Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-kfd97 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-23T02:24:36.991Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Business and Welfare State Development: Why Did Employers Accept Social Reforms?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2013

Thomas Paster
Thomas Paster*
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in Cologne, Germany, Email: Thomas.Paster@mpifg.de

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In recent years, employer-centered explanations of welfare state development have begun to challenge conventional labor-centered and state-centered explanations. These new explanations suggest that sector-specific business interests and cross-class alliances propelled the adoption and expansion of social programs (the business interests thesis). This article presents a novel explanation of differences in business support for welfare state expansion based on a diachronic analysis of the German case and shadow case studies of Sweden and the United States. The article suggests that when looking at changes in employers’ positions across time rather than across sectors, political constraints turn out to be the central factor explaining variation in employers’ support for social reforms (the political accommodation thesis). The article identifies two goals of business intervention in welfare state development: pacification and containment. In the case of pacification, business interests propel social policy expansion; in the case of containment, they constrain it. Business chooses pacification when revolutionary forces challenge capitalism and political stabilization thus becomes a priority. Business chooses containment when reformist forces appear likely to succeed in expanding social protection and no revolutionary challenge exists. The article shows that changes over time in the type of political challenges that business interests confront best explain the variation in business support for labor-friendly social reforms.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
World Politics , Volume 65 , Issue 3 , July 2013 , pp. 416 - 451
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 2013 

References

REFERENCES

Alber, Jens. 1989. Der Sozialstaat in der Bundesrepublik 1950–1983 [The Welfare State in the Federal Republic, 1950–1983]. Frankfurt am Main, Germany, and New York, N.Y.: Campus.Google Scholar
Amenta, Edwin, and Parikh, Sunita. 1991. “Capitalists Did Not Want the Social Security Act: A Critique of the ‘Capitalist Dominance’ Thesis.” American Sociological Review 56, no. 1 (February): 124–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayass, Wolfgang, Tennstedt, Florian, and Winter, Heidi, eds. 2003. Quellensammlung zur Geschichte der deutschen Sozialpolitik 1867 bis 1914: Von der Kaiserlichen Sozialbotschaft bis zu den Februarerlässen Wilhelm II. (1881–1890), vol. 1, Grundfragen der Sozialpolitik: Die Diskussion der Arbeiterfrage auf Regierungsseite und in der Öffentlichkeit [Sourcebook on the History of Social Policy in Germany from 1867 to 1914: From the Imperial Message to the February Decrees of Wilhelm II (1881–1890), vol. 1, Basic Questions of Social Policy: The Discussion of the Workers' Question within Government and in Public]. Darmstadt, Germany: Wissenschaftiche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Baare, Louis. 1880. “Protokoll der Konferenz in Bochum am 2. und 3. November 1880.” Potsdam, Germany: Bundesarchiv Potsdam.Google Scholar
Baldwin, Peter. 1990. The Politics of Social Solidarity: Class Bases of the European Welfare State, 1875–1975. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, W., Luzius, H. P., and Mehring, J.. 1956. Die elastische Staatsbürgergrundrente als Grundlage einer echten sozialen Reform: Verfasst auf Anregung eines Kreises von Versicherungsfachleuten [The Elastic Citizen's Basic Pension as a Foundation of True Social Reform: Written at the Suggestion of a Group of Insurance Experts]. Karlsruhe, Germany: Verlag der Versicherungswirtschaft.Google Scholar
BDA. 1956. Jahresbericht der Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände, 1. Dez. 1955–30. Nov. 1956 [Annual Report of the Confederation of German Employers' Associations, December 1, 1955–November 30, 1956]. Cologne, Germany: Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände.Google Scholar
BDA. 1957. Jahresbericht der Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände, 1. Dez. 1956–30. Nov. 1957 [Annual Report of the Confederation of German Employers' Associations, December 1, 1956–November 30, 1957]. Cologne, Germany: Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände.Google Scholar
