• ©flickr-Dani Lütolf
  
• ©flickr-Dani Lütolf
  

By Jeanne Lazarus, CSO

Money is part of every sphere of modern life. The financial crisis of 2008 affected economic and social situations in many countries, and has been analysed by many researchers, including economists. However, they are not the only ones: sociologists have also looked into this topic, considering not only its financial aspects, but other dimensions too. In the wake of this crisis, Damien de Blic, political scientist at Paris 8, and Jeanne Lazarus, sociologist and CNRS research fellow at the Sciences Po Centre for the Sociology of Organisations, felt the need to re-write and republish ‘Sociologie de l’argent’ (Sociology of money), first published in 2007.
No-holds-barred interview with Jeanne Lazarus.

In 2021, you are republishing your book, after a thorough revision. You describe the 2008 subprime crisis as a turning point, notably in the academic world. What changes have you observed?

Jeanne Lazarus: The subprime crisis obviously had a number of severe economic and social effects, but it also had repercussions in the world of academia. Although works analysing finance and money dates back well before 2008 – the first edition of our book was published in 2007 – the subprime crisis attracted much more attention to these topics. The number of research projects on financial subjects increased significantly, as well as interest in sociological topics, such as credit or household spending. For instance, explaining the credit choices of American families implies considering not only the credit market, but also state regulations, the employment market, family relations, investment models, the place of debt in a life cycle, etc. Similarly, the crisis cannot be understood without bearing in mind the all-important relationships of class, gender and race.

What is the sociology of money? How can such a broad, multidimensional topic be approached? As well as economic and social aspects, there are moral and religious dimensions to money too…

People are queuing for service in Department of Sberbank of Russia, 2013 in Moscow © Pavel L Shutterstock

J.L: Yes, the sociology of money is a potentially infinite field since money is present almost everywhere⁽¹⁾ . We try to consider all the dimensions of social life that participate in the landscape in which monetary practices evolve. Our ambition is to bring money-related issues to the attention of as many people as possible, including sociologists, regardless of their fields of study. Money is present in one way or another in so many areas ranging from families to work, school, gender, childhood, the State, and so on. This is why we suggest that it is a social institution, i.e. it is associated with norms and values that are imposed upon those who use it. Even if these norms are violated at times, they are well known to the individuals who interact. A specific difficulty in this field of sociology is that it deals with a subject that carries a particularly heavy moral weight.

How can these difficulties be overcome?

J.L.: The ‘axiological neutrality’ requirement – the rule that demands that sociologists keep their own personal judgements from influencing their work – is particularly difficult to reach in this field. The solution that we have found is to expose the morality of money, to establish its genealogy and to attempt to understand in which cases our opinions on money are formed.
The other major challenge lies in the investigation: since money is present in almost every sphere of social life, where should we begin? Where should we be looking, and at what? Sociologists have deployed their skills to examine all forms of money and particularly the social relationships that it creates and transforms. This book presents various approaches in a research field that began with the very first sociologists, and is continuously improving.

In terms of the French attitude to money, you prefer the term ‘embarrassment’ to ‘taboo’. How does our position compare with that of other European countries and the USA, where money is freely discussed?

J.L.: We think that there are two misconceptions: the first is that the French do not talk about money and the second, that people elsewhere, notably in the USA, talk about it more openly. These notions are not upheld by our research. As someone who works on money, I can guarantee that the topic is omnipresent! Just switch on the radio or the TV, open a journal or a magazine, and you will find countless mentions of money, pay, property, etc., even in France. The question of rich and poor people is common enough in political discussions. From François Hollande who claimed not to like the rich in 2006, to Emmanuel Macron, who has been described as the ‘President of the rich’, like his ante-predecessor, Nicolas Sarkozy, etc. Similarly, social movements increasingly bring money issues into the spotlight.
Conversely, money is not discussed all that easily elsewhere. This has been proved by various studies on money in the USA, such as the work by Caitlin Zaloom, professor at New York University, on financing higher education⁽²⁾, which reveals that parents do not tell their children everything. The book Uneasy Street⁽³⁾. , by journalist Rachel Sherman, describes the super-rich in New York who try to hide their wealth ⁽⁴⁾

Cover of a BNCI brochure aimed at married women, circa 1960 – BNP Paribas historical archives

We use ‘embarrassment’ rather than ‘taboo’ to indicate that money is a subject of discussion that requires special care. Every society has its own ways of talking about money, but everywhere the topic is not addressed in the same manner to everyone and not all aspects are discussed. Boundaries indicate the place of money in the conception of society. For a long time in France, people were only looking at social inequalities based on academic and professional success. However, the increase in monetary inequalities, job insecurity and the erosion of certain welfare measures have led to a change of perceptions in society and economic boundaries have moved over the past few decades. For years, French sociology ignored the inequalities of economic capital, preferring to focus its research on the inequalities of cultural capital. Although the contribution of such research has not been abandoned, researchers are now showing increasing interest in economic capital.

Will the growing use of electronic payment methods and the appearance of new currencies (cryptocurrency, bitcoin, etc.) lead to the demise of cash?

© Shutterstock

J.L:

The disappearance of cash has been predicted for a number of years: multiple innovations have accelerated the development of electronic payments, improving their security and reducing their cost. The Covid health crisis further boosted their use and caused a decline in cash payments. However, cash continues to circulate massively and the countries that were planning to go cashless are changing their minds. The most famous example is that of Sweden. A few years ago, the Swedish government was considering going cashless and yet a law was enacted in January 2020 to ensure that it would remain possible to use cash to avoid the social exclusion of seniors, children and people with disabilities. In the Euro zone⁽⁵⁾, cash is far from disappearing. In 2019, it was still used for 73% of payments in shops and the number of bank notes in circulation continues to rise – often for use as a means of storing value (i.e. to be kept at home or in a safe) rather than a means of payment.

