Austria — The Paradigm Case of Liberal Corporatism?

Marin, Bernd

doi:10.1007/978-1-349-18041-7_4

Cited by 22 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Political parties are incorporated into interest associations, associations into political parties." [19]. The interdependence of government and interest organisations was also clearly expressed in the interviews conducted in the context of this research: "I think the Minister of Economy has a high level of integrity and is a very competent minister, but who as Minister of Economy, is subject to certain constraints, starting with the Federation of Industry, Chamber of Commerce and so on" (interview with former Social Democratic Secretary on 06.12.2011).…”

Section: Corporatism In Austria: Social Partnershipmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…The problem of effective climate change policies today lies in the fact that even in countries like Austria and Germany with good conditions for effective policies, well developed environmental industries, relatively strong steering capacities of the state, high environmental consciousness, little negative impacts of the current economic crisis, the corridor of ecological modernization seems to be rather narrow. The on-going pre-eminence of orientations at economic growth, international competitiveness and the securing or creation of employment results in a primacy of functional interest organisations over political parties and social partnership over parliamentarianism and government, because they are "its most powerful executives" [19]. The same can be also said for the dominant (party) political forces in the Austrian landscape, the Social Democratic Party and the Peoples Party.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…"Governments cannot govern without or even against the consensus of giant interest organisations, but can only execute their common (!) will" [19]. And it is quite obvious after decades of environmental policy that environmental issues do not have such a political weight as other policy areas have.…”

Section: Corporatism and Strategic/epistemic Selectivitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Put another way, "associational co-operation is based on a latent guideline which is that of organising the (capitalist) economic system's rationality into politics. Economising politics (…) establishes orientations on international competitiveness, productivity and economic growth as dominant standards of social rationality and political success (…) and sets up its cultural hegemony over other political goals" [19].…”

Section: Contested Austrian Renewable Energy Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Selectivities at Work: Climate Concerns in the Midst of Corporatist Interests. The Case of Austria

Brand¹,

Pawloff²

2014

JEP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite legally binding greenhouse gas emission reduction targets and good pre-conditions for progressive climate action, emissions in Austria are on the rise. This article explores the reasons why climate change policy is so ineffective in Austria. We show that the social partnership has contributed significantly to the standstill in renewable energy production and the rejection of more ambitious reduction targets concerning greenhouse gas emissions, and consider the role of experts and expertise in climate change policies. The ineffectiveness of climate policy in Austria is largely due to corporatist actors who often act like an ex-ante filter or selective mechanism for what is politically acceptable or possible and what is not. Climate change is for the most part successfully kept off the political agenda and (climate sceptical) politicization does not take place. Insights from the literature on corporatism are enhanced by the concepts of strategic and epistemic selectivity to analyse not only access to the state terrain but also the domination of specific knowledge forms, problem perceptions, and narratives over others.

show abstract

Section: Corporatism In Austria: Social Partnershipmentioning

confidence: 73%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Corporatism and Strategic/epistemic Selectivitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Contested Austrian Renewable Energy Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Selectivities at Work: Climate Concerns in the Midst of Corporatist Interests. The Case of Austria

Brand¹,

Pawloff²

2014

JEP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…100 The evaluation variable is therefore income measured in conventional terms. The aggregation principle is a type of utilitarian Pareto criterion: maximize average income and fully compensate losers.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Choice Theory and Deliberative Democracy: A Reconciliation

Dryzek

List²

2002

Brit. J. Polit. Sci.

325

193

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is an electronic version of anNuffield College in 1998, and Dryzek thanks the College for its hospitality. For helpful comments, we thank Keith Dowding, James Fishkin, Natalie Gold, Robert Goodin, Iain McLean, Gerry Mackie, David Miller, Claus Offe, Anne Sliwka, the editor, and the anonymous reviewers of this paper.2 Social Choice Theory and Deliberative Democracy:A Reconciliation AbstractThe two most influential traditions of contemporary theorizing about democracy, social choice theory and deliberative democracy, are generally thought to be at loggerheads, in that the former demonstrates the impossibility, instability or meaninglessness of the rational collective outcomes sought by the latter. We argue that the two traditions can be reconciled.After expounding the central Arrow and Gibbard-Satterthwaite impossibility results, we reassess their implications, identifying the conditions under which meaningful democratic decision making is possible. We argue that deliberation can promote these conditions, and hence that social choice theory suggests not that democratic decision making is impossible, but rather that democracy must have a deliberative aspect. Two Traditions of Democratic TheoryIn the past decade the theory of democracy has been dominated by two very different approaches. Within democratic theory as conventionally defined the strongest current is now deliberative. 1 For deliberative democrats, the essence of democratic legitimacy is the capacity of those affected by a collective decision to deliberate in the production of that decision. Deliberation involves discussion in which individuals are amenable to scrutinizing and changing their preferences in light of persuasion (but not manipulation, deception, or coercion) from other participants. Claims for and against courses of action must be justified to others in terms they can accept. Jürgen Habermas and John Rawls, respectively the most influential continental and Anglo-American political philosophers of the late 20 th century, have both identified themselves as deliberative democrats. 2 Deliberative democrats are uniformly optimistic that deliberation yields rational collective outcomes.The main competing tradition is social choice theory, whose proponents generally deduce far less optimistic results. To social choice theorists, the democratic problem involves aggregation of views, interests, or preferences across individuals, not deliberation over their content. From the seminal work of Kenneth Arrow on, it has been argued that such aggregation is bedeviled by impossibility, instability and arbitrariness. 3 Arrow proved the non-existence of any aggregation mechanism satisfying a set of seemingly innocuous conditions. This critique of democracy was radicalized by William Riker, who argued that any notion of a popular will independent of the mechanism used to aggregate preferences was untenable. 4 Given that there is no good reason to choose any particular mechanism over any other, supposedly democratic collective choices are arbitrary, and dem...

show abstract

Sectors in Modern Capitalism: Modes of Governance and Variations in Performance

Schmitter¹

1990

Labour Relations and Economic Performance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Austria — The Paradigm Case of Liberal Corporatism?

Cited by 22 publications

References 0 publications

Selectivities at Work: Climate Concerns in the Midst of Corporatist Interests. The Case of Austria

Selectivities at Work: Climate Concerns in the Midst of Corporatist Interests. The Case of Austria

Social Choice Theory and Deliberative Democracy: A Reconciliation

Sectors in Modern Capitalism: Modes of Governance and Variations in Performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About