Consumer Sovereignty and the Integrity of Practices 1990
This paper presents a case for protecting cultural institutions from the market by drawing on Alasdair MacIntyre's conception of social practices, with their own internal goods and standards of excellence. It argues that an especially problematic feature of markets is ‘the sovereignty of consumers’, since consumer judgments may not be based on the same criteria as those employed by cultural practitioners, who may thus have to choose between maintaining the integrity of the practice and securing its material resources. [Reprinted as Ch 1 in CGLM]
Introduction to Enterprise Culture 1991
This is the Introduction that I wrote for the first volume of collected papers produced by Lancaster University's Centre for the Study of Cultural Values. It tries to identify the meaning of this political catchphrase of the UK government in the 1980s, which was being used to indicate that the major changes in and expansions of 'the free market' had an important cultural character, not a 'merely' economic one. For example, public sector institutions such as universities were being encouraged to adopt the outlook and lnguage of commercial enterprises, and individuals to replace dependency by enterprise.
The Moral Boundaries of the Market 1993
This develops a theoretical framework for thinking about market boundaries, starting from Michael Walzer’s account of the separation of spheres and the risk of market domination. It explores the relationship between Walzer, Marx and Hegel, distinguishes goods-based from justice-based arguments for boundaries, and argues that the protection of various goods from the market requires attention to the conditions of their production rather than their exchange.
Scepticism, Authority and the Market 1994
This paper defends arguments for the protection of cultural practices from the market against the charge of elitism. Distinguishing ‘elitism of access’ from ‘elitism of judgment’, it explores how anti-elitism of the latter kind is supported by scepticism about values, and criticises justifications for the market that appeal to such scepticism. It argues that while the kind of epistemically based authority required by cultural practices implies the rejection of scepticism, such authority is not only compatible with, but conducive to, the autonomy of individuals. [Reprinted as Ch 2 in CGLM]
Citizens, Consumers and the Environment 1994
In The Economy of the Earth, Mark Sagoff argues that the basic error in using cost-benefit analysis to make environmental decisions is that it requires people to think and act in their role as consumers, rather than as citizens. In response, is argued that what should also be recognised is that when deliberating and acting as citizens, people must consider the value both of the environment and of consumption, and make collective decisions about the priority to be given to these common goods when they conflict. [Reprinted as Ch 3 in CGLM]
Delivering the Goods: Socialism, Liberalism and the Market 1996
This paper explores the relationships between goods-based arguments for market boundaries and wider debates and traditions in political theory. It argues that ‘classical’ justifications for the market, with their focus on human well-being, are more amenable to arguments for non-market provision than ‘liberal’ justifications that focus on contractual exchange, and criticises contemporary neutralist liberalism for excluding the substantive concerns about markets and goods that have been central to socialist and conservative traditions of political thought.
Values and Preferences in Neo-Classical Environmental Economics 1997
This paper explores theoretical problems in the use of cost-benefit analysis for environmental decision-making, arising from defects in the neo-classical concept of preferences. It argues that preferences depend on judgments, and that people’s judgments about their own well-being must be distinguished from their ethical judgments about the ‘existence value’ or ‘rights’ of non-human species. Failure to recognise this leads to illegitimate applications of market-modelled criteria to environmental decisions.
Colonisation by the Market: Walzer on Recognition 1997
Taking up Michael Walzer’s comment that colonisation (or domination) may result from an ‘illicit transfer of meanings’ from one sphere to another, it is argued that his own account of ‘modern’ recognition provides a possible example of this, with its subjective and competitive nature apparently being modelled on features of the market domain. This modern form of recognition, it is suggested, threatens the integrity of social practices such as scientific enquiry which require an objective, non-competitive mode of recognition. (See 'Science and Recognition', below, for a development of this argument) [Reprinted as Ch 4 in CGLM]
Market Boundaries and the Commodification of Culture 1999
This paper argues that the protection of cultural practices from the market can be justified by showing how this enhances the ability of markets themselves to contribute to human well-being. The argument is developed through an analysis of how the value of certain kinds of consumer goods is realised outwith the economy, through their use in various social practices, and of how non-market cultural practices enable judgments to be made about the possible benefits of consumer goods.
