Publikation:

Dualization, stratification, liberalization, or what? : An attempt to clarify the conceptual underpinnings of the dualization debate

Lade...
Vorschaubild

Dateien

Busemeyer_2-8jjnfpdmoz259.pdf
Busemeyer_2-8jjnfpdmoz259.pdfGröße: 71.94 KBDownloads: 183

Datum

2020

Autor:innen

Kemmerling, Achim

Herausgeber:innen

Kontakt

ISSN der Zeitschrift

Electronic ISSN

ISBN

Bibliografische Daten

Verlag

Schriftenreihe

Auflagebezeichnung

ArXiv-ID

Internationale Patentnummer

Link zur Lizenz

Angaben zur Forschungsförderung

Projekt

Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Open Access Hybrid
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz

Gesperrt bis

Titel in einer weiteren Sprache

Publikationstyp
Zeitschriftenartikel
Publikationsstatus
Published

Erschienen in

Political Science Research and Methods. Cambridge. 2020, 8(2), pp. 375-379. ISSN 2049-8470. eISSN 2049-8489. Available under: doi: 10.1017/psrm.2019.47

Zusammenfassung

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.

Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache

Fachgebiet (DDC)
320 Politik

Schlagwörter

Konferenz

Rezension
undefined / . - undefined, undefined

Forschungsvorhaben

Organisationseinheiten

Zeitschriftenheft

Zugehörige Datensätze in KOPS

Zitieren

ISO 690BUSEMEYER, 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. 2020, 8(2), pp. 375-379. ISSN 2049-8470. eISSN 2049-8489. Available under: doi: 10.1017/psrm.2019.47
BibTex
@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>

Interner Vermerk

xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter

Kontakt
URL der Originalveröffentl.

Prüfdatum der URL

Prüfungsdatum der Dissertation

Finanzierungsart

Kommentar zur Publikation

Allianzlizenz
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
Internationale Co-Autor:innen
Universitätsbibliographie
Ja
Begutachtet
Ja
Diese Publikation teilen