Cordial Goods: The Role of Intangibles in Economics

  • Patrici Calvo
Part of the Ethical Economy book series (SEEP, volume 55)


Extending the margins of economic rationality in an effective and ethical-critical sense through cordiality opens the door to the possibility of managing and promoting the intangible capital which, just like reciprocity, trust, affinity or reputation, is a condition of the possibility of economic progress. This is because, among other things, these allow the establishment and development of the relational processes, like cooperation, that allow it but with an underlying emotional and communicative dimension, which cannot be duly managed through merely strategic-technical and calculative-instrumental rationality. It is also because these assets are a both a means and an end for the economy as they are an essential element to deal with managing common good and are, at the same time, a special kind of common good. The aim of this chapter is to show the role, characteristics and cordial dimension that underlie the common goods that are so important for the economic domain, such as reciprocity, trust or reputation, through the works of Elinor Ostrom , Pierpaolo Donati , Amartya Sen or Domingo García-Marzá , among others.


  1. Archer, Margaret. 1982. Morphogenesis versus structuration: On combining structure and action. The British Journal of Sociology 33 (4): 455–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ———. 1987. Resisting the revival of relativism. International Sociology 2 (3): 235–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. ———. 1988. Culture and Agency: The Place of Culture in Social Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. ———. 1995. Realist Social Theory: The Morphogenetic Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Becchetti, Leonardo, Luigino Bruni, and Stefano Zamagni. 2010. Microeconomia. Scelte, Relazione, Economia Civile. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
  6. Bicchieri, Cristina, John Duffy, and Gil Tolle. 2004. Trust among Strangers. Philosophy of Science 71 (3): 286–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruni, Luigino. 2005. Felicità, Economia e Beni Relazionali. Nuova Umanità 27 (159–160): 543–565.Google Scholar
  8. ———. 2008 [2006]. Il Prezzo Della Gratuità. Madrid: Ciudad Nueva.Google Scholar
  9. Bruni, Luigino, and Stefano Zamagni. 2007 [2004]. Civil Economy: Efficiency, Equity, Public Happiness. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  10. Calvo, Patrici. 2013. Neuro-racionalidad: Heterogeneidad motivacional y comportamiento moral. Daimon. Revista Internacional de Filosofía 59: 157–170.Google Scholar
  11. Calvo, Patrici, and Elsa González-Esteban. 2013. Neuroeconomía, ¿un saber práctico? In Ética y neurociencias: la aportación a la política, la economía y la educación, ed. Domingo García-Marzá and Ramón A. Feenstra, 93–116. Castellón de la Plana: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I.Google Scholar
  12. Cárdenas, Juan-Camilo, and Elinor Ostrom. 2004. What do people bring into the game? Experiments in the field about cooperation in the commons. Agricultural Systems 82: 307–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carrasco, Cristina. 2014. El cuidado como bien relacional: hacia posibles indicadores. Papeles de relaciones ecosociales y cambio global 128: 49–60.Google Scholar
  14. Cortina, Adela. 2000. Ética empresarial en el contexto de una ética cívica. In La ética de la empresa. Claves para una nueva ética empresarial, ed. Adela Cortina, 35–50. Madrid: Trotta.Google Scholar
  15. ———. 2007a. Ethica cordis. Isegoría. Revista de Filosofía Moral y Política 37: 113–126.Google Scholar
  16. ———. 2007b. Ética de la razón cordial. Educar en la ciudadanía en el siglo XXI. Oviedo: Nobel.Google Scholar
  17. ———. 2010. Justicia cordial. Madrid: Trotta.Google Scholar
  18. ———. 2011. Neuroética y Neuropolítica. Sugerencias para la Educación Moral. Madrid: Tecnos.Google Scholar
  19. ———. 2012. Neuroética, presente y futuro. In Neurofilosofía práctica, ed. Adela Cortina, 9–38. Comares: Granada.Google Scholar
  20. ———. 2013a. Ética del discurso: ¿un marco filosófico para la neuroética? Isegoría. Revista de Filosofía Moral y Política 48: 127–148.Google Scholar
  21. ———. 2013b. ¿Para qué sirve realmente… la ética? Barcelona: Paidós Ibérica.Google Scholar
  22. ———. 2017. Aporofobia, el rechazo al pobre. Un desafío para la democracia. Barcelona: Paidós Ibérica.Google Scholar
  23. del Estado, Jefatura. 2007. Ley 14/2007, de 3 de julio, de Investigación bi- omédica [Biomedical Research Act 14/2007, of 3 July]. Boletín Oficial del Estado 159: 28826-28846. Accessed 25 Sept 2017.
