Pub Date : 2022-03-31DOI: 10.1080/14036096.2022.2058603
Allison Roberts, J. Steinkopf
ABSTRACT We use the sociocognitive approach of critical discourse studies to examine the media’s discourse on homelessness in Portland, Oregon in the United States. Using the discourse-cognition-society triangle of critical discourse studies we find that the discursive and semiotic structures largely advance an us-versus-them discourse and personal choice. These discourses build upon cognitive structures that include reference to the ideologies of hard work and personal responsibility, which are fundamental ideologies in the United States. The need for collective action is recognized but is muted. These discourses and cognitions interact with and inform social and political efforts by advancing solutions which rely upon non-profits rather than government intervention, for government intervention is portrayed as inefficient. This belief in the limited role of government is a primary ideology in the United States. Contributions of this study include demonstrating how the central ideologies of a nation influence local understandings of homelessness.
{"title":"The Discourse-cognition-society Triangle of Homelessness: A Critical Discourse Study","authors":"Allison Roberts, J. Steinkopf","doi":"10.1080/14036096.2022.2058603","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2022.2058603","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We use the sociocognitive approach of critical discourse studies to examine the media’s discourse on homelessness in Portland, Oregon in the United States. Using the discourse-cognition-society triangle of critical discourse studies we find that the discursive and semiotic structures largely advance an us-versus-them discourse and personal choice. These discourses build upon cognitive structures that include reference to the ideologies of hard work and personal responsibility, which are fundamental ideologies in the United States. The need for collective action is recognized but is muted. These discourses and cognitions interact with and inform social and political efforts by advancing solutions which rely upon non-profits rather than government intervention, for government intervention is portrayed as inefficient. This belief in the limited role of government is a primary ideology in the United States. Contributions of this study include demonstrating how the central ideologies of a nation influence local understandings of homelessness.","PeriodicalId":47433,"journal":{"name":"Housing Theory & Society","volume":"39 1","pages":"573 - 588"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2022-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49001703","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-15DOI: 10.1080/14036096.2021.2022751
Viggo Nordvik, Kristin Aarland
ABSTRACT The focus article of this issue of the journal argues for the need to use tools and concepts from many disciplines of social science when analysing real-world housing market. Lux and Sunega argue that analyses relying only on the toolbox of mainstream economics fail to capture important aspects of the working of the markets, we agree. However, part of the critique of mainstream economics is based on a caricature of economics. In order to arrive at a new pragmatic socio-economics of housing markets, we see it as crucial to arrive at explicit, concise and shared interpretations of core concepts, e.g. the concept of norms is often used differently in different disciplines. Two of the lines of future housing market research proposed by Lux and Sunega that we regard as particular promising is design of surveys capturing variation in expectations, preferences and risk attitudes and use of (stochastic) agent-based models.
{"title":"On the Inadequacy of Economics for Understanding Housing Markets – A Pragmatic Response","authors":"Viggo Nordvik, Kristin Aarland","doi":"10.1080/14036096.2021.2022751","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2021.2022751","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The focus article of this issue of the journal argues for the need to use tools and concepts from many disciplines of social science when analysing real-world housing market. Lux and Sunega argue that analyses relying only on the toolbox of mainstream economics fail to capture important aspects of the working of the markets, we agree. However, part of the critique of mainstream economics is based on a caricature of economics. In order to arrive at a new pragmatic socio-economics of housing markets, we see it as crucial to arrive at explicit, concise and shared interpretations of core concepts, e.g. the concept of norms is often used differently in different disciplines. Two of the lines of future housing market research proposed by Lux and Sunega that we regard as particular promising is design of surveys capturing variation in expectations, preferences and risk attitudes and use of (stochastic) agent-based models.","PeriodicalId":47433,"journal":{"name":"Housing Theory & Society","volume":"39 1","pages":"162 - 167"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47585528","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-15DOI: 10.1080/14036096.2021.2022753
Martin Lux, Petr Sunega
ABSTRACT In our Focus article we introduced pragmatic socioeconomics, a methodological and theoretical approach that we believe may create a more solid interdisciplinary bridge between sociology and mainstream economics. This paper reacts on the critical review of our approach by six academics recognised in the field. We devoted the most space to those comments that uncovered the blank spots in our approach or areas that we had poorly addressed. We better defined the position of pragmatic socioeconomic towards ‘grand naratives’, traditional economics, economic sociology or new institutional economics. Our new program certainly has a long road ahead of it before it can prove its value. Along the way it will have to deal with both unfair accusations and justified criticisms highlighting areas where it is theoretically and methodologically unclear – just as we have tried to deal with these criticisms in this paper. Whatever its future is, we hope that this paper is opening up an important interdisciplinary discussion much needed in housing studies.
