Capitalist Convergence? European (dis?)Integration and the Post-crash Restructuring of French and European Capitalisms

ABSTRACT

This article critiques and builds upon first-wave (Höpner and Schäfer 2010. A new phase of European integration: organised capitalisms in post-Ricardian Europe. West European Politics, 33 (2), 344–368) and second-wave (Johnston and Regan 2018. Introduction: is the European Union capable of integrating diverse models of capitalism? New Political Economy, 23 (2), 145–159) European Integration and comparative capitalisms literatures which posit convergence towards a single model of capitalism or growth. It utilises the case study of France to explore the impact of European integration and disintegration on national models of capitalism in the post-crisis era. The article focuses on the impact of integrative and disintegrative dynamics on France’s ‘state-industry-finance nexus’, putting forward three core claims. First, French capitalism is not accurately captured by the above frameworks and remains better characterised by the concept of post-dirigisme. Indeed, comparative capitalisms debates must move beyond a simple bifurcation of capitalist types. Second, European integrative pressures must be viewed as fragmented, differentiating, mediated by domestic state actors and producing capitalist variegation and hybridisation. Countering functionalist tendencies within this literature, it shows how different conceptions of state-market relations crucially mediate the relationship between national capitalisms and European integration. Finally, in the context of Brexit, the dynamics of European disintegration – an issue not discussed so far in these debates – is contributing to a variegated and multi-directional process of capitalist restructuring in post-crisis France.

KEYWORDS:

• Comparative capitalisms
• growth models
• European Union
• Brexit
• economic policy

Acknowledgements

Both authors would like to thank the NPE editor and two anonymous referees for thorough and constructive critical engagement with the manuscript which helped refine the argument and the article’s central claims. The authors would also like to thanks participants for valuable feedback at the PSA British and Comparative Political Economy Specialist Group Workshop at Jesus College, Cambridge, September 13th 2017; the BA-PSA ‘Economic policy-making institutions at the state/market frontier’ workshop at Warwick University on 18–19 March 2019; and the 25th International Conference of Europeanists, in Chicago.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors

Ben Clift is Professor of Political Economy at the University of Warwick. His research interests lie at the interface of comparative and international political economy. He is author of The IMF and the politics of austerity in the wake of the global financial crisis (OUP 2018), Comparative political economy: states, markets and global capitalism (Palgrave 2014), French socialism in a global era (Continuum 2003), and co-editor of Economic patriotism: political intervention in open markets (Routledge 2012) and Where are national capitalisms now? (Palgrave 2004). He has published widely on topics including French and comparative capitalisms, the IMF, the politics of economic ideas, and the political economy of economic patriotism in many leading journals.

Sean McDaniel is Senior Lecturer in Political Economy at Future Economies Research Centre, Manchester Metropolitan University. His research analyses the Comparative Political Economy of post-crisis Europe, focusing predominantly on the comparative political economy of European models of capitalism, the political economy of European social democracy and British and French politics. He has published articles in leading international peer-reviewed journals including Socio-Economic Review, The Journal of European Public Policy and Geoforum.

Notes

1 This more liberal adaptation of EU rules by French state actors can also be seen in relation to European fiscal rules, where French authorities have rejected the EC’s assessments on the Fiscal Compact in favour of its own (Clift and Ryner 2014, p. 153; Clift 2016, p. 527).

2 The FTT, for instance, whilst raising close to €1 billion each year in revenue does not tackle the ‘harmful’ financial practices it set out to (Migaud 2017). Furthermore, although on paper a law was passed to separate retail and investment banking activities, the law is narrowly defined and impacts only around 1 per cent of the banking activities of France’s two largest banks (see Pinson 2015).

Additional information

Funding

Ben Clift gratefully acknowledges the support of the Leverhulme Trust. Their Major Research Fellowship (MRF-2017-063) facilitated the final phase of completion of this manuscript.