Search

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to use spatial thinking (space-time) as a lens through which to examine the ways in which the socio-economic conditions and values of the post-Fordist academy work to diminish and even subsume the immaterial affective labour of librarians even as it serves to reproduce the academy.Design/methodology/approachThe research question informing this paper asks, In what ways does spatial thinking help us to better understand the immaterial, invisible and gendered labour of academic librarians' public service work in the context of the post-Fordist university? This question is explored using a conceptual approach and a review of recent library information science (LIS) literature that situates the academic library in the post-Fordist knowledge economy.FindingsThe findings suggest that the feminized and gendered immaterial labour of public service work in academic libraries – a form of reproductive labour – remains invisible and undervalued in the post-Fordist university, and that academic libraries function as a procreative, feminized spaces.Originality/valueSpatial thinking offers a corrective to the tendency in LIS to foreground time over space. It affords new insights into the spatial and temporal aspects of information work in the global neoliberal knowledge economy and suggests a new spatio-temporal imaginary of the post-Fordist academic library as a site of waged work.

В статье исследуется феномен позднего капитализма. Поздний капитализм рассматривается как форма капиталистического производства, которая пришла на смену развитым формам капитализма 1950-х — 1960-х гг. Иначе данный переход именуется переходом от фордизма к постфордизму.Фордизм определяется как социально-экономическая система, возникшая в послевоенный период на Западе (США и Западная Европа) и типичными особенностями которой были массовое производство в рамках крупной вертикально интегрированной корпорации, а также создание соответствующих стабильных массовых рынков. В противоположность фордизму постфордизм представляет собой систему, которая сформировалась в условиях начавшейся глобализации и отражала в значительной мере как изменения на глобальных рынках, так и собственные внутренние противоречия фордизма.Последовательно рассматривается сначала становление фордистской системы (производственный и социальный проект Форда и послевоенный «фордистский компромисс»), а затем становление постфордистской системы. Особенности последней раскрываются на примере известной концепции американских авторов М. Пиоре и Ч. Сабеля. Также на материале концепции французских исследователей Л. Болтански и Э. Кьяпелло рассматривается идеология современного (позднего) капитализма. Для того чтобы показать многообразие форм (в том числе региональных) позднего капитализма, автор обращается к концепции известного американского социолога М. Кастельса.На примере фордизма и постфордизма можно убедиться в том, что капитализм — весьма гибкая и адаптивная система, однако постфордизм представляет собой как бы радикализацию «гибкости» и инновационности, изначально присущей капиталистической системе.

