IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v7y1987i03p259-284_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Corporatism Really Matter? The economic crisis and issues of political theory

Author

Listed:
  • Therborn, Goran

Abstract

In spite of a recently growing interest in corporatism as a political explanation of cross-national variations of economic performance and as a device for successful crisis management, there is little evidence that corporatism matters as a determinant of economic outcomes. Two kinds of corporatism – as a pattern of interest intermediation or industrial relations, and as a system of concerted public policy-making – are distinguished and tested with OECD data from the 1973 – 85 crisis. Little or no support for either corporatist explanation was found. Alternative perspectives of industrial relations, labour organisations, public policy concertation, state administration, and politico-economic institutions are discussed as offering more promising explanations of differences in governments’ responses to economic crisis.

Suggested Citation

  • Therborn, Goran, 1987. "Does Corporatism Really Matter? The economic crisis and issues of political theory," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 259-284, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:7:y:1987:i:03:p:259-284_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X0000444X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Kenworthy, Lane, 2000. "Quantitative indicators of corporatism: A survey and assessment," MPIfG Discussion Paper 00/4, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    2. Francis G. Castles & Vance Merrill, 1989. "Towards a General Model of Public Policy Outcomes," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 1(2), pages 177-212, April.
    3. Feick, Jürgen & Jann, Werner, 1989. "Comparative Policy Research: Eclecticism or Systematic Integration?," MPIfG Discussion Paper 89/2, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    4. Oliver Lah, 2017. "Continuity and Change: Dealing with Political Volatility to Advance Climate Change Mitigation Strategies—Examples from the Transport Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-13, June.
    5. Barbara Vis & Jaap Woldendorp & Hans Keman, 2013. "Examining variation in economic performance using fuzzy-sets," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1971-1989, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:jnlpup:v:7:y:1987:i:03:p:259-284_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pup .

    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.