Mu Honors 1210008575
Mu Honors 1210008575
Mu Honors 1210008575
Robert Boyer
CEPREMAP, CNRS, E.H.E.S.S.
142, Rue du Chevaleret 75013 PARIS, France
Phone: +33 (0)1 40 77 84 28 - Fax: +33 (0)1 44 24 38 57
e-mail: [email protected]
November 1999
This paper has been prepared as background paper for the Portuguese Presidency of the
European Union. It deals with the theme : “The recent evolution of Institutional forms and the
reforms at stake to undertake this transition with growth, employment and social cohesion.
Institutional forms at European and national level and policy mix”.
i
Institutional Reforms for Growth, Employment and Social Cohesion:
Elements of an European and National Agenda
ROBERT BOYER
Executive summary
1. After quite an uncertain period, some optimism about the future of Europe is observed, but it is far from
sure that this movement will go on several years ahead, without further and significant institutional
reforms. Three factors do motivate such a strategy. First, the EU has exhibited some weaknesses specially
in terms of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), job creation. Second, a totally new
institutional architecture and style for economic policy are required, given the globalisation of finance, the
internationalisation of competition. Third, after the Amsterdam treaty and the subsequent processes
created by the European Councils, governments are facing a totally new institutional context, made both
of new constraints (a common monetary and exchange rate policy) as well as promising opportunities
(stimulate growth and employment by better co-ordination among national States via new processes).
2. There is a European paradox. Seen from outside, the EU appears to be quite an impressive economic
entity in terms of market size, quality of skills and diversity of scientific and technological knowledge.
Observed from within, major co-ordination problems have recurrently emerged and have to be overcome
if the member States want to reap and share the benefits of the closer integration implied by the Euro.
They concern the policy mix, the transformation of the bargaining arena between firms and wage
earners. The structural reforms and the dynamism and diversity of systems of innovation.
3. What broad development strategy should Europeans adopt in order to foster growth and fight against
unemployment for the next decade?
A deepening of mass-production via differentiation by quality and innovation seems within European
reach, even if it is no longer the most promising strategy.
The revolutionary impact of ICT has been mitigated in Europe by the legacy of post-world war II
institutions, even if some countries have been quite efficient in coping with this challenge.
Given its traditional strength and variety of academic systems and its concern for the training of
workers, the EU could be at the forefront of a Knowledge Based Economy (KBE)…but probably the
nature and density of relations between research and economic activity should be reconsidered and
extended.
A welfare reform driven development regime would be quite adequate to the old continent: the
movement towards gender equality could benefit both production and demand and help in solving the
problem of an ageing population.
Last but not least, some regions of Europe are probably in a good position and able to cope with a
finance led regime, with highly specific consequences upon the adaptation of industrial relations and
State regulations.
Probably the emerging development regime will borrow some components from most if not all of these
ideal models. And this perspective opens to a significant national and local variability in the institutional
reforms required to promote a steady and job creating growth.
4. The report argues that a recovery of investment is quite essential for employment performance, but this is
not at all sufficient since capital formation has to be directed towards (and governed by) smart
organisations that propitiate interactive and permanent learning and are inserted into regional, national
and international networks. But given the large diversity of national institutions, benchmarking of best
practices should be used carefully: more adaptation than pure adoption, innovation more than simple
ii
replication. In this respect, European initiatives should respect one of the old continent major assets: the
large diversity of national innovation systems that may provide a lot of adaptability and potential
economic performance at the European level.
6. How could these general ideas be implemented within the European agenda for the coming years? By an
ordered flow of reforms in order to transform a short run recovery into a medium-long term growth. By
chance, the complex architecture of the Amsterdam treaty, the Cardiff, Luxembourg and Cologne
processes addresses these issues, but they are so complex, interrelated and overlapping that their possible
inconsistencies by recomposing them and grouping all the mechanisms promote a coherent set of positive
spill-over from one domain to another. Thus, more clarity and efficiency could be brought into these
processes by recomposing them according to their contribution to one or another of the key strategies
presented earlier. The idea is to stop the various vicious circles that have generated a recurring and rising
unemployment and to promote one or another of four major virtuous growth circles.
A relational approach to the policy mix may enhance a steady boom of the investment, directed
towards material and immaterial components, thus generating favourable expectations about the
stability of a given win/win strategy. This should be the major concern for ECB and Ministries of
finance.
Organising the shift from ICT to KBE is another method for initiating a virtuous circle, built upon
innovation, growth and job creation. This strategy is up to Ministers of science, technology,
education, in close connection with social partners.
Welfare systems if adequately reformed, may well be a major trump for Europe. A better
implementation of gender equality and the phasing out of early retirement could trigger a surge in
demand, innovation, and activity that would ease the financing of welfare systems. This is a matter
for social affairs Ministers and social partners.
Coping with a finance led regime may be on the agenda of countries already specialised in financial
inter-mediation and business related services. The objective of the ECB should incorporate the
curbing down of asset inflation, social partners should negotiate profit sharing and pension fund
management and the supply of welfare could be progressively transformed by the privatisation of
some components. The task of Central bankers, Ministers of finance, and social partners could be to
define rules of the game ensuring the financial economic and social stability of such a regime.
iii
The public opinion in each society may prefer one or another of these strategies. Clearly the subsidiarity
principle preserving national political preferences, is important indeed for the long run viability and
legitimacy of European integration.
iv
Institutional Reforms for growth, employment and social cohesion:
Elements of a European and National Agenda
REFERENCES....................................................................................................................................................................21
v
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 – The post W.W.II capital-labour accord shaped most other socio-economic institutions...............................25
Figure 2 – The Euro implies a new hierarchy and architecture of each national socio-economic regime.....................26
Figure 3 – European Union : a potential economic giant…...........................................................................................26
….But a lot of co-ordination problems..........................................................................................................27
Figure 4 – European countries suffer from both low wage and high wage employment gap in the services.................31
Figure 5 – What strategy against European unemployment ?.........................................................................................36
Figure 6 – The impact of technological co-operation upon the sales of new or improved products..............................37
Figure 7 – The Euro sets into motion a series of complex transformations, both at the national and European level,
with unintended fallout..................................................................................................................................38
Figure 8 – A possible outcome of the macroeconomic dialogue: a better policy-mix.....................................................41
Figure 9 – Why economic policy remains difficult within Euroland..............................................................................42
Figure 10 – European Union : the same macroeconomic environment but contrasted unemployment rate evolutions. .43
Figure 11 – Good news : the new hierarchy among institutional forms is taken into account by the structure
of European treaties and subsequent decisions..............................................................................................44
Figure 12 – Strategy one : Use the dividend of faster growth to lower the tax and remove welfare related barriers to job
creation and launch the macroeconomic dialogue.........................................................................................46
Figure 13 – Strategy two : Convert the information and communication technologies (ICT) into the basis for
Knowledge Based Economy (KBE)...............................................................................................................47
Figure 14 – Strategy three : Gender equality and responses to ageing as the source of a new service led growth..........48
Figure 15 – Strategy four : Riding the financial globalisation..........................................................................................49
LIST OF TABLES
“The difficulty lies, not in the new ideas, but in escaping from the old ones, which ramify (…)
into every corner of our minds” John Maynard Keynes, December 13,
1935.
