exchange,ie.,money)determined by the sup- repeated exchanges occur between buyers and ply and demand for the commodity.From the sellers under a set of formal and informal point of view of the sociology of markets,the rules governing relations between competi- problem is that this type of exchange already tors,suppliers,and customers.+These fields shows a great deal of social structure.Mar-operate according to local understandings and ket actors have to find one another.Money formal and informal rules and conventions has to exist to allow market actors to get be-that guide interaction,facilitate trade,define yond bartering nonequivalent goods.Actors what products are produced,indeed are con- have to know what the price is.Underlying stitutive of products,and provide stability for all exchange is that both buyers and sellers buyers,sellers,and producers.These market- have faith that they will not be cheated.Such places are dependent on governments,laws, faith often implies informal (i.e.,personal and larger cultural understandings support- knowledge of the buyer or seller)and formal ing market activity.The first thing a sociol- 3JO'SMOIA3IEnuue Ajuo asn mechanisms(i.e.,law)that govern exchange.ogy of markets suggests is that market actors euosiad Furthermore,market actors are often organi- will develop social structures to mediate the zations,implying that organizational dynam-problems they encounter in exchange,com- 豆 ics influence market structures.For sociolo- petition,and production.We discuss each of gists,market exchange implies a whole back-these in turn and delineate the primary contri- drop of social arrangements that economics butions ofeach perspective with regard to how does not even begin to hint at. market actors solve these problems and,in do- But the sociology of markets goes further ing so,construct and navigate their worlds. 宝 than just questioning the institutional embed- Many aspects of exchange relationships dedness of an anonymous market.It is pre-in markets have been examined by sociolo- pared to unpack the black boxes of exchange,gists.Institutional theory suggests not only 尊 competition,and production.Sociologists be-that contractual market exchange depends gin by realizing that market actors are in-on the rule setting and sanction enforce- volved in day-to-day social relationships with ment of states,but also that states may de- one another,relationships based on trust,fine what types of products are appropriate friendship,power,and dependence.For the for exchange.Furthermore,theinternalstruc- modern sociology of markets (Durkheim ture of the state as rule setter and regulator 1964)3,unstructured,haphazard,one-shot,can influence the types of products states al- anonymous social exchange is not a market.low to be exchanged and the rules support- Instead,markets imply social spaces where ing and surrounding exchange(Carruthers Halliday 1998,Delaney 1992,Schneiberg Soule 2005).Buyers and sellers also are gener- Ironically,scholars of the sociology of markets almost ally known to one another and in many cases never cite Durkheim.But a good case can be made that are involved in repeated exchange.Network almost all of the important ideas in the sociology of mar- kets have Durkheimian roots.Durkheim recognized the theorists have emphasized the role that so- pivotal role of the state and law in capitalist exchange,pre- cial networks play in generating trust between figuring the political economy concern with these issues. buyers and sellers that makes exchange possi- He also recognized that there was a noncontractual basis to contract that implied that personal relationships were ble (Granovetter 1985).Cultural sociologists necessary for people to honor contracts.Finally,in the di- have looked at how specific exchange relations vision of labor the major mechanism that drove modern society was competition.Durkheim's argument was that people divided up tasks to lessen their competition with other people.This mechanism is arguably at the core of +Of course,some of the identities of the buyers and sellers the population ecology view that market niches become change over time.In addition,more peripheral buyers and partitioned by competition and White's arguments about sellers come into the market,leave,and do not return.But how firms avoid competition by signaling which part of the the core players in the market,the largest producers and market they will produce for. consumers,create a social structure. www.annualreviews.org The Sociology of Markets 1I3ANRV316-SO33-06 ARI 24 May 2007 10:6 exchange, i.e., money) determined by the sup￾ply and demand for the commodity. From the point of view of the sociology of markets, the problem is that this type of exchange already shows a great deal of social structure. Mar￾ket actors have to find one another. Money has to exist to allow market actors to get be￾yond bartering nonequivalent goods. Actors have to know what the price is. Underlying all exchange is that both buyers and sellers have faith that they will not be cheated. Such faith often implies informal (i.e., personal knowledge of the buyer or seller) and formal mechanisms (i.e., law) that govern exchange. Furthermore, market actors are often organi￾zations, implying that organizational dynam￾ics influence market structures. For sociolo￾gists, market exchange implies a whole back￾drop of social arrangements that economics does not even begin to hint at. But the sociology of markets goes further than just questioning the institutional embed￾dedness of an anonymous market. It is pre￾pared to unpack the black boxes of exchange, competition, and production. Sociologists be￾gin by realizing that market actors are in￾volved in day-to-day social relationships with one another, relationships based on trust, friendship, power, and dependence. For the modern sociology of markets (Durkheim 1964)3, unstructured, haphazard, one-shot, anonymous social exchange is not a market. Instead, markets imply social spaces where 3Ironically, scholars of the sociology of markets almost never cite Durkheim. But a good case can be made that almost all of the important ideas in the sociology of mar￾kets have Durkheimian roots. Durkheim recognized the pivotal role of the state and law in capitalist exchange, pre- figuring the political economy concern with these issues. He also recognized that there was a noncontractual basis to contract that implied that personal relationships were necessary for people to honor contracts. Finally, in the di￾vision of labor the major mechanism that drove modern society was competition. Durkheim’s argument was that people divided up tasks to lessen their competition with other people. This mechanism is arguably at the core of the population ecology view that market niches become partitioned by competition and White’s arguments about how firms avoid competition by signaling which part of the market they will produce for. repeated exchanges occur between buyers and sellers under a set of formal and informal rules governing relations between competi￾tors, suppliers, and customers.4 These fields operate according to local understandings and formal and informal rules and conventions that guide interaction, facilitate trade, define what products are produced, indeed are con￾stitutive of products, and provide stability for buyers, sellers, and producers. These market￾places are dependent on governments, laws, and larger cultural understandings support￾ing market activity. The first thing a sociol￾ogy of markets suggests is that market actors will develop social structures to mediate the problems they encounter in exchange, com￾petition, and production. We discuss each of these in turn and delineate the primary contri￾butions of each perspective with regard to how market actors solve these problems and, in do￾ing so, construct and navigate their worlds. Many aspects of exchange relationships in markets have been examined by sociolo￾gists. Institutional theory suggests not only that contractual market exchange depends on the rule setting and sanction enforce￾ment of states, but also that states may de- fine what types of products are appropriate for exchange. Furthermore, the internal struc￾ture of the state as rule setter and regulator can influence the types of products states al￾low to be exchanged and the rules support￾ing and surrounding exchange (Carruthers & Halliday 1998, Delaney 1992, Schneiberg & Soule 2005). Buyers and sellers also are gener￾ally known to one another and in many cases are involved in repeated exchange. Network theorists have emphasized the role that so￾cial networks play in generating trust between buyers and sellers that makes exchange possi￾ble (Granovetter 1985). Cultural sociologists have looked at how specific exchange relations 4Of course, some of the identities of the buyers and sellers change over time. In addition, more peripheral buyers and sellers come into the market, leave, and do not return. But the core players in the market, the largest producers and consumers, create a social structure. www.annualreviews.org • The Sociology of Markets 113 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