Skip to main content

2021 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

4. Corporatism and Planning in Monnet’s Idea of Europe

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

During the 30s in France the debate on the “third way” was particularly intense. The efforts to develop an alternative to liberal capitalism and socialism involved two main different solutions: planning and corporatism that often overlapped; moreover both of them were imbued with some elements of neo-liberalism. Such a combination of corporatism-planning-neoliberalism characterized France reconstruction after WWII, but it is also the backbone of the French design developed for the European construction. Such a design as originally conceived by Jean Monnet never succeeded and it was instead replaced by a deeply different architecture.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
As for instance, Paul Valery’s essay “La crise de l’esprit” (1919), André Gide’s article “L’avenir de l’Europe. Le point de vue d’un français” (1923); Gaston Riu’s volume S’unir ou mourir (1929); Ortega Y Gasset’s book La rebellion de las masses (1930) and Julien Benda’s “Discours à la Nation européenne” (1933).
 
2
Most notably, the idea of “Paneuropa” (1923) suggested by the count Coudenhove-Kalergi who founded the Paneuropean Union and Aristide Briand’s proposal of a European Federal Union (1929).
 
3
There is not indeed a clear-cut difference between these two perspectives that share the same reproach of the “absence of order and organization” to the capitalist system (Pirou 1933, 15) and oppose the individualistic capitalism with more or less structured forms of state intervention (Pirou 1933, 15).
 
4
“Neoliberalism” developed out of the Colloque Lippman organized by Louis Rougier in Paris in 1938 and which gathered together the main representatives of the liberal credo. Since the beginning in France neoliberalism was something pretty compound and manifold that counted people with very different perspectives, from those closest to socialism to those who were supporters of a rather radical laissez-faire. This miscellaneous soul continued to characterize French neoliberalism also after WWII (as it clearly appears at the first meeting of the Mont Pèlerin Society in 1947: see on this Denord 2009) and it explains its intertwining with the corporative and planiste ideas (Denord 2009, 2016; Margairaz 2001; Pirou 1939). By using the term neoliberalism therefore it should be kept in mind that it is a term “plus commode que précis” (Margairaz 1991, 722).
 
5
Étienne Clémentel was Minister of Commerce and Industry of Government Briand during WWI. In 1917 he presented a reconstruction plan with a strong corporatist frame and with the suggestion of an “inter-allied pooling of scarce materials” (see Kuisel 1981, 37–55). His plan has several resemblances with the planning efforts developed after World War II. See below.
 
6
Among the others by: Firmin Baconnier, Pierre Lucius, Pierre Gaxotte and Eugène Mathon, who became a crucial reference for the corporatist approach in France (Pirou 1937, 15–16; Brocard 1933).
 
7
Neo-corporatists underlined the plasticity of corporations that aimed at “preserving competition which compels everyone to make efforts and at assuring the game of personal interest which is the most important stimulus for economic activity” (E. Mathon, in Pirou 1937, 44).
 
8
For instance, the economist François Perroux tried to promote a “French” version of corporatism—to be neatly distinguished from the totalitarian corporatism experiences in Italy and Germany—that was based on the concept of “Communauté de Travail” (1938a, b, c; see Brisset and Fèvre 2019).
 
9
As for instance Jean Coutrot, a progressive industrialist; Alfred Sauvy, demographer-statician; Jean Ullmo, economist; and Auguste Detoeuf, industrialist who played an important role during Vichy.
 
10
Rationalization and scientific management as the symbol of modern industry were particularly endorsed by French syndicalism (Kuisel 1981; Denord 2001).
 
11
Belgian socialist who promoted an idea of corporatism based on the importance of self-government for workers and entrepreneurs (Pirou 1937, 17; Perroux 1938a, 175).
 
12
A study group founded with the publication of a volume manifesto in 1932 by a number of people that broke with the Socialist Party. Among its founders we find: Georges Lefranc, Pierre Boivin, Claude Levy-Strauss and Robert Marjolin, who was to become Secretary-General of the OEEC (Organisation for European Economic Co-operation) from 1948 to 1955 and Vice-President of the EEC (European Economic Community) from 1958 to 1967. See below.
 