BDA. 1991. Zur Neuordnung der Pflegeversicherung: Das Zwei-Komponenten-Modell der Arbeitgeber [On the Reorganization of Long-Term Care Insurance: The Employers' Two-Component Model]. Cologne, Germany: Bundesvereinigung der deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände.Google Scholar
Berlepsch, Hans-Jörg von. 1994. “Konsensfähige Alternativen zu Bismarcks Modell Sozialpolitischer Gestaltung.” In Machtan, Lothar, ed., Bismarcks Sozialstaat: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Sozialpolitik und zur Sozialpolitischen Geschichtsschreibung [Bismarck's Welfare State: Contributions to the History of Social Policy]. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Campus.Google Scholar
Blyth, Mark. 2001. “The Transformation of the Swedish Model: Economic Ideas, Distributional Conflict, and Institutional Change.” World Politics 54, no. 1 (October): 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Böhme, Helmut. 1966. Deutschlands Weg zur Grossmacht: Studien zum Verhältnis von Wirtschaft und Staat während der Reichsgründungszeit 1848–1881 [Germany's Path to Becoming a Superpower: Studies about the Relationship of Economy and State during the Founding Period of the Empire, 1848–1881]. Cologne and Berlin, Germany: Kiepenheuer und Witsch.Google Scholar
Böhme, Helmut. 1978. An Introduction to the Social and Economic History of Germany: Politics and Economic Change in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. New York, N.Y.: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
Braun, Egon. 1927. “Wandlungen des Arbeitgeberstandpunktes in der deutschen Industrie seit Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts.” Ph.D. diss., University of Tübingen.Google Scholar
Breger, Monika. 1982. Die Haltung der industriellen Unternehmer zur staatlichen Sozialpolitik in den Jahren 1878–1891 [The Positions of Industrial Entrepreneurs toward Public Social Policy in the Years 1878–1891]. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Haag + Herchen.Google Scholar
Breger, Monika. 1994. “Der Anteil der deutschen Großindustriellen an der Konzeptualisierung der Bismarckschen Sozialgesetzgebung.” In Machtan, Lothar, ed., Bismarcks Sozialstaat: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Sozialpolitik und zur sozialpolitischen Geschichtsschreibung [Bismarck's Welfare State: Contributions to the History of Social Policy]. Frankfurt am Main, Germany, and New York, N.Y.: Campus.Google Scholar
Brosig, Magnus. 2011. “Sozialpolitik als Hilfe für die Wirtschaft? Deutsche Arbeitgeber und die Systeme der Arbeitslosenversicherung.” Zeitschrift für Sozialreform 57, no. 3: 313–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bueck, Henry Axel. 1905. Der Centralverband Deutscher Industrieller, 1876–1901 [The Central Association of German Industrialists, 1876–1901]. Berlin, Germany: J. Guttentag.Google Scholar
Büren, Herbert. 1934. “Arbeitgeber und Sozialpolitik: Untersuchung über die grundsätzliche Haltung des deutschen Unternehmertums gegenüber der Sozialpolitik in der Vorkriegs-, Kriegs- Und Nachkriegszeit. I. Band.” Ph.D. diss., University of Cologne.Google Scholar
Carr, William. 1979. A History of Germany, 1815–1945. London, UK: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
DAGZ. 1920. “Die moralischen Gefahren der reichsgesetzlichen Regelung der Arbeitslosen-Versicherung.” Die Deutsche Arbeitgeber–Zeitung: Zentralblatt deutscher Arbeitgeberverbände. October 31, no. 44: 1–2.Google Scholar
Arbeitgeber, Der. 1992. “Gemeinsame Erklärung zur Neuordnung der Pflegeabsicherung.” Der Arbeitgeber. May 15: 310.Google Scholar
Deutscher Industrie- und Handelstag. 1920. “Arbeitslosenversicherung.” Handel und Gewerbe: Zeitschrift für die zur Vertretung von Handel und Gewerbe gesetzlich berufenen Körperschaften: Im Auftrag des Deutschen Industrie- und Handelstags. November 6: 56–57.Google Scholar
Domhoff, G. William. 1996. State Autonomy or Class Dominance? Case Studies on Policy Making in America. New York, N.Y.: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Domhoff, G. William, and Webber, Michael J.. 2011. Class and Power in the New Deal: Corporate Moderates, Southern Democrats, and the Liberal-Labor Coalition. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Duisberg, Carl. 1923. “Soziale Gegensätze und ihre Überwindung.” Der Arbeitgeber 13, no. 5 (February 15): 67–69.Google Scholar