You show how inequalities develop between the ‘ultra-rich’, who benefit from the financialization of the economy and the declining protection provided by the welfare state, and the increasingly large population of poor people who face great difficulties. How is a threshold of wealth defined?

Source: Rapport Oxfam The Inequality Virus Bringing together a world torn apart by coronavirus through a fair, just and sustainable economy, January 2021

J.L : The very possibility of defining a wealth threshold is the subject of heated debate because, of course, it is not just a technical matter, but a question of how society and its structure are represented. One option is to mirror the wealth threshold to the poverty threshold⁽⁶⁾. The poverty threshold is defined as half (or sometimes 60%) of the median income and the wealth threshold could therefore correspond to twice the median income. The French observatory of inequalities thus proposed the figure of €3,470 per month in France in 2020, considering 5 million people to be wealthy.

However, this calculation is not satisfactory for various reasons: like poverty, wealth has many dimensions and the monetary threshold lacks substance. Furthermore, measuring income without considering capital neglect one essential element of what constitutes wealth. But most importantly, wealth develops exponentially. In statistical terms, we say that wealth has a wide dispersion: it may never stop. A family living comfortably and a billionaire at the head of an industrial empire might be called rich using such thresholds, but their social experiences and the role they play in the inequalities generated are hardly the same. Wealth is a ‘new’ challenge for sociology, qualitatively and quantitatively. Various projects are currently in progress to measure or define wealth and to consider its origins, its reproduction, its unequal distribution in terms of social class, geography, gender and even age. ‘Super rich’ has become a buzzword used by both sociology books and social movements. The return of massive wealth, reminiscent of the end of the 19th century, is one of today’s major political topics.

Interview by Samia Ben, Centre de sociologie des organisations

 Read COGITO

• Riyadh – King Saud University – University Grand Mosque. © Stephen Downes; CC BY
  
• Riyadh – King Saud University – University Grand Mosque. © Stephen Downes; CC BY
  

Elsa Bedos, Arabic language specialist and expert in the challenges of evaluating education and research, wrote her thesis on the implementation of processes to develop and certify university courses in Saudi Arabia. Her work was awarded the prestigious Louis Cros prize by the French academy of moral and political sciences in 2020. Interview.

Your graduate research seeks to understand how and why Saudi Arabia implemented a higher education evaluation policy. Why did you pick this topic?

Elsa Bedos: My main goal was that this research work would enable me to progress professionally in my specialist field, which is the administration of higher education and research. I had previously worked for the research and higher education evaluation agency to evaluate universities in France. I then have training courses in Arabic language and civilisation. I have made several trips to the Arab world, some for long periods, such as to Saudi Arabia, for my master of Research degree in comparative sociology. I particularly appreciated one of the professors of my master’s course – Christine Musselin, higher education sociologist – for her class on survey methodology. I liked how she combined high standards with benevolence and I knew that I would be needing guidance throughout my thesis. While talking to her, I discovered the existence of the Saudi Arabian National Commission for Academic Assessment and Accreditation – NCAAA. This was the starting point for my thesis project, which analyses the creation of this commission and its supervisory policy.

This policy fits with a global movement and feeds upon a range of foreign models and tools. Was there a national discussion – and/or within the establishments themselves – about these sources of inspiration? Were these models adapted to the Saudi culture?

Riyadh – King Saud University – University Grand Mosque. © Stephen Downes; CC BY-NC 2.0, via Flickr

E.B.: In the university where I observed the implementation of this scheme, I showed how it had transformed the administrative structure by creating a new hierarchy based on quality, quality agents and the introduction of teaching procedures. I also noted several simultaneous and intertwined forms of bureaucratisation: rational legal (Weber’s bureaucracy⁽¹⁾), managerial (New Public Management – NPM) and rationalised⁽²⁾. The introduction of assessment and accreditation tools, inspired by NPM, was described by the quality agents as being a break away from the former bureaucratic system. In fact, these tools, and the accompanying work practices, were an extension of the bureaucratic process, characterised by an increase in written documents and procedures. The quality agents imposed the formal task of writing dossiers and reports.
These processes were supposed to transform the teachers’ pedagogical approach and the university education provided. I proposed to investigate and qualify the Saudi regime based on these practices, using this control as the subject of study. I analysed quality as being related to the way in which practises and discourse can combine elements of both democratic and authoritarian governments at the same time. NPM is primarily a North American and European doctrine; various studies conducted in democratic contexts have shown that the spread of formal control reduces the margins for freedom, and particularly academic freedom. My work shows that in an authoritarian context, which implements political and moral control focussed on individual people and their thoughts, the spread of NPM actually helped to reduce political and moral control. This case finally provides an enlightening overview of public action, the entanglement between instrumental reform, bureaucratisation and methods of government.E.B.: Saudi universities have been international institutions for a long time, through their professors, who are mostly non-Saudis originating from and having been trained in other countries, along with Saudis who have been educated abroad, generally in English-speaking countries (the USA, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, etc.). When the Saudi assessment and accreditation policy was invented in the early 2010s, the academics directing the NCAAA asked consultants from Australia, the USA, Great Britain to study and compare foreign systems.
This use of international expertise and international comparison is not specific to Saudi higher education. It is actually relatively common in Saudi Arabia’s public administrations. Public policies are often planned and developed with the support of international consultants or foreign administrations. In fact, I observed and even collaborated in the development of the research and technology plan (maarifah). In the universities assessed, the people I interviewed were aware of having a process inspired by foreign models imposed upon them. Some regretted the massive importation without adaptation to the Saudi situation, the absence of a gradual, incremental approach to enable the universities to adapt to the new practices and work methods resulting from the assessment. At the time, NCAAA thus became trapped by its own, overly complex, accreditation process, due to its remoteness from the realities of Saudi universities: it was impossible to issue accreditation. This state of affairs had been imported by Saudi ‘couriers’, who were accustomed to participating in international congresses and working with networks of quality assurance technicians, who used the same vocabulary and shared the same beliefs concerning the problem-solving ability of certain public action tools.

