Journal articles on the topic 'Knowledge capitalism'
To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Knowledge capitalism.
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Knowledge capitalism.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Murphy, Peter. "Knowledge Capitalism." Thesis Eleven 81, no. 1 (May 2005): 36–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0725513605051613.
Full text
2
Sünker, Heinz. "Knowledge Society/Knowledge Capitalism and Education." Policy Futures in Education 4, no. 3 (September 2006): 217–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2006.4.3.217.
Full text
3
Diehl-Callaway, Linda. "Is Capitalism Kaput?" American Economist 36, no. 1 (March 1992): 71–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/056943459203600111.
Full textAbstract:
In this article, we examine metaphors in economics, specifically looking at the term capital and its family of metaphors, and investigate the role they play in a capitalist economy. Serving as a means of communicating complex ideas and outstripping their literal meanings, metaphors become a part of the developing knowledge in a discipline. We demonstrate how a metaphor constitutes an active interchange between a word and the complex idea it signifies, and, by extension, the formation of yet another idea results. We show how, from the parent metaphors capital and capitalism, there developed a number of derivative (i.e., sibling or relational) metaphors that describe the different functions and forms of capital in capitalism. And we point out metaphors related to different types of goods and property that exist in a capitalist economy. Are the family of metaphors of capital helpful or harmful to capitalism? To the extent that metaphors enrich and expand its language, we submit that they do indeed contribute to the survival of the capitalist society which spawns them.
4
Kochetkov, Dmitry M., and Irina A. Kochetkova. "Knowledge: From Ethical Category to Knowledge Capitalism." Changing Societies & Personalities 5, no. 4 (December 30, 2021): 553. http://dx.doi.org/10.15826/csp.2021.5.4.150.
Full textAbstract:
In the post-industrial economy, the efficiency of scientific knowledge generation becomes crucial. Researchers began to interpret knowledge as a factor of economic growth in the second half of the 20th century; since then, within the theory of economics and management, various approaches have been developed to study the impact of knowledge on economic growth and performance. With time, the focus of knowledge-based theories shifted from corporate management to macrosystems and economic policy. The article describes the main stages in the development of socio-economic concepts of knowledge and analyzes the theoretical and methodological aspects of each approach. The authors have also formulated the critical problems in the analysis of the economic category of knowledge at the present stage and suggested ways of overcoming them. The article may be of interest both to researchers and practitioners in the sphere of corporate strategies and economic policy.
5
Wijesinghe, Sarah N. R., Paolo Mura, and Harold John Culala. "Eurocentrism, capitalism and tourism knowledge." Tourism Management 70 (February 2019): 178–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.07.016.
Full text
6
Peters, Michael A. "Digital socialism or knowledge capitalism?" Educational Philosophy and Theory 52, no. 1 (April 4, 2019): 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2019.1593033.
Full text
7
ŠItera, Daniel. "On New Travels in Space-Time: Theoretical Rediscoveries after the Crisis in (Comparative) Capitalism(s)." New Perspectives 23, no. 2 (September 2015): 77–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2336825x1502300204.
Full textAbstract:
This review essay on the books New Directions in Comparative Capitalisms Research and The Future of Capitalism After the Financial Crisis uses the prism of ‘travelling theory’ to appraise whether both edited volumes meet their proclaimed aim to challenge the alleged reductionisms inherent in the Comparative Capitalisms (CC) research and reinvigorate the CC agenda's radical potential to analyse contemporary capitalism in critical and global perspectives. The verdict is affirmative as both volumes (i) introduce new as well as forgotten approaches to combined inter-spatial and inter-temporal comparisons into the CC literature, which then (ii) allows for the rediscovery of a multitude of roads to (knowledge about) really existing capitalisms. However, the essay urges some of the authors to avoid tracing capitalism only at its worst, which leads to an exaggerated intellectual pessimism and fatalism. Finally, putting both volumes into the context of post-socialist Central and Eastern European (CEE) capitalism, the review documents the continuing relevance of empirical discoveries in CEE for developing an expanded critical-global CC scholarship.
8
CAO, Longhu. "The Discussion of Ziben zhuyi (capitalism) in China’s Debate on Socialism (1920-1921)." Cultura 17, no. 2 (January 1, 2020): 75–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.3726/cul022020.0006.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract: The spread of “capitalism” from West to East not only brought knowledge of an economic model but also offered nations a new path for development. This expansion was met by the rise of the socialist revolutionary movement, which aimed to overthrow the capitalist political and economic system. This article examines the concept of “capitalism” in the context of the debate on socialism. By studying the elaborations of Ziben zhuyi (capitalism) by its proponents and opponents, as well as the debate-related expressions proposed by later scholars in different contexts, this study reflects on the politicization of “capitalism”, the complexity of its meaning, and the degree of political ideology in its implementation. Based on the analysis of relevant papers on the debate, it concludes that (1) as a highly politicized concept, “capitalism” reflects intellectuals’ assumptions regarding China’s future and the evolution of its political ideologies; (2) “capitalism” has a complicated conceptual connotation, and it is necessary to consider its many aspects to present the full picture of what people think about it; and (3) the degree of capitalist ideology varies in different periods and contexts.
9
Erik Kristensen, Jens. "Kapitalismens nye ånd og økonomiske hamskifte - Boltanski og Chiapello og tesen om den kognitive kapitalisme." Dansk Sociologi 19, no. 2 (April 21, 2008): 87–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.22439/dansoc.v19i2.2555.
