사회적 합의주의의 성공가능성에 관한 연구-한국과 독일 사례의 비교를 중심으로-
A Study on Potential for Successful Social Corporatism -Based on Case Comparison of Korea and Germany-
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The importance of establishing cooperative labor relations based on mutual trust between labor, business and government is emphasized in order to achieve high productivity, competitiveness and quality of life in the modern economic society. Germany is one of the most successful countries in achieving social corporatism based on its strong industrial unions and social democratic party since the 1960s. In February of 1998, Korean Tripartite Commission managed to reach a social agreement for the first time as a joint effort to overcome the financial crisis despite the lack of requisites for the advancement of social corporatism such as congress of industrial organization or labor-friendly political party. Although the Tripartite Commission has not been performing its role to public’s expectation, recently, there have been visible changes in Korean society that show the potential of successful social corporatism. The object of the study is to research the potential for successful social corporatism in Korea by comparing its state to the success cases of Germany.
Abstract
The importance of establishing cooperative labor relations based on mutual trust between labor, business and government is emphasized in order to achieve high productivity, competitiveness and quality of life in the modern economic society. Germany is one of the most successful countries in achieving social corporatism based on its strong industrial unions and social democratic party since the 1960s. In February of 1998, Korean Tripartite Commission managed to reach a social agreement for the first time as a joint effort to overcome the financial crisis despite the lack of requisites for the advancement of social corporatism such as congress of industrial organization or labor-friendly political party. Although the Tripartite Commission has not been performing its role to public’s expectation, recently, there have been visible changes in Korean society that show the potential of successful social corporatism. The object of the study is to research the potential for successful social corporatism in Korea by comparing its state to the success cases of Germany.
참고문헌 (36)
- 김상곤, "사회적 합의주의와 노사정위원회, In 현장에서 미래를" (1998), 한국노동이론정책연구소
- 김용원, "자본주의와 사회주의" (2007), 대구대학교출판부
- 김용철, "신자유주의와 코포라티즘의 관리기제: 네덜란드의 경험과 한국의 노사정협의체제", 한국정치학회 연례학술회의 발표논문 (2000), 한국정치학회
- 김용철, "한국의 협약정치: 짧은 반응과 긴 교착", 21세기정치학보, 16(2), pp.1~17 (2006)
- 김윤태, "한국의 노사관계와 사회적 대화", 한국사회학회 사회학대회논문집, pp.517~531 (2007), 한국사회학회
- 김태수, "사회적 합의에 의한 접근방법의 비교검토", 서울행정학회 학술발표논문집, pp.199~141 (2005)
- 노중기, "코포라티즘과 한국의 사회적 합의", 진보평론, (13), pp.84~105 (2002)
- 박기성, "노동정책에 있어서의 자유재량의 원칙: 노사정위원회를 중심으로", 노동경제논집, 21(2), pp.233~238 (1998), 한국노동경제학회
- 박덕제, "노사정위원회의 문제점과 개선방향", 한국노동경제학회 추계정책토론회 발표문 (1998)
- 선한승, "구조조정기의 사회적 시장경제의 노사관계 비교분석, In 사회적 시장경제" (1999), Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung
- 성태규, "세계화와 독일 노동시장의 변화", 한독사회과학논총, 15(1), pp.1~20 (2005), 한독사회과학회
- 시장경제와 사회적 합의, "이근식", 한국개발연구원, ~ (1999)
- 이내주, "코포라티즘", 한국논단, 70(1), pp.234~239 (1995)
- 이병천, "위기, 그리고 대전환 - 새로운 한국경제 패러다임을 찾아서" (1998), 당대
- 이연호, "노동 통제메커니즘으로서의 공급중심적 사회코포라티즘: 한국의 사례", 신아세아, 14(4), pp.166~191 (2007), 신아시아연구소
- 장귀연, "코포라티즘의 노동정치", 산업노동연구, 12(1), pp.223~258 (2006), 한국산업노동학회
- 정병기, "세계화 시기 코포라티즘의 신자유주의적 변형: 독일과 네덜란드의 예", 국제정치논총, 44(3), pp.197~216 (2004), 한국국제정치학회
- 최낙관, "독일 “Agenda 2010”과 사회정책 패러다임의 변화", 한국자치행정학보, 19(1), pp.167~192 (2005)
- 선진국 사회적 합의주의의 특성과 시사점, "최성수", 한국경제연구원, ~ (2000)
- 한국의 노사관계와 노동정치(I) - ’87년 이후 사회적 합의주의를 중심으로, "최영기", 한국노동연구원, ~ (1999)
- 한국노동연구원(편), "세계 각국의 사회협약" (2004), 한국노동연구원
- 한배호, "비교정치론" (2000), 법문사
- 고용창출을 위한 독일의 사회적 연대, "헤르베르트 에렌베르크", 프리드리히 에베르트 재단 한국협력사무소, ~ (1999)
- Berthold, N., "Das Bündnis für Arbeit, Ein Weg aus der institutionellen Verflech- tungsfalle?, In Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Beiträge des Lehrstuhls für Volkswirt- schaftslehre", pp.39~ (2000), Wirtschaftsordnung und Sozialpolitik
- Bruff, I., "Germany’s shift from the Alliance for Jobs to Agenda 2010 : The Role of Transnationalizing German Capital", Debatte, 16(2) (2008)
- Cawson, A., "Variety of Corporatism, Organized Interests and the State, In Studies in Meso-Corporatism" (1984), Sage
- Crouch, C., "Industrial Relations and European State Traditions", Clarendon Press
- Eichhorst, W., "Bündnis für Arbeit, Chancen Vergeben?", Sozialer Fortschritt, 11 (2002)
- Franz, W., "Die Agenda 2010: Symbol eines wirtschaftspolitischen Kurswechsels", Wirtschaftsdienst, 3 (2008)
- Hardach, K., "Wirtschaftsgeschichte Deutschlands in 20, In Jahrhundert(1914- 1970), 3. Aufl" (1993)
- Hassel, A., "Bündnis für Arbeit: Nationale Handlungsfähigkeit im europäischen Regimewettbewerb" (1999), Max-Plank-Institut für Gesellschaftsfor- schung
- Krupp, H. -J., "Eine neue konzertierte Aktion ist wünschenswert und machbar" (1995), Wirtschsftsdienst
- Kuesters, H., "Grundlagen der Sozialpartnerschaft: Arbeitsbeziehungen in Deutschland" (1998), Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung
- Schmitter, P. C., "Trends Toward Corporatist Intermediation" (1979), Beverly Hills & London
- Schroeder, W., "Modell Deutschland: Von der Konzertierte Aktion zum Bündnis für Arbeit", Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte (1999)
- Streeck, W., "Die Gewerkschaften im Bündnis für Arbeit, In Umbrüche und Kontinuitäten: Perspektiven nationaler und internationaler Arbeitsbeziehungen", pp.271~ (2001), München und Mering