  24. Deloitte. 2016. Global Human Capital Trends 2016. The New Organization: Different by Design. Deloitte University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Donati, Pierpaolo. 1986. Introduzione alla sociologia relazionale. Milan: Francine.Google Scholar
  26. ———. 1989. La cultura della vita. Dalla società tradizionale a quella postmoderna. Milan: FrancoAngeli.Google Scholar
  27. ———. 1991. Teoria relazionale della società. Milan: FrancoAngeli.Google Scholar
  28. ———. 2008. Discovering the relational character of the common good. In Pursuing the Common Good: How Solidarity and Subsidiarity Can Work Together, ed. Margaret Archer and Pierpaolo Donati, 659–683. Vatican City: The Pontifical Academy Social Sciences.Google Scholar
  29. ———. 2011. Modernization and relational reflexivity. International Review of Sociology. Revue Internationale de Sociologie 21 (1): 21–39.Google Scholar
  30. ———. 2013. Sociologia relazionale. Come cambia la società. Brescia: Editrice La Scuola.Google Scholar
  31. ———. 2014. Relational goods and their subjects: The ferment of a new civil society and civil democracy. Recerca. Revista de Pensament i Anàlisi 14: 19–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. ———. 2015. L’enigma della relazione. Milan: Mimesis.Google Scholar
  33. Donati, Pierpaolo, and Patrici Calvo. 2014a. New insight into relational goods. In New Insight into Relational Goods, ed. Pierpaolo Donati and Patrici Calvo, 7–17. Castellón: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I.Google Scholar
  34. ———. 2014b. New Insight into Relational Goods. Castellón de la Plana: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I.Google Scholar
  35. Donati, Pierpaolo, and Riccardo Solci. 2011. I beni relazionali. Che cosa sono e quali effetti producono. Turin: Bollati Boringhieri.Google Scholar
  36. Edelman Berland. 2003–2016. Edelman Trust Barometer Executive Summary. Annual Global Study. Edelman Berland.Google Scholar
  37. Fehr, Ernst, Urs Fischbacher, and Simon Gächter. 2002. Strong reciprocity, human cooperation and the enforcement of social norms. Human Nature 13 (1): 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Fehr, Ernst, Holger Herz, and Tom Wilkening. 2013. The lure of authority: Motivation and incentive effects of power. American Economic Review 103 (4): 1325–1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Gallup. 2013. State of the Global Workplace: Employee Engagement Insights for Business Leaders Worldwide. Washington, DC: Gallup Inc.Google Scholar
  40. García-Marzá, Domingo. 2004. Ética empresarial: del diálogo a la confianza. Madrid: Trotta.Google Scholar
  41. ———. 2005. Diálogo y responsabilidad: bases éticas de la confianza en la empresa. Revista Icade 64: 91–108.Google Scholar
  42. ———. 2007. Responsabilidad social de la empresa: una aproximación desde la ética empresarial. Veritas 2 (17): 183–204.Google Scholar
  43. Gui, Benedetto. 2000. Behind transaction: On interpersonal dimension of economic reality. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics 71 (1): 139–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hardin, Garrett. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162 (1): 1243–1248.Google Scholar
  45. Hirschman, Albert O. 1984. Against parsimony: Three easy ways of complicating some categories of economic discourse. Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 37 (8): 11–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Henrich, Josep, Robert Boyd, Samuel Bowles, Colin Camerer, Ernst Fehr, Herbert Gintis, and Richard McElreath. 2001. In search of Homo Economicus: Behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies. American Economic Review 91 (2): 73–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kosfeld, Michael, Markus Heinrichs, Paul J. Zak, Urs Fischbacher, and Ernst Fehr. 2005. Oxytocin increases trust in humans. Nature 435 (1): 637–677.Google Scholar
  48. Medina-Vicent, Maria. 2016. Neurociencia y teoría política feminista. La inestabilidad sexo-género-sexualidad a través de la obra de Paul B. Preciado. Pensamiento. Revista de Investigación e Información Filosófica 72 (273): 981–996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. North, Douglass C. 1994. Performance through time. The American Economic Review 84 (3): 359–368.Google Scholar
  50. Nussbaum, Martha. 1986. The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Offe, Claus, and Ulrich K. Preuss. 1991. Democratic institutions and moral resources. In Political Theory Today, ed. David Held, 143–171. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Ostrom, Elinor. 1990. Governing the Commons. The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. ———. 1999. Design Principles and Threats to Sustainable Organizations that Manage Commons [Workshop on Political Theory and Policy Analysis]. Indianapolis: Center for the Study of Institutions, Population, and Environmental Change, Indiana University. Accessed 25 Sept 2017.