{"title":"Bridging Economics and Sociology: Responses to a Critique of Pragmatic Socioeconomics","authors":"Martin Lux, Petr Sunega","doi":"10.1080/14036096.2021.2022753","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2021.2022753","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In our Focus article we introduced pragmatic socioeconomics, a methodological and theoretical approach that we believe may create a more solid interdisciplinary bridge between sociology and mainstream economics. This paper reacts on the critical review of our approach by six academics recognised in the field. We devoted the most space to those comments that uncovered the blank spots in our approach or areas that we had poorly addressed. We better defined the position of pragmatic socioeconomic towards ‘grand naratives’, traditional economics, economic sociology or new institutional economics. Our new program certainly has a long road ahead of it before it can prove its value. Along the way it will have to deal with both unfair accusations and justified criticisms highlighting areas where it is theoretically and methodologically unclear – just as we have tried to deal with these criticisms in this paper. Whatever its future is, we hope that this paper is opening up an important interdisciplinary discussion much needed in housing studies.","PeriodicalId":47433,"journal":{"name":"Housing Theory & Society","volume":"39 1","pages":"180 - 199"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"60239747","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-15DOI: 10.1080/14036096.2022.2019953
Hannu Ruonavaara
It is quite well-known that economics and sociology as disciplines have a somewhat strained relationship. Both disciplines have (some of) their roots in the 18 century Political Economy (Adam Smith, Adam Ferguson and others) but from very early on the two disciplines started to develop quite different perspectives to social life. The most self-consciously sociologist of the founders of sociology, Émile Durkheim, was rather dismissive of the utilitarian and individualist view of the human actor that he found in the works of the economists of the time. He saw the search for individual gain as one side of the human being whereas solidarity with others was the other side – the one that constituted a functioning society. The difference between economics and sociology has often been summarized by a simple juxtaposition: economics explains behaviour by reference to people’s rational pursuit of their interests whereas sociology explains it by reference to people’s adherence to, or breaking of, the social norms of the community or society. While there is some truth in this formulation, it is nevertheless a quite coarse simplification hiding variety of perspectives within the disciplines. Apart from the difference between the strategy of explanation, the two disciplines have developed quite different methodological orientations: mainstream economics makes and tests formalized mathematical models, whereas sociology uses a variety of, often less formalized, quantitative and qualitative research techniques. There have been several attempts to bridge the gap between these two cultures of inquiry. In sociology, the special field of economic sociology has incorporated insights from economics to sociological analysis of economic phenomena. In economics, behavioural and institutional economics have been influenced by ideas coming from sociology. There have also been some attempts to combine what are considered the best insights from both disciplines into an approach that is strictly neither economics, nor sociology. In this Focus article issue of Housing, Theory and Society, we meet one such attempt tailored to the investigation of a carefully limited range of housing issues – but mutatis mutandis relevant to many others. Martin Lux and Petr Sunega are experienced housing researchers. Their Focus article Pragmatic socioeconomics: A way towards new findings on sources of (housing) market instability has grown out of their 10 years’ experience of doing research on the impact of social norms on home-buying behaviour and the housing market consequences of that behaviour in the Czech Republic. The Focus article is a programmatic one proposing us a new approach for investigation housing choice and its impacts on markets. HTS has invited six comments on the Lux and Sunega’s Focus article from eight distinguished housing scholars representing economics and sociology (or both). The comments by Atkinson and Jacobs, Clapham, Dewilde, Norvik and Aarland, Nygaard HOUSING, THEO
