Decoupling and re-coupling

Economics

Decoupling and re-coupling during financial crises is typified by the decoupling hypothesis that, in 2007, held that Latin American and Asian economies, especially emerging ones, had broadened and deepened to the point that they no longer depended on the United States economy for growth, leaving them insulated from a slowdown there, even a fully fledged recession. Faith in the concept had generated strong outperformance for stocks outside the United States. However, over the course of 2008, as fears of recession mounted in the United States, worldwide stock markets declined heavily. Contrary to the decoupling hypothesis, the losses were greater outside the United States, with the worst experienced in emerging markets and developed economies like Germany and Japan. Exports make up especially large portions of economic activity in those places, but that fact was not supposed to matter anymore in a decoupled world because domestic activity was thought to be so robust.[1] On the other hand, after the slump the emerging countries experienced a strong recovery, much stronger than that in advanced economies.[2]

The phenomenon of decoupling and re-coupling has been explained by observing that global demand for factors such as capital and raw material declines when one part of the world economy suffers a crisis, which benefits the remaining healthy parts of the world economy through lower interest rates and lower commodity prices. However, once the crisis reaches the stage where global lenders suffer significant losses, they will cut back on their loan supply and interest rates for everybody will rise.[3]

Organization theory

In organizational theory, decoupling refers to the creation and maintenance of gaps between formal, symbolic policies and actual organizational practices on the ground.[4] In contrast, recoupling is a process by which previously decoupled policies and practices become coupled, leading to substantive, rather than symbolic, compliance.[5][6][7] Thus, recoupling is a process of organizational ritual becoming reality, of pretense becoming practice.[5][8] Studies on re-coupling (or coupling) suggest that "the initially created gaps between policy and practice may not be permanent: that is, policies and practices that were once decoupled may eventually become coupled."[9]

References

  1. ↑ "Decoupling: Theory vs. reality." International Herald Tribune. January 27, 2008. http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/27/business/26delink.php
  2. ↑ Krugman, Paul (2010-11-09). "We Are Not The World". The New York Times.
  3. ↑ Korinek, Anton; Agustin Roitman; Carlos Vegh (2010), "Decoupling and Recoupling" (PDF), American Economic Review 100(2), pp. 393-397
  4. ↑ Meyer, John W., and Brian Rowan. 1977. "Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony," American Journal of Sociology, 83: 340-63.
  5. 1 2 Tilcsik, András. “From Ritual to Reality: Demography, Ideology, and Decoupling in a Post- Communist Government Agency,” Academy of Management Journal, 53:6 (December 2010): 1474-1498.
  6. ↑ Hallett, Tim. 2010. “The Myth Incarnate: Recoupling Processes, Turmoil, and Inhabited Institutions in an Urban Elementary School.” "American Sociological Review." 75, 1: 52-74.
  7. ↑ Espeland, Wendy. 1998. "The Struggle for Water: Politics, Rationality, and Identity in the American Southwest." Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  8. ↑ Marquis, Christopher, Jianjun Zhang, and Yanhua Zhou. "Regulatory Uncertainty and Corporate Responses to Environmental Protection in China." California Management Review 54, no. 1 (2011): 39-63
  9. ↑ Tilcsik, András. “From Ritual to Reality: Demography, Ideology, and Decoupling in a Post-Communist Government Agency,” Academy of Management Journal, 53:6 (December 2010): 1474-1498, p. 1475.
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the Thursday, February 18, 2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.