Author
Rainelli, Hélène
Huault, Isabelle
Type
Communication / Conférence
Item number of pages
34
Abstract (EN)
The recent financial crisis has triggered radical criticism against financial markets. In this
paper, we propose to analyse this criticism in the perspective drawn by Boltanski and
Thevenot (1991/2006) around the notion of justification. We see the main debate as opposing
the critics and the defenders of what can be identified as a Market order (Boltanski and
Thevenot, 1991/2006). While the former regret the consequences of deregulation in financial
markets, the latter insist on the preservation of regulatory options favouring market activity
as much as possible.
This debate however relies on the hypothesis that financial markets in general fit the ideal-
type of the Walrasian market model. While this hypothesis might make sense as regards the
description of stock markets (this refers to the so called market efficiency issue), it appears
unrealistic when applied to the majority of modern financial markets. At least 80% of those
are OTC markets where bilateral contracts are exchanged between counterparties in the
absence of any centralized structure.
Our thesis is that to be useful, a critical perspective on financial markets should take full
account of the nature of OTC markets, which guarantees neither the transparency of prices
nor the efficiency of competition mechanisms. We propose to characterize this nature using
Boltanski and Chiapello’s concept (1999/2008) of the Connexionnist World. We then
emphasize the difficulty of the connexionnist grammar of worth to develop principles of
justice in OTC markets, which are characterized by their despatialization and the infinity of
potential members. We suggest potential tracks to struggle more efficiently against the drifts
of the connexionnist logic as they arise on financial markets and their spillover effects on
societies.
The contribution of the paper is thus to provide a more precisely targeted critique of modern
financial markets.