Work and Neoliberal Globalization: A Polanyian Synthesis

Abstract

This article reviews sociological research about economic globalization’s impact on work and labor in developed and developing countries since the 1980s. We find that this period of neoliberal globalization influences work because of intensified activities of multinational corporations (MNCs), financialization of the global economy, and amplified prominence of international organizations, some of which diffuse neoliberal policy scripts while others mobilize a transnational civil society. Research we review generally points to liabilities of neoliberal globalization for workers. To understand these findings, we apply Karl Polanyi’s concepts of fictitious commodities, the self‐regulating market, and the double movement. We propose that, on the one hand, the activities of MNCs, international financial organizations, and many states exemplify pushes for institutional separation of economy and society in effort to institutionalize the idea of a self‐regulating market at a global scale, which increases labor commodification and global inequalities. On the other hand, the activities of social movements, including unions and transnational actors that target globalization’s impact on work, constitute the counter movement at national and global levels resisting marketization and pushing for labor decommodification. The aftermath of the ongoing economic crisis will tell to what extent this countermovement will be successful in generating an alternative to neoliberal globalization, and more protections for workers.

Understanding Perceived Worker Insecurity in Europe, 2002–2016: Economic Freedom and Neoliberalism as Alternative Theories?

“…“Neoliberalism” is another such concept, which appears in studies in sociology and allied disciplines. John L. Campbell and Ove K. Pedersen (2001:5) conceptualize neoliberalism partly as institutions, such as “minimalist welfare-state, taxation, and business regulation programs; flexible labor markets and decentralized capital-labor relations.” For David Harvey (2005:2), neoliberalism is “a theory of political economic practices that proposes that human well-being can best be advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills within an institutional framework characterized by strong private property rights, free markets, and free trade.” In research focused on work, the global neoliberal revolution—or neoliberal globalization—emphasizes “the centrality of markets and market-driven solutions, privatization of government resources, and removal of government protections” (Kalleberg 2009:3; see also Bandelj, Shorette, and Sowers 2011). Although there continues to be debate over the meaning of neoliberalism (see Birch 2015), extant theory suggests some common characteristics of it are privatization, free markets, and minimal or selective (Jessop 2002) government intervention in the economy.…”

“…In addition, Standing (2016) highlights labor market flexibility and de-unionization as major reasons for heightened worker insecurity. In their review of research on work, Nina Bandelj et al (2011:816) conclude that “among the many liabilities of neoliberal globalization are increased job security . .…”

Signalling Demand for Foreign Investment: Postsocialist Countries in the Global Bilateral Investment Treaties Network

“…Multinational corporations (MNCs) that engage in foreign investment activities create a deeply integrated contemporary global economy (Gereffi 2005), compared to other historical periods of globalisation. Their pervasive activities are also consistent with the prominence of a neoliberal agenda in economic policy circles since the 1980s, which advocates the freer flow of capital across borders, along with other tenets of the Washington Consensus (Gore 2000;Campbell & Pederson 2001;Prasad 2006;Bandelj et al 2011).…”

Globalization and Its Countermovement: Marxian Contention or Polanyian Resistance?

“…There is a growing body of literature that interprets collective mobilizations spurred by globalization as a countermovement against the diffusion of capitalism and market economy (Almeida 2007;Bandelj, Shorette and Sowers 2011;Burawoy 2010;Evans 2008;Gemici 2013;Levien 2012;Munck 2004Munck , 2007Silver 2003;Silver and Zhang 2009;Webster, Lambert and Bezuidenhout 2008). Two different and seemingly contradicting streams of analysis can be identified in this literature.…”

“…On the other hand, there are voluminous studies on contentious politics instances where the intensification of the market economy is met with protests by groups such as peasants, students, and urban poor. These are social groups who are unmade by economic globalization and neoliberal reforms (Almeida 2007;Auyero 2001Auyero , 2003aAuyero , 2003bAuyero and Moran 2007;Bandelj, Shorette and Sowers 2011;Epstein 2003;Evans 2000;Gemici 2013;Hammond 1999Hammond , 2009Munck 2007;Nair 2011Nair , 2016. In this article, we survey the two streams of scholarship on the countermovement against the global integration of capitalist markets by using Beverly Silver's distinction between Marx-type and Polanyi-type protests (2003).…”