{"title":"Bridging Economics and Sociology in Housing Research","authors":"Hannu Ruonavaara","doi":"10.1080/14036096.2022.2019953","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2022.2019953","url":null,"abstract":"It is quite well-known that economics and sociology as disciplines have a somewhat strained relationship. Both disciplines have (some of) their roots in the 18 century Political Economy (Adam Smith, Adam Ferguson and others) but from very early on the two disciplines started to develop quite different perspectives to social life. The most self-consciously sociologist of the founders of sociology, Émile Durkheim, was rather dismissive of the utilitarian and individualist view of the human actor that he found in the works of the economists of the time. He saw the search for individual gain as one side of the human being whereas solidarity with others was the other side – the one that constituted a functioning society. The difference between economics and sociology has often been summarized by a simple juxtaposition: economics explains behaviour by reference to people’s rational pursuit of their interests whereas sociology explains it by reference to people’s adherence to, or breaking of, the social norms of the community or society. While there is some truth in this formulation, it is nevertheless a quite coarse simplification hiding variety of perspectives within the disciplines. Apart from the difference between the strategy of explanation, the two disciplines have developed quite different methodological orientations: mainstream economics makes and tests formalized mathematical models, whereas sociology uses a variety of, often less formalized, quantitative and qualitative research techniques. There have been several attempts to bridge the gap between these two cultures of inquiry. In sociology, the special field of economic sociology has incorporated insights from economics to sociological analysis of economic phenomena. In economics, behavioural and institutional economics have been influenced by ideas coming from sociology. There have also been some attempts to combine what are considered the best insights from both disciplines into an approach that is strictly neither economics, nor sociology. In this Focus article issue of Housing, Theory and Society, we meet one such attempt tailored to the investigation of a carefully limited range of housing issues – but mutatis mutandis relevant to many others. Martin Lux and Petr Sunega are experienced housing researchers. Their Focus article Pragmatic socioeconomics: A way towards new findings on sources of (housing) market instability has grown out of their 10 years’ experience of doing research on the impact of social norms on home-buying behaviour and the housing market consequences of that behaviour in the Czech Republic. The Focus article is a programmatic one proposing us a new approach for investigation housing choice and its impacts on markets. HTS has invited six comments on the Lux and Sunega’s Focus article from eight distinguished housing scholars representing economics and sociology (or both). The comments by Atkinson and Jacobs, Clapham, Dewilde, Norvik and Aarland, Nygaard HOUSING, THEO","PeriodicalId":47433,"journal":{"name":"Housing Theory & Society","volume":"39 1","pages":"127 - 128"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46845751","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-15DOI: 10.1080/14036096.2021.2022752
C. Nygaard
ABSTRACT “Pragmatic socioeconomics” seeks to provide a more solid interdisciplinary bridge between economics and sociology, by pragmatically setting aside incompatibles. Its key point, that social norms condition resource allocations also in housing markets, is important and matters for our analysis of affordability and financial and macroeconomic stability. It also extends to the role of housing in transitioning to socially and environmentally sustainable urban futures. However, there are also aspects of “pragmatic socioeconomics” that become entangled in conceptual fault lines between sociology and neoclassical economics and also within economics itself. Drawing on institutional economics (old and new), this commentary focuses on the upwards and downwards reconstituting effects of norms and institutions in decision-making and its implications for “pragmatic socioeconomics”. A second and shorter commentary relates to discussion of price elasticities (demand, income and supply). Both these, in turn, relate to the effect of norms and institutions on housing markets.
