How should we understand business interests in the welfare state when firms have strategic incentives to misrepresent their preferences? This article uses an event study to uncover firms’ preferences over social protection. We use the stock market’s response to proposed legal changes in employment and wage protection to test class- versus skill-based understandings of employer preferences. Using data from France between 1997 and 2003, we find evidence in favor of the skill-centered approach.
AcemogluD.JohnsonS.KermaniA.KwakJ.MittonT. (2016). The value of connections in turbulent times: Evidence from the United States. Journal of Financial Economics, 121, 368-391.
2.
AcemogluD.RobinsonJ. A.VerdierT. (2017). Asymmetric growth and institutions in an interdependent world. Journal of Political Economy, 125, 1245-1305.
3.
Al-IssissM. M.MillerN. H. (2013). What does health reform mean for the health care industry? Evidence from the Massachusetts special Senate election. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 5(3), 1-29.
4.
AuvrayT.BrossardO. (2016). French connection: Interlocking directorates and the ownership-control nexus in an insider governance system. Revue d’Économie Industrielle, 154, 177-206.
5.
AvrilP. (2001a, avril25). Les syndicats jugent utiles les orientations preésentées par Elisabeth Guigou [Unions find the guidelines presented by Elisabeth Guigou useful]. Le Figaro.
6.
AvrilP. (2001b, juin9). Négociation collective: Alors que la pression politique se fait plus forte [Collective Bargaining: When the political pressure increases]. Le Figaro.
7.
AvrilP. (2003, février 5). Paritarisme. blocages sur la négotiation collective [Joint Administration. Blockages in collective bargaining]. Le Figaro.
8.
AvrilP.FreyssenetE. (2001, May30). La Rue de Solferino réfléchit à la façon de contrer la refondation sociale lancée par le patronat [Solferino Street considers how to respond to the social reconstruction launched by employers]. Le Figaro.
9.
BacarroL.HowellC. (2010, April). Institutional change in European industrial relations: Reformulating the case for neoliberal convergence. Paper prepared for the 9th European Congress of the International Industrial Relations Association, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
10.
BeckerG. S. (1962). Investment in human capital: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 70, 9-49.
11.
BergerS. (1972). Peasants against politics: Rural organization in Brittany, 1911-1967. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12.
BergerS. (1977). D’une boutique á l’autre: Changes in the organization of the traditional middle classes from the fourth to the fifth republics. Comparative Politics, 10, 121-136.
13.
BergerS. (1983). Organizing interests in Western Europe: Pluralism, corporatism, and the transformation of politics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
14.
BlochL.KrempE. (2001). Ownership and voting power in France. In BarcaF.BechtM. (Eds.), The control of corporate Europe (pp. 106-127). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
15.
ChikhS.FilbienJ.-Y. (2011). Acquisitions and CEO power: Evidence from French networks. Journal of Corporate Finance, 17, 1221-1236.
16.
ClaessensS.FeijenE.LaevenL. (2008). Political connections and preferential access to finance. Journal of Financial Economics, 88, 554-580.
17.
CleggD.PalierB. (2009, April). From rescue to rupture: Understanding change in French labor market policy. Paper prepared for Joint Sessions of the European Consortium for Political Research, Lisbon, Portugal.
18.
CliftB. (2012). French responses to the global economic crisis: The political economy of “postdirigisme” and new state activism. In GrantW.WilsonG. (Eds.), The consequences of the global financial crisis (pp. 206-225). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
19.
CombrexelleJ.-D. (2008). Loi du 4 mai 2004: quel bilan? [Law of May 4th, 2004: what results?] Droit Social, 1, 20-23.
20.
CulpepperP. (2005). Institutional change in contemporary capitalism: Coordinated financial systems since 1990. World Politics, 57, 173-199.
21.
CulpepperP. (2007). Small states and skill specificity: Austria, Switzerland, and interemployer cleavages in coordinated capitalism. Comparative Political Studies, 40, 611-637.
22.
CulpepperP. (2011). Quiet politics and business power: Corporate control in Europe and Japan. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
23.
