Mainstream economists argue that unemployment must be tackled with ‘flexibilisation’ or ‘labour market deregulation’. The public policy application has been the principle of ‘flexicurity’, with mixed labour market outcomes and limited success. Central contributions to theoretical and empirical economics writing on unemployment issues still espouse ‘flexibilisation’ as a general approach and warn about the detrimental effects of systematic deregulation under expectations of outcomes such as lower unemployment. Departing from a review of this literature, we take a step further from the ‘flexicurity’ prescription, to follow the capabilities approach of Sen and others, and develop a concept of social capabilities–based flexicurity for a learning economy, arguing that labour market performance must be targeted in an approach that includes a strong commitment to social well-being.
BaccaroLReiD (2007) Institutional determinants of unemployment in OECD countries: does the deregulatory view hold water?International Organization61(3): 527–569.
2.
BakerDGlynAHowellDR. (2005) Labour market institutions and unemployment: a critical assessment of the cross-country evidence. In: HowellDR (ed.) Fighting Unemployment: The Limits of Free Market Orthodoxy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 72–113.
3.
BergJKuceraD (2008) In Defense of Labour Market Institutions. Geneva: International Labour Office; Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
4.
BlanchardOWolfersJ (2000) The role of shocks and institutions in the rise of European unemployment: the aggregate evidence. The Economic Journal110(462): 1–33.
5.
BurroniLKeuneM (2011) Flexicurity: a conceptual critique. European Journal of Industrial Relations17(1): 75–91.
6.
CrockerDA (1992) Functioning and capability: the foundations of Sen’s and Nussbaum’s development ethic. Political Theory20(4): 584–612.
7.
DaveriFTabelliniG (2000) Unemployment, growth and taxation in industrial countries. Economic Policy15(30): 47–104.
8.
ElmeskovJMartinJPScarpettaS (1998) Key lessons for labour market reforms: evidence from OECD countries’ experiences. Swedish Economic Policy Review5(2): 205–252.
9.
FrameMKhanHA (2007) Deep democracy: a political and social economy approach. CIRJE-F-469. Tokyo, Japan: CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo. Available at: http://www.cirje.e.u-tokyo.ac.jp/research/dp/2007/2007cf469.pdf (accessed 5 February 2016).
10.
FreemanRB (2005) Labour market institutions without blinders: the debate over flexibility and labour market performance. International Economic Journal19(2): 129–145.
FreemanRB (2013) Failing the test? The flexible US job market in the Great Recession. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science650: 78–97.
13.
GabrieleAKhanH (2010) China’s National Innovation System at the Cross Roads. Berlin: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.
14.
GalbraithJK (2012) Inequality and Instability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15.
HegelGWF ([1821] 2005) Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts [Philosophy of Right] (trans. DydeSW, 1896). Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, Inc.
16.
HeyesJ (2011) Flexicurity, employment protection and the jobs crisis. Work, Employment & Society25(4): 642–657.
17.
HeyesJ (2013) Flexicurity in crisis: European labour market policies in a time of austerity. European Journal of Industrial Relations19(3): 71–86.
18.
International Labour Organization (ILO) (2015) An Employment-Oriented Investment Strategy for Europe (Studies on growth with equity). Geneva: ILO.
JudzikDSalaH (2015) The determinants of capital intensity in Japan and the US. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies35(1): 78–98.
21.
KhanHA (1998) Technology, Development and Democracy: The Limits of National Innovation Systems in the Age of Postmodernism. Lyme, NH: Edward Elgar.
22.
KhanHA (2004) Innovation and Growth in East Asia: The Future of Miracles. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
23.
KhanHA (2007a) A theory of deep democracy and economic justice in the age of postmodernism. CIRJE-F-468. Tokyo, Japan: CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo. Available at: http://www.cirje.e.u-tokyo.ac.jp/research/dp/2007/2007cf468.pdf (accessed 5 February 2016).
24.
KhanHA (2007b) Trade liberalization and poverty reduction in general equilibrium: the role of labour market structure. CIRJE-F-462. Tokyo, Japan: Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo. Available at: http://www.cirje.e.u-tokyo.ac.jp/research/dp/2007/2007cf462.pdf (accessed 5 February 2016).
KhanHA (2013a) Basel III, BIS and global financial governance. Journal of Advanced Studies in FinanceIV(2(8)): 121–144.
27.
KhanHA (2013b) Development strategies: lessons from the experiences of South Korea, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam. In: AugustinKF (ed.) Achieving Development Success. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 119–132.
28.
KhanHA (2013c) Global financial governance: towards a new global financial architecture for averting deep financial crisis. MPRA paper no. 49275. Available at: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/49275/1/MPRA_paper_49275.pdf (accessed 5 February 2016).
29.
KhanHA (2014) Development and women’s rights as human rights: a political and social economy approach within a deep democratic framework. Denver Journal of International Law and Policy42(3): 451.
30.
KhanHASogabeH (1994) Macroeconomic effects of IMF adjustment policies. In: ShepherdGWSonkoGW (eds) Economic Justice in Africa: Adjustment and Sustainable Development. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, pp. 27–40.
31.
LayardRNickellSJackmanR (1991) Unemployment: Macroeconomic Performance and the Labour Market. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
32.
LazearEPSpletzerJR (2012) The United States labour market: status quo or a new normal? NBER working papers 18386. National Bureau of Economic Research. Available at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w18386 (accessed 5 February 2016).
33.
LundvallBÅ (1992) National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Pinter Publishers.
34.
NickellS (1997) Unemployment and labour market rigidities: Europe versus North America. The Journal of Economic Perspectives11(3): 55–74.
35.
NickellS (1998) Unemployment: questions and some answers. The Economic Journal108(448): 802–816.
36.
NickellSNunziataLOchelW (2005) Unemployment in the OECD since the 1960s: what do we know?The Economic Journal115(500): 1–27.
37.
NussbaumM (1995) Poetic Justice: The Literary Imagination and Public Life. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
38.
NussbaumM (2000) Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) (1994) The OECD Jobs Study. Paris: OECD.
40.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) (2004) OECD Employment Outlook. Paris: OECD.
41.
PikettyT (2014) Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
42.
RinneUZimmermannKF (2013) Is Germany the north star of labour market policy?IMF Economic Review61(4): 702–729.
43.
RothsteinJ (2012) The labour market four years into the crisis: assessing structural explanations. Industrial and Labor Relations Review65(3): 437–500.
44.
SenA (1992) Inequality Reexamined. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
45.
SenA (1999) Development as Freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.
46.
SenA (2004) Elements of a theory of human rights. Philosophy and Public Affairs32(4): 315–356.
47.
SmithA ([1759] 2006) The Theory of Moral Sentiments, part 1. London: Dover Publications.
48.
SmithA ([1776] 1904) An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (Book IV; ed CannanE). London: Methuen and Co.
49.
SolowRM (1997) It ain’t the things you don’t know that hurt you, it’s the things you know that ain’t so. The American Economic Review87(2): 107–108.
50.
StockhammerEKlärE (2011) Capital accumulation, LMIs and unemployment in the medium run. Cambridge Journal of Economics35(2): 437–457.
51.
StormSNaastepadCMW (2008) The NAIRU reconsidered: why labour market deregulation may raise unemployment. International Review of Applied Economics22(5): 527–544.