13
Most notably the coalition government of the socialist Blum (1936–1938)—due to its different contrasting component parts (i.e. radicals, communists, and socialists)—was uncapable to realize a comprehensive program of structural reforms as it was in its original intention (see on this Kuisel 1981, 121–23; Margairaz 1991, vol. I; Pirou 1939, 169–70; Marjolin 1989). Planning—partly supported by some representatives of the CGT—was rather left aside as well as the program of nationalizations the socialists wished (Asselain 1984, 58). There are however some exceptions: along with the creation of the Wheat Office and the nationalization of some war industries, the most important reform concerns the reorganization of the Bank of France (Margairaz 1991, 232–40), which is herald of the post-war nationalization (Monnet 2018, 44–63).
 
14
The only partial realization of the planned structural reforms under Vichy was mainly due to the interference and then the increasing intrusion of Germany into the economic choices of the Petain’s regime. Soon after the armistice, the main idea of the Vichy’s authorities was to develop a new politique based on a sort of “economic collaboration” with Germany: the creation of the COs and OCRPI was indeed functional to Petain’s “politics of presence” in the occupied territory. However this strategy pretty ambiguous since the beginning (Margairaz 1991, 523–90) became a clear failure during the second period of the Vichy regime (1942–1944) when it became completely subjugated to the Germany’s choices and directions (Margairaz 1991, 671–715).
 
15
This aspect was particularly underlined by Perroux who, commenting on the Vichy’s first results, notes for instance that the Reform incorporated in the 1941 Labour Charter was just a pre-corporatist law (1943, 158; 1942, 12) although it marked the way “towards a true corporatist economy” (1943, 186). See on this Margairaz (1991, 564–70); on the outcomes obtained in terms of corporatist reform under the Vichy regime see also Cohen (2006a).
 
16
Besides, many COs simply reproduced existing cartels and trade associations (Kuisel 1981, 142).
 
17
The Ministry of Industrial Production controlled the OCPRI, selected CO’s personnel, appointed a government commissioner and exercised an overreaching surveillance (Kuisel 1981, 135–36).
 
18
Former director of the Renault automobile company, he was appointed head of the Commissariat for the Unemployment in 1940; in 1941, Petain assigned him the role of Délegué general à l’Équipement for the government.
 
19
The DGEN and its plans were openly thwarted by Laval, who became head of government in 1942 and progressively they were marginalized. In 1942, Bichelonne, head of the Ministry of Industrial Production, created the Conseil Supérieur de l’Économie Industrielle et Commerciale to deal also with economic planning. However the Conseil dealt with planning only on a very general ground and stressed, instead the importance of strong corporatist bodies to “mediate planning and thus avoid centralized bureaucratic management” (Kuisel 1981, 152).
 
20
As André Philip, Georges Boris, Jules Moch, Mèndes-France and Robert Marjolin.
 
21
Among the others, H. Alphand, E. Hirsch, R. Courtin and R. Pléven.
 
22
Named chief of the Commissariat for Economics and Colonies by De Gaulle in 1941, Alphand was at the head of a Commission that should study post-war economic and social problems. The commission was expression of different orientations, from the more liberal—represented by Alphand and Pléven—to the socialist (with André Philip, Georges Boris and Robert Marjolin) sides.
 
23
Étienne Hirsch, former manager of a chemical firm, cooperated with Fighting France during the war and with Jean Monnet in the post-war period. He was General Commissioner for the Second French Plan and President of Euratom from 1959 to 1962. See below.
 
24
Developed by a Committee of experts (the Comité Général d’Études) named by the Organisation Civil et Militaire (OCM) which operated in the occupied France. Among its members we find: de Menthon, Paul Bastid, Robert Lacoste, Alexandre Parodi and René Courtin.
 
25
André Philip, named by De Gaulle the CFLN’s commissaire in charge, organized a study group for the post-war problems with Mendès-France, Albert Gazier and Luis Vallon.
 
26
Under the Provisional Government, in De Gaulle’s cabinet a particularly thorny question was indeed related to the problem of what to do with the Vichy’s institutions and there was a strong contrast between those who wanted to radically liquidate them because expression of a dictatorial experience (as Paul Giacobbi, commissioner for supply and production) and those who thought it was better to maintain them (as Raymond Offroy, De Gaulle’s counselor on economic affairs).
 
