The four Visegrad states — Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia (until 1993 Czechoslovakia) and Hungary — form a compact area between Germany and Austria in the west and the states of the former USSR in the east. They are bounded by the Baltic in the north and the Danube river in the south. They are cut by the Sudeten and Carpathian mountain ranges, which divide Poland off from the other states. Poland is an extension of the North European plain and like the latter is drained by rivers that flow from south to north west — the Oder, the Vlatava and the Elbe, the Vistula and the Bug. The Danube is the great exception, flowing from its source eastward, turning through two 90-degree turns to end up in the Black Sea, forming the barrier and often the political frontier between central Europe and the Balkans. Hungary to the east of the Danube is also an open plain. The region is historically and culturally part of western Europe, but its eastern Marches now represents a vital strategic zone between Germany and the core of the European Union to the west and the Russian zone to the east.

Economy and Society

This 1966 paperback edition of a publication which first appeared in 1963 has by now been widely reviewed as a worthy contribution to the sociological study of deviant behavior. Its current appearance as a paperback is a testimonial both to the quality of the work and to the prominence of deviant behavior in this generation. In general the author places deviance in perspective, identifies types of deviant behavior, considers the role of rule makers and enforcers, and some of the problems in studying deviance. In addition, he develops a sequential model of deviance relying on the concept of career, a concept originally developed in studies of occupations. In his study of a particular kind of deviance, the use of marihuana, the author posits and tests systematically an hypothesis about the genesis of marihuana use for pleasure. The hypothesis traces the sequence of changes in individual attitude

Outsiders Studies in the Sociology of Deviance.

What makes organizations so similar? We contend that the engine of rationalization and bureaucratization has moved from the competitive marketplace to the state and the professions. Once a set of organizations emerges as a field, a paradox arises: rational actors make their organizations increasingly similar as they try to change them. We describe three isomorphic processes-coercive, mimetic, and normative—leading to this outcome. We then specify hypotheses about the impact of resource centralization and dependency, goal ambiguity and technical uncertainty, and professionalization and structuration on isomorphic change. Finally, we suggest implications for theories of organizations and social change.

The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields (Chinese Translation)

Culture and Imperialism

Scholars in management and economics widely share the assumption that business firms focus on profits only, while it is the task of the state system to provide public goods. In this view business firms are conceived of as economic actors, and governments and their state agencies are considered the only political actors. We suggest that, under the conditions of globalization, the strict division of labour between private business and nation-state governance does not hold any more. Many business firms have started to assume social and political responsibilities that go beyond legal requirements and fill the regulatory vacuum in global governance. Our review of the literature shows that there are a growing number of publications from various disciplines that propose a politicized concept of corporate social responsibility. We consider the implications of this new perspective for theorizing about the business firm, governance, and democracy.

https://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/9783834931795-c1.pdf?SGWID=0-0-45-1347110-p174325274

The New Political Role of Business in a Globalized World: A Review of a New Perspective on CSR and its Implications for the Firm, Governance, and Democracy

This article explores emerging discursive formations concerning the relationship of business and morality. It suggests that contemporary tendencies to economize public domains and methods of government also dialectically produce tendencies to moralize markets in general and business enterprises in particular. The article invokes the concept of ‘responsibilization’ as means of accounting for the epistemological and practical consequences of such processes. Looking at the underlying ‘market rationality’ of governance, and critically examining the notion of ‘corporate social responsibility’, it concludes that the moralization of markets further sustains, rather than undermining, neo-liberal governmentalities and neo-liberal visions of civil society, citizenship and responsible social action.

The age of responsibilization: on market-embedded morality

While globalization is largely theorized in terms of trans-border flows, this article suggests an exploratory sociological framework for analyzing globalization as consisting of systemic processes of closure and containment. The suggested framework points at the emergence of a global mobility regime that actively seeks to contain social movement both within and across borders. The mobility regime is theorized as premised upon a pervasive “paradigm of suspicion” that conflates the perceived threats of crime, immigration, and terrorism, thus constituting a conceptual blueprint for the organization of global risk-management strategies. The article draws on multiple examples, singling out some elementary forms of the mobility regime, emphasizing the sociological affinity between guarded borders on the one hand and gated communities on the other. In particular, the article aims at theorizing the translation of the paradigm of suspicion into actual technologies of social screening designed to police the mobilit...

Without Borders? Notes on Globalization as a Mobility Regime*

This paper situates the field of action known as “corporate social responsibility” within the theoretical context of global capitalism. I posit that corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a field of action that is shaped through the interplay of popular pressures and the response of corporations to such pressures thereof. Specifically, I analyze this field as consisting of a symbolic struggle over the meaning of the term “social responsibility.” I analyze a set of corporate practices relating to CSR and show how they shape the notion of responsibility in ways that diffuse its radical transformative potential. In particular, I look at various corporate strategies designed to prevent the use of law as means for bringing about greater corporate accountability. I also discuss particular agents that mobilize the CSR field. Specifically, I discuss the establishment of corporate-sponsored and corporate-oriented NGOs and analyze the role they play in structuring the CSR field. I designate such organizations as ...

The De-Radicalization of Corporate Social Responsibility:

Using Alien Tort Claims Act suits against multinational corporations as an immediate context for discussion, this article explores the emerging field of corporate social responsibility. The article argues for an understanding of concrete legal struggles as part of broader competing strategies for regulating corporate obligations to a multitude of stakeholders. By identifying and analyzing the positions of concrete actors who operate in the field, the main thesis of this article is that the field strongly tilts in the direction of voluntary and self-reliant models of corporate responsibility. The article identifies this process as consistent with the privatization of regulative structures in general and with extant modeling of corporate governance in particular, and points at the correlation between these trends and the interests of multinational corporations.

Between self-regulation and the Alien Tort Claims Act: On the contested concept of corporate social responsibility

The image of courts as impartial and independent sources of authority is considered a prerequisite if they are to play a legitimining role. Yet many studies suggest that courts systematically support and uphold state-sponsored policies. I ask how courts can support dominant political interests and at the same time appear impartial. A solution is suggested by looking at highly plblicibdml judicial decisions by Israel's High Court of Justice in which state policies concerning the Israeli occupied territories were overruled. Such cases, while rare, nevertheless reinforce the legitimacy of courts. Consequently, decisions that counter some governmental practices allow courts to confer legitimacy on other and sometimes similar governmental policies. Finally, I place the findings in a eomparative context and outline a possible explanation for the circumstances under which landmark decisions are reached.

Ronen Shamir

Papers

The age of responsibilization: on market-embedded morality

Without Borders? Notes on Globalization as a Mobility Regime*

The De-Radicalization of Corporate Social Responsibility:

Between self-regulation and the Alien Tort Claims Act: On the contested concept of corporate social responsibility

"Landmark Cases" and the Reproduction of Legitimacy: The Case of Israel's High Court of Justice