Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II

Autores
Auvray, Tristan; Durand, Cédric; Rabinovich, Joel; Rikap, Cecilia Alejandra
Año de publicación
2021
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
This paper argues that, as far as the investment behavior of non-financial corporations is concerned, the apparent continuity over the last four decades suggested by the corporate financialization label is misleading. Indeed, while the disconnection between profitability and investment is a robust stylized fact for most of the period, with cumulative detrimental consequences for labor, we contend that the underlying mechanisms changed meaningfully at the turn of the millennium. This contribution identifies—empirically and theoretically—two distinct successive corporate financialization regimes (Mark I and Mark II) and explains their evolutionary articulation. Financialization Mark I is characterized by the empowerment of financial actors: in a context of high interest rates and full-blown liberalization, diminishing retained earnings by non-financial corporations resulted in a dramatic slowdown of investment. Contrastingly, Financialization Mark II is characterized by a strongly established financial hegemony with new forms of intellectual and financial monopoly. In this configuration, interest rates are low and global value chains are deeply seated. This fuels rampant deflationary pressure, which changes the overall dynamic of the profit-investment nexus. Then, in Financialization Mark II, contrary to what occurred during Financialization Mark I, distributed profits are the consequence of slow investment.
Fil: Auvray, Tristan. Universite de Paris 13-Nord; Francia
Fil: Durand, Cédric. Universite de Paris 13-Nord; Francia. Universidad de Ginebra; Suiza
Fil: Rabinovich, Joel. University Of Leeds.; Reino Unido
Fil: Rikap, Cecilia Alejandra. Universite de Paris; Francia. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Instituto de Ciencias de la Educación. Programa de Investigación en Sociología de la Educación; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Materia
CORPORATE FINANCIALIZATION
INTELLECTUAL MONOPOLY
PROFIT-INVESTMENT NEXUS
FINANCIAL MONOPOLY
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/164254
Acceder
id CONICETDig_18c608629558e224acc36d67bc3c6f0e
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/164254
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark IIAuvray, TristanDurand, CédricRabinovich, JoelRikap, Cecilia AlejandraCORPORATE FINANCIALIZATIONINTELLECTUAL MONOPOLYPROFIT-INVESTMENT NEXUSFINANCIAL MONOPOLYhttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.2https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5This paper argues that, as far as the investment behavior of non-financial corporations is concerned, the apparent continuity over the last four decades suggested by the corporate financialization label is misleading. Indeed, while the disconnection between profitability and investment is a robust stylized fact for most of the period, with cumulative detrimental consequences for labor, we contend that the underlying mechanisms changed meaningfully at the turn of the millennium. This contribution identifies—empirically and theoretically—two distinct successive corporate financialization regimes (Mark I and Mark II) and explains their evolutionary articulation. Financialization Mark I is characterized by the empowerment of financial actors: in a context of high interest rates and full-blown liberalization, diminishing retained earnings by non-financial corporations resulted in a dramatic slowdown of investment. Contrastingly, Financialization Mark II is characterized by a strongly established financial hegemony with new forms of intellectual and financial monopoly. In this configuration, interest rates are low and global value chains are deeply seated. This fuels rampant deflationary pressure, which changes the overall dynamic of the profit-investment nexus. Then, in Financialization Mark II, contrary to what occurred during Financialization Mark I, distributed profits are the consequence of slow investment.Fil: Auvray, Tristan. Universite de Paris 13-Nord; FranciaFil: Durand, Cédric. Universite de Paris 13-Nord; Francia. Universidad de Ginebra; SuizaFil: Rabinovich, Joel. University Of Leeds.; Reino UnidoFil: Rikap, Cecilia Alejandra. Universite de Paris; Francia. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Instituto de Ciencias de la Educación. Programa de Investigación en Sociología de la Educación; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaSpringer2021-07info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/164254Auvray, Tristan; Durand, Cédric; Rabinovich, Joel; Rikap, Cecilia Alejandra; Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II; Springer; Review of Evolutionary Political Economy; 2021; 2; 7-2021; 431-4572662-61442662-6136CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43253-021-00045-4#citeasinfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1007/s43253-021-00045-4info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T10:01:09Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/164254instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 10:01:09.879CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II
title Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II
spellingShingle Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II
