IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mpifgd/1416.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Challenging varieties of capitalism's account of business interests: The new social market initiative and German employers' quest for liberalization, 2000-2014

Author

Listed:
  • Kinderman, Daniel

Abstract

Do employers in coordinated market economies (CME's) actively defend the non-liberal, market- constraining institutions upon which their strategic coordination and competitive success depends? This paper revisits the debate over firms' employer preferences with an in-depth examination of employers in Germany - a paradigmatic CME and crucial "test case" for Varieties of Capitalism. It is based on interviews with key officials and an in-depth examination of a large-scale campaign - the New Social Market Initiative or INMS - founded and funded by German metalworking employers to shape public opinion. The paper argues that German employers have a strong preference for liberalization: they have pushed hard for the liberalization of labor markets, the reduction of government expenditures, the expansion of market-oriented freedoms, and cuts to social protection, employment protection and benefit entitlements. I find no empirical support for the claim that the INSM is an attempt to appease discontented firms within employers' associations. On the contrary: for many employers, the Agenda 2010 reforms did not go far enough. Following the discrediting of the Anglo-American model in the financial crisis, far-reaching concessions by employees, and the unexpected revitalization of the German economy, employers have moderated their demands - but liberalization remains their default preference. This paper also addresses the role of ideas and the conditions under which employer campaigns can influence policy.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:1416
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/104715/1/80691291X.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Culpepper,Pepper D., 2011. "Quiet Politics and Business Power," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521118590, December.
    2. Daron Acemoglu & James A. Robinson & Thierry Verdier, 2012. "Can't We All Be More Like Scandinavians? Asymmetric Growth and Institutions in an Interdependent World," NBER Working Papers 18441, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Martin,Cathie Jo & Swank,Duane, 2012. "The Political Construction of Business Interests," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107018662, December.
    4. Mares,Isabela, 2003. "The Politics of Social Risk," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521534772, December.
    5. Streeck, Wolfgang, 2005. "Nach dem Korporatismus: Neue Eliten, neue Konflikte," MPIfG Working Paper 05/4, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    6. Bruno Amable & Stefano Palombarini, 2009. "A neorealist approach to institutional change and the diversity of capitalism," Post-Print hal-00345887, HAL.
    7. Christian Dustmann & Bernd Fitzenberger & Uta Sch?nberg & Alexandra Spitz-Oener, 2014. "From Sick Man of Europe to Economic Superstar: Germany's Resurgent Economy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 28(1), pages 167-188, Winter.
    8. Anke Hassel, 2014. "The Paradox of Liberalization — Understanding Dualism and the Recovery of the German Political Economy," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 52(1), pages 57-81, March.
    9. Nicklich, Manuel, 2013. "Tarifpolitische Positionen der deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände," WSI-Mitteilungen, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 66(7), pages 526-532.
    10. Martin,Cathie Jo & Swank,Duane, 2012. "The Political Construction of Business Interests," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107603646, December.
    11. Schneider, Hilmar & Eichhorst, Werner, 2008. "Bald erstmals weniger als 3 Mio. Arbeitslose in Deutschland," IZA Research Reports 20, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Culpepper,Pepper D., 2011. "Quiet Politics and Business Power," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521134132, December.
    13. Mares,Isabela, 2003. "The Politics of Social Risk," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521827416, December.
    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. Thomas Paster, 2016. "Adaptation and Influence: The Schumpeterian Perspective on Business-Politics Relations," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 444, Collegio Carlo Alberto.

    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. Huo, Jingjing, 2015. "How Nations Innovate: The Political Economy of Technological Innovation in Affluent Capitalist Economies," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198735847, Decembrie.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Lisa Kastner, 2017. "Tracing policy influence of diffuse interests: The post-crisis consumer finance protection politics in the US," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-02186320, HAL.
    7. Francesca Colli & Johan Adriaensen, 2020. "Lobbying the state or the market? A framework to study civil society organizations’ strategic behavior," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 501-513, July.
    8. Höpner, Martin & Waclawczyk, Maximilian, 2012. "Opportunismus oder Ungewissheit? Mitbestimmte Unternehmen zwischen Klassenkampf und Produktionsregime," MPIfG Discussion Paper 12/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    9. Frederik Stevens & Iskander De Bruycker, 2020. "Influence, affluence and media salience: Economic resources and lobbying influence in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(4), pages 728-750, December.
    10. Busemeyer, Marius R., 2011. "Varieties of cross-class coalitions in the politics of dualization: Insights from the case of vocational training in Germany," MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/13, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    11. Wonik Kim, 2007. "Social Insurance Expansion and Political Regime Dynamics in Europe, 1880–1945," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 88(2), pages 494-514, June.
    12. Neimanns, Erik & Blossey, Nils, 2022. "From media-party linkages to ownership concentration causes of cross-national variation in media outlets' economic positioning," MPIfG Discussion Paper 22/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    13. Cornelia Woll, 2013. "Lobbying under Pressure: The Effect of Salience on European Union Hedge Fund Regulation," Post-Print hal-02186537, HAL.
    14. Höpner, Martin & Baccaro, Lucio, 2022. "Das deutsche Wachstumsmodell, 1991-2019," MPIfG Discussion Paper 22/9, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    15. Pritish Behuria, 2019. "The comparative political economy of plastic bag bans in East Africa: why implementation has varied in Rwanda, Kenya and Uganda," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 372019, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    16. Hassel, Anke, 2011. "The paradox of liberalization – understanding dualism and the recovery of the German political economy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 53212, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Massoc, Elsa Clara, 2022. "Fifty shades of hatred and discontent: Varieties of anti-finance discourses on the European Twitter (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK)," SAFE Working Paper Series 338, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    18. Joachim Möller, 2015. "Did the German Model Survive the Labor Market Reforms? [Hat das Modell Deutschland die Arbeitsmarktreformen überlebt?]," Journal for Labour Market Research, Springer;Institute for Employment Research/ Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), vol. 48(2), pages 151-168, August.
    19. Stephen Bell & Andrew Hindmoor, 2014. "The Politics of Australia's Mining Tax: A Response to Marsh and Lewis," New Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 634-637, August.
    20. Massimiliano Vatiero, 2018. "Transaction and transactors’ choices: what we have learned and what we need to explore," Chapters, in: Claude Ménard & Mary M. Shirley (ed.), A Research Agenda for New Institutional Economics, chapter 11, pages 97-108, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    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:zbw:mpifgd:1416. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mpigfde.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.