“The outstanding faults of the economic society in which we live, are its failure to provide for
full-employment and its arbitrary and inequitable distribution of wealth and incomes”.
John Maynard Keynes, General Theory, Chapter 24, 1936.
The turning point of the nineties has pointed out some recurring weaknesses
of Europe
It is now clear that the 90s exhibit intense and multi-faceted transformations with quite
unequal consequences for the three members of the triad:
The previous Fordist productive paradigm has progressively led to alternative principles,
based on a knowledge economy (OECD, 1999; see Soete’s contribution).
The so-called globalisation of finance and diffusion of export led growth strategies to
Newly Industrialised Countries (NICs) has propagated local financial crises to the rest of
the world.
A large de-synchronisation of the business cycles has nevertheless been observed since the
early 90s, with some impact upon the misalignment of exchange rates Euro/Dollar and
Yen/Dollar.
More basically, the miracles of 60’s (France, Germany , Scandinavian countries, and even
Japan, East Asian NICs,…) have turned into seeming failures and major crises. Therefore,
many experts think that any government struggles to implement market friendly
institutions.
The perception of a crisis of the welfare State, specially of its financing, has been triggered
by the post-1973 growth slowdown and more recently by the prospect of an ageing
population (See Gosta Esping-Andersen’s contribution).
2
Most European countries have been adversely affected by these structural transformations. It
took a long time for economic and political decision makers to take the measure of the far
reaching consequences of this turning point. Many firms are lagging in terms of the diffusion of
information and communication technologies (ICT) and still more in the production of the
related hardware and software components. Macroeconomic performance has been poor,
specially when compared with contemporary American or past European growth during the
60s. Last but not least, unemployment has resisted to many therapies, at least for medium size
European countries. The legacy of the 90s in terms of macroeconomic disequilibrium calls for
new directions for economic policies. But this is not the only argument.
Clearly, during the 60s, an original capital labour accord was the corner stone of the
diffusion of mass production and consumption, since it was generally organising the quid
pro quo between the acceptance by workers of Fordist productive methods and the
institutionalisation of real wage increases in line with productivity (Figure 1). Basically all
other institutional forms were organised in accordance with this core compromise:
oligopolistic competition on a national basis was the rule, the State was organising the
Welfare State along with Keynesian fine tuning policies, the monetary policy was reflecting
an abundant credit supply, at the possible cost of periodic devaluation when inflation was
no more in line with world trends. The whole macroeconomic regime was built upon this
clear institutional hierarchy.
During the 90s, the picture is quite different (Figure 2). The leading institutional form
relates to the insertion of each economy into the world system, in terms of trade,
investment, credit and global finance. Thus, the competitive forces permeate from one
country to another, even if they may finally tend to the formation of international
oligopolistic groups, as shown by the international merger mania of the late 90s. Similarly,
national monetary policies are governed by the appraisal by the international financial
community and thus, the fine tuning of the policy mix is made far more complex. In the
early 90s slow growth has brought recurring and long lasting public deficits, difficult to
finance given the high interest rates implied by the strict monetary policy implemented by
Central banks and the international unbalance between investment and saving trends.
Finally, the capital labour accord is under strong pressures, since it has to cope with the
constraints exerted by the stiffening of competition and the emergence of a lean State. The
frequency of the call for more labour market flexibility is good evidence of this complete
reversal of the institutional hierarchy of the post-World War II.
This shift might well be one of the underlying and neglected factors explaining why Social
Europe is so difficult to implement, but conversely more required than over (Maurice 1999).
3
But there are many other difficulties facing the present European institutions after the
Amsterdam Treaty.
Does monetary integration mean the end of the economic and political process
contemplated by the founding fathers of Europe? What compatibility is there with the still
independent budgetary policies and national political processes.
What about the long run economic and political viability of a system that is partially
federalist (on the issue of money, competition, international trade policy,…) but still deeply
embedded in national political arena, in spite of the growing role of the European
Parliament? (Boyer, 1998).
While foreign analysts tend to blame and fear the so-called “fortress Europe”, is not the
Old Continent suffering from a lack of co-ordination among member States, specially in
terms of foreign policy and defence?
Is the European common monetary policy compatible with the persisting diversity of
national regulation modes, political coalitions, welfare systems and life styles?
Last but not least, many experts and political leaders have come to express some doubts
about the desirability and long run viability of the so-called European social model in the
era of finance and globalisation.
The launching of the Euro has made the paradox of European integration quite clear. Seen
from outside, the Old Continent displays a quite an impressive economy, but analysed from
within, many structural and institutional disequilibria have to be overcome, in order to convert
this economic and political strength from potential to effective.
The European dilemma is rather simple: how to foster growth and employment while
preserving or even extending social cohesion? Is there a single best way? The basic message of
this contribution is that several options are opened to EU, they are not at all equivalent and
they call for alternative institutional redesign and economic policy strategy.
They differ significantly according to the various economic paradigms (table 2) that may
prevail in the early 21st century (Boyer, 1999a).
5
Maybe the situation is not as bad as it may seem at first look. First, detailed statistical and
econometric studies suggest that the impact of ICT on growth and employment is positive and
significant but the size of the effects are rather modest indeed (Boyer, Didier 1998). Second,
even in the US, the leader in ICT, job creation in the related industries is important but does
not represent the major source on the so-called American miracle in terms of the job creating
machine. Nearly the same hierarchy is observed for job creation for the whole OECD during
the period 1980-1995 (table 3). Third, some international comparisons show that there is no
clear correlation between the mastering of any single emerging technological paradigm and
unemployment performance (Amable, Barre, Boyer 1997a). Fourth, no innovations in the
contemporary world can be reduced to ICT since many other sources of technological and
scientific advances are observed and may play a major role in fostering growth.
Clearly, the mechanisms for diffusing information should not be confused with knowledge
creation and use. Thus, there is an alternative interpretation of the contemporary
transformation in production and marketing organisations: the advances in basic knowledge
would be more easily converted into profitable new products by the close interconnectedness
of scientific research, market analysis and flexible manufacturing. This may well define a new
paradigm, premise of knowledge based economy (KBE). Of course, ICT do help the efficiency
of this paradigm and speed up the diffusion of knowledge, they provide the infrastructure, not
the essence KBE. From a theoretical point of view, information and knowledge are to be
distinguished. Various statistical indicators have been built to capture the two diffusion of ICT
and KBE, and they tend to be somehow different.
Actually, the statistical indexes recently elaborated and diffused by OECD (1999) tend to show
that the situation of Europe is finally close to that of the US, whereas the Japanese society
would suffer from the relative poor performance of its academic system (Table 2, column 4).
This assessment takes into account the fact that RD expenditures, public education, software
(but design and copyright are not presently incorporated into the OECD indicators), are all
factors that enhance transferable knowledge, thus the ability to develop new ideas, products,
processes and organisations.
But this trend toward the abstraction of production and the new sources of economic
performance simultaneously generates some forms of tacit knowledge that raise the power of a
limited fraction of the employees able to implement the radical innovations that determine the
competitive position of a firm: creative people in advertising, financial experts creating new
options, software designers, artists at the core of the leisure industry,…. One might recognise
the symbolic analysts pointed out by Robert Reich, highly internationalised and that play a
significant role in the widening of income and wealth inequalities. In this respect, the highly
regulated institutional context of most continental European countries seems to have been
detrimental to the maturation of such a leading group. The European Council resolution on the
1999 Employment Guideline tackles this issue and proposes various measures in order to
develop entrepreneurship. It has recently been proposed to introduce cross European mobility,
just to fully exploit the potential of a KBE economy (Soete 1999). Note that it seems to prevail
a trade off between economic performance and reduced income inequalities, a dilemma that
Europe has to overcome.
