ILPC 2027

Susana Cabaco*, Andrew Cumbers*, Robert McMaster*, and Michael White**

*Adam Smith Business School, University of Glasgow

**School of Architecture, Design, and the Built Environment, Nottingham Trent University.

 

E-mails:susana.cabaco@glasgow.ac.uk; andrew.cumbers@glasgow.ac.uk; robert.mcmaster@glasgow.ac.uk; michael.white@ntu.ac.uk

 

Abstract submitted for consideration of inclusion at the 2017 International Labour Process Conference 

 

Abstract

This paper centres around the basic proposition that societies with strong economic democracy are more likely to achieve crucial public policy goals; such as combating climate change, reducing inequalities and creating more sustainable forms of economic activity. The key argument advanced here is that dominant economic policy regimes in many OECD countries - where decision-making is increasingly monopolised and centralised among financial and economic elites and “experts” - have had negative effects in terms of greater income and wealth inequalities, increasing susceptibility to financial crises and fragility, and arguably a failure to effectively address the causes of climate change. 

Our central proposition is that greater economic democracy – more diversity and plurality in economic decision-making – will lead to better policy outcomes in terms of better taking into account critical economic, social and environmental issues. In this paper, we draw on this background to discuss a number of aspects of the construction of an index of economic democracy (EDI) as both a tool to test the proposition and as a key indicator of individual country performance in the pursuit of open and democratic governance of the economy. 

The paper starts by presenting our conceptual framework, which draws upon inter-disciplinary scholarship, arguing for the importance of individual economic rights, collective action and public discourse in economic decision-making. We further discuss our definition of economic democracy – employing four dimensions: (i) workplace (nature and structure of employment relations, levels of co-determination, etc); (ii) degree of associational economic governance (e.g. level of cooperatives within economy, number and extent of business and labour associations in economic policy forums); (iii) distribution of economic decision-making powers across space and sector (e.g. ownership structure, size structure of firms, spatial division of labour between regions); (iv) transparency, openness and democratic engagement of broader population in macro-economic decision-making (e.g. central bank governance structures). Subsequently, we turn to the methodological aspects associated with the construction of a composite indicator (EDI), discussing the challenges and issues arising from this endeavour. With this contribution, we expect to influence and inform the research on the transparency and openness of economic policy-making and institutions, social and spatial diversity of economic governance and practice and, more crucially, the key public policy debates around public engagement and democratic accountability in economic decision-making.