27
This part of the reform was elaborated in strict collaboration with Georges Boris, who was a very close friend of Mendés-France and played an important role for the emergence of planning in France (see on this Fourquet 1980).
 
28
The elaboration of this reform was rather troubled, and it gave rise to a rather struggled debate within the economic committee, which was formed by the main economic ministers (transport, industrial production, agriculture and so forth). See on this Mioche (1987, 37–52).
 
29
De Gaulle followed instead the suggestions of the liberal Pléven, Minister of Finance, who promoted a softer policy based on the negotiation of prices and wages and the recourse to public debt (Fourquet 1980, 50–51).
 
30
Consequently, Mendès-France resigned in April 1945.
 
31
This aspect was critically stressed by Georges Boris and other supporters of planning. In 1945 a debate on planning involved some politicians, university professors, economists like C. Rist, Aftalion, R. Mossé, R. Courtin and others (Mioche 1987, 60–61).
 
32
In a letter written to Pléven he stresses that “the plan is indispensable” (quoted in Mioche 1987, 62).
 
33
Monnet was very familiar with the American culture and politics. In the interwar period he was a League of Nations official and part of the executive committee in an American bank (Kuisel 1981, 220; Margairaz 1991, 756–57). Between 1943 and 1945 he was in Washington as head of the staff of the French Supply Council and there gathered the people of his post-war team, with among the others Robert Marjolin and Étienne Hirsch (Monnet 1976).
 
34
Along with other two crucial conditions that Monnet explicitly mentions in a memorandum dated 24 July 1947 and presented to the Minister of Foreign Affairs Georges Bidault (see on this Margairaz 1991, 892–96): namely the involvement of Germany into the European reconstruction and the financial and monetary stabilization of the country. Monnet as General Planning Commissioner dealt with the first aspect pushing towards the creation of the ECSC; as for the second issue, even more crucial for the problem of the dollar gap (Margairaz 1991, 876–903), Monnet worked towards the stabilization of money, prices and exchange rates without falling into a deflationist policy (Margairaz 1991, 928–31); in order to deal with the latter manifold and difficult problem, Monnet promoted and achieved the creation of the Commission of National Accounting of which he was the president (Fourquet 1980, 74–95) and that became a crucial tool for the CGP.
 
35
According to Monnet’s idea, each European recipient country should have an equivalent of the French Plan to ease the distribution of the American aids. These different plans then should be inserted into a “European pyramid of economic control” (Gillingham 2003, 21) through the Organization of European Economic Cooperation (OEEC). However, his idea remained unsuccessful and the European Recovery Program followed its own criteria to distribute money to the European countries, whereas the OEEC became the main promoter of free trade with and within the European countries and in 1961 it was transformed in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development which became sponsor of global liberalization (Esposito 1994; Gillingham 2003).
 
36
This definition is indeed due to Hirsch, as Monnet recalls (Monnet 1976, 373) and Hirsch himself emphasizes: “C’est moi qui a inventé la formule d’économie concertée, car je considère que dans le monde modern il est indispensable que les différents acteurs de l’économie, étant donnée leur interdépendance, se connaissent et discutent entre eux” (quoted in Fourquet 1980, 56).
 
37
The Plan and its revisions were indeed the result of the joint work done by Monnet’s small operative team: here we find E. Hirsch, R. Marjolin, A. Sauvy, J. Fourastier, J.-R. Rabier, J. Ripert, P. Denis, R. Auboin, L. Kaplan and J. Vergeot and from 1947 P. Uri (Monnet 1976, 346–378). Monnet was the General Commissioner of the first Plan.
 
38
In underlining the importance of the synergy between the General Planning Commissariat, the Commissions de Modernisation and the state, it is pointed out: “C’est ainsi seulement que les problèmes pourront être réglés par un échange permanent d’idées entre l’administration et le pays, dans une économie concertée et non pas dans une économie dirigée à caractère bureaucratique ou corporatif (Premier Plan, 101).
 
