The article addresses how societal inequalities shape market arrangements. While business scholars developed important work about the interplay of organizations and societal economic inequalities, less has been said about the embeddedness of markets in unequal social structures. We argue that this issue may be addressed by cross-fertilizing the sociological approach of Bourdieu and the Strategic Action Fields perspective. To demonstrate our view, we assessed the extreme case of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) recycling markets in Brazil, conducting a qualitative study based on the precepts of abductive analysis and using data from different secondary sources, interviews, and participant observation. We verified the existence of correspondences between the power of strategic action fields and the positions the individuals controlling them occupy in what Bourdieu calls the social space and show how these differences enable inter field connections that tend to reproduce social hierarchies.
Abiquim. (2004). Anuário da Indústria Química Brasileira [Brazilian Chemical Industry Yearbook].
2.
AlamgirF.CairnsG. (2015). Economic inequality of thebadliworkers of Bangladesh: Contested entitlements and a “perpetually temporary” life-world. Human Relations, 68, 1131–1153.
3.
AlvaredoF.ChancelL.PikettyT.SaezE.ZucmanG. (Eds.). (2018). World inequality report 2018. Belknap Press.
4.
AshleyL.EmpsonL. (2013). Differentiation and discrimination: Understanding social class and social exclusion in leading law firms. Human Relations, 66, 219–244.
5.
Associação Brasileira da Indústria do PET. (2016). Décimo Censo da Reciclagem do PET [10th PET Recycling Census].
BapujiH. (2015). Individuals, interactions and institutions: How economic inequality affects organizations. Human Relations, 68, 1059–1083.
8.
BapujiH.NevilleL. (2015). Income inequality ignored? An agenda for business and strategic organization. Strategic Organization, 13, 233–246.
9.
BealB. D.AstakhovaM. (2017). Management and income inequality: A review and conceptual framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 142, 1–23.
10.
BiagioF. (2011). Agora Vai [Here we go]. Plástico em Revista [Plastics in Review], 574, 46–47.
11.
BourdieuP. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard University Press.
12.
BourdieuP. (1996). The state nobility. Stanford University Press.
13.
BourdieuP. (2005). The social structures of the economy. Polity Press.
14.
BourdieuP.PasseronJ. C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture. SAGE.
15.
BourdieuP.WacquantL. J. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. University of Chicago Press.
16.
BowerJ. L.LeonardH. B.PaineL. S. (2011). Capitalism at risk: Rethinking the role of business. Harvard Business Press.
17.
CabanesR.FerroneF. (2011). A coleta e o tratamento de lixo [Garbage collection and treatment]. In GeorgesI.CabanesR.RizekC.Silva TellesV. (Eds.), Saídas de emergência: Ganhar/perder a vida na periferia de São Paulo [Emergence exits: earn / lose life on the outskirts of Sao Paulo] (pp. 115–134). Boitempo Editorial.
18.
CandidoS. E. A.CôrtesM. R.TruzziO. M. S.Sacomano NetoM. (2018). Fields in organization studies: Relational approaches?Gestão & Produção [Management & Production], 25, 68–80.
19.
CandidoS. E. A.SouléF. V.Sacomano NetoM. (2017). Power and culture in supply chains: Contributions of the strategic action fields approach. Production, 27, Article e20162135.
20.
CandidoS. E. A.SouléF. V.Sacomano NetoM. (2019). The emergence of “solidarity recycling” in Brazil: Structural convergences and strategic actions in interconnected fields. Organization & Environment, 32, 363–385.
21.
CaodaglioA.CytrynowiczR. (2012). Limpeza Urbana Na Cidade de São Paulo: Uma história para contar [Urban Cleaning In São Paulo City: A story to tell]. Selurb.
22.
CobbJ. A. (2016). How firms shape income inequality: Stakeholder power, executive decision making, and the structuring of employment relationships. Academy of Management Review, 41, 324–348.
23.
Corporate Commitment to Recycling. (2012). Ano +20: a Reciclagem na vida do brasileiro [Year +20: Recycling in the lyfe of Brazilians].