Full textAbstract:
Boltanski og Chiapellos må krediteres for at have rehabiliteret kapitalismekategorien og kapitalismekritikken i en sociologisk og postmarxistisk sammenhæng. Le Nouvel Esprit du capitalisme føjer sig imidlertid til andre forsøg på at forstå de aktuelle transformationer af økonomien og kapitalismen. Med deres fokus på kapitalismens nye ånd ser Boltanski og Chiapello delvist bort fra de økonomiske transformationer af kapitalismen som akkumulationsregime. Tesen er, at deres analyse derfor med held kan komplementeres med indsigterne fra et andet ambitiøst forsøg på at forstå den nye form for kapitalisme – nemlig teserne om den såkaldte kognitive kapitalisme.
ENGELSK ABSTRACT:
Jens Erik Kristensen: The New Spirit of Capitalism and the Shedding of the Economic
Boltanski and Chiapello must be credited for rehabilitating the category of ca-pitalism and capitalism critique in a sociological and post-Marxist context. However Le nouvel ésprit du capitalisme follows other attempts to understand the current transformations of the economy and of capitalism itself. In their focus on the new spirit of capitalism Boltanski and Chiapello ignore in part the eco-nomic transformations of capitalism as a regime of accumulation. The thesis of this article, therefore, is that their analysis can be complemented with insights from another ambitious attempt to understand the new forms of capitalism – namely the theses on the so-called cognitive capitalism.
Key words: New spirit of capitalism, cognitive capitalism, knowledge economy, the immaterial, exploitation, network.
10
Zuboff, Shoshana. "Surveillance Capitalism or Democracy? The Death Match of Institutional Orders and the Politics of Knowledge in Our Information Civilization." Organization Theory 3, no. 3 (July 2022): 263178772211292. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/26317877221129290.
Full textAbstract:
Surveillance capitalism is what happened when US democracy stood down. Two decades later, it fails any reasonable test of responsible global stewardship of digital information and communications. The abdication of the world’s information spaces to surveillance capitalism has become the meta-crisis of every republic because it obstructs solutions to all other crises. The surveillance capitalist giants–Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, and their ecosystems–now constitute a sweeping political-economic institutional order that exerts oligopolistic control over most digital information and communication spaces, systems, and processes. The commodification of human behavior operationalized in the secret massive-scale extraction of human-generated data is the foundation of surveillance capitalism’s two-decade arc of institutional development. However, when revenue derives from commodification of the human, the classic economic equation is scrambled. Imperative economic operations entail accretions of governance functions and impose substantial social harms. Concentration of economic power produces collateral concentrations of governance and social powers. Oligopoly in the economic realm shades into oligarchy in the societal realm. Society’s ability to respond to these developments is thwarted by category errors. Governance incursions and social harms such as control over AI or rampant disinformation are too frequently seen as distinct crises and siloed, each with its own specialists and prescriptions, rather than understood as organic effects of causal economic operations. In contrast, this paper explores surveillance capitalism as a unified field of institutional development. Its four already visible stages of development are examined through a two-decade lens on expanding economic operations and their societal effects, including extraction and the wholesale destruction of privacy, the consequences of blindness-by-design in human-to-human communications, the rise of AI dominance and epistemic inequality, novel achievements in remote behavioral actuation such as the Trump 2016 campaign, and Apple-Google’s leverage of digital infrastructure control to subjugate democratic governments desperate to fight a pandemic. Structurally, each stage creates the conditions and constructs the scaffolding for the next, and each builds on what went before. Substantively, each stage is characterized by three vectors of accomplishment: novel economic operations, governance carve-outs, and fresh social harms. These three dimensions weave together across time in a unified architecture of institutional development. Later-stage harms are revealed as effects of the foundational-stage economic operations required for commodification of the human. Surveillance capitalism’s development is understood in the context of a larger contest with the democratic order—the only competing institutional order that poses an existential threat. The democratic order retains the legitimate authority to contradict, interrupt, and abolish surveillance capitalism’s foundational operations. Its unique advantages include the ability to inspire action and the necessary power to make, impose, and enforce the rule of law. While the liberal democracies have begun to engage with the challenges of regulating today’s privately owned information spaces, I argue that regulation of institutionalized processes that are innately catastrophic for democratic societies cannot produce desired outcomes. The unified field perspective suggests that effective democratic contradiction aimed at eliminating later-stage harms, such as “disinformation,” depends upon the abolition and reinvention of the early-stage economic operations that operationalize the commodification of the human, the source from which such harms originate. The clash of institutional orders is a death match over the politics of knowledge in the digital century. Surveillance capitalism’s antidemocratic economic imperatives produce a zero-sum dynamic in which the deepening order of surveillance capitalism propagates democratic disorder and deinstitutionalization. Without new public institutions, charters of rights, and legal frameworks purpose-built for a democratic digital century, citizens march naked, easy prey for all who steal and hunt with human data. Only one of these contesting orders will emerge with the authority and power to rule, while the other will drift into deinstitutionalization, its functions absorbed by the victor. Will these contradictions ultimately defeat surveillance capitalism, or will democracy suffer the greater injury? It is possible to have surveillance capitalism, and it is possible to have a democracy. It is not possible to have both.
11
О.О., Романовський, Романовська Ю.Ю., Романовськa О.О., and Махді M.Ель. "«АКАДЕМІЧНИЙ КАПІТАЛІЗМ» І КОМЕРЦІАЛІЗАЦІЯ НОВИХ ЗНАНЬ." Economics and Management, no. 86(2) (May 22, 2020): 127–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.36919/2312-7812.2.2020.127.