© 2021 British Council

One such tool, learning outcomes, had been particularly deeply integrated because it is supposed to add value to the qualification acquired, guaranteeing the employability of the students and thus reducing the unemployment rates of young Saudis. This importation was due to the involvement of certain key players, such as the British Council in Saudi Arabia, and the UK’s Quality Assurance Agency, with which the NCAAA managers were in regular contact. To resolve the problem of most Saudi universities failing to get accreditation, NCAAA became highly creative, never actually reaching the stage of delivering accreditation. Its managers opted to extend the process upstream, notably through increasingly complex eligibility conditions, and by reorienting its activity to proposing training for the universities to get them used to its assessment-accreditation methods.

One of the challenges was to improve the employability of young Saudis. Was this goal achieved?

E.B.: That is one of the paradoxes of this policy. Those who developed it made a big deal of publicising the goal of improving the higher education system to make Saudi graduates more employable. However, it never once contacted the companies or other public authorities responsible for training people for professional/vocational careers, such as the institution charged with developing non-academic training courses leading to professional qualifications. This situation revealed certain perimeter conflicts between ministries and between administrative authorities. The NCAAA wanted to include within its scope all the training qualifications issued whether they were academic or professional, but it failed to do so.

This reform, launched two years after the Twin Towers attack, also had a number of moral goals. What were they and what did they achieve?

E.B.: I would not use the term moral goals, although it is relevant to recall the context of the discussions on the Saudi higher education reform. This aspect was quickly evacuated and I would say it was more of a desire to respond to what was perceived by Saudi leaders as a political risk of destabilisation, even overturning of the regime, which resulted from accusations, mainly from the USA and Europe and, in a second phase, from Saudi Arabia. The Saudi education system was seen as a ‘public problem’ after the attacks perpetrated in the US in September 2001 (almost all those involved in these terrorist attacks were of Saudi nationality): the system was producing terrorists.

Al-Mahala | King Khalid University. © Abdulaziz Asiri, own work, CC BY-SA 3.0

Saudi government managed, through what is called the sixth ‘national dialogue’, to technicise the problem of the Saudi education system, sliding it from the register of moral values (fighting extremism, developing tolerance) towards more technical and less symbolic aspects: curricula, development of teaching technologies, qualifications and measuring teacher performance, quality assessment. The ‘national dialogue’ provided a public platform to work on ‘relabelling’ Saudi Arabia’s education problem. It went from being a quality problem, expressed in terms of ideological deviance (‘wahhabisme’), to becoming a technical problem. This technicisation was also supported by expert knowledge and linguistic tools: performance, assessment, indicators, ‘good practices’, learning outcomes, quality assurance, benchmarking, etc. With this shift, the operation pacified the discussions, enabling the reorientation of uncertainties – brought into the spotlight by the international crisis that followed the September 11 attacks – and focussing on the quality of the higher education system. The meeting with NCAAA was based on the notion of quality, and assessment and accreditation were the two pillars of this quality. NCAAA set itself up as a quality ‘specialist’, proposing a method for quality assurance.

Although, generally speaking, this type of reform limits academic freedom by multiplying the tools of control, in this case, you show that the ‘ideological’ constraints weighing upon the teachers have actually been reduced. How do you explain this?

E.B.: In the university where I observed the implementation of this scheme, I showed how it had transformed the administrative structure by creating a new hierarchy based on quality, quality agents and the introduction of teaching procedures. I also noted several simultaneous and intertwined forms of bureaucratisation: rational legal (Weber’s bureaucracy), managerial (New Public Management – NPM) and rationalised. The introduction of assessment and accreditation tools, inspired by NPM, was described by the quality agents as being a break away from the former bureaucratic system. In fact, these tools, and the accompanying work practices, were an extension of the bureaucratic process, characterised by an increase in written documents and procedures. The quality agents imposed the formal task of writing dossiers and reports. These processes were supposed to transform the teachers’ pedagogical approach and the university education provided. I proposed to investigate and qualify the Saudi regime based on these practices, using this control as the subject of study. I analysed quality as being related to the way in which practises and discourse can combine elements of both democratic and authoritarian governments at the same time.

© Shutterstock

NPM is primarily a North American and European doctrine; various studies conducted in democratic contexts have shown that the spread of formal control reduces the margins for freedom, and particularly academic freedom. My work shows that in an authoritarian context, which implements political and moral control focussed on individual people and their thoughts, the spread of NPM actually helped to reduce political and moral control. This case finally provides an enlightening overview of public action, the entanglement between instrumental reform, bureaucratisation and methods of government.

However, on the administrative side, these reforms had quite different effects…

E.B.: Indeed. Being concerned with organisational transformations, I observed that the quality agents used the reform for professional promotion purposes, and showed how they constituted a ‘technical legal authority’. By identifying a number of profiles and a multitude of strategies, I revealed the heterogeneity of the quality chain. Academics from Saudi Arabia thus deploy similar action logic, follow similar professional trajectories and use their interknowledge. Non-Saudi academics, on the other hand, develop professional survival strategies. All of them, however, combine academic, administrative and managerial skills. This hybridisation is the central resource of the quality agents in their quest for power within.

Entrée principale de l’université Mohamed bin Saoud. Source : Facebook de l’université

Were the people you interviewed open and involved?

