Composite indicators of flexibilization across EU

regions: a critical re-appraisal &

interpretation

Stelios Gialis, Lila Leontidou and

Michael Taylor

Aim of this presentation

to present a comparative analysis of the diffusion of ‘flexible contractual arrangements’ (FCA) across the European Union (EU).

To analyze findings following a critical realist and theoretically informed analysis;

To discuss findings within a wider framework that encompasses underlying forces (such as accumulation priorities) that determine socio-economic patterns across EU regions.

‘flexible contractual arrangements’ : flexible or atypical forms of work such as part-time or temporary work

Methodology

The FCA Composite Indicator (CI) is calculated for all 200 NUTS II-level regions in France, Germany, the UK, Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Bulgaria and Romania.

These countries constitute a representative sample of EU-27 nations as far as the different socio-economic and institutional backgrounds of member countries are concerned.

The CI is calculated for 2005, 2008 and 2011 to present a clear picture of causal effects leading up to, and arising from, the 2008 financial crisis and the ensuing recession.

This study is the first research attempt to account for a regional

FCA CI by critically re-appraising the existent methodology.

Composite indicators (Cis): stylized meaningful measures or

misleading indexes?

Certain critiques, either constructive or not, have been raised against the general use and reliability of CIs.

Many of these critiques are echoes of the diachronic ontological and epistemological tension that exists between the need for simplification & quantification on the one hand, and the apparent integrative & qualitative character of the phenomena they aim to describe, on the other.

CI analysis should not be considered as a goal per se; rather, it should be seen as a first step towards in-depth and focused research.

Famous Cis: Human Development Index; Genuine Progress Index; Gross Domestic Product (GDP); Environmental Sustainability CI; Sustainable

Economic Welfare CI

Selection of the necessary sub-indicators.

A total of eight (8) sub-indicators, grouped into three (3) distinct pillars, are synthesized into the common FCA CI.

Statistical analysis, testing and pre-calculation considerations

• correlations were calculated in order to identify redundant indicators

• data gaps were checked

• standardized z-score values were calculated

• the CI was calculated using an equal weighting scheme (i.e. all sub-indicators within the same pillar participate with the same weight)

Maps of the FCA CI across the study regions, in 2005, 2008 and 2011

Results of the CI

all 13 Greek regions lie at the top-15 of the flexibilization ranking

almost all regions that lie at the bottom-15 are regions of Germany

Maps of regional clusters and outliers based on the FCA CI, in 2005, 2008 and

2011

“Cluster and Outlier Analysis”, Arc-GIS, statistically significant (p=0.025, 95% conf. level): • clusters of high values (HH), • clusters of low values (LL), • outliers of a high value surrounded by primarily low values (HL), • outliers of a low value surrounded primarily by high values (LH)

Inequalities have been re-formatted and even deepened due to the 2008

crisis…

Regions of the EU “periphery”, namely all Greek and more than half of the Spanish, Portuguese, Bulgarian and Romanian regions have moved towards higher flexibilization ranking places…

… while the regions of West-Central EU have fallen and occupy the lowest ranking places

Change of FCA CI across the study regions between 2005 and 2011

Exacerbation of unevenness between the EU North and South/ South-East…

the cluster of highly-flexible regional labour markets (mostly concerning Greece, Portugal and Romania in 2005) is seen to expand and incorporate most of the Spanish and Bulgarian regions in 2011.

during that same period, a new cluster of low-flexibility, that did not exist in 2005, is formed and is seen to include Germany, major parts of Sweden and Belgium along with some French regions

Regional clusters and outliers based on the FCA CI, change between 2005 and 2011

“Cluster and Outlier Analysis”, Arc-GIS, statistically significant (p=0.025, 95% conf. level): • clusters of high values (HH), • clusters of low values (LL),

Regions of Greece comprise an exceptional case…

all 13 Greek regions lie at the top-15 of the flexibilization ranking and converge on the higher-end of the flexibility hierarchy across the EU.

this trend is also evident for other countries of the EU South…

…but flexibilization in Italy, Spain and Portugal is neither as intense nor as regionally-homogenous as it is in Greece

An appreciation of the uneven socio-spatial development of neoliberal

capitalism is of critical importance…

In the EU scale, embedded and deeply-rooted trends of inequality between EU North and South acted in favour of the interests of Northern states and powerful firms therein

different flexibilizing mechanisms related to re-regulation, increasing global competition and de-stabilized modes of social reproduction, reinforced each other many years before the current crisis even occurred

Flexibilization in labour markets: an agenda for re-regulating employment & security according to new accumulation priorities.

cities and regions of the EU South lost competitive advantage as world-trade agreements & EU regulations acted in favor of imports…

Thanks for your interest

Major parts of the EU, especially the South-Eastern ones are being transformed into regions of poorly paid, very atypical work…

… while the ongoing recession in Northern parts of the EU suggests that this trend does not contribute to wider regional growth and should be challenged

Concluding…