Abstract
The aim of this chapter is to demonstrate the power of particularistic interests in the policy-making processes which govern the overall pattern of distributional conflict in the textile and clothing sector. In this sense it will build on the analysis of the material economic base underpinning these conflicts of interest which was presented in Chapters 1 and 2. To accomplish this, the chapter will examine the political strength of the textile and clothing sector in the UK and the US, and will then look in detail at the pattern of state-industry relations in the French sector. The French case provides evidence of how textile interests were able to dominate and indeed ‘capture’ the policy agenda, a detailed and extended example of the political economy of capture.1 The employers’ organisations were able to commandeer industrial and trade policy resources and so as to attenuate the impact of rising import competition, a process repeated across a broad range of industrialised economies, demonstrating the ways in which policy processes are part of market structuration. The chapter will then demonstrate how a very different industrial culture and pattern of interest intermediation in Italy led to a dynamic strategy of successful market-led adjustment to the new transnational competitive pressures of the global market. Italian firms organised themselves so as to increase their competitiveness through a collectively sponsored strategy of flexible specialisation and became the leading textile and clothing exporters in the global economy. The associational patterns and mechanisms of state-industry relations were crucial to this outcome.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
There are typically two notions of ‘capture’ in the literature. In some cases associated with the public choice literature, regulatory capture is used to illustrate the somewhat dogmatic point that regulatory regimes are initiated to serve the regulated. A second notion of capture, and the one employed here, denotes cases where a particular set of interests in the political economy acquire excessive influence over the official bodies, supposed guardians of the ‘public interest’, to which they are in theory subject. In these cases, the institutions of state and the definition of the public interest is effectively appropriated by private interests in limited regulatory domains, but this situation is far from inevitable. See William W. Bratton and Joseph A. McCahery, ‘Regulatory Competition, Regulatory Capture, and Corporate Self-regulation’, North Carolina Law Review, vol. 73/5, June 1995, pp. 1903–25.
For a more conceptual discussion of patterns of interest intermediation in relation to the textile and clothing sector, see Geoffrey R.D. Underhill, ‘Neo-Corporatist Theory and the Politics of Industrial Decline’, European Journal of Political Research, vol. 16, 1988, pp. 489–511.
Andrew Martin, ‘Political Constraints on Economic Strategies in Advanced Industrial States’, Comparative Political Studies, vol. 10, no. 3, October 1977, p. 333.
Martin Wolf, Hans H. Glismann, Joseph Selzman and Dean Spinanger, Costs of Protecting Jobs in Textiles and Clothing (London: Trade Policy Research Centre, 1984), p. 32.
See discussion in Richard Friman, Patchwork Protectionism: Textile Trade Policy in the United States, Japan, and West Germany (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990), pp. 65–71
Lane Steven Hurewitz, Textiles, a volume in the series The GATT Uruguay Round: A Negotiating History, ed. Terence P. Stewart (Deventer/Boston: Kluwer Law and Taxation, 1993), p. 68
See William R. Cline, The Future of World Trade in Textiles and Apparel (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 1990), pp. 208–30
Caroline Miles, ‘Protection in the British Textile Industry’, in W.M. Corden and G. Fels (eds), Public Assistance to Industry: Protection and Subsidies in Britain and Germany (London: Macmillan, 1976), pp. 184–214.
See Janet Walsh, ‘The Performance of UK Textiles and Clothing: Recent Controversies and Evidence’, International Review of Applied Economics, 5/3, 1991, pp. 297–303.
See the example of Courtaulds, in Arthur Knight, Private Enterprise and Public Intervention: The Courtaulds Experience (London: Allen & Unwin, 1974).
J.P. Hayes, Making Trade Policy in the European Community (London: Macmillan/Trade Policy Research Centre, 1993), p. 109.
See for example William Lazonick, ‘The Cotton Industry’, in B. Elbaum and W. Lazonick (eds), The Decline of the British Economy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986), pp. 18–50
Yves Mény and Vincent Wright, La Crise de la sidérurgie, Européenne 1974–1984 (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1985), p. 39.
