A construção social dos mercados sob a ótica bourdieusiana: uma meta-síntese

Abstract

Scientific development occurred submerged in the idea that the only correct way to produce science would be through the adoption of objectivist approaches, such as those adopted by the epistemology of the natural sciences, regardless of the scientific field. Such misunderstanding led to social theory repeatedly generating theoretical misconceptions and artificial and generic interpretations of reality in the process of investigating various objects, compromising the scientific development of fields such as economics. The abstraction of social aspects in the investigation of economic phenomena has made economic theory increasingly distant from the social sciences and their objects, with the market being one of the most neglected objects. In order to counteract economic orthodoxy, several classical sociologists have developed studies focusing on the social aspects of economic phenomena, such as Marx, Emile Durkheim, and Max Weber. More recently, studies to this end have resurfaced in the context of the so-called New Economic Sociology, through several other authors, among which Pierre Bourdieu stands out. His research has made it possible, in addition to a fierce critique of the ontological and epistemological assumptions of orthodox economics, to construct a rigorous theoretical-methodological framework for the investigation of social phenomena that allow us to recover the forgotten complexity of economic phenomena. However, despite all this potential, the approach is still underutilized, even in an area lacking research. Given this, this research aims to present the Bourdieusian theoretical-methodological approach to market studies, in order to highlight the main idiosyncratic trends and regularities of the Economic Field. To this end, a meta-synthesis of international production using this approach was performed. Eight investigations were identified. Through the analysis, three ways of discussion emerged that allowed the apprehension of general properties of the Economic Field: (i) the relationship between the Economic Field and the State, (ii) the hegemony of Economic Capital and (iii) the symbolic power in the Economic field. In general, the Bureaucratic Field has proved to be one of the main influencers and guides of the Economic Field, both in objective and symbolic terms, which raises questions about the effective autonomy and independence of the field. Economic capital presented itself as the most powerful capital in all the analyzed markets, especially for its ability to manipulate the other capitals of the countryside and to access and co-opt the Bureaucratic Field in the interests of its holders. In its symbolic dimension, the Economic Field appears as an environment of constant dispute for models of representation, classification and division of the world, either among its own agents, or under the influence of the State, these disputes being profoundly determinant in the process of construction and reproduction of markets. Both in the process of grasping the dynamics and social structures that underpin a market, and in understanding and analyzing the disputes and conflicts for power that are latent in this dynamic, Bourdieusian praxiology is a promising theoretical-methodological framework for market studies, when respecting their ontological and epistemological assumptions.