  54. ———. 2003. Toward a behavioral theory linking trust, reciprocity, and reputation. In Trust & Reciprocity. Interdisciplinary Lessons from Experimental Research, ed. Elinor Ostrom and James Walker, 19–79. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  55. Ostrom, Elinor, and Harini Nagendra. 2010. Governing the commons in the new millennium: A diversity of institutions for natural resource management. In Re-inventing construction, ed. Ilca Rudy and Andreas Ruby, 380–387. Rudy Press: Berlin.Google Scholar
  56. Pallarés-Domínguez, Daniel. 2016. Neuroeducación en diálogo: neuromitos en el proceso de enseñanza-aprendizaje y en la educación moral. Pensamiento. Revista de Investigación e Información Filosófica 72 (273): 941–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ramis, Álvaro. 2017. Bienes comunes y democracia. Crítica del individualismo posesivo. Santiagio de Chile: LOM ediciones.Google Scholar
  58. Reyes, Agustín. 2008. El Enfoque de las Capacidades, la Agencia Cognitiva y los Recursos Morales. Recerca. Revista de Pensament i Anàlisi 8: 153–172.Google Scholar
  59. Sen, Amartya. 1977. Rational fools. A critique of the behavioral foundations of economic theory. In Philosophy and Public Affairs, ed. Frank Hahn and Martin Hollis, 317–344. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  60. ———. 1987. On Ethics and Economy. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  61. ———. 2000. Development as Freedom. New York: Anchor.Google Scholar
  62. ———. 2003. Ética de la empresa y desarrollo económico. In Construir confianza, ed. Adela Cortina, 39–54. Madrid: Trotta.Google Scholar
  63. Uhlaner, Carole. 1989. Participation. Incorporating sociability into a theory of rational action. Public Choice 62 (3): 253–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. ———. 2014. Relational goods and resolving the paradox of political participation. Recerca. Revista de Pensament i Anàlisi 14: 47–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Zamagni, Stefano. 2006. Heterogeneidad motivacional y comportamiento económico. La perspectiva de la economía civil. Madrid: Unión Editorial.Google Scholar
  66. ———. 2007a. El bien común en la sociedad posmoderna: propuestas para la acción político-económica. Revista Cultural Económica 25 (79): 23–43.Google Scholar
  67. ———. 2007b. L’economia del bene comune. Rome: Città Nuova.Google Scholar
  68. ———. 2008. La Economía civil y los bienes relacionales. In Las nuevas economías. De la economía evolucionista a la economía cognitivista: más allá de las fallas de la teoría neoclásica, ed. Riccardo Viale, 169–186. Flacso México: Mexico.Google Scholar
  69. ———. 2009. Fraternity, gifts and reciprocity in Cáritas in Veritate. Revista Cultural Económica 27 (75–76): 11–29.Google Scholar
  70. ———. 2010a. Catholic social thought, civil economy, and the spirit of capitalism. In The True Wealth of Nations, ed. Daniel K. Finn, 63–93. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. ———. 2010b. Globalization: Guidance from Franciscan economic thought and caritas in veritate. Faith & Economics 56: 81–109.Google Scholar
  72. ———. 2014. Bienes communes y economía civil. Revista Cultura Económica XXXII 87: 8–25.Google Scholar
  73. ———. 2016. Il bene comune come berillo intellettuale in economia. Archivio di filosofía 84 (1–2): 161–176.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrici Calvo
    • 1
  1. 1.Universitat Jaume ICastellón de la PlanaSpain

Personalised recommendations