Is social concertation a viable alternative under globalization? Reconsidering the case of Ireland

Abstract

By exploring how the Irish social partnership was established and evolved, this article highlights the validity of a social concertation model, and takes a critical look at hasty attempts to identify the causes of its breakdown. The article holds that the collapse of Irish social partnership in the current economic crisis does not suggest the irrelevancy of social concertation under globalization, as neoliberals argue, nor does it confirm a predetermined path generated by the absence of supportive institutions or the structural nature of neoliberal social partnership. To the contrary, the social concertation model remains viable as an alternative to the neoliberal free market under globalization, and it can be used even in the absence of strong institutional arrangements. Contesting the accounts of neoliberals and Marxist-inspired structuralists, the article argues that social partnership has achieved a greater success in Ireland than neoliberal Britain, under similar globalization challenges. Against institutionalist accounts, it holds that social partnership was able to survive over two decades even in the absence of supportive corporatist institutions. The article's core argument is that domestic politics, rather than institutional and structural determinism, are needed to form social consensus in building and sustaining social concertation.

Keywords:

• social partnership
• Celtic Tiger
• globalization
• neoliberalism
• institutionalism
• Marxist structuralism

Acknowledgements

I would especially like to thank the SBS culture foundation, which supported my study during sabbatical in 2011–2012. I would also like to thank Ian Holliday and the reviewers of Contemporary Politics for valuable comments on this article. This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (NRF-2010-330-B00049).

Notes

Social partnership in this article refers to seven tripartite social agreements regarding socioeconomic macro policy issues from 1987 to 2008. The social partnership formally came to end in 2009. But, in 2010, Ireland created a new form of bipartite coordination, so-called ‘social dialogue’, including the Croke Park Agreement for the public sector and a protocol in the private sector. Thus, in this article, social concertation refers to a general term of corporatist social coordination, while social partnership is its specific variant that existed in 1987–2008 in Ireland.

For the recent crisis of Ireland, see Barrett et al. (2009, p. 32), Kwon (2012), Lewis (2011), Gunnigle et al. (2011), MacDonald and Novo (2011).

The politics of transformation in this section relies much on Kwon (2009).

According to a recent survey by Price Waterhouse Coopers of 229 CEOs in Ireland in 2007, a majority of employers are on the whole satisfied with the social partnership although the level of support fell from 82% in 2006 to 72% in 2007 (IRN, 29 March 2007, pp. 24–25).

Interview with a HR manager on 23 June 2008; interview with a manager from the Bank of Ireland on 11 July 2008.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Hyeong-ki Kwon

Hyeong-ki Kwon is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Seoul National University, South Korea. His main research topics are various governing regimes of advanced economies under globalization, such as the USA, Germany, Japan, and Ireland. His publications in comparative politics include Fairness and Division of Labor in Market Societies (2004) and many articles in journals including Politics & Society, Theory and Society, Comparative Political Studies, and Economic and Industrial Democracy.