Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-k8lnt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T03:53:07.663Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Explaining the deadlock of the European social dialogue: negotiating in the shadow of hierarchy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2022

Julie Malene Eichstedt Sørensen ,
Mathias Würtzenfeld  and
Magnus Paulsen Hansen Open the ORCID record for Magnus Paulsen Hansen [Opens in a new window]
Julie Malene Eichstedt Sørensen
Affiliation:
Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde, Denmark
Mathias Würtzenfeld
Affiliation:
Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark
Magnus Paulsen Hansen*
Affiliation:
Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: mapaha@ruc.dk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The European Social Dialogue (ESD) is a mixed story of ongoing negotiations between the social partners but with rather few binding agreements. Whereas some see the sparse actions as an inevitable consequence of deep structural and political asymmetries, others have pointed out the key role played by the Commission, as a “shadow of hierarchy”, in pushing the social partners towards binding agreements. By applying novel insights from theories of veto players and asymmetric interdependence to an in-depth case study of two agreements, the article is the first attempt to take a systematic game theoretical approach to the study of the ESD. We show that the likelihood of a binding agreement depends on the degree and changeability of the shadow of hierarchy as well as the complexity of issue and reputational risks of the social partners. The findings have implications for the likely effectiveness of the recent attempt to “re-launch” the ESD.

