Regulation school
The Régulation School is a group of writers on political economy and economics whose origins can be traced to France in the early 1970s where economic instability and stagflation were rampant in the French economy. The term ‘régulation’ was coined by Frenchman Destanne de Bernis who aimed to use the approach as a system theory to bring Marxist economic analysis up to date.[1] They are influenced by structural Marxism, the Annales School, and institutionalism among others and sought to present the emergence of new economic (and hence, social) forms in terms of tensions existing within old arrangements. Since they are interested in how historically specific system of capital accumulation is 'regularized' (i.e. stabilized), their approach is called "regulation approach" or "regulation theory". Though this approach originated in Michel Aglietta's monograph, A Theory of Capitalist Regulation: The US Experience (Verso, 1976) and popularized by other Parisiens such as Robert Boyer [1], the school membership goes well beyond the so-called Parisien School: Grenoble School, German School, Amsterdam School, British radical geographers, Social Structure of Accumulation School (US), and neo-Gramscian school, etc.
Contents |
[edit] The Régulation Approach
Robert Boyer describes the wide encompassing theory as “The study of the transformation of social relations, which creates new forms- both economic and non-economic- organized in structures and reproducing a determinate structure, the mode of reproduction” [2] This theory or approach looks at the capitalist economies as a function of social and institutional systems and not just as government's role in the regulation of the economy although that is a big part of the approach.
[edit] Regimes of Accumulation and Modes of Regulation
Regulation theory discusses historical change of the political economy through two central concepts: Regimes of Accumulation (or Accumulation Regime)(AR) and Modes of Regulation (MR). Regimes of Accumulation analyze the way production, circulation, consumption, and distribution organizes and expands capital in a way that stabilizes the economy over a period of time. Alain Lipietz in Towards a New Economic Order describes the Regimes of Accumulation of Fordism as mass producing, proportionate share-out of value added, and a consequent stability in firm’s profitability; with the plant used at full capacity and full employment are all elements of this approach (p. 6).
MRs are institutional sets of law, norms, forms of state, policy paradigms and other practices which provide the context for the AR's operation. Typically, it is said that it comprises money form, competition form, wage form, state form, and international regime, but can encompass many more elements than these. Generally speaking, MRs support ARs by providing a conducive and supportive environment, in which the AR's are given guidelines to which they should follow. In case that there is a tension between the two, then there may occur a crisis. Thus this approach parallels Marx's characterisation of historical change as driven by 'contradictions' between the forces and the relations of production (see Historical Materialism).
[edit] Translation and definition
Bob Jessop summarises the difficulties of the term in Governing Capitalist Economies, where he states: "The RA seeks to integrate analysis of political economy with analysis of civil society and or State to show how they interact to normalize the capital relation and govern the conflictual and crisis-mediated course of capital accumulation. In this sense, 'régulation' might have been better- and less mechanically-translated as regularization or normalization" (p 4). Therefore the term régulation does not necessarily translate well as regulation. Regulation, as in the sense of government action, does have a part in Régulation theory.
[edit] History of Modes of Regulation
Robert Boyer identified two main distinct modes of regulation throughout the 19th and 20th centuries.
- 1850 - 1930 : the "mode of regulation of competition". It consist of a first mode of regulation, from 1850 to the beginning of the century, called by Boyer "extensive mode of regulation", characterized by low productivity gains, important part of the output dedicated to equipments, and high competition. The second period is called "intensive mode of regulation without mass consumption", because the period consists of high productivity gains, thanks to taylorism methods, and by the production of consumption commodencies.
- After 1930 : the "monopolist mode of regulation". It consists of a mode of accumulation with high productivity and mass consumption. The fordist system made possible a regular growth of the economic output and an increase in income at the same time.
[edit] Crisis
Regulationist economists make a distinction between cyclical crisis and structural crisis. They study only structural crisis, which are the crisis of a mode of regulation. From this distinction, the regulationists have made a typology of the crises which gives an account of various disarrangements in the institutional configuration - according to its initial objective which was to understand the rupture of the fordist made of regulation:
- the exogenic crises are due to an external event: they can be very perturbing, but cannot put in in danger the mode of regulation, and even less the mode of accumulation. The New Classical Economists (or economists of the school of rational anticipations) consider that all crises are exogenic.
- the endogenous crises are cyclical crisis which are necessary and inevitable, for they make it possible to cancel imbalances accumulated during the phase of expansion, without major deterioration of the institutional forms. These crises are indissociable of the operation of capitalism.
- the crisis of the mode of regulation: unable to avoid a downward spiral, the institutional forms and the way the State intervene in the economy must be modified. The best example is that of the crisis of 1929 where the free play of market forces and competition did not lead to a renewed phase of expansion.
- the crisis of the mode of accumulation means that it is impossible to continue the long-term growth without major upheaval of institutional forms. The crisis of 1929 is the best example: the period of the inter-war period marks the passage of a mode of accumulation characterised by mass production without consumption of mass to a mode incorporating all at the same time, mass production and consumption.
[edit] Members of the Regulation School
[edit] References
[edit] External links
- An overview of the Regulation School
- A scholarly blog on the Regulation School in Economic Thought
- An interview in which Alain Lipietz gives a brief introduction to Regulation Theory
- Article on Lipietz's approach to Regulation Theory
- A page containing some notes on the Regulation School's approach to Fordism, as presented by A. Amin
- A selection of key works by Regulation School writers.
- Chapter 2 of this monograph explores the theoretical approach of the Regulation School.
- A Critique of the Fordism of the Regulation School - from Wildcat.
- A research article on whether regulation theory can explain change in sub-national government.
