| My dissertation documents and explains the ability of European economies to compete in rapid, innovation-based, high-technology industries. The literature on comparative political economy is quite pessimistic about the capacity of European economies to compete in this space. Neo-liberal critics contend that rigid, "neo-corporatist" bargains among state, industry and labor representatives delay the flexible redistribution of resources. Even supporters of corporatism suggest that these economies compete primarily by incremental adjustment in established low- or medium-technology industries and cannot accommodate disruptive technological innovations. My dissertation challenges this characterization of European capitalism by arguing that neo-corporatism bargains can be adapted to facilitate high-technology competition. More specifically, I identify three different patterns of neo-corporatist bargaining and adjustment.;Historically, scholars linked neo-corporatism to patient capital, generous social benefits and reactive industrial policies. This form of "conservative corporatism" mobilized resources around existing actors in stable, gradually evolving industries. More recent literature on "competitive corporatism" suggests that neo-corporatism can be adapted to perform different functions. This literature focuses on liberal objectives, such as fiscal retrenchment wage restraint and market-oriented social benefit reforms. I identify an alternative adaptation, "creative corporatism," in which neo-corporatist economies engage state, industry and labor representatives in the construction of new, supply-side resources. By investing in risk capital, skill formation and research, stakeholders can facilitate movement into new, high-technology industries.;My dissertation supports these claims by examining shifting patterns of institutionalized cooperation and high-technology competition in Finland, Denmark and Ireland. In Finland, a shift from conservative to creative corporatism helped the country assume global leadership in telecommunications equipment. Denmark relied on a similar shift to facilitate high-technology competition, although more decentralized cooperation supported a smaller and more diverse collection of activities. Finally, I contrast creative corporatism in Denmark and Finland to competitive corporatist strategies in Ireland. Ireland also leveraged neo-corporatism to move into new, high-technology industries, although bargaining privileged cost competition and movement relatively low-end assembly and service operations rather than research and development. Analysis is based on 253 interviews with politicians, policy-makers and industry representatives conducted between 2005 and 2006. |
