Author:
Polese Abel,Fradejas-García Ignacio,Šimić Banović Ružica,Škokić Vlatka,Kerikmäe Tanel,Molina José Luis,Alpeza Mirela,Lubbers Miranda J.,Camerani Alberica
Abstract
Post-Weberian definitions see the state–individual relationship as a “do ut des” one. The state grants protection, education, medical care, and its citizens contribute labour, compliance, and taxes. When this does not occur, it is generally accepted that the citizens are deviating from state goals. However, there are cases where lack of compliance stems from the fact that society members do not feel protected by formal structures, and they rely on informal ones to replace, supplement, or even compete with state institutions. The starting point of this article is that this lack of support may result from enhanced labour mobility (and migration) across Europe, and may enhance the creation and persistence of informal practices. Taking advantage of two case studies, Romanian migrants to Spain and ethnic entrepreneurs in Croatia, we observe how governance is constructed and provide two novel interpretative frameworks. First, we explore the use of informality (informal practices) to suggest that apparently insignificant actions that are repeated routinely and without much thought, are a way to contribute to the construction of the political and that everyday governance should receive more attention. Second, we use this claim to argue that a better understanding of informality can help identify governance areas where interventions are more urgent. These are the spheres of public life where it is possible to identify a larger gap between the wishes of a state and the ways citizens actually act as they informally avoid or bypass its rules.
Subject
Public Administration,Sociology and Political Science
Reference86 articles.
1. Adascalitei, D. (2012). Welfare state development in Central and Eastern Europe: A state of the art literature review. Studies of Transition States and Societies, 4(2), 59–70.
2. Aidis, R., Estrin, S., & Mickiewicz, T. (2008). Institutions and entrepreneurship development in Russia: A comparative perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(6), 656–672.
3. Aligica, P. D., & Tarko, V. (2014). Crony capitalism: Rent seeking, institutions and ideology. Kyklos, 67(2), 156–176.
4. Alpeza, M., Oberman, M., & Has, M. (2018). Small and medium enterprises report—Croatia 2018. CEPOR—SMEs & Entrepreneurship Policy Center. http://www.cepor.hr/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/EN-SME-Report-2018-za-web.pdf
5. Brzozowski, J., Šimić Banović, R., & Alpeza, M. (2021). Overcoming constraints to immigrant entrepreneurship in Croatia: The role of formal and informal institutions. Post-Communist Economies. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/14631377.2021.1928825
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献