Market Boundaries and Human Goods 2000
Arguments for the protection of cultural practices from the market are often criticised because they imply the use of state powers to support authoritative judgments about human goods, and thus fall foul of a liberal principle of state neutrality. This paper argues that state support for market institutions is no more consistent with neutrality than its support for non-market ones: in both cases, collective decisions have to be made about the provision of distinct kinds of human goods.
CGLM Contents, Introduction, Bibliography 2000
This file includes the publication details and table of contents for Cultural Goods and the Limits of the Market (Palgrave Macmillan 2000), followed by the Introduction, which sets out the broad conceptual framework adopted in the book, and its philosophical debts, as well as presenting brief outlines of its eight chapters, half of which were published previously, and the others written for the book. The Bibliography includes all items referred to in the book's chapters, whilst the Notes are located within each chapter.
Science and Recognition 2000
Through a critical commentary on sociological analyses of the organisation of modern science, this paper explores generic problems in the institutional design of social practices, giving particular attention to the nature and role of recognition. It argues for the importance of recognition in the form both of ‘moral acknowledgment’ and of ‘epistemic confirmation’, and also points to the damaging effects of the direct and competitive pursuit of recognition, and hence to the dangers posed to science and other practices by market-modelled institutional changes. [Published as Ch 5 in CGLM]
Markets, Firms and Practices 2000
This paper questions Alasdair MacIntyre’s view that market economies are incompatible with the conduct of production as a practice, with internal goods and standards of excellence. It argues that the extent to which markets are practice-antithetical is quite variable, depending on institutional factors whose significance is concealed by neo-classical economic theory. MacIntyre’s linking of practices exclusively to local communities, and the low value that his theory places on modern consumption, are also criticised. [Published as Ch 6 in CGLM] The argument is developed further in ‘Practices, Firms and Varieties of Capitalism’ (2008), located in Ethics and Markets.
Consumer-Friendly Production or Producer-Friendly Consumption? 2000
In The Market Experience, Robert Lane argues that in tending inherently to prioritise consumption-benefits over production-benefits, market economies sacrifice greater goods for lesser ones. Although sympathetic to Lane’s emphasis on the (potential) goods of production, this paper argues, first, that in the case of certain cultural ‘products’, there is no necessary antithesis between consumer and producer benefits; and second, that certain kinds of consumption make it possible to enjoy the kinds of benefits that Lane regards as available only through production ‘at its best’. [Published as Ch 7 in CGLM]
Justifying the Market and its Limitation 2000
It is argued that possible justifications for placing limits on the market depend on the kind of justification given for the market itself. In particular, 'liberal' justifications for the market in terms of the individual freedom embedded in its exchange relationships give a lot less less scope for limitation arguments than 'classical' justifications in terms of its beneficial outcomes. It goes on to sketch out a case for non-market provision of cultural goods based on their role in enabling individuals to make well-grounded judgments about the value of possible market purchases as sources of well-being. [Published as Ch 8 in CGLM]
Bringing Ethics Back In: Cultural Production as a Practice 2011
Based on a conference lecture, this paper provides a less formal account of key concepts and ideas in my work on cultural goods and market boundaries. It argues for the importance of ethical judgments concerned with the sources of human well-being in evaluating cultural production and understanding its institutional requirements, and re-visits my earlier use MacIntyre’s concept of practices in the light of recent literature on varieties of capitalism and their implications for the commerce-culture relationship.
Market Limits and their Limits 2012
This review essay analyses and evaluates the contributions to philosophical debates about market boundaries made by two important books published in 2010: Debra Satz's Why Some Things Should Not Be For Sale: The Moral Limits of Markets (Oxford University Press), and Martha Nussbaum's Not For Profit: Why Democracy Needs The Humanities (Princeton University Press).
Political Philosophy and Public Service Broadcasting 2012
This paper examines possible justifications for public service broadcasting (PSB) in relation to debates in political philosophy about the proper grounds for state action. It argues that the nature of such justifications differs significantly between different kinds of programmes (eg News, Arts, Soap); that the neutralist liberal exclusion of ethical purposes as grounds for state action unduly limits the legitimate scope of PSB, and that the concept of market failure in neo-classical welfare economies provides an inadequate basis for the justification of PSB.