Book Review: Bernhard Ebbinghaus and J Timo Weishaupt The role of social partners in managing Europe’s great recession. Crisis corporatism or corporatism in crisis?

IF 2.9 3区 社会学 Q1 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research Pub Date : 2023-03-23 DOI:10.1177/10242589231160419
Franziska Laudenbach
{"title":"Book Review: Bernhard Ebbinghaus and J Timo Weishaupt The role of social partners in managing Europe’s great recession. Crisis corporatism or corporatism in crisis?","authors":"Franziska Laudenbach","doi":"10.1177/10242589231160419","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The financial crisis of 2008 unleashed a serious economic crisis across the globe and, accordingly, across the European Union (EU). The so-called Great Recession hit Europe severely and caused both short-term and long-term consequences at different levels for economic growth and employment, but also with regard to income inequality (Brzezinski, 2018). The EU’s policy responses to this crisis focused strongly on European actors, which promoted structural reforms at the national level (De la Porte and Pochet, 2014). In this multi-level context, however, it is also the Member States’ duty to respond to such a crisis in order to absorb the economic, political and social consequences. When reading about EU Member State policy responses, the relevance of the respective institutional contexts becomes evident (Kiess et al., 2017). It is this institutional context in which the social partners come into play. Policy-making by governments together with collective actors in neo-corporatist settings is not new. However, neo-corporatist structures seem to be especially relevant in times of crisis. It is this perspective of collective crisis management and policymaking that the anthology The role of social partners in managing Europe’s great recession. Crisis corporatism or corporatism in crisis? (edited by Bernhard Ebbinghaus and J Timo Weishaupt) draws together. By means of a comparative analysis, they aim at understanding crossnational variations in Europe with regard to government involvement of the social partners in crisis management. Moreover, the authors ask ‘what have been the main consequences of such concertation efforts (or their failure or their absence) on labour relations and the future of neocorporatist policymaking?’ (p. 5). In this book, the authors make use of the traditional concept of crisis corporatism, which was initially theorised by Schmitter and Lehmbruch (1979). By including socio-economic, political (politics, elections, institutions) and power-resource factors in industrial relations, they analyse the involvement of social partners across European countries during the financial and economic crisis in 2008/2009 and afterwards. In the space of 293 pages, the book covers national as well as European perspectives on corporatism in times of crises, as analysed by 17 authors. The country chapters1 explain in detail the political situation, the economic context and the respective industrial relations systems. They thus systematically shed light on the role of corporatist actors in crisis management processes, the prompt establishment of social pacts between actors in the respective social dialogues, but also government activities without social partnership. 1160419 TRS0010.1177/10242589231160419TransferBook Reviews book-review2023","PeriodicalId":23253,"journal":{"name":"Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research","volume":"1 1","pages":"267 - 269"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10242589231160419","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The financial crisis of 2008 unleashed a serious economic crisis across the globe and, accordingly, across the European Union (EU). The so-called Great Recession hit Europe severely and caused both short-term and long-term consequences at different levels for economic growth and employment, but also with regard to income inequality (Brzezinski, 2018). The EU’s policy responses to this crisis focused strongly on European actors, which promoted structural reforms at the national level (De la Porte and Pochet, 2014). In this multi-level context, however, it is also the Member States’ duty to respond to such a crisis in order to absorb the economic, political and social consequences. When reading about EU Member State policy responses, the relevance of the respective institutional contexts becomes evident (Kiess et al., 2017). It is this institutional context in which the social partners come into play. Policy-making by governments together with collective actors in neo-corporatist settings is not new. However, neo-corporatist structures seem to be especially relevant in times of crisis. It is this perspective of collective crisis management and policymaking that the anthology The role of social partners in managing Europe’s great recession. Crisis corporatism or corporatism in crisis? (edited by Bernhard Ebbinghaus and J Timo Weishaupt) draws together. By means of a comparative analysis, they aim at understanding crossnational variations in Europe with regard to government involvement of the social partners in crisis management. Moreover, the authors ask ‘what have been the main consequences of such concertation efforts (or their failure or their absence) on labour relations and the future of neocorporatist policymaking?’ (p. 5). In this book, the authors make use of the traditional concept of crisis corporatism, which was initially theorised by Schmitter and Lehmbruch (1979). By including socio-economic, political (politics, elections, institutions) and power-resource factors in industrial relations, they analyse the involvement of social partners across European countries during the financial and economic crisis in 2008/2009 and afterwards. In the space of 293 pages, the book covers national as well as European perspectives on corporatism in times of crises, as analysed by 17 authors. The country chapters1 explain in detail the political situation, the economic context and the respective industrial relations systems. They thus systematically shed light on the role of corporatist actors in crisis management processes, the prompt establishment of social pacts between actors in the respective social dialogues, but also government activities without social partnership. 1160419 TRS0010.1177/10242589231160419TransferBook Reviews book-review2023
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
书评:伯恩哈德·艾宾浩斯和J·蒂莫·魏斯豪特社会伙伴在管理欧洲大衰退中的作用。危机社团主义还是危机中的社团主义?
2008年的金融危机在全球范围内引发了一场严重的经济危机,因此也波及了整个欧盟(EU)。所谓的大衰退严重打击了欧洲,在不同程度上对经济增长和就业以及收入不平等造成了短期和长期后果(布热津斯基,2018)。欧盟对这场危机的政策反应主要集中在欧洲参与者身上,这促进了国家层面的结构性改革(De la Porte and Pochet, 2014)。然而,在这种多层次的情况下,会员国也有责任对这种危机作出反应,以便吸收其经济、政治和社会后果。在阅读欧盟成员国的政策反应时,各自制度背景的相关性变得明显(Kiess等人,2017)。正是在这种制度背景下,社会伙伴开始发挥作用。在新社团主义背景下,政府与集体行动者共同制定政策并不新鲜。然而,新社团主义结构似乎在危机时期尤为重要。正是这种集体危机管理和政策制定的视角,造就了《社会伙伴在管理欧洲大衰退中的作用》这本选集。危机社团主义还是危机中的社团主义?(由Bernhard Ebbinghaus和J Timo Weishaupt编辑)。通过比较分析,他们的目的是了解在欧洲关于政府参与危机管理的社会伙伴的跨国差异。此外,作者还提出了这样的问题:“这种协调努力(或它们的失败或缺失)对劳资关系和新社团主义政策制定的未来产生了什么主要后果?”(第5页)。在这本书中,作者利用了危机社团主义的传统概念,该概念最初是由Schmitter和Lehmbruch(1979)提出的。通过将社会经济、政治(政治、选举、机构)和权力资源因素纳入工业关系,他们分析了2008/2009年及之后金融和经济危机期间欧洲国家社会伙伴的参与情况。在293页的篇幅里,本书涵盖了17位作者对危机时期社团主义的国家和欧洲视角的分析。国家章节1详细解释了政治形势、经济背景和各自的劳资关系制度。因此,它们系统地揭示了社团主义行动者在危机管理过程中的作用,在各自的社会对话中行动者之间迅速建立社会契约,以及没有社会伙伴关系的政府活动。1160419 trs0010.1177 /10242589231160419 transferbookreviews bookreview2023
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research
Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
35
期刊最新文献
Governing neo-nationalism, trade unions and industrial relations: the cases of Hungary and Poland From a handful of activists towards an organising subculture: institutionalisation of transnational union organising in Central and Eastern Europe Round Table. Implementing the EU Directive on adequate minimum wages in the Low Countries: the case of the Netherlands Promoting employed worker status on digital platforms: how France’s labour inspection and social security agencies address ‘uberisation’ Internalising precariousness: experiences of Georgian platform workers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1