Эксоцман
на главную поиск contacts
Что такое экономическая социология? Это не "междисциплинарные исследования". Это не "изучение социальных проблем в экономике". Это не проведение опросов населения. Это не маркетинговые исследования. Что же это? (подробнее...)

American Sociological Review

Опубликовано на портале: 22-05-2004
Peter Evans, James E. Rauch American Sociological Review. 1999.  Vol. 64. No. 5. P. 748-765. 
The role of bureaucratic authority structures in facilitating economic growth has been a sociological concern since Max Weber's classic contributions almost 100 years ago. Using a recent and original data set, we examine the characteristics of core state economic agencies and the growth records of a sample of 35 developing countries for the 1970-1990 period. Our "Weberianness Scale" offers a simple measure of the degree to which these agencies employ meritocratic recruitment and offer predictable, rewarding long-term careers. We find that these "Weberian" characteristics significantly enhance prospects for economic growth, even when we control for initial levels of GDP per capita and human capital. Our results imply that "Weberianness" should be included as a factor in general models of economic growth. They also suggest the need for more attention by policymakers to building better bureaucracies and more research by social scientists on variations in how state bureaucracies are organized.
Опубликовано на портале: 29-05-2004
Evelyne Huber, John D. Stephens American Sociological Review. 2000.  Vol. 65. No. 3. P. 323-342. 
The causes of the expansion and cross-national variation in the provision of welfare state goods and services are examined. Social democratic governance is by far the most important determinant of the public delivery of services and is one of the most important determinants of the public funding of the provision of welfare state goods and services. Christian democratic governance is an important determinant of public funding services, but is not related to public delivery. State structure is also an important determinant. Women's labor force participation is an important determinant of the expansion of public social welfare services net of other social, political, and historical factors. The analysis also shows an interactive effect of women's labor force participation and social democratic governance on public delivery of welfare state services. We conclude that public delivery of a wide range of welfare state services is the most distinctive feature of the social democratic welfare state and that this feature is a product of the direct and interactive effects of social democracy and women's mobilization.
Опубликовано на портале: 19-05-2004
Kenneth I. Spenner, Olga O. Suhomlinova, Sten A. Thore American Sociological Review. 1998.  Vol. 63. No. 4. P. 599-617. 
We examine the factors affecting the performance of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) during early transition to a market economy. Data come from a longitudinal study of a representative sample of Bulgarian SOEs for the period from 1989 (the last year under communism) to 1993 (three years after major macroeconomic shifts). We investigate how changes in authority structure, work organization, technology, marketing strategy, and organizational boundaries during these years affected organizational performance in 1993. We also assess the degree of path dependence in performance and the role of competitive industry conditions. Numerous organizational changes made by SOEs during early transition had little effect on performance. Yet organizational performance from 1989 to 1993 was highly path-dependent, although this dependence was mediated by the competitive conditions: Stronger markets displayed less path dependence. Overall the results favor the interpretations derived from selected neo-institutional and ecological perspectives of organizational sociology over neoclassical economic interpretations.
Опубликовано на портале: 22-05-2004
Walter Korpi, Joakim Palme American Sociological Review. 1998.  Vol. 63. No. 5. P. 661-687. 
Debates on how to reduce poverty and inequality have focused on two controversial questions: Should social policies be targeted to low-income groups or be universal? Should benefits be equal for all or earnings-related? Traditional arguments in favor of targeting and flat-rate benefits, focusing on the distribution of the money actually transferred, neglect three policy-relevant considerations: (1) The size of redistributive budgets is not fixed but reflects the structure of welfare state institutions. (2) A trade-off exists between the degree of low-income targeting and the size of redistributive budgets. (3) Outcomes of market-based distribution are often more unequal than those of earnings-related social insurance programs. We argue that social insurance institutions are of central importance for redistributive outcomes. Using new data, our comparative analyses of the effects of different institutional types of welfare states on poverty and inequality indicate that institutional differences lead to unexpected outcomes and generate the paradox of redistribution: The more we target benefits at the poor and the more concerned we are with creating equality via equal public transfers to all, the less likely we are to reduce poverty and inequality.