Working Papers
Academic Year 2001-2002
Germany:
Managing Migration in the 21st Century (668kb .pdf file)
Philip L. Martin, University of California, Davis;
Chair, UC Comparative Immigration & Integration Program
May 2002
This monograph reviews Germany’s evolution
from a country of emigration to a reluctant land of immigration
between
the 1960s and 1980s, as guest workers settled and asylum seekers
arrived. During the 1990s, Germany became a magnet for diverse
foreigners, including the families of settled guest workers, newly
mobile Eastern Europeans and ethnic Germans, and asylum seekers
from throughout the world. Germany, with a relatively structured
and rigid labor market and economy, finds it easier to integrate
especially unskilled newcomers into generous social welfare programs
than into the labor market. Since immigration means change as immigrants
and Germans adjust to each other, an aging German populace may
resist the changes in the economy and labor market that could facilitate
immigrant integration as well as the changes in culture and society
that invariably accompany immigrants.
>>
Back to Top
Immigration
in the United States (435kb .pdf file)
Philip L. Martin, University of California, Davis;
Chair, UC Comparative Immigration & Integration Program
April 30, 2002
This chapter summarizes migration patterns, puts the immigration and integration
challenges facing the US in a global context, reviews the evolution of US immigration
and immigration policy, and then focuses on some of the immigration and integration
issues being debated early in the 21st century. Immigration is likely to continue
at current levels of 900,000 legal and 300,000 unauthorized a year, so that Americans
will, in the words of former Census director Kenneth Prewitt, "redefine
ourselves as the first country in world history which is literally made up of
every part of the world." (quoted in Alvarez, 2001)
>>
Back to Top
Restructuring "Germany
Inc." The Politics of Company and Takeover Law Reform in Germany and the
European Union (785kb
.pdf file)
John W. Cioffi, Assistant Professor, Political Science, University
of California, Riverside.
April 15, 2002
The reform of German company law by the Control and Transparency Law ("KonTraG")
of 1998 reveals politics of corporate governance liberalization. The reforms
strengthened the supervisory board, shareholder rights, and shareholder equality,
but left intra-corporate power relations largely intact. Major German financial
institutions supported the reform’s contribution to the modernization of
German finance, but blocked mandatory divestment of equity stakes and cross-shareholding.
Conversely, organized labor prevented any erosion of supervisory board codetermination.
Paradoxically, by eliminating traditional takeover defenses, the KonTraG’s
liberalization of company law mobilized German political opposition to the EU’s
draft Takeover Directive and limited further legal liberalization.
>>
Back to Top
The
Enlargement Challenge: Can Monetary Union be Made to Work in an
EU of 25 Members? (187kb .pdf file)
Barry Eichengreen, George C. Pardee and Helen N.
Pardee Professor of Economics and Political Science; Director, Institute
of European Studies, University of
California, Berkeley
February 2002
This lecture considers how Europe’s monetary union will evolve in the next
five to ten years. It concentrates on what is likely to be the most important
change in that period, namely, the increasing number and heterogeneity of participating
states. By 2006, less than four years from now, it is virtually certain that
EMU will be enlarged to include a number of Eastern European countries that have
not yet been admitted to the EU itself. These new members will differ sharply
from the incumbents in terms of their economic structures, their per capita incomes,
and their growth rates. The analysis focuses on the implications of this momentous
change for the structure, organization and operation of EMU.
>>
Back to Top
Why
is There No Mad Cow Disease in the United States? Comparing the Politics of Food
Safety in Europe and the U.S. (284kb .pdf file)
Christoph Strünck, Heinrich-Heine-Universität
Düsseldorf, Germany, Institute of Social Sciences, Visiting
Scholar at Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley
December 2001
This paper compares approaches towards food safety regulation in Europe and the
United States. It focuses on mad cow disease and examines how the British Government
and the European Union handled the first big crisis in the nineties, juxtaposed
to the American response. This worst public health disaster in Europe has led
to new agencies and policies. However, these institutional changes do not abolish
fragmentation, but extend the existing landscape of regulatory bodies. The paper
emphasizes that fragmentation – as the American case shows despite its
shortcomings – prevents science from being captured by the state, allows
interest groups broader access and ensures a distinct pattern of checks and balances.
>>
Back to Top 
