Markets, Morals, and Practices of Trade: Jurisdictional Disputes in the US Commerce in Cadavers

From AcaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Citation: Anteby, M. (2010) Markets, Morals, and Practices of Trade: Jurisdictional Disputes in the US Commerce in Cadavers. Administrative Science Quarterly (Volume 55) (RSS)
DOI (original publisher): 10.2189/asqu.2010.55.4.606
Semantic Scholar (metadata): 10.2189/asqu.2010.55.4.606
Sci-Hub (fulltext): 10.2189/asqu.2010.55.4.606
Internet Archive Scholar (search for fulltext): Markets, Morals, and Practices of Trade: Jurisdictional Disputes in the US Commerce in Cadavers
Download: http://asq.sagepub.com/content/55/4/606.short
Tagged: Sociology (RSS) Occupations (RSS), Morals (RSS), markets (RSS), market legitimacy (RSS), trading (RSS), micro-foundations of markets (RSS), professional jurisdictions (RSS)

Summary

Via an examination of the New York State commerce in human cadavers, Anteby expands upon and problematizes current conceptions of legitimacy and morality in markets.

Where previous accounts rely upon the nature of the good exchanged as an explanatory factor for market legitimacy, Anteby focuses on the methods of exchange (he labels these "practices") as key explanatory factors. To this point: Anteby describes two important sellers in the market for cadavers in New York State: academics and private enterprises. These sellers attempted to legitimize their approach to this market via narratives; this is to be expected, given previous scholarship on moral markets.

These sellers also engaged in markedly different sets of practices, however, and these practices also served to legitimize each seller's moral standing in the market. Anteby summarizes these practices in a table (p624). While Anteby doesn't articulate it explicitly, he essentially relies upon a structurational perspective: these practices and related moral frames exist in a relation of mutual constitution; the enactment of the practices (e.g. cutting up cadavers to sell the parts vs. keeping cadavers whole, earning a profit vs. covering costs) modifies, informs and reinforces relevant moralities (e.g. add maximum value vs. sanctity of the body, reasonable return vs. dirty money), and relevant moralities in turn modify, inform and reinforce enacted practices.

Theoretical and Practical Relevance

Anteby encourages scholars to:

  • Examine situated practices as a source of legitimacy, especially in novel, morally-fraught or contested markets.
  • Consider the possibility that "markets traditionally seen as uniformly moral or immoral" may "include spheres or suubmarkets, each with its own morality, that are distinguished along lines of practices."
  • Consider that practice avoidance might be as powerful - if not more powerful - a tactic in sustaining legitimacy as engaging in a given practice.
Retrieved from "https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Markets,_Morals,_and_Practices_of_Trade:_Jurisdictional_Disputes_in_the_US_Commerce_in_Cadavers&oldid=7900"