Emmenegger, Patrick, and Marx, Paul. 2011. “Business and the Development of Job Security Regulations: The Case of Germany.” Socio-Economic Review 9, no. 4: 729–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erdmann, Gerhard. 1966. Die deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände im sozialgeschichtlichen Wandel der Zeit [The German Employers' Associations through the Changing Periods of Social History]. Neuwied, Germany: Luchterhand.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 1985. Politics against Markets: The Social Democratic Road to Power. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Faust, Anselm. 1987. “Von der Fürsorge zur Arbeitsmarktpolitik: Die Errichtung der Arbeitslosenversicherung.” In Abelshauser, Werner, ed., Die Weimarer Republik als Wohlfahrtsstaat [The Weimar Republic as a Welfare State]. Stuttgart, Germany: Steiner.Google Scholar
Feldman, Gerald D. 1970. “German Business between War and Revolution: The Origins of the Stinnes-Legien Agreement.” In Ritter, Gerhard A., ed., Entstehung und Wandel der modernen Gesellschaft: Festschrift für Hans Rosenberg zum 65. Geburtstag [Origins and Change of Modern Society: A Festschrift for Hans Rosenberg's 65th Birthday]. Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter Co.Google Scholar
Francke, L. 1881. “Die Stimmen der deutschen Handels- und Gewerbekammern über das Haftpflicht-Gesetz vom 7. Juni 1871 und dem Reichs-Unfallversicherungs-Gesetzentwurf vom 8. März 1881.” Zeitschrift des Königlich-Preussischen Statistischen Bureaus 21: 397–416.Google Scholar
Führer, Karl Christian. 1990. Arbeitslosigkeit und die Entstehung der Arbeitslosenversicherung in Deutschland 1902–1927 [Unemployment and the Origins of Unemployment Insurance in Germany, 1902–1927]. Berlin, Germany: Colloquium.Google Scholar
Gordon, Colin. 1991. “New Deal, Old Deck: Business and the Origins of Social Security, 1920–1935.” Politics and Society 19, no. 2 (June): 165–207.Google Scholar
Gordon, Colin. 1994. New Deals: Business, Labor, and Politics in America, 1920–1935. New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Grote, Jürgen R., Lang, Achim, and Traxler, Franz. 2007. “Germany.” In Traxler, Franz and Huemer, Gerhard, eds., Handbook of Business Interest Associations, Firm Size and Governance: A Comparative Analytical Approach. London, UK, and New York, N.Y.: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hacker, Jacob. 2002. The Divided Welfare State: The Battle over Public and Private Social Benefits in the United States. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacker, Jacob S., and Pierson, Paul. 2002. “Business Power and Social Policy: Employers and the Formation of the American Welfare State.” Politics and Society 30, no. 2 (June): 277–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Peter A. 2007. “The Evolution of Varieties of Capitalism in Europe.” In Hancke, Bob, Rhodes, Martin, and Thatcher, Mark, eds., Beyond Varieties of Capitalism: Conflict, Contradiction, and Complementarities in the European Economy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hall, Peter A., and Soskice, David. 2001. “An Introduction to Varieties of Capitalism.” In Hall, Peter A. and Soskice, David, eds., Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hassel, Anke. 2007. “What Does Business Want? Labour Market Reforms in CMEs and Its Problems.” In Hancke, Bob, Rhodes, Martin, and Thatcher, Mark, eds., Beyond Varieties of Capitalism: Conflict, Contradiction, and Complementarities in the European Economy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hellwig, Timothy T. 2005. “The Origins of Unemployment Insurance in Britain.” Social Science History 29, no. 1 (Spring): 107–36.Google Scholar
Hennock, E. Peter. 2007. The Origin of the Welfare State in England and Germany, 1850–1914: Social Policies Compared. New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hockerts, Hans Günter. 1980. Sozialpolitische Entscheidungen im Nachkriegsdeutschland: Allierte und deutsche Sozialversicherungspolitik 1945–1957 [Social Policy Decisions in Postwar Germany: Allied and German Social Insurance Policies]. Stuttgart, Germany: Klett-Cotta.Google Scholar
Hohorst, Gerd, Kocka, Jürgen, and Ritter, Gerhard Albrecht. 1978. Sozialgeschichtliches Arbeitsbuch: Materialien zur Statistik des Kaiserreichs 1870–1914 [Social Historical Handbook: Statistical Material about the Empire, 1870–1914]. Munich, Germany: Beck.Google Scholar
