Tag Archives: Espeland

Performances of Value

[Ana Gross avisa del siguiente evento]

Dear Colleagues,

We would like to invite you to attend a public event David Stark is organising to mark the end of his Performances of Value project on the 4th May in London. This was a project hosted at the Centre for Interdisciplinary Methodologies at Warwick University and funded by the Leverhulme Trust. It was aimed at developing an international network of scholars working in the field of valuation studies, with a strong focus placed on discussing the effects that rankings and ratings have in social life.

Please join us in what will be a very lively and interesting evening with interventions from Will Davies (Goldsmiths); Wendy Espeland (Northwestern); Kristian Kreiner (CBS); and Christine Musselin (Sciences-Po) followed by a drink reception.

For more details and to register please follow this linkContinue reading

Advertisements

Making Things Valuable

Making Things ValuableOxford University Press acaba de publicar el libro Making Things Valuable editado por Martin Kornberger, Lise Justesen, Anders Koed Madsen & Jan Mouritsen. El libro incluye capítulos de temas y autores discutidos frecuentemente en este blog. Por ejemplo, el capítulo 1 de Wendy Espeland y Stacy Lom “Noticining Numbers: how quantification changes what we see and what we don’t”; el capítulo 5 de Liliana Doganova y Fabian Muniesa “Capitalization Devices: Business Models and the renewal of markets”; el capítulo 6 de Trine Pallesen “Valuable Assemblages – Or Assembling Values”; o el capítulo 11 de Celia Lury y Noortje Marres “Notes on Objectual Valuation”. El contribuidor de este blog José Ossandón es el autor del capítulo 9 “The enactment of economic things: The objects of insurance”.

 

La introducción al volume está disponible en Continue reading

Seminar Review: Making things valuable – CBS (first part)

[Como parte de nuestra colaboración inter-redes este post es publicado conjuntamente con Charisma-Network]

Photo: Sidsel Nelund

Pricing cell phone numbers in Beirut. Photo: Sidsel Nelund

Last week, I was lucky enough to attend an excellent two-day workshop “Making things valuable” held at the Copenhagen Business School. The final program had eight presenters – Peter Miller, Paulo Quattrone, Wendy Espeland, David Stark, Martha Poon, Lucien Karpik, Celia Lury and Vicent Lépinay – each with an hour for presentation and Q&A. Unsurprisingly, these very rich two days left me thinking about many different things and my thoughts went in many directions. In this post (and hopefully in a second one too), I am going to try and organize what I heard. However, more than giving a full account of the event, I am going to focus mostly on one main issue, which, as expected, was central in at least half of the presentations, namely: quantification in the form of rankings and scores. Considering that the lineup of the workshop included some of the most influential authors of these topics today, in the next paragraphs I am going to use their work to illustrate what I understand is the state of the art in this domain (follow this link for my slightly longer summary of the previous literature), to finish with a short remark about an issue I believe has somehow been left aside: how to stop rankings. Continue reading

Sociologies of Rankings

Breve artículo de José Ossandón para journal online griego: Re-Public cuyo tema puede ser de eventual interés acá….

There is no doubt: rankings are everywhere. We are surrounded by thousands of lists measuring a vast array of variables such as: competitiveness, productivity, quality of life, risk, and even happiness. Some globally famous examples are: Fortune 500, the FICO Score, The Times Higher Education World University Ranking, The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), Global Competitiveness, and the UNDP Human Development Index. Together with the growing relevance of rankings, in the last years there has been a multiplication in the modes of approaching these objects within social sciences and particularly sociology. In the following paragraphs I distinguish six different sociologies of rankings, and to finish, in the last part, I give a brief comment about some of the political consequences connected with each of these levels. Continue reading