...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Public Policy >Explaining German Selectivity Regarding European Union Pension Directives
【24h】

Explaining German Selectivity Regarding European Union Pension Directives

机译:解释德国对欧盟退休金指令的选择性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Why do German policymakers support some aspects of a single European pension market, but not others? This article argues that the German government's preferences towards European Union (EU) pension directives are best explained by combining historical institutionalism (HI) and domestic discourse analysis (DA). Each approach by itself is insufficient to account for the observed variation between 1991 and 2007. Arguments based on party ideologies offer less explanatory power. HI explains why all governments - Kohl, Schroder, and Mcrkel - protected employer-sponsored book reserve pensions, a cornerstone of Germany's coordinated market economy, from the scope of EU directives. DA allows us to grasp how interests were reframed. While the status quo stance of the Kohl government succeeded in delegitimizing supporters of alternative pension security concepts, the Schroder administration imposed an economically efficient pension reform without much public support. The grand coalition, in turn, abandoned Chancellor Mcrkel's initial plan to expand second-tier pensions in the light of rising pressures that the Left Party posed for the Social Democratic coalition partner.
机译:为什么德国决策者支持单一欧洲养老金市场的某些方面,而不支持其他方面?本文认为,结合历史制度主义(HI)和国内话语分析(DA)可以最好地解释德国政府对欧盟(EU)养老金指令的偏好。每种方法本身不足以解释1991年至2007年之间观察到的变化。基于政党意识形态的论点提供的解释力较小。 HI解释了为什么所有政府-科尔,施罗德和麦克尔-都从欧盟指令的范围内保护雇主赞助的账本储备金,这是德国协调市场经济的基石。 DA使我们能够掌握如何重新构建利益。尽管科尔政府的现状成功地使替代性养老金保障概念的支持者合法化,但施罗德政府在没有太多公众支持的情况下实施了经济上有效的养老金改革。鉴于左翼党向社会民主党联盟伙伴施加的压力越来越大,大联盟反过来放弃了麦克克尔总理扩大二线养老金的最初计划。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号