39
It was for instance maintained: “Pour la·mise en œuvre du plan, il faut prévoir des méthodes d’exécution variables suivant les secteurs de l’économie, méthodes qui, cependant, doivent toutes s’inspirer du principe que la modernisation est une obligation pour toutes les activités du pays, et que nos ressources limitées en matières, main d’œuvre et moyens financiers doivent être utilisées en priorité pour l’exécution du plan” (Premier Plan, 102).
 
40
Controls of licensing, selective tax treatments, privileged subsidies, financing of (public and private) industry through the Fund for Economic and Social Development (FDES) and so forth.
 
41
Indeed, even if the most authoritative instruments that had characterized the first Plan disappeared from the Second Plan, several inducement measures continued to be used in order to direct economic activities (Bauchet 1966, 118–38). Moreover, some tasks continued to be considered as “imperative”.
 
42
In the 1942 Plan d’Équipement National (quoted in Kuisel 1977, 79).
 
43
In the Tranche de Démarrage where they write: “L’orientation et le contrôle ne doivent pas enserrer étroitement l’action mais lui imprimer l’impulsion necessaire” (quoted in Kuisel 1977, 92).
 
44
In fact, the idea of creating those commissions is due to Hirsch who already in the thirties had largely expressed himself in favour of techno-corporatist structures.
 
45
This aspect is often ignored by literature, as stressed in Warlouzet (2010, 345).
 
46
This idea is stated also in the 9 May 1950 Schuman Declaration with the following words: “La mise en commun des productions de charbon et d’acier assurera immédiatement l’établissement de bases communes de développement économique, première étape de la Fédération européenne” (Schuman 1963, 203).
 
47
The other ECSC institutions were: the Common Assembly, which was composed of national parliamentarians and had a supervisory power; the Special Council of national ministers with the representatives of the national governments and the assignment to issue opinions, and the Court of Justice, composed by judges appointed by the national governments and with the task to ensure the observation of the treaty; the Consultative Committee, composed by representatives of producers, workers, dealers of the sector that were nominated by the national governments.
 
48
These remained however mostly on paper, as thoroughly described by Marchal (1964, 289–311).
 
49
The Schuman Declaration explicitly refers to the need for “l’application d’un plan de production et d’investissements”.
 
50
It caused a long debate which culminated with the failure to obtain ratification in the French Parliament on the 30 August 1954.
 
51
There were a Commission, made of 5 people independent from the national governments; the Council of ministers; the Assembly which had to control the works of the Commission; the Court of Justice.
 
52
As noted by Marchal the Commission could be considered as an industrial administrative council with technical expertise (1964, 318).
 
53
As for instance agriculture or overseas’ relations.
 
54
It was drafted by the Spaak Committee where a particularly important role was played by Pierre Uri who was one of the closest Monnet’s collaborators, economic and financial adviser of the General Planning Commissariat (1947–1952), and director at the ECSC (1952–1959).
 
55
The text of the Rome Treaty neglects also other issues included instead in the Spaak Report, as for instance the pooling of the air transport and the creation of a postal union.
 
56
For the ECSC, the Schuman Declaration stresses in fact that it was “A l’opposé d’un cartel international tendant à la répartition et à l’exploitation des marchés nationaux par des pratiques restrictives et le maintien de profits élevés…”.
 
57
Socialist, with a Keynesian formation (Arena 2000), since the beginning he played a crucial role in promoting the idea of Common market; he was a strict collaborator of Monnet far before the end of the war: in 1943, in Algiers, Monnet—as member of the First French National Liberation Committee—formed a small group to reflect on the future of France. In this group there were E. Hirsch, R. Marjolin and P. Mendès France (see Dangel-Hagnauer and Raybaut 2007). Marjolin was not a doctrinaire planner (he also participated to the Colloque Lippman in 1938) but he thought that planning was a necessary means to prompt economic progress. He also considered useful some degree of corporatist organization, as in the American experience of the National Recovery Administration (NRA) developed by Roosevelt in 1933 (Marjolin 1935).
 
58
Based on the idea of the necessary coordination among the European members of both economic policies of medium and long term and of cyclical and monetary policies.
 
59
European integration developed about the coordination of some macroeconomic aspects leaving completely aside most of the elements that the idea of French planning involved and that never again became part of the European agenda. The main ones are the following three that are among them strictly interconnected: (a) long run perspective; (b) consideration of collective and social goods; and (c) discretionary interventions due to the danger and limits of any automatism (see Caldari 2019).
 
