制定国家干预的条件:奥地利和丹麦职业教育机构的雇主、工会和包容性政治

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Martin B. Carstensen, P. Emmenegger, Daniel Unterweger
{"title":"制定国家干预的条件:奥地利和丹麦职业教育机构的雇主、工会和包容性政治","authors":"Martin B. Carstensen, P. Emmenegger, Daniel Unterweger","doi":"10.1017/S1755773922000017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract How do coalitional dynamics matter for the capacity of states to maintain social inclusion in coordinated models of capitalism? Taking its departure in scholarship emphasizing the influence of employers on the extent of state intervention in post-industrial economies, this paper argues that employer influence depends on which actors they team up with – unions or parties. If unions depend on employers for their organizational influence in a policy field, unions become a strong coalitional partner for employers in weakening demands for inclusiveness from the parliamentary arena. Conversely, if unions have influence independent of any coalition with employers, both unions and employers are likely to team up with political parties aligned with their preferences. This makes the level of inclusion resulting from increased state intervention more fluctuating, depending on who holds government power. A comparative study of reforms of Danish and Austrian vocational education institutions corroborates the empirical purchase of the argument.","PeriodicalId":47291,"journal":{"name":"European Political Science Review","volume":"14 1","pages":"245 - 262"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Setting the terms of state intervention: employers, unions and the politics of inclusiveness in Austrian and Danish vocational education institutions\",\"authors\":\"Martin B. Carstensen, P. Emmenegger, Daniel Unterweger\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S1755773922000017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract How do coalitional dynamics matter for the capacity of states to maintain social inclusion in coordinated models of capitalism? Taking its departure in scholarship emphasizing the influence of employers on the extent of state intervention in post-industrial economies, this paper argues that employer influence depends on which actors they team up with – unions or parties. If unions depend on employers for their organizational influence in a policy field, unions become a strong coalitional partner for employers in weakening demands for inclusiveness from the parliamentary arena. Conversely, if unions have influence independent of any coalition with employers, both unions and employers are likely to team up with political parties aligned with their preferences. This makes the level of inclusion resulting from increased state intervention more fluctuating, depending on who holds government power. A comparative study of reforms of Danish and Austrian vocational education institutions corroborates the empirical purchase of the argument.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47291,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Political Science Review\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"245 - 262\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Political Science Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773922000017\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Political Science Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773922000017","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要联盟动态对国家在协调的资本主义模式中保持社会包容的能力有何影响?本文偏离了强调雇主对后工业经济中国家干预程度的影响的学术观点,认为雇主的影响取决于他们与哪些行为者合作——工会或政党。如果工会在政策领域的组织影响力依赖雇主,那么工会将成为雇主强有力的联盟伙伴,削弱议会对包容性的要求。相反,如果工会的影响力独立于与雇主的任何联盟,那么工会和雇主都可能与与其偏好一致的政党合作。这使得国家干预增加带来的包容性水平更加波动,这取决于谁掌握政府权力。对丹麦和奥地利职业教育机构改革的比较研究证实了这一论点的实证购买力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Setting the terms of state intervention: employers, unions and the politics of inclusiveness in Austrian and Danish vocational education institutions
Abstract How do coalitional dynamics matter for the capacity of states to maintain social inclusion in coordinated models of capitalism? Taking its departure in scholarship emphasizing the influence of employers on the extent of state intervention in post-industrial economies, this paper argues that employer influence depends on which actors they team up with – unions or parties. If unions depend on employers for their organizational influence in a policy field, unions become a strong coalitional partner for employers in weakening demands for inclusiveness from the parliamentary arena. Conversely, if unions have influence independent of any coalition with employers, both unions and employers are likely to team up with political parties aligned with their preferences. This makes the level of inclusion resulting from increased state intervention more fluctuating, depending on who holds government power. A comparative study of reforms of Danish and Austrian vocational education institutions corroborates the empirical purchase of the argument.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
3.10%
发文量
50
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信