Thus, when job creation perspectives for the next decade are analysed (Soete 1999; Table 2
and Table 3), one gets quite an unconventional picture, by comparison with the clichés about
the future of employment. Again the US seem to be leading: according to the Labour
Statistical Bureau forecast, the employment linked to computer and data processing is
supposed to have a 7.6 % annual growth rate until 2006. But simultaneously, all the jobs
related to health care will grow at 4.0 %, higher than the business and financial services, not to
forget environment related and leisure activitiy jobs, that will experience a fast growth. One
7
gets the same picture for OECD as a whole (Table 3). Therefore, the ICT and even knowledge
based activities will represent a significant contribution to employment growth. But not at all
the totality.
Nevertheless, a more radical picture of a service led growth can be proposed. Actually, many
components of the services try to cope with the needs of social life in large urban centres, for
instance taking care of children within families where both the father and the mother have a
job, either full-time or part-time, day care for elderly people, restaurants, retailing, distribution
and transportation, education services, and of course the bulk of health care. Some analysts
even think that the transformations related to an equal gender opportunity inside the family
and within the whole society are powerful enough to engineer a new virtuous circle of changed
life style – consumption transformations – insertion of new talents into the economy – new
directions for innovation - and so on (Majnoni d’Intignano 1999).
According to this interpretation and prognosis, the slow growth of unemployment in Europe
would be attributed mainly to the lag in the development of a fully fledged service economy, a
statement found in many European reports (for instance, European Commission 1999: 16).
Actually, should the share of the services in total employment reach the American level, Europe
could enjoy an employment rate 14.6 % higher than actually observed. Of course, the situation
is quite unequal across member States : fewer services in Germany but highly developed in
Denmark, UK, Sweden and so on. But the question is then: could Europeans create as many
jobs as Americans do, while preserving relatively high wage and good social protection? Some
evidence suggests that the EU has fewer persons employed both in the high wage and low
wage industries (Freeman 1998 and Figure 4).
This model is quite relevant for small open economies and has been imposing itself on medium
size economies during the 80s. But precisely, the constitution of the single market and the
creation of the Euro do change the respective importance of competitiveness and internal
market dynamism. Of course, each firm in order to stay in business has to be profitable, but the
vanishing of exchange rate variability and the changing pattern of expectations associated to
the European Monetary Union (EMU) give a better chance to a domestic led growth regime.
After all, globally Euro15 is nowadays less open than US or Japan (Table 2, two last columns)
and this gives more degrees of freedom to the design of a better policy mix combining
monetary stability, growth dynamism and job creation. All the players will progressively learn
the new properties of a common monetary policy and the essential benefits associated to it.
Thus external competition could be mitigated by comparison with the 90s, even though a
8
The boom of mergers and acquisitions in Europe after January 1999 seems to confirm such a
hypothesis: the concentration on many manufacturing sectors, the constitution of large
financial groups, the project of implementing pension funds in order to complement previous
systems perceived to be under severe strain due to the ageing of European population, all these
factors seem to be evidence for the next convergence of European and even Japanese
configurations toward such a finance led regime, already at work in North America.
Nevertheless, a closer look at the organisation of financial systems of the triad and simple
statistical indexes suggest that with the exception of UK, few European countries are able to
enter into such a finance led regime (Table 4). Furthermore, some theoretical analyses hint that
the exhilarating phase of the diffusion of new financial instrument, which is favourable to
growth, may end up in a zone of structural instability, by the very success and generalisation
of behaviour of businesses and households quite exclusively governed by the optimisation of
financial rates of returns (Boyer 1999c). Therefore, the EU should be careful in reaping the
benefits of financial liberalisation, without entering the dangerous zone of financial and
economic instability. Incidentally, Europeans should be quite active in promoting a viable new
architecture for the international financial system, that remains quite shaky, in spite of a
renewed optimism at the end of 1999 (Davanne 1998 ; Boyer 1999b).
Basically, each emerging growth regime calls for a precise institutional architecture, even
though some reforms may enhance simultaneously the likelihood of several of them (Table 5).
Conversely, given the precise economic, social and political configuration of each country, the
chance of implementation, maturation and success of one regime may be easier to reach than
another. For instance, Japan may still be leading in terms of a modernisation of the post World
War II mass consumption paradigm, whereas the equivalent of industrial districts might be
crucial for ICT and competition led growth still a characteristic of small open economies.
According to this diagnosis, the task of European initiative is to promote equally the
emergence of these diverse regimes, that may jointly contribute to European competitiveness
and performance, while preserving the social cohesion that has been manufactured by the long
run historical process of nation state formation.
Besides the optimisation of the short run policy mix, one major task for public authorities is to
create incentive constraints that push economic actors to innovate in the direction of one or
another of the alternative growth regimes. Four major hints are to be discussed.
Recent research on European economic geography suggests a more balanced view. Only few
sectors exhibit increasing returns to scale in the production of homogeneous goods, since the
majority of them search for product differentiation by quality ladders and innovation in order to
cope with an extended competition (Maurel 1999). Therefore, the intra European
specialisation according to quality differentials could continue to prevail in the next decades,
possibly with the exception of some sectors such as finance.
Thus, the large diversity of production and innovation systems could be preserved, even
though of course some transformation and structural adjustments will take place during the
next decades (Amable, Barré, Boyer 1997). This could be a strength since it would make it
possible to jointly reap the benefits of contrasted social innovation system (SSI): market based,
in UK, social-democrat for Sweden, Finland and Austria, as well as public institutions based
SSI, with France, Netherlands, Germany (Table 6). But of course, the national and European
science and technology policies have to take into account this variety in the design of adequate
subsidies, incentives and statistical indexes of performance of SSI….and it is not necessarily an
easy task.
With the process of globalisation, searching for best practices has been a leading phenomenon
for firms and organisations. This method has been extended to public policy, for example by the
Luxembourg summit on employment policies (European Council 1999b) or more recently for
technology policies (OECD 1999). But it has to be remembered that a successful partial
device may not succeed when inserted into a totally different institutional architecture: this is
the central message of the recent research about institutional complementarity (Aoki 2000) and
the hierarchy of institutional forms (Boyer, Saillard 2000).
This hint is globally confirmed for innovation policies. All of them look for internalising the
externalities associated to the very process of innovation, but given the large variety of
mechanisms involved, the exact economic policy tools may differ drastically. Just to give an
example, enhancing human capital formation calls for different incentives than those required
for tangible capital (Table 7). Furthermore, the permanent development of skills and
competence may be the common outcome of contrasted institutional settings: an extended
democratic educational system (Japan), implementation of a dual training system (Germany) or
alternatively an intense retraining of workers hit by the obsolescence of their competence
(Sweden) (Boyer, Durand 1997: 53).