Auvray, Tristan
CORPORATE FINANCIALIZATION
INTELLECTUAL MONOPOLY
PROFIT-INVESTMENT NEXUS
FINANCIAL MONOPOLY
title_short Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II
title_full Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II
title_fullStr Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II
title_full_unstemmed Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II
title_sort Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Auvray, Tristan
Durand, Cédric
Rabinovich, Joel
Rikap, Cecilia Alejandra
author Auvray, Tristan
author_facet Auvray, Tristan
Durand, Cédric
Rabinovich, Joel
Rikap, Cecilia Alejandra
author_role author
author2 Durand, Cédric
Rabinovich, Joel
Rikap, Cecilia Alejandra
author2_role author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv CORPORATE FINANCIALIZATION
INTELLECTUAL MONOPOLY
PROFIT-INVESTMENT NEXUS
FINANCIAL MONOPOLY
topic CORPORATE FINANCIALIZATION
INTELLECTUAL MONOPOLY
PROFIT-INVESTMENT NEXUS
FINANCIAL MONOPOLY
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.2
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv This paper argues that, as far as the investment behavior of non-financial corporations is concerned, the apparent continuity over the last four decades suggested by the corporate financialization label is misleading. Indeed, while the disconnection between profitability and investment is a robust stylized fact for most of the period, with cumulative detrimental consequences for labor, we contend that the underlying mechanisms changed meaningfully at the turn of the millennium. This contribution identifies—empirically and theoretically—two distinct successive corporate financialization regimes (Mark I and Mark II) and explains their evolutionary articulation. Financialization Mark I is characterized by the empowerment of financial actors: in a context of high interest rates and full-blown liberalization, diminishing retained earnings by non-financial corporations resulted in a dramatic slowdown of investment. Contrastingly, Financialization Mark II is characterized by a strongly established financial hegemony with new forms of intellectual and financial monopoly. In this configuration, interest rates are low and global value chains are deeply seated. This fuels rampant deflationary pressure, which changes the overall dynamic of the profit-investment nexus. Then, in Financialization Mark II, contrary to what occurred during Financialization Mark I, distributed profits are the consequence of slow investment.
Fil: Auvray, Tristan. Universite de Paris 13-Nord; Francia
Fil: Durand, Cédric. Universite de Paris 13-Nord; Francia. Universidad de Ginebra; Suiza
Fil: Rabinovich, Joel. University Of Leeds.; Reino Unido
Fil: Rikap, Cecilia Alejandra. Universite de Paris; Francia. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Instituto de Ciencias de la Educación. Programa de Investigación en Sociología de la Educación; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
description This paper argues that, as far as the investment behavior of non-financial corporations is concerned, the apparent continuity over the last four decades suggested by the corporate financialization label is misleading. Indeed, while the disconnection between profitability and investment is a robust stylized fact for most of the period, with cumulative detrimental consequences for labor, we contend that the underlying mechanisms changed meaningfully at the turn of the millennium. This contribution identifies—empirically and theoretically—two distinct successive corporate financialization regimes (Mark I and Mark II) and explains their evolutionary articulation. Financialization Mark I is characterized by the empowerment of financial actors: in a context of high interest rates and full-blown liberalization, diminishing retained earnings by non-financial corporations resulted in a dramatic slowdown of investment. Contrastingly, Financialization Mark II is characterized by a strongly established financial hegemony with new forms of intellectual and financial monopoly. In this configuration, interest rates are low and global value chains are deeply seated. This fuels rampant deflationary pressure, which changes the overall dynamic of the profit-investment nexus. Then, in Financialization Mark II, contrary to what occurred during Financialization Mark I, distributed profits are the consequence of slow investment.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-07
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/164254
Auvray, Tristan; Durand, Cédric; Rabinovich, Joel; Rikap, Cecilia Alejandra; Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II; Springer; Review of Evolutionary Political Economy; 2021; 2; 7-2021; 431-457
2662-6144
2662-6136
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/164254
identifier_str_mv Auvray, Tristan; Durand, Cédric; Rabinovich, Joel; Rikap, Cecilia Alejandra; Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II; Springer; Review of Evolutionary Political Economy; 2021; 2; 7-2021; 431-457
2662-6144
2662-6136
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43253-021-00045-4#citeas
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1007/s43253-021-00045-4
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Springer
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Springer
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1844613802012704768
score 13.070432

Publicaciones similares