Search

This article compares the Lisbon Strategy and the EUROPE 2020 Strategy. It demonstrates while none of the two strategies are sufficient as support for the monetary integration and the Euro-collaboration.

Orientadores: Valeriano Mendes Ferreira Costa, Yves Surel Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas e Université Paris 3 Sorbonne Nouvelle École doctorale Resumo: A década de 1990 assistiu ao nascimento das chamadas « transferências condicionadas de renda » : programas assistenciais para famílias pobres à condição de que elas incentivem seus filhos a prosseguirem os estudos e que frequentem centros de saúde. Com o objetivo de reduzir a pobreza e assegurar um futuro melhor para os « pobres » de amanhã, essas políticas representam um novo tipo de proteção social com princípios e modos de operaçäo diferentes dos programas tradicionais. A análise de suas origens revela uma estruturação progressiva marcada por contextos institucionais e trajetórias distintas que geraram resultados semelhantes. O objetivo deste estudo é identificar uma ou mais variáveis que possam explicar a emergência e expansão no Brasil e no México nas décadas de 1990 e 2000, examinando a maneira como suas evoluções suscitaram oposições mais ou menos fortes de atores e os constrangimentos institucionais enfrentados. Nós podemos observar uma estruturação de grupos reunidos em torno a « causas » - notadamente a causa do capital humano - que influem na elaboração e na implementação dessas políticas. Esse trabalho busca matizar a ideia de reformas consensuais no México e no Brasil, sem negar a dimensão das transformações ocorridas. A mudança institucional no Brasil é operada por meio da adição de novos recursos às instituições existentes; e no México, em primeira instância, o processo de mudança e consolidação da política de transferência de renda ocorreu como um deslocamento institucional e, posteriormente, os atores defensores do status quo modificam marginalmente o programa para manter os seus interesses. Assim, esses programas são objeto de um consenso ambíguo, uma vez que atores de diferentes coalizões passam a reivindicar eventualmente esses instrumentos. Finalmente, os « interesses » constituíram-se como uma variável chave para entender a permanência e o reforço das condicionalidades dessas políticas por meio de fenômenos de lock- in Abstract: The 1990s saw the birth of so-called 'conditional cash transfers', assistance programs for poor families on the condition that they encourage their children to seek education and attend health centers. In order to reduce poverty and ensure a better future for tomorrow's « poor », these policies represent a new type of social protection with different principles and modes of operation for traditional programs. The analysis of their origins reveals a progressive structuring marked by institutional contexts and different paths that have generated similar results. The objective of this study is to identify one or more variables that might explain their emergence and expansion in Brazil and Mexico in the 1990s and 2000s and to highlight how the evolution of these policies could generate more or less strong opposition from some actors as well as the institutional constraints these policies face. We can observe group structures centred on "causes" - notably the cause of human capital - that have largely determined the development and implementation of these policies. This paper seeks to show the nuances of the idea of consensual reforms in Mexico and Brazil, without denying the extent to which these transformations have occurred. This means that institutional change in Brazil is operated by adding new features to existing institutions; while in Mexico, in the first instance, the process of change and consolidation of conditional cash transfer programs has occurred as an institutional shift and then the defenders of the status quo actors marginally modified the program to keep their interests. As monetary instruments to combat poverty, these programs are the subject of an ambiguous consensus and actors from different coalitions end up supporting them. Finally, "interests", necessary at different times, were constituted as a key variable to understand the permanence and strengthening of these policies through locking phenomena Doutorado Ciência Política Doutora em Ciência Política CAPES 99999.005717/2014-00 Eiffel Excellence Scholarship Programme

