7 - Conclusion

Summary

In the sciences, the word “model” is used to refer to “an idealized representation of reality [designed] in order to demonstrate certain of its properties” (Ackoff, Gupta & Minas, cited in Haggett 1965: 27). In this case, “model” refers to what is common to certain aspects of reality, rather than to what is different. In the 1990s the concept of the “social model” was used to refer instead to what made societies different and distinctive. One of the first cases was the identification of three different models of welfare capitalism. In the Western world after the Second World War capitalism was articulated with different varieties of welfare state. Esping-Andersen (1990) identified three different regimes of welfare capitalism: a social democratic model, committed to equality and high standards of provision; a corporatist conservative family-centred model, reflecting a distrust of markets in so far as social reproduction is concerned; and a liberal model of individual competition, which emphasizes the traditional work ethic. Other scholars then identified other welfare models. In 1997, drawing in part on theories of regulation (Aglietta 1976; Dunford 1990), Hollingsworth and Boyer (1997), published an edited collection concerned with the institutional mechanisms through which economic activity is coordinated and coined the concept of “social systems of production”, embracing industrial and financial organization, state structures and policies and societal values and norms. A central issue concerns the respective roles of markets and states/institutions at regional, national, transnational and global levels in identifying different societal models of economic governance. This interest in different social models was reinforced, yet also significantly narrowed, with the introduction of the concept of “varieties of capitalism” by Hall and Soskice (2001). In their study they distinguish between liberal market economies, closely corresponding with neoclassical representations of market economies, and coordinated market economies, with consensus-building institutions connecting employers and trades unions. This distinction overlaps with one drawn ten years earlier between neo-American and Rhine capitalism (Albert 1991). Subsequently many scholars drew on these concepts to examine different aspects of the performance of Western societies. More recently attention turned to China, and the Chinese social model or China model. In China itself, however, the term “social model” had been used at least as early as the early 1980s, by Deng Xiaoping (Deng 1994: 318).