Full textAbstract:
The author analyzes the features of the appearance, existence and world spread “academic capitalism”, “academic (or university) entrepreneurship” phenomena, as well as a new type of university-oriented universities – “entrepreneurial universities”. The reasons for the emergence of “academic capitalism” in the United States have been examined. It has been noted that “academic capitalism” is an intellectual, knowledge-based entrepreneurial component of the economic system of capitalism and directly affects its subsystems – productive forces, technical and economic relations, industrial relations and economic mechanism. It has been noted that academic capitalism is a specific type of a holistic process of expanded capitalist reproduction, dissemination and consumption of new knowledge as intellectual capital and intellectual property, technics, technologies, methods and techniques for the formation of innovative means of production, the identification of new resources and innovative methods of management. The authors consider the theoretical and methodological foundations of the innovative development of higher education based on a comprehensive analysis of university (academic) entrepreneurship phenomenon. Assessment of its role in the innovative development of society and on the basis of a study of the historical cause and effect relationships of the emergence of “academic capitalism” and the development of university entrepreneurship. It has been also indicated that the causal relationship between the emergence of “academic capitalism” and the emergence of university entrepreneurship should be studied in a sequence of interrelated events and stages of development of society, science and higher education, as its components. The scheme of the process of evolution of new knowledge in the system of creating knowledge from the beginning of R&D to the commercialization has been considered. The authors’ research will be useful for the further development of national economic and entrepreneurial education, own academic (university) entrepreneurship and innovative reform of higher education in Ukraine.
12
Brandon, Pepijn. "Marxism and the ‘Dutch Miracle’: The Dutch Republic and the Transition-Debate." Historical Materialism 19, no. 3 (2011): 106–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156920611x573806.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe Dutch Republic holds a marginal position in the debate on the transition from feudalism to capitalism, despite its significance in the early stage of the development of global capitalism. While the positions of those Marxists who did consider the Dutch case range from seeing it as the first capitalist country to rejecting it as an essentially non-capitalist commercial society, all involved basically accept an image of Dutch development as being driven by commerce rather than real advances in the sphere of production. Their shared interpretation of the Dutch ‘Golden Age’, however, rests on an interpretation of Dutch economic history that does not match the current state of historical knowledge. Rereading the debate on the Dutch trajectory towards capitalism in the light of recent economic historiography seriously challenges established views, and questions both major strands in the transition-debate.
13
Burton-Jones, Alan. "Knowledge Capitalism: The New Learning Economy." Policy Futures in Education 1, no. 1 (March 2003): 143–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2003.1.1.4.
Full textAbstract:
The increasing economic importance of knowledge is redefining firm-market boundaries, work arrangements and the links between education, work and learning. This article describes a framework for identifying organisational knowledge assets and learning needs, optimising knowledge supply and planning knowledge growth. The framework enables firms to improve their selection and deployment of internal and external knowledge resources and individuals to improve their career planning. It also assists learning institutions to tailor their products and services to the needs of individual and corporate knowledge consumers.
14
Maher, Frances A., and Mary Kay Tetreault. "The knowledge economy and academic capitalism." British Journal of Sociology of Education 29, no. 6 (November 2008): 733–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01425690802423726.
Full text
15
Davis, Charles K., and Charlene A. Dykman. "Knowledge Management and Capitalism: A Conundrum." International Journal of Knowledge, Culture, and Change Management: Annual Review 4, no. 1 (2005): 0. http://dx.doi.org/10.18848/1447-9524/cgp/v04/49934.
Full text
16
Дадаев, Якуб Элхазурович, and Зинаида Магомедовна Закриева. "COMMERCIALIZATION OF NEW KNOWLEDGE AND THE CONCEPT OF «ACADEMIC CAPITALISM»." Вестник Тверского государственного университета. Серия: Экономика и управление, no. 2(54) (June 25, 2021): 227–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.26456/2219-1453/2021.2.227-239.
Full textAbstract:
Статья посвящена рассмотрению особенностей появления и распространения в мире феноменов «академический капитализм», «университетское предпринимательство», нового типа организации деятельности университетов, ориентированных на предпринимательство в сфере образования. Целью статьи является исследование теоретико-методологических основ инновационного развития системы образования на базе анализа феномена университетского (академического) предпринимательства, оценки его роли в инновационном развитии общества и на основе изучения исторических причинно-следственных связей - рассмотрение причин возникновения «академического капитализма» и развития университетского предпринимательства. В статье определено, что «академический капитализм» является интеллектуально-знаниевой предпринимательской составляющей капиталистической экономической системы, которая непосредственно влияет на его подсистемы - производительные силы, технико-экономические и производственные отношения, хозяйственный механизм. Научная новизна полученных результатов заключается в обосновании такого феномена как «академический капитализм», позволяющего эффективное использование его технологии и получение выгоды от академического (университетского) предпринимательства образовательным организациям России для достижения научно-технических, технологических и финансовых успехов. The article is devoted to the consideration of the peculiarities of the emergence and spread of the phenomena of «academic capitalism», «university entrepreneurship» in the world, a new type of organization of the activities of universities focused on entrepreneurship in the field of education. The purpose of the article is to study the theoretical and methodological foundations of the innovative development of the education system based on the analysis of the phenomenon of university (academic) entrepreneurship, assessment of its role in the innovative development of society and based on the study of historical causal relationships - consideration of the causes of the emergence of «academic capitalism» and the development of university entrepreneurship ... It is determined that «academic capitalism» is the intellectual and knowledge entrepreneurial component of the capitalist economic system, which directly affects its subsystems - productive forces, technical, economic and production relations, economic mechanism. The scientific novelty of the results obtained lies in the justification of such a phenomenon as «academic capitalism», which allows the effective use of its technology and benefits from academic (university) entrepreneurship to educational organizations in Russia to achieve scientific, technical, technological and financial success.
