当代法团主义理论研究
|
摘要
当代法团主义理论是20世纪70年代中期重新兴起的研究国家与社会关系的理论范式。之所以说是“重新兴起”，是因为成熟的法团主义思想在19世纪中叶已经开始形成，这种思想反对自由主义过分强调个人而渴望社会团结，反对马克思主义的阶级冲突而主张社会和谐，正因为如此，法团主义曾经作为一种意识形态赢得过众多信徒，以至于在一战和二战期间，法团主义被许多国家付诸政治实践，并掀起一波高潮。但是，由于法团主义与法西斯意大利、纳粹德国和许多独裁主义政权的密切联系，在二战后，法团主义失势了且名誉扫地，在随后30年都很少为人所提起。直到在20世纪70年代中期，在观察到在欧洲和拉丁美洲残存着或者重新兴起了法团主义实践的基础上，以菲利普·施密特为代表的一大批理论家重拾法团主义的概念来描述这些现象，并且还试图发展出一种关于国家和社会关系的一般理论模型。本文正是从政治学的视角来探析当代法团主义兴起和发展的全过程，并对这种理论的核心要点做出解析和评价。
本论文共分为四个部分：一、当代法团主义理论的生长背景；二、当代法团主义理论的兴起及其主要代表；三、当代法团主义理论的纵深传播和回应质疑；四、当代法团主义理论的新进展。
第一部分主要分析了当代法团主义理论兴起的社会历史背景和知识背景。在社会历史背景中，本文集中于考察战后法团主义的政治实践，讨论了战后欧洲重新兴起的新形式的法团主义实践及其兴起的原因和拉丁美洲复活的威权形式的法团主义实践及其复活的原因，并且比较了这两种实践，讨论了它们之间的区别与联系，指出，战后欧洲的法团主义和拉丁美洲的法团主义都能冠以法团主义之名，是因为它们具有一些共同特征，如社会中的功能性组织、由国家承认或特许的利益团体，而且它们被纳入国家机构或决策过程之中。但是，它们之间的区别也是重要的，它们分别与不同的政体相联系、发挥着不同的政治功能，等等。这种区别说明至少有两种不同形式的法团主义，而这正是之后兴起的法团主义理论所需要解释和分析的。至于当代法团主义理论的兴起背景，本文从“利用”与“回应”两个角度介绍和分析了可作为当代法团主义理论智识资源的法团主义思想和当代法团主义的兴起所要回应的美国规范主义思潮，尤其是这个思潮中所包含的多元主义理论。
第二部分主要介绍了20世纪70年代中期复活法团主义概念的三个代表人物及其核心思想，分别是菲利普·施密特和杰哈德·莱姆布鲁赫——他们是当代法团主义理论研究中的新法团主义流派的代表人物；以及霍华德·威亚尔达，他是当代法团主义理论研究中的“历史连续性”学派的代表人物。这三位代表人物对于法团主义的概念的界定存在着重要分歧，施密特将法团主义定义为一个利益代表系统，莱姆布鲁赫则把法团主义定义为一种决策过程，威亚尔达则把法团主义定义为与自由主义-多元主义和马克思主义比肩的另一种“主义”。但是他们共同奠定了当代法团主义理论需要进一步研究的核心问题的框架。
第三部分讨论了在20世纪80年代对法团主义理论所包含的核心问题的深入探讨，以及其他研究者对法团主义理论一些核心问题的批评。这些核心问题包括法团主义的定义、法团主义的生成原因、法团主义与多元主义的关系以及法团主义理论本身的完整性。法团主义理论家都曾在这些问题上做过深入讨论，但是批评者也指出了存在的问题。法团主义理论家发展出了丰富的定义资源，希望能建立更有用的分析工具，但是却导致了法团主义理论核心的混乱，招致了批评。法团主义理论家一开始就试图针对多元主义建立一种分析组织化利益的模型，但是批评者认为社会法团主义与多元主义的分野并没有那么清晰。正因为在这些核心问题上的争议，批评者提出，法团主义的研究最多是启发性的，还不能成其为理论。这些批评都具有一定的中肯性，也部分得到了法团主义理论研究者的回应。
第四部分讨论了从20世纪90年代开始的法团主义的研究。因为法团主义实践在20世纪80年代衰退又在90年代回归，并且这一波回归的法团主义实践展现了与20世纪六七十年代的法团主义实践的诸多不同之处，一些法团主义理论家发现在20世纪七八十年代建立的法团主义理论和模型不能够完全解释20世纪90年代的现象，所以他们力图重新部署法团主义的概念，在这方面，有两种重要的努力，其一是为早期的法团主义概念“瘦身”，即去掉其结构特征而保持其程序特性；其二是赋予法团主义概念以新的核心内容，比如引入政治交换和整合的概念。
Contemporary Corporatism Theory is a theoretical paradigm re-emerged in1970sto research the relationship between state and society. The reason to call it as are-emergence is because mature Corporatism ideology began to form in the mid-19th.The ideology desires for social solidarity opposing Liberalism which overemphasizesindividual and advocates social harmony opposing Marxism class conflicts. Thus, as anideology, Corporatism won many followers so that was put into practice by manycountries during World War I and II and set off a wave of climax. However, due to itsclose ties with Corporatism and Italian Fascist, German Nazi and many authoritarianregimes, Corporatism lost ground and unpopular in the subsequent30years. Until themid-1970s, on the basis of observation of remnants of Corporatism, a large number oftheorists including Philippe C. Schmitter re-used Corporatism to describe thesephenomena and tried to develop a general theoretical model regarding the relationshipbetween state and society. This paper is to explore the emergence and development ofcontemporary Corporatism and analyze and evaluate core arguments of the theory.
The paper is divided into four parts. The first part is about the background ofcontemporary Corporatism. The second part is about the rise of Corporatism and itsprincipal representatives. The third part is to deeply elaborate core issues ofcontemporary Corporatism and to respond to questions to the theory. The last part is tointroduce the developments of contemporary Corporatism.
The first part mainly analyzes the social and historical background of the risecontemporary Corporatism theory. Under the social-historical context, this paperfocuses on the political practices of Corporatism after World War II, to discuss reasonsabout its reemergence as new forms in Europe and resurrection of authoritarian formsof Corporatism in Latin America, to compare the two kinds of practices, and discussthe differences and contacts between them, noting that both corporatism in postwarEurope and the counterpart in Latin America can be called as Corporatism because ofthe common characteristics such as functional organizations in the society, interestgroups admitted or licensed by the state, and the inclusion into national institutions ordecision-making processes. However, their differences are also important. Theyrespectively associate with various regimes and play different political functions, andso on. The distinctions show that there are at least two kinds of Corporatism, whichrequires further interpretations by the reemerging Corporatism. As for the risingbackground of contemporary Corporatism theory, this paper will introduce and analyzethe Corporatism ideology which can be regarded as the intellectual resource ofcontemporary Corporatism and the American normative ideology which needs to beresponded by contemporary Corporatism from the perspectives of Use and Response,especially Pluralism contained in the latter.
The second part introduces three characters and their core ideas who restarted theconcept of corporatism. Philippe C.Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch were therepresentatives of new corporatism in the research of contemporary corporatism andHarward Wiarda was the representative of “historical continuity” school. They haddifferent opinions on the concept of corporatism, Schmitter claimed that corporatismwas the system for interest represent, Gerhard Lehmbruch regarded corporatism as adecision-making process, Harward Wiarda treated corporatism as another doctrinewhich paralleled with liberalism-pluralism and Marxism.However, they laid the framework of core problems for the research of contemporary corporation theory
The third part introduces the deep discussion on the core problems involved incorporatism, and other researchers’ criticism to the core problems in corporatism.These core problems included the corporatism’s concept, the reason of birth, therelationship with pluralism. The theorists of corporatism have already discussed deeplyon these issues, but critics also pointed out the remaining questions. The theorists ofcorporatism developed rich resource of conception, and hoped to establish more usefulanalysis instrument which led to the chaos in the core of corporatism and criticism. Thetheorists of corporatism tried to establish a model for organized interests aiming atpluralism at first, however, the critics held that the difference between corporatism andpluralism was not so clear. Based on the controversy in these core problems, thecritics claimed that corporatism was enlightening at most but it was not theory. Thesecriticisms were unbiased to some extent, and received the reply by researchers incorporatism partly.
The fourth part introduces the research of corporatism in the late of1990s.Thepractice of corporatism declined in1980s and returned in1990s, furthermore, thisreturn of corporatism’s practice manifested some differences with the practice in1960sand1970s.Some theorists found that the theory and model established in1970s and1980s were not enough to explain the phenomenon in1990s,thus they tried to reset theconcept of corporatism. Theorists worked in two ways, one was to slim the concept ofcorporatism, i.e., removing the structural character and keeping the processingcharacter; another was to impose new core contents on corporatism,for example,theintroduction of political exchange and integration.
本论文共分为四个部分：一、当代法团主义理论的生长背景；二、当代法团主义理论的兴起及其主要代表；三、当代法团主义理论的纵深传播和回应质疑；四、当代法团主义理论的新进展。
第一部分主要分析了当代法团主义理论兴起的社会历史背景和知识背景。在社会历史背景中，本文集中于考察战后法团主义的政治实践，讨论了战后欧洲重新兴起的新形式的法团主义实践及其兴起的原因和拉丁美洲复活的威权形式的法团主义实践及其复活的原因，并且比较了这两种实践，讨论了它们之间的区别与联系，指出，战后欧洲的法团主义和拉丁美洲的法团主义都能冠以法团主义之名，是因为它们具有一些共同特征，如社会中的功能性组织、由国家承认或特许的利益团体，而且它们被纳入国家机构或决策过程之中。但是，它们之间的区别也是重要的，它们分别与不同的政体相联系、发挥着不同的政治功能，等等。这种区别说明至少有两种不同形式的法团主义，而这正是之后兴起的法团主义理论所需要解释和分析的。至于当代法团主义理论的兴起背景，本文从“利用”与“回应”两个角度介绍和分析了可作为当代法团主义理论智识资源的法团主义思想和当代法团主义的兴起所要回应的美国规范主义思潮，尤其是这个思潮中所包含的多元主义理论。
第二部分主要介绍了20世纪70年代中期复活法团主义概念的三个代表人物及其核心思想，分别是菲利普·施密特和杰哈德·莱姆布鲁赫——他们是当代法团主义理论研究中的新法团主义流派的代表人物；以及霍华德·威亚尔达，他是当代法团主义理论研究中的“历史连续性”学派的代表人物。这三位代表人物对于法团主义的概念的界定存在着重要分歧，施密特将法团主义定义为一个利益代表系统，莱姆布鲁赫则把法团主义定义为一种决策过程，威亚尔达则把法团主义定义为与自由主义-多元主义和马克思主义比肩的另一种“主义”。但是他们共同奠定了当代法团主义理论需要进一步研究的核心问题的框架。
第三部分讨论了在20世纪80年代对法团主义理论所包含的核心问题的深入探讨，以及其他研究者对法团主义理论一些核心问题的批评。这些核心问题包括法团主义的定义、法团主义的生成原因、法团主义与多元主义的关系以及法团主义理论本身的完整性。法团主义理论家都曾在这些问题上做过深入讨论，但是批评者也指出了存在的问题。法团主义理论家发展出了丰富的定义资源，希望能建立更有用的分析工具，但是却导致了法团主义理论核心的混乱，招致了批评。法团主义理论家一开始就试图针对多元主义建立一种分析组织化利益的模型，但是批评者认为社会法团主义与多元主义的分野并没有那么清晰。正因为在这些核心问题上的争议，批评者提出，法团主义的研究最多是启发性的，还不能成其为理论。这些批评都具有一定的中肯性，也部分得到了法团主义理论研究者的回应。
第四部分讨论了从20世纪90年代开始的法团主义的研究。因为法团主义实践在20世纪80年代衰退又在90年代回归，并且这一波回归的法团主义实践展现了与20世纪六七十年代的法团主义实践的诸多不同之处，一些法团主义理论家发现在20世纪七八十年代建立的法团主义理论和模型不能够完全解释20世纪90年代的现象，所以他们力图重新部署法团主义的概念，在这方面，有两种重要的努力，其一是为早期的法团主义概念“瘦身”，即去掉其结构特征而保持其程序特性；其二是赋予法团主义概念以新的核心内容，比如引入政治交换和整合的概念。
Contemporary Corporatism Theory is a theoretical paradigm re-emerged in1970sto research the relationship between state and society. The reason to call it as are-emergence is because mature Corporatism ideology began to form in the mid-19th.The ideology desires for social solidarity opposing Liberalism which overemphasizesindividual and advocates social harmony opposing Marxism class conflicts. Thus, as anideology, Corporatism won many followers so that was put into practice by manycountries during World War I and II and set off a wave of climax. However, due to itsclose ties with Corporatism and Italian Fascist, German Nazi and many authoritarianregimes, Corporatism lost ground and unpopular in the subsequent30years. Until themid-1970s, on the basis of observation of remnants of Corporatism, a large number oftheorists including Philippe C. Schmitter re-used Corporatism to describe thesephenomena and tried to develop a general theoretical model regarding the relationshipbetween state and society. This paper is to explore the emergence and development ofcontemporary Corporatism and analyze and evaluate core arguments of the theory.
The paper is divided into four parts. The first part is about the background ofcontemporary Corporatism. The second part is about the rise of Corporatism and itsprincipal representatives. The third part is to deeply elaborate core issues ofcontemporary Corporatism and to respond to questions to the theory. The last part is tointroduce the developments of contemporary Corporatism.
The first part mainly analyzes the social and historical background of the risecontemporary Corporatism theory. Under the social-historical context, this paperfocuses on the political practices of Corporatism after World War II, to discuss reasonsabout its reemergence as new forms in Europe and resurrection of authoritarian formsof Corporatism in Latin America, to compare the two kinds of practices, and discussthe differences and contacts between them, noting that both corporatism in postwarEurope and the counterpart in Latin America can be called as Corporatism because ofthe common characteristics such as functional organizations in the society, interestgroups admitted or licensed by the state, and the inclusion into national institutions ordecision-making processes. However, their differences are also important. Theyrespectively associate with various regimes and play different political functions, andso on. The distinctions show that there are at least two kinds of Corporatism, whichrequires further interpretations by the reemerging Corporatism. As for the risingbackground of contemporary Corporatism theory, this paper will introduce and analyzethe Corporatism ideology which can be regarded as the intellectual resource ofcontemporary Corporatism and the American normative ideology which needs to beresponded by contemporary Corporatism from the perspectives of Use and Response,especially Pluralism contained in the latter.
The second part introduces three characters and their core ideas who restarted theconcept of corporatism. Philippe C.Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch were therepresentatives of new corporatism in the research of contemporary corporatism andHarward Wiarda was the representative of “historical continuity” school. They haddifferent opinions on the concept of corporatism, Schmitter claimed that corporatismwas the system for interest represent, Gerhard Lehmbruch regarded corporatism as adecision-making process, Harward Wiarda treated corporatism as another doctrinewhich paralleled with liberalism-pluralism and Marxism.However, they laid the framework of core problems for the research of contemporary corporation theory
The third part introduces the deep discussion on the core problems involved incorporatism, and other researchers’ criticism to the core problems in corporatism.These core problems included the corporatism’s concept, the reason of birth, therelationship with pluralism. The theorists of corporatism have already discussed deeplyon these issues, but critics also pointed out the remaining questions. The theorists ofcorporatism developed rich resource of conception, and hoped to establish more usefulanalysis instrument which led to the chaos in the core of corporatism and criticism. Thetheorists of corporatism tried to establish a model for organized interests aiming atpluralism at first, however, the critics held that the difference between corporatism andpluralism was not so clear. Based on the controversy in these core problems, thecritics claimed that corporatism was enlightening at most but it was not theory. Thesecriticisms were unbiased to some extent, and received the reply by researchers incorporatism partly.
The fourth part introduces the research of corporatism in the late of1990s.Thepractice of corporatism declined in1980s and returned in1990s, furthermore, thisreturn of corporatism’s practice manifested some differences with the practice in1960sand1970s.Some theorists found that the theory and model established in1970s and1980s were not enough to explain the phenomenon in1990s,thus they tried to reset theconcept of corporatism. Theorists worked in two ways, one was to slim the concept ofcorporatism, i.e., removing the structural character and keeping the processingcharacter; another was to impose new core contents on corporatism,for example,theintroduction of political exchange and integration.
引文
1参见Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M]. Armonk, N. Y.:M.E.Sharpe, Inc.,1997.
2[英]杰弗里·托马斯.政治哲学导论[M].顾肃，刘雪梅译.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2006:110.
3杰弗里·托马斯（Geoffrey Thomas）总结市民社会这一观念经历三个主要阶段：第一阶段从古希腊罗马一直到18世纪中叶的欧洲，在这一阶段，市民社会只是城邦或国家内部的宾格，凡有国家之处，便存在一个社会，即市民社会；第二阶段最详尽的表述见于黑格尔对市民社会的说明，它定义了一个介于家庭和国家之间的需求体系，该领域涵盖了市场、雇佣、同业公会及其他；第三阶段的市民社会指介于个人和国家之间的中间机构，即潘格尔（Thomas Pangle）的“自由或非强迫的民间社团体系”，它在20世纪的自由主义思想里非常显著。在自由主义思想里，这些社团是工会、同业公会、公司、教会、特殊利益团体等等，其主要组织和行为特征有：自愿性、自治或说不受国家的直接控制。详见[英]杰弗里·托马斯.政治哲学导论[M].顾肃，刘雪梅译.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2006:110-111.
4参见《大不列颠百科全书》在线版本中”civil society (social science)”词条，http://global.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1916880/civil-society。
1分别是Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Development in the Iberic-Latin World: Persistent Strains and NewVariations[J].The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):3-33; Ronald C. Newton, Natural Corporatism and the Passing ofPopulism in Spanish America[J]. Review of Politics,1974,36(1):33-51; James M. Malloy, Authoritarianism,Corporatism and Mobilization in Peru[J]. Review of Politics,1974,36(1):52-84; Philippe C. Schmitter. Still theCentury of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):85-131.; and Fredrick B. Pike, Corporatism andLatin American-United States Relations[J]. Review of Politics,1974,36(1):132-170.
2Peter J. Williamson. Corporatism in Perspective: An Introductory Guide to Corporatist Theory[M].London：SagePublications，1989:4.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):95.
4Peter J. Williamson. Corporatism in Perspective: An Introductory Guide to Corporatist Theory[M].London：SagePublications，1989:7.
1Samuel Beer. Pressure Groups and Parties in Britain[J].American Political Science Review,1956,50(1):7.
2Samuel Beer. Modern British Politics [M]. London：Faber，1969:427-428.
3Harry Eckstein. Pressure Group Politics: The Case of the British Medical Association[M].California：StanfordUniversity Press，1960:23-24.
4Joseph LaPalombara. Interest Groups in Italian Politics[M]. Princeton, NJ：Princeton University Press，1964：222-246.
5Stein Rokkan. Norway: Numerical Democracy and Corporate Pluralism[M]. Bergen, Norway: Chr. Michelsensinstitutt,1966:113.
1Olaf Ruin. Participation, Corporativization and Politicization Trends in Present-day Sweden[C]. Paper presentedat Sixty-second Annual Meeting of the Society for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study, New York,1972,May5-6.
2Hans Meijer. Bureaucracy and Policy Formulation in Sweden[J].Scandinavian Political Studies,1969(4):103-116.
3Roland Huntford.The New Totalitarians[M].New York: Allen Lane,1972:86.
4Hans Huber, Swiss Democracy[M]//H.W. Ehrmann(ed.). Democracy in a Changing Society. New York,1964:101-106.
5John P. Windmuller. Labour Relations in the Netherlands[M]. Ithaca,NY: Cornell University Press,1969.
6Kenneth E. Miller. Government and Politics in Denmark[M]. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Comp.,1968.
7Keith R. Legg. Politics in Modern Greece[M]. Stanford: Stanford University Press,1969.
8Juan Linz. An Authoritarian Regime: Spain[M]//Erik Allardt and Stein Rokkan (eds.).Mass Politics. New York:Free Press,1970:251-283.
9Philippe C. Schmitter. Corporatist Interest Representation and Public Policy-Making in Portugal[C]. Paperpresented at the Conference Group on Modern Portugal, Durham, N. H., October10-14,1973.
10Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:43.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):99-100.
2Bo Rothstein. Corporatism and Reformism: The Social Democratic Institutionalization of Class Conflict[J]. ActaSociologica,1987(30)::295-311.
3（英）戴维米勒，（英）韦农波格丹诺﹒布莱克维尔政治学百科全书[M]﹒邓正来等，译﹒北京：中国政法大学出版社，2002：417.
1Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before “the Century”and After[M]//Colin Crouch andWolfgang Streeck (eds.).The Diversity of Democracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict. Cheltenham:Edward Elgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:13.
1Andrew Shonfield. Modern Capitalism：The Changing Balance of Public and Private Power[M].London：OxfordUniversity Press，1965:231.
2（英）戴维米勒，（英）韦农波格丹诺﹒布莱克维尔政治学百科全书[M]﹒邓正来等，译﹒北京：中国政法大学出版社，2002：854.
5（英）戴维米勒，（英）韦农波格丹诺﹒布莱克维尔政治学百科全书[M]﹒邓正来等，译﹒北京：中国政法大学出版社，2002：855.
1Harry Eckstein. Pressure Group Politics: The Case of the British Medical Association[M].California：StanfordUniversity Press，1960:23-24.
2（美）彼得J.卡岑斯坦﹒世界市场中的小国家——欧洲的产业政策[M]﹒叶静，译﹒长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2009：4.
1（美）彼得J.卡岑斯坦﹒世界市场中的小国家——欧洲的产业政策[M]﹒叶静，译﹒长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2009：21-22.
3（美）彼得J.卡岑斯坦﹒世界市场中的小国家——欧洲的产业政策[M]﹒叶静，译﹒长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2009：98.
4（美）彼得J.卡岑斯坦﹒世界市场中的小国家——欧洲的产业政策[M]﹒叶静，译﹒长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2009：99.
5Andrew Shonfield. Modern Capitalism：The Changing Balance of Public and Private Power[M].London：OxfordUniversity Press，1965.
6Ghita Ionescu. Centripetal Politics: Government and the New Centres of Power[M]. London：Hart-Davis，Macgibbon，1975.
3Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:119.
1Andrew Shonfield. Modern Capitalism：The Changing Balance of Public and Private Power[M].London：OxfordUniversity Press，1965:192-245.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):106.
1Guillermo A. O’Donnell.Corporatism and the Question of the State[M]//James M. Malloy (ed.).Authoritarianismand Corporatism in Latin America. London: University of Pittsburgh Press,1977:47.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:112.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997：114.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997：114.
3James M. Malloy. Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America: The Modal Pattern[M]//James M. Malloy(ed.). Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America[M]. London：University of Pittsburgh Press，1977:4.
4Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997：79.
1John Leddy Phelan. The Kingdom of Quito in the Seventeenth Century: Bureaucratic Politics in the SpanishEmpire[M]. Madison：University of Wisconsin Press，1967.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Toward a Framework for the Study of Political Change in the Iberic-Latin Tradition: TheCorporative Model[J].World Politics,1973,25:225-226.有关这方面的论述，还可参见Howard J. Wiarda.Corporatism and Development in the Iberic-Latin World: Persistent Strains and New Variations[J].The Review ofPolitics,1974,36(1):3-33.
1James M. Malloy. Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America: The Modal Pattern[M]//James M. Malloy(ed.). Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America. London: University of Pittsburgh Press,1977:5.
2原文参见Peter Evans. Dependent development: TheAlliance of Multinationals, State, and Local Capital inBrazil[M]. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press,1979:26-27.此处转引自（美）乔尔S.米格代尔﹒社会中的国家：国家与社会如何相互改变与相互构成[M]﹒李杨，郭一聪，译﹒南京：江苏人民出版社，2013：223.
1James M. Malloy. Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America: The Modal Pattern[M]//James M. Malloy(ed.). Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America. London: University of Pittsburgh Press,1977:7-8.
1James M. Malloy. Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America: The Modal Pattern[M]//James M. Malloy
(ed.). Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America. London: University of Pittsburgh Press,1977:5-6.
1原文参见Alfred C. Stepan. The State and Society: Peru in Comparative Perspective, Princeton[M].N. J.:Princeton University Press,1978:47.此处转引自（美）乔尔S.米格代尔﹒社会中的国家：国家与社会如何相互改变与相互构成[M]﹒李杨，郭一聪，译﹒南京：江苏人民出版社，2013：221﹒
2（美）乔尔S.米格代尔﹒社会中的国家：国家与社会如何相互改变与相互构成[M]﹒李杨，郭一聪，译﹒南京：江苏人民出版社，2013：211﹒
1原文参见Gudmond Hernes and Arnie Selvik, Local Corporatism[M]//Suzanne Berger(ed.).Organizing Interestsin Western Europe: Pluralism, Corporatism, and the Transformation Politics. London and New York: CambridgeUniversity Press,1981:104.这里转引自（美）乔尔S.米格代尔﹒社会中的国家：国家与社会如何相互改变与相互构成[M]﹒李杨，郭一聪，译﹒南京：江苏人民出版社，2013：211﹒
2（美）乔尔S.米格代尔﹒社会中的国家：国家与社会如何相互改变与相互构成[M]﹒李杨，郭一聪，译﹒南京：江苏人民出版社，2013：211.
3（美）乔尔S.米格代尔﹒社会中的国家：国家与社会如何相互改变与相互构成[M]﹒李杨，郭一聪，译﹒南京：江苏人民出版社，2013：211-212.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997：27.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997：30.
1Peter J. Williamson. Varieties of Corporatism: A Conceptual Discussion[M]. Cambridge：Cambridge UniversityPress，1985:19.
2Peter J. Williamson. Varieties of Corporatism: A Conceptual Discussion[M]. Cambridge：Cambridge UniversityPress，1985:20.
1Peter J. Williamson. Varieties of Corporatism: A Conceptual Discussion[M]. Cambridge：Cambridge UniversityPress，1985:20.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:18.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:18.
3Mihail Manoilesco. Le Siecle du Corporatisme[M]. Paris: Felix Alcan,1934.
1Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before ‘The Century’ and After[M]//Colin Crouch andWolfgang Streeck (eds.). The Diversity of Democracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:3.
3这是美国社会科学家丹尼尔·贝尔（Daniel Bell）在1965年发表的一部著作的题名，参见Daniel Bell. The Endof Ideology: On the Exhaustion of Political Ideas in the Fifties[M]. New York: The Free Press,1965.
44这里意指美国著名经济学家克拉克·克尔和与其共同著作《工业主义和工业人：经济增长中的劳动和管理问题》的其他作者。在这本著作中，克尔等人持有一种所谓技术决定论的工业主义趋同论，他们认为，现代社会，包括其政治，都是由技术的发展所塑造的，在社会组织模式甚至是生活方式上，留有极小的或没有更多的选择余地。事实上，面对技术的不断进步和工业的持续发展所提出的不可抵挡的要求，政治已然变成了合理调整社会实践和制度以适应这些毋庸置疑具有普遍性的制约，而这最好留给技术专家去处理，他们被训练得只追求实用主义的最佳实践。具体参见Clark Kerr, Frederick H. Harbison, John T. Dunlop, and Charles A.Myers.Industrialism and Industrial Man: The Problems of Labor and Management in Economic Growth[M].Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,1960.
