关闭

关闭

关闭

封号提示

内容

首页 how institutions evolve.pdf

how institutions evolve.pdf

how institutions evolve.pdf

上传者: 月儿弯弯 2014-03-11 评分 0 0 0 0 0 0 暂无简介 简介 举报

简介:本文档为《how institutions evolvepdf》,可适用于高等教育领域,主题内容包含P:KcSpreThelenJune,:HowInstitutionsEvolveTHEPOLITICALECONOMYOFSKILLSINGERM符等。

P:KcSpreThelenJune,:HowInstitutionsEvolveTHEPOLITICALECONOMYOFSKILLSINGERMANY,BRITAIN,THEUNITEDSTATES,ANDJAPANKATHLEENTHELENNorthwesternUniversityvP:KcSpreThelenJune,:PUBLISHEDBYTHEPRESSSYNDICATEOFTHEUNIVERSITYOFCAMBRIDGEThePittBuilding,TrumpingtonStreet,Cambridge,UnitedKingdomCAMBRIDGEUNIVERSITYPRESSTheEdinburghBuilding,CambridgeCBRU,UKWestthStreet,NewYork,NY,USAWilliamstownRoad,PortMelbourne,VIC,AustraliaRuizdeAlarcon,Madrid,SpainDockHouse,TheWaterfront,CapeTown,SouthAfricahttp:wwwcambridgeorgKathleenThelenThisbookisincopyrightSubjecttostatutoryexceptionandtotheprovisionsofrelevantcollectivelicensingagreements,noreproductionofanypartmaytakeplacewithoutthewrittenpermissionofCambridgeUniversityPressFirstpublishedPrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmericaTypefaceJansonTextRomanptSystemLATEXεTBAcatalogrecordforthisbookisavailablefromtheBritishLibraryLibraryofCongressCataloginginPublicationdataThelen,KathleenAnnHowinstitutionsevolve:thepoliticaleconomyofskillsinGermany,Britain,theUnitedStates,andJapanKathleenThelenpcm–(Cambridgestudiesincomparativepolitics)IncludesbibliographicalreferencesandindexISBN–ISBN(pbk)Employees–Trainingof–Europe–CasestudiesEmployees–Trainingof–UnitedStates–CasestudiesEmployees–Training–Japan–CasestudiesOccupationaltraining–Europe–CasestudiesOccupationaltraining–UnitedStates–CasestudiesOccupationaltraining–Japan–CasestudiesITitleIISeriesHFTT′–dcISBNhardbackISBNpaperbackviP:KcSpreThelenJune,:ContentsPrefacepagexiTHEPOLITICALECONOMYOFSKILLSINCOMPARATIVEHISTORICALPERSPECTIVESkillsandSkillFormationTheArgumentinBriefTheoriesofInstitutionalGenesisandChangeTheOriginsandEvolutionofInstitutions:LessonsfromthePresentStudyOutlinefortheBookTHEEVOLUTIONOFSKILLFORMATIONINGERMANYTheImportanceoftheArtisanalEconomyintheEvolutionofSkillFormationinGermanyStrategiesoftheLargeMachineandMetalworkingCompaniesPoliticalCoalitionsandtheEvolutionoftheSystemThePoliticalCoalitionagainstReformTHEEVOLUTIONOFSKILLFORMATIONINBRITAINStatePolicyandtheFateoftheBritishArtisanateUnionandEmployerStrategiesintheMetalworkingEngineeringIndustryReformEffortsbeforeWorldWarITheImpactofWarandItsAftermathComparisonsandConclusionsixP:KcSpreThelenJune,:ContentsTHEEVOLUTIONOFSKILLFORMATIONINJAPANANDTHEUNITEDSTATESTheEvolutionofSkillFormationinJapanTheRoleoftheStateandtheFateoftheJapaneseArtisanateStrategiesoftheLargeMetalworkingCompaniesTheEvolutionoftheJapaneseManagementSystemGermanyandJapanComparedTheEvolutionofSkillFormationintheUnitedStatesSkillFormationinEarlyIndustrialAmericaUnionandEmployerStrategiesintheMetalworkingIndustrybeforeWorldWarIThePoliticsofTrainingduringandafterWorldWarIComparisonsandConclusionsEVOLUTIONANDCHANGEINTHEGERMANSYSTEMOFVOCATIONALTRAININGTheEvolutionoftheSystemunderNationalSocialismVocationalTraininginPostwarGermanyContemporaryDevelopmentsintheGermanTrainingSystem:ErosionthroughDriftCONCLUSIONS,EMPIRICALANDTHEORETICALCrossNationalComparisons:TheOriginsofDivergentSkillRegimesInstitutionalComplementaritiesInstitutionalEvolutionandChangeBibliographyIndexxP:JzGJzKcThelenMay,:ThePoliticalEconomyofSkillsinComparativeHistoricalPerspectiveThepasttwodecadeshavewitnessedanenormousoutpouringofliteratureontheputativeeffectsof“globalization”onthepoliticaleconomiesoftheadvancedindustrialcountriesAgooddealofthisliteraturewasinspiredbyearly,sometimesratherbreathlesspredictionsofatrendtowardconvergenceintheinstitutionalarrangementsgoverningthesepoliticaleconomiesSuchconvergence,itwasarguedbysome,wouldresultfromthepressuresimposedbyfootloosefirmsengagedin“regimeshopping”whichwouldinturndrivecompetitivederegulationamongtheadvancedcountries(see,forexample,KapsteinKurzer)TheseprospectswereespeciallyworrisometostudentsofEurope’s“corporatist”politicaleconomies,whichhadlongbeenadmiredasmodelsofeconomicefficiencyandsocialequalityInthemeantime,however,agooddealofevidencehasaccumulatedthatcallsintoquestionargumentsaboutaconvergenceamongtheinstitutionalarrangementsthatcharacterizedifferentpoliticaleconomies(BergerandDoreBrown,Green,andLauderFernerandHymanGarrettIversen,Pontusson,andSoskiceKitscheltetalStreeckandYamamuraVogelWallersteinandGolden)Althoughtherearecertainlychangesafootinallcountries,anumberofscholarshavepointedtosystematicandapparentlyenduringdifferencesintheorganizationofcapitalismacrosstheadvancedindustrialcountriesDifferentauthorscharacterizethesedifferenceseachinhisorherownway,buttheconsensusthathasemergedistrulystrikingBoyerandHollingsworthwriteofdistinctivenational“productionregimes”whicharedefinedbyaHarryKatzandOwenDarbishiremakeamorenuancedargumentaboutthepaceandscopeofcommontrends(KatzandDarbishireseealsoMartinandRoss)P:JzGJzKcThelenMay,:ThePoliticalEconomyofSkillsinComparativeHistoricalPerspectivesetamutuallyreinforcinginstitutionalarrangementsthattogethersupportdifferenttypesoffirmstrategiesininternationalmarkets–situatingtheUnitedStatesandtheUnitedKingdomatoneendofacontinuumandGermanyandJapanattheother(BoyerandHollingsworthseealsoKingandWood)ThisworkresonateswithStreeck’sanalysis,whichdistinguishesbetween“liberal”marketeconomiessuchastheUnitedStatesandBritainand“sociallyembedded”politicaleconomiessuchasJapanandGermany(Streeck)MichelAlbert’spopularbookdrawsadistinctionbetweenwhathecallsthe“AngloSaxon”andthe“Rhineland”versionsofcapitalism,which,asStreeckhaspointedout,alsosituates“notjustStockholmbutalsoTokyo”onthebanksoftheRhine(Albert)Allthis,inturn,mapswellontotheanalysisofDavidSoskice,whohascharacterizedcrossnationaldifferencesinadvancedcapitalismintermsofabroaddistinctionbetween“coordinated”and“noncoordinated”marketeconomies,andmorerecently,incollaborationwithPeterHall,of“coordinated”versus“liberal”marketeconomies(HallandSoskiceSoskice)WhatalltheseworksshareincommonisaperspectiveonnationalmodelsofcapitalismthatarecharacterizedbydistinctiveinstitutionalarrangementswhichinturnsupportspecifickindsofstrategiesonthepartoffirmsininternationalmarketsTheseauthorsallpointtomoreorlessthesamesetofinstitutionalarrangementsthathavetraditionallybeendefinedascentraltothefunctioningofthesepoliticaleconomies–financialinstitutions,industrialrelationsinstitutions,vocationaltrainingsystems,bank–industrylinks,andmorerecently,welfarestateinstitutionsandpolicies(EbbinghausandManowEstevezAbe,Iversen,andSoskice)Foralltheirdifferences,theseauthorsmakeverysimilardistinctionsacrosscountries,anddrawanespeciallysharplinebetween“organized”(or“embedded”)capitalisteconomiessuchasGermanyandJapanontheonehand,and“liberal”marketeconomiessuchastheUnitedStatesandtheUnitedKingdomontheotherTheformerarecharacterizedby“patientcapital,”coordinatedTheliteratureonthepoliticaleconomyofadvancedcapitalismfromthesandssimilarlyfocusedondistinctivenationalmodels(forexample,Hall,Zysman,andcorporatismtheoristsofthes)Thenewerliteratureon“varietiesofcapitalism”isanoutgrowthofthatearlierwork,thoughwithsomeimportanttheoreticalinnovationsForanextendeddiscussion,seeThelen(b)Infact,allthesevariouscategorizationschemesalsohavetroublesortingthesamesetof“intermediate”orhardtoclassifycountries,includingFranceandItalyP:JzGJzKcThelenMay,:ThePoliticalEconomyofSkillsinComparativeHistoricalPerspectiveemployers,andvariousformsoflabormanagementcooperationThelatter,bycontrast,aredefinedbyshorttermfinancingarrangements,fragmentedemployers,andmoreadversarialindustrialrelationssystemsWhatthesecharacterizationsalsoshareisaviewofthesesystemsasmoreorlessintegratedwholes,inwhichthevariouspartsworktogetherinwaysthataremutuallyreinforcingButwhatbroughtthesesystemsintobeingAndwhatholdsthemtogethertodayAnd,sincenoonewouldarguethatthesesystemsarenotchanginginfundamentalways,howshouldwecharacterizethedynamicsofchangeandweightheseagainsttheforcesofinstitutionalreproductionThesequestionsareatthetopoftheagendainthecontextofcurrentglobalizationpressures,andyetontheseissuestheconsensusbeginstobreakdownHallandSoskice’scharacterizationoftheidealtypical“organized”and“liberal”marketeconomiesemphasizestightcouplingandmultiplefunctionalinterconnectionsamongthevariousinstitutionalarrangementsthatmakeupanationaleconomic“system”(HallandSoskice)Fortheseauthors,theexistenceofinstitutionalcomplementaritiesacrossvariousarenascontributestotherobustnessofthesystemasawhole,fortworeasonsOneisthatinstitutionalframeworksprovidethefoundationonwhich(nationallydistinctive)competitiveadvantagerests,sothatkeyactors(especiallyemployers)whohaveorganizedtheirstrategiesaroundtheseinstitutionswillbeloathtopartwiththemTheotheristhat,eveniftheywantedtochangesomeaspectsofthesystem,shiftingrulesinonearenawouldrequireadjustmentsinother,neighboringrealms,whichbothincreasesthecostsofchangeforthemandalsomultipliesthepoliticalobstaclestosuchchangeThatsaid,however,anddespitethefactthatHallandSoskiceoverallseethesystemsasveryrobust,tightcouplingandstronginstitutionalcomplementaritiesalsoseemtosuggestthatamajordisruptioninonerealm(forexample,financialinstitutions)wouldimmediately“radiate”andtranslateintosignificantstrainsandchangeinneighboringrealms(forexample,collectivebargaining)Streeck’shistorical–sociologicalaccountalsostressesinstitutionalcomplementaritiesbutitdownplaysthefunctionalandeconomiclogicinfavorofamoresingularlypoliticalviewStreeckviewsnational“systems”astheproductofpastandongoingpoliticalinterventionandtinkering,ofactivemaintenanceandresettingWhateverstructuralorfunctionalcoherencewemaynowobserveinthesesystems,heargues,“hadtobecontinuouslyestablished,restored,redefinedanddefendedagainstallsortsofdisorganizingP:JzGJzKcThelenMay,:ThePoliticalEconomyofSkillsinComparativeHistoricalPerspectiveforces”(Streeck:)Heemphasizeshownationalmodelsarenottheproductofagranddesign,and“Expostaccommodationseemstohavebeenatleastasimportantasaprioricalculationsoftheadvantagesofcompatibilityandcomplementarityunderconditionsofinterdependence”(Streeck:)UnlikeHallandSoskice’sequilibriumbasedviewofinstitutions,Streeckseesthesearrangementsasinherentlylesscoherentandthereforealsonotatallselfequilibrating,whichleadstoapicturethatisoveralllesssanguineabouttherobustnessofsuchsystemsAtthesametime,however,andformanyofthesamereasons,thisalternativeviewwouldnotnecessarilyseesuchsystemsasvulnerabletothekindof“unraveling”mentionedaboveintheeventofstrongperturbationsinonerealmThepremiseofthisbookisthatinordertounderstandthelikelyfutureoftheinstitutionsthatmakeupthedifferent“varietiesofcapitalism”weneedabettersenseofwheretheseinstitutionscamefrom,whathassustainedthem,andwhatarethewaysinwhichtheyhavechangedovertimeThisisnotthefirsttimethesesystemshaveexperiencedstrain,andunderstandinghowtheyevolvedinthepastcanyieldnewinsightsintothemodesandmechanismsofchangethroughwhichtheycontinuetodeveloptodayMyanalysisfocusesontheinstitutionsofskillformationbecausetheyconstituteakeyelementintheinstitutionalconstellationsidentifiedbyalltheauthorscitedaboveInfact,onerecentstrandofscholarshipseesskillsandskillformationsystemsascausallycentraltothedevelopmentandarticulationofsocialpolicypreferencesgenerally,andthusfoundationalforthedevelopmentandmaintenanceofdifferentsystemsofsocialprotectionacrossthedevelopeddemocracies(see,especially,IversenandSoskicealsoIversen)Iapproachthepoliticsofskillformationfromtwoangles,pursuingbothacrossnationalandalongitudinaldimensionFirst,thecrossnationalcomponentofthestudytracestheoriginsofdifferentskillformationregimes,focusingespeciallyonBritainandGermany,andwithonlyslightlylessdetailedtreatmentsaswellofJapanandtheUnitedStatesThispartofthebookasksthequestions:WhydiddifferentcountriespursuesuchdifferenttrajectoriesintermsofplantbasedtrainingAnd:howdidtheevolutionoftraininginstitutionsinteractwiththedevelopmentof“collateral”organizationsandinstitutions–especiallylaborunionsandemployerassociations,andindustrialrelationsinstitutionsOneofthemostwidelyciteddifferencesbetween“coordinated”marketeconomies(suchasGermanyandJapan)and“liberal”marketeconomies(suchastheUnitedStatesandUnitedKingdom)isthattheformerP:JzGJzKcThelenMay,:ThePoliticalEconomyofSkillsinComparativeHistoricalPerspectivesupportmoreandbetterplantbasedtrainingMycomparativehistoricalinstitutionalanalysistracestheoriginsofthesecontemporarydifferencesbacktothenineteenthcenturyContemporarydifferencesinskillformationgobacktoimportantdifferencesinthecharacterofthesettlementbetweenemployersinskillbasedindustries,artisans,andearlytradeunionsIshowhowthedevelopmentofskillformationintheearlyindustrialperiodinteractedwiththedevelopmentofcollectivebargaininginstitutionsandnascentlaborunionsandemployerorganizationsinwaysthatsetcountriesondifferentnationaltrajectoriesThepresentanalysisidentifiessomesimilaritiesbetweenGermanyandJapan(bothas“coordinated”marketeconomies),andbetweenBritainandtheUnitedStates(as“liberal”marketeconomies)However,italsounderscoresthesubstantialdifferencesbetweenthesecasesinhowtrainingisorganized–withenormousimplicationsforthetypeofskillformationthateachcountryinstitutionalizedandforlabor’srolewithinitThecrossnationalcomponentoftheanalysisdrawsonanexcellentsecondaryliteratureonthehistoriesofunions,employerorganizations,andskillformation,aswellasonprimarydocumentswherethesewereneededtoaddressthespecificquestionsaroundwhichthisresearchwasorganizedThemaingoalistosituateanumberofcountryexperiencesMineisnotthefirststudytodrawattentiontotheseparticularcasesAsmentionedabove,thedifferentliteraturesonvarietiesofcapitalismtendtofocusonthesamebasicclustersofcountriesLikewise,intheliteratureonskillsinparticular,itisnotuncommontodrawabroaddistinctionbetweenGermanyandJapanononehand(as“highskill”economies)andtheUnitedStatesandUnitedKingdomontheother(as“lowskill”orstronglyskillbifurcatedeconomies)(forexample,AshtonandGreenBrown,Green,andLauder)ThisconventionfollowspioneeringworkbyFinegoldandSoskice(),whodrawasharplinebetween“highskill”and“lowskill”equilibriumcountries,thoughinthemeantimethissomewhatsimplifieddistinctionhasbeensupersededbyamoredifferentiatedviewthatemphasizesthedifferenttypesandmixesofskillsproducedwithinanyonecountryThisisalsowhyIadoptthesomewhatlessnormativelyinflectedlanguageof“coordinated”versus“liberal”trainingregimes,whicharecharacterizedbydifferentmixesofstrengthsandweaknessesinskillformationSeethediscussionbelowAshtonandGreen()proposeanexplanationoftheseoutcomesthatisbroadlycompatiblewithmineHowevertheirhistoricalanalysisisveryfleeting(fivetotenpagespercountry,andineachcasecoveringbothplantbasedandschoolbasedtraining)Theirexplanationoftheseoutcomeshingesonthebehaviorofhighlyaggregatedactors(“therulingclass,”the“bourgeoisie,”the“aristocracy”),andtheconclusions–althoughnotwrong–arehighlysimplifiedManyoftheirassertions(forexample,theideathattheHandwerksectorwas“undermined”byindustrializationortheimplicationthatunionspushedforskillstandardizationagainstemployeropposition)arenotconsistentwiththeresultsofthehistorical–empiricalresearchpresentedhere(AshtonandGreen:–)P:JzGJzKcThelenMay,:ThePoliticalEconomyofSkillsinComparativeHistoricalPerspectivewithinatheoreticalframeworkthatcanilluminatecausalmechanismsatworkacrossanumberofcasesEachofthecountriesincludedinthebroaderstudycanbe–hasbeen–characterizedasuniqueintheliteratureonpoliticaleconomyandlabordevelopment–BritainasthefirstindustrializertheGerman“Sonderweg”AmericanandJapanese“exceptionalism”Withouttakingawayfromthefundamentaluniquenessofeachcase,thisprojectattemptstoputtheirexperienceswithskillformationandlaborincorporationsidebysidetoshedlightonsystematicparallelsanddifferencesamongthemSecond,thelongitudinaldimensionoftheresearchtracksthedevelopmentoftheGermanvocationaltrainingsystemoveralongertimeframethantheothercases–indeed,uptothepresentThisaspectofthestudytacklesthequestionofhowinstitutionsevolveandisorganizedaroundasomewhatdifferentpuzzleGermany’svocationaltrainingsystemhasbeenheldupasanexemplarysolutiontoanumberofknottycoordinationproblemsthatplaguemostprivatesectortrainingregimesTheGermansystemencouragesfirmstoinvestinworkerskills,anditprovidesmechanismstoassurethatapprenticeswillreceivehighqualitytrainingMoregenerally,vocationaltraininginstitutionsinGermanyaretypicallyseenaspartofalargerinstitutionalpackagewhich,alongwithcentralizedcollectivebargaining,strongbank–industrylinks,andencompassingemployerassociatio

用户评论(0)

0/200

精彩专题

上传我的资料

每篇奖励 +2积分

资料评价:

/20
0下载券 下载 加入VIP, 送下载券

意见
反馈

立即扫码关注

爱问共享资料微信公众号

返回
顶部