Suchergebnisse

"Skills and Inequality studies the political economy of education and training reforms from the perspective of comparative welfare state research. Highlighting the striking similarities between established worlds of welfare capitalism and educational regimes, Marius R. Busemeyer argues that both have similar political origins in the postwar period. He identifies partisan politics and different varieties of capitalism as crucial factors shaping choices about the institutional design of post-secondary education. The political and institutional survival of vocational education and training as an alternative to academic higher education is then found to play an important role in the later development of skill regimes. Busemeyer also studies the effects of educational institutions on social inequality and patterns of public opinion on the welfare state and education. Adopting a multi-method approach, this book combines historical case studies of Sweden, Germany, and the United Kingdom with quantitative analyses of macro-level aggregate data and micro-level survey data"--

Marius R. Busemeyer beschreibt die wesentlichen Unterschiede von Bildungssystemen in westlichen OECD-Demokratien. Er stellt methodologische und theoretische Zugänge zur Analyse von Bildungspolitik vor. Anhand konkreter Fallbeispiele werden die Besonderheiten des deutschen Bildungssystems herausgearbeitet und in einem internationalen Kontext verortet. Darüber hinaus diskutiert der Autor die Wechselwirkungen zwischen Bildungs- und Sozialpolitik.

In der OECD-Welt wird etwa ein Viertel des gesamten Bruttoinlandsprodukts und knapp die Hälfte der Staatsausgaben für den Sozialstaat, also die Sicherung gegen zentrale Lebensrisiken, verwendet. Deutschland gehört dabei zur Spitzengruppe, widmet dem jedoch kaum Forschungsenergien. Die Leistungen des Sozialstaats sind für eine immer größer werdende Zahl von Menschen überlebenswichtig und seine Reformen prägen heute den politischen Alltag. Angesichts seiner vielfältigen Herausforderungen – etwa durch den Wandel der Bildungs- und Arbeitswelt sowie der Familienstrukturen und durch massive demographische Veränderungen – muss dem Sozialstaat künftig nachhaltig größere Aufmerksamkeit in Wissenschaft und Forschung gelten. Andernfalls wird »Sozialpolitik im Blindflug« normal und Sicherungserfolg zufällig. In dieser Denkschrift werden die anstehenden Herausforderungen bilanziert und auf breiter Front neue Perspektiven für eine thematische und analytische Neuausrichtung der Sozialpolitikforschung vorgeschlagen.

The literature notes an increasing trend towards labor market stratification and dualization in coordinated market economies such as Germany. Labor market insiders and insider-oriented cross-class coalitions are usually identified as the driving forces behind these developments. This paper adds to this perspective by identifying different varieties of cross-class coalitions. On the basis of three case studies from the field of vocational training policy in Germany, two kinds of coalitions are identified: a conservative cross-class coalition of unions and employers that is against state intrusion into the domain of firm-based training, and a segmentalist cross-class coalition of social democratic government actors and business that is promoting an incremental flexibilization of the system against union opposition. In an alternating manner, both coalitions block the large-scale change that would be the most effective in countering dualization. Hence, they tacitly support dualization by drift.

This paper uses an original dataset from a survey conducted in Switzerland in 2007 to explore the dynamics of education policy preferences. This issue has largely been neglected so far as most studies on welfare state attitudes do not look at preferences for education. We argue that education policy preferences vary along two dimensions: the distribution of resources across different sectors of the education system (i.e. vocational training vs. academic education) and the level of investment in education both from public and private sources. With regard to the former, the findings suggest that individual educational experience matters most, i.e., individuals prefer to concentrate resources on those educational sectors that are closest to their own educational background. With regard to the second dimension, we find that affiliation to partisan ideologies matters much more than other variables. Proponents of the left demand more investment both from the state as well as from the private sector and oppose individual tuition fees.

This paper builds on the arguments developed by Carles Boix (1997, 1998) about partisan differences in supply-side oriented strategies. The original Boix model argues that social democrats in government prefer to increase public investment in human capital formation, while conservatives are opposed to this. The model is presented and subjected to a comprehensive empirical test. It is argued that it is necessary to determine the dynamics of spending in each educational sector separately. In addition, economic internationalization is not treated as a background variable as with Boix (1997, 1998), but fully included in the analysis. Finally, instead of relying on a simple dichotomy of leftist and rightist parties, the impact of government participation on the part of social democrats, Christian democrats and conservatives is analysed. The empirical test supports the Boix model only on a very general level. Social democrats are found for the most part to increase spending on higher education, which is at odds with the predictions of the Boix model and partisan theory in general. The paper concludes with a discussion of the consequence of the findings for the development of partisan theory.