5美国经济学家，趋同理论的代表人物，代表著作有Walt Whitman Rostow. The Stages of Economic Growth: ANon-Communist Manifesto[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1960.
1Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before ‘The Century’ and After[M]//Colin Crouch andWolfgang Streeck (eds.). The Diversity of Democracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:3.
2Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before ‘The Century’ and After[M]//Colin Crouch andWolfgang Streeck (eds.). The Diversity of Democracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:7.
1Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before ‘The Century’ and After[M]//Colin Crouch andWolfgang Streeck (eds.). The Diversity of Democracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:5.
1可参见本论文的导论第5-11页，其中讨论了战后60年代有关法团主义的一些研究。
2Peter J. Williamson. Corporatism in Perspective: An Introductory Guide to Corporatist Theory[M].London：SagePublications，1989:10.
2施密特在加州大学伯克利分校的博士学位论文就是研究巴西的利益政治，这篇博士论文后来于1971年出版（参见Philippe C. Schmitter. Interest Conflict and Political Change in Brazil, Stanford[M]. CA: StanfordUniversity Press,1971.）
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):88-89.
2Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):89.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):91.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):86.
2Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):93-94.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):94.
4Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):95.
1（英）戴维米勒，（英）韦农波格丹诺﹒布莱克维尔政治学百科全书[M]﹒邓正来等，译﹒北京：中国政法大学出版社，2002：298.
2参见Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward CorporatistIntermediation[M].London：Sage Publications Ltd.,1979.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Modes of Interest Intermediation and Models of Societal Change in Western Europe[M]//Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation.London：SagePublications Ltd.,1979:65.
4Philippe C. Schmitter. Modes of Interest Intermediation and Models of Societal Change in Western Europe[M]//Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation.London：SagePublications Ltd.,1979:86.
1参见张静﹒法团主义[M]﹒北京：中国社会科学出版社，1998（2005修订版）：31.
2Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):96.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):97.
2Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):98.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):102-103.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):103-104.
1亨利·菲利浦·贝当（1856-1951），法国陆军将领、政治家，法国陆军将领、政治家，1940年7月-1944年8月任维希政府元首，成为希特勒德国的傀儡。
2恩格尔伯特·陶尔斐斯（1892—1934)，奥地利第14任内阁总理（1932-1934），基督教社会党首领，独裁者。
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1)：104-105.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):96.
1（美）汉密尔顿，杰伊，麦迪逊﹒联邦党人文集[M]﹒程逢如，在汉，舒逊，译﹒北京：商务印书馆，1980：44-47.
2（美）汉密尔顿，杰伊，麦迪逊﹒联邦党人文集[M]﹒程逢如，在汉，舒逊，译﹒北京：商务印书馆，1980：47.
1原文参见Jean Malherbe. Le Corporatisme d’association en Suiss[M].Lausanne,1940:13-14.这里转引自PhilippeC. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):105.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):106.
2Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):p.108.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Modes of Interest Intermediation and Models of Societal Change in Western Europe[M]//Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation.London：SagePublications Ltd.,1979:63-94.
1Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation[M].London：SagePublications Ltd.,1979:4.
2实际上，在1974年，还有两位英国的社会科学家雷·帕尔（Ray Pahl）和杰克·温克勒（Jack Winkler）在新社会杂志（New Society）上发表了一篇文章，题为《即将到来的法团主义》（The Coming Corporatism）。参见Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation[M].London：Sage Publications Ltd.,1979:1.
1Gerhard Lehmbruch. Consociational Democracy, Class Conflict and the New Corporatism[M]//Philippe C.Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation. London：Sage PublicationsLtd.,1979:54.
1Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977,（10）:93-94.
2Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977（,10）:94.
3Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977（,10）:94.
1Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977（,10）：95.
2Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977（,10）：96.
3Gerhard Lehmbruch. Consociational Democracy, Class Conflict and the New Corporatism[M]//Philippe C.Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation. London：Sage PublicationsLtd.,1979:56.
1Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977,（10）:96.
1Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977（,10）:109.
2Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977（,10）:110.
3（荷）费舍，黑姆耶克﹒荷兰的奇迹：荷兰就业增加、福利改革、法团主义[M]﹒张文成译﹒重庆：重庆出版社，2008：58.
1Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977（,10）:111.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1)：108.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Reflections on Where the Theory of Neo-corporatism Has Gone and Where the Praxis ofNeo-corporatism May Be Going[M]//Gerhard Lehmbruch, Philippe Schmitter (eds.).Patterns of Corporatist PolicyMaking. London: Sage,1982:263.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:23.
1（美）霍华德威亚尔达﹒比较政治学导论：概念与过程[M]﹒楼亚译﹒北京：北京大学出版社，2005：96-97.
2（美）霍华德威亚尔达﹒比较政治学导论：概念与过程[M]﹒楼亚译﹒北京：北京大学出版社，2005：96.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Development in the Iberic-Latin World: Persistent Strains and NewVariations[J].The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):6.
2Philippe C. Schmitter. The “Portugalization of Brazil?”[M]//Thomas E. Skidmore(ed.). Authoritarian Brazil:Origins, Policies, and Future. New Haven[u. a.]: Yale University Press,1973:179-232.
3参见Howard J. Wiarda. Toward a Framework for the Study of Political Change in the Iberic-Latin Tradition: TheCorporative Model[J].World Politics,1973,xxv:206-236.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997: preface ix.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997: preface ix.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:3-4.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:4.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:5.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:6.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:7-8.
3Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:8.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:16.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:16.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:19.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:9.
1Peter J. Williamson. Corporatism in Perspective: An Introductory Guide to Corporatist Theory[M].London：SagePublications，1989:14-18.
1J.T. Winkler.“Corporatism”, Archives Europeennes de Sociologie[J].European Journal of Sociology,1976,17:103.
2Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation[M].London：SagePublications Ltd.,1979:3.
1Alan Cawson. Pluralism, Corporatism and the Role of the State[J].Government and Opposition,1978,13(2):184.
2Alan Cawson. Pluralism, Corporatism and the Role of the State[J].Government and Opposition,1978,13(2):184.
3Samuel H. Beer, Modern British Politics[M]. London: Faber,1969,407-408.
4Alan Cawson. Pluralism, Corporatism and the Role of the State[J].Government and Opposition,1978,13(2):187.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Reflections on Where the Theory of Neo-corporatism Has Gone and Where the Praxis ofNeo-corporatism May Be Going[M]//Gerhard Lehmbruch, Philippe Schmitter (eds.).Patterns of Corporatist PolicyMaking. London: Sage,1982:261.
2参见Philippe C. Schmitter. Interest Intermediation and Regime Governability in Contemporary Western Europeand North America[M]//S Berger(ed.).Organizing Interests in Western Europe. New York: Cambridge UniversityPress,1981:285-337；和Philippe C. Schmitter. Reflections on Where the Theory of Neo-corporatism Has Gone andWhere the Praxis of Neo-corporatism May Be Going[M]//Gerhard Lehmbruch, Philippe Schmitter (eds.).Patternsof Corporatist Policy Making. London: Sage,1982:259-279.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Interest Intermediation and Regime Governability in Contemporary Western Europe andNorth America[M]//S Berger(ed.).Organizing Interests in Western Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press,1981:285-337。
1Arthur F. P. Wassenberg. Neo-corporatism and the quest for control: the cuckoo game[M]//Gerhard Lehmbruch,Philippe Schmitter (eds.).Patterns of Corporatist Policy Making. London: Sage Publications,1982:87.
2Alan Cawson. Organized Interests and the State: Studies in Meso-corporatism[M]. London: Sage Publications,1985.
3Wolfgang Streeck, Philippe C.Schmitter. Private Interest Government: Beyond Market and State[M].London:Sage,1985.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:154.
2参见Philippe C. Schmitter. Interest Intermediation and Regime Governability in Contemporary Western Europeand North America[M]//S Berger(ed.).Organizing Interests in Western Europe. New York: Cambridge UniversityPress,1981:285-337；David Cameron. Social Democracy, Corportism, Labour Quiescence and the Representationof Economic Interests in Advanced Capitalist Society[M]//John Goldthrope (ed.). Order and Conflict inContemporary Capitalism[M]. Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984:143-178；等。
3参见David Cameron. Social Democracy, Corportism, Labour Quiescence and the Representation of EconomicInterests in Advanced Capitalist Society[M]//John Goldthrope (ed.). Order and Conflict in ContemporaryCapitalism[M]. Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984:143-178; Michael Brono and Jeffrey D. Sachs. Economics ofWorldwide Stagflation[M]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,1985;等。
4参见Gerhard Lehmbruch. Concertation and the Structure of Corporatist Networks[M]//John Goldthrope (ed.).Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism. Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984:60-80.
5Hans Keman. Politics, Policies, and Consequences: A Cross-national Analysis of Public Policy Formation inAdvanced Capitalist Democracies(1967-1981)[J].European Journal of Political Research,1984,12(2):147-170;（美）彼得·J.卡岑斯坦.世界市场中的小国家——欧洲的产业政策[M].叶静，译.长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2009.
1例如参见Martin O. Heisler. Corporate Pluralism Revisited Where is the Theory?[J]. Scandinavian PoliticalStudies, Bind2,1979(3):277-295; Grant Jordan. Pluralistic Corporatisms and Corporate Pluralism[J]. ScandinavianPolitical Studies, Bind7,1984(3):137-152.
2Ross Martin. Pluralism and the New Corporatism[J].Political Studies,1983,31:86-102.
1Ross Martin. Pluralism and the New Corporatism[J].Political Studies,1983,31:102.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:162.
1Philippe C. Schmitter,Jurger R. Grote.法团主义的命运：过去、现在和将来[M]//张静.法团主义.北京：中国社会科学出版社，1998（2005修订版）：202.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Corporatism is Dead! Long Live Corporatism![J].Government andOpposition,1989,24:54-73.
2Gerhard Lehmbruch. Neo-corporatism in Western Europe: A reassessment of the Concept in Cross-nationalPespective[R]. Paper Presented at the IPSA13THWorld Congress Paris,1985, July15-19:1.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Corporatism is Dead! Long Live Corporatism![J].Government andOpposition,1989,24:54-73.
4Philippe C. Schmitter and Wolfgang Streeck. Organized Interests and the Europe of1992[M]//Norman j.Ornstein/Mark Perlman (eds.), Political Power and Social Change: The United States Faces a United Europe(Washington, D.C.),1991:46-67.
5Mark James Gobeyn. Explaining the Decline of Macro-corporatist Political Bargaining Structures in AdvancedCapitalist Societies[J]. Governance,1993,6(1):20.
1Paulette Kurzer. Business and Banking: Political Change and Economic Integration in Western Europe[J].Ithaca/London: Cornell University Press,1993:244-245.
2Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before “the Century”and After[M]//Colin Crouch andWolfgang Streeck (eds.).The Diversity of Democracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict. Cheltenham:Edward Elgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:19-23.
1Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before “the Century”and After[M]//Colin Crouch andWolfgang Streeck (eds.).The Diversity of Democracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict. Cheltenham:Edward Elgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:23.
1参见J. Visser and Hemerijck.ADutch Miracle: Job Growth, Welfare Reform and Corporatism in theNetherlands[M]. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press,1997; M. Rhodes. Globalization, Welfare States, andEmployment: Is There a European “Third Way”?[M]//Pierson(ed.). Unemployment in the New Europe, UK:Cambridge University Press,1998等。
2Philippe Schmitter and Jürgen R. Grote. Sisifo Corporatista: Passato, Presente e Futuro[J]. Stato Mercat.50:183-215.
1Franz Traxler. Farewell to Labour Market Associations? Organized versus Disorganized Decentralization as aMap for Industrial relations[M]//Colin Crouch, Franz Traxler(eds.).Organized industrial relations in Europe: WhatFuture. Aldershot,UK: Avebury,1995:3-19.
2Martin Rhodes. Globalization, Welfare States, and Employment: Is There a European “ThirdWay”?[M]//Pierson(ed.). Unemployment in the New Europe, UK: Cambridge University Press,1998.
3Oscar Molina and Martin Rhodes. Corporatism: The past, Present and Future of a Concept[J].Annual Review ofPolitical Science,2002,5:305-331.
1Jukka Pekkarinen. Corporatism and Economic Performance in Sweden, Norway and Finland[M]//JukkaPekkarinen, Matti Pohjola, Bob Rowthorn(eds.).Social Corporatism: A Superior Economic System?. Oxford, UK:Clarendon,1992:298-337.
2B.Ebbinghaus and A. Hassel. Striking Deals: Concertation in the Reform of European Welfare States[J]. Eur:Public Policy,20007(1):44-62.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Corporatism is Dead! Long Live Corporatism![J].Government and Opposition,1989,24:70.
1G.Fajertag and P. Pochet(eds.). Social Pacts in Europe: New Dynamics[M]. Brussels: Europe Trade Union Inst./Observatoire Soc. Eur.,1997.
2F. Traxler, S.Blaschke and B.Kittel. National Labour Relations in Internationalized Markets: A Comparative Studyof Institutions, Change, and Performance[M]. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press,2001:302.
1参见Bruce Western. AComparative Study of Corporatist Development[J].American SociologicalAssociation,1991，56（3）：283-294；Markus M. L. Crepaz. Corporatism in Decline? An Empirical Analysis of theImpact of Corporatism on Macroeconomic Performance and Industrial Disputes in18Industrialized Democracies[J].Comparative Political Studies,1992,25(2):139-168.
