Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Varieties of capitalism essay
The varieties of capitalism
Varieties of capitalism essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Introduction
Due to the rapid process of globalization, the issue of whether socio-economic institutions and policies are converging or diverging across different nations has become controversial. Various literatures on comparative institutional studies has been developed, in which the Varieties of Capitalism approach by Hall and Soskice (2001) is one of the most significant concepts that is being widely discussed. According to Hall and Thelen (2005), the ‘varieties of capitalism’ is a firm-centered approach where firm is placed as a key actor and is being considered relational. It emphasizes the concept of institutional complementarities, which ‘…one set of institutions is complementary to another when its presence raises the returns available from the other’ (Hall and Gingerich, 2004, p.6). Also, the development of relationships between firms and other five domains – industrial relations, vocational training and education, corporate governance, inter-firm relations as well as employees, is essential to ensure coordination to maintain competencies (Hall and Soskice, 2001). According to Knell and Srholec (2005), the varieties of capitalism literature has mainly distinguished and identified two types of coordination - Liberal Market Economies (LMEs) and Coordinated Market Economies (CMEs), in which competitive markets are dominant in LMES while CMEs are mainly based on strategic interaction.
Using the UK as an example of LME and Germany as an example of CME, this essay will consider the ‘varieties of capitalism’ (VoC) implications for financial structures as well as labour relations of the respective economies. The definition of institutional complementarities will be outlined in the first paragraph, while the implications w...
... middle of paper ...
...s: Coordinated and Uncoordinated Market Economies in the 1980s and 1990s’ In Kitschelt H, Lange P, Marks G, and Stephens J (eds) Continuity and Change in Contemporary Capitalism New York, Cambridge University Press
Sternberg, R. and Kiese, M. and Stockinger, D. (2008) ‘Cluster policies in the US and Germany: varieties of capitalism perspective on two high-tech states’ Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 2010, 28, pp.1063-1082
Streeck, W. (1992) Social Institutions and Economic Performance, Beverly Hills, Sage Publication
Thelen, K. (2001) ‘Varieties of Labour Politics in the Developed Democracies’, in Hall, Peter A.; Soskice, David (eds.) Varieties of Capitalism: the Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage, pp. 71–103. New York: Oxford University Press
Witt, M. A. (2010) ‘China: What Variety of Capitalism?’ working paper, INSEAD
Throughout the 19th century, capitalism seemed like an economic utopia for some, but on the other hand some saw it as a troublesome whirlpool that would lead to bigger problems. The development of capitalism in popular countries such as in England brought the idea that the supply and demand exchange systems could work in most trade based countries. Other countries such as Russia thought that the proletariats and bourgeoisie could not co-exist with demand for power and land, and eventually resorted to communism in the early 20th century. Although many different systems were available to the countries in need of economic change, a majority of them found the right system for their needs. And when capitalist societies began to take full swing, some classes did not benefit as well as others and this resulted in a vast amount of proletariats looking for work. Capitalists societies are for certain a win-loss system, and many people did not like the change from having there society changed to a government controlled money hungry system. On the other hand, the demand for labor brought the bourgeoisie large profits because they could pay out as much as they wanted for labor.
The economy is substantially bigger than it was in 1980s and the amount of spending increases even though the share remains constant. Kotz showcases his perspective as he points out that the that the US made Neoliberal Capitalism be the new template. The rising rate of profit after neoliberal restructuring encouraged firms to expand. Wages were stagnating while profits were rising rapidly. The financial sector of big business after decades of subordination “under regulated capitalism was able to emerge as the dominant force in the 1970s.” (Kotz) Ongoing accumulation of the capital is known to result in neoliberalism. What makes neoliberalism as economically different from other regimes of accumulation is its solution to the problem of maintaining profits as capital cycles through the realms of production and consumption.Every producer needs to find a consumer willing to buy his or her product. This is a common-sense observation, but it runs into some tricky problems under Neoliberal
Reich, R. (2007). How capitalism is killing democracy. Foreign Policy, Sep/Oct2007, 38-42. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete.
