Campaigning on expertise: how the OECD framed EU welfare and labour market policies -and why success could trigger failure Dostal The article first sketches the increased Europeanization of welfare and labour market policies throughout the 1990s. The second part examines how international organizations such as the OECD influence agenda-setting at different levels of policy-making by providing a controlled environment for the creation, development and dissemination of political discourse. The OECD's influence on policy-making can be explained through an analysis of the specific features of its 'organizational discourse', dominated by liberal economists, and characterized by the exclusion of interest groups. The third part takes the OECD Jobs Study (1994)as an exemplary case of its organizational discourse and demonstrates how the OECD utilized this study to bridge the gap between abstract liberal economic beliefs and concrete agenda-setting efforts. It underlines the high degree of influence of the Jobs Study on the EU's subsequent European Employment Strategy (EES). The conclusion poses the question: to what extent could the OECD's 'campaigning on expertise' potentially weaken its long-term institutional interests if the EU chooses to 'take over' OECD discourses wholesale -thereby leaving less organizational space for the OECD in the future?
This article outlines the rise and fall of the 'Patriotic Europeans against the Islamisation of the West' (Pegida), a right-wing populist street movement that originated in the city of Dresden in October 2014 and peaked in January 2015. The Pegida movement combined fear of 'Islamisation' with general criticism of Germany's political class and the mainstream media. This ambivalent and largely undefined political profile proved its strength in mobilising a significant minority of right-wing citizens in the local context of Dresden and the federal state of Saxony, but generally failed to spill over to other parts of Germany. The social profile of the Pegida movement, which included 'ordinary citizens' with centre-right to far-right attitudes, points to significant overlap between general disenchantment of the political centre ground in Germany with the political system, as outlined in recent sociological research, and the ability of a largely leaderless populism to mobilise in the streets.
The global threat of the coronavirus pandemic has forced policy makers to react quickly with totally new policy‐making approaches under conditions of uncertainty. This article focuses on such crisis‐driven policy learning, examining how the experiences of China and South Korea as early responder states influenced the subsequent coronavirus crisis management in Germany. The first reaction of the German core executive was the quick concentration of decision‐making power at the top of the political hierarchy. Asserting the prerogatives of the executive included the radical simplification of the relationship between politics, law and science. State actors took emergency measures by recourse to a single piece of legislation—the ‘infection protection law’ (Infektionsschutzgesetz)—overriding other elements of the legal order. They also limited the government’s use of scientific expertise to a small number of advisors, thereby cutting short debates about the appropriateness or otherwise of the government’s crisis measures. Finally, German actors failed to understand that some of the earlier Chinese and Korean responses required a precondition—namely public willingness to sacrifice privacy for public health—that is absent in the German case.
The 2017 German federal election delivered dramatic electoral decline of the two traditional main parties, the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) and the Social Democratic Party (SPD), who had governed Germany in a 'grand coalition' government since 2013. The main reason for this outcome was the decision by Chancellor Angela Merkel to open Germany's borders for refugees and migrants, an unprecedented policy that abandoned border controls and remained in place between September 2015 and March 2016. This article focuses on how the refugee and migration problem subsequently turned into a wedge issue, splitting most German political parties and handing a major election victory to the main critics of Merkel's decision, namely the rightist Alternative for Germany (AfD) and the right-wing liberals of the Free Democratic Party (FDP). Rather than explaining these developments in isolation, the article highlights how past welfare state retrenchment and fear over future economic prosperity make significant groups of the electorate, including former supporters of left-of-centre parties, lose confidence in the ability of the political system to deliver stability and social integration.
In this paper, we investigate the link between windfall gains and losses of income associated with commodity exports and economic performance in a panel of 45 sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries over the period from 1990 to 2019. Windfall gains and losses of income are measured in terms of fluctuations in a country-specific commodity terms of trade (CTOT) index in which each commodity is weighted by the ratio of exports of that commodity in the country’s gross domestic product (GDP). The CTOT index therefore reflects the commodity export specialisation for individual countries. The data on CTOT are taken from the International Monetary Fund. Additionally, we use changes in real GDP per capita as our SSA economic performance measure. We employ a random coefficient model that yields individual estimates for each of the countries included in the analysis. Our approach is based on the assumption that the effect of windfall gains and losses on real GDP per capita growth varies across different SSA countries. Our main conclusion can be elaborated as follows: first, natural resources have undoubtedly contributed to higher economic growth in SSA countries since 1990. Second, when SSA countries are analytically divided into two groups depending on their commodity export specialisation, we find that resource-rich countries—in particular oil rich—are the best economic growth performers during the observation period. Finally, we find that windfall gains from commodity exports are not significantly associated with increased real GDP per capita growth in most agriculture-exporting countries.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.