Experimenting with Price: Crafting the New Social Contract in Finland

Abstract

This article is concerned with price and pricing in the context of finance led neoliberal reform. It considers the sentiment often encountered in accounts of such reform that price instability is the outcome of the retreat of the state from the regulation of price and its externalization in the competitive play of the market. Drawing on the case of contemporary Finland, and especially a major round of government reform, we show how unstable prices are anchored in a set of coordinating mechanisms that form part of the infrastructure of a reorganizing state. We elaborate, then, a state infrastructure for the coordination of price instability and do so for the price and pricing of labour. This infrastructure is, however, not one that is coherent, centralized or integrated, but is dispersed and disintegrated and operates on multiple scales.

Affective Institutional Work and Ordoliberal Governance: Gender Equality in Parliamentary Debates on the Competitiveness Pact in Finland

“…For a policy measure to come into force, reaching consensus in the tripartite framework is crucial. While this was also the case with the Competitiveness Pact, here, the government took on an exceptional leadership role and tried to dictate the formulation and implementation of this labour market policy (see also Adkins et al, 2019).…”

“…In the aftermath of these crises, the global neoliberal project gained legitimacy, thus facilitating the paradigm shift from the welfare state to the competition state (Kantola & Kananen, 2013; see also Elomäki et al, 2016). The Sipilä government in particular moved the state towards ordoliberal governance (Adkins, Kortesoja, Mannevuo, & Ylöstalo, 2019;Kantola & Kananen, 2013). As showcased in the formulation of the obligatory laws of the Competitiveness Pact, the state tried to bypass the labour market parties and restrict their freedom to negotiate-or force them to agree to the Pact-by implementing legislation.…”

“…While debate on austerity measures peaked in 2015, before the parliamentary elections (e.g. Adkins et al, 2019), Finland had already adopted austerity measures some years earlier, and the previous government had raised awareness of the crisis. The Ministry of Finance set the terms of this debate and all major political parties accepted, rather uncritically, the Ministry's view that austerity was necessary to survive the crisis (Elomäki, 2019).…”

“…The Ministry of Finance set the terms of this debate and all major political parties accepted, rather uncritically, the Ministry's view that austerity was necessary to survive the crisis (Elomäki, 2019). According to Juha Sipilä of the Centre Party, who became the Prime Minister, something needed to be done to "save the country", and Finland would face economic difficulties similar to those of Greece unless the reforms were implemented (see also Adkins et al, 2019). Austerity measures and national competitiveness were central to the strategic government programme, Finland-Land of Solutions (Prime Minister's Office, 2015).…”

“…The Competitiveness Pact and the state's role in enforcing it were also connected to a discourse of the waning role of the corporatist system and centralized collective bargaining, which were portrayed as historical remnants. According to Brown (2015) and Adkins et al (2019), this was an inversion of the traditional social contract: the government demanded sacrifices from Finnish citizens in order to protect the Finnish economy and competitiveness instead of protecting the citizens' rights.…”