Keywords

BATNAEuropean Social Dialoguegame theoryshadow of hierarchyveto player

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Public Policy , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , June 2022 , pp. 323 - 342
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Adamczyk, S (2018) Inside the Trade Union Family: The ‘Two Worlds’ within the European Trade Union Confederation. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 24(2): 179–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahlberg, K (2008) A Story of Failure – But Also of Success: The Social Dialogue on Temporary Agency Work and the Subsequent Negotiations Between the Member States on the Draft Directive. In Ahlberg, K., Bercusson, B., Bruun, N., Kontouros, H., Vigneau, C. and Zappalà, L. (eds.), Transnational Labour Regulation. Brussels: Peter Lang, 191–262.Google Scholar
Benson, AM (2007) A Game Theoretical Approach to Sustaining Social Dialogue. Thesis, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Berlingher, D (2018) Member States’ Compliance with EU Law in 2018 in the Field of Internal Market. Journal of Legal Studies, 22(36): 15–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bieler, A and Schulten, T (2008) European Integration: A Strategic Level for Trade Union Resistance to Neoliberal Restructuring and for the Promotion of Political Alternatives? In A. Biele, I. Lindberg and D. Pillay (eds.), Labour and the Challenges of Globalization. Lenham: Rowman and Littlefield, 231–260.Google Scholar
Blatter, J and Haverland, M (2012) Designing Case Studies: Explanatory Approaches in Small-N Research. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collier, D (2011) Understanding Process Tracing. PS: Political Science and Politics, 44: 823–830.Google Scholar
Dølvik, JE (1999) An Emerging Island? ETUC, Social Dialogue and the Europeanisation of the Trade Unions in the 1990s. Brussels: ETUI.Google Scholar
European Commission (2016) A New Start for Social Dialogue. Luxemburg: European Commission.Google Scholar
Falkner, G (1998) EU Social Policy in the 1990s: Towards a Corporatist Policy Community. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Faro, ALO (2012) Bargaining in the Shadow of ‘Optional Frameworks’? The Rise of Transnational Collective Agreements and EU Law. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 18(2): 153–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furåker, B and Bengtsson, M (2013) On the Road to Transnational Cooperation? Results from a Survey of European Trade Unions. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 19(2): 161–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartzén, AC (2017) The European Social Dialogue in Perspective – Its Future Potential as an Autopoietic System and Lessons from the Global Maritime System of Industrial Relations. Doctoral thesis, Lund University.Google Scholar
Héritier, A and Lehmkuhl, D (2008) The Shadow of Hierarchy and New Modes of Governance. Journal of Public Policy, 28(1): 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, L (2012) Anatomy of a “Critical Friendship”: Organized Labour and the European State Formation. Globalizations, 9(4): 577–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janusch, H (2018) The Interaction Effects of Bargaining Power: The Interplay Between Veto Power, Asymmetric Interdependence, Reputation, and Audience Costs. Negotiation Journal, 34(3): 219–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, B and Sörries, B (1999) The New European Social Dialogue: Old Wine in New Bottles? Journal of European Social Policy, 9(2): 111–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, RO and Nye, JS (2001) Power and Interdependence, 3rd ed. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Keune, M and Marginson, P (2013) Transnational Industrial Relations as Multi-Level Governance: Interdependencies in European Social Dialogue. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 51(3): 473–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, H (1999) Constructing European Collective Bargaining. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 20(3): 393–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kröger, S (2009) The Open Method of Coordination: Underconceptualisation Overdetermination, De-Politicisation and Beyond. European Integration Online Paper, 13(5): 1–22.Google Scholar
Lapeyre, J (2017) Le dialogue social européen Histoire d’une innovation sociale (1985–2003) [The European social dialogue: History of a social innovation]. Brussels: ETUI.Google Scholar
Larsen, TP and Andersen, SK (2007) A New Mode of European Regulation? The Implementation of the Autonomous Framework Agreement on Telework in Five Countries. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 13(2): 181–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marginson, P and Sisson, K (2004) European Integration and Industrial Relations: Multi-Level Governance in the Making. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Miller, GD (2003) Hypothesis on Reputation: Alliance Choices and The Shadow of the Past. Security Studies, 12(3): 40–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohl, LD (1997) Coercive Power in Social Exchange. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, A (1998) The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pochet, P and Degryse, C (2017) The European Social Dialogue: What Is the Role of Employers and What Are the Hopes for the Future? In Vandenbroucke, F., Barnard, C., & De Baere, G. (eds.), A European Social Union after the Crisis. Cambridge: Cambridge, 231–260.Google Scholar
Prosser, TJ (2016) Economic Union without Social Union: The Strange Case of the European Social Dialogue. Journal of European Social Policy, 26(5): 460–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prosser, TJ and Perin, E (2015) European Tripartism: Chimera or Reality? The ‘New Phase’ of the European Social Dialogue in the Light of Tripartite Theory and Practice. Business History, 57(3): 376–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sartori, AE (2002) The Might of the Pen: A Reputational Theory of Communication in International Disputes . International Organization, 56(1): 121–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schäfer, A and Leiber, S (2009) The Double Voluntarism in EU Social Dialogue and Employment Policy. European Integration Online Papers (EIoP), 13(1): 1–19.Google Scholar
Scharpf, FW (2002) The European Social Model: Coping with the Challenges of Diversity. Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(4): 645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scharpf, FW (2010) The Asymmetry of European Integration, or Why the EU Cannot be a ‘Social Market Economy’. Socio-Economic Review, 8(2): 211–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schömann, I (2011) EU Integration and EU Initiatives on Employee Participation and Social Dialogue. Brussels: ETUI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulten, T, Müller, T and Eldring, L (2015) Prospects and Obstacles of a European Minimum Wage Policy. In Gyes, GV and Schulten, T (eds.), Wage Bargaining under the New European Economic Governance. Brussels: ETUI, 327–359.Google Scholar
Seeliger, M (2019) Trade Unions in the Course of European Integration: The Social Construction of Organized Interests. Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smismans, S (2008) The European Social Dialogue in the Shadow of Hierarchy. Journal of Public Policy, 28(1): 161–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Streeck, W (1994) European Social Policy after Maastricht: The “Social Dialogue” and “Subsidiarily”. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 15(2): 151–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Streeck, W and Schmitter, PC (1991) From National Corporatism to Transnational Pluralism: Organized Interests in the Single European Market. Politics and Society, 19(2): 133–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teague, P (1993) Towards Social Europe? Industrial Relations after 1992. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 4(2): 349–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The European Parliament, Council of European Union, & European Commission (2017) Establishing a European Pillar of Social Rights, COM(2017) 250 final, Brussels, 26.04.2017, Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
Tsarouhas, D (2006) European Integration and Path Dependence: Explaining the Evolution of EU Social Policy. European Political Economy Review, 3(2): 87–111.Google Scholar
Tsebelis, G (2002) Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varoufakis, Y (2008) Game Theory: Can It Unify the Social Sciences? Organization Studies, 29(8–9): 1255–1277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, S (2010) Sectoral Social Dialogue at EU Level – Recent Results and Implementation Challenges. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 16(4): 489–507.Google Scholar
Welz, C (2008) The European Social Dialogue under Articles 138 and 139 of the EC Treaty: Actors, Processes, Outcomes. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar