Agrarian political economy and modern world capitalism: the contributions of food regime analysis

This paper provides a selective survey of food regimes and food regime analysis since the seminal article by Harriet Friedmann and Philip McMichael in 1989, and further traced through their subsequent (individual) work. It identifies eight key elements or dimensions of food regime analysis, namely the international state system; international divisions of labour and patterns of trade; the ‘rules’ and discursive (ideological) legitimations of different food regimes; relations between agriculture and industry, including technical and environmental change in farming; dominant forms of capital and their modalities of accumulation; social forces (other than capitals and states); the tensions and contradictions of specific food regimes; and transitions between food regimes. These are used to summarise three food regimes in the history of world capitalism to date: a first regime from 1870 to 1914, a second regime from 1945 to 1973, and a third corporate food regime from the 1980s proposed by McMichael within the period of neoliberal globalisation. Questions of theory, method and evidence are noted in the course of the exposition and pulled together in a final section which criticises the ‘peasant turn’ of the ‘corporate food regime’ and the analytical and empirical weaknesses associated with it.     

Formed by thalidomide: mass torts as a false cure for toxic exposure

Professor Bernstein considers a theme of Judge Weinstein's judicial and academic writings--that tort law works imperfectly to effect justice in mass disaster cases--through the vehicle of thalidomide, the paradigmatic toxic substance. Thirty-five years ago, thalidomide poisoned thousands of children, inflicting limb-reduction birth defects. Professor Bernstein argues that the drug has also had a malforming effect on mass tort law. Courts and scholars have used the precedent of thalidomide to build stringent legal standards of proof and causation, without enough attention to the functions and consistency of these standards. Thalidomide has also prompted commentators to celebrate American drug regulation and the American liability system; Professor Bernstein argues that these paeans are exaggerated. She concludes that the United States must confront its thalidomide history, as other nations in the world have done, and build social institutions--strong regulation and social insurance--to guard against toxic disasters of the future.     

Employee attitude surveys: perception vs. reality

In order to correctly interpret employee perceptions, analysts must understand the organization's past, present, and future goals and policies, its performance and success, and its place in the business environment.     

Les transformations du travail et de l'entreprise : qu'attendre des politiques publiques?1

Sommaire : Les politiques publiques du travail ont été conçues pour offrir des mesures de protection aux salariés travaillant à temps plein, pour un seul employeur, sous son contrôle et sur les lieux de l'entreprise. Or, le marché du travail est aujourd'hui composé d'une pluralité de relations d'emploi qui limitent l'efficacité de ces protections. Ce constat soulève la question suivante : que devraient contenir les politiques publiques pour être mieux adaptées au marché du travail? La première partie de cet article examine les voies de renouvellement possible des politiques publiques pour tenir compte des transformations du travail et de l'entreprise. Certaines suggèrent de faire reposer l'octroi de droits et d'avantages sur l'existence d'un travail ou d'une activité professionnelle alors que d'autres les rattachent à l'individu ou au citoyen. Ces propositions ne pourront cependant voir le jour que si elles font l'objet d'une appropriation par les acteurs sociaux et étatiques. Une réflexion sur le contenu des politiques doit ainsi être combinée à l'étude des processus sociaux susceptibles de faire émerger de telles réformes. Cette question est abordée dans la deuxième partie de l'article à partir de trois exemples récents de réformes législatives. Abstract: Public labour policies were developed to ensure the protection of workers who work for one employer on a full‐time basis, at the employer's place of work and under his control. However, today's labour market is composed of a multiplicity of employment relations that limit the effectiveness of the protection. This raises the following question: what features should public policies include to better meet the needs of the labour market? The first part of this article examines how public policies could be renewed in order to take work and organizational transformations into account. Some policies suggest that rights and benefits should be granted on the basis of a job or professional activity, whereas others link rights and benefits to the individual or the citizen. However, these proposals will only emerge if they are appropriated by social and governmental stakeholders. A reflection on the content of the policies must therefore be undertaken in combination with a study of the social processes that may influence the emergence of such reforms. This question is examined in the second part of the article through a review of three recent examples of legislative reform initiatives.     

The Social Life of Regulation in Taipei City Hall: The Role of Legality in the Administrative Bureaucracy

This article explores the role of legality in conceptions of state and society among bureaucrats in the Taipei, Taiwan city government. When administrators confront the global arena, the existence of law emblematizes modernity and the ability to participate in the international system. In interactions among administrators, law is laden with impossible ideals and fraught with assumptions of hypocrisy. In dealings with people outside the government, legality often signals the breakdown of other, more valuable social norms. Far from legitimating administrative action, legality itself is legitimated by reference to the same values as other social action: it is held up to an ideal of consensus and cultural coherence and judged by its ability to fulfill obligations and nurture relationships. Law does not hegemonically structure administrators’ conceptions of state and society. Rather, it defines one aspect of governance at the margins of legitimacy, dependent on justification through other ethical norms.