E.B.: Overall, I was well received. I turned up without making prior contact. Although this is a somewhat uncomfortable situation, experience told me that I would find people to talk to. To start with, you have to meet 2 or 3 people to serve as intermediaries and mediators for the people that you really want to interview. I was therefore put in touch with correspondents at the Saudi assessment and accreditation commission, as well as in several universities of different sizes and with different statuses, some of which played a key role in my networking operation. Nevertheless, there was one moment when I felt quite isolated: the president of the National Commission for Academic Assessment and Accreditation asked me to stop doing interviews and just watch people working. The trust-based relationship was broken after an interview with one of its employees. I had actually thought the interview had actually gone quite well. She had given me lots of interesting material. Luckily, I had already carried out enough interviews when this incident happened. In the end, this obstacle was fortunate, because it forced me to consider the entire process, from the origin of the public policy to its implementation.

As a woman, did you feel that you were taken as seriously as a research interviewer should be?

A group of women Saudi returnees wait for their turn to disembark, ©UNICEF Ethiopia/2013/Ayenefemale

E.B.: Male/female segregation is institutionalised in the universities where I conducted my survey, resulting in areas being reserved for one gender or another (one campus for women and one campus for men). For me personally, the segregation rules were applied more or less strictly. Often, it was not until I reached the interview room that I found out whether I was going to be meeting men, women or both. Although gender segregation is institutionalised in public areas once the rules have been defined, there is room for manoeuvre. Saudi intermediaries provided me with access to areas totally reserved for men, male academics accepted to breach the gender segregation rule by meeting me in places where the people involved felt that they could deviate from this norm: the reception areas of large, international hotels, for example, and the university’s medical college, where I spent the most time. The uncertainty in which I found myself also became an opportunity, materialising the possibility of bypassing the rules. After analysis, these experiences revealed sociological mechanisms: the composition of hierarchies applied to nationalities, university grades and professions.
The Western academics that I met thus behaved as if they were not totally bound by the same rules as those imposed on Saudi nationals and other foreigners. They found this transgression normal, both for themselves and for me. The range of reactions to my requests with regard to the segregation rule and its transgression was broader among Non-Western male foreign nationals (Arab or Asian). This not only reflects the hierarchy of nationalities, but also the professional status and political capital of the person that had referred me. It reveals the extent of the interpretation margin surrounding the rules and their transgression, which also explains the unexpected situations that I encountered. All Saudis, both academics and civil servants, agreed to meet me, even in workplaces where no women were present. My status as a Westerner and a researcher helped to build a positive image of Saudi Arabia that was able to bypass the segregation rule to enable a woman to do her job. There was also an attempt to influence my analysis of Saudi society by countering my supposed biases. They were thus trying to convince the ‘West’ of the existence of a Saudi Arabia that is open to discussion and in its way of dealing with women. These experiences show the wide range of possible situations and interpretations of this rule, which is still presented so uncompromisingly, both in Saudi Arabia and abroad. They recall the principle, already highlighted by Durkheim that violation of the rule does not necessarily result in sanctions and that exemption from a rule is perfectly normal. They also show that respecting or transgressing the rule expresses individual strategies, enshrined in socio-political mechanisms that are larger than the rule itself.

Read COGITO

Propos recueillis par Hélène Naudet, direction scientifique

Elsa Bedos, associate researcher at the Centre for the Sociology of Organisations (CSO), is also responsible for monitoring scientific activities in the Scientific Direction of Sciences Po and is helping to develop the research dimension of CIVICA – a European alliance of eight universities.

DÉBAT DU VENDREDI 18 JUIN 2021 DE 12H30 À 14H SUR ZOOM

Discussion autour de l'ouvrage " Faut-il légaliser le cannabis ? " de Renaud Colson et Henri Bergeron.

Le consensus qui a longtemps prévalu sur la prohibition du cannabis a disparu. L’usage de ce produit est désormais toléré dans de nombreux pays et plusieurs Etats en ont légalisé la production et la distribution à des fins récréatives. Ce n’est pas le cas de la France où la consommation et les trafics de cannabis font l’objet, depuis une vingtaine d’années, d’une réponse pénale de plus en plus vigoureuse. Le niveau d’usage demeure pourtant très élevé, notamment chez les jeunes, et l’interdit légal s’accompagne de nombreux effets pervers, en particulier la création d’un vaste marché criminel et sa violence associée, la circulation de produits frelatés et les conséquences sanitaires qui lui sont liées, et la marginalisation des consommateurs.

Faute de distinguer entre les effets délétères du cannabis et les conséquences négatives de son interdiction, le risque est que la prohibition se renforce de ses propres échecs à la manière d’une prophétie autoréalisatrice. Le débat est d’autant plus difficile à mener qu’il est techniquement complexe et ne se résume pas à l’alternative simpliste entre interdiction absolue et liberté sans limite dans laquelle on veut trop souvent l’enfermer. Il convient de prendre la mesure des connaissances scientifiques acquises sur le sujet afin d’évaluer le droit en vigueur de la manière la plus neutre possible, et de réfléchir aux conditions de sa réforme. 

Les invités : 

Evènement organisé en partenariat avec le laboratoire Droit et Changement Social - UMR CNRS

Débat DU jeudi 20 mai 2021 de 12h30 à 14h

Discussion autour de l'ouvrage "Sociologie de l'argent" de Damien de Blic et Jeanne Lazarus. 

L’argent est présent dans toutes les sphères de la vie moderne. Il conditionne l’accès aux biens matériels les plus essentiels et définit en grande partie les hiérarchies sociales. Cette nouvelle édition, largement remaniée, montre la place nouvelle qu’a prise l’argent dans les enjeux politiques et sociaux. La crise des subprimes de 2008 ainsi que l’accumulation massive d’argent par ceux que l’on nomme désormais les « ultrariches » ont récemment transformé notre regard sur l’argent. Sa centralité est plus que jamais l’objet d’interrogations collectives et de revendications.
Comment l’argent est-il devenu une source tout à la fois d’aliénation et de libération ? Pourquoi fait-il l’objet de condamnations morales récurrentes ? Les comportements face à l’argent diffèrent-ils selon les groupes sociaux ? selon le genre ? Comment circule-t-il au sein de la famille ? Quelles sont les conséquences de sa dématérialisation ? Telles sont quelques-unes des questions auxquelles propose de répondre une approche sociologique de l’argent.

