Flexicurity: A contested concept at the core of the European labour market debate

Intereconomics

Volumn 43, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 92-98

  Keune, Maarten ^a  

^a Employment and Social Policies Unit of the Research Department at the European Trade Union Institute   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 42349094164     PISSN: 00205346     EISSN: 1613964X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10272-008-0244-0     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. F. Scharpf: Negative and positive integration in the political economy of European welfare states, in: G. Marks, F. Scharpf, P. Schmitter, W. Streeck (eds.): Governance in the European Union, London, 1996, SAGE Publications; F. SchaCpf: The European social model: coping with the challenges of diversity, in: Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 40, No. 4, 2002, pp. 645-670.
2. J. Goetschy: Taking stock of social Europe: Is there such a thing as a Community social model?, in: M. Jepsen, A. Serrano Pascual (eds.): Unwrapping the European Social Model, Bristol 2006, Policy Press.
3. M. Keune: EU Enlargement and Social Standards: Exporting the European Social Model?, in: J. Orbie, L. Tortell (eds.): The EU and the Social Dimension of Globalisation, GARNET 'Europe in the World' series, London and New York, forthcoming, Routledge.
4. L. Hooghe, G. Marks: The Making of A Polity. The Struggle over European Integration, in: H. Kitschelt, G. Marks, P. Lange, J. Stephens (eds.): Continuity and Change in Contemporary Capitalism, Cambridge 1999, Cambridge University Press.
5. Ibid.
6. F. Scharpf: Negative and positive intgration..., op. cit., p. 15.
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid.
9. F. Scharpf: The European social model..., op. cit.
10. M. Keune: The European model and enlargement, in: M. Jepsen, A. Serrano Pascual (eds.), op. cit.
11. J. Zeitlin: A Decade of Innovation in EU Governance: The European Employment Strategy, the Open Method of Coordination, and the Lisbon Strategy, Paper prepared for the Portuguese Presidency of the European Union, June 2007.
12. M. Mailand: Coalitions and Policy Coordination - Revision and Impact of the European Employment Strategy, Copenhagen 2006, DJØF Forlagene.
13. J. Zeitlin: The Open Method of Coordination in Action. Theoretical Promise, Empirical Realities, Reform Strategies, in: J. Zeitlin, P. Pochet, L. Magnusson (eds.): The Open Method of Coordination in Action: The European Employment and Social Inclusion Strategies, Brussels 2005, Peter Lang, p. 448.
14. M. Keune, M. Jepsen: Not balanced and hardly new. The European Commission's quest for flexicurity, in: H. Jørgensen, P. K. Madsen (eds.): Flexicurity and Beyond, Copenhagen 2007, DJØF Publishing; There is little agreement in the literature concerning the extent to which the EES is achieving its objectives and concerning its actual in. uence on national policies and policymaking processes. There seems to be agreement on the powerful position of the Commission as agenda setter and disseminator of cognitive models and concepts. The direct in. uence on national policymaking is much more disputed. For general discussions of the EES, see e.g. M. Mailand, op. cit.
15. A. Watt: Reform of the European Employment Strategy aftAr five years: a change of course or merely of presentation?, in: European Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2004, pp. 117-137.
16. B. Casey: The OECD Jobs Strategy and the European Employment Strategy: Two Views of the Labour Market and the Welfare State, in: European Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 10, No. 3, 2004, pp. 329-352.
17. More speci. cally on the OMC employment, see J. Zeitlin, P. Pochet, L. Magnusson (eds.), op. cit.
18. A. Schüttpelz: Policy Transfer and pre-accession Europeanization of the Czech employment policy, Discussion paper SP III 2004-2001, Berlin 2004, WZB.
19. K. Jacobsson: Soft regulation and the subtle transformation of states: the case of EU employment policy, in: Journal of European Social Policy, Vol. 14, No. 4, 2004, pp. 355-370.
20. J. Zeitlin: A Decade of Innovation..., op. cit.
21. T. Wilthagen, F. Tros: The concept of "flexicurity": A new approach to regulating employment and labour markets, in: Transfer, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2004, pp.166-186.
22. W. Van Oorschot: Flexible work and flexicurity policies in the Netherlands. Trends and Experiences, in: Transfer, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2004, pp. 208-225.
23. P. Madsen: The Danish model of flexicurity: A paradise - with some snakes, in: Hedva Sarfati, Giuliano Bonoli (eds.): Labour market and social protection reforms in international perspective: Parallel or converging tracks? Aldershot 2002, Ashgate, pp. 243-265.