60
Following Brocard (1933), the concepts of “économie concertée” and “économie organisée” are to be taken as synonymous and clearly distinguished from the idea of “économie dirigée”. However, as we have seen, a certain degree of dirigisme (never indeed quantified) is implicit in the French idea of “économie concertée” or “économie organisée”. In fact, some French authors—as for instance François Perroux (1938a, 298)—use the term “économie dirigée” as a synonymous of “économie organisée”.
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Arena, Richard. 2000. “Les économistes français en 1950.” Revue économique 51 (5): 969–1007. Arena, Richard. 2000. “Les économistes français en 1950.” Revue économique 51 (5): 969–1007.
Zurück zum Zitat Asselain, Jean-Charles. 1984. Histoire économique de la France du XVIIIe siècle à nos jours, vol. 2. Paris: Éditions du Seuil. Asselain, Jean-Charles. 1984. Histoire économique de la France du XVIIIe siècle à nos jours, vol. 2. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.
Zurück zum Zitat Bauchet, Pierre. 1966. La Planification française. Vingt ans d’expérience. Paris: éditions du Seuil. Bauchet, Pierre. 1966. La Planification française. Vingt ans d’expérience. Paris: éditions du Seuil.
Zurück zum Zitat Bossuat, Gérard. 2012. La France et la Construction de l’Unité Européene. Paris: Armand Colin. Bossuat, Gérard. 2012. La France et la Construction de l’Unité Européene. Paris: Armand Colin.
Zurück zum Zitat Brisset, Nicolas, and Raphaël Fèvre. 2019. “Peregrinations of an Economist: Perroux’s Grand Tour of Fascist Europe.” GREDEG No. 2019–11, CNRS, University of Nice Sophia Antipolis. Brisset, Nicolas, and Raphaël Fèvre. 2019. “Peregrinations of an Economist: Perroux’s Grand Tour of Fascist Europe.” GREDEG No. 2019–11, CNRS, University of Nice Sophia Antipolis.
Zurück zum Zitat Brocard, Lucien. 1933. “Le concezioni francesi dell’economia regolata.” In V.V.A.A., l’Economia programmatica, 3–41. Firenze: Sansoni Editore. Brocard, Lucien. 1933. “Le concezioni francesi dell’economia regolata.” In V.V.A.A., l’Economia programmatica, 3–41. Firenze: Sansoni Editore.
Zurück zum Zitat Caldari, Katia. 2019. “From ‘Planning’ to ‘Programming’: A Lost Opportunity for the European Project?” Forum for Social Economics, published online. Caldari, Katia. 2019. “From ‘Planning’ to ‘Programming’: A Lost Opportunity for the European Project?” Forum for Social Economics, published online.
Zurück zum Zitat Cohen, Antonin. 2006a. “Du Corporatisme au Keynésianisme.” Revue française de Science politique 56: 555–92.CrossRef Cohen, Antonin. 2006a. “Du Corporatisme au Keynésianisme.” Revue française de Science politique 56: 555–92.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 2006b. “De la Révolution Nationale à l’Europe Fédérale. Les metamorphoses de la troisième voie aux origins du movement fédéraliste francais: la Fédération (1943–1948).” Le Mouvement social 217: 53–72.CrossRef ———. 2006b. “De la Révolution Nationale à l’Europe Fédérale. Les metamorphoses de la troisième voie aux origins du movement fédéraliste francais: la Fédération (1943–1948).” Le Mouvement social 217: 53–72.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Dangel-Hagnauer, Cécile, and Alain Raybaut. 2007. “French Economists Within Public Institutions. The Making of Economic Policy in Post-Second-World-War France.” In Economics and Institutions. Contributions from the History of Economic Thought, edited by Pier F. Asso and Luca Fiorito, 163–85. Milano: Franco Angeli. Dangel-Hagnauer, Cécile, and Alain Raybaut. 2007. “French Economists Within Public Institutions. The Making of Economic Policy in Post-Second-World-War France.” In Economics and Institutions. Contributions from the History of Economic Thought, edited by Pier F. Asso and Luca Fiorito, 163–85. Milano: Franco Angeli.