2例如参见Robert J. Flanagan, David W. Soskice, Lloyd Ulman. Unionism, Economic Stabilization and IncomesPolicies: European Experience[M]. Washington：Brookings Inst Pr.，1983；
3Jaap Woldendorp. Neo-corporatism and Macroeconomic Performance in Eight Small West EuropeanCountries(1970-1990)[J].Acta Politica,1997,32:49-79.
4Robert J. Flanagan. Macroeconomic Performance and Collective Bargaining: an InternationalPerspective[J].Journal of Economic Literature,1999,37(3):1171.
1Anton Hemerijck. Corporatist immobility in the Netherlands[M]//Colin Crouch, Franz Traxler(eds.).Organizedindustrial relations in Europe: What Future. Aldershot,UK: Avebury,1995：183-226.
2Lucio Baccaro. What is Alive and What is Dead in the Theory of Corporatism[J].British Journal of IndustrialRelations,2003,41(4):683-706.
3A. Hemerijck and M. Schludi. Sequences of Policy Failures and Effective Policy Responses[M]//F. Scharpf and V.Schmidt(eds.). Welfare and Work in the Open Economy, Vol. I, From Vulnerability to Competitiveness, Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press,2000:208.
4MJ. Bull. The Corporatist Ideal-type and Political Exchange[J]. Politics Study,1992,40:256.
1Robert J. Flanagan. Macroeconomic Performance and Collective Bargaining: an InternationalPerspective[J].Journal of Economic Literature,1999,37(3):1150-1175.
2Oscar Molina and Martin Rhodes. Corporatism: The past, Present and Future of a Concept[J].Annual Review ofPolitical Science,2002,5:321.
3Gerhard Lehmbruch. Concertation and the Structure of Corporatist Networks[M]//J. Goldthorpe(ed.) Order andConflict in Contemporary Capitalism[M]. Oxford, UK:Clarendon,1984:60-80.
4Alan Cawson. Corporatism and Political Theory[M]. London: Blackwell,1986:38.
5Franz Traxler.The Logic of Social Pacts[M]//G.Fajertag and P. Pochet(eds.). Social Pacts in Europe: NewDynamics[M]. Brussels: Europe Trade Union Inst./Observatoire Soc. Eur.,1997:35.
1有学者专门作过一份研究，考察20世纪70年代初到2010年间与法团主义相关的文献的产出情况，研究结果显示，在1991-1995年间，法团主义术语进入文献的次数最多，不过大多作为研究主题之一而不是唯一，而法团主义作为最主要的研究主题被讨论的时间是1986-1990年间。详见Jose Luis Cardoso and PedroMendonca. Corporatism and Beyond: an Assessment of Recent Lterature[R].Working Papers of ICS,2012.http://www.ics.ul.pt/publicacoes/workingpapers/wp2012/wp2012_1.pdf.
1Abraham Kaplan. The Conduct of Inquiry[M].San Francisco: Chandler,1964.
[1]边燕杰.市场转型与社会分层：美国社会学者分析中国[M].北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店，2002.
[2]陈尧.新权威政权的民主转型[M].上海：上海人民出版社，2006.
[3]邓正来，（英）J.C.亚历山大.国家与市民社会：一种社会理论的研究路径[M].北京：中央编译出版社，1999.
[4]房宁等﹒自由威权多元——东亚政治发展研究报告[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社，2011.
[5]高丙中，袁瑞军﹒中国公民社会发展蓝皮书[M].北京：北京大学出版社，2009.
[6]胡伟.政府过程[M].杭州：浙江人民出版社，1998.
[7]马长山.国家、市民社会与法治[M].北京：商务印书馆，2002.
[8]汪丁丁.制度分析基础讲义——社会思想与制度[M].上海：上海人民出版社，2005.
[9]王绍光.安邦之道：国家转型的目标与途径[M].北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店，2009.
[10]于建嵘.抗争性政治：中国政治社会学基本问题[M].北京：人民出版社，2010.
[11]臧志军.政府政治[M].香港：香港三联书店，1994.
[12]张静.法团主义[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社，1998（2005修订版）.
[13]张静.国家与社会[M].杭州：浙江人民出版社，1998.
[14]赵鼎新.社会与政治运动讲义：第二版[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社，2012.
[15]郑宇硕，罗金义.政治学新论——西方学理与中华经验[M].香港：中文大学出版社，1997.
[16]郑振清.工会体系与国家发展[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社，2009.
[17]邹谠.二十世纪中国政治[M].香港：牛津大学出版社（中国）有限公司，1994.
[1]（美）安东尼·奥罗姆.政治社会学导论[M].张华青，等，译.上海：世纪出版集团上海人民出版社，2006.
[2]（英）安东尼·吉登斯.第三条道路：社会民主主义的复兴[M].郑戈，译.北京：北京大学出版社，2000.
[3]（美）巴林顿·摩尔.专制与民主的社会起源[M].王茁，顾洁，译.上海：上海译文出版社，2013.
[4]（美）彼得·J.卡岑斯坦.世界市场中的小国家——欧洲的产业政策[M].叶静，译.长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2009.
[5]（美）戴维·E.阿普特.现代化的政治[M].陈尧，译.上海：世纪出版集团上海人民出版社，2011.
[6]（英）戴维·米勒，（英）韦农·波格丹诺.布莱克维尔政治学百科全书
[M].邓正来，等，译.北京：中国政法大学出版社，2002.
[7]（美）道格拉斯·C﹒诺思.制度、制度变迁与经济绩效[M].杭行，译.上海：格致出版社，上海三联书店，上海人民出版社，2008.
[8]（荷）费舍，黑姆耶克.荷兰的奇迹：荷兰就业增加、福利改革、法团主义[M].张文成，译.重庆：重庆出版社，2008.
[9]（美）霍华德·威亚尔达.新兴国家的政治发展——第三世界还存在吗？
[M].刘青，牛可，译.北京：北京大学出版社，2005.
[10]（美）霍华德·威亚尔达.非西方发展理论：地区模式与全球趋势[M].董正华，等，译.北京：北京大学出版社，2006.
[11]（美）霍华德·威亚尔达﹒非西方发展理论：地区模式与全球趋势[M]﹒董正华等译﹒北京：北京大学出版社，2006.
[12]（美）吉尔伯特·罗兹曼.中国的现代化[M].南京：江苏人民出版社，1988.
[13]（美）加里布埃尔·A﹒阿尔蒙德，小G﹒宾厄姆·鲍威尔.比较政治学——体系、过程和政策[[M].曹沛霖，等，译.北京：东方出版社，2007.
[14]（美）加里布埃尔·A﹒阿尔蒙德，西德尼·维伯.公民文化——五个国家的政治态度和民主制[M].徐湘林，译.北京：华夏出版社会，1989.
[15]（英）杰弗里·托马斯.政治哲学导论[M].顾肃，刘雪梅，译﹒北京：中国人民大学出版社，2006.
[16]（美）莱斯利·里普森.政治学的重大问题——政治学导论[M].刘晓，译.北京：华夏出版社，2001.
[17]（美）罗伯特·A﹒达尔，布鲁斯·斯泰恩布里克纳.现代政治分析：第六版[M].吴勇，译.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2012.
[18]（美）乔尔·S.米格代尔.社会中的国家：国家与社会如何相互改变与相互构成[M].李杨，郭一聪，译.南京：江苏人民出版社，2013.
[19](美)塞缪尔·P﹒亨廷顿.变化社会中的政治秩序[M].王冠华，刘为，等，译.上海：世纪出版集团上海人民出版社，2008.
[20](美)塞缪尔·亨廷顿.第三波——二十世纪民主化浪潮[M].上海：上海三联书店，1998.
[21]（法）托克维尔.旧制度与大革命[M].冯棠，译.北京：商务印书馆，1992.
[22]（美）西达·斯考切波.国家与社会革命：对法国、俄国和中国的比较分析[M].何俊志，王学东，译.上海：上海人民出版社，2007.
[23]（美）西摩·马西·李普塞特.政治人：政治的社会基础[M].张绍宗，译.上海：世纪出版集团上海人民出版社，2011.
[24]（美）西摩·马西·李普塞特.共识与冲突[M].张华青，等，译.上海：世纪出版集团上海人民出版社，2011.
[1](澳)安戈，陈佩华.中国、组合主义及东亚模式[J].战略与管理，2001（1）：52-60.
[2]陈家喜.市民社会抑或统合主义——西方学者关于中国商会研究的论争[J].国外社会科学，2008（2）：104-109﹒
[3]陈明明.政府改革及其社会空间：从多元主义到法团主义[J].复旦公共行政评论，2006﹒
[4]陈剩勇.另一领域的民主：浙江温州民间商会的政治学视角[J].学术界，2003（6）：23-35.
[5]陈剩勇，马斌.温州民间商会：民主的价值与民主发展的困境[J].开放时代，2004（1）：138-149.
[6]陈祥超.意大利法西斯主义职团制[J].历史研究，1996（6）：146-159.
[7]邓伟志，陆春萍.合作主义模式下民间组织的培育和发展[J].南京社会科学，2006（11）：126-130.
[8]顾昕.公民社会发展的法团主义之道——能促型国家与国家和社会的相互增权[J].浙江学刊，2004（6）：64-70.
[9]顾昕，王旭.从国家主义到法团主义——中国市场转型过程中国家与专业团体关系的演变[J].社会学研究，2005（2）：155-175.
[10]何增科.渐进政治改革与民主的转型（上）[J].北京行政学院学报，2004（3）：10-14.
[11]黄冬娅.国家如何塑造抗争政治——关于社会抗争中国家角色的研究评述[J].社会学研究，2011（2）：217-246.
[12]景跃进.比较视野中的多元主义、精英主义与法团主义——一种在分歧中寻求逻辑结构的尝试[J].江苏行政学院学报，2003（4）：81-87.
[13]康晓光，韩恒.分类控制：当前中国大祟国家与社会关系研究[J].社会学研究，2005（6）：73-89.
[14]李力东.政治发展研究的法团主义维度——威亚尔达政治发展理论研究[D]﹒浙江大学，2009.
[15]李姿姿.国家与社会互动理论研究述评[J].学术界，200（81）：270-277.
[16]林尚立.有效政治与大国成长——对中国三十年政治发展的反思[J].公共行政评论，2008（1）：38-66.
[17]马秋莎.比较视角下中国合作主义的发展：以经济社团为例[J].清华大学学报：哲学社会科学版，2007（2）：126-138.
[18]孙双琴.论当代中国国家与社会关系模式的选择：法团主义视角[J].云南行政学院学报，2002（5）：29-32.
[19]王绍光，何建宇.中国的社团革命——中国人的结社版图[J].浙江学刊，2004（6）：71-77.
[20]王威海.西方合作主义理论述评[J].上海经济研究，200（73）：105-112.
[21]王向民.工人成熟与社会法团主义：中国工会的转型研究[J].经济社会体制比较，2008（4）：151-156.
[22]吴建平.理解法团主义——兼论其在中国国家与社会关系研究中的适用性[J].社会学研究，2012（1）：174-198.
[23]吴军民.行业协会研究综论：在国家与社会之间[J].理论与改革，2007（4）：51-55.
[24]吴巧瑜.转型期民间商会组织的角色与功能——从全作主义的理论视角分析[J].学术研究，2007（8）：15-19.
[25]夏立安.法团主义在法西斯意大利的命运[J].齐鲁学刊，2003（2）：11-17.
[26]徐勇.治理转型与竞争——合作主义[J].开放时代，2001（7）：25-33.
[27]颜文京.调整国家与社会关系的第三种模式——试论组合主义[J].政治学研究，1999（2）：85-93.
[28]张静.“合作主义”理论的中心问题[J].社会学研究，1996（5）：39-44.
[29]张静.“法团主义”模式下的工会角色[J].工会理论与实践，2001（1）：1-6.
[30]张雄.权威主义还是合作主义——我国国家与社会关系的不同视角及其发展方向[J].云南行政学院学报，2006（6）：17-20.
[31]赵司空.论东欧的法团主义与马克思主义的走向[J].现代哲学，2008（4）：15-20.
[32]郑春荣.合作主义理论在德国的发展与实践[J].德国研究，2008（4）：7-13.
[1] Alan Cawson. Corporatism and Political Theory[M].Oxford：Blackwell,1986.
[2] Alan Cawson. Organized Interests and the State: Studies inMeso-corporatism[M]. London: Sage Publications,1985.
[3] Alan Cawson. Corporatism and Political Theory[M]. London: Blackwell,1986.
[4] Andrew Henley and Euclid Tsakalotos. Corporatism and EconomicPerformance: A Comparative Analysis of Market Economies[M]. Cheltenham：Edward Elgar Publishing Limited,1993.
[5] Andrew G. Walder. Communist Neo-Traditionalism: Work and Authority inChinese Industry[M].Berkeley： University of California Press，1988.
[6] Andrew Shonfield. Modern Capitalism：The Changing Balance of Public andPrivate Power[M].London：Oxford University Press，1965.
[7] Arthur Lewis Rosenbaum(ed.).State and Society in China: The Consequencesof Reform[M]. Boulder CO：Westview Press，1992.
[8] Baogang He. The Democratic Implications of Civil Society in China[M].London：Macmillan Publishers Limited，1997.
[9] Colin Crouch and Wolfgang Streeck (eds.).The Diversity of Democracy:Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict[M]. Cheltenham：Edward ElgarPblishing Ltd.，2006.
[10] Daniel Kelliher. Peasant Power in China: The Era of Rural Reform,1979-1989[M]. New Haven： Yale University Press，1992.