Huber, Evelyne, and Stephens, John D.. 2001. Development and Crisis of the Welfare State: Parties and Policies in Global Markets. Chicago, Ill., and London, UK: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iversen, Torben, and Soskice, David. 2009. “Distribution and Redistribution: The Shadow of the Nineteenth Century.” World Politics 61, no. 3 (July): 438–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jastrow, Ignaz, Erdmann, Gerhard, and Spliedt, Franz. 1925. Das Problem der Arbeitslosenversicherung in Deutschland: Verhandlungen der Deutschen Gesellschaft zur Bekämpfung der Arbeitslosigkeit am 20. Februar 1925 zu Berlin mit Berichten [The Problem of Unemployment Insurance in Germany: Proceedings of a Conference by the German Society for the Fight against Unemployment on February 20, 1925, in Berlin, with Reports]. Berlin, Germany: Reimar Hobbing.Google Scholar
Jenkins, J. Craig, and Brents, Barbara G.. 1989. “Social Protest, Hegemonic Competition, and Social Reform: A Political Struggle Interpretation of the Origins of the American Welfare State.” American Sociological Review 54, no. 6 (December): 891–909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, J. Craig, and Brents, Barbara G.. 1991. “Capitalists and Social Security: What Did They Really Want?” American Sociological Review 56, no. 1 (February): 129–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaelble, Hartmut. 1967. Industrielle Interessenpolitik in der Wilhelminischen Gesellschaft: Centralverband Deutscher Industrieller 1895–1914 [Industrial Interest Politics in Wilhelmine Society: The Central Association of German Industrialists, 1895–1914]. Berlin, Germany: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinderman, Daniel. 2005. “Pressure from Without, Subversion from Within: The Two-Pronged German Employer Offensive.” Comparative European Politics 3, no. 3 (December): 432–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kocka, Jürgen. 1984. Facing Total War: German Society, 1914–1918. Cambridge, Mass.: Berg.Google Scholar
Korpi, Walter. 1983. The Democratic Class Struggle. London, UK, and Boston, Mass.: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Korpi, Walter. 2006. “Power Resources and Employer-Centered Approaches in Explanations of Welfare States and Varieties of Capitalism: Protagonists, Consenters, and Antagonists.” World Politics 58, no. 2 (January): 167–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leckebusch, Roswitha. 1966. Entstehung und Wandlung der Zielsetzungen, der Struktur und der Wirkungen von Arbeitgeberverbänden [Origins and Change in the Goals, Structure and Impact of Employers' Assocations]. Berlin, Germany: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
Levine, Rhonda F. 1988. Class Struggle and the New Deal: Industrial Labor, Industrial Capital, and the State. Lawrence, Kans.: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Lewek, Peter. 1992. Arbeitslosigkeit und Arbeitslosenversicherung in der Weimarer Republik 1918–1927 [Unemployment and Unemployment Insurance in the Weimar Republic, 1918–1927]. Stuttgart, Germany: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar
Lidtke, Vernon L. 1966. The Outlawed Party: Social Democracy in Germany, 1878–1890. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Maier, Charles S. 1975. Recasting Bourgeois Europe: Stabilization in France, Germany, and Italy in the Decade after World War I. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Manow, Philip. 2009. “Electoral Rules, Class Coalitions and Welfare State Regimes, or How to Explain Esping-Andersen with Stein Rokkan.” Socio-Economic Review 7, no. 1 (January): 101–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mares, Isabela. 1997. “Is Unemployment Insurable? Employers and the Development of Unemployment Insurance.” Journal of Public Policy 17, no. 3 (September–December): 299–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mares, Isabela. 2003a. The Politics of Social Risk: Business and Welfare State Development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mares, Isabela. 2003b. “The Sources of Business Interest in Social Insurance: Sectoral versus National Differences.” World Politics 55, no. 2 (January): 229–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, Cathie Jo. 2004. “Reinventing Welfare Regimes: Employers and the Implementation of Active Social Policy.” World Politics 57, no. 1 (October): 39–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, Cathie Jo, and Swank, Duane. 2011. “Gonna Party Like It's 1899: Party Systems and the Origins of Varieties of Coordination.” World Politics 63, no. 1 (January): 78–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menz, Georg. 2005. “Old Bottles–New Wine: The New Dynamics of Industrial Relations.” German Politics 14, no. 2 (June): 196–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michalka, Wolfgang, and Niedhart, Gottfried. 1992. Deutsche Geschichte, 19181933: Dokumente zur Innen- und Aussenpolitik [German History, 1918–1933: Documents about Domestic and Foreign Policy]. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Fischer.Google Scholar
