Abstracts
Abstract
The Varieties of Capitalism (VoC) has become the dominant approach in comparative political economy and enjoys wide application and attention in disciplines outside of political science and sociology. Indeed the VoC approach has enjoyed much attention in comparative industrial/employment relations (IR). This article undertakes a critical evaluation of the importation of the VoC paradigm into comparative IR. Inter alia, it is argued that the VoC approach, as it is presently configured, may have little to teach IR scholars because its basic theoretical concepts and methodological priors militate against accounting for change.
This article begins with a summary of the routine problems researchers in comparative political economy and comparative IR have encountered when attempting to account for change within the constraints of the VoC paradigm. Here the focus is on the limitations imposed when privileging the national scale and the problems engendered by a heavy reliance on comparative statics methodology infused with the concepts of equilibrium and exogenous shocks. The article then goes beyond these routinely recognized limitations and argues that the importation of terminology from neoclassical economic theory, of which the original VoC statement makes foundational reference, further serves to constrain and add confusion to the comparative enterprise; namely, comparative advantage, Oliver Williamson’s neoclassical theory of the firm, the use of the distinction made between (im)perfect market competition in neoclassical economics and the fuzzy distinction made between firms, markets and networks.
In the concluding section we argue that the VoC’s narrow focus on the firm and its coordination problems serve to legitimate IRs traditional narrow focus on labour management relations and the pride of place that HRM now enjoys in the remaining IR departments. Ultimately, however, the embrace of the VoC paradigm by comparative IR is a net negative normative move.
Keywords:
- Comparative political economy,
- comparative industrial relations,
- varieties of capitalism,
- theory of the firm,
- industrial relations theory
Résumé
L’analyse des « variétés du capitalisme » (VdC) est devenue l’approche dominante en analyse politique comparée et bénéficie d’un degré élevé d’attention et d’application dans des disciplines extérieures à la science politique et la sociologie. En effet, cette approche a connu un succès notoire dans le domaine des relations industrielles et des relations d’emploi comparées. Cet article propose une évaluation critique de l’importance du paradigme VdC dans ce secteur. Entre autres, il y est soutenu que l’approche VdC, telle que présentement articulée, a peu à apporter aux spécialistes de notre domaine parce que ses concepts théoriques fondamentaux et ses postulats méthodologiques ne permettent pas la prise en compte du changement.
L’article débute par un résumé des problèmes courants rencontrés par les chercheurs en économie politique et en relations industrielles comparées lorsqu’ils cherchent à rendre compte du changement à l’intérieur des contraintes posées par le paradigme VdC. Ici, l’accent est mis sur les limites imposées lorsque le niveau national est privilégié ainsi que les problèmes engendrés lors d’un recours important à une méthodologie statique comparée, elle-même imprégnée des concepts d’équilibre et de chocs exogènes. Puis, l’article va au-delà de ces limitations courantes reconnues et soutient que l’importation d’une terminologie en provenance de la théorie économique néoclassique — à partir de laquelle l’énoncé initial du VdC établit sa référence fondatrice — a un effet réducteur et ajoutent encore plus de confusion à la démarche d’analyse comparée, notamment à cause de l’usage de la notion d’avantages comparées, de la théorie néoclassique de la firme d’Oliver Williamson, du recours à la distinction entre marché parfait et imparfait en économie néoclassique ainsi qu’à cause de la distinction floue entretenue entre firmes, marchés et réseaux.
En conclusion, nous soutenons que l’approche VdC, de par son accent étroit mis sur la firme et ses problèmes de coordination, sert à légitimer l’idée que les relations industrielles traditionnelles mettent l’accent sur les relations de travail (entre employeurs et travailleurs) ainsi qu’à cautionner la place de choix dont jouit maintenant la gestion des ressources humaines (GRH) dans les départements de relations industrielles qui existent encore sous cette appellation. Ultimement, l’engouement pour le paradigme VdC en relations industrielles comparées cons-tituerait un déplacement normatif nettement négatif.
Mots-clés:
- analyse politique comparée,
- relations industrielles comparées,
- variétés de capitalisme,
- théorie des relations industrielles
Resumen
Las variedades del capitalismo (VdC) se ha vuelto el enfoque dominante en la economía política comparativa y cuenta con amplia aplicación y atención en las disciplinas fuera de la ciencia política y la sociología. Por cierto, el enfoque VdC ha beneficiado de mucha atención en el campo del estudio comparativo de las relaciones industriales y del empleo. Este artículo asume una evaluación crítica de la importación del paradigma de VdC en las relaciones industriales comparativas. Entre otros, se argumenta que el enfoque de VdC, tal que configurado actualmente, puede tener poco a enseñar a los académicos de las relaciones industriales porque sus conceptos teóricos básicos y antecedentes metodológicas militan contra los argumentos que explican el cambio.
Este artículo comienza con un resumen de los problemas recurrentes que los investigadores en economía política comparativa y en relaciones industriales comparativas han encontrado cuando intentan explicar el cambio dentro de las restricciones del paradigma de VdC. La crítica se centra en las limitaciones impuestas al privilegiar la escala nacional y los problemas engendrados por una confianza extrema en una metodología comparativa estática basada en los conceptos de equilibrio y choques exógenos. Este artículo va más allá de estas limitaciones frecuentemente reconocidas y critica la importación de terminología de la teoría de economía clásica que constituye la referencia fundamental del paradigma de VdC. Dichos conceptos importados, tales como las ventajas comparativas, la teoría neoclásica de la empresa de Oliver Williamson, el uso de la distinción establecida entre competencia (im)perfecta de mercado en la economía neoclásica y la distinción nebulosa entre las compañías, mercados y redes, sirven a restringir y añadir la confusión a los estudios comparativos en relaciones industriales.
En la conclusión, argumentamos que la visión limitada de las VdC con respecto a la empresa y sus problemas de coordinación contribuye a legitimar la focalización reductora de las relaciones industriales tradicionales en las relaciones de gestión del trabajo y el lugar central que la gestión de recursos humanos ocupa en los departamentos de relaciones industriales restantes. Por último, la adopción del paradigma de VdC en la comparación de las relaciones industriales es un cambio normativo manifiestamente negativo.
Palabras claves:
- Economía política comparativa,
- relaciones industriales comparativas,
- variaciones del capitalismo,
- teoría de la firma,
- teoría de las relaciones industriales
Download the article in PDF to read it.
Download
Appendices
References
- Akers, Peter and Adrian Wilkinson. (2008) “Industrial Relations and the Social Sciences”, in The SAGE Handbook of Industrial Relations, edited by Paul Blyton et al., London: Sage, 53-68.
- Albo, Greg. (2005) “Contesting the ‘New Capitalism’ ‘’, in Varieties of Capitalism, Varieties of Approaches edited by David Coates, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 63-82.
- Alchian, Armen and Harrold Demsetz. (1972) “Production, Information Costs, and Economic Organization”, The American Economic Review, 62 (5), 777-795.
- Amable, Bruno. (2010) “On Wolfgang Streeck Re-Forming Capitalism: Institutional Change in the German Political Economy”, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009, in Socio-Economic Review, 8, 559-580.
- Barry, Michael and Adrian Wilkinson, editors. (2012) Research Handbook of Comparative Employment Relations, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
- Barry, Michael and Werner Nienhueser. (2010) “Coordinated Market Economy/liberal Employment Relations: Low Cost Competition in the German Aviation Industry”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 21 (2), 214-229.
- Barry, Michael and Nick Wailes. (2005) “Revisiting the Australia-New Zealand Comparison”, New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 30 (3), 1-17.
- Blyth, Mark. (2003) “Same as It Never Was: Temporality and Typology in the Varieties of Capitalism,“ Comparative European Politics, 1 (2), 215-225.
- Bruff, Ian and Laura Horn. (2012) “Varieties of Capitalism in Crisis?”, Competition and Change, 16 (3), 161-168.
- Bruff, Ian, Matthias Ebenau, Christian May and Andreas Nölke. (2013) “Vergleichende Kapitalismusforschung und Diversität innerhalb von Kapitalismen: Das Beispiel Arbeit und Beschäftigung”, in Vergleichende Kapitalismusforschung: Stand, Perspektiven, Kritik, edited byIan Bruff, Matthias Ebenau, Christian May and Andreas Nölke, Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot.
- Coase, Ronald H. (1937) “The Nature of the Firm”, Economica, 4 (16), 386-405.