CusackT. R.IversenT.SoskiceD. (2007). Economic interests and the origins of electoral systems. American Political Science Review, 101, 373-391.
24.
Direction de l’animation de la recherche, des études et des statistiques. (2013, April). Les relations professionelles au debut des années 2010: entre changements institutionnels, crise et évolutions sectorielles [Professional relations at the beginning of the 2010s: between institutional change, crisis, and sectoral evolutions]. DARES Analyses, pp. 1-16.
25.
DasguptaA.ZiblattD. (2015). How did Britan democratize? Views from the sovereign bond market. Journal of Economic History, 75, 1-29.
26.
De JongA.DeJongD.HegeU.MertensG. (2013). Blockholders and leverage (Technical report). Paris, France: Hautes Études Commerciales.
DubeA.KaplanE.NaiduS. (2011). Coups, corporations, and classified information. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126, 1375-1409.
29.
EmmeneggerP.MarxP. (2011). Business and the development of job security regulations: The case of Germany. Socio-Economic Review, 9, 729-756.
30.
Esping-AndersenG. (1985). Politics against markets: The social democratic road to power. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
31.
Esping-AndersenG. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
32.
Esping-AndersenG.KorpiW. (1984). Social policy as class politics in post-war capitalism: Scandinavia, Germany and Sweden. In GoldthorpeJ. H. (Ed.), Order and conflict in contemporary capitalism (pp. 179-208). Oxford, UK: Claredon Press.
33.
Estévez-AbeM.IversenT.SoskiceD. (2001). Social protection and the formation of skills: A reinterpretation of the welfare state. In HallP. A.SoskiceD. (Eds.), Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage (pp. 145-183). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
34.
FengL.XuW. (2007). Has the reform of nontradable shares raised prices? An event-study analysis. Emerging Markets Finance & Trade, 43(2), 33-62.
35.
FismanD.FismanR.GalefJ.KhuranaR.WangY. (2012). Estimating the value of connections to Vice-President Cheney. B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 13(3), Article 5.
36.
FismanR. (2001). Estimating the value of political connections. American Economic Review, 91, 1095-1102.
37.
FligsteinN. (2002). The architecture of markets. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
38.
France’s not-so-social partners. (2000, January20). The Economist, p. 51.
39.
François Fillon devoile ses pistes pour reformer les retraites [François Fillon unveils clues about pension reform]. (2002, December3). Le Monde.
40.
FranksJ.MayerC. (1997). Corporate ownership and control in the UK, Germany and France. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 9(4), 30-45.
41.
GoyerM. (2006). Varieties of institutional investors and national models of capitalism: The transformation of corporate governance in France and Germany. Politics & Society, 34, 399-430.
42.
GoyerM. (2011). Contingent capital: Short-term investors and the evolution of corporate governance in France and Germany. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
43.
GoyerM.JungD. K. (2011). Diversity of institutional investors and foreign blockholdings in France. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 19, 562-584.
44.
GuidolinM.La FerraraE. (2007). Diamonds are forever, wars are not: Is conflict bad for private firms?American Economic Review, 97, 1978-1995.
45.
GuidolinM.La FerraraE. (2010). The economic effects of violent conflict: Evidence from asset market reactions. Journal of Peace Research, 47, 671-684.
46.
HackerJ. S.PiersonP. (2002). Business power and social policy: Employers and the formation of the American welfare state. Politics & Society, 30, 277-325.
47.
HackerJ. S.PiersonP. (2004). Varieties of capitalist interests and capitalist power: A response to Swenson. Studies in American Political Development, 18, 186-195.
48.
HallP.GingerichD. (2009). Varieties of capitalism and institutional complementarities in the macroeconomy. British Journal of Political Science, 39, 449-482.
49.
HasselA. (1999). The erosion of the German system of industrial relations. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 37, 483-505.
50.
HerronM. C. (2000). Estimating the economic impact of political party competition in the 1992 British election. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 326-337.
51.
HerronM. C.LavinJ.CramD.SilverJ. (1999). Measurement of political effects in the United States economy: A study of the 1992 presidential election. Economics & Politics, 11, 51-81.
52.