Nevertheless it would be too optimistic to consider that a good policy mix in the short run on
one side, favourable demographic trends in the long run on the other are sufficient conditions
for the progressive phasing out of mass-unemployment. If the investment is made along wrong
and now obsolete productive paradigms, the rate of return may even be negative with a totally
adverse long run impact on employment. The quality of the decision process, the relevance of
the managerial tools of the firm and more generally the ability to implement the complete set of
procedures that allows to be competitive in contemporary world, all these factors are necessary
to get positive effects from investment (Boyer 1995). Similarly, the content of the investment is
important indeed and closely related to the quality of the internal and external information
systems of the firm. This shows up out of international comparisons: for instance access to
internet and to a lesser extent access to internet seem to play a role in reducing unemployment
on top of the investment rate (Figure 5).
But of course it is a difficult task for public authorities to deliver a fine tuning of their
intervention in accordance with such an objective, since the quality of internal managerial
routines is not easy to be assessed by external auditors.
Similarly, the large vertically integrated firm is no longer efficient in organising research and
development if the competence belonging to various sectors and entities is to be combined.
More generally, horizontal as well as vertical networking seem to be a key organisational
structure in the era of ICT, specially given the major uncertainties linked to the
internationalisation of production and research.
Recurrent evidence shows that technological co-operation has a definite and large impact upon
the success of innovation (Figure 6). But the question is the level at which such a networking
should operate: in the case of ICT, European joint ventures seem to have been less successful
than the co-operation with the American or Asian partners (Soete 1999). But a precise analysis
of the related externalities (see Table 7 supra) suggests that the relevant level may vary
drastically from the local community to the entire world, with a lot of intermediate levels
including the Nation or the region. It should be essential for European policy to carefully select
the innovation sectors that are to be managed at the continental level. Even so, networking
should be privileged.
Monetary policy and exchange rate management are irreversibly a matter of common
12
concern, the task being given mainly to the European Central Bank with some role to the
European Council about the strategic choice of an exchange regime.
By contrast, budgetary policies, that exert similar externalities, are kept under the control
of national authorities, but the Stability and Growth Pact imposes a limit to public deficits
as well as sanctions (C.A.E. 1998). This discrepancy has been playing a role in the
evolution of the Euro/Dollar exchange rate during the first semester 1999, as explained
more fully in the next section.
Competition policy principles are common to all member States but the implementation
and control remain national. In the long term this might trigger the constitution of a fair
trade and competition agency, US style. This would mean a large breakthrough by
comparison with the previous juxtaposition of contrasted national styles for governing
competition (Dumez, Jeunemaître 1996).
A theory of such a complex socio-economic system remains to be elaborated and the task is
overwhelmingly difficult and it will take some time and a lot of learning and experimenting.
Thus, meanwhile some pragmatic rules have to be invented and discussed in order to initiate
quite a pragmatic process, with largely unintended configurations one or two decades later
(Boyer 1999b).
The first one relates to the fact that the time required for any institutional reform to deliver
the expected (or unexpected) results, is far longer than the sequencing of elections and still
more the speed of financial quotations. The scrutiny by financial markets of any
government decision is an incentive for public authorities to focus upon short term issues.
But in the long run, everybody is now convinced that structural reforms are required, but
they may take ten or fifteen years to deliver all their (hopefully) positive outcomes. The
reforms of the Dutch welfare system and labour contracts are a good example of such a
long lag between the negotiation of a social pact and the decline in unemployment.
The second dilemma concerns the links between the timing of structural reforms and the
business cycles. When the economy is booming, governments are happy to distribute the
related surplus and do not perceive any need for painful structural reforms, since they are
enticed to consider that “the crisis is over!”. They could do reforms but they are not
induced to do so. Conversely, when a major crisis bursts out, the need for structural
reforms becomes self evident but the cost is so huge and the lag so important, that they are
postponed to better days. Even if they are done it is too late to overcome the current crisis.
Thus the real trick is to conduct a “wise” short run economic policy, while sequencing the
structural reforms that will be operative several years later. Again, the good prospect of
European growth for 2000 enlightens the temptation to postpone quite necessary reforms.
13
Thus, the implementation of the Euro is part of a deeper move in the conceptions and tools of
contemporary economic policies. Back to the 60s, a highly centralised management of the
policy mix was organised, in most countries, by the national Ministries of finance that had a
clear control over the Central Bank. Information was mainly originating from the State and
was inserted into macro modelling and annual forecasting exercises. By contrast, in the 90s,
the main players have become formally more independent but have to exchange information
about their strategy: the actual policy mix is the outcome of this complex process (Table 9). In
a sense, the creation of the ECB is a step in that direction, with the need to organise a forum
for co-ordinating strategies that have now to operate both at the European level and the
national.
The decision of the Cologne European Council to implement a macroeconomic dialogue may
mean a new stage in this process of mutual information and co-ordination. By inviting social
partners to discuss wage and employment issues, some emerging conflicts could be cured at an
early stage and this could significantly improve the performance of EU in terms of job creation
(Maurice 1999). Price stability would be largely warranted by collective negotiations delivering
a near stability of unit labour cost, thus the ECB could deal with symmetric shocks affecting
European growth, while delivering monetary stability (Figure 8).
Nevertheless, the European policy mix is facing a major challenge (Figure 9). On one hand,
the Amsterdam Treaty formalises a clear asymmetry between the Central Bank that is given
both a clear autonomy and precise objectives, governed first by price stability and second by a
contribution to general economic policy. Furthermore, the Stability and Growth Pact puts an
institutional constraint upon the autonomy of each national budgetary policy, precisely to
preserve the credibility of a low inflation monetary policy. But on the other hand, the ECB
policy is itself under the close scrutiny of international financial markets, that assess, on a
permanent basis and in real time, the viability of the current policy mix. Consequently, the
European monetary policy is itself disciplined by the rules and evolution of the international
economy. That feature makes the process operating within Euro11 specially important and by
extension the process implemented by the Cologne European Council.
Among medium size European countries, the pattern for unemployment is quite different
between continental Europe and UK, specially since the early 1993 (Figure 10a). This can
be interpreted as a premium to decentralisation, privatisation of public services, slimming
down of welfare compensation. This is the origin of the Third way strategy that tries now
to develop new security and social rights benefiting the “employability” of workers
(Giddens 1998). By contrast the strategy “wait and see” has proved to be quite
detrimental.
Small open economies display, on average, far better results since they are benefiting, at
the end of the 90s, from a quasi full-employment (Figure 10b). This can be explained by
the fact that since the 50s, social partners have taken into account the need for
competitiveness and expressed a major concern for full-employment. Nevertheless, the
discrepancy between the inherited welfare and tax system and the new pressures
associated to internationalisation have triggered the need for major reforms in the mid 80s.
When national social pacts have been struck, the outcome seems to have been quite
favourable indeed. Netherlands is a good example to this alternative to the Third way.
Consequently, in the long run social bargaining matters, along with fine tuning the policy mix
in the short run. This gives a lot of meaning to the subsidiarity principle and significance of
responsibility to social partners. The Luxembourg process may help in pointing out the
diversity of institutional arrangements across European countries and give some hints for
reforming the legal and conventional procedures that have proved to be detrimental to job
creation and social cohesion (European Commission 1999b; 1999d). But mere importation and
copy are generally not sufficient, since national industrial relation systems are quite
idiosyncratic and call for an adaptation of any one best way, the search for functional
equivalents and even radical innovation (Boyer, Charron, Jurgens, Tolliday 1998).
