The strength and weaknesses of the varieties of capitalism approach: the case of Central and Eastern Europe
| Dec 31, 2018
About this article
Article Category: Research Article
Published Online: Dec 31, 2018
Page range: 328 - 342
Received: Oct 08, 2018
Accepted: Dec 28, 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ijme-2018-0030
Keywords
© 2018 Krzysztof Jasiecki, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.
Summary of selected VoC literature on postcommunist countries
| Publications | Main conclusions |
|---|---|
| King and Szelenyi [2005] | The VoC approach can be applied to CEE as a framework of analysis, but it has to consider postcommunist similarities (importance of backwardness, lack of working-class pressure) which are more important than the respective differences in terms of VoC typology. In the form of Weberian ideal types, three variants of capitalism are identified: 1) capitalism from without; 2) capitalist from above; 3) capitalism from below. The first type they have, liberal political institutions and their economic development, is based on foreign capital (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland). The second type has authoritarian power and patrimonial economic systems with patron– client ownership networks (Russia, Ukraine). The third type has totalitarian political regimes in the process of selective liberalization, and hybrid economic systems dominated by state-led development with the supporting role of private business (China, Vietnam). |
| Nolke and Vliegenthart [2009] | The VoC approach directly by Hall and Soskice dichotomy applied to CEE leads to the thesis, where the identification of individual institutional parallels between CEE capitalism and either the CME or the LME model is misleading. CEE signifies the emergence of the new third basic variety, a “DME” type of capitalism. In DME, a single universal explanatory factor is the essential role of foreign capital, which has a huge impact on coordination mechanism dependency on intrafirm hierarchies within transnational enterprises, system of corporate governance, finance system, industrial relations, educational and training system, and transfer of innovation. |
| Schneider and Paunescu [2012] | 26 OECD countries moved toward the liberal market model in longitudinal data (1990–2005) and the cluster analysis, which describe five clusters with institutional configurations: state-dominate economies, CMEs, hybrid economies, LME-like economies, and LMEs. The types of capitalism are more varied and more dynamic then the VoC approach suggest. Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic have mixed hybrid economies in a process of transformation. The cluster of hybrid economies has a heterogeneous composition and should not be considered a distinct type of capitalism. The same cluster includes also so different countries such as Japan, Norway, Italy, and South Korea. |
| The VoC approach is difficult to apply to CEE as institutions are still not consolidated. Four types of capitalist systems, based on institutional configurations and performances, are identified: neoliberal Baltic countries, Balkan countries, Welfarist Visegrad countries, and Corporatist Slovenia. Capitalist diversity in CEE is explained by six dimensions of the Polanyian origins: democracy representation/ungovernability, government accountability/state captures, corporatism: interest mediation/rent seeking, welfare state: protection/pauperization, macroeconomic coordination: stability/straightjacket on development, market efficiency/commodification. | |
| Farkas [2016] | The VoC approach (in Amable’s version) is applied to the classification of the models of capitalism to the UE-25 states, including CEE. In the form of the clusters, an empirical analysis is identified: the Nordic model, North-Western economies, Mediterranean Europe, and the post-socialist countries. The combined clusters essentially correspond to the four models that crystallized from the old EU member states also with CEE. According to this typology, individual clusters have their subclusters. In the case of CEE, the following are identified: the Baltic states, the Visegrad countries [and Hungary’s separate path since 2010], Slovenia, and South-Eastern Europe (Romania, Bulgaria and Croatia). |