Pour en débattre : 

Damien de Blic, Maître de conférences en science politique à l’Université Paris 8 et co-auteur de l'ouvrage

Nicolas Duvoux, Professeur à l’Université Paris 8 

Bernard Horenbeek, Président du directoire de la Nef, finance éthique

Jeanne Lazarus, Chargée de recherche CNRS, sociologue au CSO et co-auteure de l'ouvrage

Hélène Périvier, Directrice du Programme de recherche et d’enseignement des savoirs sur le genre (PRESAGE) de Sciences Po

Modérateur : Xavier Molénat, Rédacteur en chef adjoint d'Alternatives Economiques

La séance du Département de sociologie de Sciences Po, organisée par le CEE, accueille Tommaso Vitale, Associate Professor de sociologie à Sciences Po et directeur scientifique du master Governing the Large Metropolis.

Son intervention s'intitule : 
How Romanian Roma obtain social support in France? Beyond representation of homophily and network closure. Preliminary results of a mixed-method research.

Abstract : 

In this seminar, we will discuss some preliminary results of research on the sociology of Roma migrations, and issues related to sociability, Roma immigrants inclusion in the local urban setting, forms of social support. Whether presented as 'ethnic solidarity' or 'ethnic segregation' the idea that migrants' social world is dominated by tightly-knit, homogeneous, and supportive networks of kin and co-ethnics is common in scholarly and public discourse around migration, particularly for minorities with a history of marginalization, segregation, and stigmatization. We discuss this idea mobilising using data from the first survey of personal networks and social support of Romanian Roma migrants in France. Analyzing egocentric network data on Romanian Roma migrants in France, we will discuss "structures" of "personal communities", and then analyse issues and dimensions of social support, so to say who is contacted to ask for help and support. We will distinguish and discuss individual, relational, and contextual factors associated with the provision of support.

The main scope of the class is to see to have analytical and conceptual tools to discuss the relationship between contexts of strong marginalization and stigmatization and ties that bind. The hypotheses of ethnic solidarity, sociodemographic homophily, and network closure are inadequate to explain the way migrants obtain social support. We will introduce and discuss some of the main findings in the sociology of ethnic minorities, and notably, the concept of "networked individualism" in which autonomous individuals strategically maintain diverse and far-flung networks, combine bonding and bridging social capital, and mobilize different social ties for different, specialized types of support.

Le 28 mai, l'axe de recherche "Action publique et transformations de l'Etat" organise une séance en invitant Renaud Epstein, maitre de conférences en science politique dont le titre de son intervention est :

Aux frontières de l’Etat : labels et trophées territoriaux

Résumé :

Instruments honorifiques par lesquels l’Etat distingue des villes jugées exceptionnelles ou exemplaires, les trophées, labels et autres titres de « capitale de… » se multiplient dans les politiques territoriales. En accordant ces distinctions, l’Etat délimite des frontières qui ne sont pas que symboliques. Car les distinctions territoriales –et plus encore leur accumulation– donnent aux villes lauréates accès à des clubs au sein desquels circulent diverses ressources. L’examen de ces instruments fournit donc un éclairage sur les transformations de l’Etat, sous le double angle des rapports centre/périphérie et des frontières.

Ce séminaire a lieu le vendredi de 10h à 12h en distanciel. 

Si vous souhaitez y assister, merci de contacter Samia Ben.

La prochaine séance du séminaire "Enseignement supérieur et recherche" est programmée le lundi 21 juin de 12h30 à 14h.

Kathia Serrano Velarde, Professeur de sociologie politique à l'université de Heidelberg, présentera une communication intitulée : 
How do academic organizations select candidates?

Le séminaire "Enseignement supérieur et recherche" de Sciences Po est co-organisé par le CSO (sous la co-responsabilité de Jérôme Aust et Clémentine Gozlan) et par le RESUP (Réseau d’étude sur l’Enseignement Supérieur).

Formulaire d'inscription 

Contacts : Jérôme Aust et Clémentine Gozlan

Le 21 mai, le séminaire doctoral laisse place à une séance organisée par l'axe de recherche "Savoirs, science et expertise".

Intervention de Sylvain Parasie, professeur de sociologie à Sciences Po :
Les données peuvent-elles réconcilier journalisme et sciences sociales ? Circulation des savoirs et tensions épistémiques dans le journalisme de données.

Ce séminaire a lieu le vendredi de 10h à 12h. En raison des conditions sanitaires actuelles, il se tient en distanciel. 

Si vous souhaitez y assister, merci de contacter Samia Ben.

Intervention de Vincent Himmer, doctorant au CSO
Faire valoir le social en y mettant les formes. L’économie sociale face à la formalisation.

FacSem - 22 avril de 12h30 à 14h00

La direction scientifique de Sciences Po vous invite au FacSem de Philipp BRANDT, Assistant Professor au CSO.

Il y présentera ses travaux autour du thème "Data science’s beginnings: an epistemological hole, the digital age, and some reflexive creativity".

Son exposé sera discuté par Jen SCHRADIE, Assistant Professor à l'OSC, Sciences Po.

Ce FacSem est organisé à distance de 12h30 à 14h00.

Pour y assister, veuillez vous inscrire auprès de marina.abelskaiagraziani@sciencespo.fr

La prochaine séance du séminaire "Enseignement supérieur et recherche" est programmée le mardi 6 avril de 12h30 à 14h.

Clémentine Gozlan, Maîtresse de conférences à l'Université Versailles St Quentin, membre du laboratoire Printemps et chercheure associée au CSO, présentera une communication intitulée :

Le séminaire "Enseignement supérieur et recherche" de Sciences Po est co-organisé par le CSO (sous la co-responsabilité de Jérôme Aust et Clémentine Gozlan) et par le RESUP (Réseau d’étude sur l’Enseignement Supérieur).