Molin, Björn. 1965. Tjänstepensionsfragen: En Studie i svensk Partipolitik [The Supplementary Pensions Question: A Study in Swedish Party Politics]. Göteborg, Sweden: Akademieförlaget.Google Scholar
Murmann, Klaus 1997. Kontrakt für die Zukunft: Was mich bewegt [Contract for the Future]. Berlin, Germany: Brandenburgisches Verlagshaus.Google Scholar
Nijhuis, Dennie Oude. 2009. “Revisiting the Role of Labor: Worker Solidarity, Employer Opposition, and the Development of Old-Age Pensions in the Netherlands and United Kingdom.” World Politics 61, no. 2 (April): 296–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oechelhäuser, Wilhelm. 1889. Soziale Tagesfragen [Current Social Issues]. Berlin, Germany: J. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsson, Sven E. 1990. Social Policy and the Welfare State. Lund, Sweden: Arkiv.Google Scholar
Orloff, Ann Shola. 1993. The Politics of Pensions: A Comparative Analysis of Britain, Canada, and the United States, 1880–1940. Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Paster, Thomas. 2009. “Choosing Lesser Evils: The Role of Business in the Development of the German Welfare State from the 1880s to the 1990s.” Ph.D. diss., European University Institute.Google Scholar
Paster, Thomas. 2011. “German Employers and the Origins of Unemployment Insurance: Skills Interest or Strategic Accommodation?” MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/05. Cologne, Germany: Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.Google Scholar
Paster, Thomas. 2012. The Role of Business in the Development of the Welfare State and Labor Markets in Germany: Containing Social Reforms. London, UK: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pontusson, Jonas. 1992. The Limits of Social Democracy: Investment Politics in Sweden. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Quadagno, Jill S. 1984. “Welfare Capitalism and the Social Security Act of 1935.” American Sociological Review 49, no. 5: 632–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raumer, Hans von. 1954. “Unternehmer und Gewerkschaften in der Weimarer Zeit.” Deutsche Rundschau 80: 425–34.Google Scholar
RDI. 1921. Geschäftliche Mitteilungen für die Mitglieder des RDI [Newsletter to the Members of the Federation of German Industry] 3, no. 1. Berlin, Germany: Reichsverband deutscher Industrie.Google Scholar
Reichert, Jakob Wilhelm. 1919. Entstehung, Bedeutung und Ziel der “Arbeitsgemeinschaft” [Origins, Importance and Goals of the “Working Group”]. Berlin, Germany: Selbstverlag der Arbeitgemeinschaft.Google Scholar
Reiswitz, Willy Freiherr von. 1904. “Protokoll der Arbeitsnachweiskonferenz zu Hamburg, den 22. August 1903.” Hamburg, Germany: Arbeitgeberverband Hamburg-Altona.Google Scholar
Ritter, Gerhard A., ed., 2007. Geschichte der Sozialpolitik in Deutschland seit 1945, vol. 11, Bundesrepublik Deutschland, 1989–1994: Sozialpolitik im Zeichen der Wiedervereinigung [History of Social Policy in Germany since 1945, vol. 11, The Federal Republic 1989–1994: Social Policy against the Background of Reunification]. Baden-Baden, Germany: Nomos-Verlag.Google Scholar
Ritter, Gerhard A., and Tenfelde, Klaus. 1975. “Der Durchbruch der Freien Gewerkschaften Deutschlands zur Massenbewegung im letzten Viertel des 19. Jahrhunderts.” In Vetter, Heinz O., ed., Vom Sozialistengesetz zur Mitbestimmung: Zum 100. Geburtstag von Hans Böckler [From the Anti-Socialist Laws to Codetermination: Honoring the 100th Birthday of Hans Böckler]. Cologne, Germany: Bund-Verlag.Google Scholar
Schmidt, Manfred G. 1998. Sozialpolitik in Deutschland: Historische Entwicklung und internationaler Vergleich [Social Policy in Germany: Historical Development and International Comparison]. Opladen, Germany: Leske+Budrich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schreiber, Wilfried. 1955. Existenzsicherheit in der industriellen Gesellschaft: Vorschläge des Bundes Katholischer Unternehmer zur Reform der Sozialversicherungen [Financial Security in an Industrial Society: Proposals for the Reform of Social Insurance by the Federation of Catholic Entrepreneurs]. Cologne, Germany: Bund Katholischer Unternehmer.Google Scholar
Seeber, Gustav, and Fesser, Gerd. 1994. “Linksliberale und Sozialdemokratische Kritik an Bismarcks Sozialreform.” In Machtan, Lothar, ed., Bismarcks Sozialstaat: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Sozialpolitik und zur sozialpolitischen Geschichtsschreibung [Bismarck's Welfare State: Contributions to the History of Social Policy]. Frankfurt am Main, Germany, and New York, N.Y.: Campus.Google Scholar
