IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mpifgw/053.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Sequenzorientierte Policy-Analyse: Warum die Rentenreform von Walter Riester nicht an Reformblockaden scheiterte

Author

Listed:
  • Trampusch, Christine

Abstract

Aufgrund der Eigentümlichkeiten des deutschen Regierungssystems gehen viele politikwissenschaftliche Studien von der Blockadethese aus. Die Blockadethese gründet in der Annahme gegebener Präferenzen und stabiler institutioneller Rahmenbedingungen und führt auf der analytischen Ebene zu am Rationalwahlansatz orientierten Interaktionsanalysen, die politische Entscheidungen von der Veränderung gesellschaftlicher Probleme, Präferenzen und institutioneller Rahmenbedingungen isoliert betrachten. Interaktionsorientierte Analysen fokussieren auf die Erklärung von inkrementellen Policy-Wandel. Anhand der innovativen Rentenreform von Bundesarbeitsminister Walter Riester wird vorgeschlagen, Rückkoppelungseffekte von Policies auf das Handeln politischer Akteure zu betrachten, und Politik damit dynamisch zu betrachten. Theoretisch wird dies mit dem Bedarf an sozialintegrativer Wirkungen von Policies begründet. Die Hauptthese des Beitrages ist, dass Sequenzorientierung es der Policy-Forschung ermöglichen würde, endogene Ursachen für innovativen Policy-Wandel zu identifizieren.

Suggested Citation

  • Trampusch, Christine, 2005. "Sequenzorientierte Policy-Analyse: Warum die Rentenreform von Walter Riester nicht an Reformblockaden scheiterte," MPIfG Working Paper 05/3, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgw:053
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/44290/1/550480617.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Schulze-Cleven, Tobias, 2006. "The Politics of an Experimental Society: Creating Labor Market Flexibility in Europe," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt92x040tt, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.

    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:zbw:mpifgw:053. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mpigfde.html .

    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.