24. It is questionable, though, to what extent the flexicurity models of the two countries have led to successful labour market developments. Dutch employment and unemployment rates are favourable largely because of a high share of part-time employment (now close to 50%): When calculated in full-time equivalents the Dutch employment rate is actually similar to the German rate and below that of countries like Spain, France or Greece (WRR: Investeren in Werkzekerheid, Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid rapport No. 77, Amsterdam 2007, Amsterdam University Press. Table 2.2). And in the Danish case the importance of the country's flexicurity model seems overrated. Indeed, it is inevitably an over-simplistic undertaking to seek to explain labour market success or failure solely by the type of labour market regulations. More complex approaches, taking into account elements like macroeconomic conditions, wage policies, fiscal policies, industrial relations systems, are required. For examples of such more complex explanations of the Danish success and revival since the mid-1990s.
25. See J. Campbell, J. Hall, O. Pedersen (eds.): National identity and the varieties of capitalism: The Danish experience, in: Montreal & Kingston, London, Ithaca 2006, McGill-Queen's University Press.
26. C. Larsen: Policy paradigms and cross-national policy (mis)learning from the Danish employment miracle, in: Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 9, No. 5, October 2002, pp. 715-735.
27. OECD: The OECD Jobs Study, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris 1994.
28. OECD: OECD Employment Outlook. Boosting jobs and income, Organisation dor Economic Co-operation and Developmant, Paris 2006, pp. 96-100.
29. OECD: OECD Employment Outlook, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris 1999.
30. T. Wilthagen, F. Tros, op. cit., p. 169.
31. P. Auer: Protected mobility for employment anL decent work: labour market security in a globalised world, in: Employment Strategy Papers, No. 1, 2005, ILO, Geneva.
32. CEC: Integrated guidelines for growth and jobs (2008-2010) including a Commission recommendation on the broad guidelines for the economic policies of the Member States and the Community (under Article 99 of the EC Treaty) and a proposal for a Council decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (under Article 128 of the EC Treaty), Brussels 2007, http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/pdf/ european-dimension-200712-annual-progressreport/ 200712-annual-report-integrated-guidelines_en.pdf; The attention paid to the relation between flexibility and security is, however, not a novelty in the EES. In the first employment guidelines of 1998, the social partners were already invited to negotiate agreements to modernise the organisation of work with the aim of making undertakings productive and competitive and achieving the required balance between flexibility and security. Also, in the 2003 guidelines it was argued that the right balance between flexibility and security will help support the competitiveness of firms, increase quality and productivity at work and facilitate the adaptation of firms and workers to economic change. Cf. Council of the European Union: Council Decision of 22 July 2003 on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States, OJ L 197 of 5 August 2003, pp.13-21, http://europa.eu/eurlex/pri/en/oj/dat/ 2003/l_197/l_19720030805en00130021.pdf. Finally, in the 2005 guidelines, guideline 21 called upon the member states to promote flexibility combined with employment security and reduce labour market segmentation, having due regard to the role of the social partners. Cf. Council of the European Union: Council Decision of 12 July 2005 on Guidelines for the employment policies of the member states, OJ L 205 of 6 August 2005, pp. 21-27, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2005/l_205/ l_20520050806en00210027.pdf.
33. CEC: Communication from the Commission..., op. cit., p. 4.
34. Ibid.
35. M. Jepsen, A. Serrano Pascual: Deconstructing the European Social Model, in: M. Jepsen, A. Serrano Pascual (eds.), op. cit.
36. For a dTtailed analysis see M. Keune: Flexicurity: the new cure for Europe's labour market problems?, in: C. Degryse, P. Pochet eds.): Social Developments in the European Union 2007, Brussels 2008, ETUI-REHS/ OSE.
37. M. Keune, M. Jepsen, op. cit.
38. CEC: Recommendation for a Council Recommendation on the 2008 up-date of the broad guidelines for the economic policies of the Member States and the Community and on the implementation of Member States' employment policies, Brussels, 11 December 2007, http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/ pdf/european-dimension-200712-annual-progress-report/ 200712-countries-speci.c-recommendations_en.pdf.
39. Ibid.
40. M. Höpner, A. Schäfer: A New Phase of European Integration. Organized Capitalisms in Post-Ricardian Europe, MPIfG Discussion Paper 07/4, Cologne 2007, Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung.
41. Council of the European Union: Council conclusions. Towards Common Principles of Flexicurity, adopted on 5/6 December 2007.
42. Ibid., p. 5, emphasis added.
43. European Parliament: Report on common principles of flexicurity 2007/ 2209(INI), Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, Brussels 2007, 15.11.2007.
44. Ibid.
45. Ibid.
46. BusinessEurope: EurApe's social reality: a stocktaking, BusinessEurope Position Paper, 2008, http://www.businesseurope.eu/Content/Default.asp
47. Intervention by Mr. Philippe De Buck, BusinessEurope Secretary General at the Commission Stakeholder Conference on Flexicurity, 20 April 2007.
48. ETUC: The Flexicurity debate and the Challenges for the Trade Union Movement, Brussels 2007, ETUC.
49. Ibid.