IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/indrel/v46y2015i1p54-76.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Neoliberal reform for greater competitiveness: labour market deregulation in Japan and Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Hiroaki Richard Watanabe

Abstract

According to ‘varieties of capitalism’ (VoC) perspective, coordinated market economies (CMEs) attain comparative advantages by coordinating industrial relations and maintaining regulation to a greater extent than liberal market economies and mixed market economies (MMEs). Yet, Japan, a typical CME in the VoC literature, introduced greater labour market flexibility than Italy, an MME. This article analyses why this is the case and claims that the institutional complementarities that had functioned well previously in Japan have been unraveling since the early 1990s and neoliberal deregulation of the labour market ensued. This comparative study of Japan and Italy shows that economic stagnation and the globalisation of finance and production exerted neoliberal pressures on the state and employers to increase competitiveness by introducing market-oriented policies and business strategies. However, the power resources of labour unions and the partisan composition of the government affected the characteristics of neoliberal changes in labour market policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Hiroaki Richard Watanabe, 2015. "Neoliberal reform for greater competitiveness: labour market deregulation in Japan and Italy," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 54-76, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:indrel:v:46:y:2015:i:1:p:54-76
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/irj.12084
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen Crowley & Miroslav Stanojević, 2011. "Varieties of Capitalism, Power Resources, and Historical Legacies: Explaining the Slovenian Exception," Politics & Society, , vol. 39(2), pages 268-295, June.
    2. Jason Heyes & Paul Lewis & Ian Clark, 2012. "Varieties of capitalism, neoliberalism and the economic crisis of 2008–?," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 222-241, May.
    3. Lucio Baccaro, 2003. "What is Alive and What is Dead in the Theory of Corporatism," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 41(4), pages 683-706, December.
    4. Rebick, Marcus, 2005. "The Japanese Employment System: Adapting to a New Economic Environment," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199247240.
    5. Arjan B. Keizer, 2008. "Non-regular employment in Japan: continued and renewed dualities," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 22(3), pages 407-425, September.
    6. Crouch, Colin, 2005. "Capitalist Diversity and Change: Recombinant Governance and Institutional Entrepreneurs," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199286652.
    7. Kathleen Thelen, 2009. "Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 47(3), pages 471-498, September.
    8. Anke Hassel, 2014. "The Paradox of Liberalization — Understanding Dualism and the Recovery of the German Political Economy," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 52(1), pages 57-81, March.
    9. Chris Howell & Rebecca Kolins Givan, 2011. "Rethinking Institutions and Institutional Change in European Industrial Relations," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 49(2), pages 231-255, June.
    10. Jun Imai, 2011. "The Transformation of Japanese Employment Relations," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-0-230-29530-8, December.
    11. Kathleen Thelen & Ikuo Kume, 1999. "The Effects of Globalization on Labor Revisited: Lessons from Germany and Japan," Politics & Society, , vol. 27(4), pages 477-505, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hiroaki Richard Watanabe, 2018. "Labour Market Dualism and Diversification in Japan," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 56(3), pages 579-602, September.
    2. Myrto Tourtouri & Dimitris Pavlopoulos & Christos Papatheodorou, 2020. "Assessing the impact of liberalisation policies on the Greek labour market: an insider–experts' view from the perspective of the varieties of liberalisation," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(6), pages 517-535, November.
    3. Kyoji Fukao & Cristiano Perugini & Fabrizio Pompei, 2023. "Non‐standard Employment and Rent‐sharing," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 90(357), pages 178-211, January.
    4. A. Arrighetti & F. Landini, 2018. "Eterogeneità delle imprese e stagnazione del capitalismo italiano," Economics Department Working Papers 2018-EP01, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gerber, Christine, 2014. "Trade union responses towards labour market dualization comparing the impact of the varieties of industrial relations in Germany, Slovenia and Poland," PIPE - Papers on International Political Economy 23/2014, Free University Berlin, Center for International Political Economy.
    2. Hiroaki Richard Watanabe, 2018. "Labour Market Dualism and Diversification in Japan," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 56(3), pages 579-602, September.
    3. Jonathan Morris & Rick Delbridge & Takahiro Endo, 2018. "The Layering of Meso‐Level Institutional Effects on Employment Systems in Japan," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 56(3), pages 603-630, September.
    4. John Buchanan & Damian Oliver, 2016. "‘Fair Work’ and the Modernization of Australian Labour Standards: A Case of Institutional Plasticity Entrenching Deepening Wage Inequality," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 54(4), pages 790-814, December.
    5. Ji-Whan Yun, 2016. "The Setback in Political Entrepreneurship and Employment Dualization in Japan, 1998–2012," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 54(3), pages 473-495, September.
    6. Storz, Cornelia & Riboldazzi, Federico & John, Moritz, 2015. "Mobility and innovation: A cross-country comparison in the video games industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 121-137.
    7. Thomas Paster & Dennie Oude Nijhuis & Maximilian Kiecker, 2020. "To Extend or Not to Extend: Explaining the Divergent Use of Statutory Bargaining Extensions in the Netherlands and Germany," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 58(3), pages 532-557, September.
    8. Christian Dufour & Adelheid Hege, 2013. "Special Issue. Edited by: Gregor Murray, Christian Lévesque, Christian Dufour and Adelheid Hege," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(4), pages 355-372, July.
    9. Marsden, David, 2015. "The future of the German industrial relations model," Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 48(2), pages 169-187.
    10. Ulrike Weske & Peter Leisink & Eva Knies, 2014. "Local government austerity policies in the Netherlands: the effectiveness of social dialogue in preserving public service employment," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 20(3), pages 403-416, August.
    11. Christian Lyhne Ibsen & Lisa Sezer & Virginia Doellgast, 2023. "Coordination versus organization: Diverging logics of firm cooperation in Denmark and Sweden," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 61(3), pages 526-549, September.
    12. Martí López‐Andreu, 2019. "Employment Institutions under Liberalization Pressures: Analysing the Effects of Regulatory Change on Collective Bargaining in Spain," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 57(2), pages 328-349, June.
    13. Paul Teague & Jimmy Donaghey, 2009. "Why has Irish Social Partnership Survived?," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 47(1), pages 55-78, March.
    14. Gregory Jackson, 2016. "Toward a Conceptual Framework for Understanding Institutional Change in Japanese Capitalism: Structural Transformations and Organizational Diversity," Working Papers halshs-01643921, HAL.
    15. Andreas Kornelakis, 2016. "Inclusion or Dualization? The Political Economy of Employment Relations in Italian and Greek Telecommunications," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 54(2), pages 385-408, June.
    16. John T. Addison & Paulino Teixeira & Katalin Evers & Lutz Bellmann, 2016. "Is the Erosion Thesis Overblown? Alignment from Without in Germany," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 415-443, July.
    17. Phil Almond & Maria C. Gonzalez & Jonathan Lavelle & Gregor Murray, 2017. "The local in the global: regions, employment systems and multinationals," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(2), pages 115-132, March.
    18. W. R. Garside, 2012. "Japan’s Great Stagnation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14624.
    19. Bjarke Refslund & Jens Arnholtz, 2022. "Power resource theory revisited: The perils and promises for understanding contemporary labour politics," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 43(4), pages 1958-1979, November.
    20. Chiara Benassi, 2016. "Liberalization Only at the Margins? Analysing the Growth of Temporary Work in German Core Manufacturing Sectors," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 54(3), pages 597-622, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:indrel:v:46:y:2015:i:1:p:54-76. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0019-8692 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.