Suchergebnisse

The Israeli citizenship regime is a moving target. Some basic social, ethnic and political divisions which are captured by the categories of nationality, ethnicity, class, gender and religiosity are redefined by day-to-day administrative, regulatory and political processes. In these ways, Israeli citizenship is not so much a matter of constitutional debates on abstract rights of all or parts of the citizenry, it is also and more importantly, a manifestation of regulatory processes. The basic divisions are explored here with regard to a newly defined "credit ranking" regime which has been constructed by various state actors during the past two decades. This regime promotes the establishment of a new kind of citizenship, a financial citizenship. As part of its activity, each citizen is categorized according to his or her 'financial worth', and their personal financial profile is constructed as a device for identifying, locating and classifying targeted populations. Under these information markets citizens are no longer seen as individual customers, but as varying degrees of commercial risks and revenues. The new regime is expected to enhance competition in the highly centralized banking sector and encourage more competitions in this field. In this sense, these market-building initiatives are part of an extension of the credit based culture (or Financialization) of Israeli citizenship. The research, which is the first academic research on this issue in Israel, analyzes the policy process and extends the discussion around it by analyzing the economic, social and political aspects of Israeli citizenship in general and regarding minority and disadvantaged groups in particular.

This unique Handbook offers the most up-to-date and comprehensive, state-of-the-art reviews of the politics of regulation. It presents and discusses the core theories and concepts of regulation in response to the rise of the regulatory state and regulatory capitalism, and in the context of the 'golden age of regulation'. Its ten sections include forty nine chapters covering issues as diverse and varied as theories of regulation; historical perspectives on regulation; regulation of old and new media; rise regulation, enforcement and compliance; better regulation; civil regulation; European regu

The promotion of European Citizenship and participation of citizens in EU decision making are key aims of the European Union. However, while considerable attention has been focused on citizenship in the political sphere, less has been said about the meaning of citizenship in the economic, the social, and the financial spheres. Following the literature on the financialization of the everyday, this study focuses on the meaning of citizenship in the financial sphere. We illustrate the image of an ideal European financial citizen, as reflected in (and shaped by) EU regulation. We compare this image in two EU directives, on credit (2008) and on payment accounts (2014), and highlight the influences which shaped it, with a particular focus on new forms of citizen participation. The paper argues the image of the ideal financial citizen reflected in these directives is that of a confident, empowered and active citizen, 'making markets work'. At the same time, however, this image is complemented by the image of a vulnerable citizen, both shielded from the market and encouraged to participate in it. Compared to political citizenship, financial citizenship appears to be more demanding, requiring high levels of human capital, time and attention to detail. Citizenship in the financial sphere is more inclusive, based on the will to participate in the market, as opposed to the more exclusive nature of political citizenship.

This article examines the outcome of the EU policy process from various comparative perspectives in an effort to distinguish the "net effects" of EU membership and EU-level regimes from more general - perhaps global - processes of change. It argues that the major features of liberalization would have been diffused to most if not all member states even in the absence of the European Commission, other agents of supranationalism, and EU-level intergovernmental commitment to liberalize. This is not to suggest that Europeanization does not matter but that it matters in less obvious and perhaps in less critical ways than is frequently assumed. The argument is supported by comparative empirical analysis of the spatial and temporal diffusion of liberalization since the 1980s and of nationalization since the late 19th century.

This article examines the outcome of the EU policy process from various comparative perspectives in an effort to distinguish the "net effects" of EU membership and EU-level regimes from more general - perhaps global - processes of change. It argues that the major features of liberalization would have been diffused to most if not all member states even in the absence of the European Commission, other agents of supranationalism, and EU-level intergovernmental commitment to liberalize. This is not to suggest that Europeanization does not matter but that it matters in less obvious and perhaps in less critical ways than is frequently assumed. The argument is supported by comparative empirical analysis of the spatial and temporal diffusion of liberalization since the 1980s and of nationalization since the late 19th century.

The role of regulation and the regulatory state in social policy, redistribution, and the reforms of the welfare state are increasingly important but often underestimated and misunderstood. These problems are evident in Majone's highly influential work where the regulatory state and the 'positive' state stand as two alternative monomorphic forms of state. This article offers a polymorphic alternative where the regulatory state may come to the rescue of the welfare state, allowing independent extension, retrenchment, and stagnation of welfare via social regulation. The article extends a regulatory governance perspective into the core of the welfare state, clarifies the relations between fiscal and regulatory instruments, and demonstrates that the boundaries of the regulatory state are wider than are usually understood. It turns our understanding of the welfare state on its head, highlighting first the less visible regulatory layer, and then the more visible layer of fiscal transfers.

This article assesses the "odyssey" of the regulatory state from a mereAmerican thin and monomorphic concept to a global, thick and polymorphic concept that captures some of the more important features of the capitalist–democratic state. The burgeoning literature on the regulatory state presents a confusing number of images and characterizations that are increasingly conflicting, and it too often presents a monomorphic conception of the regulatory state. The article suggests that we need to define the regulatory state rather than merely characterizing it. And we need to do so in a manner that will allow us to move beyond the specific institutional features of a certain era, nation, region, or sector. Rather than contrasting regulation with distribution and redistribution, and contrasting the regulatory state with other forms of state, I treat the regulatory state as one morph of the polymorphic capitalist state, a morph that may help constitute other morphs (such as the welfare state and the developmental state) instead of replacing them. This in turn may help remove the artificial walls between the regulatory scholarly community and other social scientists, and promote more fruitful social science.