{"title":"On “Pragmatic Socioeconomics” and the Architecture of the Rational Decision Making Framework","authors":"C. Nygaard","doi":"10.1080/14036096.2021.2022752","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2021.2022752","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT “Pragmatic socioeconomics” seeks to provide a more solid interdisciplinary bridge between economics and sociology, by pragmatically setting aside incompatibles. Its key point, that social norms condition resource allocations also in housing markets, is important and matters for our analysis of affordability and financial and macroeconomic stability. It also extends to the role of housing in transitioning to socially and environmentally sustainable urban futures. However, there are also aspects of “pragmatic socioeconomics” that become entangled in conceptual fault lines between sociology and neoclassical economics and also within economics itself. Drawing on institutional economics (old and new), this commentary focuses on the upwards and downwards reconstituting effects of norms and institutions in decision-making and its implications for “pragmatic socioeconomics”. A second and shorter commentary relates to discussion of price elasticities (demand, income and supply). Both these, in turn, relate to the effect of norms and institutions on housing markets.","PeriodicalId":47433,"journal":{"name":"Housing Theory & Society","volume":"39 1","pages":"168 - 174"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46265836","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-15DOI: 10.1080/14036096.2021.2022747
D. Clapham
ABSTRACT This commentary examines the concept of “pragmatic socio-economics” and argues that it is unlikely to offer a major breakthrough in the search for a holistic approach to the study of housing. Although the authors outline the serious barriers to the integration of sociological insights into neo-classical economics, they seek to avoid these through the adoption of concepts, such as that of social norms, that could be acceptable to economists. The result does not challenge some of the fundamental assumptions of neo-classical economics that need to be amended if meaningful integration with sociology is to be achieved.
{"title":"Pragmatic Socio-economics: A Way Forward?","authors":"D. Clapham","doi":"10.1080/14036096.2021.2022747","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2021.2022747","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This commentary examines the concept of “pragmatic socio-economics” and argues that it is unlikely to offer a major breakthrough in the search for a holistic approach to the study of housing. Although the authors outline the serious barriers to the integration of sociological insights into neo-classical economics, they seek to avoid these through the adoption of concepts, such as that of social norms, that could be acceptable to economists. The result does not challenge some of the fundamental assumptions of neo-classical economics that need to be amended if meaningful integration with sociology is to be achieved.","PeriodicalId":47433,"journal":{"name":"Housing Theory & Society","volume":"39 1","pages":"151 - 154"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42162470","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-15DOI: 10.1080/14036096.2021.2022750
Elias Oikarinen
ABSTRACT The article aims to create a more solid interdisciplinary bridge between sociology and mainstream economics in the study of economic behaviour, especially in terms of the housing market. This is an important aim: It would indeed be valuable to combine insights from both disciplines to find mutually benefiting synergies. The aim also is challenging, and I find the merit of this article to be in raising such discussion and providing an attempt to offer insights from sociological housing research on the understanding of housing price dynamics and thus on housing economics. Unfortunately, there are several notable complications is the article’s discussion and analysis, due to which I do not think the aim of the article is reached. In any matter, I encourage the authors as well as other sociologists and housing economists to continue this debate.
{"title":"Comments on “Pragmatic Socioeconomics: A Way Towards New Findings on Sources of (Housing) Market Instability”","authors":"Elias Oikarinen","doi":"10.1080/14036096.2021.2022750","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2021.2022750","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The article aims to create a more solid interdisciplinary bridge between sociology and mainstream economics in the study of economic behaviour, especially in terms of the housing market. This is an important aim: It would indeed be valuable to combine insights from both disciplines to find mutually benefiting synergies. The aim also is challenging, and I find the merit of this article to be in raising such discussion and providing an attempt to offer insights from sociological housing research on the understanding of housing price dynamics and thus on housing economics. Unfortunately, there are several notable complications is the article’s discussion and analysis, due to which I do not think the aim of the article is reached. In any matter, I encourage the authors as well as other sociologists and housing economists to continue this debate.","PeriodicalId":47433,"journal":{"name":"Housing Theory & Society","volume":"39 1","pages":"175 - 179"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43747424","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-15DOI: 10.1080/14036096.2021.2022749
Caroline Dewilde
ABSTRACT In this commentary from sociology, I argue that whilst Lux and Sunega’s (2022) plea for “pragmatic socio-economics” is an interesting starting point towards a more interdisciplinary study of issues related to housing market inefficiencies, it makes theoretical sense to strife towards a more ambitious integration of sociology and economics. Contrary to universally applicable emotional, cognitive or even physiological mechanisms, social norms are intricately interwoven with the institutional context in which different social groups enact them. Though “universal” social norms historically lie at the basis of variegated institutional arrangements, the latter over time develop in ways reflective of initial and evolving power relationships. Analyses of recursive relationships between institutions and social norms ideally include issues of power. I illustrate the potential of such a more integrated approach by presenting a “case” from the politics of welfare and labour market reform.