Cette thèse propose une typologie rendant compte de la diversité des politiques publiques visant à promouvoir l'indépendance des jeunes, ou leur citoyenneté socioéconomique, en Europe. Elle repose sur deux dimensions. La première concerne l’action publique lorsqu’elle vise à promouvoir l’emploi des jeunes grâce à la politique d’éducation et la politique de l’emploi : c’est l’enjeu de la citoyenneté économique des jeunes. Elle peut être inclusive, lorsqu’un pays est fortement macrocorporatiste, ou sélective, lorsque le macrocorporatisme est faible, selon que cette action délivre des compétences à tous les jeunes ou à une partie seulement. La deuxième dimension renvoie à l’action publique lorsqu’elle délivre directement une aide publique aux jeunes. C’est l’enjeu de la citoyenneté sociale des jeunes. Elle peut être familialisée dans les Etats-providence de tradition Bismarckienne, lorsque les jeunes sont considérés comme des enfants, ou individualisée dans les Etats-providence de tradition Beveridgienne, quand ils sont vus comme des adultes. En croisant ces deux dimensions, on obtient quatre régimes de citoyenneté socioéconomique, avec une citoyenneté habilitante (inclusive/individualisée), une citoyenneté encadrée (inclusive/familialisée), une citoyenneté de seconde classe (sélective/individualisée), et une citoyenneté refusée (sélective/familialisée). Dans une première partie empirique, nous classons 15 pays d’Europe de l’Ouest dans cette typologie, après avoir élaboré deux indices synthétiques de citoyenneté économique et de citoyenneté sociale. Puis, dans une deuxième partie empirique, nous procédons à quatre études de cas représentatifs de chaque régime, à savoir la Suède, l’Allemagne, le Royaume-Uni et la France. This dissertation proposed a typology that accounts for the diversity of public policies promoting young people’s independence, i.e. what I call ‘youth welfare citizenship’, in Europe. This typology is built around two dimensions. The first dimension relates to public intervention on the school-to-work transition in order to promote the access to employment for young people, through the education policy and the employment policy: this is the issue of youth economic citizenship. It can be encompassing, when a country is strongly macrocorporatist, or selective, when it is not, according to the distribution of skills among the youth population. The second dimension has to do with public aids from the state towards young people: this is the issue of youth social citizenship. It can be familialized in Bismarckian welfare states, where young people are seen as children, or it can be individualized in Beveridgian welfare states, where young people are deemed to be adults. Combining these two dimensions, we end up with four regimes of youth welfare citizenship: an enabling citizenship (inclusive/individualized), a monitored citizenship (inclusive/familialized), a second-class citizenship (selective/individualized), and a denied citizenship (selective/familialized). In the first empirical part, I classify 15 western European countries into the typology by building two synthetic indices of youth economic citizenship and youth social citizenship. Then, in the second empirical part, I proceed to four case studies, each representing a regime of the typology: Sweden, Germany, the United Kingdom, and France. Programme doctoral en Science politique

Comment, en France et en Allemagne, les réformes récentes dans les assurances sociales qui affaiblissent les syndicats réputés jusqu’alors veto players ont-elles pu être adoptées ? Après avoir montré la construction historique du pouvoir politique des partenaires sociaux, cette thèse montre par quels changements ceux-ci l’ont perdu. La première partie met en évidence trois caractéristiques de la période allant de la fin du XIXe aux années 1980. 1. Les partenaires sociaux ont eu une influence parfois décisive sur l’agencement institutionnel des assurances sociales. 2. Les partenaires sociaux ont cherché à maintenir un système financé par les cotisations sociales pour obtenir et conserver la gestion des assurances sociales. Aussi ont-ils agi pour en évincer l’Etat. La dépendance au chemin emprunté est le facteur principal expliquant qu’ils y sont parvenus. 3. Il existe des spécificités nationales et sectorielles. La seconde partie montre que ces spécificités peuvent expliquer la forme mais non la faisabilité des réformes. Les changements dans les deux secteurs de la maladie et du chômage, en France et en Allemagne, sont analysés et caractérisés. La même évolution est à l’œuvre : affaiblissement des partenaires sociaux et renforcement de la tutelle de l’Etat aux niveaux du financement, de la gestion et de la décision. Cette évolution incite à en rechercher une explication commune aux deux pays et aux deux secteurs. Dans un contexte de difficultés macroéconomiques, de délégitimation des syndicats, d’autonomisation du politique par rapport aux partenaires sociaux, la cause principale est non pas la division des partenaires sociaux ou des syndicats eux-mêmes, mais la rupture d’un relatif consensus paritaire (le financement par cotisations sociales proportionnel au revenu et la gestion par les partenaires sociaux). Le désaccord recoupe la question de la prise en charge des non salariés : doit-elle être financée par les cotisations sociales ou par l’impôt, relever des assurances sociales ou de la solidarité nationale ? How was it possible for recent reforms of the social insurance systems in France and in Germany to be adopted, despite the fact that they have weakened unions that were until then considered veto players? After going over the history of how these social partners built their political power, we describe the changes that led to them losing this power. The first part highlights three characteristics of the era that spans from the end of the 19th century to the 1980s. 1. The influence of social partners was sometimes crucial in deciding how to organize social insurance systems as institutions. 2. Social partners tried to preserve a system financed by payroll taxes in order to achieve and maintain control over social insurance. To do so, they acted to prevent the State from being involved. Path dependency is the main factor in explaining how they were successful. 3. Different countries and sectors have their own specificities. In the second part, we show how these specificities can explain the nature, but not the feasibility, of the reforms. Changes in the health and unemployment sectors, in France and in Germany, are analyzed and characterized. The same evolution is at work: social partners are weakened, while the State gains more control over financing, management, and decision making. This parallel evolution leads us to search for a common explanation for both countries and both sectors. In the current context of macroeconomic difficulties, loss of legitimacy on the part of unions, increased autonomy of politicians with respect to social partners, the main cause is not division within the ranks of the social partners or of the unions themselves, but the abrupt end to a relatively corporatist consensus (financing through a payroll tax proportional to income and management by social partners). This disagreement overlaps with the question of coverage for non-employees: should it be financed through social contributions or taxes, and should it be considered part of the social insurance system, or of national solidarity?