Zurück zum Zitat Denord, Fraçois. 2001. “Aux origines du néo-libéralisme en France: Louis Rougier et le Colloque Walter Lippmann de 1938.” Le mouvement social 2 (195): 9–34.CrossRef Denord, Fraçois. 2001. “Aux origines du néo-libéralisme en France: Louis Rougier et le Colloque Walter Lippmann de 1938.” Le mouvement social 2 (195): 9–34.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 2009. “French Neoliberalism and Its Divisions: From the Colloque Walter Lippman to the Fifth Republic.” In The Road from Mont Pèlerin: The Making of the Neoliberal Thought Collective, edited by Philip Mirowski and Dieter Plehwe, 45–67. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ———. 2009. “French Neoliberalism and Its Divisions: From the Colloque Walter Lippman to the Fifth Republic.” In The Road from Mont Pèlerin: The Making of the Neoliberal Thought Collective, edited by Philip Mirowski and Dieter Plehwe, 45–67. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 2016. Le néo-libéralisme à la Française: Historire d’une idéologie politique. Marseille: Agone. ———. 2016. Le néo-libéralisme à la Française: Historire d’une idéologie politique. Marseille: Agone.
Zurück zum Zitat Denord, François, and Antoine Schwartz. 2010. “L’Économie (très) politique du Traité de Tome.” Politix 1 (89): 35–56.CrossRef Denord, François, and Antoine Schwartz. 2010. “L’Économie (très) politique du Traité de Tome.” Politix 1 (89): 35–56.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Dreyfus, François-Georges. 1988. Histoire del la démocratie chrétienne en France. Paris: Albin Michel. Dreyfus, François-Georges. 1988. Histoire del la démocratie chrétienne en France. Paris: Albin Michel.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1990. Histoire de Vichy. Paris: Perrin. ———. 1990. Histoire de Vichy. Paris: Perrin.
Zurück zum Zitat Esposito, Chiarella. 1994. Americas Feeble Weapon: Funding the Marshall Plan in France and Italy 1948–1950. Westport: Greenwoods Press. Esposito, Chiarella. 1994. Americas Feeble Weapon: Funding the Marshall Plan in France and Italy 1948–1950. Westport: Greenwoods Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Fourquet, François. 1980. Les Comptes de la Puissance. Histoire de la comptabilité nationale et due plan. Paris: Recherches. Fourquet, François. 1980. Les Comptes de la Puissance. Histoire de la comptabilité nationale et due plan. Paris: Recherches.
Zurück zum Zitat Gillingham, John. 2003. European Integration, 1950–2003. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Gillingham, John. 2003. European Integration, 1950–2003. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Gruson, Claude. 1968. Origine et Espoirs de la Planification française. Paris: Dunod. Gruson, Claude. 1968. Origine et Espoirs de la Planification française. Paris: Dunod.
Zurück zum Zitat Hackett, John, and Anne-Marie Hackett. 1963. Economic Planning in France. London: George Allen & Unwin. Hackett, John, and Anne-Marie Hackett. 1963. Economic Planning in France. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Zurück zum Zitat Journal officiel de la République française 1964, Rapport sdur les principales options qui commandent la preparation du Ve Plan”, 23 Décembre. Journal officiel de la République française 1964, Rapport sdur les principales options qui commandent la preparation du Ve Plan”, 23 Décembre.
Zurück zum Zitat Kuisel, Richard F. 1977. “Vichy et les origines de la planification économique (1940–1946).” Le Mouvement Social 98: 77–101.CrossRef Kuisel, Richard F. 1977. “Vichy et les origines de la planification économique (1940–1946).” Le Mouvement Social 98: 77–101.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1981. Capitalism and the State in Modern France. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ———. 1981. Capitalism and the State in Modern France. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Lynch, Frances M. B. 1984. “Resolving the Paradox of the Monnet Plan: National and International Planning in French Reconstruction.” The Economic History Review 37 (2): 229–43.CrossRef Lynch, Frances M. B. 1984. “Resolving the Paradox of the Monnet Plan: National and International Planning in French Reconstruction.” The Economic History Review 37 (2): 229–43.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1997. France and the International Economy. London: Routledge. ———. 1997. France and the International Economy. London: Routledge.