- Coase, Ronald H. (1991) “Prize Lecture”. http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/1991/coase-lecture.html, accessed July 5th, 2011.
- Coates, David. (2000) Models of Capitalism: Growth and Stagnation in the Modern Era, Malden, Mass.: Polity Press.
- Coates, David. (2005), Varieties of Capitalism, Varieties of Approaches, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Crouch, Colin. (2006) “Models of Capitalism”, in Key Debates in New Political Economy edited by Anthony Payne, London: Routledge, 11-31.
- Crouch, Colin, Martin Schröder and Helmut Voelzkow. (2009) “Regional and Sectoral varieties of capitalism”, Economy and Society, 38 (4), 654-678.
- Estevez-Abe, Margarita. (2006) «Gendering the Varieties of Capitalism: A Study of Occupational Segregation by Sex in Advanced Industrial Societies.» World Politics, 59 (1), 142-175.
- Fast, Travis and Greg Albo. (2003) “Varieties of Neoliberalism: Trajectories of Workfare in Advanced Capitalist Countries”, Annual Meetings of the Canadian Political Science Association, Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences, May, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia.
- Fast, Travis. (2005) “Disparate Models, Desperate Measures: The Convergence of Limits”, in Varieties of Capitalism, Varieties of Approaches edited by David Coates, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 242-264.
- Fast, Travis. (2012) “The Profound Hegemony of Neoliberalism: Economic Theory, Public Policy and Capitalist Accumulation”, PhD dissertation, Toronto: York University.
- Foss, Nicholas. (1994) “The Two Coasian Traditions”, Review of Political Economy, 6 (1), 37-61.
- Foss, Nicholas. (1997) “The New Growth Theory: Some Intellectual Growth Accounting”, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy Copenhagen Business School, Working Paper 97-2.
- Fukuyama, Francis. (1989) “The End of History?”, The National Interest, Summer, no? pages manquantes.
- Fukuyama, Francis. (1992) The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Free Press.
- Graefe, Peter. (2014) “Economic Development Policies in Ontario and Quebec: Thinking about Structures of Representation” in Comparing Canada: Methods and Perspectives on Canadian Politics edited by Martin Papillon, Luc Turgeon, Jennifer Wallner, Stephen White, Vancouver: UBC Press.
- Gereffi, Gary, Miguel Korzeniewicz and Roberto Korzeniewicz. (1994) Commodity Chains and Global Capitalism, Connecticut: Praeger.
- Gereffi, Gary. (1999) “International Trade and Industrial Upgrading in the Apparel Commodity Chain”, Journal of International Economics, 48 (1), 37-70.
- Gereffi, Gary and Asian Development Bank. (2002) “The International Competitiveness of Asian Economies in the Apparel Commodity Chain”, ERD Working Paper, Manila: Asian Development Bank.
- Gordon, Robert. (1990) “What Is New-Keynesian Economics?”, Journal of Economic Literature, 28 (3), 1115-1171.
- Hyman, Richard. (2004) “Is Industrial Relations Theory Always Ethnocentric?”, Theoretical Perspectives on Work and the Employment Relationship, edited by Bruce E Kaufman, Industrial Relations Research Association, Cornell University Press: Madison, 265-292.
- Hall, Peter A. and Daniel Gingerich. (2004) “Varieties of Capitalism and Institutional Complementaries in the Macro Economy: An Empirical Analysis”, MPIfG Discussion Paper 04/5.
- Hall, Peter A. and Kathleen Thelen. (2009) “Institutional Change in Varieties of Capitalism”, Socio-Economic Review, 7 (1), 7-34.
- Hamann, Kersten and John Kelly. (2008), “Varieties of Capitalism and Industrial Relations” in The SAGE Handbook of Industrial Relations, edited by Paul Blyton et al. London: Sage, 129-148.
- Howell, Chris. (2003) “Varieties of Capitalism: And Then There Was One?”, Comparative Politics, 36 (1), 103-124.
- Iversen, Torben. (2000) “Decentralization, Monetarism, and the Social Democratic Welfare State”, in Unions, Employers, and Central Banks: Macroeconomic Coordination and Institutional Change in Social Market Economies, edited by Torben Iversen, Johnas Pontusson, and David Soskice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Kaufman, Bruce E. (2004) Theoretical Perspectives on Work and the Employment Relationship, Cornell: Cornell University Press.