...hown to be a fundamental socioeconomic transformation. My paper has shown many aspects of the market society, by using a number of theorists’ concepts. I focused on the characteristics of a market society, as well as why this transformation from traditional society was so significant. I also discussed the changes that have taken place in the workplace and the impact on the workers, which these material conditions became apparent throughout time. Lastly, I explained Weber’s idea of “economic rationality” and the worldview of people in a market society, to show how workers rationalized the work they put into the production and distribution of material goods. Generally, this paper’s purpose was to show how the market society has established itself over time, and how both material and ideological conditions interacted and changed the ways we view market society today.
One of the most common major types of economic systems in the world today is capitalism. In its simplest terms, capitalism can be defined as an economic system in which a country’s trade and industry are run by private organizations for profit. So within capitalism major industries such as manufacturing, energy, banks, transportation, medicine and more are not run by the government. The earliest forms of capitalism can be traced to the 17th century English Puritans who possessed a strong work ethic that focused an importance on productive labor. Modern capitalism is said to have started in the mid-18th century with the birth of factories. Factory owners were able to maximize wealth by making goods that were in-demand and also by streamlining labor. For capitalism to work. supply and demand is typically unregulated by government. It is based on the f...
Capitalism as an economic system has not been around for a very long time. Stanford indicates that this economic system began in the mid-1700s in Europe . For a considerably young system, it almost seems impossible to imagine a different way of living. Capitalism has become deeply embedded in our social structures; it is naturalized as a way of doing day to day things. If this is the case, then we as humans have a long way to go if we are to achieve social and economic justice. The question I aim to explore is whether capitalism is capable of achieving socio-economic justice. I am arguing that it cannot achieve justice because there is too much focus on profit rather than people and it dislocates the consumers from the modes of production which indirectly promotes social inequality. Our current economic system which I will be interchangeably using as capitalism throughout the paper will examine why the focus on profit is detrimental to the social well-being of people and explain how capitalism is divisive and why this can pose negative outcomes for individuals and communities. It is with these arguments that outline the need for a fundamental change to how our economy is structured and managed.
In an article entitled “Resisting and reshaping destructive development: social movements and globalizing networks”, P. Routledge describes neoliberal development, “Contemporary economic development is guided by the economic principles of neoliberalism and popularly termed ‘globalization’. The fundamental principal of this doctrine is ‘economic liberty’ for the powerful, that is that an economy must be free from the social and political ‘impediments,’ ‘fetters’, and ‘restrictions’ placed upon it by states trying to regulate in the name of the public interest. These ‘impediments’ - which include national economic regulations, social programs, and class compromises (i.e. national bargaining agreements between employers and trade unions, assuming these are allowed) - are considered barriers to the free flow of trade and capital, and the freedom of transnational corporations to exploit labor and the environment in their best interests. Hence, the doctrine argues that national economies should be deregulated (e.g. through the privatization of state enterprises) in order to promote the allocation of resources by “the market” which, in practice, means by the most powerful.” (Routledge)
Capitalism is known as a very laissez-faire system, or one where the government makes no interference. Throughout the years, many countries have adopted this form of economy in order to have the people’s say in it. Without interference from the government, there is more freedom and less risk of the government messing the ec...
The world we live in today is going through enormous changes in economics, technology, culture, politics, etc. The effects of the changes are not so clear, since it is hard to predict how each sector would affect the other and how society will be affected. However, analyzing past and present occurrences provides some information for experts to interpret society’s reaction in the future to different transformations. Globalization can be seen as a process in which societies around the world come together and expand through the combination of different forces. This paper will explore the effects of globalization on US companies, US society and economy, and the implications for other countries in the post-industrial world.
In The Origin of Capitalism, Ellen Wood addresses misconceptions about the origin of Capitalism. In addition to challenging the naturalization of Capitalism, she draws attention to specific social forms and the particular ways in which Capitalism departs from them. Wood reviews John Locks’s Second Treatise of Government, which brings a new and revolutionary attitude towards property by turning the acquisition of property into a moral calling and associating it with dignity. She sees Locke as a prophet of Capitalism, arguing that Locke’s doctrine led to value added becoming a strong argument for expansion and annexation. Specifically, it is in the fifth chapter that Locke discusses property. Locke begins with the original condition of nature, in which the creation of property is through the labor of one's body and the work of one's hands. Labor is, for Locke, the source of all value and our title to ownership. Human labor, not nature is the source of property and of acquisition. Moreover, by the end of that chapter, there is the creation of a sophisticated market economy with various inequalities of wealth and property, within the state of nature. With a series of shifts, Locke neutralizes the radical discourses of property of his time; although natural law clearly has democratic implications, Locke, in effect, excludes people from the system by restricting the rights of commoners.
