CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,065Social Policy and Reform StudiesEmployment, Labor, and Gender StudiesLabor Movements and Unions

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Varieties of Liberalization and the New Politics of Social Solidarity

Thelen, Kathleen·2014·Cambridge University Press eBooks
DOI 10.1017/cbo9781107282001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This book examines contemporary changes in labor market institutions in the United States, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, and the Netherlands, focusing on developments in industrial relations, vocational education and training, and labor market policy. It finds that there are in fact distinct varieties of liberalization associated with very different distributive outcomes. Most scholarship equates liberal capitalism with inequality and coordinated capitalism with higher levels of social solidarity. However, this study explains why the institutions of coordinated capitalism and egalitarian capitalism coincided and complemented one another in the 'Golden Era' of postwar development in the 1950s and 1960s, and why they no longer do so. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, this study reveals that the successful defense of the institutions traditionally associated with coordinated capitalism has often been a recipe for increased inequality due to declining coverage and dualization. Conversely, it argues that some forms of labor market liberalization are perfectly compatible with continued high levels of social solidarity and indeed may be necessary to sustain it.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/cbo9781107282001

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 1,000

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Thelen, K.
Affiliations
Max Planck Society (DE)
Corresponding author
Thelen, Kathleen
ORCID
Thelen, Kathleen
Venue
Cambridge University Press eBooks
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Published
2014-03-31
DOI
10.1017/cbo9781107282001
OpenAlex
W2058145111
Cited by
1,065
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 76 · 2025: 89 · 2024: 83 · 2023: 86 · 2022: 75 · 2021: 130 · 2020: 114 · 2019: 90 · 2018: 97 · 2017: 89 · 2016: 69 · 2015: 55 · 2014: 12
FWCI
110.48
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 66 d)
Locations
  • Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Policy and Reform Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Industrial relations › Employment, Labor, and Gender Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Industrial relations › Labor Movements and Unions
Keywords
labour market deregulation, social solidarity, coordinated capitalism, liberal capitalism, labor relations, vocational education and training, labour market policy, income inequality, dualization, post-war welfare state

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review