Dualization, stratification, liberalization, or what? : An attempt to clarify the conceptual underpinnings of the dualization debate
Dualization, stratification, liberalization, or what? : An attempt to clarify the conceptual underpinnings of the dualization debate
Loading...
Date
2020
Authors
Kemmerling, Achim
Editors
Journal ISSN
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliographical data
Publisher
Series
URI (citable link)
DOI (citable link)
International patent number
Link to the license
EU project number
Project
Open Access publication
Collections
Title in another language
Publication type
Journal article
Publication status
Published
Published in
Political Science Research and Methods ; 8 (2020), 2. - pp. 375-379. - Cambridge. - ISSN 2049-8470. - eISSN 2049-8489
Abstract
Despite its many contributions, a central problem in the dualization debate is conceptual overstretching, as we will argue in this short comment. The term “dualization” has been used to describe different processes, which are often subsumed under this heading: the rise of atypical employment, increasing labor market stratification in general, or the partial deregulation of welfare state policies and institutions. This multitude of usages weakens the utility of dualization as a theoretical concept. In the next section, we briefly look at the evolution of the dualization debate on the micro level before we proceed to the macro level. In the concluding section, we speculate about the future of dualization as a concept for describing welfare state transformations.
Summary in another language
Subject (DDC)
320 Politics
Keywords
Conference
Review
undefined / . - undefined, undefined. - (undefined; undefined)
Cite This
ISO 690
BUSEMEYER, Marius R., Achim KEMMERLING, 2020. Dualization, stratification, liberalization, or what? : An attempt to clarify the conceptual underpinnings of the dualization debate. In: Political Science Research and Methods. Cambridge. 8(2), pp. 375-379. ISSN 2049-8470. eISSN 2049-8489. Available under: doi: 10.1017/psrm.2019.47BibTex
@article{Busemeyer2020-04Duali-49334, year={2020}, doi={10.1017/psrm.2019.47}, title={Dualization, stratification, liberalization, or what? : An attempt to clarify the conceptual underpinnings of the dualization debate}, number={2}, volume={8}, issn={2049-8470}, journal={Political Science Research and Methods}, pages={375--379}, author={Busemeyer, Marius R. and Kemmerling, Achim} }
RDF
<rdf:RDF xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/" xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/49334"> <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/49334/1/Busemeyer_2-8jjnfpdmoz259.pdf"/> <dc:creator>Kemmerling, Achim</dc:creator> <dc:contributor>Kemmerling, Achim</dc:contributor> <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2020-04-29T07:10:40Z</dc:date> <dc:rights>Attribution 4.0 International</dc:rights> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/> <dcterms:issued>2020-04</dcterms:issued> <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"/> <dc:contributor>Busemeyer, Marius R.</dc:contributor> <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Despite its many contributions, a central problem in the dualization debate is conceptual overstretching, as we will argue in this short comment. The term “dualization” has been used to describe different processes, which are often subsumed under this heading: the rise of atypical employment, increasing labor market stratification in general, or the partial deregulation of welfare state policies and institutions. This multitude of usages weakens the utility of dualization as a theoretical concept. In the next section, we briefly look at the evolution of the dualization debate on the micro level before we proceed to the macro level. In the concluding section, we speculate about the future of dualization as a concept for describing welfare state transformations.</dcterms:abstract> <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/42"/> <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/42"/> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> <dc:creator>Busemeyer, Marius R.</dc:creator> <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/49334/1/Busemeyer_2-8jjnfpdmoz259.pdf"/> <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/> <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/49334"/> <dcterms:title>Dualization, stratification, liberalization, or what? : An attempt to clarify the conceptual underpinnings of the dualization debate</dcterms:title> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2020-04-29T07:10:40Z</dcterms:available> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>
Internal note
xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter
Examination date of dissertation
Method of financing
Comment on publication
Alliance license
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
International Co-Authors
Bibliography of Konstanz
Yes
Refereed
Yes