456789/8360
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subjectSocially responsible investment
dc.subjectSocial-movement research as a theoretical framework
dc.subjectInstitutionalization
dc.subjectComparative studies
dc.subjectFinancial markets
dc.subject.ddc658en
dc.subject.classificationjelM.M1.M14en
dc.titleMistaking an Emerging Market for a Social Movement? A Comment on Arjaliès’ Social-Movement Perspective on Socially Responsible Investment in France
dc.typeArticle accepté pour publication ou publié
dc.description.abstractenIn a recent contribution to this journal, Arjaliès (J Bus Ethics 92:57–78, 2010) suggests that the emergence of socially responsible investment (SRI) in France can be best described as a social movement with a collective identity that aimed to challenge the dominant logic of the financial market. Such an account is at odds with a body of empirical studies that approaches SRI in the French context as a process of market creation led by loosely coordinated actors with contradictory and conflicting interests and values, who have mainly complied with—rather than opposed—the existing dominant financial logic of the asset-management field. In this comment, we build on this prior research to contest Arjaliès’ perspective on both theoretical and empirical grounds, with the aim of highlighting the shortcomings of conflating social movements and other forms of collective actions in understanding the building of new markets in organization theory and SRI studies. We contend that in mistaking for social movement forms of collective actions that underpin the emergence of markets, scholars of organization theory may confuse distinct mechanisms in their explanation of SRI emergence across countries, overlook the complex dynamics and interactions of markets and social movements, and, most importantly, fail to evaluate the real political significance of SRI as an empirical phenomenon. We propose that future research on SRI distinguishes carefully “social-movement research as a theoretical framework” from “social movement as an empirical phenomenon” in order to avoid such drawbacks while benefiting from recent advances in social-movement research.
dc.relation.isversionofjnlnameJournal of Business Ethics
dc.relation.isversionofjnlvol112
dc.relation.isversionofjnlissue2
dc.relation.isversionofjnldate2013
dc.relation.isversionofjnlpages205-212
dc.relation.isversionofdoi10.1007/s10551-012-1241-6
dc.description.sponsorshipprivateouien
dc.relation.isversionofjnlpublisherKluwer Academic Publishers
dc.subject.ddclabelGestion des entreprisesen
dc.description.ssrncandidatenon
dc.description.halcandidateoui
dc.description.readershiprecherche
dc.description.audienceInternational
dc.relation.Isversionofjnlpeerreviewedoui
dc.date.updated2017-02-02T14:31:41Z
hal.faultCode{"duplicate-entry":{"hal-00779797":{"doi":"1.0"}}}
hal.author.functionaut
hal.author.functionaut
hal.author.functionaut
hal.author.functionaut
hal.author.functionaut


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record