Post-Fordist ekonomi, günümüz dünyasında her alandaki yapıları ve düşünme biçimlerini derinden etkilemekte ve aynı zamanda kendi ihtiyaçlarına göre şekillendirmektedir. Post-Fordizmin yarattığı ‘yeni emek gücünün’ son yıllarda artan hareketliliği (yersiz-yurtsuz) ve çok yönlülüğü (mutli-dicipliner) bu açıdan, yaşamın neredeyse tümüne yayılan ‘çalışma zaman(lar)ını ve mekan(lar)ını’ yeniden ve başka türlü ele almamızı, düşünmemizi sağlıyor. Post-Fordist ekonominin, Fordizm’den radikal bir şekilde farklılaşan ve temel üretici güçleri haline gelen, soyutlama yeteneği zirvede olan ‘zeka’ ve sembolik/gayri maddi -veya maddi olmak zorunda olmayangöstergeler, çağdaş dünyada hemen tüm disiplinleri sermayeye eklemleyip araçsallaştırmıştır. Sanat dünyalarına ait, zihinsel emek kategorisinin de kültürel-ekonomik süreçlerle piyasaya dahil edildiğinden söz edilebilir. Bu açıdan iletişim yöntemleriyle, estetik algı operasyonlarının da araçsal bir rol oynadığını belirtebiliriz. Salt sanat alanına deği; tüm yaşama ilişkin olan ifade etme ve yaratıcılık, Neoliberal-Kültüralist politikalarla günümüz kapitalizminin merkezlerine oturtulup sömürü süreçlerine dahil edilmiştir. Emek güçleri sadece çalışkan, başarılı değil, aynı zamanda yaratıcı da olmak zorunda. Her alandan, her kesimin, sürekli ‘yaratıcı çözümler’den söz etmesi başka türlü nasıl ele alınabilir. Bu durumu Antonio Negri ve Michael Hardt İmparatorluk (2008) üçlemesinde daha önce belirtmişti; “(…) iletişim ve bilişim teknolojilerinin de gelişimi ile gayri maddi-zihinsel emeğin, emek sürecinde hegemonik bir konum elde etmesinin, artı-değerin üretiminde doğrudan payı olmuştur”. Güncel kapitalizmin ilgisine bu kadar mazhar olmuş “yaratıcı ifade’nin, her halde toplumsal bir mesele olarak da ciddiye alınması gereklidir. Bunun nedeni sadece sermaye ile ilişkili ‘artı değerin üretiminde doğrudan payı olduğu’ için değil (Bu paya güncel kapitalizm tarafından el konulmuştur), aynı zamanda yine Hardt ve Negri’nin (2008) belirttiği gibi gayri maddi ‘zihinsel emek’ (…) çokluk için devrimci bir fırsat sunduğu, yepyeni bir direniş olasılığını barındırdığı için ciddiyetle ele alınması gerekir. Zihinsel emek, bir direniş aralığı açıyor. Bu aralıkta yaratıcı ifadenin, sanatın denetime direnen gücünün göstergeleri mevcuttur., In this study, mature seeds of Buttum (Pistacia khinjuk Stocks) cultured in vitro conditions were exposed to The economic model of Post-Fordism deeply influences the structures and ways of thinking in every field in today’s world, and at the same time this model shapes them according to their own needs. The increasing mobility of “new labor power” created by Post-Fordism (deterritorialization) and its versatility (multi-disciplinary dimension) again and differently allows us to embrace the 'working time (s) and space (s)' which spreads almost all fields of the life. The signs of the post-Fordist economy which are radically differentiating from Fordism and becoming fundamental productive forces, being at the peak of abstraction ability, and those that are not symbolic/immaterial or material, have been instrumentalized by almost all the disciplines in the contemporary world. It can be mentioned that the mental labor category, which belongs to the art worlds, is included in the market through cultural-economic processes. In this respect, We could say that aesthetic perception operations also play an instrumental role with communication methods. Not just to the field of art, expression and creativity that are related to all life have been incorporated into the processes of exploitation and exploitation by the neoliberalculturalist policies. Labor forces have to be not only hard-working, successful, but also creative. How can each sector constantly talk about ‘creative solutions’ from every area? Antonio Negri and Michael Hardt have mentioned this before in the trilogy of Empire (2008): “(…) The existence of a hegemonic position in the labor process of informal and mental labor as well as the development of communication and information technologies have been directly involved in the production of surplus-value.”. It is necessary to take seriously “the creative expression” that has been so obsessed with the interest of contemporary capitalism in every situation as a social matter. Not only because it has a ‘direct share in the production of the surplus-value’ associated with capital (this share has been confiscated by current capitalism), but also, as Hardt and Negri (2008) point out, the immaterial ‘mental labor’ (...) must be handled with seriousness because of the possibility of resistance for multiplicity and an revolutionary opportunity. Mental labor opens a range of resistance. In this range, there are indications of the power of creative expression that resists control of art.

Cet article propose une interprétation de l'évolution de l'économie canadienne depuis les années soixante-dix à la lumière de la théorie de la régulation. Une telle perspective permet de tisser des liens conceptuels entre globalisation économique, pertes d'emplois dans les pays développés, recul de l'État-providence et virages vers la droite sur la scène politique. Nous attribuons à l'après-fordisme le découplage croissant entre production et consommation, le déclin et la polarisation des revenus, ainsi que la crise des finances publiques, qui caractérisent l'évolution économique canadienne au cours des 25 dernières années. Le texte s'intéresse aussi aux conséquences régionales de l'après-fordisme au Canada, en particulier à la concentration de la croissance économique sur des territoires de plus en plus restreints et à la piètre performance de la majorité des régions. La conclusion examine la possibilité que certaines formes alternatives de développement économique prenant racine dans les régions désavantagées puissent éventuellement contribuer à une évolution de la société au-delà de l'après-fordisme., This paper interprets the evolution of the Canadian economy since the early 1970s from the perspective of regulation theory. This framework makes it possible to draw conceptual links between economic globalization, job losses in developed countries, retrenchment of the welfare state, and political shifts to the right. It portrays post-Fordism as a source of income decline and polarization, disjunction between production and consumption, and fiscal crisis, which together mark the evolution of the Canadian economy over the last 25 years. The paper focuses on the regional consequences of post-Fordism in Canada, in particular on the concentration of economic growth in areas whose size is increasingly limited and on the poor performance of most regions. It concludes by exploring the possibility for alternative, small scale, forms of economic development to emerge in economically declining regions, and eventually contribute to the replacement of post-Fordism.

(2006). Globalisation, Policy and Shipping: Fordism, Post-Fordism and the European Union Maritime Sector. By Evangelia Selkou and Michael Roe. Economic Geography: Vol. 82, No. 4, pp. 457-459.