17
Peters, Michael A. "Education Policy in the Age of Knowledge Capitalism." Policy Futures in Education 1, no. 2 (June 2003): 361–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2003.1.2.12.
Full textAbstract:
The term ‘knowledge capitalism’ emerged only recently to describe the transition to the so-called ‘knowledge economy’. Knowledge capitalism and knowledge economy are twin terms that can be traced at the level of public policy to a series of reports that emerged in the late 1990s by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (1996a,b,c) and the World Bank (1998, 1999), before they were taken up as a policy template by world governments in the late 1990s. In terms of these reports, education is reconfigured as a massively undervalued form of knowledge capital that will determine the future of work, the destiny of knowledge institutions and the shape of society in the years to come. This article focuses on the twin notions of knowledge capitalism and the knowledge economy as a comparative context for formulating education policy. First, it provides a brief theoretical context based on developments in the economics of knowledge and information by reference to the work of Hayek; second, it analyses recent documents of world policy agencies concerning these two concepts; third, it discusses the notion of knowledge capitalism as it has figured in the work of Alan Burton-Jones (1999). These accounts serve as three accounts of knowledge capitalism that have exerted a profound influence upon national education policies. This article is an essay in the new political economy of knowledge and information. It adopts the concept of knowledge capitalism as an overarching concept that denotes a sea change in the nature of capitalism. Finally, the article entertains the concept of knowledge socialism as an alternative organizing concept for knowledge creation, production and development.
18
Feldmann, Magnus. "Global Varieties of Capitalism." World Politics 71, no. 1 (December 24, 2018): 162–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0043887118000230.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article analyzes the prospects for globalizing the varieties of capitalism (voc) debate. It identifies and compares firm-centered, governance-centered, and state-centered approaches to extending the debate on capitalist diversity, and discusses the distinctive contributions of each approach as well as the trade-offs between them. The author draws on three agenda-setting volumes that engage with thevocframework and study capitalist diversity in three regions not usually covered by this literature: Latin America, East and Southeast Asia, and East Central Europe. As these regions play an increasingly important role in the world economy, this article examines what the books imply about the current state of knowledge about globalvoc. The author argues that the extension of thevocdebate to these parts of the world is important for advancing the understanding of economic institutions; the approach can reinvigorate research on capitalist diversity and the institutional foundations of economic development in the current era of globalization.
19
Semenenko, I. "«Alternative Capitalism» or Alternative to Capitalism?" World Economy and International Relations, no. 7 (2012): 92–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2012-7-92-106.
Full textAbstract:
In October 2011, in the Center for Comparative Socio-Economic and Socio-Political Studies of IMEMO RAN the meeting of a scientific-theoretical workshop on the subject «"Alternative capitalism" or Alternative to Capitalism?» took place. Problems of conceptual crisis in social sciences and methodology of the modern socio-political changes analysis were in the spotlight. The discussion evolved over two main problems: 1. Knowledge crisis or development crisis? On methodology of the modern socio-political changes analysis and problems of a new social sciences research paradigm development. 2. Capitalism and modernization. Main ideas of presentations by scientists from IMEMO and other scientific institutions are outlined in two issues of the journal (No. 7, 8).
20
Brunila, Kristiina, and Kristiina Hannukainen. "Academic researchers on the project market in the ethos of knowledge capitalism." European Educational Research Journal 16, no. 6 (January 20, 2017): 907–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1474904116685100.
Full textAbstract:
How knowledge capitalism retools the scope of academic research and researchers is an issue which this article ties to the project market in the ethos of knowledge capitalism. In Finland, academic research has been forced to apply for funding in project-based activities reflecting European Union policies. The project market, which in this article represents knowledge capitalism, shapes opportunities related to research and knowledge as well as in terms of researcher subjectivity. However, a critical approach that recognises the function of power can both highlight and challenge the forms of knowledge capitalism that reorganises the scope of research and researchers today.
21
Peters, Michael A., and James Reveley. "Retrofitting Drucker: Knowledge work under cognitive capitalism." Culture and Organization 20, no. 2 (July 4, 2012): 135–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14759551.2012.692591.
Full text
22
Baumgarten, Stefan. "Translation and hegemonic knowledge under advanced capitalism." Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 29, no. 2 (June 29, 2017): 244–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/target.29.2.03bau.
Full textAbstract:
Translation occurs in a context of power asymmetries. Using two English translations of Adorno’s seminal Ästhetische Theorie as an example, this paper elaborates an eclectic phenomenology of power structured alongside three symbolic images: the street market, the assembly line, and a technological gadget. By aligning some key concepts of critical theory with the evolutionary stages of capitalism, it will be argued that recontextualisations of Adornian thought in English may reflect the well-known antagonism between Adorno’s philosophical thought and the dominant scientistic mindset of mid-20th century American social science. Ultimately, this paper contemplates the extent to which Adorno’s Anglophone mirror image has been refracted through a positivist and neoliberal order of discourse that is at odds with the ideological, or utopian, convictions of German critical theory.
