Economy of Difference and Social Differentiation

Precarity—Searching for a New Interpretative Paradigm
  • Peter HerrmannEmail author
Part of the Prekarisierung und soziale Entkopplung – transdisziplinäre Studien book series (PSETS)


Instead of approaching precarity from the perspective of employment, labour market and social security, the contribution aims on putting forward some paradigmatic questions that allow analysing the setting in the frame which makes it possible to understand some structural aspects of the current economic situation more thoroughly, also opening a view on a perspective beyond overcoming the crisis by opening for a new round of competitive capitalist accumulation.


Paradigm change Precarity Accumulation Economic shift Crisis 


  1. Albert, M. (1993). Capitalism against Capitalism. London: Whurr.Google Scholar
  2. Anand, P. B., Gasper, Des., & Teschl, M. (2010). Markets, governance and human development. revue de philosophie économique; Ed. Association de philosophie économique, 11(1), 3–10.Google Scholar
  3. Archibugi, F. (2000). The associative economy. Insights Beyond the welfare state and into post-capitalism. London et altera: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Arendt, H. (1959). The human condition; With an introduction by Margaret Canovan. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 19982.Google Scholar
  5. Beck, W., van der Maesen, L., & Walker, A. (2012). Theoretical foundations. In: L. J. G. van der Maesen & A. Walker (eds.). Social quality. From theory to indicators, (pp. 44–69). Houndsmills: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  6. Bieling, H.-J., & Brand, U. (2015). Competitiveness or emancipation? Rethinking regulation and (counter-)hegemony in times of capitalist crisis. In R. Westra, D. Badeen, & R. Albritton (Eds.), The future of capitalism after the financial crisis. The varieties of capitalism debate in the age of austerity, (pp. 184–204). Oxon et altera: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Churchill, W. (1947). Speech in the house of commons. Parliament Bill; HC Deb 11 November 1947 vol 444 cc203–321; Accessed 14. Jun. 2018.
  8. Bloch, E. (1959). Prinzip Hoffnung. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  9. Boyer, R., & Saillard, Y. (eds.). (2002). Régulation theory. The state of the art. London: Routledge [French original published in 1995]; Boyer, Robert: Théorie de la Régulation. !. Les Fondamentaux; Paris: La Découverte, 2004.Google Scholar
  10. Brie, M. (Ed.). (2014). Futuring. Perspektiven der Transformation im Kapitalismus über ihn hinaus. Münster: Verlag Westfälisches Dampfboot.Google Scholar
  11. Buhr, D., & Frankenberger, R. (2014). Spielarten des inkorporierten Kapitalismus. In A. Nölke, C. May, & S. Claar (Eds.), Die großen Schwellenländer. Ursachen und Folgen ihres Aufstiegs in der Weltwirtschaft, (pp. 61–84). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.Google Scholar
  12. Caffentzis, G. (1980). The work/energy crisis and the apocalypse. In letters of blood and fire: Work, machines, and the crisis of capitalism, (pp. 11–57). Oakland: PM Press.Google Scholar
  13. Castel, R. (1995). Les Métamorphoses de la Question Sociale. Une Chronique du Salariat. Paris: Libraire Arthème Fayard.Google Scholar
  14. Coates, D. (2014). Studying comparative capitalisms by going left and by going deeper. Capital & Class, 38(1), 18–30. Scholar
  15. Costanza, R., et al. (2014). Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change, 26, 152–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Costanza, R., et al. (1997). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. In Nature, 387, 253-v dvdde z Sociology and the Globalized Society; Paper presented at the ESA 10th Conference, Geneva, September 7–10, 2011; Accessed 29. Jan. 2014.
  17. Elias, N. (1939). On the process of civilisation: Sociogenetic and psychogenetic investigations. Translation by Edmund Jephcott with some notes and corrections by the author; The Collected Works of Norbert Elias, vol. 3; S. Mennell, E. Dunning, J. Goundsblo, & R. Kilminster (eds.), Dublin: University College Dublin Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  18. Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. Critical Inquiry, 8(4 Summer), 777–795; The University of Chicago Press.
