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

Busemeyer, Marius R.; Kemmerling, Achim

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

Dateien

Busemeyer_2-8jjnfpdmoz259.pdfGröße: 71.94 KBDownloads: 180

Datum

2020

Autor:innen

Busemeyer, Marius R.

Kemmerling, Achim

Open Access-Veröffentlichung

Open Access Hybrid

Sammlungen

Politik- und Verwaltungswissenschaft

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.

Fachgebiet (DDC)

320 Politik

Zitieren

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. 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>

Universitätsbibliographie

Ja

Begutachtet

Ja