IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mul/jl9ury/doi10.1425-88486y2017i3p421-458.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who wants to loosen employment protection? Evidence on preferences for labour market deregulation in Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Chiara Morandini

Abstract

This paper presents an empirical analysis of the political economy of recent labour market reforms in Italy. Through 2011-13 ITANES survey data, the paper analyses preferences for a general reduction in employment protection. Strong consensus for a more flexible labour market comes from self-employed, managers, professionals and craft and shop owners, inactive people and seniors, in line with the insider-outsider theory. Some support from the «outsiders» emerged by unemployed but not atypical workers. Trade union members, left-wing people and people experiencing degrading economic conditions are generally opposed. Lastly, consensus significantly increased in time. Implemented under left-wing led coalition governments and at odds with the idea of socialist parties defending «insiders» unionised workers, we argue that the current incumbents' political strategy is not as paradoxical as it might seem. Comparing our results with findings on voting behaviour in 2013, both the main leftist and centrist parties in the ruling coalition are in fact gaining consensus among some of the social groups that are the most favourable to labour market flexibilisation.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Chiara Morandini, 2017. "Who wants to loosen employment protection? Evidence on preferences for labour market deregulation in Italy," Stato e mercato, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 3, pages 421-458.
  • Handle: RePEc:mul:jl9ury:doi:10.1425/88486:y:2017:i:3:p:421-458
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rivisteweb.it/download/article/10.1425/88486
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.rivisteweb.it/doi/10.1425/88486
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:mul:jl9ury:doi:10.1425/88486:y:2017:i:3:p:421-458. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.rivisteweb.it/ .

    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.