24.
DagninoR. D. S.JohansenI. C. (2017). Os Catadores no Brasil: características demográficas e socioeconômicas dos coletores de material reciclável, classificadores de resíduos e varredores a partir do censo demográfico de 2010 [Waste pickers in Brazil: demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of recyclable material collectors, waste classifiers and sweepers from the 2010 population census]. Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada [Institute of Applied Economic Research].
25.
DavisG. F. (2009). Managed by the markets: How finance re-shaped America. Oxford University Press.
26.
DavisG. F. (2017). How institutions create income inequality. In GreenwoodR.OliverC.LawrenceT. B.MeyerR. E. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 689–704). SAGE.
27.
DavisG. F.CobbJ. A. (2010). Corporations and economic inequality around the world: The paradox of hierarchy. Research in Organizational Behavior, 30, 35–53.
28.
DiMaggioP.PowellW. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Collective rationality and institutional isomorphism in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.
29.
FligsteinN. (1990). The transformation of corporate control. Harvard University Press.
30.
FligsteinN. (2001). The architecture of markets: An economic sociology of twenty-first-century capitalist societies. Princeton University Press.
31.
FligsteinN.McAdamD. (2012). A theory of fields. Oxford University Press.
32.
FrangellaS. M. (2004). Corpos urbanos errantes: Uma etnografia da corporalidade de moradores de uma rua em São Paulo [Wandering urban bodies: An ethnography of the corporeality of street dwellers in São Paulo] [Doctoral thesis]. Universidade Estadual de Campinas [State University of Campinas].
33.
GereffiG.HumphreyJ.SturgeonT. (2005). The governance of global value chains. Review of International Political Economy, 12, 78–104.
34.
GiovanniniF.KruglianskasI. (2008). Fatores críticos de sucesso para a criação de um processo inovador sustentável de reciclagem: um estudo de caso [Critical success factors for creating an innovative sustainable recycling process: a case study]. Revista de Administração Contemporânea [Journal of Contemporary Administration], 12, 931–951.
35.
GomesG.DvorsakP.HeilT. B. B. (2005). Indústria petroquímica brasileira: Situação atual e perspectivas [Brazilian petrochemical industry: current situation and perspectives]. BNDES Setorial [BNDES Sectorial], 21, 75–104.
36.
GonçalvesR. D. S. (2004). Catadores de materiais recicláveis: Trajetórias de vida, trabalho e saúde [Recyclable waste collectors: lyfe trajectories, work and health] [Doctoral thesis]. Fundação Oswaldo Cruz.
37.
GrayB.Kish-GephartJ. J. (2013). Encountering social class differences at work: How “class work” perpetuates inequality. Academy of Management Review, 38, 670–699.
38.
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics). (2008). Síntese de indicadores sociais: Uma análise das condições de vida da população brasileira, 2008 [Synthesis of social indicators: An analysis of the living conditions of the Brazilian population].
39.
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics). (2019). Indicadores de desenvolvimento sustentável [Sustainable development indicators]. https://sidra.ibge.gov.br/tabela/1202
40.
KingB. G.PearceN. A. (2010). The contentiousness of markets: Politics, social movements, and institutional change in markets. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 249–267.
41.
LewellynK. B. (2018). Income inequality, entrepreneurial activity, and national business systems: A configurational analysis. Business & Society, 57, 1114–1149.
42.
LimaA.CastelliR.Jr. (2018). Indicadores de analfabetismo funcional—Brasil 2018 [Functional illiteracy indicators – Brazil 2018]. Ação Educativa & Paulo Montenegro [Educational Action and Paulo Montenegro Institute].
43.
LounsburyM.VentrescaM.HirschP. M. (2003). Social movements, field frames and industry emergence: A cultural–political perspective on US recycling. Socio-Economic Review, 1, 71–104.
44.
MartinJ. L. (2003). What is field theory?American Journal of Sociology, 109, 1–49.
45.
MarxK. (1981). Capital (Vol. 3). Pelican Books.
46.
