Search results

Objective of this paper was to analyze differences in labour market performance in various labour market regimes during and after the latest recession. Different labour market regimes had specific paths of adjustments to recessional macroeconomic shocks, which can be related to underlying labour market institutions, as well as other institutional characteristics. Reaction of European labour markets on economic crisis 2008‐2009 varied across the Member States. Classification of countries was primarily based on principal component analysis performed in order to capture two main labour market features: flexibility and security. These features are a basis of the "flexicurity" concept and they are mainly determined by labour market institutions. Key determinants of flexibility and security balance in the labour market are: employment protection legislation, unemployment benefits system and active labour market policies. Within the labour market regimes results have been rather uneven, but we might say that Nordic and Continental regime tend to have had better labour market performances compared to Anglo‐Saxon and Mediterranean. However, one must be careful with definite conclusions, since a lot of other factors, beside labour market institutions, influenced labour market performances.

Die Arbeit analysiert den Einfluss von Arbeitsmarktregimen auf das Sparverhalten privater Haushalte in Deutschland und Großbritannien aus einer vergleichenden Perspektive. Im Zentrum steht dabei die Frage, ob das Sparvermögen abhängig beschäftigter Personen durch ihre Angst vor Arbeitslosigkeit beeinflusst wird. Die Untersuchung widmet sich dem Einfluss von Institutionen auf individuelles Verhalten in unterschiedlichen nationalen Kontexten: geringere Dynamik des deutschen Arbeitsmarktes – operationalisiert über die durchschnittliche Verweildauer in Arbeitslosigkeit – und entsprechend höhere individuelle Angst vor Arbeitslosigkeit tragen demnach zur Erklärung bei, warum die aggregierten Sparquoten privater Haushalte in kontinental-europäischen deutlich höher sind als in angelsächsischen Wohlfahrtsstaaten. Die theoretische Fundierung auf der Mikroebene liefert ein Buffer-Stock Saving-Modell, wonach sich Individuen gegen Einkommensvolatilität durch das Anhäufen von Sparvermögen absichern (Vorsichtssparen). Anhand von Panel-Daten abhängig beschäftigter Personen in Deutschland (SOEP) und Großbritannien (BHPS) ergibt sich unter Kontrolle für Konsumpräferenzen und weitere Einflussfaktoren in Deutschland bei Einverdiener-Haushalten ein Vorsichtsmotiv, das durchschnittlich einem Drittel des liquiden Vermögens entspricht, wohingegen sich kein vergleichbarer Effekt in Großbritannien zweigt. ; The dissertation analyzes the influence of labor market regimes in Germany and the United Kingdom on private household saving from a comparative perspective. The main question is whether the amount of saving of employees is related to the perception of their individual unemployment risk. The analysis focuses on the influence of institutions on the micro level in different national contexts: lower dynamics of the German labor market – indicated by the average unemployment duration – and consequently higher individual fear of job loss seem to be part of the explanation why in continental welfare states the private saving rates are substantially higher than in their Anglo-Saxon counterparts. The theoretical foundation on the micro level is a buffer-stock saving model, which assumes that individuals insure against income volatility by the accumulation of wealth, i.e. precautionary saving. Using panel data on employees in Germany and the UK from the SOEP and the BHPS reveals that, when controlling for consumption preferences and other aspects, the average amount of precautionary saving in Germany is roughly a third of the liquid wealth in households with one earner – while there is no comparable effect in the UK.

Two-sided network effects in card payment systems are analysed under different market structures, e.g., competition, one-sided monopoly, bilateral monopoly and duopoly; with and without an interchange fee; for the so-called Baxter's case of non-strategic merchants. A partial ranking of market structures according to their welfare effects is provided. Some support is found for the policy adopted by the EU Commission in the competition law case concerning Visa's interchange fees.

The aim of the article is to discuss the differences between the labour market regimes in Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland in a historical perspective. The foundations of the regimes were laid more than 100 years ago. Differences in labour market institutions and practices are in fact substantial, particularly as regards the role of the state in collective bargaining and conflict resolution, but also in connection with incomes policy. While the state for a long time has played a significant role in Denmark and Norway, mainly concerning conflict resolution, and in Finland since the 1960s in the form of comprehensive incomes policy agreements, a doctrine of freedom of the labour market from state intervention has dominated in Sweden. These divergences can to a great extent be explained by differences in the democratization process and the organizational structure, particularly in the trade unions, which reflect different timing and structure in the process of industrialization. 'Path dependency' has been strong in the North. The main elements of the four national labour market regimes are still there, such as trade union fragmentation and strong instruments for conflict resolution in Denmark and Norway, relatively advanced social partner responsibility for bargaining outcomes and conflict resolution in Sweden (although sometimes against the background of threats of state intervention), and almost continuous tripartite consultation in Finland as a stabilizing element in a much more turbulent political environment than in the neighbouring countries. There are no clear tendencies towards convergence between the Nordic labour market regimes.