Lien pour se connecter au séminaire :
https://sciencespo.zoom.us/j/4755867036

Contacts : Jérôme Aust et Clémentine Gozlan

La journée d’étude « Coopérer en contexte patrimonial » propose de faire retour sur deux chantiers du musée du Louvre ayant fait l’objet d’une recherche en sociologie filmée. Le premier, engagé en 2016, est un projet d’échange de compétences : il s’agissait pour une petite équipe du musée du Louvre de se rendre à Sarajevo afin de transmettre aux professionnels du musée national de Bosnie-Herzégovine leur expertise concernant l’inventaire, le récolement et la conservation préventive. Le second est le chantier d’entretien du grand salon des appartements Napoléon III qui a requis la fermeture des lieux au public pendant quatre mois en 2017.

Ces deux opérations très singulières mettent au jour des questions qui intéressent les professionnels du patrimoine et les chercheurs : Comment naît un projet et comment évoluent ses contours ? A quelles conditions la coopération entre personnes de mondes professionnels, de statuts d’emploi et éventuellement de pays différents est-elle possible ? Quels sont les effets de la singularité de l’établissement « musée du Louvre » dans le paysage patrimonial sur la conduite de projets et sur les parcours des participants ?

En partant des images captées sur les lieux même de la coopération, et en offrant des mises en perspective par le biais d’autres travaux sociologiques, cette journée d’étude sera l’occasion de réfléchir à la spécificité du travail en contexte patrimonial et aux dynamiques professionnelles et organisationnelles inhérentes à la réalisation de projets engageant des coopérations nombreuses et complexes.

• Consulter le programme

• Inscription gratuite et obligatoire : https://forms.gle/HGqsFrBcsGhTpAYB6
  Cette journée d’étude se tiendra en visioconférence, via zoom.

• Organisatrices :
  Léonie Hénaut, chargée de recherche au CNRS, Sciences Po-CSO
  Anne Krebs, cheffe de service adjointe, direction de la recherche et des collections, musée du Louvre
  Jasmina Stevanovic, chargée d’études au DEPS-Doc, Ministère de la culture.

Le 2 avril, le séminaire doctoral laisse place à une séance organisée par l'axe de recherche "Droit, normes et régulations".

Intervention de Julien Larregue, Université de Copenhague :
Les usages profanes de la biologie par les acteurs du monde judiciaire

La finalité de cette séance est de favoriser les échanges entre les chercheurs et les doctorants du laboratoire autour des différents axes de recherche du CSO.

Ce séminaire a lieu le vendredi, au CSO (19 rue Amélie, 75007 Paris), de 10h à 12h. En raison des conditions sanitaires actuelles, il se tient en distanciel. 

Si vous souhaitez y assister, merci de contacter Samia Ben.

En savoir plus sur le programme doctoral

Servane Gueben-Veniere et Anne Moyal rejoignent le projet ANR intitulé Organisations en crises (CrisOrg) dirigé par Olivier Borraz accompagné par un consortium de sept autres chercheurs, dont Henri Bergeron, Patrick Castel, Renaud Crespin, Etienne Nouguez pour le CSO.
Cette recherche entend étudier à l’échelon national, local et au sein du système de soins la réaction de différentes organisations à la pandémie de Covid-19.

Diplomée d'un doctorat de géographie obtenu à l'Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, Servane Gueben-Veniere a mené au LATTS (LAboratoire Techniques Territoires et Sociétés) des recherches en post-doctorat sur l'anticipation en situation de crise et sur la gestion des crises de grande ampleur.

Doctorante au CSO et au LIEPP, Anne Moyal vient de soutenir une thèse de sociologie sur les professionnels libéraux de soins primaires en Maisons de Santé Pluriprofessionnelles en France sous la direction d'Henri Bergeron. 

En savoir plus

Voir la fiche descriptive du projet Organisations en crises (CrisOrg)

Intervention de Mallory Hope, doctorante de Yale University invitée au CSO :
La “Grande Peur” des marchés financiers au 18e siècle. La guerre et son impact sur le marché d’assurances maritimes à Marseille, 1755-1756.

Après la parution de Priceless Markets (2001)et Dark Matter Credit (2019), écrits par les co-auteurs Hoffman, Postel-Vinay, et Rosenthal, les historiens ont commencé à apprécier que les notaires français de l’Ancien Régime jouaient le rôle essentiel du courtier dans le marché de crédit immobilier. En l’absence des banques, ce marché irrigué par l'intermédiation des notaires était capable de mobiliser d'énormes capitaux. 

À Marseille du 17e jusqu’aux premières décennies du 19e siècle, les notaires avaient un rôle charnière dans le marché d’assurances maritimes également. Ils ont laissé une archive énorme d’un estimé 200.000 à 250.000 polices d’assurance sur les navires envoyés des ports d’Europe au Levant, aux colonies antillaises, et aux autres comptoirs fréquentés par les marchands qui ont choisi de s’assurer à Marseille. Cette archive, presque ignorée par les historiens, forme la base de mes recherches doctorales. Je mène une étude quantitative de ces polices d’assurances, cherchant surtout à comprendre comment les acteurs du marché (notaires, négociants, et assureurs) évaluaient les risques du transport maritime et du négoce, et par quelles logiques ils quantifiaient ces risques dans un seul chiffre : la prime d’assurance.

Gwenaële Rot, Professeure des universités de Sciences Po au CSO et François Vatin, Professeur de sociologie à l'Université Paris-Nanterre publient un ouvrage collectif L'esthétique des 30 glorieuses aux éditions Illustria.

Cet ouvrage d'art fait suite au colloque de Cerisy qui s'est tenu en juin 2019.

