IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/erp/eiopxx/p0228.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

European social dialogue as multi-level governance: Towards more autonomy and new dependencies

Author

Listed:
  • Marginson, Paul
  • Keune, Maarten

Abstract

Almost twenty years ago the Maastricht Treaty introduced procedures for European Social Dialogue, as part of a larger package of measures to strengthen the social dimension of European integration. Through the Treaty provisions (articles 154-155 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union), the European social partners received the competence to become, in principle, co-regulators of the European labour market. The conventional reading of the evolution of European social dialogue since its inception is that it has evolved from a relationship of dependency of the European social partners on the European institutions for the implementation of their framework agreements, towards a more autonomous position in which the social partners themselves take charge of implementation. Since the early 2000s, the argument continues, the social partners have taken a more proactive and independent stance and opted to focus on autonomous framework agreements, and other ‘new generation texts’, including joint reports, recommendations, compendia of good practices, etc., which are not directed at the European institutions in order to secure implementation. In this paper we want to challenge and move beyond this rather linear and one-dimensional conceptualisation of the evolution of European social dialogue. Empirically, we will show that there has not been a straightforward move away from the ‘implementation through Directive’ mode in favour of autonomous agreements. Whereas this may seem the case if we take a view of the cross-sector dialogue only, the picture changes when we have a closer look and include developments in the European sector social dialogue in the analysis. Analytically, we will argue that framing the issue in terms of dependency or autonomy does not do justice to the complexity of relationships that are involved in the European social dialogue and the European sector social dialogue, and in the implementation of framework agreements and other new generation texts. Also it accords little attention to the role of power in the relationships involved. We draw on a multi-governance perspective to analyse the dynamics of European social dialogue, which allows us to capture the relevant multiple horizontal and vertical relationships, or interdependencies, between the European and national, and public and private, actors involved. Interdependency implies the presence of both autonomy and dependence in a relationship, and our central proposition is that these interdependencies simultaneously enhance and limit the capacity of the European social partners to make and implement agreements.

Suggested Citation

  • Marginson, Paul & Keune, Maarten, 2012. "European social dialogue as multi-level governance: Towards more autonomy and new dependencies," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 16, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:erp:eiopxx:p0228
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2012-004a.htm
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://eiop.or.at/eiop/pdf/2012-004.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean-Claude Barbier & Fabrice Colomb, 2012. "EU Law as Janus bifrons, a sociological approach to "Social Europe"," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00670666, HAL.
    2. Hartlapp, Miriam, 2012. "Deconstructing EU old age policy: Assessing the potential of soft OMCs and hard EU law," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 16, February.
    3. Crouch, Colin, 2005. "Capitalist Diversity and Change: Recombinant Governance and Institutional Entrepreneurs," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199286652, Decembrie.
    4. Jean-Claude Barbier & Fabrice Colomb, 2012. "EU Law as Janus bifrons, a sociological approach to "Social Europe"," Post-Print halshs-00670666, HAL.
    5. Horen Voskeritsian, 2009. "Labour, Education & Society. New Forms of Work Organisation and Industrial Relations in Southern Europe – Edited by Francesco Garibaldo and Volker Telljohan," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 47(2), pages 454-456, June.
    6. Smismans, Stijn, 2008. "The European Social Dialogue in the Shadow of Hierarchy," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 161-180, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nussbaum Bitran, Ilana & Dingeldey, Irene & Laudenbach, Franziska, 2022. "Theoretical conceptions of transnational solidarity in working relations," Schriftenreihe Institut Arbeit und Wirtschaft 34/2022, Institut Arbeit und Wirtschaft (IAW), Universität Bremen und Arbeitnehmerkammer Bremen.
    2. Ian Fitzgerald & Ron Beadle & Kevin Rowan, 2022. "Trade unions and the 2016 UK European Union Referendum," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 43(1), pages 388-409, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maarten Keune & Paul Marginson, 2013. "Across Boundaries: The Global Challenges Facing Workers and Employment Research 50th Anniversary Special Issue," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 51(3), pages 473-497, September.
    2. Tanja Börzel, 2010. "European Governance: Negotiation and Competition in the Shadow of Hierarchy," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(2), pages 191-219, March.
    3. Emil Evenhuis, 2017. "Institutional change in cities and regions: a path dependency approach," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 10(3), pages 509-526.
    4. Amable, Bruno & Azizi, Karim, 2011. "Varieties of capitalism and varieties of macroeconomic policy. Are some economies more procyclical than others?," MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    5. Hyman, Richard, 2015. "Three scenarios for industrial relations in Europe," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 61888, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Tony Edwards & Paul Marginson & Anthony Ferner, 2013. "Multinational Companies in Cross-National Context: Integration, Differentiation, and the Interactions between MNCS and Nation States," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 66(3), pages 547-587, May.
    7. Boschma, Ron & Capone, Gianluca, 2015. "Institutions and diversification: Related versus unrelated diversification in a varieties of capitalism framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1902-1914.
    8. Farkas Beáta, 2018. "What can institutional analysis say about capitalism in Central and Eastern Europe? Results and limitations," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 54(4), pages 283-290, December.
    9. Mazumdar, Surajit, 2010. "Indian Capitalism: A Case that doesn’t Fit?," MPRA Paper 28162, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Ahlquist, John S. & Breunig, Christian, 2009. "Country clustering in comparative political economy," MPIfG Discussion Paper 09/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    11. Byung-Seong Min & Peter Verhoeven, 2013. "Outsider Board Activity, Ownership Structure and Firm Value: Evidence from Korea," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 13(2), pages 187-214, June.
    12. Ayse Saka-Helmhout & Richard Deeg & Royston Greenwood, 2016. "The MNE as a Challenge to Institutional Theory: Key Concepts, Recent Developments and Empirical Evidence," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 1-11, January.
    13. Thomas Prosser, 2017. "Explaining Implementation through Varieties of Capitalism Theory: The Case of the Telework and Work-related Stress Agreements," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(4), pages 889-908, July.
    14. Emmanuelle Perin & Evelyne Léonard, 2011. "European sectoral social dialogue and national social partners," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 17(2), pages 159-168, May.
    15. Rosemary Batt & David Holman & Ursula Holtgrewe, 2009. "The Globalization of Service Work: Comparative Institutional Perspectives on Call Centers," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 62(4), pages 453-488, July.
    16. Ayse Saka-Helmhout & Mike Geppert, 2011. "Different Forms of Agency and Institutional Influences within Multinational Enterprises," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 51(5), pages 567-592, October.
    17. Charis Vlados & Nikolaos Deniozos & Demosthenes Chatzinikolaou & Michail Demertzis, 2018. "Perceiving Competitiveness under the Restructuring Process of Globalization," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(8), pages 135-135, June.
    18. ., 2013. "The financial crisis and the politics of international tax cooperation," Chapters, in: The Dynamics of Global Economic Governance, chapter 4, pages 81-110, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Fabien Martinez, 2023. "Exploring the syncretic dynamics involved in dyadic business–NGO partnerships," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(7), pages 4068-4083, November.
    20. Jean-Claude, Barbier and Fabrice Colomb, 2012. "EU Law as Janus bifrons, a sociological approach to 'Social Europe'," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 16, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:erp:eiopxx:p0228. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Editorial Assistant (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecsaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.