[11] Deborah S. Davis (ed.). Urban Space in Contemporary China: The Potentialfor Autonomy and Community in Post-Mao China[M].Cambridge：CambridgeUniversity Press，1995.
[12]Gerhard Lehmbruch, Philippe Schmitter (eds.).Patterns of Corporatist PolicyMaking[M]. London: Sage Publications,1982.
[13] Ghita Ionescu. Centripetal Politics: Government and the New Centres ofPower[M].London： Hart-Davis，Macgibbon，1975.
[14] Harry Eckstein. Pressure Group Politics: The Case of the British MedicalAssociation[M].California：Stanford University Press，1960.
[15] Howard J， Wiarda. Corporatism and National Development in LatinAmerica[M]. Boulder CO： Westview Press，1981.
[16] Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great“Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.： M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997.
[17] Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Development: The PortugueseExperience[M]. Amherst：University of Massachusetts Press，1977.
[18] Howard J， Wiard. The Corporative Origins of the Iberian and LatinAmerican Labor Relations Systems[M]. Amherst：University of Massachusetts, LaborRelations and Research Center，1976.
[19] Howard J，Wiarda (ed.). Authoritarianism and Corporatism in LatinAmerica—Revisited[M]. Gainesville, FL.：University of Florida，2004.
[20]Ilja Scholten. Political Stability and Neo-Corporatism：Corporatist Integrationand Societal Cleavages in Western Europe[M]. London：Sage Publications，1987.
[21] John Leddy Phelan. The Kingdom of Quito in the Seventeenth Century:Bureaucratic Politics in the Spanish Empire[M]. Madison：University of WisconsinPress，1967.
[22] Joseph LaPalombara. Interest Groups in Italian Politics[M]. Princeton, NJ：Princeton University Press，1964.
[23] Lyle N. McAlister. The “Fuero Militar” in New Spain,1748-1800[M].Gainesville：University of Florida Press，1957.
[24] James M. Malloy (ed.). Authoritarianism and Corporatism in LatinAmerica[M]. London：University of Pittsburgh Press，1977.
[25]John Goldthrope (ed.). Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism[M].Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984.
[26] Peter J. Williamson. Varieties of Corporatism: A Conceptual Discussion[M].Cambridge：Cambridge University Press，1985.
[27] Peter J. Williamson. Corporatism in Perspective: An Introductory Guide toCorporatist Theory[M].London：Sage Publications，1989.
[28] Philippe C. Schmitter. Corporatism and Public Policy in AuthoritarianPortugal[M]. Beverly Hills：Sage，1975.
[29] Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends towardCorporatist Intermediation[M].London：Sage Publications Ltd.,1979.
[30] Robert J. Flanagan, David W. Soskice, Lloyd Ulman. Unionism, EconomicStabilization and Incomes Policies: European Experience[M]. Washington：Brookings Inst Pr.，1983.
[31] Samuel Beer. British Politics in the Collectivist Age[M]. New York：Knopf，1965.
[32] Samuel Beer. Modern British Politics [M]. London：Faber，1969.
[33] Stein Rokkan. Norway: Numerical Democracy and Corporate Pluralism[M].Bergen, Norway: Chr. Michelsens Institutt,1966.
[34] Suzanne Berger(ed.). Organizing Interests in Western Europe: Pluralism,Corporatism and the Transformation of Politics[M].Cambridge： CambridgeUniversity Press，1981.
[35] Vivienne Shue. The Reach of the State: Sketches of Chinese BodyPolitic[M].Palo Alto：Stanford University Press，1988.
[1] Alan Cawson. Pluralism, Corporatism and the Role of theState[J].Government and Opposition,1978,13(2):178-198.
[2] Alan Cawson. In Defense of the New Testament: A Reply to Andrew Cox,“The Old and New Testaments of Corporatism”[J]. Political Studies,1988,36:309-315.
[3] Andrew Cox. The Old and New Testaments of Corporatism: Is it a PoliticalForm or a method of Policy-making?[J]. Political Studies,1988,36(2):294-308.
[4] Anita Chen. Revolution or Corportism? Workers and Trade Unions inPost-Mao China[J].The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs,1993（29）：31-61.
[5] Anton Hemerijck. Corporatist immobility in the Netherlands[M]//ColinCrouch, Franz Traxler(eds.).Organized industrial relations in Europe: What Future.Aldershot,UK: Avebury,1995：183-226.
[6]Anton Hemerijck and Martin Schludi. Sequences of Policy Failures andEffective Policy Responses[M]//F. Scharpf and V. Schmidt(eds.). Welfare and Workin the Open Economy, Vol. I, From Vulnerability to Competitiveness, Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press,2000:125-228.
[7]Bernhard Ebbinghaus and Anke Hassel. Striking Deals: Concertation in theReform of European Welfare States[J]. Eur: Public Policy,20007(1):44-62.
[8] Bruce J. Dickson. Cooptation and Corporatism in China: The Logic of PartyAdaptation[J]. Political Science Quarterly,2000/2001，115（4）：517-540.
[9] Bruce Western. A Comparative Study of CorporatistDevelopment[J].American Sociological Association,1991，56（3）：283-294.
[10] Charles S. Maier. Preconditions for Corporatism[M]//John Goldthrope(ed.).Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism. Oxford: ClarendonPress,1984:39-59.
[11] Colin Crouch. Pluralism and the New Corporatism: A Rejoinder[J]. PoliticalStudies,1983,31:452-460.
[12] David M. Savino. The Failure of Corporatism in Twenty-First CenturyAmerica[J]. Franklin Business&Law Journal,2001（4)：1-8.
[13] Edward Gu. State Corporatism and the Politics of the State-ProfessionRelationship in China: a Case Study of Three Professional Communities[J]. AmericanAsian Review,2011，19（4)：163-199.
[14] Elizabeth J. Perry. Trend in the Study of Chinese Politics: State-SocietyRelations[J].The China Quarterly,1994（139）：704-713.
[15] Franz Traxler. The Logic of Social Pacts[M]//G.Fajertag and P. Pochet(eds.).Social Pacts in Europe: New Dynamics[M]. Brussels: Europe Trade Union Inst./Observatoire Soc. Eur.,1997:27-35.
[16] Frederic Jr. Wakeman. The Civil Society and Public Sphere Debate: WesternReflections on Chinese Political Culture[J]. Modern China,1993，19（2）：108-138.
[17] Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and PartyGovernment[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977,（10）:91-126.
[18] Gerhard Lehmbruch. Concertation and the Structure of CorporatistNetworks[M]//John Goldthrope (ed.). Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism.Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984:60-80.
[19] Gerhard Lehmbruch，Consociational Democracy, Class Conflict and the NewCorporatism[M]//Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.).Trends towardCorporatist Intermediation. London: Sage Publications Ltd.,1979:53-62.
[20] Gerhard Lehmbruch. The Organization of Society, Administrative Strategies,and Policy Networks[M]//Adrienne Windhoff-Heritier and Roland M. Czada(eds.).Political Choice: Institutions, Rules, and the Limits of Rationality.Boulder CO:Westview Press,1991:121-160.
[21] Hans Meijer. Bureaucracy and Policy Formulation inSweden[J].Scandinavian Political Studies,1969(4):103-116.
[22] Heath B, Chamberlain. Civil Society with Chinese Characteristics?[J].TheChina Journal,1998(39)69-81.
[23] Honggang Tan and Luozhong Wang. The Policy Influence of Women’sOrganizations in China[J]. Women’s Policy Journal of Harvard,2012,9:42-55.
[24] Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Development in the Iberic-Latin World:Persistent Strains and New Variations[J].The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):3-33.
[25] Howard J. Wiarda. Toward a Framework for the Study of Political Change inthe Iberic-Latin Tradition: The Corporative Model[J].WorldPolitics,1973,xxv:206-236.
[26] Howard J. Wiarda. Where Does Europe End Now? Expanding Europe’sFrontiers and the Dilemmas of Enlargement and Identity[J].Brown Journal ofInternationa Affairs,2005,12(1):89-98.
[27] Jaap Woldendorp. Neo-corporatism and Macroeconomic Performance inEight Small West European Countries(1970-1990)[J].Acta Politica,1997,32:49-79.
[28] James M. Malloy. Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America: TheModal Pattern[M]//James M. Malloy (ed.). Authoritarianism and Corporatism in LatinAmerica. London: University of Pittsburgh Press,1977：3-20.
[29] Jean C. Oi. The Role of Local State in China’s Transitional Economy[J].TheChina Quarterly,1995,144:1132-1149.
[30] Jude Howell. Civil Society, Corporatism and Capitalism in China[J].Journalof Comparative Asian Development,2012,11(2):271-297.
[31] Jukka Pekkarinen. Corporatism and Economic Performance in Sweden,Norway and Finland[M]//Jukka Pekkarinen, Matti Pohjola, BobRowthorn(eds.).Social Corporatism: A Superior Economic System?. Oxford, UK:Clarendon,1992:298-337.
[32] Kazuko Kojima, Jae-Young Choe, Takafumi Ohtomo and Yutaka Tsujinaka.The Corporatist System and Social Organizations in China[J].Management&Organization Review,2012,8(3):609-628.
[33] Leo Panitch, Recent Theoretizations of Corporatism: Reflections on aGrowth Industry[J].British Journal of Sociology,1980,31(2):159-185.
[34] Lucio Baccaro. What is Alive and What is Dead in the Theory ofCorporatism[J].British Journal of Industrial Relations,2003,41(4):683-706.
[35] Lyle N. McAlister. Social Structure and Social Change in NewSpain[J].Hispanic American Historical Review1963,43(3):349-370.
[36] Margaret M. Pearson. The Janus Face of Business Associations in China:Socialist Corporatism in Foreign[J].The Australian Journal of ChineseAffairs,1994(31):25-46.
[37] Markus M. L. Crepaz. Corporatism in Decline? An Empirical Analysis of theImpact of Corporatism on Macroeconomic Performance and Industrial Disputes in18Industrialized Democracies[J]. Comparative Political Studies,1992,25(2):139-168.
[38] MJ. Bull. The Corporatist Ideal-type and Political Exchange[J]. PoliticsStudy,1992,40:255-272.
[39] Olaf Ruin. Participation, Corporativization and Politicization Trends inPresent-day Sweden[C]. Paper presented at Sixty-second Annual Meeting of theSociety for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study, New York,1972,May5-6.
[40] Oscar Molina and Martin Rhodes. Corporatism: The past, Present and Futureof a Concept[J].Annual Review of Political Science,2002,5:305-331.
[41] Paulette Kurzer. Unemployment in Open Economies: the Impact of Trade,Finance and European Integration[J]. Comparative Political Studies,1994,24(1):3-30.
[42] Philip C. C. Huang.“Public Sphere”/“Civil Society” in China?: The ThirdRealm between State and Society[J]. Modern China,1993,19(2):216-40.
[43] Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review ofPolitics,1974,36(1):85-131.
[44] Philippe C. Schmitter. Modes of Interest Intermediation and Models ofSocietal Change in Western Europe[M]//Philippe C. Schmitter and GerhardLehmbruch (eds.).Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation. London: SagePublications Ltd.,1979:63-94.
[45] Philippe C. Schmitter and Jurger R. Grote. The Corporatist Sisyphus: Past,Present and Future[C].European University Institute Working Paper SPS,1997,4.http://hdl.handle.net/1814/284.
[46] Philippe C. Schmitter. Reflections on Where the Theory of Neo-corporatismHas Gone and Where the Praxis of Neo-corporatism May Be Going[M]//GerhardLehmbruch, Philippe Schmitter (eds.).Patterns of Corporatist Policy Making. London:Sage,1982:259-279.
[47] Philippe C. Schmitter. Corporatism is Dead! Long Live Corporatism![J].Government and Opposition,1989,24:54-73.
[48] Philippe C. Schmitter. Interest Intermediation and Regime Governability inContemporary Western Europe and North America[M]//S Berger(ed.).OrganizingInterests in Western Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press,1981:285-37.
[49] Ray Yep. The Limitations of Corporatism for Understanding ReformingChina: an Empirical Analysis in a Rural County[J].Journal of ContemporaryChina,2000,9(25):547-566.
[50] Richard M. Morse. The Heritage of Latin American[M]//Louis Hartz (ed.).The Founding of New Societies: Studies in the History of the United States, LatinAmerica, South Africa, Canada, and Australia. New York: Harcourt Brace and World,1964:33-58.
[51] Robert J. Flanagan. Macroeconomic Performance and Collective Bargaining:an International Perspective[J].Journal of Economic Literature,1999,37(3):1150-1175.
[52] Ross Martin. Pluralism and the New Corporatism[J].PoliticalStudies,1983,31:86-102.
[53] Shanhe Jiang and Richard H. Hall. Local Corporatism and Rural Enterprisesin China’s Reform[J].Organization Studies (Walter de Gruyter Gmbh&Co.KG.),1996,17(6):929-952.
[54] Samuel Beer. Pressure Groups and Parties in Britain[J].American PoliticalScience Review,1956,50(1):1-23.
[55] Tony Saich. Negotiating the State: The Development of Social Organizationsin China[J].The China Quarterly,2000(161):124-141.
[56] Victor V. Mgagna. Representing Efficiency: Corporatism and DemocraticTheory[J].The Review of Politics,1988,50(3):420-444.
[57] Vivienne Shue. State Power and Social Organization in China[M]//JoelSamuel Migdal, Atul Kohli, and Vivienne Shue(eds.). State Power and Social Forces:Domination and Transformation in the Third World. New York: Cambridge UniversityPress,1994:65-88.
[58] William T. Rowe. The Public Sphere in Modern China[J]. ModernChina,1990,16(3):309-329.
[59] Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before “theCentury”and After[M]//Colin Crouch and Wolfgang Streeck (eds.).The Diversity ofDemocracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict. Cheltenham: EdwardElgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:3-45.
