While Polanyi argues that all economies are embedded and enmeshed in social relations and institutions, he tends to see market economy as disembedded, which reveals a tension in his thought. The main motivation for this paper is to understand the origins of this tension. On the basis of a systematic formulation of Polanyi's work, it is argued that Polanyi employs embeddedness in a dual manner: (a) as a methodological principle akin to methodological holism, and (b) as a theoretical proposition on the changing place of economy in society. These two formulations of embeddedness contradict each other. After tracing out the origins of this contradiction, this paper concludes by considering the implications of this analysis for economic sociology. It is argued that embeddedness as a methodological principle is the only acceptable usage of the term. Yet, in this capacity, embeddedness falls short of economic sociology's goal of providing a theoretical alternative to neoclassical economics.

amount of previous work, it is refreshing and admirable that they don't use the book's pages as a teleological promotion of PB as the answer to society's problems. In fact, the authors make a significant and transparent effort to hold themselves at arm's length from their object of analysis. Participation is not necessarily evidence of democracy. What matters for democracy is what happens after the participation has occurred. It is fundamentally a pragmatist challenge to the literature (and one can sense the presence of John Dewey and others behind the writing): What appreciable difference does participation make in the lives (and actions) of participants, or of anyone else, for that matter? In some cases, the authors tell us, the answer is ''not very much.'' So, for those who care about democracy, there is still significant work to be done in research and in practice.This leads me to a minor disappointment with the book. In short, I wanted more details on how to connect participation to governance. What should we do? What should we be on the lookout for? How can we do it? This is a compliment, as I found myself convinced in the writing that the authors really know their stuff. Who better to muse on this (and at least spend a page or two more than they allotted in the conclusion) envisioning a real utopia or two? Perhaps this will be their next project. I certainly hope so. This is a unique and important piece of scholarship. The book certainly left me feeling invigorated and motivated to think differently about my own work on deliberation and democracy. I plan to use this book in my courses on Political Sociology and Democracy at the undergraduate level, and I will ask all of my graduate students working in this area to read it. It will become a ''must-read'' in the field. I imagine the book will be of interest to sociologists, political scientists, and communication scholars, as well as anyone who wants to understand how democracy works.

This article shows, through a detailed examination of Karl Polanyi's published works and unpublished writings, that Polanyi relies heavily on the neoclassical economics of his time in his conceptualization of the market in capitalist societies. This approach is instrumental to the thesis of The Great Transformation concerning the destructive impact of the market on society. However, such an analytical perspective neglects the social character of the market economy. This perspective is also deficient in capturing why the market is destructive to the social fabric. By identifying the origins and limitations of Polanyi's self-regulating market, this article contributes to critical reevaluations of his work that aim to expand the scope of Polanyian analysis. In particular, this article outlines how the analysis of the market's contradictory place is not predicated on the notion of self-regulation. Polanyi's own historical work, as opposed to his theoretical articulations, illustrates such an analysis.

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.

The authors propose a novel technique for the visualization of networks that contain a hierarchical structure: networks in which certain nodes and groups of nodes can be classified through a relation of precedence. Networks with a hierarchical structure frequently arise in sociology and various other disciplines, but the existing methods for visualizing such networks leave much to be desired. The method developed in this work builds on the tradition of visualization in social network analysis; it aims to simultaneously represent the positions of different nodes and the relationships between groups containing the nodes in the network. As such, the proposed visualization method facilitates theoretical and empirical analysis of social structures by algorithmically combining information from the underlying network with the information from the hierarchical structure of the network. The authors illustrate the proposed method with social networks examined through cohesive blocking and k-core decomposition.