For a general historical account of the emergence of the French patronat, see Jean Lambert, Le Patron (Brussels: Bloud and Gay, 1969)
Marcel Boussac, for instance, was reluctant to engage in restructuring which would result in large-scale redundancies in the small Vosges communities in which his factories were located and toward which he felt a paternal responsibility. These attitudes had their origins in the last century. With respect to the paternalism of the textile families of the Nord, see P. Pierrard, Histoire du Nord (Paris: Hachette 1978, pp. 359–60)
Erhard Friedberg, L’Etat et l’industrie en France: rapport d’enquête (Paris: CNRS, Groupe Sociologie des Organisations, mimeo 1976), pp. 119–21.
Chris Farrands, ‘Textile Diplomacy: The Making and Implementation of European Textile Policy 1974–1978’, Journal of Common Market Studies, vol. XVIII, no. 1, September 1979, p. 38.
René Mouriaux Les Syndicats dans la société française, Paris: Presses de la Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politiques, 1983)
Philip M. Williams, Crisis and Compromise: Politics in the Fourth Republic (London: Longman, 1972), p. 384.
Lynn Krieger Mytelka, ‘The French Textile Industry — Crisis and Adjustment’, in Harold K. Jacobson and Dusan Sidjanski (eds), The Emerging International Economic Order: Dynamic Processes, Constraints, and Opportunities (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1982), p. 135.
See the strong-state-weak-state argument formulated by Peter J. Katzenstein (ed.), Between Power and Plenty (Madison, Wisconsin: Wisconsin University Press, 1978).
Michael Atkinson and W.D. Coleman, ‘Strong States and Weak States: Sectoral Policy Networks in Advanced Capitalist Economies’, British Journal of Political Science, vol. 19, no. 1, January 1989, pp. 47–67.
Benoît Boussemart and Jean-Claude Rabier, Le Dossier Agache-Willot: un capitalisme à contre-courant (Paris: Presses de la Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politiques, 1983), p. 156
See Geoffrey R.D. Underhill, ‘When Technology Doesn’t Mean Change: Industrial Adjustment and Textile Production in France’, in Michael Talalay, Chris Farrands and Roger Tooze (eds), Technology, Culture, and Competitiveness in the World Political Economy (London: Routledge, 1997), pp. 139–50.
State intervention in the sector tended to be either general measures such as support for employment levels in industry or regional subsidies, or related to ‘lifesaving’ for firms in crisis. The textile and clothing sector was never regarded by the state as one of strategic importance. See Pierre Dubois and Giusto Barisi, Le Défi technologique dans l’industrie de l’habillement: les stratégies des entrepreneurs français et italiens (Paris: CNRS, Groupe Sociologie du Travail, 1982), pp. 45–8.
P. Moati and E.M. Mouhoud, ‘Information et organisation de la production: vers une division cognitive du travail’, Economie appliquée, vol. XLVI, no. 1, 1994, p. 63.
Giorgio Barba Navaretti and Giorgio Perosino, ‘Redeployment of Production, Trade Protection, and Firms’ Global Strategies: The Case of Italy’, in G.B. Navaretti, R. Faini, and Aubrey Silbertson (eds), Beyond the Multifibre Arrangement: Third World Competition and Restructuring Europe’s Textile Industry (Paris: OECD, 1995), p. 170.
F. Pyke, G. Becattini and W. Sengenberger (eds), Industrial Districts and Inter-Firm Co-operation in Italy (Geneva: International Institute for Labour Studies, 1990).
See M. Piore and C. Sabel, The Second Industrial Divide (New York: Free Press, 1984).
See Theda Skocpol and Ellen Kay Trimberger, ‘Revolutions and the World-Historical Development of Capitalism’, in Barbara Hockey Kaplan (ed.), Social Change in the Capitalist World Economy (London: Sage 1978), p. 132.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1998 Geoffrey R. D. Underhill
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Underhill, G.R.D. (1998). State, Market Governance, and Particularistic Interests: The Political Economy of Capture. In: Industrial Crisis and the Open Economy. International Political Economy Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26903-7_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26903-7_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-26905-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-26903-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)