Présentation 

On considère avec nostalgie les Trente Glorieuses comme si, dans les années 1945-1975, avait régné l'abondance économique, alors qu'il fallait d'abord reconstruire un pays en ruine, mais on dénigre son bilan idéologique et culturel, dominé par une croyance illusoire au progrès. Pollution, urbanisme sans âme, matières plastiques imputrescibles, tels seraient les seuls legs de ce temps d'inconscience. Aussi, l'architecture et l'art monumental des Trente Glorieuses, encore mal-aimés, ont subi beaucoup de destructions et commencent à peine à être patrimonialisés.
Or, comme le montrent les études réunies ici, en dépit de l'urgence de la reconstruction, on a accordé à cette époque une grande importance aux questions esthétiques. On faisait confiance aux nouveaux moyens techniques pour faire du beau moins cher à destination du plus grand nombre.
Esthétique fonctionnelle et démocratisation artistique sont étroitement liées. On comprend dès lors le rôle central de l'industrie dans les représentations de cette époque. Contre l'opposition romantique du beau et de l'utile, il fallait réinstaller le monde industriel dans les valeurs humaines. Les usines, aussi, devaient être belles comme fonctionnelles et constituer un objet d'intérêt pour l'art. La démocratisation du beau exigeait qu'il s'impose dans les lieux de travail.
Inversement, l'expérience industrielle de la simplicité, de la cohérence, pouvait nourrir l'inspiration artistique.
Réunissant vingt-quatre spécialistes qui croisent leurs multiples terrains, cet ouvrage vise, non à défendre l'esthétique des Trente Glorieuses, mais à la restituer dans sa complexité. Il invite le lecteur à regarder un peu différemment un passé trop proche pour qu'on puisse encore pleinement l'estimer.

En savoir plus

Voir le flyer 

 La direction scientifique de Sciences Po vous invite au FacSem d’Émilie Biland-Curinier, professeure des universités, chercheuse au CSO.

Elle y présentera ses travaux autour du thème "Families Encounter the Law. How Judicial Policies Shape Intersectional Inequalities after Divorce".

Son exposé sera discuté par Angela Greulich, professeure des universités, chercheuse à l'Observatoire sociologique du changement.

Sociologue et politiste, Émilie Biland-Curinier analyse la contribution des organisations et des groupes professionnels aux dynamiques inégalitaires qui recomposent les sociétés contemporaines. Elle s'intéresse aux dispositifs qui cadrent les individus dans leur vie privée (en particulier à l'occasion des séparations conjugales) et dans leur vie professionnelle (à l'instar des concours administratifs).
En savoir plus

Ce FacSem est organisé à distance le 11 mars de 12h30 à 14h00.

Pour y assister, veuillez vous inscrire auprès de marina.abelskaiagraziani@sciencespo.fr

On the 5 march 2021, Anne Moyal defends a thesis in sociology, the subject of which is : 

Freedom under constraints? Rationalization of self-employed primary care professionals’ practices in multi-professional ambulatory healthcare organizations in France.

Jury :

Henri Bergeron, Directeur de recherche CNRS, Sciences Po, Centre de Sociologie des Organisations (directeur de thèse)

Lawrence D. Brown, Professor in Health Policy and Management, Columbia University, Mailman School of Public Health

Patrick Hassenteufel, Professeur des universités en science politique, Université Paris-Saclay (UVSQ), laboratoire PRINTEMPS (rapporteur)

Christine Musselin, Directrice de recherche CNRS, Sciences Po, Centre de Sociologie des Organisations (présidente du jury)

Magali Robelet, Maîtresse de conférences en sociologie, Université Lumière Lyon 2, Centre Max Weber

François-Xavier Schweyer, Professeur en sociologie de l’Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Santé Publique, Centre Maurice Halbwachs

Nadège Vezinat, Maîtresse de conférences HDR en sociologie, Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, laboratoire REGARDS (rapporteure)

Summary:

This thesis focuses on multi-professional primary care structures in France (called “Maisons de Santé Pluriprofessionnels”, MSPs), which we consider as a policy instrument that contributes to rationalizing the ambulatory healthcare sector. Introduced at the end of the 2000s and bringing together self-employed primary care professionals (mainly GPs and paramedics), these new organizations are presented by the State and a growing number of professionals as one of the main responses to the problem of care access, able to attract GPs to certain territories and facilitate the transfer of tasks to paramedics – making it possible to attenuate the demographic crisis of the medical profession. 

In a predominantly private sector, the government has chosen an incentive and contractual policy to encourage – rather than constrain – healthcare professionals to regroup in MSPs, which involves the labeling of structures by the health administration and the allocation of new remunerations by the health insurance, in addition to individual fee-for-service revenues. Without calling into question their private status, this new contractual relationship with public authorities comes with rules and procedures, unprecedented in the private sector, which affect care access, types of care services and coordination between professionals. 

Why do self-employed practitioners willingly enter into a contractual relationship with public authorities that inherently limits their sacrosanct autonomy? What are the effects of these new rationalization procedures on their practices? Through a qualitative sociological analysis at both national and local levels in 6 MSPs, we show that self-employed healthcare professionals manage to maintain their autonomy by appropriating the new rationalization procedures in order to limit their constraining dimension, and even turn such procedures into a new resource that empowers them to develop new forms of practice. Moreover, we argue that the organizational context creates new situations of cooperation leading to a reconfiguration of professional jurisdictions at the organization level.

Intervention de Julie Oudot, doctorante au CSO :

De la lutte contre la pauvreté au combat pour l'emploi. Transformer le dispositif et les acteurs du RSA.

La finalité est de favoriser les échanges entre les chercheurs et les doctorants du laboratoire autour des différents axes de recherche du CSO.

Ce séminaire a lieu le vendredi, au CSO (19 rue Amélie, 75007 Paris), de 10h à 12h. En raison des conditions sanitaires actuelles, il se tient en distanciel. 

Si vous souhaitez y assister, merci de contacter Samia Ben.

En savoir plus sur le programme doctoral

Retour sur les deux débats qui se sont tenus le 2 novembre dernier autour du livre :

COVID-19: une crise organisationnelle avec les auteurs Henri Bergeron, Olivier Borraz, Patrick Castel et François Dedieu aux Presses de Sciences Po.

Une enquête « à chaud » auprès d'acteurs de la crise du Covid-19, qui, plutôt que des défaillances individuelles ou des dysfonctionnements techniques, met en avant des facteurs organisationnels : mauvaises leçons tirées du passé, faux sentiment de sécurité, confiance aveugle dans les outils de planification...

débat 1 : cOVID-19 : retour sur la crise (DE 12H30 À 14H) 

 Accès à la retransmission (durée 1h31) 

Invités : 

Henri Bergeron, directeur de Recherche CNRS, sociologue au Centre de sociologie des organisations et directeur de l'Executive Master "Management des Politiques Publiques" de Sciences Po. Co-auteur du livre,

Anne-Claude Crémieux, professeur en maladies infectieuses à l'hôpital Saint-Louis à Paris,

François Dedieu, chargé de recherche INRAE au Laboratoire interdisciplinaire sciences innovations sociétés (LISIS). Co-auteur du livre,

Emmanuel Hirsch, professeur d'éthique médicale à l'Université Paris-Saclay,

Modératrice : 

Marika Mathieu, journaliste indépendante, documentariste, productrice radio et podcast (RCJ/Binge Audio).

débat 2 : Crise du COVID-19 : quelles leçons devons-nous retenir ? (de 17h à 18h30)

 Accès à la retransmission (durée 1h27) 

Invités : 

Olivier Borraz, directeur de Recherche CNRS, directeur du Centre de sociologie des organisations et sociologue. Co-auteur du livre, 

Patrick Castel, chercheur et sociologue au Centre de sociologie des organisations. Co-auteur du livre, 

Carole Dautun, spécialiste en management de crise,

Thierry Mandon, directeur général de la Cité du design de Saint-Etienne et ancien secrétaire d'État à l'Enseignement supérieur et à la Recherche (2015-2017),

Modérateur :
Sylvain Bourmeau, journaliste, directeur du journal AOC et producteur de l'émission "La Suite dans les idées" sur France Culture 

Intervention de Marion Michel, doctorante au CSO :
Orienter vers des pratiques écologiques : le marché de la prescription de consommation durable sur les réseaux sociaux numériques.

La finalité est de favoriser les échanges entre les chercheurs et les doctorants du laboratoire autour des différents axes de recherche du CSO.

Ce séminaire a lieu le vendredi, au CSO (19 rue Amélie, 75007 Paris), de 10h à 12h. En raison des conditions sanitaires actuelles, il se tient en distanciel. 

Si vous souhaitez y assister, merci de contacter Samia Ben.

En savoir plus sur le programme doctoral

replay du débat
PESTICIDES, COMMENT IGNORER CE QUE L'ON SAIT

Accèder à la vidéo (1:58:30)

La discussion s'est tenue le 19 janvier 2021 autour de PESTICIDES, COMMENT IGNORER CE QUE L'ON SAIT de Jean-Noël Jouzel, publié aux Presses de Sciences Po.

Une enquête sur les pesticides, en France et aux États-Unis, pour comprendre ce qui conduit les agences d'évaluation à ignorer volontairement certaines données scientifiques lorsqu'elles n'ont pas été élaborées selon les normes de la toxicologie réglementaire.

Nos invités (par ordre d'apparition à l'écran, en haut de gauche à droite):

• Jean-Noël JOUZEL, Directeur de recherche CNRS, sociologue et auteur de l'ouvrage
• Isabelle BALDI, Professeur des Universités et directrice de l'Equipe EPICENE (Epidémiologie des cancers et expositions environnementales) de l'Université de Bordeaux - INSERM U1219
• Laurence HUC, Responsable du service COMICS (Contaminants & Stress Cellulaire) à TOXALIM /INRAE
• Henri BASTOS, Adjoint au directeur de l'évaluation des risques en charge de la thématique Santé-Travail à l'Agence nationale de sécurité sanitaire de l’alimentation, de l’environnement et du travail (ANSES) 
• Guillaume DUVAL, ancien éditorialiste à Alternatives Economiques et modérateur
• Antoine LAMBERT, Président de l'Association Phyto-Victimes

Débat : Cent ans de sous-reconnaissance des maladies professionnelles 

 Lundi 8 février 2021 de 12h30 à 14h00

Autour de l'ouvrage "Cent ans de sous-reconnaissance des maladies professionnelles" sous la direction de Catherine Cavalin, Emmanuel Henry, Jean-Noël Jouzel et Jérôme Pélisse (Presses des Mines)

A la suite de votre inscription, vous recevrez un email de confirmation dans lequel vous trouverez les informations de connexion.

Patrick Castel is promoted to Director of Research at the Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politiques de Sciences Po.

Patrick Castel's work lies at the crossroads of the sociology of organizations, the sociology of professions and the sociology of science.

Three axes guide his research:

• decision-making in organizations; 
• the organization of work and the conditions of cooperation between professionals; 
• the collective processes of formation of public action. 

Health is the privileged, but not exclusive, field of investigation. In particular, he has worked on policies for fighting obesity and innovation in cancer, on the organization of care for cancer patients and on Evidence-Based Medicine. He is particularly interested in the figure of the organizing clinician, as well as in the recomposition of work and care related to precision and digital medicine.

He has just published alongside Henri Bergeron, Olivier Borraz and François Dedieu Covid-19 : une crise organisationnelle at the Presses of Sciences Po.

See his page