一个金融上的社会运动的观点:社会责任投资重要

上海师范大学

摘要：此文所讨论的是社会运动如何影响经济体系。运用一种政治-文化的方式去对待市场，这意味着折衷行为可以利用一个可预见的新制度去帮助改变现有的金融制度。此文的观点立足于支持社会运动重整经济制度出发。

关键词：框架制度变化组织域社会运动

Abstract:This study discusses how social movements can influence economic systems.Employing a political-cultural approach to markets,it purports that‘compromise movements’can help change existing institutions by proposing new ones.This study argues in favor of the role of social movements in reforming economic institutions.

KEY WORDS:framinginstitutional changeorganizational fieldsocial movements

Changing institutions: the role of social movements

How do social movements change institutions？

A ‘coordinated collective action form’ （Touraine,1969;Zald and Berger,1978） can be identified as a new social movement if it satisfies four features: having a collective identity,sharing individual resources in the pursuit of a common purpose,aiming to change existing institutions,and providing a new orientation for society.In a given organizational field （DiMaggio and Powell,1983）,institutions provide guidance on how actors should behave in the field （Friedland and Alford,1991）.The concept of organizational field has been widely developed by institutional theorists.DiMaggio and Powell （1983） defined it as organizations that,in the aggregate,constitute a recognized area of institutional life:key suppliers,resource and product consumers,regulatory agencies,and other organizations that produce similar services or products.

Social movements aim at transforming existing institutions.They have been traditionally designed to change institutions by opposing them from the outside.To do so,they first de-institutionalize the existing beliefs,norms,and values embedded in the current form.Then,they create new forms that instantiate new beliefs,norms,and values.Hence,social movements have been theorized as ‘protest movements’,which rally challengers against existing institutions by adopting an ‘outsider’ position.This relates to the traditional view of institutions as a punctuated equilibrium disturbed by exogenous jolts.The Civil Rights Movements （Andrews,2001） and the Suffragette Movement （McCammon et al.,2001） are examples.

More recently,social movement theorists have acknowledged that social movements can also emerge among the organizational field （Fligstein,1996,2001）.For example,Rao et al.（2003） explored how social movements underlined re-institutionalization in certain professions.They demonstrated how the Nouvelle Cuisine movement （re）shaped the institutional logics and role identities of French cuisine.In this case,social movements gather ‘insider challengers’ who rely on existing institutions and hitherto aim to theorize,articulate,and combine new projects or practices with prevalent arrangements.Contrary to traditional social movements,these movements aim to change existing institutions not by opposing them from the outside,but by transforming them from the inside.This internal change can rely on a compromise approach or a conflicting approach between incumbents and challengers.Lastly,a social movement can gather both outsider and insider challengers.Notably,this is the case for the French SRI movement which,while emerging within the asset management field,has implicated challengers from outside organizations,such as NGOs and trade unions.

The key success factors of a social movement

The impact of a social movement on institutions often hinges on how it forms new organizations and shapes collective identities.McAdam et al.（1996） identified three key factors mobilized by challengers to succeed,usually known as a resource mobilization

perspective:

1.The mobilizing structures that refer to the organizational forms （formal and informal）available to the challengers.

2.The political opportunity structures （and associated constraints）,which provides the context to challengers.

3.The framing processes defined as the collective processes of interpretation,attribution,and social construction,which mediate opportunity and action.

According to social movement theorists,challengers must frame the issues they defend in order to make them resonate with the ideologies,identities,and cultural meanings of potential supporters of the movement,namely among the incumbents （Benford and Snow,2000）.The concept of frame refers to the work of Goffman who defines it as an ‘interpretative scheme’,which helps actors reduce socio-cultural complexity in order to perceive,interpret,and act in a socially efficient way （Goffman,1974）.The framing of a social movement relates to its strategic creation and manipulation of shared meanings,world interpretations,and problems.Therefore,framing is a cognitive mechanism,which affects how people perceive the interests,identities,and possibilities for social change （Campbell,1988）.It relies on the mobilizing and political opportunity structures available to the challengers.

References:

Adler,P.A.and P.Adler: 1987,Membership Roles in Field Research （Sage Publications,Newbury Park,CA）

Andrews,K.T.: 2001,‘Social Movements and Policy Implementation: The Mississippi Civil Rights Movement and the War on Poverty,1965 to 1971’,American Sociological Review 66（1）,7195

Annan,K.: 2005,The Principles for Responsible Investment （UNEP-Finance Initiatives Publications）

Azoulay,O.and V.Zeller: 2006,ISR: strate′gie de ‘‘niche’’ ou ‘‘mainstream’’？ ［SRI: A ‘Niche’ or a ‘Mainstream’ Strategy？］.Revue d’Economie Financie`re 85,191208

Barker,R.S.: 1990,Political Legitimacy and the State （Oxford University Press,New York）

Benford,R.D.and D.A.Snow: 2000,‘Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment’,Annual Review of Sociology 26,611639

Bengtsson,E.: 2008,‘A History of Scandinavian Socially Responsible Investing’,Journal of Business Ethics 82（4）,969-983（责任编辑：陈 通）