Zurück zum Zitat Loubet del Bayle, Jean-Louis. 1969. Les non-conformistes des années 30. Paris: Seuil. Loubet del Bayle, Jean-Louis. 1969. Les non-conformistes des années 30. Paris: Seuil.
Zurück zum Zitat Lutz, Vera. 1969. Central Planning for the Market Economy: An Analysis of the French Theory and Experience. London: Longmans and Green. Lutz, Vera. 1969. Central Planning for the Market Economy: An Analysis of the French Theory and Experience. London: Longmans and Green.
Zurück zum Zitat Marchal, André. 1964. L’Europe Solidaire. Toulouse: Éditions cujas. Marchal, André. 1964. L’Europe Solidaire. Toulouse: Éditions cujas.
Zurück zum Zitat Margairaz, Michel. 1991. L’État, les finances et l’économie. Histoire d’une conversion. 1932–1952. 2 vols. Paris: Comité pour l’Histoire Économique et Financière de la France. Margairaz, Michel. 1991. L’État, les finances et l’économie. Histoire d’une conversion. 1932–1952. 2 vols. Paris: Comité pour l’Histoire Économique et Financière de la France.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 2001. “Entre Néo-Liberalisme et Corporatisme: Apports et Limites des Deux Trajectoires Singulièrs.” Le Mouvement Social 195: 3–7.CrossRef ———. 2001. “Entre Néo-Liberalisme et Corporatisme: Apports et Limites des Deux Trajectoires Singulièrs.” Le Mouvement Social 195: 3–7.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Marjolin, Robert. 1935. “La N.R.A. aux États-Unis.” In L’Homme Réel, n. 15–16, 88–95. Syndicalisme et Corporations. Marjolin, Robert. 1935. “La N.R.A. aux États-Unis.” In L’Homme Réel, n. 15–16, 88–95. Syndicalisme et Corporations.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1953. Europe and the United States in the World Economy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. ———. 1953. Europe and the United States in the World Economy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1989. Architect of European Unit: Memoirs 1911–1986. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. ———. 1989. Architect of European Unit: Memoirs 1911–1986. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
Zurück zum Zitat Massé, Pierre. 1965. Le Plan ou l’anti-hasard. Paris: Gallimard. Massé, Pierre. 1965. Le Plan ou l’anti-hasard. Paris: Gallimard.
Zurück zum Zitat Mioche, Philippe. 1984. “Le démarrage du Plan Monnet: comment une entreprise conjoncturelle est devenue une institution prestigieuse.” Revue d’Historie Moderne et Contemporaine 31 (3): 398–416.CrossRef Mioche, Philippe. 1984. “Le démarrage du Plan Monnet: comment une entreprise conjoncturelle est devenue une institution prestigieuse.” Revue d’Historie Moderne et Contemporaine 31 (3): 398–416.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1987. Le Plan Monnet. Genèse et Élaboration 1941–1947. Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne. ———. 1987. Le Plan Monnet. Genèse et Élaboration 1941–1947. Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne.
Zurück zum Zitat Monnet, Eric. 2018. Controlling Credit: Central Banking and the Planned Economy in Postwar France, 1948–1973. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Monnet, Eric. 2018. Controlling Credit: Central Banking and the Planned Economy in Postwar France, 1948–1973. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Monnet, Jean. 1976. Mémoires. Paris: Fayard. Monnet, Jean. 1976. Mémoires. Paris: Fayard.
Zurück zum Zitat Parlement Européen. 1962. Débats Compte rendu in extenso des séances, n. 60. Parlement Européen. 1962. Débats Compte rendu in extenso des séances, n. 60.
Zurück zum Zitat Parlement Européen. 1965. Cahiers Mensuels de Documentation Européenne, Julliet n. 7. Parlement Européen. 1965. Cahiers Mensuels de Documentation Européenne, Julliet n. 7.