On one hand, the task may seem easy since at least eight solutions are available, with
contrasted features and outcomes in terms of dynamic efficiency and social justice. Social
partners could pick up their preferred solutions among this rather large menu (Table 10).
However it seems that a fully integrated collective bargaining at the European level is, for
the time being out of reach, as far as quantitative issues are concerned (Kim 1999).
CLearly it is quite difficult to make compatible a set of national wage demands given the
remaining large heterogeneity of productivity levels within the same sectors across Europe.
But on the other hand, in the absence of well organised business associations and workers
unions or if, when existing, they are prone to conflict and the adoption of “loss-loss
strategies”, most of these co-operative solutions are out of reach (Boyer 1998b). The only
path available is then a large social deregulation, that would be a threat to domestic social
and political stability and could mean the end of the ideal of a social Europe (Maurice
1999; Freyssinet 1999). It can even been argued that in the emerging new economy, the
15
market cannot elicit the requested commitment from workers by pure market mechanisms,
without provoking in the long run major instability (Bowles, Boyer 1990).
With respect to the Luxembourg procedure, that launched the benchmarking of employment
policies, a lot of initiatives have to be delegated to national or regional actors in order to select
what innovations could possibly be imported and adapted to the local context. Again the
subsidiarity principles is quite essential for the future of the EU.
Redesigning all legal and tax incentives in order to promote the adoption of
new growth regimes.
All experts, economists (including the Keynesians!) and of course the politicians should take
seriously the warning from Keynes. Most of us are consciously or not following the ideas and
theories of economists of the past, who themselves were analysing a now largely obsolete
economic system or vanishing “régulation mode”. The institutional contemporary systems have
been built by the sedimentation of a series of compromises and legislation over one or two
centuries. The task is now to scrutinise this complex architecture in order to detect possible
shifts in these compromises or, in some cases, to propose brand new arrangements. But the
real difficulty is then: how to build a self sustaining political and social majority in favour of
such reforms? Just to mention some items at the top of this agenda:
Given the issue of the ageing European population, it is important to shift from
unemployment policies that aim at reduction of activity rates for old workers towards
more active policy of job creation (European Commission 1999; European Council
1999a,b). The facility of early retirement should be phased out, the more so the more
dynamic the European economic recovery and the more likely the emergence of labour
scarcity for some professions (Taddei 1999).
A plan for training the less privileged members of European societies would be welcome
for many reasons. From an economic point of view, whatever the growth regime that will
prevail during the next decade (ICT or KBE), the access to general education is more
essential than ever. The evolution towards a learning society is a common feature to many
of these scenario. Similarly, the changing productive paradigm may hurt the practice of on
the job training and call for a renewed interest for vocational training systems, promoting
some transferability of skills (Caroli 1995). This is specially important given a trend
toward a large heterogeneity of labour contracts according to the level of competence and
their transferability (Beffa, Boyer, Touffut 1999). Some workers get out of the educational
system without any clear competence and are unable to acquire some professional
expertise, given the large mobility they experience from one low skill job to another. The
objective about the reduction of social inequality is thus more essential than ever. Last but
not least, modern democratic societies need informed and learned citizens.
The welfare systems that had been designed in order to fight against the social inequalities
observed after the World War II have in a sense succeeded. For instance, in most European
countries, retired people are no longer poorer than the rest of the population. But, in some
cases, they have become counterproductive (concerning for instance the rise of labour
costs due to the financing of welfare) and still more these systems totally neglect the new
sources of inequalities (youth unemployment, social exclusion, unequal access to
education, single parent family, emerging urban ghettos,…). This is a major topic for social
security reforms (Esping-Andersen 1999).
16
The reform of the tax system is facing another dilemma. On one hand, a Schumpeterian
conception would imply a shift of taxation from innovators and entrepreneurs to the new
rentiers who have prospered during the last fifteen years…But, in turn, this could trigger
wide income differentials when for instance stock options dramatically inflate the revenue
of top managers by comparison with rank and file workers. On the other hand, the social
heterogeneity brought by the diffusion of market led capitalist institutions puts a new
emphasis on the agenda set forward by John Maynard Keynes during the 30s,…even
though the regulation modes and international regime are not at all the same. But then
governments may fear a brain drain of the most talented individuals, a loss of dynamic
efficiency and finally less growth and less employment. European contemporary social
democrats are muddling through this dilemma.
Last but not least, EU should contemplate extending financial supervision at the
community level in order to prevent the emergence of speculative bubbles that could be
quite detrimental to growth stability in the medium-long term. For the time being, the issue
is hotly debated among experts. On the one hand, moral hazard arguments would attribute
the role of supervision to national authorities over their domestic banking and financial
systems and confirm the clauses of the Amsterdam Treaty. But, on the other hand, what
about the globalisation of finance and the spill-over of the systemic risk from one country
to another? (C.A.E. 1998; Aglietta, De Boissieu 1998; 1999). In the long run, won’t the
European financial system be integrated and call for a common supervision?
This is an invitation to consider what new domains should be attributed to the European
Community responsibility, thinking ahead of emerging problems. But conversely, other areas
of present intervention should be phased out.
At the national level, the subsidies should be shifted from mature industries to sunrise
industries, as far as such a strategic move is allowed by the political configuration that
governs typically for each society. Furthermore, the numerous lobbies present around the
European Commission seem to be more active in mature and declining industries than in
sunrise and emerging industries.
A new design of the regional and structural European funds would be useful, in order to
17
take into account that some targeted regions are now developed, that new sources of
inequalities may emerge from this new phase of European integration and finally that the
admission of new members will increase heterogeneity and call for new solidarity
principles.
Finally, the targeted socio-economic research programmes should resist to the temptation
of launching large public projects, mission oriented. It would be far better to propitiate the
building of European networks, mobilising medium and small firms as well as large
corporations along with the academic world. To convert the diversity of social systems of
innovation into a European asset would be quite a rewarding objective. That would give a
lot of adaptability to Europe, given the coexistence and dynamism of contrasted growth
regimes among the EU (Amable, Barré, Boyer 1997).
But there is a major difficulty: how to actually implement such broad orientations? It is not an
easy task. By chance, the recent processes launched by the various European Councils provide
some tools.
The current context is quite good, since many conditions governing the appeal and feasibility
of such a programme are fulfilled. Nevertheless, the agenda is far from simple and many
obstacles have to be overcome. These short remarks are quite preliminary and introductory.
If European leaders look with some envy to the so-called American “New Economy”, they
should notice that the remarkable performance of the 90s have been reached after a series of
structural reforms, starting back in the early 70s and affecting nearly each aspect of social and
economic life. Even so, the long run viability of such a regime, is still to be assessed (Boyer
1999c). The problem is still more acute for Europe, since, for some if not all countries, major
reforms are still to be made in order to consolidate the current optimist expectations and
growth perspectives. Only a well ordered flow of reforms will transform the current recovery
into a long term growth regime.
