| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
102570
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The effect of globalisation on social spending is one of the most intensely studied issues in the political economy literature. Until recently, conventional wisdom held that globalisation leads governments to expand social spending to compensate workers for increasing risk exposure. The latest research shows, however, that globalisation has become strongly associated with spending cutbacks since the late 1980s. This article adds to this research by arguing that the negative impact of globalisation is conditioned on the capitalist system in different countries. In coordinated market economies (CMEs), employers are dependent on the willingness of the workforce to invest in specific skills and therefore become supportive of extensive social spending. Not so in liberal market economies (LMEs), where employers are much less dependent on social spending because the workforce in general invests less in specific skills. Employers in LMEs are therefore likely to use increasing globalisation as a means to push through retrenchment, whereas employers in CMEs are not. This argument is tested in a time-series cross-section regression analysis, which clearly supports it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
171112
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Women shoulder a heavier burden of family work than men in modern society, preventing them from matching male success in the external labor market. Limiting working hours is a plausible way to level the playing field by creating the possibility of less gendered roles for both sexes. But why then are heavily regulated European labor markets associated with a smaller share of women in top management positions compared with liberal market economies such as in the United States? We explain this puzzle with reference to the difficulty of ambitious women to signal their commitment to high-powered careers in regulated markets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
081295
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is an organization charged with the responsibility to observe governance experiments to enhance institutional competitiveness in its member states. While the IMF's role in propagating certain forms of institutional competitiveness in developing economies is commonly discussed, less emphasis has been placed on how the IMF seeks to transfer policy knowledge, and to learn from, the governance of institutional competitiveness in its developed Western member states. This article provides a corrective by providing an analysis of IMF staff and Executive Board advice on taxation and monetary reform to two 'coordinated' market economies, Denmark and Sweden, and two 'liberal' market economies, Australia and New Zealand, from 1975 to 2004. The article traces how IMF staff and Executive Board advice compares with actual changes to taxation and monetary regimes in these four small open economies. In sum, this article explores the notion that the IMF is an 'experimentalist governance' organization that seeks to build its comparative knowledge of policy reform, providing a contrast with the common depiction of the IMF as an institution that dictates 'neoliberal' policy homogeneity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|