- Kaufman, Bruce E. (2004b). The Global Evolution of Industrial Relations, Geneva: International Labour Office.
- Kirman, Alan P. (1992) “Whom or What Does the Representative Individual Represent?”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 6 (2), 117-136.
- Lavelle, David. (2007) “Social Democracy or Neo-liberalism? The Cases of Germany and Sweden”, in Globalising Government Business Relations, edited by Giorel Curran and Elizabeth van Acker, Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson, 117-144.
- Lane, Christel and Geoffrey Wood. (2009) “Capitalist Diversity and Diversity within Capitalism”, Economy and Society, 38 (4), 531-551.
- Mandel, Hadas and Michael Shalev. (2009) “Gender, Class, and Varieties of Capitalism”, Social Politics”, 16 (2), 161-181.
- Marginson, Paul. (2015) “Coordinated Bargaining in Europe: From Incremental Corrosion to Frontal Assault?”, European Journal of Industrial Relations, June, 21 (2), 97-114.
- Martin, Andrew. (2000) “The Politics of Macroeconomic Policy and Wage Negotiations in Sweden”, in Unions, Employers, and Central Banks: Macroeconomic Coordination and Institutional Change in Social Market Economies, edited by Torben Iversen, Jonas Pontusson and David Soskice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Mirowski, Philip. (1989) More Heat than Light: Economics as Social Physics, Physics as Nature’s Economics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Mirowski, Philip. (2009) “The Rise of the Chicago School of Economics and the Birth of Neoliberalism”, in The Road from Mont Pèlerin: The Making of the Neoliberal Thought Collective, edited by Philip Mirowski and Dieter Plehwe, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
- Mirowski, Philip. (2004), “Philosophizing with a Hammer: Reply to Binmore, Davis and Klaes”, Journal of Economic Methodology, 11 (4), 499-513.
- Peck, Jamie and Nicholas Theodore. (2007) “Variegated Capitalism”, Progress in Human Geography, December 31, 731-772.
- Rowthorn, Robert and Richard Kozul-Wright. (1998) “Globalization and Economic Convergence: An Assessment” UNCTAD Discussion Papers No. 108.
- Sayer, Andrew. (2000) Realism and Social Science, London: Sage.
- Sayer, Andrew. (2005) “Reductionism in Social Science”, Challenges to Dominant Modes of Knowledge: Reductionism, Paris, France: Department of Sociology, Lancaster University.
- Schmidt, Vivien A. (2009) “Putting the Political Back into Political Economy by Bringing the State Back in Yet Again”. World Politics, 61, 516-546.
- Soskice, D. (2000) “Macroeconomic Analysis and the Political Economy of Unemployment”, in Unions, Employers and Central Banks: Wage Bargaining and Macroeconomic Regimes in an Integrating Europe edited by Torben Iversen, Johnas Pontusson, and David Soskice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 38-76.
- Streeck, Wolfgang. (2010) “On Re-Forming Capitalism: Institutional Change in the German Political Economy-Reply”. Socio-Economic Review, 8 (3), 573-580.
- Streeck, Wolfgang. (2009). Re-Forming Capitalism: Institutional Change in the German Political Economy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Streeck, Wolfgang and Kathleen Thelen. (2005) Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Thelen, Kathleen. (2014) Varieties of Liberalization and the New Politics of Social Solidarity, New York, Cambridge University Press.
- Wailes, Nick. (2011) “Employment Relations in Australia and New Zealand”, in Research Handbook of Comparative Employment Relations, edited by Michael Barry and Adrian Wilkinson, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 286-302.
- Williamson, Oliver. (1975) Markets and Hierarchies, Analysis and Antitrust Implications: A Study in the Economics of Internal Organization, New York: Free Press.
- Williamson, Oliver. (1985) The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting, London: Free Press: Collier Macmillan.
- Williamson, Oliver, Sidney G. Winter and Ronald H. Coase. (1991) The Nature of the Firm: Origins, Evolution, and Development, New York: Oxford University Press.
- Williamson, Oliver and Scott Masten. (1999) The Economics of Transaction Costs, Cheltenham, UK: Elgar.