@techreport{AnheierFilip, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Anheier, Helmut K. and Filip, Alexandru}, title = {The Rodrik Trilemma and the Dahrendorf Quandary: An Empirical Assessment}, series = {Dahrendorf Forum IV Working Paper No. 15}, journal = {Dahrendorf Forum IV Working Paper No. 15}, pages = {32}, abstract = {Rodrik's Trilemma rests on the incompatibility of democracy, national sovereignty and global economic integration: any two can be combined, but never all three simultaneously and in full. Addressing the same probl{\´e}matique, Dahrendorf´s Quandary posits that, over time, maintaining global economic competitiveness requires countries either to adopt measures detrimental to the cohesion of civil society, or to restrict civil liberties and political participation. The purpose of this paper is to examine the empirical foundations of Rodrik's and Dahrendorf's propositions. Assessing developed market economies from 1991 to 2014, evidence suggests that in only rare cases the Trilemma can be overcome, and the tensions the Quandary hypothesises build up to a significant extent. In most cases examined, however, the performance of the countries is too varied to support the broad claims Rodrik and Dahrendorf put forth in their respective writings. Specifically, next to the small group of five cases where either the Trilemma or the Quandary apply, there are twice as many countries that generally managed to grow moderately in terms of economic globalisation, liberal democracy, and social cohesion, while avoiding some of the tensions implied in the Quandary or reaching Trilemma conditions. For an even larger group of countries the evidence suggests that growing economic globalisation can co-exist with lower societal stressor levels.}, language = {en} } @article{AnheierFilip2021, author = {Anheier, Helmut K. and Filip, Alexandru}, title = {The Dahrendorf Quandary, Crisis Severity, and Country Performance}, series = {Global Policy}, volume = {3}, journal = {Global Policy}, edition = {12}, publisher = {John Wiley \& Sons Ltd.}, address = {New Jersey}, doi = {10.1111/1758-5899.12901}, pages = {298 -- 312}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Abstract Dahrendorf´s Quandary, an early formulation of the Rodrik Trilemma, stipulates that maintaining economic competitiveness requires countries either to adopt measures detrimental to the cohesion of civil society, or to restrict civil liberties and political participation. The global financial and economic crisis of 2008-09 offers a test case for the applicability of the Quandary. We do so by examining economic, political and social stressors afflicting countries during the period of 2009-2014 relative to the severity and type of crises they experienced, and the ensuing political consequences for economy policy, democracy and society prevalent in 2019. We find that the Quandary does not apply uniformly across advanced market economies. Instead we detect distinct clusters that vary in their intensity of the tension the Quandary stipulates. We also find a consistent and positive relationship between Quandary intensity and crisis severity, yet obtain inconclusive results when looking at the relationship with current trends. The findings suggest that the crisis preparedness and the actual governance capability of countries to address the negative effects of economic globalization are key to managing the tensions inherent in the Dahrendorf Quandary and the Rodrik Trilemma.}, subject = {-}, language = {en} } @article{AnheierFilip, author = {Anheier, Helmut K. and Filip, Alexandru}, title = {The Rodrik Trilemma and the Dahrendorf Quandary: An Empirical Assessment}, series = {Global Perspectives}, volume = {2}, journal = {Global Perspectives}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1525/gp.2021.21245}, abstract = {Rodrik's Trilemma rests on the incompatibility of democracy, national sovereignty, and global economic integration: any two can be combined, but never all three simultaneously and in full. Addressing the same probl{\`e}matique but from a different perspective, Dahrendorf's Quandary posits that, over time, maintaining global economic competitiveness requires countries either to adopt measures detrimental to the cohesion of civil society or to restrict civil liberties and political participation. The purpose of this article is to examine the empirical foundations of Rodrik's and Dahrendorf's propositions. When one assesses developed market economies from 1991 to 2014, evidence suggests that only in rare cases can the Trilemma be overcome, and the tensions the Quandary hypothesizes build up to a significant extent. In most cases examined, however, the performance of the countries is too varied to support the broad claims Rodrik and Dahrendorf put forth in their respective writings. Specifically, next to the small group of five cases where either the Trilemma or the Quandary apply, there are twice as many countries that generally managed to grow moderately in terms of economic globalization, liberal democracy, and social cohesion while avoiding some of the tensions implied in the Quandary or reaching Trilemma conditions. For an even larger group of countries, the evidence suggests that growing economic globalization can coexist with lower societal stressor levels.}, language = {en} } @article{AnheierFilip, author = {Anheier, Helmut K. and Filip, Alexandru}, title = {"Managing the Impossible?" Comparing How Countries Address the Dahrendorf Quandary}, series = {Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice}, journal = {Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice}, issn = {1387-6988}, doi = {10.1080/13876988.2021.1945418}, pages = {1 -- 26}, abstract = {This paper examines the policy approaches and measures that developed market economies countries have adopted to "manage" what has become known as the Dahrendorf Quandary, a profound challenge facing globalizing economies: over time, staying economically competitive requires either adopting measures detrimental to the cohesion of society or restricting civil liberties and political participation. Examining a range of countries over time, it is found that their policy choices and subsequent performance are too varied to support the inevitable, almost mechanical, incompatibility the Quandary implies. While balancing the relationship between economic globalization, social cohesion, and democracy continues to be a major challenge for developed market economies, results show they are not helpless in what Dahrendorf feared to be a Herculean task of "squaring the circle" among incompatible trends. In other words, while the tensions the Quandary posits apply, they nonetheless need not lead to similar or negative outcomes.}, language = {en} } @incollection{AnheierFilip, author = {Anheier, Helmut K. and Filip, Alexandru}, title = {How to Square the Circle Between Economic Globalization, Social Cohesion, and Liberal Democracy?}, series = {The Future of the Liberal Order: The Key Questions}, booktitle = {The Future of the Liberal Order: The Key Questions}, editor = {Anheier, Helmut K.}, publisher = {Routledge}, address = {London}, isbn = {9780367772307}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {21 -- 44}, language = {en} }