Shalev, Michael. 1983. “The Social Democratic Model and Beyond: Two Generations of Comparative Research on the Welfare State.” Comparative Social Research 6: 315–51.Google Scholar
Skocpol, Theda. 1992. Protecting Soldiers and Mothers: The Political Origins of Social Policy in the United States. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skocpol, Theda, and Amenta, Edwin. 1985. “Did Capitalists Shape Social Security?” American Sociological Review 50, no. 4: 572–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephens, John D. 1979. The Transition from Capitalism to Socialism. London, UK: MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swenson, Peter A. 1991. “Bringing Capital Back In, or Social Democracy Reconsidered: Employer Power, Cross-Class Alliances, and Centralization of Industrial Relations in Denmark and Sweden.” World Politics 43, no. 4 (July): 513–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swenson, Peter A.. 2002. Capitalists against Markets: The Making of Labor Markets and Welfare States in the United States and Sweden. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swenson, Peter A.. 2004. “Varieties of Capitalist Interests: Power, Institutions, and the Regulatory Welfare State in the United States and Sweden.” Studies in American Political Development 18, no. 1 (April): 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tänzler, Fritz. 1918. “Auf falscher Bahn?” Der Arbeitgeber: Zeitschrift der Vereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände, no. 1: 1–2.Google Scholar
Tänzler, Fritz. 1924. “Am Wendepunkt?” Der Arbeitgeber 2.Google Scholar
Thelen, Kathleen A. 2001. “Varieties of Labour Politics in the Developed Democracies.” In Hall, Peter A. and Soskice, David, eds., Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ullmann, Hans-Peter. 1979. “Industrielle Interessen und die Entstehung der deutschen Sozialversicherung 1880–1889.” Historische Zeitschrift 229: 574–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ullmann, Peter. 1977. Tarifverträge und Tarifpolitik in Deutschland bis 1914: Entstehung und Entwicklung, interessenpolitische Bedingungen und Bedeutung des Tarifvertragswesens für die sozialistischen Gewerkschaften [Wage Agreements and Wage Policy in Germany up to 1914: Origins and Development, Interest Politics and the Importance of Wage Agreements for the Socialist Unions]. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Van Hook, James C. 2004. Rebuilding Germany: The Creation of the Social Market Economy, 1945–1957. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VDA. 1914. “Umschau.” Der Arbeitgeber: Organ der Vereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände. January 15: 18–19.Google Scholar
VDA. 1926. “Stellungnahme zu den Grundfragen der Arbeitslosenversicherung.” Berlin, Germany: Vereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände.Google Scholar
Vogel, Walter. 1951. Bismarcks Arbeiterversicherung: Ihre Entstehung im Kräftespiel der Zeit [Bismarck's Worker Insurance: Its Origins in the Power Play of the Times]. Braunschweig, Germany: Georg Westermann Verlag.Google Scholar
Weber, Adolf. 1954 Der Kampf zwischen Kapital und Arbeit: Gewerkschaften und Arbeitgeberverbände in Deutschland [The Struggle between Capital and Labor: Unions and Employers' Associations in Germany]. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr.Google Scholar
Wehler, Hans-Ulrich. 1997. The German Empire, 1871–1918. Oxford, UK: Berg.Google Scholar
Weinstein, James. 1968. The Corporate Ideal in the Liberal State, 1900–1918. Boston, Mass.: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Weisbrod, Bernd. 1978. Schwerindustrie in der Weimarer Republik: Interessenpolitik zwischen Stabilisierung und Krise [Heavy Industry in the Weimar Republic: Interest Politics between Stabilization and Crisis]. Wuppertal, Germany: Peter Hammer Verlag.Google Scholar
Wermel, Michael, and Urban, Roswitha. 1949. “Arbeitslosenfürsorge und Arbeitslosenversicherung in Deutschland.” Neue Soziale Praxis 6, no. 2: 111.Google Scholar
Witte, Edwin E. 1963. The Development of the Social Security Act: A Memorandum on the History of the Committee on Economic Security and Drafting and Legislative History of the Social Security Act. Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Wood, Stewart. 2001. “Business, Government, and Pattern of Labor Market Policy in Britain and the Federal Republic of Germany.” In Hall, Peter A. and Soskice, David, eds., Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zahnbrecher, Franz X. 1914. Arbeitslosenversicherung und Arbeitgeber [Unemployment Insurance and Employers]. Nuremberg, Germany: Hofbuchhandlung Schrag.Google Scholar