18
For instance, the redesign of the objectives and tools of public interventions, implied by the
concern for credibility and the emergence of a lean and smart State, could be propitiated by the
stability and convergence programmes. Initially conceived as methods and principles for
controlling by peer review excessive public deficit, they should evolve towards an analysis of
the efficiency of various public spending strategies. Similarly, the Luxembourg process defines
guidelines for making the wage labour nexus more reactive to technical change,
macroeconomic fluctuations, gender equity issues,…. Even the Cologne process is part of this
evolution, since it recognises that a viable “régulation mode” has to make the initially
disconnected transformations of monetary policy, budgetary strategy, wage bargaining and
competition compatible.
Therefore, the various European processes are tuned with the major structural transformations
taking place both at the international and national levels: this feature creates some room for
success.
The present analysis provides one hint: why not consider that the unit of analysis for public
intervention is not the precise domain (tax, welfare, industrial relations, …) but the whole set
of positive spill-over that may define a coherent development mode or at least a complete set
of mechanisms linking the various domains? This is no more than converting the analysis of
the third section into a practical tool for assessing the coherence of a strategy. This could
possibly define new frontiers among the existing Cardiff, Luxembourg and Cologne processes.
Only four examples will be given.
Channelling the dividends of a relational policy mix is a first and important option, since it
relates the short run to the medium and long run perspectives (Figure 12). The success of a
19
pragmatic approach to the policy mix, based upon mutual learning among a densely
organised arena for exchange of information, may be an ingredient for a steady boom of the
investment, directed towards material and immaterial components, thus generating a
positive and increasing sum game. This should be the major concern for ECB and Ministry
of finance typical decisions. This is the first virtuous circle, relatively well defined, at odds
with the vicious circle that emerged during the early 90s in Europe. But then, the reforms
concerning competition policy, labour market organisation and public budget should be
explicitly coordinated according to this specific virtuous circle (Table 11).
Macroeconomists could be the architects of such a strategy, in response to the strategy
adopted by the European Councils and debated within the European Parliament.
Organising the shift from ICT to KBE is another method for trying to initiate a virtuous
circle of innovation, growth and job creation. This is one of the interpretations of the “New
Economy” and this strategy should be implemented by Ministers of science, technology,
education, of course in close connection with social partners (Figure 13). It is important to
note that this mechanism is largely independent from the previous one and calls for
different institutional reforms that might therefore be congruent with the first strategy
(Table 12). In contrast with the previous virtuous circle, this one is specially appealing for
private actors, entrepreneurs, employees, teachers, researchers and so on...
Welfare reform led virtuous circle may well be a major trump for Europe. This might sound
quite strange in an era when the burden of the European welfare is frequently considered as
the major obstacle to European job creation. Clearly the idea is not to keep unchanged the
complex welfare systems progressively built during the “Golden Age” and amended
afterwards, but to reform them in accordance with new social demands and
macroeconomic opportunities and constraints. A better implementation of gender equality
and the phasing out of early retirement could trigger a surge in activity rate and generate
new demand, all movements that would ease the financing of welfare systems (Figure 14).
The more so, the more they would be redesigned in order to cope with the new forms of
social exclusion, related for example with an inadequate initial general education and the
inability to master modern technologies. This is a matter for social affairs Ministers and
social partners. Again, the institutional reforms necessary for the implementation of such a
mechanism are not necessarily contradictory to the previous ones (Table 13). The benefit of
such an approach is to provide a clear rationale and various tools for coordinating a series
of reforms and check that they are more complementary than contradictory.
Coping with a finance led regime could define another alternative, specially relevant for
the countries already specialised in financial inter-mediation and business related services
(Figure 15). The objective of the ECB should then incorporate the curbing down of asset
inflation, social partners should negotiate profit sharing and pension funds management and
probably the supply of welfare could be more or less significantly transformed by
privatisation of many components, including retirement payments (Table 14). The logic of
such a mechanism seems so strong, that according to some extreme scenarios, it may enter
into conflict with the three previous virtuous circles. Furthermore, it is not sure that the
related regime is stable in the very long run. In any case, it is far from being widely diffused
across Europe, specially if new members joined the EU. Nevertheless, this framework may
help in conceptualising the issue brought by the implementation in Europe of pension
funds. Can Europe find out some functional equivalents to the American system or should
the whole institutional setting be redesigned? This is a major political choice, that has to be
enlightened by more investigations.
20
These proposals raise another important issue: at what level should these virtuous circles
operate?
This is specially important for the long run acceptability of the European integration
(Quermone 1999). It has to be simultaneously politically legitimate and economically
efficient: the subsidiarity principle and the emergence of jointly decided rules of the game may
provide these two requisites.
Last but not least, these ideas and proposals should be made simple enough and sufficiently
attractive to be submitted to, discussed and amended by European and national political
leaders. Maybe such a project is not totally out of reach. Here comes Keynes warning: “The
difficulty lies not in your ideas, but in escaping from the old ones, which ramify into every
corner of our minds”.
21
REFERENCES
BOYER ROBERT (1999b) “Deux enjeux pour le XXIe siècle : discipliner la finance et organiser
l’internationalisation”, Techniques financières et développement, n° 53-54, Décembre
1998-Mars 1999, Epargne sans frontière, p.8-19.
BOYER ROBERT (1999c) “Is a finance led growth regime a viable alternative to Fordism?”,
Mimeograph CEPREMAP, to appear in Economy and Society, February 2000.
BOYER ROBERT (sous la présidence de) (1999d) Le gouvernement de la zone Euro, Rapport du
groupe de travail du Commissariat Général du Plan, La Documentation Française,
Paris.
BOYER ROBERT, CHARRON ELSIE, JÜRGENS ULRICH, TOLLIDAY STEVE (eds) (1998) Between
imitation and innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
BOYER ROBERT, DIDIER MICHEL (1998) « Innovation et Croissance », Les Rapports du
Conseil d’Analyse Economique, n° 10, La Documentation Française, Paris, p. 11-132.
BOYER ROBERT, DURAND JEAN-PIERRE (1997) After Fordism, MacMillan Business,
London.
BOYER ROBERT, SAILLARD (eds) (2000) Régulation Theory : The State of the Art,
London: Routledge.
CAROLI EVE (1995) « Croissance et formation : le rôle de la politique éducative »,
Economie et Prévision, n° 116, 1995-5.
COMMISSION EUROPÉENNE (1997) Le deuxième rapport européen sur les indicateurs
scientifiques et technologiques 1997, Etudes 1, Décembre, Luxembourg : Office des
publications officielles des Communautés Européennes, EUR 17639 FR.
COMMISSION EUROPÉENNE (1997) L’emploi en Europe, Septembre, Luxembourg :
Office des publications officielles des Communautés Européennes.
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPÉAN COMMUNITIES (1999) Commission’s recommendation
for the Broad Guidelines of the Economic Policies of the Member States and the
Community, Mimeograph Brussels, 30.03.
CONSEIL D’ANALYSE ÉCONOMIQUE (1998) Coordination européenne des politiques
économiques, n° 5, La Documentation Française.
DAVANNE OLIVIER (1998) “Instabilité du système financier international”, Conseil d’Analyse
Economique, n° 14, La documentation Française, Paris.
DUMEZ HERVÉ, JEUNEMAÎTRE ALAIN (1996) “The Convergence of Competition Policies in
Europe: Internal Dynamic and External Imposition”, in BERGER SUZANNE et DORE
RONALD, National Diversity and Global Capitalism, Cornell University Press, Ithaca,
p. 216-238.
