The corporatist-pluralist debate is explored as it applies to the Federal Republic of Germany. It is argued that the Federal Republic has an ‘accommodationalist’ political structure in which elements that resemble both corporatism and pluralism may be found. Corporatism and pluralism really explain two fundamentally different phenomenon. It is implicitly and explicitly argued that the mutual exclusivity of corporatism and pluralism, widely taken for granted in the literature, is more apparent than real. The apparent tension between the two models results from the epistemological parameters that are engaged in the process of model building. The empirical basis for the discussion stems from an in-depth analysis of present industrial policies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenC, 1988, “The politics of meso-economic change: Banks, industry organizations, regional governments and trade unions as institutional actors”, paper presented at the meeting of the Southern Political Science Association, 3–5 November; copy available from the author, Department of Political Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA
2.
AtkinsonM MColemanW D, 1985, “Corporatism and industrial policy”, in Organized Interests and the State Ed. CawsonA, (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA) pp 22–44
3.
BergerR, 1976Forschung-Politik-Gesellschaft: Forschungs- und Innovationspolitik als Ideologie und Gesellschaftspolitik (Universitätsverlag Erlangen, Erlangen)
4.
BoschGSeifertHSpiesB-G, 1984Arbeitsmarkt und gewerkschaftliche Interessenpolitik (Bund, Köln)
5.
CawsonA, (Ed.), 1985Organized Interests and the State (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA)
6.
CawsonA, 1986Corporatism and Political Theory (Basil Blackwell, Oxford)
7.
CohenYPavoncelloF, 1987, “Corporatism and pluralism: A critique of Schmitter's typology”British Journal of Political Science17117–122
8.
CoxA, 1988, “The old and new testaments of corporatism: Is it a political form or a method of policy making?”Political Studies36309–315
9.
DittrichWFuchsGRuchtDWatzlawczikG-U, 1989Ansätze innovativer Arbeitspolitik in München (Wisslit, Konstanz)
10.
FuchsG, 1989, “Implementing ISDN technology in Europe: The example of West Germany”, paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Atlanta, 31 August-3 September; copy available from the author
11.
GrantWStreeckW, 1985, “Large firms and the representation of business interests in the United Kingdom and West German construction industry”, in Organized Interests and the State Ed. CawsonA, (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA) pp 145–173
12.
HancockM D, 1989West Germany: The Politics of Democratic Corporatism (Chatham House, Chatham, NJ)
13.
HauffVScharpfF W, 1975Modernisierung der Volkswirtschaft. Technologiepolitik als Strukturpolitik (Europäische Verlagsanstalt, Köln)
14.
JessopB, 1979, “Corporatism, parliamentarism and social democracy”, in Trends Toward Corporatist Intermediation Eds SchmitterPLehmbruchG, (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA) pp 147–177
15.
KatzensteinP J, 1987Politics and Policy in West Germany: The Growth of a Semi-sovereign State (Temple University Press, Philadelphia, PA)
16.
LehmbruchG, 1979, “Consociational democracy, class conflict and the new corporatism”, in Trends Toward Corporatist Intermediation Eds SchmitterPLehmbruchG, (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA) pp 53–62
17.
LehmbruchG, 1989, “Wirtschaftspolitischer Strategiewechsel und die institutionelle Verknüpfung von Staat und Gesellschaft”, in Macht und Ohnmacht politischer Institutionen Ed. HartwichH-H, (Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen) pp 222–235
18.
MaierH E, 1987Das Modell Baden-Württemberg. Über institutionelle Voraussetzungen differenzierter Qualitäts-produktion—Eine Skizze (Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung, Berlin)
19.
MarksG, 1986, “Neocorporatism and incomes policy in Western Europe and North America”Comparative Politics18253–277
20.
PahlR EWinklerJ T, 1974, “The coming corporatism”New Society10(October)
21.
PanitchL, 1979, “The development of corporatism in liberal democracies”, in Trends Toward Corporatist Intermediation Eds SchmitterPLehmbruchG, (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA) pp 119–146
22.
PryorF L, 1988, “Corporatism as an economic system: A review essay”Journal of Comparative Economics12317–344
23.
RhodesM, 1985, “Organized interest and industrial crisis management: Restructuring the steel industry in West Germany, Italy, and France”, in Organized Interests and the State Ed. CawsonA, (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA) pp 192–221
24.
RuchtD, 1988, “Gegenöffentlichkeit und Gegenexperten: Zur Institutionalisierung des Widerspruchs in Politik und Recht”, in Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie Sonderheft 2 (Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen)
25.
RuchtDFuchsG, 1989, “Technological regulation and technology assessment: Interventions by parliament, administration, and judiciary”, in Rechtspolitologie und Rechtspolitik: Jahresschrift für Rechtspolitologie, 1989 Eds GörlitzAVoigtR, (Centaurus, Pfaffenweiler) pp 47–79
26.
SchmitterP, 1974, “Still the century of corporatism?”Review of Politics3685–126
27.
SchmitterP, 1979, “Modes of interest intermediation and models of societal change in Western Europe”, in Trends Toward Corporatist Intermediation Eds SchmitterPLehmbruchG, (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA) pp 7–52
28.
SchütteG, 1986, “Regionale Technologieförderung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland”Bremer Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik9471–476
29.
SturmR, 1989, “The industrial policy debate in the Federal Republic of Germany”, in The Changing Agenda of West German Public Policy Ed. BulmerS, (Dartmouth, Brookfield, VT) pp 155–174
30.
SüllowB, 1983Korporative Repräsentation der Gewerkschaften (Campus, Frankfurt)
31.
WilliamsonP J, 1985Varieties of Corporatism (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
32.
WilliamsonP J, 1989Corporatism in Perspective: An Introductory Guide to Corporatist Theory (Sage, London)
33.
WillkeH, 1983, “Der Staat am Verhandlungstisch: Das Beispiel der Konzertierten Aktion”, in Abschied vom Recht? Ed. VoigtR, (Suhrkamp, Frankfurt) pp 298–315