This article examines the changing relationship between global cities and territorial states in contemporary Europe, and outlines some of its implications for the geography of world capitalism in the late twentieth century. Most accounts of global cities are based upon a ‘zero-sum’ conception of spatial scale that leads to an emphasis on the declining power of the territorial state: as the global scale expands, the state scale is said to contract. By contrast, I view globalization as a highly contradictory reconeguration of superimposed spatial scales, including those on which the territorial state is organized. The state scale is not being eroded, but rearticulated and reterritorialized in relation to both sub- and supra-state scales. The resultant, re-scaled coneguration of state territorial organization is provisionally labeled a ‘glocal’ state. As nodes of accumulation, global cities are sites of post-Fordist forms of global industrialization; as coordinates of state territorial power, global cities are local-regional levels within a larger, reterritorialized matrix of increasingly ‘glocalized’ state institutions. State re-scaling is a major accumulation strategy through which these transformed ‘glocal’ territorial states attempt to promote the global competitive advantage of their major urban regions. Global city formation and state re-scaling are therefore dialectically intertwined moments of a single dynamic of global capitalist restructuring. These arguments are illustrated through a discussion of the interface between global cities and territorial states in contemporary Europe. A concluding section argues that new theories and representations of spatial scale and its social production are needed to grasp the rapidly changing political geography of late twentieth-century capitalism.

Globalisation became truly frequented notion of our era. There is wide consent that global processes increase both risks and opportunities for individuals, enterprises as well as whole communities and countries. In spite of this, it is only seldom stated that globalisation involves also numerous local impacts. Indeed, particular manifestations of global processes can be contemplated in concrete localities and polarity between the global and the local is not accurate. The global does include local and globalisation means also the linking of localities. The main objective of this paper consists in the clarification of socioeconomic nexuses between global processes and localities. Taking into consideration recent socioeconomic developments, we are increasingly entitled to talk about the process of glocalisation that involves both global and local aspects. Global and local represent two sides of the same coin and the nature of contemporary time-spatial processes may be better understood by recognizing and analyzing socioeconomic aspects of glocalisation.

Das besprochene Buch ist ein empirisch-kulturwissenschaftlich ausgerichte­ter Sammelband, der eine Annäherung an neo­liberale Arbeits- und Lebenswelten vornimmt. Durch die Konzentration auf lebensweltliche Gesichtspunkte werden Prognosen zum Wandel von Produktionsregimes wie die Entdeckung neu­er Arbeitskrafttypen, neuartiger Strukturierungs­prinzipien von Ge­sellschaft und Ökonomie sowie andersartiger Ge­sellschaftstypen differenziert. Dabei verlieren sich die Autoren jedoch keinesfalls in reinen Mikrobeobachtungen – eine Schwäche, die gerade den historisch informierten, empirisch arbeitenden Geschichts- und Kulturwissenschaft­lern gerne zugeschrieben wird. Es gelingt ihnen, mit Hilfe zum Teil anspruchsvoller methodischer Ansätze wie der über stationär arbeitende Feldfor­schung hinausgehende "multi-sited-ethnography" die Grenzverschie­bungen zwischen Arbeits- und Lebenswelt, die im Mittelpunkt der Diskussion um die "Krise des For­dismus" stehen, empirisch zu erfassen. Während solche Fallstudien über­zeugen, bleiben Überlegungen zum Ende der Voll­erwerbsgesellschaft oder zur Kultur der "New Eco­nomy" zu sehr in Spe­kulationen verhaftet. Ziel der Rezension ist es, eine Verortung der Artikel in die anfangs vor allem in der Regulations­theorie, inzwischen vor allem auch in der Arbeits- und Industriesoziologie geführten Diskussion um den Wandel von Produktionsregimes, vorzuneh­men. Herausgearbeitet wird, welche Diskussions­stränge in wissenschaftlicher Literatur zu identifizieren sind, die die Entgrenzung von Arbeit und Lebenswelt sowie reflexive Wieder-Begrenzungen analysieren. Von besonderem Interesse sind innovative Methodiken, die es erlauben, verschiedene Lebenssphären empirisch gleichzeitig in den Blick zu nehmen. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs050324, This anthology reflects the spheres of working and living in a neo-liberal society from the viewpoint of cultural studies in European ethnology. Concentrating on daily life, it questions prognoses about regimes of production, new types of manpower and the rediscovery of new structures of society and economy as well as new types of societies. The book is not only about micro-studies—concentrating on micro-studies has often been criticized by both the science of history and cultural studies, which work empirically. The authors of this book work on the basis of ambitious methodological approaches such as "multi-sited-ethnography," which transgresses static fieldwork and is able to grasp the differential between paid work and leisure. These case studies are fully convincing, but reflections about the end of a society in which everyone has a job or about the culture of the "new economy" remain too speculative. The review attempts to place the articles within discussions about changing regimes of production. These discussions began mostly in the field of regulation theory, then in industrial sociology and finally in the sociology of work. Especially innovative methods are considered, which allow the reader to simultaneously analyze the spheres of living and working. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs050324, Esta antología refleja las esferas del trabajo y de la vida en una sociedad neoliberal desde el punto de vista de los estudios culturales en la etnología europea. Focalizando la vida diaria, cuestiona los pronósticos sobre los regímenes de producción, los nuevos tipos de mano de obra y el redescubrimiento de las nuevas estructuras de sociedad y economía así como los nuevos tipos de sociedades. El libro no trata sólo de microestudios, que han sido a menudo criticados tanto por las ciencias históricas como por los estudios culturales que trabajan empíricamente. Los autores de este libro trabajan sobre la base de aproximaciones metodológicas ambiciosas como "la etnografía multi-situada", que transgrede el campo de trabajo estático y es capaz de comprender las diferencias de grado entre el trabajo pagado y el ocio. Estos estudios de caso son totalmente convincentes, pero las reflexiones sobre el final de una sociedad en la cual cada uno tiene un trabajo o sobre la cultura de la "nueva economía" son demasiado especulativas. La revisión intenta colocar los artículos dentro de los debates sobre los cambios de regímenes de producción. Estas discusiones comenzaron sobre todo en el campo de teoría de regulación, luego en la sociología industrial y finalmente en la sociología de trabajo. Se consideran sobre todo métodos innovadores, que permiten al lector analizar simultáneamente las esferas de vida y de trabajo. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs050324