ECONOMIC POLICY COMMITTEE (1999) Synthesis report on structural reforms in Member
States, Report addressed to the Council and the Commission, Brussels, 25 February,
EPC/II/168/99.
ESPING-ANDERSEN GOSTA (1999) Ageing Societies, Knowledge Based Economies, and the
Sustainability of European Welfare States, Mimeograph, Universita di Trento and
Universitat Pompeu Fabra, September.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (1998) Wages and employment, EC/DGV – OECD/DEELSA
seminar, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (1999a) Community Policies in Support of Employment,
Mimeograph Brussels.
23
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (1999b) Joint Employment report 1999, Part I : The European
Union, Mimeograph Brussels.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (1999c) Multilateral review of economic reforms in Member States,
opinion addressed to the Council, Mimeograph Brussels, 5 August, EPC/II/444/99.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (1999d) Strategies for jobs in the information society, Report to the
European Council (Draft of September 17th, Mimeograph Brussels.
EUROPEAN COUNCIL (1999a) Presidency conclusions of the Cologne European Council, 3-4
June.
EUROPEAN COUNCIL (1999b) Council Resolution on the 1999 Employment Guidelines,
Mimeograph Brussels 29.07.
FREEMAN RICHARD B. (1998) “Wages, employment and unemployment: an overview”,
European Commission, EC/DGV – OECD/DEELSA seminar, Office for Official
Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, p. 21-31.
FREYSSINET JACQUES (1999), “Système de régulation et stratégies des acteurs”, Les Cahiers
de l’Observatoire de l’ANPE: Les transformations du marché du travail, 30 et 31
Mars, p. 29-34.
GIDDENS ANTONY (1998) The Third Way. The renewal of Social Democracy, Polity Press,
London.
GUTERRES ANTONIO (Presented by) (1999) A European Employment Pact for a new European
Way, Report adopted by the Party of European Socialists, Milan, 1-2 March.
HERZOG PHILIPPE (1999) Manifeste pour une démocratie européenne, Les Editions de
l’Atelier/Les éditions ouvrières, Paris.
INSTITUT DE L’ENTREPRISE (1998) Croissance et emploi : pourquoi les Pays-Bas font-ils
mieux que la France ? Séminaire organisé par l’Institut de l’Entreprise à l’initiative de
la Commission “Benchmarking” présidée par Bernard Esambert, Paris.
KIM HAKNOH (1999) “Constructing European Collective Bargaining”, Economic and
Industrial Democracy, Vol. 20, n° 3, August, p. 393-426.
KEIZAI KOHO CENTER (1998) Japan 1998. An International Comparison, Tokyo.
MAJNONI D’INTIGNANO BÉATRICE (1999), Egalité entre femmes et hommes: aspects
économiques, Conseil d’Analyse Économique, n° 15, La Documentation Française,
Paris.
MARKS GARY, SCHARFF FRITZ W., SCHMITTER PHILIPPE C. and STREECK WOLFGANG
(1996) Governance in the European Union, Sage Publications, London.
MAUREL FRANÇOISE (sous la présidence de) (1999) Marché unique, monnaie unique : trois
scénarios pour une nouvelle géographie unique de l’Europe, rapport du groupe
« Géographie économique »Commissariat général du Plan, to appear.
MAURICE JOËL (sous la présidence de) (1999), Emploi, négociation collective, protection
sociale: vers quelle Europe sociale?, Rapport du groupe « Europe Sociale »,
Commissariat général du Plan, La Documentation Française, Paris..
OECD (1999) L’économie fondée sur le savoir: des faits et des chiffres, Réunion du Comité
de la politique scientifique et technologique (GPST) au niveau Ministériel, OECD,
Paris 22-23 juin.
24
FIGURE 1 – THE POST W.W.II CAPITAL-LABOUR ACCORD SHAPED MOST OTHER SOCIO-
ECONOMIC INSTITUTIONS
A wage earners
Oligopolistic state Beveridge
competition Mark-up High and Stable + Keynes
pricing growth
Coherent and
Credit money Possible permissive
regime permanent Exchange international
inflation Rate regime
adjustment
Macroeconomic links
Adjusting variable
26
CONFLICTING/uncertain
principles for the world
economy
more project of
competitive a single European
markets currency
Growing
heterogeneity Weak transnational workers
of labour organisation
a lean state :
no deficit, minimalist social
transfers, fewer instruments
the wage-labour
nexus under
restructuring
Market
forces Wage/
permeate employment
production as adjustment Rationalisation
organisation variables of welfare
1999
POPULATION PIB
Japan
Japan
16%
15%
EU
41%
EU
49%
US
35% US
44%
160 148,3
140
120 108,5
100
100
80
60
40
20
0
EU US Japan
Japan
EU Japan
EU 20%
26% 25%
34%
US
US 49%
46%
1999
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
12
10,2
10
6 4,7
4,2
4
0
Euro11 Japan US
Source : (1), (2), (3), (4) : OECD « L’économie fondée sur le savoir », Juin 1995
(5) Economie Européenne, n° 66, 1998, p. 149, 142.
(6) OECD Perspectives Economiques, Juin 1999, p. 237.
Intensity of competition is defined as: E = X/Y + (1-X/Y).M/D X export, M import, D domestic demand, Y production.
30
TABLE 3 – NET JOB CREATIONS TAKE PLACE IN QUITE DIVERSE SECTORS, NOT ONLY IN
HIGH TECH ONES.
OECD : 1980 – 1995 (Variation in percent)
Source : Second European Report on Scientific and Technological Indicators (1997 :34)
31
FIGURE 4 – EUROPEAN COUNTRIES SUFFER FROM BOTH LOW WAGE AND HIGH WAGE
EMPLOYMENT GAP IN THE SERVICES
0,2
0,177
0,18
0,16
0,139
0,14
0,12 0,113
0,106
0,098
0,1
0,08
0,06
0,04
0,02
0
U.S. Germany France U.K. Italy
0,2
0,179
0,18
0,16 0,147
0,14
0,12 0,111
0,097
0,1
0,08
0,08
0,06
0,04
0,02
0
U.S. Germany France U.K. Italy
1998
Countries United UK Canada Japan Germany France
Parameters
States
1. Average propensity to
0.95 0.926 0.956 0.869 0.884 0.908
consume (1996)
2. Wealth in shares/
disposable income 145 75 95 30 25 20
(1997) %
3. Extent of capital
gains /disposable 35.5 15 11 -7 7 5
income (%)
Sources : Line (1) Japan 1998, Keizai Koho Center, An international comparison, p. 97.
Lines (2) and (3) The Economist, September 19 th –25th, 1998, p. 129
Line (4) Japan Almanach, Asahi Shimbun 1998, p. 26
Line (5) The Economist, September 19th –25th, 1998, p. 129
33
TABLE 5 – ALTERNATIVE EMERGING GROWTH REGIMES AND THE REDESIGN OF INSTITUTIONAL FORMS
A previous work (Amable, Barré, Boyer, 1997:423) has proposed a theoretical analysis about the existence of
alternative social systems of innovation, gathered a series of statistical indexes in order to capture the major
features of twelve OECD countries, showed the clustering of data around four configurations: the social
democrat model (Sweden, Norway, Finland); the mesocorporatist model (Japan); the marketbased model
(USA, UK, Canada and Australia); and the publicinstitutionsbased model (France, Germany, Italy and the
Netherlands).
