Rejoinder: on terminology, functionalism, (historical) institutionalism and liberalization
- 1 September 2005
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Socio-Economic Review
- Vol. 3 (3) , 577-587
- https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwi026
Abstract
Authors receiving such impressive comments on their work as we did must be grateful even if some of the comments are critical. Since criticism is essential to scholarly progress, they might even be tempted to respond that critical debate was all they ever wanted to achieve. But given the significance of the themes raised by Herrigel, O'Sullivan and Pempel, this would be all too complacent. Respecting inevitable limitations of space, I want to focus on three issues that to me are the most important. First, I will try to defend our choice of terminology, pointing out what its purpose was and what it was not. Second, I will address the relationship between economical functionalism and historical institutionalism, hoping to be able to bring out how one might try to...Keywords
This publication has 7 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Global and the LocalPublished by Oxford University Press (OUP) ,2005
- Educating capitalists: a rejoinder to Wright and TsakalotosSocio-Economic Review, 2004
- The Diversity of Modern CapitalismPublished by Oxford University Press (OUP) ,2003
- Toward a Comparative Institutional AnalysisPublished by MIT Press ,2001
- Varieties of CapitalismPublished by Oxford University Press (OUP) ,2001
- Beneficial Constraints: On the Economic Limits of Rational VoluntarismPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,1997
- Political Economy of Modern Capitalism: Mapping Convergence and DiversityPublished by SAGE Publications ,1997