Submitted by Margarida Galamba (galamba@isa.utl.pt) on 2009-09-16T15:53:07Z No. of bitstreams: 1 REP-Moreira, M.B.-6-bonanno_etal vol 4.pdf: 635716 bytes, checksum: 09b2522d94f6d8c491adccd6b2057e79 (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2009-09-16T15:53:07Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 REP-Moreira, M.B.-6-bonanno_etal vol 4.pdf: 635716 bytes, checksum: 09b2522d94f6d8c491adccd6b2057e79 (MD5) Previous issue date: 1994

ResumenEn 1995 los autores del presente artículo escribieron un ensayo en el que reflexionaron acerca de la posibilidad de que la sociología del trabajo, con sus paradigmas disciplinarios “normales”, pudiera explicar las nuevas realidades que surgían en aquel momento como consecuencia del posfordismo en la fase globalizada del capitalismo. Doce años más tarde llevaron a cabo una lectura crítica, así como una actualización de aquellos conceptos, tratando de establecer nuevos retos para los estudios sociales del trabajo. En ambas ocasiones se afirmaba la existencia de una crisis de la sociología del trabajo marcada por un reduccionismo económico que tiende a considerar a los actores sociales del proceso de trabajo como meras categorías del “modelo fabril”. También se afirmó que la transformación radical de los actores sociolaborales del siglo xx, cada vez más evidente en los años noventa y claramente desarrollada en el siglo xxi, fue desafiando la delimitación temática de la disciplina. En consecuencia, era necesario incorporar dimensiones tanto subjetivas como colectivas en el contexto del análisis disciplinario. En este artículo, se proponen avanzar en la revisión de cuestiones teóricas que deben replantearse y modificarse con el objetivo de comprender el nuevo escenario global y sus consecuencias para las relaciones laborales y los trabajadores.AbstractIn 1995, the authors of this paper wrote an article asking whether Sociology of Work, with its “normal” disciplinary paradigms, could account for the new realities that were emerging at that time as a consequence of Post-Fordism in the globalized phase of capitalism. In 2012, a critical reading was carried out, as well as an update of those concepts, in an attempt to establish new challenges for social studies of work. On both occasions it was claimed that Sociology of Work faced a crisis marked by an economic reductionism that tends to consider social actors of the labor process as mere categories of the “factory model.” It was also stated that the radical transformation of the 20th century socio-labor actors -that was becoming increasingly evident in the 90 s and clearly developed in the 21st century-was modifying the ability to keep the focus on the discipline's mainstream. As a result, it was necessary to incorporate both subjective and collective dimensions into the context of disciplinary analysis. This paper aims at advancing theoretical issues that need to be reviewed and changed so as to understand the new global scenario and its consequences for labor relationships and workers.