HervéN. (2000). Le Medef préfère le contrat à la loi [Medef prefers contract to law]. Libération, mai 20.
53.
HowellC. (1992). Regulating labor. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
54.
HowellC. (2009). The transformation of French industrial relations: Labor representation and the state in a post-dirigiste era. Politics & Society, 37, 229-256.
55.
HuberE.StephensJ. D. (2001). Development and crisis of the welfare state: Parties and policies in global markets. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
56.
Institut National de la Statistique et des Études Économiques (INSEE). (2011). Déclaration Annuelle de Données Sociales, 1997-2003 [Annual Declaration of Social Data, 1997-2003]. [Data set]. Retrieved from https://www.insee.fr/fr/metadonnees/source/s1163
57.
IversenT. (2005). Capitalism, democracy, and welfare. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
58.
IversenT.SoskiceD. (2001). An asset theory of social policy preferences. American Political Science Review, 95, 875-893.
59.
JayachandranS. (2006). The Jeffords effect. Journal of Law & Economics, 49, 397-425.
60.
KindermanD. (2005). Pressure from without, subversion from within. Comparative European Politics, 3, 432-463.
61.
KindermanD. (2017). Challenging varieties of capitalism’s account of business interests. Socio-Economic Review, 15, 587-613.
62.
KorkeamäkiT.KoskinenY.TakaloT. (2007). Phoenix rising: Legal reforms and changes in valuations in Finland during the economic crisis. Journal of Financial Stability, 3, 33-58.
63.
KorpiW. (1983). The democratic class struggle. London, England: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
64.
KorpiW. (1989). Power, politics, and state autonomy in the development of social citizenship: Social rights during sickness in 18 OECD countries since 1930. American Sociological Review, 54, 309-328.
65.
KorpiW. (2006). Power resources and employer-centered approaches in explanations of welfare states and varieties of capitalism: Protagonists, consenters, and antagonists. World Politics, 58, 167-206.
66.
KuiselR. F. (1983). Capitalism and the state in modern France: Renovation and economic management in the twentieth century. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
67.
LallementM. (2006). New patterns of industrial relations and political action since the 1980s. In CulpepperP. D.PalierB.HallP. A. (Eds.), The politics that markets make: Social change in France (pp. 50-79). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
68.
Le Medef est plus pessimiste que le government [Medef is more pessimistic than the government]. (2001, juin29). Le Figaro.
69.
Le scrutin prud’homal renforce le debat sur la reforme du dialogue social.” [The prud’homal results reinforce the debate about reform of social dialogue] (2002, December13). Libération, p. 4.
70.
LebaubeA. (2001, April10). Une curieuse faculté d’oubli [A curious tendency to forget]. Le Monde.
71.
MandraudI. (2000, April1). Patronat et syndicats affichent leurs divergences sur le paritarisme [Employers and unions show their divergences on joint administration]. Le Monde.
72.
MandraudI. (2001, April20). Le gouvernment veut creér une obligation de résultat pour les plan sociaux [The government wants to create an obligation of results for social plans]. Le Monde.
73.
ManowP.EbbinghausB. (Eds.). (2001). Comparing welfare capitalism: Social policy and political economy in Europe, Japan and the USA. London, England: Routledge.
74.
MaresI. (2001). Firms and the welfare state: When, why and how does social policy matter to employers? In HallP. A.SoskiceD. (Eds.), Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage (pp. 184-212). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
75.
MaresI. (2003). The politics of social risk: Business and welfare state development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
76.
MartinC. J.SwankD. (2012). The political construction of business interests. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
77.
MorinF. (2000). A transformation in the French model of shareholding and management. Economy and Society, 29, 36-53.
78.
MurphyA. E. (2005). Corporate ownership in France: The importance of history. In A history of corporate governance around the world (pp. 185-222). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
79.
N’egociation sociale: le syndicats inquiets [Social negotiation: the worried trade unions]. (2000, April1). Le Figaro.
80.
OfferléM. (2013). Les patrons des patrons [The bosses of the bosses]. Paris, France: Odile Jacob.
81.
O’SullivanM. (2007). Acting out institutional change: Understanding the recent transformation of the French financial system. Socio-Economic Review, 5, 389-436.
