Tag Archives: Market-design

E&S special issue: Markets for collective concerns and their failures

[Luego de varios años de trabajo, finalmente acaba de salir el número especial en Economy & Society editado por Christian Frankel, José Ossandón y Trine Pallesen. El título del número es “Markets for Collective Concerns and their failures”. ‘Markets for collective concerns’ son mercados que han sido construidos como instrumentos de políticas públicas, mercados de los que se espera solucionen problemas colectivos. Los artículos estudian cómo las fallas de estos mercados, en vez de gatillar una búsqueda por otro tipo de instrumento, han permitido el surgimiento de un nuevo tipo de experto que reclama conocer cómo hacer que mercados que no funcionan funcionen. El gobierno de problemas públicos deviene evaluación, reparación y diseño de mercados. Para los interesados, free e-prints de la introducción acá y del artículo de Ossandón y Ureta acá] 

Publication Cover

The organization of markets for collective concerns and their failures

Christian Frankel, José Ossandón & Trine Pallesen

Problematizing markets: market failures and the government of collective concerns

José Ossandón & Sebastián Ureta

Making an exception: market design and the politics of re-regulation in the French electricity sector

Thomas Reverdy & Daniel Breslau

Carving out a domain for the market: boundary making in European environmental markets

Liliana Doganova & Brice Laurent

On the difficulties of addressing collective concerns through markets: from market devices to accountability devices

Daniel Neyland, Véra Ehrenstein & Sveta Milyaeva

On going the market one better: economic market design and the contradictions of building markets for public purposes

Edward Nik-Khah & Philip Mirowski

The concept of market (Part 2)

[El nombre de esta sección es “artículos en cuotas”. La idea es, como en una novela por entregas, ir subiendo partes de papers a medida que vayan saliendo. El texto abajo es un borrador de un artículo en el que trabajo. Presenté la primera versión en EGOS este año y esto que estoy subiendo acá es una segunda versión, pero aun, borrador y sin edición del inglés. Además de la introducción, el artículo se compondrá de cuatro secciones. Cada parte será una entrega que iré subiendo a medida que tenga las nuevas versiones listas. El texto abajo es la segunda entrega y la primera sección del artículo (ver acá la entrega anterior, la introducción). Como siempre, sugerencias son muy bienvenidas]

The concept of Market

José Ossandón, draft 4/12/2017

Concepts of markets after market design

The following extract is taken from a talk given by the winner of the 2012 Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Memory of Alfred Nobel and renowned market designer Alvin Roth:

‘So, first of all think about market design, because market design is an ancient human activity. But because markets are so pervasive we think them a little bit like language. Languages and markets are both human artifacts. But we don’t think of language as something we can change, but as something we get. I speak to you in English and I have to speak in the same kind of English that you speak, otherwise it wouldn’t work. Often we think of markets on that way too: markets just happen. But, of course, markets are human artifacts and market design is that engineering part of microeconomics, that part that fixes markets when they are broken or make new ones sometimes.’ [i]

Roth presents a constructivist approach. He emphasizes that markets are both, like language, a social product, and like other artifacts, the outcome of purposely applied technical knowledge. This description would easily fit recent sociological accounts of markets; but, it would appear as strange in the context of traditional conceptualizations of markets in economics.

A dominant position in the economic sciences of the second half of the 20th century conceived markets in opposition to organization. While organizations were associated to features such as planning, hierarchy, or centralized decision making; markets were seen as decentralized, spontaneous and even inherently non-designable entities. Continue reading

The concept of market (Part 1)

[El nombre de esta sección es “artículos en cuotas”. La idea es, como en una novela por entregas, ir subiendo partes de papers a medida que vayan saliendo. El texto abajo es un borrador de la introducción de un artículo en el que trabajo. Presenté la primera versión en EGOS este año y esto que estoy subiendo acá es una segunda versión, pero aun, borrador y sin edición del inglés. Además de la introducción, el artículo se compondrá de cuatro partes. Cada parte será una entrega que iré subiendo a medida que tenga las nuevas versiones listas. Como siempre, sugerencias son muy bienvenidas]

The concept of Market

José Ossandón, draft 30/11/2017

Introduction

The emergence of the broad set of practices and techniques grouped under the label of ‘market design’ makes apparent a challenge that has been avoided for too long in organizational and sociological studies of markets. The challenge can be illustrated with the example of school place allocation.

School allocation is a policy instrument increasingly popular among governments and policy makers. It consists in implementing algorithms to match two set of priorities; families’ preferred schools and schools’ available vacancies. School allocation is also one of the most recognized examples of ‘market design’ (Cantillon 2017). Markets designers label situations such as school place allocations, which do not feature some of the basic elements included in traditional social scientific definitions of markets (for instance: money, prices, or the transference of property rights), as market. In this context, social researchers interested in inspecting a situation like school place allocation are pushed to ask themselves a basic question: should the social researcher follow the definitions of markets accepted in their academic fields or they should take the definitions of market designers? In the following pages, I expect to demonstrate that school allocation is not merely a marginal example. It is “an extreme case” (Flyvbjerg 2006) that can be productively used as a provocation to initiate a broader discussion about the concept of market. Continue reading

Mini-artículo: Will the Real Engineers Please Stand Up?

[Estimados amigos/as: lo que sigue es la base de un ensayo en inglés en el que estoy trabajando. Cualquier comentario en español, portugues o inglés es sumamente bienvenido. Abrazos.]

Two months ago, I had the rare opportunity to speak to an audience that is foreign to (most of) us: a room full of natural scientists. The conference that I addressed, BioBricks Foundation 6.0, met at Imperial College, London, to discuss the most recent developments in synthetic biology. The panel in which I participated provided a space to introduce ‘recent’ new developments in science and technology studies to synthetic biologists. I read it as an occasion to talk about the now canonical bread-and-butter of social studies of finance—that is, how economics performs the economy. (I wholeheartedly thank Pablo Schyfter and Jane Calvert for the invitation).

While the contents of my talk were nothing new for the readers of this blog, the experience was particularly stirring in other ways, not the least because of the reactions of the audience to the concept of performativity (in their questions, those who remained in the room to listen to the social scientist sought clarification on how to model and predict what they saw as no more than noisy feedback loops between the abstract descriptions of economics and a detached, yet largely objective real world). Indeed, the greatest reward from participating of the conference came from having been exposed to, even if for a few hours, the awesome metaphors of synthetic biology. Continue reading

Are markets matching Callon and Roth?

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

The last meeting of our “Copenhagen market group”[i] was devoted to an increasingly influential stream within current economics, namely “market design”. The discussion left me with the somehow perplexing puzzle I am trying to unfold in this post: isn’t this type of economics almost too close to the ‘markets as calculative collective devices’[ii] approach developed by Michel Callon and colleagues so influential among us -non-economists market researchers- in the last years? Continue reading