Why Do National Labor Market Practices Continue to Diverge in the Global Economy? The "Missing Link" of Investment Rules

Economic creativity and innovation implementation: the entrepreneurial drivers of growth? Evidence from 63 countries

“…Research has also shown that different national institutions, including national innovation systems, evolve to support particular forms of economic creativity (Soskice 1999). Christopherson (2002) argues that the social organization of local innovation and production systems will vary dramatically according to the divergent national institutions governing labor and capital markets, corporate governance, and the kinds of social relationships that develop between actors. 1 And such national institutions, Phelps (2006) and others have pointed out, are fostered by the cultural values of a country.…”

The Competitive Foundations of Localized Learning and Innovation: The Case of Women's Garment Production in New York City*

“…The influence of national institutions on interfirm practices has been well documented in the literature on the "varieties of capitalism" and "national business systems" (see, e.g., Porter 1992;Christopherson 1993;Gertler 1997;Pauly and Reich 1997;Whitley 1998). This article seeks to take Malmberg and Maskell's thesis a step further by asserting that the degree of competition within a cluster is itself shaped by the broader institutional and market setting in which it is embedded and that certain regulatory settings may further intensify such competition.…”

New media after the Dot.com bust

“…One route is through the "varieties of capitalism" -nationally constructed governance systems affecting investment time horizons, employment regulation and other key attributes of market functioning (Christopherson 2002b;Hall & Soskice 2001). The literature on "varieties of capitalism" demonstrates how firms and individuals in Sweden, Germany and the United States respond to different institutional incentives.…”

“…In addition, in both Sweden and Germany, a greater portion of the burden of sustaining a skilled workforce is the responsibility of the firm rather than the individual worker. Policy is directly engaged in constructing these differences through legislation and regulation governing inter-firm competition, employment and collective bargaining (Christopherson 2002b).…”