Soc 1000 Final Paper Submission Form

Please complete this page and include it as the first page of your final paper, submitting as one
single document on Canvas.

Your final paper must engage with three weeks of our course. Within each week, you must have
at least two readings (which may be from the required or recommended readings for that week).
Beyond this, you are permitted but not required to include additional readings from the syllabus
or bring in outside readings. Remember to cite all the readings you use (whether from class or
outside) in your references at the end of your paper.

Name: Henry Wu

TF Name: Evan MacKay

Paper Title: The Development of Sustainable Capitalism

Word Count: 1737

Research Question: What explains the development of sustainable capitalism?

First week you selected: Capitalism

1. First reading from this week: Polanyi (The Great Transformation)
2. Second reading from this week: Zelizer (The Social Meaning of Money: “Special
Monies”)
Second week you selected: Society
1. First reading from this week: Marx (Manifesto of the Communist Party)
2. Second reading from this week: Weber (Class, Status, Party)
Third week you selected: Networks
1. First reading from this week: Domhoff (How the Power Elite Dominate Government)
2. Second reading from this week: Granovetter (Economic Embeddedness)
Running Head: SUSTAINABLE CAPITALISM

The Development of Sustainable Capitalism

Henry Wu

Harvard College

SOCIOL 1000: Introduction to Sociology

Word count = 1737

SUSTAINABLE CAPITALISM

THE DEVELOPMENT OF SUSTAINABLE CAPITALISM

As human activity increases greenhouse gas emissions, the atmosphere warms,

causing global climate change. One strategy developed to mitigate human environmental

impact is sustainable capitalism, which applies principles of environmental renewal to

capitalism. Examples of sustainable capitalism include the expansion of the plant-based

food industry, the movement to certify businesses as B Corporations to indicate their

commitment to social and environmental improvement, and the restructuring of the

clothing company Patagonia to dedicate its entire nonvoting stock to an environmental

nonprofit. What explains the development of sustainable capitalism? I argue that

sustainable capitalism arose out of the absence of governmental regulations on the

commodification of natural resources. The mass climate movement, in response to

environmental crises and government inaction, formed networks of climate conscious

people, who are incentivized to make sustainable economic decisions by their derivations

of status from sustainability. However, these networks are unevenly distributed across

economic classes, potentially limiting the ability of sustainable capitalism to impact

environmental policy.

First, the prominent role of capitalism in causing climate change must be

acknowledged. According to Marx, capitalism is an economic system based on the

private ownership and use of the means of production (including land and raw materials

extracted from Earth) for profit. The modern age is defined by industrialization, which

relied on fossil fuels to increase manufacturing output in its early stages in the 19th

century (Marx and Engels 1848). The combustion of fossil fuels releases greenhouse
SUSTAINABLE CAPITALISM

gases such as carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, which damages human, plant, and

animal health through pollution, increases global temperatures, and exacerbates natural

disasters (Barbir, Veziroǧlu, and Plass Jr. 1990). The private nature of resource

ownership in capitalism decreases the social responsibility placed on the owners. One of

Marx’s principle measures of communism was the “extension of factories and

instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-

lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan”

(1848:490). Marx implies that public ownership of the instruments of production

encourages more responsible use of the means of production compared to private

ownership. To demonstrate the exploitative nature of capitalism, Polanyi points to the

existence of fictitious commodities—elements not produced for sale on the market, such

as land—that were allowed to be bought and sold without protection (1944). In a true

market economy, just as the lack of protection of labor—another fictitious commodity—

would lead to horrific human rights abuses, the lack of protection of land would cause

“nature [to] be reduced to its elements… landscapes defiled [and] rivers polluted”

(Polanyi 1944:76). As climate scientists have discovered, these environmental damages

(and many more) occurred as a result of the commodification of land brought about by

the market economy. Thus, it is clear that capitalism, an economic system that prioritizes

the private use of natural resources for profit without regard for the sustainability of those

resources, has played a major role in causing climate change.

What response does society have to the exploitation of land and its adverse

impacts on the environment and human health? Polanyi would hypothesize that society
SUSTAINABLE CAPITALISM

should protect itself from climate change through restrictions on the market economy.

