代写论文 福利国家

| 24-3月-2013 | 代写论文

代写论文

Both avoid simplistic notions of globalisation and engage with the implications of such changes for the decommodifying effects of welfare states. Jessop theorises the displacement of the ‘KeynesianWelfare State’ (KWS) by the ‘Schumpeterian Workfare State’ (SWS) using post-Fordist categories. The KWS was epitomised by the pursuit of full employment through demand management in relatively closed national economies. By contrast the SWS seeks to promote product, process, organisational, and market innovation in open economies in order to strengthen as far as possible the structural competitiveness of the national economy by intervening on

the supply side; and to subordinate social policy to the needs of labour market flexibility and/or to the constraints of international competition (Jessop, 1994, p. 24). The Schumpeterian element of this strategy is its emphasis on innovation and flexibility. The competitive strength of national economies within the emerging global economy increasingly depends on ‘guiding supply-side developments rather than trying in vain to manage the demand side’ (Jessop, 1993, p. 20). Whilst

concern with training and labour market functioning has long been a feature of state intervention, ‘flexibility has been accorded greater weight and acquired new connotations in both fields’. Changes in social policy go beyond ‘the mere retrenchment of social welfare to restructure and subordinate it to market forces’ (Jessop, 1993, p. 27). More recently, Jessop (2000, p. 174) argued that ‘a shift is occurring from a Keynesian welfare national state (KWNS) to a Schumpeterian workfare post-national regime (SWPR)’. This reconceptualisation acknowledges both the increased significance of ‘spatial scales’ other than the national, and the increased importance of ‘non-state delivery mechanisms in providing state-sponsored economic and social policies’ (Jessop, 2000, p. 174).

代写论文

全球化既避免简单概念和参与这些变化的影响decommodifying福利国家的影响。索普理论的“keynesianwelfare状态位移”(KWS)的“熊彼特式的福利国家”(SWS)使用后福特主义的类别。KWS是集中体现在充分就业的追求通过需求管理在相对封闭的国家。相比之下,SWS旨在促进产品,过程,组织,和市场创新的开放经济体为了尽可能通过干预对国民经济结构竞争力加强

供应方面;和下属的社会政策,劳动力市场灵活性的需求和/或国际竞争的约束(索普,1994,p. 24)。这一战略的元素是熊彼特的创新和灵活性的重视。新兴国家的经济在全球经济中的竞争力越来越取决于供给方面的指导发展而不是妄图管理需求方(索普,1993,p. 20)。虽然

培训和劳动力市场运作的问题一直是国家干预的特征,“灵活性已经给予更大的重量和在领域获得新的内涵”。在社会政策的变化超出了“社会福利重组并服从它的市场势力的单纯的紧缩(索普,1993,p. 27)。最近,索普(2000,p. 174)认为,“一个转变正在发生从凯恩斯主义福利国家(kwns)一个熊彼特主义工作福利后国家的政权(swpr)”。在此reconceptualisation承认的增加意义的空间尺度”以外的其他国家,并提供国家资助的经济政策和社会政策的重要性上升的非传递机制”(索普,2000,p. 174)。

相关的论文代写的话题