1996Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooksRequires access

Post-Fordism and the State

Bob Jessop

Open publisher page 419 citations

Abstract

Drawing on recent developments in regulationist economics and neoMarxist state theory, this contribution begins with a brief comment on the nature of social reproduction regimes and the importance of taking proper account of the ‘mixed economy of reproduction’. 1 It then addresses four interrelated sets of questions about the recent restructuring and possible transcendence of the post-war social reproduction regime associated with Atlantic Fordism, especially in its north-West European guise of the Keynesian welfare state. First what is involved in theorizing ‘post-Fordist’ social reproduction regimes? Second, considering the latter in relatively abstract theoretical terms, what might its core features comprise? Third, moving to more concrete-complex terms, how might post-Fordist social reproduction regimes be distinguished one from another? And, fourth, what are the respective roles of the state (whether at supranational, national, or local level) and other forms of governance in such regimes? Unfortunately space constraints preclude a detailed answer to all these questions but I will at least try to suggest how they might be addressed. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Drawing on recent developments in regulationist economics and neoMarxist state theory, this contribution begins with a brief comment on the nature of social reproduction regimes and the importance of taking proper account of the ‘mixed economy of reproduction’. 1 It then addresses four interrelated sets of questions about the recent restructuring and possible transcendence of the post-war social reproduction regime associated with Atlantic Fordism, especially in its north-West European guise of the Keynesian welfare state. First what is involved in theorizing ‘post-Fordist’ social reproduction regimes? Second, considering the latter in relatively abstract theoretical terms, what might its core features comprise? Third, moving to more concrete-complex terms, how might post-Fordist social reproduction regimes be distinguished one from another? And, fourth, what are the respective roles of the state (whether at supranational, national, or local level) and other forms of governance in such regimes? Unfortunately space constraints preclude a detailed answer to all these questions but I will at least try to suggest how they might be addressed. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 419 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Drawing on recent developments in regulationist economics and neoMarxist state theory, this contribution begins with a brief comment on the nature of social reproduction regimes and the importance of taking proper account of the ‘mixed economy of reproduction’. 1 It then addresses four interrelated sets of questions about the recent restructuring and possible transcendence of the post-war social reproduction regime associated with Atlantic Fordism, especially in its north-West European guise of the Keynesian welfare state. First what is involved in theorizing ‘post-Fordist’ social reproduction regimes? Second, considering the latter in relatively abstract theoretical terms, what might its core features comprise? Third, moving to more concrete-complex terms, how might post-Fordist social reproduction regimes be distinguished one from another? And, fourth, what are the respective roles of the state (whether at supranational, national, or local level) and other forms of governance in such regimes? Unfortunately space constraints preclude a detailed answer to all these questions but I will at least try to suggest how they might be addressed. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Key concepts: Fordism, Reproduction, Restructuring, Social reproduction, State (computer science), Welfare state, Neoclassical economics, Economic system

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Post-Fordism and the State — Research Paper | ScholarLens