Eve Chiapello

Accounting and the birth of the notion of capitalism

The purpose of this paper is to cast a new light on the post-Sombartian debate. It contributes to some understanding of the birth of the concept of capitalism itself. The author argues that the history of how the concept of capitalism was invented is an example of the influence of accounting ideas on economic and sociological thinking.

Die Rolle der Kritik in der Dynamik des Kapitalismus und der normative Wandel

Die französische Soziologie der 70er Jahre gab sich kritisch, stieß damit aber weder im moralischen Sinne noch im Sinne der Gerechtigkeit auf großes Interesse. Im Gegensatz dazu betonte die pragmatische Soziologie der 80er Jahre das absichtsvolle Handeln der Individuen und nahm die moralischen Motive, die sie für sich in Anspruch nahmen, sehr ernst. Sie hat dabei jedoch sehr oft die kritische Sichtweise aufgegeben. In „Le nouvel esprit du capitalisme“ haben wir versucht, einen Rahmen zu konstruieren, der es ermöglicht, die Kernpunkte einer kritischen mit denen der pragmatischen Soziologie zu verbinden, und dazu das Programm einer Soziologie der Rolle der Kritik im sozialen Leben entwickelt. Um zu verstehen, wie ein neuer „Geist des Kapitalismus“ in den letzten dreißig Jahren entstehen konnte, muss man in der Zeit um 1968 ansetzen, einer Phase, die durch ein hohes Niveau der Kritik gekennzeichnet war. Der Kapitalismus hat zunächst — ohne Erfolg — versucht, dieser Krise auf dem Gebiet der sozialen Gerechtigkeit zu begegnen, um dann große Teile einer neuen Form der Kritik zu verinnerlichen, die Ende der 60er Jahre entwickelt wurde und die sich auf Forderungen nach Autonomie, Authentizität und Kreativität konzentrierte. Die Anpassung des Kapitalismus an diese Form künstlerischer Kritik, wie wir sie bezeichnen, hat zu seiner Wiederbelebung beigetragen. Zusammenfassend entwickeln wir ein Modell normativen Wandels, das auf dem Begriff der Bewährungsprobe und dem des Wechsels zwischen Regimen der Verlagerung und Kategorisierung gründet.SummaryThe French Sociology of the 70ies was said to be critical, yet it could not meet numerous interests neither in terms of morals nor justice. On the contrary, the 80ies pragmatic sociology sincerely emphasized the intentional action of individuals and their acclaimed moral reasons, but in many instances abandoning its critical perspective. “Le nouvel esprit du capitalisme” tries to link the cores of both the critical and pragmatic sociology. In order to understand the emergence of a new spirit of capitalism, it is necessary to go back to 1968, an era characterized by a high level of critique. After capitalism unsuccessfully tried to cope with the crisis in the field of social justice, it turned to digest as well as adapt to new forms of critique claiming autonomy, authenticity and creativity. This artistic critique, as we call it, facilitated the renaissance of capitalism. Eventually, we develop a model of normative change based on terms of either critical examination and interchange between regimes of transfer and categorizing.RésuméLa sociologie française des années 1970 se voulait critique mais elle n’accordait que peu d’intérêts au sens moral et au sens de la justice des personnes. A l’inverse la sociologie pragmatique des années 1980 a mis l’accent sur l’action intentionnelle et a pris au sérieux les motifs moraux invoqués par les personnes, mais elle a souvent abandonné la visée critique. Dans un ouvrage récent Le nouvel esprit du capitalisme, les auteurs ont cherché à construire un cadre permettant d’intégrer les apports de la sociologie critique et ceux de la sociologie pragmatique en développant le programme d’une sociologie du rôle que joue la critique dans la vie sociale. L’étude des changements récents du capitalisme se prête particulièrement bien à une telle approche. Après avoir caractérisé différents états du capitalisme qui se sont succédés depuis le XIXeme siècle, les auteurs mettent l’accent sur le rôle que joue la critique développée par les personnes en prenant appui sur leur sens de la justice, dans la dynamique du capitalisme. Ainsi, pour comprendre comment un nouvel „esprit du capitalisme“, pour reprendre la formule de Max Weber, a émergé au cours des trente dernières années, il faut revenir à la décennie qui entoure mai 1968, caractérisée par un haut niveau de critique Le capitalisme a cherché à faire face à cette crise d’abord en se plaçant, sans succès, sur le terrain de la justice sociale — au sens du mouvement ouvrier —, puis en incorporant des pans entiers d’une autre forme de critique, développée à la fin des années 1960, centrée sur des exigences d’autonomie, d’authenticité et de créativité que nous avons appelé la critique artiste. L’assimilation de cette critique par le capitalisme a contribué à sa relance.En conclusion nous esquissons un modèle du changement normatif fondé sur la notion d’épreuve et sur l’alternance entre des phases de déplacements et des phases de catégorisation.

Criticisms of capitalism, budgeting and the double enrolment: Budgetary control rhetoric and social reform in France in the 1930s and 1950s

This article is a contribution to the study of the spread of management innovations, methods and rhetorics. It particularly concerns the influence of ideological and political factors, which have so far mostly escaped in-depth study. In particular, we seek to understand to what extent a critique of society developed by social reformers can be a source of inspiration for managers, leading them to change their practices and experiment with new devices. Relying on the framework of historical change in management practices developed by Boltanski and Chiapello [Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, E. (2005). The new spirit of capitalism. London: Verso (Translation of Le nouvel esprit du capitalisme, Paris: Gallimard, 1999)], we study the specific development of budgetary control in France, examined in the light of the general political and economic history of the 20th century. This framework simultaneously encompasses the dissemination of a new accounting practice, the transformation of capitalist institutions and mo des of regulation in a given period and country, and the programmatic discourses [Miller, P., & Rose, N. (1990). Governing economic life. Economy and Society, 19(1), 1-31] associated with the historical move. More exactly, what interests us is a double enrolment process. The business world promoters of budgetary control use the rhetorics of social reformers to present budgetary control as a solution to the economic and social problems of their time; conversely, social reformers promote budgetary control as a realistic, efficient tool that can change the world. Ultimately, a degree of alliance is possible around this management tool, although the extent to which the meanings each group attributes to its action are shared may remain unclear. Based on an analysis of the writings of budgetary control promoters of the 1930s and the 1950s, we show the close links between their discourse and the reforming ideas of their time, and how we can trace through this corpus the evolution of this kind of political rationalities [Miller, P., & Rose, N. (1990). Governing economic life. Economy and Society, 19(1), 1-31] associated with governing and managing corporations we call the spirit of capitalism [Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, E. (2005). The new spirit of capitalism. London: Verso (Translation of Le nouvel esprit du capitalisme, Paris: Gallimard, 1999)].

The introduction of French theory into English language accounting research

Purpose - This purpose of this paper is to investigate the introduction of French theory into English language accounting research and to assess the impact of the work of French social theorists on the accounting research domain. Design/methodology/approach - The paper presents a citation analysis of articles appearing in selected English language accounting research journals for a sample of French authors, during the periods from the inception of the journals to mid-2009. In performing this citation analysis, 39 French authors who are well known as social theorists, philosophers, economists or sociologists were included. The accounting research journals chosen for analysis included the top four journals listed in many league tables for accounting research along with several journals that regularly publish research in accounting history or that focus on alternative research paradigms. Findings - The citation analysis identified the following French authors as being the most frequently cited: Michel Foucault, followed by Bruno Latour and Pierre Bourdieu. The citation analysis also identified the English language accounting research journals in which French social theorists have been most often cited. The two most significant journals have been Originality/value - This paper is the first known to provide a comprehensive analysis of the introduction of French theory into English language accounting research.;

How IFRS Contribute to the Financialization of Capitalism

The contribution of IFRS to the process of financialization of capitalism can be analysed from several angles. We first propose two meanings that can be assigned to the concept of financialization: first as a process of morphological transformation of capitalism, and second as a gradual colonisation by specific “financialised” techniques and calculation methods. We then show that in many respects IFRS can be regarded as “financialised” standards. Finally we highlight some contributions of IFRS to the morphological transformation of capitalism (that is changes in distribution of wealth and power). As a result, IFRS can be seen as much financialised as financialising standards.

Disciplining the Neoliberal Bank: Credit Risk Regulation and the Financialization of Loan Management

This paper seeks to contribute to thinking on the role of public authorities in the regulation of economic affairs in the context of neoliberal financialized capitalism. It is based on examination of changes regarding the requirements for credit risks from the Basel I accords (1988) to the Basel II and III accords (2004-2010). The shift on this question in the Basel Accords is much more than a simple tidy-up. The literature shows that the reform of the Basel requirements for credit risk was the product of a neoliberal political agenda carried by lobbies representing market actors. Our study of the instruments used to assess credit risk and to define the associated capital requirements under Basel II and III shows that the regulatory framework effectively delegates management of the security of the financial system to the actors in the system. Yet, our study also stresses that the autonomy won through this move towards self-regulation is associated with the implementation of new types of constraints. In our case, these new constraints are taking the form of an impressive system of monitoring and control of internal risk management practices. This system is then coupled with financial incentives, in a way that has been carefully designed to lead the banks to adopt specific “financialized” practices. Michel Foucault argued in his classes on neoliberalism that neoliberalism requires, not withdrawal of the State as in traditional liberalism, but a transformation of practices by the State, which on the contrary actively intervenes to produce the right conditions for a market, and help markets to emerge and operate whenever possible. Among the necessary conditions for construction of these markets, he also stressed the importance of producing subjects (through the intermediary of biopolitics) able to act in a world made up of markets, and that the form of behaviour expected of these subjects is that of the enterprise, leading to extension of this form to all sorts of actors who used to operate in different ways (nonprofit organizations, salaried individuals, etc). Our case allows to go beyond this analysis and show that when the market agents are enterprises, they too must be subjected to active production and a conformation process, and that it cannot be just any type of enterprise; it too must go through a subjectification process that also brings a range of power techniques into play. The case consequently shows the concurrent development of liberty and discipline for enterprises in neoliberal regimes. It also offers an opportunity for close examination of the nature of the disciplinarization that goes hand in hand with neoliberal financialized capitalism. In this perspective, it especially stresses three intertwined processes: the regulator’s construction of financial incentives, the imposition of working methods and the rise of a bureaucracy of control. Finally, methodologically, this study underlines the value of approaching these issues by an in-depth analysis of the technical aspects of regulatory provisions, since this approach enables us to construct the contrasting image of the changes presented here.