in a market can collectively produce equilib- whether a particular set of social structures rium,then the goal of actors in this market protects incumbents or,rather,fosters eco- becomes the preservation of that order.This nomic growth and competition. implies relationships of power and domina- In this review,we discuss the intellectual tion in markets.On the other hand,if firms are roots of the sociology of markets and how the resigned to live in a world where reproducing field evolved from problems posed in nearby one's position is not possible,then social re-fields.We then examine the crystallization of lationships become temporary arrangements the major ideas in the sociology ofmarkets and that allow one to get information or secure in doing so discuss what we know.Finally,we cutting edge technology.Because change is consider what the real differences of opinion ubiquitous,one chooses one's friends for their are and suggest avenues for future research. usefulness,and when that usefulness ends,one moves on. Finally,sociologists generally have a com- CONTEMPORARY ROOTS OF plicated relationship to the problem of THE SOCIOLOGY OF MARKETS whether a given set of social arrangements is Many good reviews have been written about efficient.The fact that so many kinds of so-the intellectual history of the sociology of cial relationships exist in markets has led to markets as a field(Biggart&Beamish 2003, the argument thatsocialrelationshipsexist be-Fourcade-Gourinchas 2007,Krippner 2001, tween market actors to solve market problems Lie 1997,Smelser Swedberg 1994,Trigilia such as agency costs(Fama Jensen 1983)2002).Our goal in this section is to put this 宝 and transaction costs(Williamson 1985)and literature together in a different way.Rather to promote trust between buyers and sell-than focusing on the roots of the sociology of ers.Some sociologists seem prepared to ac-markets in classical theory,we focus on the cept that social structures could be efficient contemporary fields of study that contributed (Baker 1984,Uzzi 1996).From this point of to the intellectual ferment around the soci- view,social structures in markets operate to ology of markets.In particular,we trace the 100c reduce information costs,give firms access to influence ofnearby fields on the different per- knowledge about what the competition is do- spectives in the sociology of markets. ing,allow market actors to trust one another, New fields of social inquiry are built in re- and reduce resource dependencies.These so-lation to other fields of social inquiry.When 夏 cial structures provide firms with information scholars working within one field find them- that allows them to learn and adapt and,in do-selves in a dialogue with scholars working ing so,compete effectively.But other scholars on similar problems in other fields,some- are agnostic on this question(Fligstein 1990,times a new field of inquiry is created.At Podolny 1993).For them,social structures the outset,new fields involve scholars bor- can operate to mitigate the effects of competi-rowing one another's perspectives and look- tion.In this view,firms try to control markets ing for mechanisms and models that might by using their size,technology,and access to help explain new objects of inquiry.In this governments to promote a status hierarchy of case,political economy,the sociology of la- incumbents and challengers.Incumbent firms bor markets,and organizational theory pio- use their advantages to signal to their princi-neered thinking about the sociology of mar- pal competitors what they will do to defend kets,and the cross-pollination ofideas in these the existing market order.For these scholars,fields formed the basic insights leading to the social structure of markets exists to pro-the establishment of the sociology of mar- duce this order.One way to make progress on kets as a field in its own right.Scholars in this issue is to problematize efficiency.The all these fields doubted that economics could sociology of markets gives us tools to decide sufficiently make sense of what happens in www.anmalreviews.org The Sociology of Markets 109ANRV316-SO33-06 ARI 24 May 2007 10:6 in a market can collectively produce equilib￾rium, then the goal of actors in this market becomes the preservation of that order. This implies relationships of power and domina￾tion in markets. On the other hand, if firms are resigned to live in a world where reproducing one’s position is not possible, then social re￾lationships become temporary arrangements that allow one to get information or secure cutting edge technology. Because change is ubiquitous, one chooses one’s friends for their usefulness, and when that usefulness ends, one moves on. Finally, sociologists generally have a com￾plicated relationship to the problem of whether a given set of social arrangements is efficient. The fact that so many kinds of so￾cial relationships exist in markets has led to the argument that social relationships exist be￾tween market actors to solve market problems such as agency costs (Fama & Jensen 1983) and transaction costs (Williamson 1985) and to promote trust between buyers and sell￾ers. Some sociologists seem prepared to ac￾cept that social structures could be efficient (Baker 1984, Uzzi 1996). From this point of view, social structures in markets operate to reduce information costs, give firms access to knowledge about what the competition is do￾ing, allow market actors to trust one another, and reduce resource dependencies. These so￾cial structures provide firms with information that allows them to learn and adapt and, in do￾ing so, compete effectively. But other scholars are agnostic on this question (Fligstein 1990, Podolny 1993). For them, social structures can operate to mitigate the effects of competi￾tion. In this view, firms try to control markets by using their size, technology, and access to governments to promote a status hierarchy of incumbents and challengers. Incumbent firms use their advantages to signal to their princi￾pal competitors what they will do to defend the existing market order. For these scholars, the social structure of markets exists to pro￾duce this order. One way to make progress on this issue is to problematize efficiency. The sociology of markets gives us tools to decide whether a particular set of social structures protects incumbents or, rather, fosters eco￾nomic growth and competition. In this review, we discuss the intellectual roots of the sociology of markets and how the field evolved from problems posed in nearby fields. We then examine the crystallization of the major ideas in the sociology of markets and in doing so discuss what we know. Finally, we consider what the real differences of opinion are and suggest avenues for future research. CONTEMPORARY ROOTS OF THE SOCIOLOGY OF MARKETS Many good reviews have been written about the intellectual history of the sociology of markets as a field (Biggart & Beamish 2003, Fourcade-Gourinchas 2007, Krippner 2001, Lie 1997, Smelser & Swedberg 1994, Trigilia 2002). Our goal in this section is to put this literature together in a different way. Rather than focusing on the roots of the sociology of markets in classical theory, we focus on the contemporary fields of study that contributed to the intellectual ferment around the soci￾ology of markets. In particular, we trace the influence of nearby fields on the different per￾spectives in the sociology of markets. New fields of social inquiry are built in re￾lation to other fields of social inquiry. When scholars working within one field find them￾selves in a dialogue with scholars working on similar problems in other fields, some￾times a new field of inquiry is created. At the outset, new fields involve scholars bor￾rowing one another’s perspectives and look￾ing for mechanisms and models that might help explain new objects of inquiry. In this case, political economy, the sociology of la￾bor markets, and organizational theory pio￾neered thinking about the sociology of mar￾kets, and the cross-pollination of ideas in these fields formed the basic insights leading to the establishment of the sociology of mar￾kets as a field in its own right. Scholars in all these fields doubted that economics could sufficiently make sense of what happens in www.annualreviews.org • The Sociology of Markets 109 Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2007.33:105-128. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org Access provided by Shanghai Jiaotong University on 02/04/15. For personal use only