Zurück zum Zitat Paxton, Robert. 1972. Vichy France: Old Guard and New Order, 1940–1944. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Paxton, Robert. 1972. Vichy France: Old Guard and New Order, 1940–1944. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Zurück zum Zitat Perroux, François. 1938a. Capitalisme et Communauté de Travail. Paris: Librairie du Recueil Sirey. Perroux, François. 1938a. Capitalisme et Communauté de Travail. Paris: Librairie du Recueil Sirey.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1938b. Syndicalisme et Capitalisme. Paris: Librairie Générl de Droit et de Jurisprudence. ———. 1938b. Syndicalisme et Capitalisme. Paris: Librairie Générl de Droit et de Jurisprudence.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1938c. “Pour et Contre la communauté de Travail.” Archives de Philosophie du droit et de sociologie juridique, Cahier spécial: Le corporatisme 3–4: 68–99. ———. 1938c. “Pour et Contre la communauté de Travail.” Archives de Philosophie du droit et de sociologie juridique, Cahier spécial: Le corporatisme 3–4: 68–99.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1942. “Exposé de M. le Professeur Perroux.” Comité Sociaux d’entreprise. Idéologie et réalité 2 Julliet, brochure Archive IMEC. ———. 1942. “Exposé de M. le Professeur Perroux.” Comité Sociaux d’entreprise. Idéologie et réalité 2 Julliet, brochure Archive IMEC.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1943. “La Charte du Travail: son contenu et son esprit.” In V.V.A.A., L’économie sans abondance. Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf. ———. 1943. “La Charte du Travail: son contenu et son esprit.” In V.V.A.A., L’économie sans abondance. Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1954. Europe sans Rivages. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. ———. 1954. Europe sans Rivages. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Zurück zum Zitat Pirou, Gaetan. 1933. “La crisi del capitalismo secondo gli economisti francesi.” In V.V.A.A., La crisi del capitalismo. Firenze: Sansoni. Pirou, Gaetan. 1933. “La crisi del capitalismo secondo gli economisti francesi.” In V.V.A.A., La crisi del capitalismo. Firenze: Sansoni.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1937. Essais sur le corporatisme. Paris: Librairie du Recueil Sirey. ———. 1937. Essais sur le corporatisme. Paris: Librairie du Recueil Sirey.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1939. Néo-Libéralisme, Néo-Corporatisme, Néo-Socialisme. Paris: Gallimard. ———. 1939. Néo-Libéralisme, Néo-Corporatisme, Néo-Socialisme. Paris: Gallimard.
Zurück zum Zitat Pühringer, Stephan. 2017. “The Success Story of Ordoliberalism as the Guiding Principle.” In Ordoliberalism, Law and the Rule of Economics, edited by Josef Hien and Christian Jorgers, 143–60. Oxford: Hart Publishing. Pühringer, Stephan. 2017. “The Success Story of Ordoliberalism as the Guiding Principle.” In Ordoliberalism, Law and the Rule of Economics, edited by Josef Hien and Christian Jorgers, 143–60. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Zurück zum Zitat Schuman, Robert. 1963. Pour l’Europe. Paris: Nagel. Schuman, Robert. 1963. Pour l’Europe. Paris: Nagel.
Zurück zum Zitat Uri, Pierre. 1991. Penser pour l’Action. Paris: Éditions Odile Jacobs. Uri, Pierre. 1991. Penser pour l’Action. Paris: Éditions Odile Jacobs.
Zurück zum Zitat V.V.A.A. 1943. L’économie sans Abudance. Paris: Éditions du Cerf. V.V.A.A. 1943. L’économie sans Abudance. Paris: Éditions du Cerf.
Zurück zum Zitat Villey, Daniel. 1945. “Pamphlet contre l’idéologie des réformes de structures.” Cahiers Politiques 11: 29–53. Villey, Daniel. 1945. “Pamphlet contre l’idéologie des réformes de structures.” Cahiers Politiques 11: 29–53.
Zurück zum Zitat Warlouzet, Laurent. 2010. Le choix de la CEE par la France. L’Europe économique en débat de Mendès France à de Gaulle (1955–1969). Paris: Comité pour l’histoire économique et financière de la France. Warlouzet, Laurent. 2010. Le choix de la CEE par la France. L’Europe économique en débat de Mendès France à de Gaulle (1955–1969). Paris: Comité pour l’histoire économique et financière de la France.
Metadaten
Titel
Corporatism and Planning in Monnet’s Idea of Europe
verfasst von
Katia Caldari
Copyright-Jahr
2021
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47102-6_4