2[英]杰弗里·托马斯.政治哲学导论[M].顾肃，刘雪梅译.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2006:110.
3杰弗里·托马斯（Geoffrey Thomas）总结市民社会这一观念经历三个主要阶段：第一阶段从古希腊罗马一直到18世纪中叶的欧洲，在这一阶段，市民社会只是城邦或国家内部的宾格，凡有国家之处，便存在一个社会，即市民社会；第二阶段最详尽的表述见于黑格尔对市民社会的说明，它定义了一个介于家庭和国家之间的需求体系，该领域涵盖了市场、雇佣、同业公会及其他；第三阶段的市民社会指介于个人和国家之间的中间机构，即潘格尔（Thomas Pangle）的“自由或非强迫的民间社团体系”，它在20世纪的自由主义思想里非常显著。在自由主义思想里，这些社团是工会、同业公会、公司、教会、特殊利益团体等等，其主要组织和行为特征有：自愿性、自治或说不受国家的直接控制。详见[英]杰弗里·托马斯.政治哲学导论[M].顾肃，刘雪梅译.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2006:110-111.
4参见《大不列颠百科全书》在线版本中”civil society (social science)”词条，http://global.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1916880/civil-society。
1分别是Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Development in the Iberic-Latin World: Persistent Strains and NewVariations[J].The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):3-33; Ronald C. Newton, Natural Corporatism and the Passing ofPopulism in Spanish America[J]. Review of Politics,1974,36(1):33-51; James M. Malloy, Authoritarianism,Corporatism and Mobilization in Peru[J]. Review of Politics,1974,36(1):52-84; Philippe C. Schmitter. Still theCentury of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):85-131.; and Fredrick B. Pike, Corporatism andLatin American-United States Relations[J]. Review of Politics,1974,36(1):132-170.
2Peter J. Williamson. Corporatism in Perspective: An Introductory Guide to Corporatist Theory[M].London：SagePublications，1989:4.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):95.
4Peter J. Williamson. Corporatism in Perspective: An Introductory Guide to Corporatist Theory[M].London：SagePublications，1989:7.
1Samuel Beer. Pressure Groups and Parties in Britain[J].American Political Science Review,1956,50(1):7.
2Samuel Beer. Modern British Politics [M]. London：Faber，1969:427-428.
3Harry Eckstein. Pressure Group Politics: The Case of the British Medical Association[M].California：StanfordUniversity Press，1960:23-24.
4Joseph LaPalombara. Interest Groups in Italian Politics[M]. Princeton, NJ：Princeton University Press，1964：222-246.
5Stein Rokkan. Norway: Numerical Democracy and Corporate Pluralism[M]. Bergen, Norway: Chr. Michelsensinstitutt,1966:113.
1Olaf Ruin. Participation, Corporativization and Politicization Trends in Present-day Sweden[C]. Paper presentedat Sixty-second Annual Meeting of the Society for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study, New York,1972,May5-6.
2Hans Meijer. Bureaucracy and Policy Formulation in Sweden[J].Scandinavian Political Studies,1969(4):103-116.
3Roland Huntford.The New Totalitarians[M].New York: Allen Lane,1972:86.
4Hans Huber, Swiss Democracy[M]//H.W. Ehrmann(ed.). Democracy in a Changing Society. New York,1964:101-106.
5John P. Windmuller. Labour Relations in the Netherlands[M]. Ithaca,NY: Cornell University Press,1969.
6Kenneth E. Miller. Government and Politics in Denmark[M]. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Comp.,1968.
7Keith R. Legg. Politics in Modern Greece[M]. Stanford: Stanford University Press,1969.
8Juan Linz. An Authoritarian Regime: Spain[M]//Erik Allardt and Stein Rokkan (eds.).Mass Politics. New York:Free Press,1970:251-283.
9Philippe C. Schmitter. Corporatist Interest Representation and Public Policy-Making in Portugal[C]. Paperpresented at the Conference Group on Modern Portugal, Durham, N. H., October10-14,1973.
10Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:43.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):99-100.
2Bo Rothstein. Corporatism and Reformism: The Social Democratic Institutionalization of Class Conflict[J]. ActaSociologica,1987(30)::295-311.
3（英）戴维米勒，（英）韦农波格丹诺﹒布莱克维尔政治学百科全书[M]﹒邓正来等，译﹒北京：中国政法大学出版社，2002：417.
1Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before “the Century”and After[M]//Colin Crouch andWolfgang Streeck (eds.).The Diversity of Democracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict. Cheltenham:Edward Elgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:13.
1Andrew Shonfield. Modern Capitalism：The Changing Balance of Public and Private Power[M].London：OxfordUniversity Press，1965:231.
2（英）戴维米勒，（英）韦农波格丹诺﹒布莱克维尔政治学百科全书[M]﹒邓正来等，译﹒北京：中国政法大学出版社，2002：854.
5（英）戴维米勒，（英）韦农波格丹诺﹒布莱克维尔政治学百科全书[M]﹒邓正来等，译﹒北京：中国政法大学出版社，2002：855.
1Harry Eckstein. Pressure Group Politics: The Case of the British Medical Association[M].California：StanfordUniversity Press，1960:23-24.
2（美）彼得J.卡岑斯坦﹒世界市场中的小国家——欧洲的产业政策[M]﹒叶静，译﹒长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2009：4.
1（美）彼得J.卡岑斯坦﹒世界市场中的小国家——欧洲的产业政策[M]﹒叶静，译﹒长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2009：21-22.
3（美）彼得J.卡岑斯坦﹒世界市场中的小国家——欧洲的产业政策[M]﹒叶静，译﹒长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2009：98.
4（美）彼得J.卡岑斯坦﹒世界市场中的小国家——欧洲的产业政策[M]﹒叶静，译﹒长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2009：99.
5Andrew Shonfield. Modern Capitalism：The Changing Balance of Public and Private Power[M].London：OxfordUniversity Press，1965.
6Ghita Ionescu. Centripetal Politics: Government and the New Centres of Power[M]. London：Hart-Davis，Macgibbon，1975.
3Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:119.
1Andrew Shonfield. Modern Capitalism：The Changing Balance of Public and Private Power[M].London：OxfordUniversity Press，1965:192-245.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):106.
1Guillermo A. O’Donnell.Corporatism and the Question of the State[M]//James M. Malloy (ed.).Authoritarianismand Corporatism in Latin America. London: University of Pittsburgh Press,1977:47.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:112.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997：114.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997：114.
3James M. Malloy. Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America: The Modal Pattern[M]//James M. Malloy(ed.). Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America[M]. London：University of Pittsburgh Press，1977:4.
4Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997：79.
1John Leddy Phelan. The Kingdom of Quito in the Seventeenth Century: Bureaucratic Politics in the SpanishEmpire[M]. Madison：University of Wisconsin Press，1967.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Toward a Framework for the Study of Political Change in the Iberic-Latin Tradition: TheCorporative Model[J].World Politics,1973,25:225-226.有关这方面的论述，还可参见Howard J. Wiarda.Corporatism and Development in the Iberic-Latin World: Persistent Strains and New Variations[J].The Review ofPolitics,1974,36(1):3-33.
1James M. Malloy. Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America: The Modal Pattern[M]//James M. Malloy(ed.). Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America. London: University of Pittsburgh Press,1977:5.
2原文参见Peter Evans. Dependent development: TheAlliance of Multinationals, State, and Local Capital inBrazil[M]. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press,1979:26-27.此处转引自（美）乔尔S.米格代尔﹒社会中的国家：国家与社会如何相互改变与相互构成[M]﹒李杨，郭一聪，译﹒南京：江苏人民出版社，2013：223.
1James M. Malloy. Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America: The Modal Pattern[M]//James M. Malloy(ed.). Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America. London: University of Pittsburgh Press,1977:7-8.
1James M. Malloy. Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America: The Modal Pattern[M]//James M. Malloy
(ed.). Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America. London: University of Pittsburgh Press,1977:5-6.
1原文参见Alfred C. Stepan. The State and Society: Peru in Comparative Perspective, Princeton[M].N. J.:Princeton University Press,1978:47.此处转引自（美）乔尔S.米格代尔﹒社会中的国家：国家与社会如何相互改变与相互构成[M]﹒李杨，郭一聪，译﹒南京：江苏人民出版社，2013：221﹒
2（美）乔尔S.米格代尔﹒社会中的国家：国家与社会如何相互改变与相互构成[M]﹒李杨，郭一聪，译﹒南京：江苏人民出版社，2013：211﹒
1原文参见Gudmond Hernes and Arnie Selvik, Local Corporatism[M]//Suzanne Berger(ed.).Organizing Interestsin Western Europe: Pluralism, Corporatism, and the Transformation Politics. London and New York: CambridgeUniversity Press,1981:104.这里转引自（美）乔尔S.米格代尔﹒社会中的国家：国家与社会如何相互改变与相互构成[M]﹒李杨，郭一聪，译﹒南京：江苏人民出版社，2013：211﹒
2（美）乔尔S.米格代尔﹒社会中的国家：国家与社会如何相互改变与相互构成[M]﹒李杨，郭一聪，译﹒南京：江苏人民出版社，2013：211.
3（美）乔尔S.米格代尔﹒社会中的国家：国家与社会如何相互改变与相互构成[M]﹒李杨，郭一聪，译﹒南京：江苏人民出版社，2013：211-212.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997：27.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997：30.
1Peter J. Williamson. Varieties of Corporatism: A Conceptual Discussion[M]. Cambridge：Cambridge UniversityPress，1985:19.
2Peter J. Williamson. Varieties of Corporatism: A Conceptual Discussion[M]. Cambridge：Cambridge UniversityPress，1985:20.
1Peter J. Williamson. Varieties of Corporatism: A Conceptual Discussion[M]. Cambridge：Cambridge UniversityPress，1985:20.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:18.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:18.
3Mihail Manoilesco. Le Siecle du Corporatisme[M]. Paris: Felix Alcan,1934.
1Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before ‘The Century’ and After[M]//Colin Crouch andWolfgang Streeck (eds.). The Diversity of Democracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:3.
3这是美国社会科学家丹尼尔·贝尔（Daniel Bell）在1965年发表的一部著作的题名，参见Daniel Bell. The Endof Ideology: On the Exhaustion of Political Ideas in the Fifties[M]. New York: The Free Press,1965.
44这里意指美国著名经济学家克拉克·克尔和与其共同著作《工业主义和工业人：经济增长中的劳动和管理问题》的其他作者。在这本著作中，克尔等人持有一种所谓技术决定论的工业主义趋同论，他们认为，现代社会，包括其政治，都是由技术的发展所塑造的，在社会组织模式甚至是生活方式上，留有极小的或没有更多的选择余地。事实上，面对技术的不断进步和工业的持续发展所提出的不可抵挡的要求，政治已然变成了合理调整社会实践和制度以适应这些毋庸置疑具有普遍性的制约，而这最好留给技术专家去处理，他们被训练得只追求实用主义的最佳实践。具体参见Clark Kerr, Frederick H. Harbison, John T. Dunlop, and Charles A.Myers.Industrialism and Industrial Man: The Problems of Labor and Management in Economic Growth[M].Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,1960.
5美国经济学家，趋同理论的代表人物，代表著作有Walt Whitman Rostow. The Stages of Economic Growth: ANon-Communist Manifesto[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1960.
1Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before ‘The Century’ and After[M]//Colin Crouch andWolfgang Streeck (eds.). The Diversity of Democracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:3.
2Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before ‘The Century’ and After[M]//Colin Crouch andWolfgang Streeck (eds.). The Diversity of Democracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:7.
1Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before ‘The Century’ and After[M]//Colin Crouch andWolfgang Streeck (eds.). The Diversity of Democracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:5.
1可参见本论文的导论第5-11页，其中讨论了战后60年代有关法团主义的一些研究。
2Peter J. Williamson. Corporatism in Perspective: An Introductory Guide to Corporatist Theory[M].London：SagePublications，1989:10.
2施密特在加州大学伯克利分校的博士学位论文就是研究巴西的利益政治，这篇博士论文后来于1971年出版（参见Philippe C. Schmitter. Interest Conflict and Political Change in Brazil, Stanford[M]. CA: StanfordUniversity Press,1971.）
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):88-89.
2Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):89.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):91.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):86.
2Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):93-94.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):94.
4Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):95.
1（英）戴维米勒，（英）韦农波格丹诺﹒布莱克维尔政治学百科全书[M]﹒邓正来等，译﹒北京：中国政法大学出版社，2002：298.
2参见Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward CorporatistIntermediation[M].London：Sage Publications Ltd.,1979.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Modes of Interest Intermediation and Models of Societal Change in Western Europe[M]//Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation.London：SagePublications Ltd.,1979:65.
4Philippe C. Schmitter. Modes of Interest Intermediation and Models of Societal Change in Western Europe[M]//Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation.London：SagePublications Ltd.,1979:86.
1参见张静﹒法团主义[M]﹒北京：中国社会科学出版社，1998（2005修订版）：31.
2Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):96.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):97.
2Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):98.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):102-103.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):103-104.
1亨利·菲利浦·贝当（1856-1951），法国陆军将领、政治家，法国陆军将领、政治家，1940年7月-1944年8月任维希政府元首，成为希特勒德国的傀儡。
2恩格尔伯特·陶尔斐斯（1892—1934)，奥地利第14任内阁总理（1932-1934），基督教社会党首领，独裁者。
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1)：104-105.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):96.
1（美）汉密尔顿，杰伊，麦迪逊﹒联邦党人文集[M]﹒程逢如，在汉，舒逊，译﹒北京：商务印书馆，1980：44-47.