In this chapter, Herbert Obinger, Peter Starke, and Alexandra Kaasch analyze various policy responses to labor market divides in three small open economies (Austria, New Zealand, and Sweden). They argue that different welfare state regimes generate distinctive patterns of insider-outsider divides and that the three countries developed quite different, albeit mainly path-dependent coping strategies. In other words, none of the three countries significantly departed from previous labor market policies in response to growing labor market inequalities.

This chapter introduces the concept of dualization. Poverty, inequality, and social exclusion are back on the political agenda in many rich democracies of Western Europe and North America, not only as a consequence of the Great Recession that hit the global economy in 2008. It argues that the translation of structural pressures into policies and outcomes has to be understood as a political process. Dualization is a political process that is characterized by the differential treatment of insiders and outsiders and that can take the form of newly created institutional dualisms or the deepening of existing institutional dualisms (policy output). Thereby, changes in the labor market are translated into the social policy realm, where new distinctions arise or old institutional distinctions are re-activated. Feedback effects and vicious circles are likely to strengthen this effect because weak labor attachment and social exclusion are associated with weaker political representation.

Poverty, increased inequality, and social exclusion are back on the political agenda in Western Europe, not only as a consequence of the Great Recession that hit the global economy in 2008, but also as a consequence of a seemingly structural trend towards increased inequality that began some time ago. How can we explain this increase in inequalities? In this book, it is argued that social and labor market policies contribute to shaping the forms and extent of the new inequalities and divides that challenge European societies. Growing inequality is related to processes of dualization, i.e. a widening, deepening, or the creation of new insider-outsider divides. The processes of division in the realms of labor markets, social policy and political representation are strongly linked. Dualization is certainly not the only driver of increasing inequality, but because of the encompassing development evidenced in this book, dualization appears one of the most important current trends affecting developed societies. However, the extent and forms of dualization observed vary greatly across countries. The comparative perspective of this book provides insights into why some countries witness lower levels of insider-outsider divides, whereas for others, they have become a core characteristic. Most importantly, the comparisons presented in this book point to the crucial importance of politics and political choice in driving and shaping the social outcomes of deindustrialization. Governments “cope” in different ways with deindustrialization. Hence, while increased structural labor market divides can be found across all countries, governments have a strong responsibility in shaping the distributive consequences of these labor market changes. Insider-outsider divides are not a straightforward consequence of deindustrialization, but rather the result of policy, i.e. of political choice.

This chapter demonstrates that the extent to which labor market segmentation leads to economic, social and political insider-outsider divides depends on the institutional context. Based on survey and income data, it shows that both the composition, as well as the economic and social situation of insiders and outsiders varies across countries and welfare regimes. The share of outsiders is highest in liberal and continental countries, followed by the Nordic and Southern European countries. In a comparative perspective, insider-outsider divides appear to be strongest in continental Europe, with regard to all three dimensions examined: labor market inequalities, welfare inequalities and political integration. The upshot of the chapter is that policies matter: they can compensate, reproduce or even deepen insider-outsider divides.

International audience; La recherche empirique met en évidence de façon incontestable la place importante qu’occupent les travaux de négociation et de mise en œuvre de la législation et des politiques de l’Union européenne dans les relations entre l’État, les marchés et la société civile en France aujourd’hui. Au-delà de ces éléments empiriques cependant, la question des conséquences analytiques de la construction européenne...

The chapter compares employment structures in five Continental European welfare states, with a focus on private services. Despite a common trend to overcome institutional employment barriers by creating a more divided labor market, a closer look reveals considerable differences between national patterns of standard and non-standard work. We identify five transformative pathways towards a more flexible and cheaper use of labor in Continental European welfare states: 1. defection from permanent contracts, 2. from full-time employment, 3. from dependent employment, 4. growing wage dispersion, and 5. government-sponsored labor cost reductions. The chapter shows that by relying on one or several of these options, each country developed a distinct solution for the labor cost problem in the service sector, which corresponds to a particular form of dualization.