  19. Foucault, M. (1997) Il faut defender la société. Cours au Collège des France (1975–196). Édition établie, dans le cadre de l ?Association pout le Centre Michel Foucault sous la direction de François Ewald …; Seuil/Gallimard, 1997.Google Scholar
  20. Galbraith, J. K. (2014). The end of normal. The great crisis and the future growth, (p. 144). New York et. altera: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  21. Gerstenberg, R. (2010). Bertelsmannrepublik Deutschland – eine Stiftung macht Politik. Frankfurt/M: Campus.Google Scholar
  22. Globalization 101 (May 4th, 2011). BRICS: The new world powers. Accessed 27. Dec. 2014.
  23. von Goethe, J. W. (1806). Faust. English translation by Abraham Hayward; with illustrations by Willy Pogany; London: A.C. Fowler, 1908: 34).Google Scholar
  24. Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (eds.). (2001). Varieties of capitalism. The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press [reprinted 2010].Google Scholar
  25. Herrmann, P. (2010). CSR – Corporate Social Responsibility versus Citizens Social Rights Or: On Regaining Political Economy. In P. Herrmann (ed.), World’s New Princedoms. Critical Remarks on Claimed Alternatives by New Life; Amsterdam: Rozenberg Publishers, 2010 and Bremen/Oxford: academicpress, 2012: 129–146.Google Scholar
  26. Herrmann, P. (2014a). Precarity―An issue of changed labour market and employment patterns or of changed social security systems? In P. Herrmann, V. Bobkov, & J. Csoba (eds.), Labour market and precarity of employment. Theoretical reflections and empirical data from Hungary and Russia (pp. 11–66). Bremen: Wiener Verlag für Sozialforschung.Google Scholar
  27. Herrmann, P. (2014b). Social policy―Production rather than distribution. A rights-based approach. Bremen: EHV Academicpress.Google Scholar
  28. Jessop, B. (2104). Capitalist diversity and variety: Variegation, the world market, compossibility and ecological dominance. Capital & Class, 38(1) 45–58. Scholar
  29. Kannankulam, J., & Georgi, F. (2014). Varieties of capitalism or varieties of relationships of forces? Outlines of a historical materialist policy analysis. Capital & Class 38(1), 1–13. Scholar
  30. Konzeptwerk neue Ökonomie (ed.). (2014). Zeitwohlstand – Wie wir anders arbeiten, nachhaltig wirtschaften und besser leben. München: oekom verlag, Gesellschaft für ökologische Kommunikation.Google Scholar
  31. Krah, W. (1965). Von der Umwandlung der Wissenschaft in eine Unmittelbare Produktivkraft, in: Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie; 1/1965.Google Scholar
  32. Lieb, W. (August 26, 2010). Ist die Bertelsmann Stiftung gemeinnützig? NachDenkSeiten. Die kritische Website. Accessed 2. Jan. 2015.
  33. Lipietz, A. (1986). New Tendencies in the international division of labor: Regimes of accumulation and modes of regulation. In A. J. Scott & M. Storper (eds.), Production, work, territory. The geographical anatomy of industrial capitalism (pp. 16–40). Boston: Allen&Unwin.Google Scholar
  34. Marx, K. (1857). Economic manuscripts of 1957–1958 (First Version of Capital). Introduction. In Karl Marx. Frederick Engels. Collected Works. Vol. 28; London: Lawrence&Wishart, 1986; 17–48.Google Scholar
  35. Marx, K. (1867). Capital Volume One. In: Karl Marx. Frederick Engels. Collected Works, Vol. 35; London: Lawrence&Wishart 1996.Google Scholar
  36. Marx, K. (1885). [First English Edition 1907, in different translation]: Capital, Volume II [German first edition 1885; second 1893]. In Karl Marx. Frederick Engels. Collected Works. Volume 36; London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1997.Google Scholar
  37. Marx, K. (1894). Capital, Volume III [German first edition 1894]. In Karl Marx. Frederick Engels. Collected Works. Vol. 37; London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1998.Google Scholar
  38. Moore, J. W. (2014a). The Capitalocene. Part I: On the Nature & Origins of Our Ecological Crisis; March 2014. Accessed 15. Jun. 2014.
  39. More, J. W. (2014b). The Capitalocene. Part II: Abstract Social Nature and the Limits to Capital; March 2014, Minor revisions June 2014. Accessed 15. Jun. 2014.
  40. Nölke, A., & Vliegenhart, A. (2009). Enlarging the Varieties of Capitalism. The Emergence of Dependent Market Economies in East Central Europe. World Politics, 61(4), 670–702.Google Scholar
  41. O’Hara, P. A. (1995). Household labor, the family, and macroeconomic instability in the United States: 1940s–1990s. Review of Social Economy, 53(1), 89–1209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Opielka, M. (2014). Warum Ernst Abbe auf die Leute vertraute; Vortrag auf der studentischen Fachtagung zur Sozialpolitik „Den Kapitalismus überholen! Sozialpolitik und Nachhaltigkeit nach Ernst Abbe’ am 12. Dezember 2014 an der Ernst-Abbe-Hochschule Jena; [copy received from the author].Google Scholar
  43. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action, Cambridge University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  44. Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton University Press: Princeton.Google Scholar
  45. Perkins, P. E. (2007). Feminist ecological economics and sustainability. Journal of Bioeconomics, 9, 227–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Piketty, T. (2013). Le Capital au XXIe siècle. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
  47. Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation. The political and economic origins of our time. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  48. Poulantzas, N. (1975). Classes in Contemporary Capitalism [original: Les Classes Sociales dans le Capitalisme Aujourd’hui; Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1974]; Translated by David Fernbach; London: NLB: 71).Google Scholar
  49. Pressestatements. (2011). Pressestatements von Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel und dem Ministerpräsidenten der Republik Portugal, Pedro Passos Coelho in Berlin, 1.9.2011. Accessed 31. Dec. 2014.
  50. Roelvink, G. (2013). Rethinking species-being in the anthropocene. Rethinking Marxism, 25(1), 52–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sablowski, T. (2018). Warum die Imperiale Lebensweise die Klassenfrage ausblenden muss (Why the imperial mode of life has to neglect the question of class; in: Luxemburg. Gesellschaftsanalyse und Linke Praxis. Accessed 14. Jun. 2018.
  52. Safri, M., & Chapas, B. (2010). The global household: Toward a feminist postcapitalist international political economy. Signs, 36(1), 99–125. Google Scholar
  53. Sauga, M. (2014). Das Zombie-System. DER SPIEGEL 43 – 20.10.2014: 66–76; Accessed 30. Dec. 2014.
  54. Sbilanciamoci. (2014). Rapporto Sbilanciamoci! Come usare la spesa pubblica per i diritti, la pace, l’ambiente. XVI rapporto. Accessed 31. Dec. 2014.
  55. Slife, B. D. (2004). Taking practice seriously: Toward a relational ontology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 24(2), 157–178. Scholar
  56. Streeck, W. (2010). E Pluribus Unum? Varieties and Commonalities of Capitalism; MPIfG Discussion Paper 10/12. Köln: MPIfG.Google Scholar
  57. Streeck, W. (2011). Taking capitalism seriously: Towards an institutionalist approach to contemporary political economy. Socio-Economic Review, 9, 137–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Šuchardin, S. V. (ed.). (1974). Wissenschaft als Produktivkraft: der Prozess der Umwandlung der Wissenschaft in eine unmittelbare Produktivkraft; Hrsg. von d. Akademie d. Wissenschaften d. UDSSR. Berlin: Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
  59. This Saint-Jean, I. (2005). Peut-on définir la sociologie économique? In Philippe Steiner and Isabelle This Saint-Jean (eds.), Sociologies Économiques. L’Année sociologique 55. (307 – 326). Accessed 9. Sept. 2014; Accessed 1. Jan. 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. UNDP [United Nations Development Programme]. (1995). Human development report 1995. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Univesity of Ersten FinlandKuopioFinland

Personalised recommendations