The double movement principle states that while the market economy took hold globally,

“a network of measures and policies was integrated into powerful institutions designed to

check the action of the market relative to labor, land, and money” (Polanyi 1944:79).

This principle would predict that the unsustainable extraction of natural resources by the

capitalist market economy would be checked by policy restrictions on resource

extraction. However, governmental responses to unsustainable market practices have

been limited. Governmental agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency in the

United States and international agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol were established

in the late 20th century, but the scientific consensus is that their efforts are not on track to

prevent a catastrophic global temperature increase due to greenhouse gas emissions

(United Nations). Current regulations on the commodification of land pale in comparison

to, for instance, the labor laws and unions that have protected against the

commodification of labor. The failure of the double movement principle can be explained

by the power elite, an interlocking network of business leaders, which prevent

governments from taking substantial action on climate change to protect their corporate

interests (Domhoff 2021). It is likely that the power elite stifled regulation of land, but

not regulation of labor, because scientists only learned about the consequences of

greenhouse gas emissions in the late 20th century (when the power elite was more

entrenched), whereas the horrors of labor exploitation were evident at the onset of the

Industrial Revolution in the 19th century. Given the government’s inability to protect the
SUSTAINABLE CAPITALISM

fictitious commodity of land, what other forces could work to control the market’s

exploitation of natural resources?

A climate movement has existed since the late 1980s, when environmental groups

began coordinating across national boundaries in response to the growing crisis and

government inaction (Hadden 2015). The movement has had success in campaigning for

international climate agreements, but as previously mentioned, those agreements

themselves have not been particularly effective. The reason that leaders of environmental

groups have not been able to directly influence policy is because they are generally not

regarded to be part of the power elite, so they do not hold the same sway over

governments as corporate leaders do (Domhoff 2021). Regardless of the effects that the

climate movement has had on policy, it has mobilized millions of people to demand

action on climate change. More importantly, it has encouraged the formation of networks

of people with consciousness of climate change. Network theories of social movements

state that social ties are essential for communication and rapid mobilization of

movements upon the presence of a catalyst (Goodwin and Jasper 2003). Thus,

widespread participation in the climate movement implies the existence of many of these

networks, which foster social relations between people who demand action against

climate change.

These social relations, in turn, greatly influence the economic decisions that

people make. Granovetter states that economic actions are “embedded in concrete,

ongoing systems of social relations,” not dictated by independent, rational logic or

membership in certain status groups (1985:169). Thus, people in climate conscious

SUSTAINABLE CAPITALISM

networks are likely to begin making economic decisions with greater climate

consciousness, such as purchasing sustainably grown food or eco-friendly clothing.

Restated from the perspective of Zelizer’s special monies model, which suggests that

different kinds of monies are shaped by different cultural and social factors, it is clear that

uses of disposable income are shaped by membership in climate networks (1989). Such

economic decisions emphasize the importance of environmental consciousness in

people’s social relations, even to the point that people derive Weberian status from being

climate conscious. The appearance of caring about the environment becomes socially

desirable to those in climate conscious networks. Weber claims that status is associated

with specific lifestyles and “principles of… consumption of goods,” reinforcing the idea

that decisions to purchase environmentally friendly vehicles and clothes are partially

motivated by their ability to boost social status (1946:193). For instance, buying a

Patagonia jacket not only reduces my environmental footprint compared to a jacket from

a different brand, but also shows the people around me that I am environmentally

conscious and may help me gain their respect. Polanyi builds on Weber’s connection

between consumption and status, arguing that “man’s economy… is submerged in

relationships. He does not act so as to safeguard in the possession of material goods; he

acts so as to safeguard his social standing, his social claims, his social assets. He values

material goods only insofar as they serve this end” (1944:48). Markets are shaped by the

people they comprise; therefore, as people make climate conscious economic decisions to

improve their social status, the market adapts to the tastes of its consumers and adopts a

greater focus on environmental sustainability. The resulting phenomenon is sustainable

SUSTAINABLE CAPITALISM

capitalism. Returning to the introductory examples, the restructuring of Patagonia to

benefit an environmental nonprofit is a prime example of a corporation responding to the

public sphere. Investors and large food companies, aware of trends in environmental

consciousness, are drastically increasing funding for plant-based food start-ups (Terazono

2021). The B Corporation certification process is now popular because it signals to

consumers that they are environmentally conscious, improving their sales prospects.