{"title":"Too Pragmatic? A Commentary from Sociology on Lux and Sunega’s Plea for ‘Pragmatic Socio-Economics’","authors":"Caroline Dewilde","doi":"10.1080/14036096.2021.2022749","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2021.2022749","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this commentary from sociology, I argue that whilst Lux and Sunega’s (2022) plea for “pragmatic socio-economics” is an interesting starting point towards a more interdisciplinary study of issues related to housing market inefficiencies, it makes theoretical sense to strife towards a more ambitious integration of sociology and economics. Contrary to universally applicable emotional, cognitive or even physiological mechanisms, social norms are intricately interwoven with the institutional context in which different social groups enact them. Though “universal” social norms historically lie at the basis of variegated institutional arrangements, the latter over time develop in ways reflective of initial and evolving power relationships. Analyses of recursive relationships between institutions and social norms ideally include issues of power. I illustrate the potential of such a more integrated approach by presenting a “case” from the politics of welfare and labour market reform.","PeriodicalId":47433,"journal":{"name":"Housing Theory & Society","volume":"39 1","pages":"155 - 161"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45004979","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-15DOI: 10.1080/14036096.2020.1853226
Martin Lux, Petr Sunega
ABSTRACT In this paper, we aim to define basic principles of pragmatic socioeconomics that may create a more solid interdisciplinary bridge between sociology and mainstream economics in the study of economic behaviour. The merit of this new concept demonstrates itself in the results of our research on the impact of social norms on home-buying behaviour and the consequences that such behaviour has for the operation of the housing market and housing price trends. That research demonstrates that interdisciplinary economic sociology may significantly enrich contemporary knowledge about housing price volatility – a phenomenon which increasingly determines social and economic stability in the world. Middle-range interdisciplinary research following the concept of pragmatic socioeconomics introduced in this paper is not limited to housing issues and may help fill in gaps in our knowledge of how markets operate in general.
{"title":"Pragmatic Socioeconomics: A Way Towards New Findings on Sources of (Housing) Market Instability","authors":"Martin Lux, Petr Sunega","doi":"10.1080/14036096.2020.1853226","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2020.1853226","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this paper, we aim to define basic principles of pragmatic socioeconomics that may create a more solid interdisciplinary bridge between sociology and mainstream economics in the study of economic behaviour. The merit of this new concept demonstrates itself in the results of our research on the impact of social norms on home-buying behaviour and the consequences that such behaviour has for the operation of the housing market and housing price trends. That research demonstrates that interdisciplinary economic sociology may significantly enrich contemporary knowledge about housing price volatility – a phenomenon which increasingly determines social and economic stability in the world. Middle-range interdisciplinary research following the concept of pragmatic socioeconomics introduced in this paper is not limited to housing issues and may help fill in gaps in our knowledge of how markets operate in general.","PeriodicalId":47433,"journal":{"name":"Housing Theory & Society","volume":"39 1","pages":"129 - 146"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44115115","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-15DOI: 10.1080/14036096.2021.2022748
R. Atkinson, K. Jacobs
ABSTRACT In this brief article, we reflect on the contribution of Martin Lux and Petr Sunega to the role of sociology in the domain of housing economics. Applauding the attempt at injecting a more sociologically informed housing economics, we draw attention to the continuous need to guard against over-abstraction and to ensure that housing’s role as a major source of material inequality in many societies must be fully recognized.
{"title":"Housing, Inequality and Sociology: A Comment on Pragmatic Socioeconomics","authors":"R. Atkinson, K. Jacobs","doi":"10.1080/14036096.2021.2022748","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2021.2022748","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this brief article, we reflect on the contribution of Martin Lux and Petr Sunega to the role of sociology in the domain of housing economics. Applauding the attempt at injecting a more sociologically informed housing economics, we draw attention to the continuous need to guard against over-abstraction and to ensure that housing’s role as a major source of material inequality in many societies must be fully recognized.","PeriodicalId":47433,"journal":{"name":"Housing Theory & Society","volume":"39 1","pages":"147 - 150"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41559449","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：