Re-Forming Capitalism — Institutional Change in the German Political Economy – By Wolfgang Streeck

By Gerhard Bosch. 2010

152 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f080415063ae8789e2fa377e5e1ea992b8ffe35f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Review Article: Comparative Political Science and the Study of Education (2011, background): “…its characterization of LMEs and CMEs is too ‘Platonistic’, disregarding institutional change, while overemphasizing the stability of production regimes, and neglecting the study of the historical and political foundations of skill regimes (Becker 2007; Korpi 2006; Stephens 2006; Streeck 2009).”
Institutional complementarities in the dynamic comparative analysis of capitalism (2015, background): “This simple prediction has been contradicted by the evolutions observed in the archetypal coordinated economy: Germany.”
Appropriation, Activation and Acceleration: The Escalatory Logics of Capitalist Modernity and the Crises of Dynamic Stabilization (2017, background): “All known capitalisms to date could only establish themselves as relatively stable formations when they managed to integrate the systemic imperative of dynamization into their specific ‘social orders’ (Streeck, 2009).”
The paradox of liberalization – understanding dualism and the recovery of the German political economy (2014, unknown): “7 changed profoundly in the direction of increasing liberalization and deregulation (Streeck, 2009).”
Taking capitalism seriously: Toward an institutionalist approach to contemporary political economy (2011, background): “In the process, capitalism became “unleashed” (Glyn 2006): As it extricated itself from the social-democratic regime imposed on it after 1945 (Streeck 2009c: 190ff., 231ff.), it became more like itself, revealing in the course of its development its “true nature,” or its “essence.””
The Handbook of Neoliberalism (2016, background): “411 Second, a radical international relations scholar, Kees van der Pijl, distinguishes a liberal, Lockean heartland from a series of ‘contender states’. The former is characterized by disembedded markets and strong civil societies that underpin the inter-state system; the latter are dominated by a ”