While the public sphere has influenced the market, its ultimate effects on

environmental policy and climate change itself may be limited. This is largely due to the

climate movement’s limited reach across economic classes. The Occupy Wall Street

movement exemplifies the phenomenon of protesters tending to be well-educated and

wealthy (Goodwin and Jasper 2003). If we assume this to be true of the climate

movement, it would explain the catering of sustainably branded corporations to the

wealthy. While economic decisions cannot be reduced to memberships in status groups, it

is primarily the wealthy that are integrated into climate conscious networks and thus

move the market towards environmental consciousness. This leaves many people

disconnected from the climate movement and not served by changing markets. Both

those included in climate conscious networks (who may engage in sustainable economic

decisions only to the extent that they are necessary to enhance status) and those excluded

(who are not incentivized to make sustainable economic decisions by the market at all)

may not behave sustainably enough to make significant progress in the fight against

climate change. There is also the matter of the power elite: more sustainable corporations

may merely indicate capitalization on a business opportunity and not true belief in
SUSTAINABLE CAPITALISM

sustainability. The corporate leaders that make up the power elite cannot be counted on to

pressure policymakers to address climate change unless their personal beliefs are aligned

with the sustainability movement. More corporate leaders like Yvon Chouinard—rock

climber, environmentalist, and Patagonia founder—would need to populate the power

elite to achieve meaningful policy change.

The development of sustainable capitalism shows that the influence of the climate

movement on environmental policy is weaker than its influence on the market. In this

case, the theory of the power elite trumps the theory of double movement, and the climate

movement is the response to the failure of double movement. The climate movement’s

influence on the market is so strong because of economic embeddedness and the

consumption of goods for status. Whether or not the market can, in turn, shape

environmental policy to address climate change requires further investigation.

SUSTAINABLE CAPITALISM

References

Barbir, F., T. N. Veziroǧlu, and H. J. Plass Jr. 1990. “Environmental damage due to fossil

fuels use.” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 15(10):739-49.

“Climate Plans Remain Insufficient: More Ambitious Action Needed Now.”

2022. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Retrieved

December 11, 2022 (https://unfccc.int/news/climate-plans-remain-insufficient-

more-ambitious-action-needed-now).

Domhoff, G. William. 2021. “How the Power Elite Dominate Government.” Pp. 151-74

in Who Rules America? The Corporate Rich, White Nationalist Republicans, and

Inclusionary Democrats in the 2020s. 8th ed. New York: Routledge.

Goodwin, Jeff, and James M. Jasper, eds. 2003. “When and Why do Social Movements

Occur?” Pp. 9-52 in The Social Movements Reader: Cases and Concepts. 3rd ed.

Chichester, United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell.

Granovetter, Mark. 1985. “Economic Embeddedness.” Pp. 165-74 in Contemporary

Sociological Theory, edited by Craig Calhoun, Joseph Gerteis, James Moody,

Steven Pfaff, and Indermohan Virk. 3rd ed. Chichester, United Kingdom: Wiley-

Blackwell.

Hadden, Jennifer. 2015. Networks in Contention: The Divisive Politics of Climate

Change. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. 1848. “Manifesto of the Communist Party.” Pp. 473-

500 in The Marx-Engels Reader, edited by Robert C. Tucker. 2nd ed. New York:

W. W. Norton and Company.

SUSTAINABLE CAPITALISM

Polanyi, Karl. 1944. The Great Transformation. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Terazono, Emiko. 2021. “Funding boom for faux meat and dairy start-ups.” The

Financial Times, March 18. Retrieved December 11, 2022

(https://www.ft.com/content/a9916e57-1b1c-4484-a5e0-576a5ecd3182).

Weber, Max. 1946. “Class, Status, Party.” Pp. 180-95 in From Max Weber: Essays in

Sociology, edited by H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills. New York: Oxford

University Press.

Zelizer, Viviana. 1989. “The Social Meaning of Money: ‘Special Monies.’” American

Journal of Sociology 95(2):342-77.