23
Bowles, Samuel, and Wendy Carlin. "Shrinking Capitalism." AEA Papers and Proceedings 110 (May 1, 2020): 372–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/pandp.20201001.
Full textAbstract:
A defining feature of capitalism is that work using privately owned capital goods under the control of an owner or manager in return for wages produces goods to be sold for profit. The domain in which this system of production works tolerably well is shrinking as the knowledge- and care-based economy expands. It is thus imperative on efficiency as well as moral grounds to develop a new paradigm for policies and institutional design. A new paradigm needs to combine a model appropriate for today's economy with ethical values that go beyond fairness to include a broad conception of freedom.
24
Ptaszek, Grzegorz. "Surveillance capitalism and privacy. Knowledge and attitudes on surveillance capitalism and online institutional privacy protection practices among adolescents in Poland." Mediatization Studies 2 (June 26, 2019): 49. http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/ms.2018.2.49-68.
Full textAbstract:
<p>The purpose of the study was to determine the level of knowledge and attitudes towards surveillance capitalism and online institutional privacy protection practices among adolescents in Poland (aged 18–19), as well as to determine the relationships between these variables. Surveillance capitalism has emerged as a result of internet users’ activities and involves the collection of all data about these users by different entities for specific benefits without letting them know about it. The dominant role in surveillance capitalism is played by hi-tech corporations. The aim of the study was to verify whether knowledge, and what kind of knowledge, on surveillance capitalism translates into practices related to the protection of online institutional privacy. The study was conducted on a sample of 177 adolescents in Poland. The main part of the questionnaire consisted of two scales: the scale of knowledge and attitudes on surveillance capitalism, and the scale of online institutional privacy protection practices. The results of the study, calculated by statistical methods, showed that although the majority of respondents had average knowledge and attitudes about surveillance capitalism, which may result from insufficient knowledge of the subject matter, this participation in specialized activities/workshops influences the level of intensification of online institutional privacy protection practices.</p>
25
Romanovskyi, Oleksandr O., and Yuliia Yu Romanovska. "“Academic Capitalism”: Pros and Cons of the Development of Science and Higher Education." Business, Economics, Sustainability, Leadership and Innovation 4 (July 15, 2020): 40–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.37659/2663-5070-2020-4-40-49.
Full textAbstract:
The environment of academic capitalism, which has covered almost the entire field of science and higher education, has both positive (PROS) and negative (KONS) influences on them. Academic capitalism has sharply accelerated the commercialization of the results of applied research and development of universities and research institutes and has allowed these organizations and institutions to significantly capitalize on their intellectual capital. This gave impetus to the development of progressive innovations and outstanding inventions. For example, in the system of higher education there is an intensive innovative development, which, of course, can be attributed to the positive impact of academic capitalism on the development of material, technical, scientific and engineering potential of universities and colleges.On the other hand, the pursuit of profit and the general search for opportunities to commercialize R&D results, mainly the results of applied research and experimental development, leads to a significant reduction in demand and attention to the development of fundamental science and the search for basic scientific values. This leads to a slowdown in the production of new basic fundamental knowledge and a slowdown in the intellectual development of society.Many recent scientific publications have also criticized the impact of academic capitalism on science and higher education. Excessive entrepreneurial activity of universities in the direction of profiting from the development and commercialization of applied research instead of purely scientific activities and basic basic research leads to the loss of the position of universities and colleges as “temples of science”. There may still be a small number of academic institutions of higher education and research that continue to conduct basic research that is difficult to commercialize but that is genuine “scientific knowledge,” or in other words, knowledge of humanity.This paper analyzes the innovative changes in the higher education system caused by the environment of academic capitalism. The negative impact of academic capitalism on the sphere of higher education and science is also analyzed.
26
Sommer, Vítězslav. "The Economics of Everyday Life in “New” Socialism." History of Political Economy 51, S1 (December 1, 2019): 52–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00182702-7903228.
Full textAbstract:
The article explores the effort by economists and economic journalists in Czechoslovakia in the 1960s to translate economic knowledge to the political language of reform communism. Czechoslovak economists aimed to cultivate public understanding of economic issues and to disseminate economic knowledge among the nonacademic public, not only through politically engaged writing in the journal Ekonomická revue, but also through research on management to change managers’ behavior, habits, and competencies. In this important communication with nonacademic recipients, experts translated their economic knowledge to the specific managerial language of advice and personal self-development. A significant part of management studies literature was concerned with capitalist economies, especially capitalist managerial praxis. It thus contributed to the social academic and journalistic genre of the 1960s that focused on exploring capitalism and the West.
27
Toscano, Alberto. "From Pin Factories to Gold Farmers: Editorial Introduction to a Research Stream on Cognitive Capitalism, Immaterial Labour, and the General Intellect." Historical Materialism 15, no. 1 (2007): 3–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156920607x173742.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article introduces a series of essays on the related concepts of cognitive capitalism, immaterial labour and the 'general intellect', which will feature in the pages of Historical Materialism from this issue onwards. It outlines the stakes of the theoretical discussion around these concepts and welcomes the recasting in Marxian terms of debates which have o en been monopolised by apologetic treatments of capitalist development. It also identifies five areas which future articles in this 'research stream' will be preoccupied with: (1) the interpretation of Marxian notions, especially arising from the Grundrisse; (2) the philosophy of history and the schemata of social change that underpin concepts such as cognitive capitalism; (3) the identification of hegemonic social figures (e.g. the immaterial labourer, the 'cognitariat'); (4) issues of philosophical anthropology bearing on the definition of knowledge and intellect; (5) the role of debates on value (and its possible crisis) in assessing the idea of knowledge as a productive force.
