IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/cup/cbooks/9781107603646.html
   My bibliography  Save this book

The Political Construction of Business Interests

Author

Listed:
  • Martin,Cathie Jo
  • Swank,Duane

Abstract

Many societies use labor market coordination to maximize economic growth and equality, yet employers' willing cooperation with government and labor is something of a mystery. The Political Construction of Business Interests recounts employers' struggles to define their collective social identities at turning points in capitalist development. Employers are most likely to support social investments in countries with strong peak business associations, that help members form collective preferences and realize policy goals in labor market negotiations. Politicians, with incentives shaped by governmental structures, took the initiative in association-building and those that created the strongest associations were motivated to evade labor radicalism and to preempt parliamentary democratization. Sweeping in its historical and cross-national reach, the book builds on original archival data, interviews and cross-national quantitative analyses. The research has important implications for the construction of business as a social class and powerful ramifications for equality, welfare state restructuring and social solidarity.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin,Cathie Jo & Swank,Duane, 2012. "The Political Construction of Business Interests," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107603646.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:cbooks:9781107603646
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Kinderman, Daniel, 2014. "Challenging varieties of capitalism's account of business interests: The new social market initiative and German employers' quest for liberalization, 2000-2014," MPIfG Discussion Paper 14/16, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    2. Ole Henning Sørensen & Virginia Doellgast & Anders Bojesen, 2015. "Intermediary cooperative associations and the institutionalization of participative work practices: A case study in the Danish public sector," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 36(4), pages 701-725, November.
    3. Michaël Zemmour, 2012. "Tax competition and the move from insurance to assistance," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 12090r, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne, revised Mar 2013.
    4. Chris F. Wright, 2017. "Employer Organizations and Labour Immigration Policy in Australia and the United Kingdom: The Power of Political Salience and Social Institutional Legacies," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 55(2), pages 347-371, June.
    5. Cathie Jo Martin, 2022. "FICTION WORKS: Cultural ideas and the design of industrial relations systems in Britain and Denmark," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 50-67, January.
    6. Linsi, Lukas Andreas & Hopkin, Jonathan & Jaupart, Pascal, 2019. "Exporting the winner-take-all economy: micro-level evidence on the impact of US investors on executive pay in the United Kingdom," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102217, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Rothstein, Sidney A., 2020. "Toward a discursive approach to growth models: Social blocs in the politics of digital transformation," MPIfG Discussion Paper 20/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    8. Jonas Meckling, 2015. "Oppose, Support, or Hedge? Distributional Effects, Regulatory Pressure, and Business Strategy in Environmental Politics," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 15(2), pages 19-37, May.
    9. Raess, Damian & Wagner, Patrick, 2022. "South to north investment linkages and decent work in Brazil," Papers 1382, World Trade Institute.
    10. Leon Gooberman & Marco Hauptmeier & Edmund Heery, 2018. "Contemporary Employer Interest Representation in the United Kingdom," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 32(1), pages 114-132, February.
    11. Duane Swank, 2015. "The Political Foundations of Redistribution in Post-industrial Democracies," LIS Working papers 653, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    12. Stefan Thewissen & Olaf Vliet & Chen Wang, 2018. "Taking the Sector Seriously: Data, Developments, and Drivers of Intrasectoral Earnings Inequality," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 1023-1048, August.
    13. Rothstein, Sidney A., 2019. "Innovation and precarity: Workplace discourse in twenty-first century capitalism," MPIfG Discussion Paper 19/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    14. Huo, Jingjing, 2015. "How Nations Innovate: The Political Economy of Technological Innovation in Affluent Capitalist Economies," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198735847.
    15. Alexander Hertel-Fernandez & William Kimball & Thomas Kochan, 2022. "What Forms of Representation Do American Workers Want? Implications for Theory, Policy, and Practice," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 75(2), pages 267-294, March.
    16. Matthew Lockwood, 2022. "Policy feedback and institutional context in energy transitions," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(3), pages 487-507, September.
    17. Castater Eric Graig, 2015. "Unionization and the partisan effect on income inequality," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 17(1), pages 1-40, April.
    18. Thomas Paster & Dennie Oude Nijhuis & Maximilian Kiecker, 2020. "To Extend or Not to Extend: Explaining the Divergent Use of Statutory Bargaining Extensions in the Netherlands and Germany," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 58(3), pages 532-557, September.

    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:cbooks:9781107603646. 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: Ruth Austin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org .

    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.