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: 179
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
Forschungsvorhaben
Organisationseinheiten
Zeitschriftenheft
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
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