82.
PasterT. (2013). Business and welfare state development: Why did employers accept social reforms?World Politics, 65, 416-451.
83.
PfersmannO. (2003). Concrete review as indirect constitutional complaint in French constitutional law: A comparative perspective. European Constitutional Law Review, 93, 113-132.
84.
RabierM. (2007). Organisations patronales: En France et en Europe [Employer organizations: In France and in Europe]. Paris, France: Direction de l’animation de la recherche, des études et des statistiques.
85.
RehmP. (2011). Social policy by popular demand. World Politics, 63, 271-299.
86.
RobertsB. (1990). A dead senator tells no lies: Seniority and the distribution of federal benefits. American Journal of Political Science, 34, 31-58.
87.
SauruggerS. (2007). France. In TraxlerF.HuemerG. (Eds.), Handbook of business interest associations, firm size and governance: A comparative analytic approach (pp. 122-140). New York, NY: Routledge.
88.
SchmidtV. (1996). From state to market? The transformation of French business and government. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
89.
SchmidtV. (2003). French capitalism transformed, yet still a third variety of capitalism. Economy and Society, 32, 526-554.
90.
SchmitterP. C.StreeckW. (1999). The organization of business interests: Studying the associative action of business in advanced industrial societies (MPIfG Discussion Paper 99/01). Cologne, Germany: Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung.
91.
SchnyderG.JacksonG. (2013). Germany and Sweden in the crisis: Re-coordination or resilient liberalism? In SchmidtV.ThatcherM. (Eds.), Resilient liberalism in Europe’s political economy (pp. 313-344). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
92.
Schulze-MarmelingS. (2015). France: New study sheds light on membership of employers organizations. Dublin, Ireland: European Observatory of Working Life.
93.
StephensJ. D. (1986). The transition from capitalism to socialism. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. (Original work published 1979)
94.
StreeckW. (2009). Re-forming capitalism: Institutional change in the German political economy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
95.
StreeckW. (2012). Skills and politics: General and specific. In BusemeyerM. R.TrampuschC. (Eds.), The political economy of collective skill formation (pp. 317-352). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
96.
SwensonP. (1997). Arranged alliance: Business interests in the New Deal. Politics & Society, 25, 66-117.
97.
SwensonP. (2002). Capitalists against markets: The making of labor markets and welfare states in the United States and Sweden. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
98.
SwensonP. (2004). Varieties of capitalist interests: Power, institutions, and the regulatory welfare state in the United States and Sweden. Studies in American Political Development, 18(1), 1-29.
99.
TaupinB. (2000, Février 2). Relations Sociales: Première réunion au sommet depuis 1995; Paritarisme: le face-à-face Medef-syndicats [Social Relations: First summit meeting since 1995; Co-Management: the Medef-Union face-to-face]. Le Figaro.
100.
ThelenK. (2014). Varieties of liberalization and the new politics of social solidarity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
101.
VailM. (2008). From “welfare without work” to “buttressed liberalization”: The shifting dynamics of labor market adjustment in France and Germany. European Journal of Political Research, 47, 334-358.
102.
VailM. (2009). Bending the rules: Institutional analysis, political change, and labor market reform in advanced industrial societies. Comparative Politics, 42(1), 21-39.
103.
VailM. (2010). Recasting welfare capitalism: Economic adjustment in contemporary France and Germany. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
104.
VincentC. (2004). Organisations syndicales et patronales face à la réforme de la négociation collective [Union and employer organizations face the reform of collective bargaining]. Dublin, Ireland: European Observatory of Working Life.
105.
Wenz-DumasF. (2001, mai29). Le Medef contre cette “brimade.” [Medef against this “bullying.”] Libération
106.
WollC. (2005). The difficult organization of business interests: Medef and the political representation of French firms (MPIfG Discussion Paper 05/12). Cologne, Germany: Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung.
107.
WollC. (2008). Firm interests: How governments shape business lobbying on global trade. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
108.
ZiblattD. (2017). Conservative parties and the birth of democracy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
109.
ZysmanJ. (1982). Governments, markets and growth. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