28
Peters, Michael. "Post-structuralism and Marxism: education as knowledge capitalism." Journal of Education Policy 18, no. 2 (April 2003): 115–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0268093022000043100.
Full text
29
Lee, Steven H., Timothy Brook, and Gregory Blue. "China and Historical Capitalism: Genealogies of Sinological Knowledge." International Journal 55, no. 4 (2000): 670. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/40203512.
Full text
30
Lošonc, Alpar. "The Conditions of Critical Knowledge on Capitalism or." Synthesis philosophica 34, no. 1 (2019): 29–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.21464/sp34103.
Full textAbstract:
Beginning with a presentation of the asymmetry between philosophical and economic reflection, the article assesses the possible effects of practical philosophy in relation to the critical analysis of the independent economic domain. The article emphasizes the importance of political genealogy of capitalism which explains conceptual mutations leading to a) autonomisation of economic reflection, b) self-hegemonic economic reflection, c) domination of “real abstraction” that reflects not mental operations but social practice in capitalism. It is necessary to conceive differences between economics, the economy and economic domain, as well as to establish mediation between these domains. It is important not to perceive theoretical production as passive reflection in relation to reality, but to consider the theory as a constitutive-practical factor, as the condensation of certain social relationships. For economics (“dismal science”), this means that it is co-constitutive in relation to “economic reality”. Practical philosophy can contribute to the self-awareness of economic reflection in three domains: a) the relevance of ideology in relation to the autonomy of the economic sphere, b) the importance of the measure for the economizing, c) the form–substance problem. Based on the effects in the mentioned domains, practical philosophy could evoke the fact that the core of the economy is something that transcends the phenomenon of economy. The foundation of the economy is based on non-economic categories.
31
Lundahl, Lisbeth. "Educational Theory in an Era of Knowledge Capitalism." Studies in Philosophy and Education 31, no. 3 (April 29, 2012): 215–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11217-012-9304-9.
Full text
32
Vogl, Joseph. "(History of) Economic Knowledge Freed from Determinism." Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics 12, no. 1 (July 24, 2019): 73–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.23941/ejpe.v12i1.409.
Full textAbstract:
The Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics (EJPE) interviewed Vogl about his intellectual career, his relationship to the history and philosophy of economics, and his perspective on the analysis of contemporary capitalism.
33
Наумова, Е. И. "Конфликт производственной и непроизводственной парадигмы в современном анализе развития капитализма." Konfliktologia, no. 2 (June 26, 2015): 135. http://dx.doi.org/10.31312/2310-6085-2015-2-135-143.
Full textAbstract:
The article is about the conflct of two approaches connected with relevant reflction of capitalism development. Common thesis about the nonmaterial nature of contemporary capitalism is critiсized. In contrast, it is postulated the thesis about fiancial nature of postfordism which can be described as «nonproductive» activity. It is Marx’s conception of general intellect reflcting in terms of inalienable property in the center of the analysis. The logic of general intellect development is described by the formula «Knowledge-Knowledge’» represented contemporary tendencies in the development of fiancial-cognitive capitalism when knowledge become the fetish embodied the principle of self-increasing value.
34
Vercellone, Carlo. "From Formal Subsumption to General Intellect: Elements for a Marxist Reading of the Thesis of Cognitive Capitalism." Historical Materialism 15, no. 1 (2007): 13–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156920607x171681.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractSince the crisis of Fordism, capitalism has been characterised by the ever more central role of knowledge and the rise of the cognitive dimensions of labour. This is not to say that the centrality of knowledge to capitalism is new per se. Rather, the question we must ask is to what extent we can speak of a new role for knowledge and, more importantly, its relationship with transformations in the capital/labour relation. From this perspective, the paper highlights the continuing validity of Marx's analysis of the knowledge/power relation in the development of the division of labour. More precisely, we are concerned with the theoretical and heuristic value of the concepts of formal subsumption, real subsumption and general intellect for any interpretation of the present change of the capital/labour relation in cognitive capitalism. In this way, we show the originality of the general intellect hypothesis as a sublation of real subsumption. Finally, the article summarises key contradictions and new forms of antagonism in cognitive capitalism.
35
Kwet, Michael. "The Digital Tech Deal: a socialist framework for the twenty-first century." Race & Class 63, no. 3 (January 2022): 63–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/03063968211064478.
Full textAbstract:
The twenty-first century global economy is largely driven by Big Tech and, more broadly, digital capitalism. This is a global phenomenon, with US power at the centre preying on global markets through the process of digital colonialism. Mainstream antidotes to the ills of Big Tech and digital capitalism are US/Eurocentric and revolve around a collection of liberal and progressive capitalist reforms, including anti-trust, limited privacy laws, unionisation of Big Tech, algorithmic discrimination and content moderation – all of which are conceived within a capitalist framework which ignores or neglects digital colonialism and the twenty-first century ecological crisis, despite their analytical and moral centrality to contemporary political economy. This author argues that a combination of political, economic and social alternatives based on a Digital Tech Deal are needed to turn the tide against digital colonisation, entailing the socialisation of knowledge and infrastructure; passing socialist laws that support digital socialism; and new narratives about the tech ecosystem. These solutions are to be nested within an anti-colonial, eco-socialist framework that embraces degrowth to ensure environmental sustainability and socioeconomic justice.
