Global Value Chains and Uneven Development (eBook)

Corporate Strategies and Class Dynamics in Argentinian Agribusiness

Christin Bernhold (Autor)

eBook Download: EPUB

2022 | 1. Auflage
479 Seiten
Campus Verlag
978-3-593-45178-7 (ISBN)

Infos

Globale Wertschöpfungsketten (GWK) bieten überall auf der Welt Möglichkeiten für ökonomische und soziale Aufwertung? Das kolportieren zumindest Institutionen wie die Weltbank. Diese Annahme ist jedoch weder theoretisch noch empirisch haltbar, so der Befund von Christin Bernhold. Die Argumentation stützt sich auf eine ideologiekritische Diskussion der GWK-Forschung und eine umfassende Analyse von Upgrading-Strategien im argentinischen Agribusiness. Wirtschaftsverbände organisieren sich dort entlang von Agrar-Wertschöpfungsketten, um Partikularinteressen durchzusetzen. Durch »upgrading in and through class differentiation« werden Ausbeutungsverhältnisse und die ungleichen Geographien des Kapitalismus zum Wohle einiger weniger umgeformt, nicht aber aufgehoben.

Christin Bernhold, Dr. phil., ist wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin am Institut für Geographie der Universität Hamburg.

Textauszug

 2.Empirical Ideology Critique—A Theoretical-Methodological Note

This study has been conceived as what I choose to call an empirical ideology critique of the GVC upgrading paradigm. I have developed and pursued a research agenda that traces the contradictions within the (implicit) assumption that upgrading can engender general socioeconomic development within capitalism, provided the right institutional or business environment. My research design comprises both a theoretical critique of mainstream GVC analysis in reference to previous scholarly discussions (Chapters 3 and 4) and, specifically, in-depth, empirical research into the contradictions of upgrading (strategies and practices) in agro-industrial value chains in Argentina (Chapters 7–10).

To substantiate my endeavor, this chapter offers introductory reflections on my understanding of ideology and its immanent critique. Taking inspiration from historical materialist approaches, including from critical theory in the Frankfurt School tradition (hereafter referred to as Critical Theory) as well as from the work of the Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci, it is intended as a first part of the theoretical-methodological basis of this book. I build on this to ask: To what extent does the GVC approach adopt a critical position on the social conditions under which uneven development—which it intends to remedy by upgrading—is reproduced in global capitalism? The presentation of the empirical methods I have used and the fieldwork I have conducted in the course of this study follows in Chapter 5, which directly precedes the empirical sections.

In general, the remarks made in this chapter are of twofold relevance to this book. Alongside their epistemological and methodological significance for my critique of the GVC approach itself, this concerns the role of ideology more broadly, inasmuch the latter works to justify or conceal social relations of exploitation and domination and contributes to perpetuating them (Hawel 2008). I will address this in different sections of my empirical chapters where I examine (a) how corporate actors act on the ideological terrain to promote approval of particular upgrading strategies in agro-industrial global value chains and (b) patterns of ideological rationalizations and consensus building in a sample case of upgrading (Chapters 8–10).

Because of this double relevance, I elaborate on some characteristics of ideology in greater detail than a depiction of the ideology-critical method alone would require. In addition, defining ideology entails further mid-range thinking tools which form a part of my understanding of a Marxist social theory and which inform this study more broadly. That being said, this chapter does not in itself provide a sufficient theoretical framework, since the methodological reference to ideology critique does not mean that ideology is the main subject of my study. Further theoretical considerations will be elaborated in the respective sections where I need them to make sense of my findings.

As an initial remark, ideology is a contested concept among various Marxist, post-structuralist, and other scholars and it may be interpreted in distinct ways. It is not my aim here to retrace this debate in detail; I will instead outline my own reading of the issue to the extent of its relevance to my work.

When you look up the term ideology in a lexicon, you find a range of synonyms, including doctrine, Weltanschauung, or credo. In everyday parlance, it is mainly used in a broad and abstract manner, describing any form of viewing the world and reflecting upon it. In this instance, I am employing the concept of ideology in a more complex, and at the same time more concrete way. From a historical materialist perspective, defining ideology as an intellectual framework that includes language, notions, imageries, theories, and representation systems “in order to make sense of, define, figure out and render intelligible the way society works” is a starting point (Hall 1983, 59). This definition, however, is not in itself sufficiently concrete; hence, the following discussion of elements that I consider crucial for making sense of ideology, its role, and the consequential necessity of its immanent critique.

 2.1Ideology and the (lacking) aspiration of social liberation

As an important point of departure, my understanding of ideology is tightly connected to the aspiration to put an end to exploitation and domination in their manifold expressions within the capitalist social formation. In this vein, reasoning on ideology in the traditions of both Critical Theory and Gramsci’s work stems from the question of why exploited classes and oppressed or marginalized groups do not inevitably seek to change a status quo that entails their own exploitation, oppression, and uneven development.

To address this problem, the Frankfurt School takes the critique of ideology as one of its starting points. Even though Marx and Engels were aware of the importance of ideology, Adorno (1973) argues that their critique of political economy and notion of social change does not in itself suffice to explain the lack of emancipatory practice. He makes this consideration against the background that building a social formation based on the dictum “from each according to [their] abilities, to each according to [their] needs” (Marx 1989 [1875], 87) is in fact both possible and overdue in terms of historical and economic conditions, and yet, such a liberated society has still not been created.6 At the same time, theory production that contradicts this goal continues. However, this is not an unconditional call for philosophy. Adorno has agreed with Marx especially about the need to criticize theory building which is detached from historically given social conditions and contradictions.

While Critical Theory rather looks at the problem of ideology from a Freudian-Marxist psychoanalytical perspective, Gramsci’s approach is somewhat different. He asks how and why exploitation and oppression can often build upon a passive or even active consensus, including of the exploited and oppressed, to the hegemonic “historical bloc,” (Gramsci 2012 [1975]-e, 1249) even if this is not built on direct coercion.7 As I will detail below, Gramsci explores how ideology contributes to the stability of hegemony, i.e., predominance by consent. Vice versa, his concept of hegemony contributes to an understanding of how particular ideologies, entangled with material interests and concessions, come to dominate. His work on this issue concerns the ways in which consensus is organized politically-economically in class struggles, and how the respective ruling classes contend for dominance not only by controlling the means of production, but also by achieving a socioeconomic, political, and ideological-cultural hegemony that transcends antagonistic social relations.

Gramscian thinking shares Critical Theory’s concern of how ideology serves the particular interests of those who benefit from sustaining the status quo of global capitalism. However, in both approaches, ideology is not the only or main reason for lacking aspirations of liberation; it cannot be understood independently of its social basis. But inversely, capitalism necessarily relies on ideological justification. The exploitation and/or domination of people in historically and geographically specific forms, and the social acceptance thereof, indispensably rely on racist, gendered, and other ideological justifications (see Werner 2016a). This also includes affirmative ideological patterns, such as Margaret Thatcher’s There Is No Alternative or the belief that no social formation could possibly...

Produkt-Details

• Erscheint lt. Verlag: 14.12.2022
• Reihe/Serie: International Labour Studies
• Reihe/Serie: International Labour Studies
• Verlagsort: Frankfurt am Main
• Sprache: englisch
• Themenwelt: Sozialwissenschaften ► Soziologie ► Spezielle Soziologien
• Schlagworte: Argentinien • Getreideanbau • Rapsanbau • Soziologie • Wertschöpfungskette • Wirtschaftsgeographie
• ISBN-10: 3-593-45178-6 / 3593451786
• ISBN-13: 978-3-593-45178-7 / 9783593451787