The ideal-typical transition from Fordism to post-Fordism: A neopositivist problem setting
The present article discusses a fundamental argument of a series of regulation approaches. Although regulation approaches are heterogeneous, both in their premises and in their analytical instruments, this relatively common argument describes a shift at the level of the economy, the state and the organization of work: from Fordism to post-Fordism and from Keynesianism to neoliberalism. Despite the influence of this argument in economic and social theory and despite its contribution to recent debates about neoliberalization and the crisis of the welfare state, this transition also sets some methodological limitations presented in this article.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Michael Kouparitsas, 2005. "Is the U.S. current account sustainable?," Chicago Fed Letter, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, issue Jun.
- Malliaris, A. G., 2002. "Global monetary instability: The role of the IMF, the EU and NAFTA," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 72-92, May.
- Stanley Fischer, 2001. "Exchange Rate Regimes: Is the Bipolar View Correct?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 3-24, Spring.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:x:y:2007:i:1-2:p:119-. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Eleni Giannakopoulou)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.