While growing up in Germany Max Weber witnessed the expansion of cities, the aristocracy being replaced by managerial elite, companies rapidly rising, and the industrial revolution. These changes in Germany, as well as the rest of the western world, pushed Weber to analyze the phenomenon, specifically to understand what makes capitalism in the west different and how capitalism was established. In The Protestant Ethic and The Spirit of Capitalism, Weber explains that capitalism is all about profit and what creates the variance between capitalism in the west and the rest of the world is rationalization, “the process in which social institutions and social interaction become increasingly governed by systematic, methodical procedures and rules”
Ellen Meiksins Wood suggests that capitalism was originally developed in England and that it is unique to this region. In her body of work, ‘The Origin of Capitalism’, Wood discusses the contributing factors that led England to introduce the social changes required in order for capitalism to become the new standard for trade and economics in that country. According to Wood, capitalism emerged in the West not so much due to what was “present” but more as a result of what was absent, such as constraints on urban economic practices. Considering this, it took only a natural expansion of trade to initiate the development of capitalism to its full maturity. However, it is important to understand the world around England during this time in order to understand why capitalism developed in England in the first
Our lives are greatly affected by our culture, ecological environment, political environment and our economic structure. The overarching method of organizing a complex modern society relies heavily on the founding economic theories regarding method of production, method of organization, and the distribution of wealth among the members of. This paper, specifically deals with the views and theoretical backgrounds of two dominant theories of the past century, Keynesianism and Neo-liberalism. Our social economic order is product of the two theories and has evolved through many stages to come to where it is today. The two ideologies rely on different foundations for their economic outcomes but both encourage capitalism and claim it to be the superior form of economic organization. Within the last quarter of the 20th century, neo-liberalism has become the dominant ideology driving political and economic decisions of most developed nations. This dominant ideology creates disparities in wealth and creates inequality through the promotion of competitive markets free from regulation. Neo-liberal’s ability to reduce national government’s size limits the powers and capabilities of elected representatives and allows corporations to become much larger and exert far greater force on national and provincial governments to act in their favour. Hence, it is extremely important at this time to learn about the underlying power relations in our economy and how the two ideologies compare on important aspects of political economy. In comparing the two theories with respect to managing the level of unemployment, funding the welfare sates, and pursuing national or international objectives, I will argue that Keynesianism provides far greater stability, equ...
David McNally (2006). ‘The Invisible Hand is a Closed Fist: Inequality, Alienation, and the Capitalist Market Economy’ from Another World is Possible: globalization and Anti-Capitalism, 2nd edition, Arbeiter Ring, 60-95.
Capitalism is a very complex system that is discuss by many authors, scholars and economists. Robert Heilbroner is a famous American economist who creatively discusses the system of capitalism in Twenty First Century Capitalism. He reveals the abstruse capitalism system and its role in society. Heilbroner begins by comparing traditional society with modern capitalist society and differentiate capital with wealth, which facilitate the reader to understand the basic definition of capitalism. He then illustrates the most crucial aspect of capitalism, that is, the two realms of capitalism. According to Heilbroner, the two realms of capitalism are state and economy or government and business. The relation between these realms is interesting in its nature, because one aspect of their relationship make them beneficial for society and another aspect turn them into dysfunctional in society. Realm of the state and the economy are beneficial when they rely on each other, as they support each other they results in peaceful state and economy of a society. At the same time, they have power to proceed independently. As soon as they split, they are dysfunctional for society because state might block the path of the economy to grow freely and economy can independently survive without supporting the government resulting in weak society. Western societies are the living example of capitalism. They present very languish condition of moral and social values, however, they proudly presents their materialistic life. This unbalance situation is because of the contribution of capitalism in modern society. The insatiable feature of capitalism results into accumulation of capital, which diminish the value of the human being and enhance the value of money an...