2（美）汉密尔顿，杰伊，麦迪逊﹒联邦党人文集[M]﹒程逢如，在汉，舒逊，译﹒北京：商务印书馆，1980：47.
1原文参见Jean Malherbe. Le Corporatisme d’association en Suiss[M].Lausanne,1940:13-14.这里转引自PhilippeC. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):105.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):106.
2Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):p.108.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Modes of Interest Intermediation and Models of Societal Change in Western Europe[M]//Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation.London：SagePublications Ltd.,1979:63-94.
1Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation[M].London：SagePublications Ltd.,1979:4.
2实际上，在1974年，还有两位英国的社会科学家雷·帕尔（Ray Pahl）和杰克·温克勒（Jack Winkler）在新社会杂志（New Society）上发表了一篇文章，题为《即将到来的法团主义》（The Coming Corporatism）。参见Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation[M].London：Sage Publications Ltd.,1979:1.
1Gerhard Lehmbruch. Consociational Democracy, Class Conflict and the New Corporatism[M]//Philippe C.Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation. London：Sage PublicationsLtd.,1979:54.
1Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977,（10）:93-94.
2Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977（,10）:94.
3Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977（,10）:94.
1Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977（,10）：95.
2Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977（,10）：96.
3Gerhard Lehmbruch. Consociational Democracy, Class Conflict and the New Corporatism[M]//Philippe C.Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation. London：Sage PublicationsLtd.,1979:56.
1Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977,（10）:96.
1Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977（,10）:109.
2Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977（,10）:110.
3（荷）费舍，黑姆耶克﹒荷兰的奇迹：荷兰就业增加、福利改革、法团主义[M]﹒张文成译﹒重庆：重庆出版社，2008：58.
1Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and Party Government[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977（,10）:111.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review of Politics,1974,36(1)：108.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Reflections on Where the Theory of Neo-corporatism Has Gone and Where the Praxis ofNeo-corporatism May Be Going[M]//Gerhard Lehmbruch, Philippe Schmitter (eds.).Patterns of Corporatist PolicyMaking. London: Sage,1982:263.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:23.
1（美）霍华德威亚尔达﹒比较政治学导论：概念与过程[M]﹒楼亚译﹒北京：北京大学出版社，2005：96-97.
2（美）霍华德威亚尔达﹒比较政治学导论：概念与过程[M]﹒楼亚译﹒北京：北京大学出版社，2005：96.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Development in the Iberic-Latin World: Persistent Strains and NewVariations[J].The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):6.
2Philippe C. Schmitter. The “Portugalization of Brazil?”[M]//Thomas E. Skidmore(ed.). Authoritarian Brazil:Origins, Policies, and Future. New Haven[u. a.]: Yale University Press,1973:179-232.
3参见Howard J. Wiarda. Toward a Framework for the Study of Political Change in the Iberic-Latin Tradition: TheCorporative Model[J].World Politics,1973,xxv:206-236.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997: preface ix.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997: preface ix.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:3-4.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:4.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:5.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:6.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:7-8.
3Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:8.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:16.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:16.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:19.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:9.
1Peter J. Williamson. Corporatism in Perspective: An Introductory Guide to Corporatist Theory[M].London：SagePublications，1989:14-18.
1J.T. Winkler.“Corporatism”, Archives Europeennes de Sociologie[J].European Journal of Sociology,1976,17:103.
2Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation[M].London：SagePublications Ltd.,1979:3.
1Alan Cawson. Pluralism, Corporatism and the Role of the State[J].Government and Opposition,1978,13(2):184.
2Alan Cawson. Pluralism, Corporatism and the Role of the State[J].Government and Opposition,1978,13(2):184.
3Samuel H. Beer, Modern British Politics[M]. London: Faber,1969,407-408.
4Alan Cawson. Pluralism, Corporatism and the Role of the State[J].Government and Opposition,1978,13(2):187.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Reflections on Where the Theory of Neo-corporatism Has Gone and Where the Praxis ofNeo-corporatism May Be Going[M]//Gerhard Lehmbruch, Philippe Schmitter (eds.).Patterns of Corporatist PolicyMaking. London: Sage,1982:261.
2参见Philippe C. Schmitter. Interest Intermediation and Regime Governability in Contemporary Western Europeand North America[M]//S Berger(ed.).Organizing Interests in Western Europe. New York: Cambridge UniversityPress,1981:285-337；和Philippe C. Schmitter. Reflections on Where the Theory of Neo-corporatism Has Gone andWhere the Praxis of Neo-corporatism May Be Going[M]//Gerhard Lehmbruch, Philippe Schmitter (eds.).Patternsof Corporatist Policy Making. London: Sage,1982:259-279.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Interest Intermediation and Regime Governability in Contemporary Western Europe andNorth America[M]//S Berger(ed.).Organizing Interests in Western Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press,1981:285-337。
1Arthur F. P. Wassenberg. Neo-corporatism and the quest for control: the cuckoo game[M]//Gerhard Lehmbruch,Philippe Schmitter (eds.).Patterns of Corporatist Policy Making. London: Sage Publications,1982:87.
2Alan Cawson. Organized Interests and the State: Studies in Meso-corporatism[M]. London: Sage Publications,1985.
3Wolfgang Streeck, Philippe C.Schmitter. Private Interest Government: Beyond Market and State[M].London:Sage,1985.
1Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:154.
2参见Philippe C. Schmitter. Interest Intermediation and Regime Governability in Contemporary Western Europeand North America[M]//S Berger(ed.).Organizing Interests in Western Europe. New York: Cambridge UniversityPress,1981:285-337；David Cameron. Social Democracy, Corportism, Labour Quiescence and the Representationof Economic Interests in Advanced Capitalist Society[M]//John Goldthrope (ed.). Order and Conflict inContemporary Capitalism[M]. Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984:143-178；等。
3参见David Cameron. Social Democracy, Corportism, Labour Quiescence and the Representation of EconomicInterests in Advanced Capitalist Society[M]//John Goldthrope (ed.). Order and Conflict in ContemporaryCapitalism[M]. Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984:143-178; Michael Brono and Jeffrey D. Sachs. Economics ofWorldwide Stagflation[M]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,1985;等。
4参见Gerhard Lehmbruch. Concertation and the Structure of Corporatist Networks[M]//John Goldthrope (ed.).Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism. Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984:60-80.
5Hans Keman. Politics, Policies, and Consequences: A Cross-national Analysis of Public Policy Formation inAdvanced Capitalist Democracies(1967-1981)[J].European Journal of Political Research,1984,12(2):147-170;（美）彼得·J.卡岑斯坦.世界市场中的小国家——欧洲的产业政策[M].叶静，译.长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2009.
1例如参见Martin O. Heisler. Corporate Pluralism Revisited Where is the Theory?[J]. Scandinavian PoliticalStudies, Bind2,1979(3):277-295; Grant Jordan. Pluralistic Corporatisms and Corporate Pluralism[J]. ScandinavianPolitical Studies, Bind7,1984(3):137-152.
2Ross Martin. Pluralism and the New Corporatism[J].Political Studies,1983,31:86-102.
1Ross Martin. Pluralism and the New Corporatism[J].Political Studies,1983,31:102.
2Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great “Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.：M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997:162.
1Philippe C. Schmitter,Jurger R. Grote.法团主义的命运：过去、现在和将来[M]//张静.法团主义.北京：中国社会科学出版社，1998（2005修订版）：202.
1Philippe C. Schmitter. Corporatism is Dead! Long Live Corporatism![J].Government andOpposition,1989,24:54-73.
2Gerhard Lehmbruch. Neo-corporatism in Western Europe: A reassessment of the Concept in Cross-nationalPespective[R]. Paper Presented at the IPSA13THWorld Congress Paris,1985, July15-19:1.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Corporatism is Dead! Long Live Corporatism![J].Government andOpposition,1989,24:54-73.
4Philippe C. Schmitter and Wolfgang Streeck. Organized Interests and the Europe of1992[M]//Norman j.Ornstein/Mark Perlman (eds.), Political Power and Social Change: The United States Faces a United Europe(Washington, D.C.),1991:46-67.
5Mark James Gobeyn. Explaining the Decline of Macro-corporatist Political Bargaining Structures in AdvancedCapitalist Societies[J]. Governance,1993,6(1):20.
1Paulette Kurzer. Business and Banking: Political Change and Economic Integration in Western Europe[J].Ithaca/London: Cornell University Press,1993:244-245.
2Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before “the Century”and After[M]//Colin Crouch andWolfgang Streeck (eds.).The Diversity of Democracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict. Cheltenham:Edward Elgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:19-23.
1Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before “the Century”and After[M]//Colin Crouch andWolfgang Streeck (eds.).The Diversity of Democracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict. Cheltenham:Edward Elgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:23.
1参见J. Visser and Hemerijck.ADutch Miracle: Job Growth, Welfare Reform and Corporatism in theNetherlands[M]. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press,1997; M. Rhodes. Globalization, Welfare States, andEmployment: Is There a European “Third Way”?[M]//Pierson(ed.). Unemployment in the New Europe, UK:Cambridge University Press,1998等。
2Philippe Schmitter and Jürgen R. Grote. Sisifo Corporatista: Passato, Presente e Futuro[J]. Stato Mercat.50:183-215.
1Franz Traxler. Farewell to Labour Market Associations? Organized versus Disorganized Decentralization as aMap for Industrial relations[M]//Colin Crouch, Franz Traxler(eds.).Organized industrial relations in Europe: WhatFuture. Aldershot,UK: Avebury,1995:3-19.
2Martin Rhodes. Globalization, Welfare States, and Employment: Is There a European “ThirdWay”?[M]//Pierson(ed.). Unemployment in the New Europe, UK: Cambridge University Press,1998.
3Oscar Molina and Martin Rhodes. Corporatism: The past, Present and Future of a Concept[J].Annual Review ofPolitical Science,2002,5:305-331.
1Jukka Pekkarinen. Corporatism and Economic Performance in Sweden, Norway and Finland[M]//JukkaPekkarinen, Matti Pohjola, Bob Rowthorn(eds.).Social Corporatism: A Superior Economic System?. Oxford, UK:Clarendon,1992:298-337.
2B.Ebbinghaus and A. Hassel. Striking Deals: Concertation in the Reform of European Welfare States[J]. Eur:Public Policy,20007(1):44-62.
3Philippe C. Schmitter. Corporatism is Dead! Long Live Corporatism![J].Government and Opposition,1989,24:70.
1G.Fajertag and P. Pochet(eds.). Social Pacts in Europe: New Dynamics[M]. Brussels: Europe Trade Union Inst./Observatoire Soc. Eur.,1997.
2F. Traxler, S.Blaschke and B.Kittel. National Labour Relations in Internationalized Markets: A Comparative Studyof Institutions, Change, and Performance[M]. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press,2001:302.
1参见Bruce Western. AComparative Study of Corporatist Development[J].American SociologicalAssociation,1991，56（3）：283-294；Markus M. L. Crepaz. Corporatism in Decline? An Empirical Analysis of theImpact of Corporatism on Macroeconomic Performance and Industrial Disputes in18Industrialized Democracies[J].Comparative Political Studies,1992,25(2):139-168.
2例如参见Robert J. Flanagan, David W. Soskice, Lloyd Ulman. Unionism, Economic Stabilization and IncomesPolicies: European Experience[M]. Washington：Brookings Inst Pr.，1983；
3Jaap Woldendorp. Neo-corporatism and Macroeconomic Performance in Eight Small West EuropeanCountries(1970-1990)[J].Acta Politica,1997,32:49-79.
4Robert J. Flanagan. Macroeconomic Performance and Collective Bargaining: an InternationalPerspective[J].Journal of Economic Literature,1999,37(3):1171.
1Anton Hemerijck. Corporatist immobility in the Netherlands[M]//Colin Crouch, Franz Traxler(eds.).Organizedindustrial relations in Europe: What Future. Aldershot,UK: Avebury,1995：183-226.
2Lucio Baccaro. What is Alive and What is Dead in the Theory of Corporatism[J].British Journal of IndustrialRelations,2003,41(4):683-706.
3A. Hemerijck and M. Schludi. Sequences of Policy Failures and Effective Policy Responses[M]//F. Scharpf and V.Schmidt(eds.). Welfare and Work in the Open Economy, Vol. I, From Vulnerability to Competitiveness, Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press,2000:208.
4MJ. Bull. The Corporatist Ideal-type and Political Exchange[J]. Politics Study,1992,40:256.
1Robert J. Flanagan. Macroeconomic Performance and Collective Bargaining: an InternationalPerspective[J].Journal of Economic Literature,1999,37(3):1150-1175.
2Oscar Molina and Martin Rhodes. Corporatism: The past, Present and Future of a Concept[J].Annual Review ofPolitical Science,2002,5:321.
3Gerhard Lehmbruch. Concertation and the Structure of Corporatist Networks[M]//J. Goldthorpe(ed.) Order andConflict in Contemporary Capitalism[M]. Oxford, UK:Clarendon,1984:60-80.
4Alan Cawson. Corporatism and Political Theory[M]. London: Blackwell,1986:38.
5Franz Traxler.The Logic of Social Pacts[M]//G.Fajertag and P. Pochet(eds.). Social Pacts in Europe: NewDynamics[M]. Brussels: Europe Trade Union Inst./Observatoire Soc. Eur.,1997:35.
1有学者专门作过一份研究，考察20世纪70年代初到2010年间与法团主义相关的文献的产出情况，研究结果显示，在1991-1995年间，法团主义术语进入文献的次数最多，不过大多作为研究主题之一而不是唯一，而法团主义作为最主要的研究主题被讨论的时间是1986-1990年间。详见Jose Luis Cardoso and PedroMendonca. Corporatism and Beyond: an Assessment of Recent Lterature[R].Working Papers of ICS,2012.http://www.ics.ul.pt/publicacoes/workingpapers/wp2012/wp2012_1.pdf.
