His Master’s Voice? Conceptualizing the Relationship Between Business and the World Economic Forum

  • Christina Garsten
  • Adrienne Sörbom
Keywords: corporations, funding, think tanks, agency, World Economic Forum

Abstract

Commonly, the relationship between corporations and non-for profit organizations, such as foundations, think tanks and private research institutes, is analyzed in terms suggesting that when acting as funders corporations set the frames for the non-for profit organization who, in turn, not only mimics but also serves as to broadcast the views of its funder. Drawing on the case of the Swizz based foundation/think tank World Economic Forum and its corporate funders we scrutinize this relationship. We show that as an organization interested in global policy making it is of vital importance for the Forum to construct its own agency, not merely giving voice to its funder’s views, and that it will do so drawing on the resources that the funders provide. Moreover, we submit that as organizations all partaking actors will endeavor to construct their own agency, oftentimes by drawing on the resources of others. In so doing, actors may have both overlapping and divergent interests. Evoking the Lévi-Strauss concept of the bricoleur, we analyze how the various and multifaceted priorities of corporations will not only be filtered by the Form, but it will also make use of the resources at hand for organizing forth own policy messages. The result is a complex and dynamic web of actors and voices.

References

Abelson, D. E. 2009. Do Think Tanks Matter? Assessing the Impact of Public Policy Institutes. 2nd Edition. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.

Aspers, P. 2010. 'The Second Road to Phenomenological Sociology.' Society 47 (3) 214 – 219.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-010-9306-6

Arin, K.Y. 2014. Think Tanks: The Brain Trust of US Foreign Policy. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachsmedien.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02935-7

Baker, T., A.S. Miner, and D.T. Eesley 2003. 'Improvising firms: Bricolage, account giving, and improvisational competency in the founding process.' Research Policy 32 (2): 255–276.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00099-9

Barley, S. 2010. 'Building an institutional field to corral a government: A case to set an agenda for organization studies.' Organization Studies 31 (6): 777–805.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840610372572

Bourdieu, P. 1986. 'The Forms of Capital', in J. G. Richardson (ed.) Handbook of Theory and Research for the. Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood Press. Pp. 241-258.

Campbell, J. K. and O. K. Pedersen 2014. The National Origins of Policy Ideas: Knowledge Regimes in the United States, France, Germany, and Denmark. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691150314.001.0001

Clemons, S. C. 2003. 'The corruption of think tanks.' JPRI Critique, X(2).

Braithwaite, J. and P. Drahos 2000. Global Business Regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fliegstein, N. 1990. The Transformation of Corporate Control. Harvard: Harvard University Press.

Goffman, I. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Random House.

Granovetter, M. S. 1973. 'The strength of weak ties.' American Journal of Sociology 78 (6): 1360–80.

https://doi.org/10.1086/225469

Hawkins, B. and J. McCambridge 2014. 'Industry actors, Think tanks and Policy in the United Kingdom.' American Journal of Public Health 104 (8).

https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301858

Hillman, A. J., G. D. Keim and D. Schuler 2004. 'Corporate political activity: A Review and Research Agenda.' Journal of Management 30 (6): 837–857.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.003

Lakoff, G. 2008. The Political Mind: Why You Can't Understand 21st Century Politics With an 18th-Century Brain. New York: Penguin Books.

Latour, B. 1986. 'The powers of association.' In J. Law (ed) Power, Action and Belief, A New Sociology of Knowledge?. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Lawton, T., S. McGuire and T. Rajwani 2012. 'Corporate political activity: A literature review and research agenda.' International Journal of Management Reviews 15 (1): 86–105.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2012.00337.x

Lévi-Strauss, C. 1966. Savage mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Kingdon J.W. 1984/2011. Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. New York: Longman.

McGarrity, T. and W. Wagner 2008. Bending Science: How Special Inter¬ests Corrupt Public Health Research. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Medvetz, T. 2012a. 'Murky power: 'Think tanks' as boundary organizations.' In D. Courpasson, D. Golsorkhi, and J. J. Sallaz (eds) Rethinking Forms of Power in Organizations, Institutions, and Markets. Bradford, UK: Emerald Group Publishing, pp. 113 – 33.

https://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X(2012)0000034007

Medvetz, T. 2012b. Think Tanks in America: Merchants of Policy and Power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226517308.001.0001

Miller, D. and Harkins, C. 2010. 'Corporate strategy, corporate capture: Food and alcohol industry lobbying and social policy.' Critical Social Policy 30 (4): 564–589.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018310376805

Mittelman, J.H. 2013. 'Global Bricolage: emerging market powers and polycentric governance.' Third World Quarterly 34 (1): 23–37.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2013.755355

Moeran, B. 2011a. 'Trade Fairs, Markets and Fields: Framing Imagined as Real Communities.' Historical Social Research, 36 (3): 79-98.

Moeran, B. 2011b. The Ursula Fainence Dinnerware Series by Royal Copenhagen. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School.

Moeran, B. and Strandgaard Pedersen, J. 2011. Negotiating Values in the Creative Industries. Cambridge: University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511790393

Nye, J. S. 2004. Soft Power: The Means to Succeed in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs.

Pigman, G. A. 2007. The World Economic Forum: A Multi-Stakeholder Approach to Global Governance. London: Routledge.

https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203962756

Rich, A. 2004. Think Tanks, Public Policy, and the Politics of Expertise. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511509889

Ruggie, J. G. 2004. 'Reconstituting the global public domain: Issues, actors and practices.' European Journal of International Relations 10 (4): 499–531.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066104047847

Scherer, A.G. and G. Palazzo 2011. 'The new political role of business in a globalised world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance and democracy.' Journal of Management Studies 48 (4): 899–931.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00950.x

Scholte, J. A. 2005. Globalization: A Critical Introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-21207-7

Sklair, L. 2002. 'The Transnational Capitalist Class and Global Politics: Deconstructing the Corporate: State Connection.' International Political Science Review 23 (22): 159–174.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512102023002003

Skove, L. 2006. 'The Role of Trade Fairs in the Global Fashion Business', Current Sociology 54 (5): 764–783.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392106066815

Stone, D. 2013. Knowledge Networks and Transnational Governance: The Public-Private Policy Nexus in the Global Agora. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137022912

Stone, D. 2012. 'Governance via Knowledge: Actors, Institutions and Networks.' In D. Levi-Faur (ed) OUP Handbook of Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Stone, D. 2008. 'Global public policy, transnational policy communities and their networks', Policy Studies Journal 36 (1): 19–38.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2007.00251.x

Stone, D. 1996. Capturing the Political Imagination: Think Tanks and the Policy Process. London: Frank Cass.

Stone, D. and A. Denham (eds) 2004. Think Tank Traditions: Policy Research and the Politics of Ideas. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Published
2019-04-29
Section
Articles