It is interesting to notice that within the fifteen countries belonging to the European Union, three distinct social
systems of innovation are observed.
The marketbased model.
The US, UK, Canada and Australia form this group. Competitiveness is low, unemployment and growth are at
average levels. Other characteristics include difficulties in implementing post Fordist productive principles;
strong industrial specialisation in aerospace and chemicals; important military R&D; high level of
publications/GDP but low levels of patents/GDP; flexibility of the labour market; and high level of expenditures
in education but weak training. The financial system is sophisticated, and venture capital available.
The socialdemocrat model
Sweden, Norway and Finland constitute this group. Competitiveness is average, unemployment (during the 80s)
is low and growth is moderate. Foreignbased subsidiaries of domestic firms are important for their laboratories.
Firms have adopted most of the principles of the 'new production model'. Industrial specialisation is strong in
resourceintensive activities. Public research plays an important role, scientific specialisation is clear in
medicine and biomedical research. Mobility and skills of the labour force are rather high. Education expenditure
is high. The financial system is not very sophisticated, no venture capital is available and the cost of capital is
rather high, but the ability to raise funds on international markets is good.
The publicinstitutionsbased model
France, Italy, Germany and the Netherlands form this group. Competitiveness is rather high, unemployment (in
the early 90s) is high and growth is slow. Income distribution is favourable to the poorest 20% of the
population. Adaptation to the new productive model is average. Otherwise, this group is characterised by a
certain number of specialisation characteristics. Scientific and industrial specialisation is marked in
pharmaceuticals, aerospace and chemicals. Low level of scientific publications/GDP. External flexibility and
mobility of the labour force is low. The financial system is relatively unsophisticated. Public expenditure in
education is relatively high, but total education expenditure is moderate.
As we see here, the scientific profile does not mechanically determine technological specialisation, any more
than technological specialisation mechanically determines macroeconomic performance. It is neither necessary
nor sufficient to have a dominant position in high tech to enjoy low levels of unemployment and high growth.
Institutions that organise the innovation process are determinant : there is no ideal configuration to organise the
relationships between science, technology and the economy.
35
36
TABLE 7 – TOWARD A KNOWLEDGE BASED ECONOMY : THE NEED FOR NEW POLICIES IN
ORDER TO COPE WITH THE RELATED EXTERNALITIES.
ROBUSTNESS
NATURE OF INTENSITY OF
OF ECONOMIC POLICY TOOLS
EXTERNALITIES IMPACT ESTIMATES
Tangible capital Strong High Low taxation of capital, efficient
financial market, stable
macroeconomic environment.
Intangible capital Variable across Rather large Intellectual property rights.
industries (high Interconnectedness of academia/
in science related research industry.
industries) Tax and credit neutrality with
respect to the choice between
tangible and intangible capital.
Knowledge and ideas Assumed to be Major difficulties, Capital and labour mobility.
quite important little robust High priority to education and
for the future. econometric training.
evidence. Subsidy to networking and joint
venture.
Openness of national research to
world community.
Human capital Important. Rather well Subsidy to education and
documented. vocational training.
Definition of tracks and diploma.
Easy access to credit by students.
Learning by
doing Significant. Not so much Employment stability but need for
statistical evidence, the stimulus by competition.
but some
monographic
evidence.
Spain
18
16
Standard Unemployment rate (1998)
14
Italy
12 France
Finland
10 Greece
Belgium Germany
8 Sweden Canada
Ireland
UnitedKingdom
6
Denmark Portugal
United States Austria
4 Netherlands Japan
Norway
Luxembourg
2
0
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
Investment/Gross Domestic Product (1995)
39
Spain
18
16
Standard Unemployment Rate (1998)
14
12 Italy France
Finland
10 Greece
Belgium Germany
Sweden Canada
8 Ireland
United Kingdom
6
Portugal Denmark
Austria United States
4 Japan Netherlands
Norway
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Personal computer (1998)
Spain
18
16
Standard Unemployment Rate (1998)
14
Italy
12
France
Finland
10 Greece
Belgium
Germany
Sweden Canada
8 Ireland
United Kingdom
6
Portugal Denmark
Austria United States
4 Japan Netherlands
Norway
Luxembourg
2
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Internet Host (1998)
40
FIGURE 7 – THE EURO SETS INTO MOTION A SERIES OF COMPLEX TRANSFORMATIONS, BOTH
AT THE NATIONAL AND EUROPEAN LEVEL, WITH UNINTENDED FALLOUT
European institution
building
TABLE 9 – THE NEW STYLE FOR ECONOMIC POLICY: A CONDITION FOR OPTIMISING THE
EUROPEAN POLICY MIX
Method to take decision Mainly centralised tools with Learning from interactions
little concerted action between actors with different
objectives
Source : Freely inspired from EC/DGE “Reinforcement of mechanisms for economic policy
co-ordination”, July 28, 1999.
44
UNIT PRICE
LABOUR STABILITY
COST AND
STABILITY GROWTH
CREDIBILITYOF A DE FACTO
PUBLIC SPENDING COORDINATION
AND TAXATION OF NATIONAL
POLICY POLICIES
NATIONAL BUDGETS
45
Assesses
TABLE 10 – WHAT REFORM OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS IN ORDER TO COPE WITH EUROPEAN MONETARY POLICY ?
RESULTS STRENGTHS SHORTCOMINGS LIKELIHOOD
CONFIGURATIONS
FIGURE 11 – A GOOD NEWS : THE NEW HIERARCHY AMONG INSTITUTIONAL FORMS IS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE STRUCTURE OF EUROPEAN
TREATIES AND SUBSEQUENT DECISIONS
State / Society Form of Wage labour Stability and Cardiff process Luxembourg
Relations competition nexus growth pact proc
ess
Article 127
Lean State More Reactive wage / Stability / Competitive Employment
49
competition on hours / Convergence product markets guidelines
product markets Employment program
FIGURE 12 – STRATEGY ONE : USE THE DIVIDEND OF FASTER GROWTH TO LOWER THE TAX AND REMOVE WELFARE RELATED BARREERS TO JOB
CREATION AND LAUNCH THE MACROECONOMIC DIALOGUE
Incentive to business
creation
FIGURE 13 – STRATEGY TWO : CONVERT THE INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES (ICT) INTO THE BASIS FOR A KNOWLEDGE
BASED ECONOMY (KBE)
New business
Smart enterprise (services to firms, New jobs
e-mail commerce)
FIGURE 14 – STRATEGY THREE : GENDER EQUALITY AND RESPONSES TO AGEING AS THE SOURCE OF A NEW SERVICE LED GROWTH
Ageing of
population
Wage labour nexus Promotion of gender equality Life long cycle of activity
Extension of retirement age
Form of competition Facilitation of new services Tax reduction for the services sheltered
from international competition
Monetary regime
State/Society relations Complete redesign welfare for a two
incomes family
Insertion into the international Relative autonomy of a welfare based
regime growth regime
Search for
Redesign of oligopolist power
prudential and Financial Redesign of Renewal of Changing
surveillance tools Globalisation corporate governance competitive hedge production pattern
Incentive to
innovation