36
Kennedy, Peter. "The Knowledge Economy and Labour Power in Late Capitalism." Critical Sociology 36, no. 6 (October 18, 2010): 821–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0896920510376998.
Full text
37
Xing, Weixi. "Knowledge capitalism put into practice as an operational mechanism." Journal of Knowledge Management 10, no. 1 (January 2006): 119–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13673270610650157.
Full text
38
Rhoads, Robert A., and Christopher Collins. "Building Knowledge Cultures: Education and Development in the Age of Knowledge Capitalism (review)." Review of Higher Education 30, no. 4 (2007): 488–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2007.0041.
Full text
39
Radivojević, Radoš, and Sonja Pejić. "Systemic needs as a precondition for the development of scientific knowledge." Socioloski godisnjak, no. 12 (2017): 149–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.5937/socgod1712149r.
Full textAbstract:
This paper presents an overview of the social history of the development of scientific knowledge, with the aim of illuminating the way in which the systemic needs (material, integrative and self-aware) of social communities were the limiting factor, but also in some cases allowed the development of scientific knowledge. The way of satisfying these systemic needs is explained as a factor that influenced the society's relation to scientific knowledge. The paper is covering several historical periods: pre-capitalism and capitalism, in order to point to the deeper socio-economic conditions that determined the future of science and technology.
40
GOLDTHWAITE, RICHARD. "The Practice and Culture of Accounting in Renaissance Florence." Enterprise & Society 16, no. 3 (April 21, 2015): 611–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/eso.2015.17.
Full textAbstract:
This article explores cultural aspects of the unique archival patrimony of private account books that survive for Florence from the fourteenth to the early seventeenth century, a period corresponding to the city’s greatness as a center of both Renaissance culture and early capitalism. The discussion first surveys the diffusion and the standardization of accounting practice throughout the society, the educational process behind this development, and the emergence of the professional accountant. It then analyzes double entry in its application to both business (including industrial) and domestic accounts in the attempt to extend our knowledge of the accounting reality in this pre-modern capitalist economy beyond the traditional view derived from manuals and theoretical notions. The conclusion examines the cultural functions of Florentine accounting practice ranging from the so-called spirit of capitalism in the business world to some particular characteristics that disposed Florentines in general toward this kind of record keeping.
41
Peters, Michael A., Tina Besley, and Petar Jandrić. "Postdigital Knowledge Cultures and Their Politics." ECNU Review of Education 1, no. 2 (June 2018): 23–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.30926/ecnuroe2018010202.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose —This paper aims at exploring politics of contemporary knowledge cultures and possible directions for responding to the postdigital challenge. Design/Approach/Methods —This paper researches history and present of several prominent strands and readings of the knowledge economy. Following Caruso's work (2016), it examines more closely the differences between the managerial paradigm and the cognitive capitalism paradigm. Recognizing the postdigital nature of contemporary knowledge cultures, it points towards a postdigital merger between the managerial paradigm and the cognitive capitalism paradigm. Findings —The paper identifies individual and social tensions between industrial and post-industrial modes of production and rapidly changing dynamic of social development. It examines the relationships between knowledge cultures and digital technologies. Based on recent insights by the father of the World Wide Web Tim Berners-Lee and his non-determinist views to digital technologies, it identifies knowledge cultures as sites of political struggle against various (material and non-material, technological and non-technological) closures over access to information and knowledge. Finally, it briefly outlines possible directions for responding to the postdigital challenge of knowledge cultures. Originality/Value —The paper provides an original contribution to theory of knowledge cultures and its relationships to the postdigital condition.
42
Rikowski, Ruth. "Value — The Life Blood of Capitalism: Knowledge is the Current Key." Policy Futures in Education 1, no. 1 (March 2003): 160–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2003.1.1.5.
Full textAbstract:
This article considers the knowledge revolution, the knowledge economy, knowledge, knowledge management and value within global capitalism. It argues that the knowledge revolution is the latest phase of capitalism and that the success of the knowledge revolution depends on the creation of value that is extracted from knowledge, and that this includes the knowledge that is in people's heads. It considers philosophical issues surrounding knowledge. It then considers the meaning of ‘value’, by first considering some of the current business and information literature, and second, returning to a Marxist analysis of value. It argues that we can only really begin to fully explain and understand the concept of value, as well as its significance within the knowledge revolution, by returning to a Marxist theoretical analysis. The article concludes by arguing that we need to become more conscious of the fact that ‘value’ is the essential ingredient upon which all forms of capitalism rest, and furthermore, that today value is being extracted from knowledge, particularly in the industrialised world. Once the human race becomes more conscious of this, it can then endeavour to create a better, kinder, fairer social and economic system that does not depend on the extraction of value from and exploitation of human labour.
43
Rössner, Philipp Robinson. "Introduction." History of Political Economy 53, no. 3 (June 1, 2021): 371–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00182702-8993260.
Full textAbstract:
Capitalism is often assumed to have been invented in the Anglosphere. Writings by Hume and Smith have been named as cornerstones in the making of capitalism and modern economic knowledge. But Smith’s and the other Enlightenment Scots’ works built on a commercial tradition that had been manifest in Anglo-Saxon economics since the sixteenth century or earlier. Moreover, this tradition of thinking about commercial society became quite widespread and in the seventeenth and eighteenth century extended to the entire European continent where it has become commonly known, in its manifold regional and national variants, under the general term Cameralism The usual genealogy of capitalist political economy, foundations of which were established by Marx (Capital, Vol. I), starts with William Petty, Richard Cantillon, Turgot and then winds down a well-known line from Adam Smith to David Ricardo, including John Stuart Mill, and Marx himself. The contributions made by continental Cameralists to the shaping of the political economy of modern capitalism on the other hand have tended to be overlooked. The present paper discusses the wider epistemic vantage points of the present special issue, some basic assumptions, as well as the broad contributions made by subsequent papers to the study of Cameralism not only as a near pan-European economic discourse during the early modern period, but also how different authors from a Cameralist vantage point and spectrum contributed to rise of modern economic analysis and modern political economies of capitalism.