Ministérioda Fazenda. (2007). Parecer Técnico n.º 06106/2007/RJ da Secretaria de Acompanhamento Econômico do Ministério da Fazenda [Technical note n. 06106/2007/RJ of the Secretariat for Economic Monitoring of the Ministry of Finance]. Rio de Janeiro, RJ.
47.
PathakS.MuralidharanE. (2018). Economic inequality and social entrepreneurship. Business & Society, 57, 1150–1190.
48.
PhillipsN. (2017). Power and inequality in the global political economy. International Affairs, 93, 429–444.
49.
PolanyiK. (1980). A grande transformação [The great transformation]. Campus.
50.
PolkinghorneD. E. (1995). Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 8, 5–23.
51.
PrasadA. (Ed.). (2012). Against the grain: Advances in postcolonial organization studies (Vol. 28). Copenhagen Business School Press.
52.
RamirezC. (2001). Understanding social closure in its cultural context: Accounting practitioners in France (1920–1939). Accounting, Organizations and Society, 26, 391–418.
53.
RiazS. (2015). Bringing inequality back in: The economic inequality footprint of management and organizational practices. Human Relations, 68, 1085–1097.
54.
RosserJ. B.Jr.RosserM. V.AhmedE. (2000). Income inequality and the informal economy in transition economies. Journal of Comparative Economics, 28, 156–171.
55.
ScullyM.RothenbergS.BeatonE. E.TangZ. (2018). Mobilizing the wealthy: Doing “privilege work” and challenging the roots of inequality. Business & Society, 57, 1075–1113.
56.
SilvaS. P. (2017). A organização coletiva de catadores de material reciclável no Brasil: Dilemas e potencialidades sob a ótica da economia solidária [The collective organization of recyclable material collectors in Brazil: Dilemmas and potentialities from the perspective of the solidarity economy]. Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada [Institute of Applied Economic Research].
57.
SmithA. (2017). A riqueza das nações [The wealth of Nations]. Nova Fronteira.
58.
SorensenJ. B.SorensonO. (2007). Corporate demography and income inequality. American Sociological Review, 72, 766–783.
59.
SouzaJ. (2009). A ralé brasileira: quem é e como vive [The Brazilian rabble: who it is and how it lives]. Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais [Federal University of Minas Gerais].
60.
SouzaJ. (2012). Os batalhadores brasileiros: Nova classe média ou nova classe trabalhadora? [Brazilian hardworkers: New middle class or new working class?] Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais [Federal University of Minas Gerais].
61.
SouzaJ. (2017). A elite do atraso [The backward elite]. Leya.
62.
SouzaJ. (2018). A classe média no espelho: Sua história, seus sonhos e ilusões, sua realidade [The middle class in the mirror: Its history, its dreams and illusions, its reality]. Sextante.
63.
SoyluS.Sheehy-SkeffingtonJ. (2015). Asymmetric intergroup bullying: The enactment and maintenance of societal inequality at work. Human Relations, 68, 1099–1129.
64.
SturgeonT.GereffiG.GuinnA.ZylberbergE. (2013). Brazil in global value chains: Implications for industrial policy and trade. Revista Brasileira de Comércio Exterior [Brazilian Journal of Foreign Trade], 115, 26–41.
65.
TavoryI.TimmermansS. (2014). Abductive analysis: Theorizing qualitative research. University of Chicago Press.
66.
WacquantL. (2013). Symbolic power and group-making: On Pierre Bourdieu’s reframing of class. Journal of Classical Sociology, 13, 274–291.
67.
WacquantL. (2014). Putting habitus in its place: Rejoinder to the symposium. Body & Society, 20(2), 118–139.
68.
WeberM. E. (1991). Economia e sociedade [Economy and Society]. Universidade de Brasília.
69.
WeedenK. A. (2002). Why do some occupations pay more than others? Social closure and earnings inequality in the United States. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 55–101.
70.
WilsonD. C.ArabaA. O.ChinwahK.CheesemanC. (2009). Building recycling rates through the informal sector. Waste Management, 29, 629–635.
71.
YinR. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods. SAGE.
