Fields in Russian Economic History

  • Jeffrey K. Hass
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter sets up the thematic and theoretical background for the book. Field frameworks have developed in the last three decades, and they have provided important insights into the genesis of corporate strategies and structures, reproduction of market logics, and variation across space and time. However, field frameworks normally are applied to advanced and stable Western capitalist economies. Russia provides an opportunity to explore how fields have developed or undergone fundamental changes: in the nineteenth century, in the Soviet era, and after 1989. Further, the Russian case provides examples of the state and international forces shaping fields (in our case, fields of professional discourse and identity). To explore the potential of field frameworks, the authors in this volume use fields in different ways and embed field frameworks in the structures of their narratives.

Works Cited

  1. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  2. ———. 1998. The State Nobility. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Dalton, Melville. 1959. Men Who Manage. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  4. DiMaggio, Paul, and Walter Powell. 1983. The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review 48: 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. ———. 1991. Introduction. In The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, ed. Walter Powell and Paul J. DiMaggio, 1–38. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Fligstein, Neil. 1990. The Transformation of Corporate Control. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. ———. 2001. The Architecture of Markets. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Fligstein, Neil, and Iona Mara-Drita. 1996. How to Make a Market: Reflections on the Attempt to Create a Single Market in the European Union. American Journal of Sociology 102: 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fligstein, Neil, and Doug McAdam. 2012. A Theory of Fields. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The Constitution of Society. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hass, Jeffrey K. 1999. The Great Transition: The Dynamics of Market Transitions and the Case of Russia, 1991–1995. Theory and Society 28: 383–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. ———. 2011a. Power, Culture, and Economic Change in Russia 1988–2008: To the Undiscovered Country of Post-socialism. New York and Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. ———. 2011b. Rethinking the Post-soviet Experience. Markets, Moral Economies, and Cultural Contradictions of Post-socialist Russia. New York and Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  14. Herrera, Yoshiko. 2005. Imagined Economies: The Sources of Russian Regionalism. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Martin, John Levi. 2009. Social Structures. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. ———. 2011. The Explanation of Social Action. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Radaev, Vadim. 2003. Sotsiologiia rynkov: k formirovaniiu novogo napravleniia. Moscow: Higher School of Economics.Google Scholar
  18. Roy, William. 1997. Socializing Capital. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Stark, David, and László Bruszt. 1998. Postsocialiust Pathways. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Zucker, Lynne. 1977. The Role of Institutionalization in Cultural Persistence. American Sociological Review 42: 726–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeffrey K. Hass
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Sociology & AnthropologyUniversity of RichmondRichmondUSA
  2. 2.Faculty of Economics, Department of Economic TheorySt. Petersburg State UniversitySt. PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations