书评:Luigi Burroni, Emmanuele Pavolini和Marino Regini(编)《地中海资本主义重访》

IF 2.9 3区 社会学 Q1 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR
Niccolo Durazzi
{"title":"书评:Luigi Burroni, Emmanuele Pavolini和Marino Regini(编)《地中海资本主义重访》","authors":"Niccolo Durazzi","doi":"10.1177/10242589231152409","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"partnership across Europe. Crisis management is dominated either by the respective government (for example, in Poland), or social partnership, social pacts or social concertation are used by governments to increase legitimacy (for example, Spain). Likewise, they also prove a renaissance of corporatism (neo-corporatism) in times of crisis (for example, Germany) despite neoliberal developments. In addition, they show the limitations of social partnership with regard to crisis management at the European level. Although the European Commission officially promotes the idea of a Social Europe and structures that resemble national social partnership, the authors show that in times of crisis it is the European Commission that is unilaterally in charge of crisis management. Taking into consideration the different levels of European social dialogue, one could argue that the sectoral perspective at the European level would have enriched the overall picture. During the Great Recession some sectors were affected more by the economic repercussions (such as the metal sector) than others (such as the textile sector). Therefore, different sectors needed different crisis management approaches. It would have been interesting to examine the crisis management carried out by the trade union and employer umbrella organisations representing specific sectors, especially the banking sector, in direct reaction to the banking crisis. Altogether, in terms of the theoretical perspective of crisis corporatism, this anthology offers a lot of potential for further research, such as crisis management during the COVID-19 pandemic at the different levels of social dialogue (companies, Member States and EU social dialogue).","PeriodicalId":23253,"journal":{"name":"Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research","volume":"98 1","pages":"269 - 271"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Book Review: Luigi Burroni, Emmanuele Pavolini and Marino Regini (eds) Mediterranean Capitalism Revisited\",\"authors\":\"Niccolo Durazzi\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10242589231152409\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"partnership across Europe. Crisis management is dominated either by the respective government (for example, in Poland), or social partnership, social pacts or social concertation are used by governments to increase legitimacy (for example, Spain). Likewise, they also prove a renaissance of corporatism (neo-corporatism) in times of crisis (for example, Germany) despite neoliberal developments. In addition, they show the limitations of social partnership with regard to crisis management at the European level. Although the European Commission officially promotes the idea of a Social Europe and structures that resemble national social partnership, the authors show that in times of crisis it is the European Commission that is unilaterally in charge of crisis management. Taking into consideration the different levels of European social dialogue, one could argue that the sectoral perspective at the European level would have enriched the overall picture. During the Great Recession some sectors were affected more by the economic repercussions (such as the metal sector) than others (such as the textile sector). Therefore, different sectors needed different crisis management approaches. It would have been interesting to examine the crisis management carried out by the trade union and employer umbrella organisations representing specific sectors, especially the banking sector, in direct reaction to the banking crisis. Altogether, in terms of the theoretical perspective of crisis corporatism, this anthology offers a lot of potential for further research, such as crisis management during the COVID-19 pandemic at the different levels of social dialogue (companies, Member States and EU social dialogue).\",\"PeriodicalId\":23253,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research\",\"volume\":\"98 1\",\"pages\":\"269 - 271\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"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/10.1177/10242589231152409\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10242589231152409","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

摘要

整个欧洲的伙伴关系。危机管理要么由各自的政府主导(例如,在波兰),要么由政府利用社会伙伴关系、社会协定或社会协商来增加合法性(例如,西班牙)。同样,尽管新自由主义发展,它们也证明了在危机时期(例如,德国)社团主义(新社团主义)的复兴。此外,它们显示了在欧洲一级处理危机方面社会伙伴关系的局限性。虽然欧盟委员会正式提出了“社会欧洲”的概念和类似国家社会伙伴关系的结构,但作者表明,在危机时刻,欧盟委员会单方面负责危机管理。考虑到欧洲社会对话的不同层次,人们可以争辩说,欧洲一级的部门观点将丰富整个情况。在大衰退期间,一些行业(如金属行业)比其他行业(如纺织行业)受经济影响更大。因此,不同的行业需要不同的危机管理方法。考察代表特定行业(尤其是银行业)的工会和雇主保护伞组织对银行业危机的直接反应所进行的危机管理,将是一件有趣的事情。总而言之,就危机社团主义的理论视角而言,该选集提供了许多进一步研究的潜力,例如在不同层面的社会对话(公司,成员国和欧盟社会对话)中进行COVID-19大流行期间的危机管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Book Review: Luigi Burroni, Emmanuele Pavolini and Marino Regini (eds) Mediterranean Capitalism Revisited
partnership across Europe. Crisis management is dominated either by the respective government (for example, in Poland), or social partnership, social pacts or social concertation are used by governments to increase legitimacy (for example, Spain). Likewise, they also prove a renaissance of corporatism (neo-corporatism) in times of crisis (for example, Germany) despite neoliberal developments. In addition, they show the limitations of social partnership with regard to crisis management at the European level. Although the European Commission officially promotes the idea of a Social Europe and structures that resemble national social partnership, the authors show that in times of crisis it is the European Commission that is unilaterally in charge of crisis management. Taking into consideration the different levels of European social dialogue, one could argue that the sectoral perspective at the European level would have enriched the overall picture. During the Great Recession some sectors were affected more by the economic repercussions (such as the metal sector) than others (such as the textile sector). Therefore, different sectors needed different crisis management approaches. It would have been interesting to examine the crisis management carried out by the trade union and employer umbrella organisations representing specific sectors, especially the banking sector, in direct reaction to the banking crisis. Altogether, in terms of the theoretical perspective of crisis corporatism, this anthology offers a lot of potential for further research, such as crisis management during the COVID-19 pandemic at the different levels of social dialogue (companies, Member States and EU social dialogue).
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
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
×
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