44
Mikhailouski, Vadzim S. "Three problems of neo-Marxism, or What you need to know before using a neo-Marxist approach." Journal of the Belarusian State University. Sociology, no. 3 (October 8, 2021): 38–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.33581/2521-6821-2021-3-38-46.
Full textAbstract:
The maturity of the neo-Marxist approach in cognition is determined not only by the heuristics of its theoretical and methodological foundations, but also by self-critical reflection. Three initial problems of the neo-Marxist approach are identified, which are useful to take into account when using it in scientific research: excessive criticism of neo-Marxist cognition, ideological bias of the neo-Marxist approach, conceptual uncertainty of capitalism as an object of neo-Marxism. It is proved that the ideological component is falsely identified with all neo-Marxism, and the critical component is treated trivially. The problem of the neo-Marxist approach lies not in the fact of a negative judgment about the reality under study, but in the level of theoretical and methodological support for the critical approach. It is necessary to distinguish criticism as a negative judgment and criticism as a dialectical logic of negation. The researcher can avoid the critical and ideological component of neo-Marxist research within the framework of the scientific tradition of neo-Marxism. This tradition does not deprive the researcher of the possibility of scientific search for new socio-economic reasons for the transformation of capitalism or new political ones by the subject of anti-capitalist resistance. The difference is that the ideological goal setting orients the researcher to the construction of the revolutionary situation of capitalism, and the scientific one – to the knowledge of the revolutionary factors of the existing «capitalist construct». More complex problem of the neo-Marxist approach is the conceptual uncertainty of capitalism. This problem requires a solution at the level of the community of neo-Marxist theorists. The unresolved nature of this problem affects the initial positions of new neo-Marxist studies. It does not allow us to define capitalism as an object of neo-Marxist research of any subject orientation. There are two options for a research strategy in this situation. First, it is possible, based on the conventional concept of truth, to join some neo-Marxist definition of modern capitalism and implement one’s subject research within the framework of the tradition of a particular neo-Marxist theorist. Secondly, it is possible to use the hypothetical-deductive method and proceed from the chosen understanding of capitalism as a hypothetical position, where the author’s subject of research is constituted as a consequence of this hypothesis and requires a verification check for truth. The solvability of general neo-Marxist epistemological problems means that there are no obstacles to the widespread application of neo-Marxism in social cognition.
45
Mika, Bartosz. "The Dialectic of Knowledge: A Contribution to the Theory of Knowledge in Advanced Capitalism." Rethinking Marxism 33, no. 2 (February 23, 2021): 263–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08935696.2020.1857644.
Full text
46
Rambla, Xavier, and Aina Tarabini. "Book Review: Building Knowledge Cultures: Education and Development in the Age of Knowledge Capitalism." Policy Futures in Education 5, no. 1 (March 2007): 111–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2007.5.1.111.
Full text
47
Olssen *, Mark, and Michael A. Peters. "Neoliberalism, higher education and the knowledge economy: from the free market to knowledge capitalism." Journal of Education Policy 20, no. 3 (January 2005): 313–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680930500108718.
Full text
48
Mueller, Jason C., and Steven Schmidt. "Revisiting Culture and Meaning-Making in World-Systems Analysis: A Proposal for Engaging with the Cultural Political Economy Approach." Critical Sociology 46, no. 4-5 (June 18, 2019): 711–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0896920519856074.
Full textAbstract:
World-systems analysis (WSA) understands socio-cultural phenomena as fundamental to the operation of global capitalism, whether through geocultures that sustain centrist liberalism, the emergence of capitalist subjectivities, or by generating structures of knowledge that bound political possibilities. Nonetheless, many scholars critique WSA’s treatment of culture as reductive and epiphenomenal. How can we theorize culture’s relationship to global capitalism without assuming that culture merely “dupes” participants into reproducing exploitative structures? In this article, we offer a critical evaluation of WSA’s treatment of culture and argue that its alleged failings can be ameliorated by adopting a cultural political economy (CPE) framework, an analytical approach that has developed separately from WSA. To do so, we outline WSA’s major theorizations of culture; namely, its discussion of global geocultures and structures of knowledge. Departing from existing critiques of WSA, we discuss the applicability of CPE, which examines how discourses both influence and are shaped by the material world. Using anti-systemic movements, populism, and race-making in the world-system as examples, we demonstrate how a CPE-oriented approach permits WSA to address its major cultural critiques. Broadly, we call for a theoretical co-mixing of CPE and WSA, allowing researchers to address the alleged cultural failings of world-systems scholarship.
49
Blumen, Robert. "KNOWLEDGE CAPITALISM: BUSINESS, WORK, AND LEARNING IN THE NEW ECONOMY." Economic Affairs 23, no. 3 (September 2003): 58–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-0270.t01-1-00434.
Full text
50
Kumar, Ravi, and Peter McLaren. "Processes of Knowledge Production and the Educational Complex in Capitalism." Contemporary Perspectives 3, no. 1 (June 2009): 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/223080750900300101.
Full text