1Abraham Kaplan. The Conduct of Inquiry[M].San Francisco: Chandler,1964.
[1]边燕杰.市场转型与社会分层：美国社会学者分析中国[M].北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店，2002.
[2]陈尧.新权威政权的民主转型[M].上海：上海人民出版社，2006.
[3]邓正来，（英）J.C.亚历山大.国家与市民社会：一种社会理论的研究路径[M].北京：中央编译出版社，1999.
[4]房宁等﹒自由威权多元——东亚政治发展研究报告[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社，2011.
[5]高丙中，袁瑞军﹒中国公民社会发展蓝皮书[M].北京：北京大学出版社，2009.
[6]胡伟.政府过程[M].杭州：浙江人民出版社，1998.
[7]马长山.国家、市民社会与法治[M].北京：商务印书馆，2002.
[8]汪丁丁.制度分析基础讲义——社会思想与制度[M].上海：上海人民出版社，2005.
[9]王绍光.安邦之道：国家转型的目标与途径[M].北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店，2009.
[10]于建嵘.抗争性政治：中国政治社会学基本问题[M].北京：人民出版社，2010.
[11]臧志军.政府政治[M].香港：香港三联书店，1994.
[12]张静.法团主义[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社，1998（2005修订版）.
[13]张静.国家与社会[M].杭州：浙江人民出版社，1998.
[14]赵鼎新.社会与政治运动讲义：第二版[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社，2012.
[15]郑宇硕，罗金义.政治学新论——西方学理与中华经验[M].香港：中文大学出版社，1997.
[16]郑振清.工会体系与国家发展[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社，2009.
[17]邹谠.二十世纪中国政治[M].香港：牛津大学出版社（中国）有限公司，1994.
[1]（美）安东尼·奥罗姆.政治社会学导论[M].张华青，等，译.上海：世纪出版集团上海人民出版社，2006.
[2]（英）安东尼·吉登斯.第三条道路：社会民主主义的复兴[M].郑戈，译.北京：北京大学出版社，2000.
[3]（美）巴林顿·摩尔.专制与民主的社会起源[M].王茁，顾洁，译.上海：上海译文出版社，2013.
[4]（美）彼得·J.卡岑斯坦.世界市场中的小国家——欧洲的产业政策[M].叶静，译.长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2009.
[5]（美）戴维·E.阿普特.现代化的政治[M].陈尧，译.上海：世纪出版集团上海人民出版社，2011.
[6]（英）戴维·米勒，（英）韦农·波格丹诺.布莱克维尔政治学百科全书
[M].邓正来，等，译.北京：中国政法大学出版社，2002.
[7]（美）道格拉斯·C﹒诺思.制度、制度变迁与经济绩效[M].杭行，译.上海：格致出版社，上海三联书店，上海人民出版社，2008.
[8]（荷）费舍，黑姆耶克.荷兰的奇迹：荷兰就业增加、福利改革、法团主义[M].张文成，译.重庆：重庆出版社，2008.
[9]（美）霍华德·威亚尔达.新兴国家的政治发展——第三世界还存在吗？
[M].刘青，牛可，译.北京：北京大学出版社，2005.
[10]（美）霍华德·威亚尔达.非西方发展理论：地区模式与全球趋势[M].董正华，等，译.北京：北京大学出版社，2006.
[11]（美）霍华德·威亚尔达﹒非西方发展理论：地区模式与全球趋势[M]﹒董正华等译﹒北京：北京大学出版社，2006.
[12]（美）吉尔伯特·罗兹曼.中国的现代化[M].南京：江苏人民出版社，1988.
[13]（美）加里布埃尔·A﹒阿尔蒙德，小G﹒宾厄姆·鲍威尔.比较政治学——体系、过程和政策[[M].曹沛霖，等，译.北京：东方出版社，2007.
[14]（美）加里布埃尔·A﹒阿尔蒙德，西德尼·维伯.公民文化——五个国家的政治态度和民主制[M].徐湘林，译.北京：华夏出版社会，1989.
[15]（英）杰弗里·托马斯.政治哲学导论[M].顾肃，刘雪梅，译﹒北京：中国人民大学出版社，2006.
[16]（美）莱斯利·里普森.政治学的重大问题——政治学导论[M].刘晓，译.北京：华夏出版社，2001.
[17]（美）罗伯特·A﹒达尔，布鲁斯·斯泰恩布里克纳.现代政治分析：第六版[M].吴勇，译.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2012.
[18]（美）乔尔·S.米格代尔.社会中的国家：国家与社会如何相互改变与相互构成[M].李杨，郭一聪，译.南京：江苏人民出版社，2013.
[19](美)塞缪尔·P﹒亨廷顿.变化社会中的政治秩序[M].王冠华，刘为，等，译.上海：世纪出版集团上海人民出版社，2008.
[20](美)塞缪尔·亨廷顿.第三波——二十世纪民主化浪潮[M].上海：上海三联书店，1998.
[21]（法）托克维尔.旧制度与大革命[M].冯棠，译.北京：商务印书馆，1992.
[22]（美）西达·斯考切波.国家与社会革命：对法国、俄国和中国的比较分析[M].何俊志，王学东，译.上海：上海人民出版社，2007.
[23]（美）西摩·马西·李普塞特.政治人：政治的社会基础[M].张绍宗，译.上海：世纪出版集团上海人民出版社，2011.
[24]（美）西摩·马西·李普塞特.共识与冲突[M].张华青，等，译.上海：世纪出版集团上海人民出版社，2011.
[1](澳)安戈，陈佩华.中国、组合主义及东亚模式[J].战略与管理，2001（1）：52-60.
[2]陈家喜.市民社会抑或统合主义——西方学者关于中国商会研究的论争[J].国外社会科学，2008（2）：104-109﹒
[3]陈明明.政府改革及其社会空间：从多元主义到法团主义[J].复旦公共行政评论，2006﹒
[4]陈剩勇.另一领域的民主：浙江温州民间商会的政治学视角[J].学术界，2003（6）：23-35.
[5]陈剩勇，马斌.温州民间商会：民主的价值与民主发展的困境[J].开放时代，2004（1）：138-149.
[6]陈祥超.意大利法西斯主义职团制[J].历史研究，1996（6）：146-159.
[7]邓伟志，陆春萍.合作主义模式下民间组织的培育和发展[J].南京社会科学，2006（11）：126-130.
[8]顾昕.公民社会发展的法团主义之道——能促型国家与国家和社会的相互增权[J].浙江学刊，2004（6）：64-70.
[9]顾昕，王旭.从国家主义到法团主义——中国市场转型过程中国家与专业团体关系的演变[J].社会学研究，2005（2）：155-175.
[10]何增科.渐进政治改革与民主的转型（上）[J].北京行政学院学报，2004（3）：10-14.
[11]黄冬娅.国家如何塑造抗争政治——关于社会抗争中国家角色的研究评述[J].社会学研究，2011（2）：217-246.
[12]景跃进.比较视野中的多元主义、精英主义与法团主义——一种在分歧中寻求逻辑结构的尝试[J].江苏行政学院学报，2003（4）：81-87.
[13]康晓光，韩恒.分类控制：当前中国大祟国家与社会关系研究[J].社会学研究，2005（6）：73-89.
[14]李力东.政治发展研究的法团主义维度——威亚尔达政治发展理论研究[D]﹒浙江大学，2009.
[15]李姿姿.国家与社会互动理论研究述评[J].学术界，200（81）：270-277.
[16]林尚立.有效政治与大国成长——对中国三十年政治发展的反思[J].公共行政评论，2008（1）：38-66.
[17]马秋莎.比较视角下中国合作主义的发展：以经济社团为例[J].清华大学学报：哲学社会科学版，2007（2）：126-138.
[18]孙双琴.论当代中国国家与社会关系模式的选择：法团主义视角[J].云南行政学院学报，2002（5）：29-32.
[19]王绍光，何建宇.中国的社团革命——中国人的结社版图[J].浙江学刊，2004（6）：71-77.
[20]王威海.西方合作主义理论述评[J].上海经济研究，200（73）：105-112.
[21]王向民.工人成熟与社会法团主义：中国工会的转型研究[J].经济社会体制比较，2008（4）：151-156.
[22]吴建平.理解法团主义——兼论其在中国国家与社会关系研究中的适用性[J].社会学研究，2012（1）：174-198.
[23]吴军民.行业协会研究综论：在国家与社会之间[J].理论与改革，2007（4）：51-55.
[24]吴巧瑜.转型期民间商会组织的角色与功能——从全作主义的理论视角分析[J].学术研究，2007（8）：15-19.
[25]夏立安.法团主义在法西斯意大利的命运[J].齐鲁学刊，2003（2）：11-17.
[26]徐勇.治理转型与竞争——合作主义[J].开放时代，2001（7）：25-33.
[27]颜文京.调整国家与社会关系的第三种模式——试论组合主义[J].政治学研究，1999（2）：85-93.
[28]张静.“合作主义”理论的中心问题[J].社会学研究，1996（5）：39-44.
[29]张静.“法团主义”模式下的工会角色[J].工会理论与实践，2001（1）：1-6.
[30]张雄.权威主义还是合作主义——我国国家与社会关系的不同视角及其发展方向[J].云南行政学院学报，2006（6）：17-20.
[31]赵司空.论东欧的法团主义与马克思主义的走向[J].现代哲学，2008（4）：15-20.
[32]郑春荣.合作主义理论在德国的发展与实践[J].德国研究，2008（4）：7-13.
[1] Alan Cawson. Corporatism and Political Theory[M].Oxford：Blackwell,1986.
[2] Alan Cawson. Organized Interests and the State: Studies inMeso-corporatism[M]. London: Sage Publications,1985.
[3] Alan Cawson. Corporatism and Political Theory[M]. London: Blackwell,1986.
[4] Andrew Henley and Euclid Tsakalotos. Corporatism and EconomicPerformance: A Comparative Analysis of Market Economies[M]. Cheltenham：Edward Elgar Publishing Limited,1993.
[5] Andrew G. Walder. Communist Neo-Traditionalism: Work and Authority inChinese Industry[M].Berkeley： University of California Press，1988.
[6] Andrew Shonfield. Modern Capitalism：The Changing Balance of Public andPrivate Power[M].London：Oxford University Press，1965.
[7] Arthur Lewis Rosenbaum(ed.).State and Society in China: The Consequencesof Reform[M]. Boulder CO：Westview Press，1992.
[8] Baogang He. The Democratic Implications of Civil Society in China[M].London：Macmillan Publishers Limited，1997.
[9] Colin Crouch and Wolfgang Streeck (eds.).The Diversity of Democracy:Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict[M]. Cheltenham：Edward ElgarPblishing Ltd.，2006.
[10] Daniel Kelliher. Peasant Power in China: The Era of Rural Reform,1979-1989[M]. New Haven： Yale University Press，1992.
[11] Deborah S. Davis (ed.). Urban Space in Contemporary China: The Potentialfor Autonomy and Community in Post-Mao China[M].Cambridge：CambridgeUniversity Press，1995.
[12]Gerhard Lehmbruch, Philippe Schmitter (eds.).Patterns of Corporatist PolicyMaking[M]. London: Sage Publications,1982.
[13] Ghita Ionescu. Centripetal Politics: Government and the New Centres ofPower[M].London： Hart-Davis，Macgibbon，1975.
[14] Harry Eckstein. Pressure Group Politics: The Case of the British MedicalAssociation[M].California：Stanford University Press，1960.
[15] Howard J， Wiarda. Corporatism and National Development in LatinAmerica[M]. Boulder CO： Westview Press，1981.
[16] Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great“Ism”[M].Armonk,N.Y.： M.E.Sharpe,Inc.，1997.
[17] Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Development: The PortugueseExperience[M]. Amherst：University of Massachusetts Press，1977.
[18] Howard J， Wiard. The Corporative Origins of the Iberian and LatinAmerican Labor Relations Systems[M]. Amherst：University of Massachusetts, LaborRelations and Research Center，1976.
[19] Howard J，Wiarda (ed.). Authoritarianism and Corporatism in LatinAmerica—Revisited[M]. Gainesville, FL.：University of Florida，2004.
[20]Ilja Scholten. Political Stability and Neo-Corporatism：Corporatist Integrationand Societal Cleavages in Western Europe[M]. London：Sage Publications，1987.
[21] John Leddy Phelan. The Kingdom of Quito in the Seventeenth Century:Bureaucratic Politics in the Spanish Empire[M]. Madison：University of WisconsinPress，1967.
[22] Joseph LaPalombara. Interest Groups in Italian Politics[M]. Princeton, NJ：Princeton University Press，1964.
[23] Lyle N. McAlister. The “Fuero Militar” in New Spain,1748-1800[M].Gainesville：University of Florida Press，1957.
[24] James M. Malloy (ed.). Authoritarianism and Corporatism in LatinAmerica[M]. London：University of Pittsburgh Press，1977.
[25]John Goldthrope (ed.). Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism[M].Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984.
[26] Peter J. Williamson. Varieties of Corporatism: A Conceptual Discussion[M].Cambridge：Cambridge University Press，1985.
[27] Peter J. Williamson. Corporatism in Perspective: An Introductory Guide toCorporatist Theory[M].London：Sage Publications，1989.
[28] Philippe C. Schmitter. Corporatism and Public Policy in AuthoritarianPortugal[M]. Beverly Hills：Sage，1975.
[29] Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). Trends towardCorporatist Intermediation[M].London：Sage Publications Ltd.,1979.
[30] Robert J. Flanagan, David W. Soskice, Lloyd Ulman. Unionism, EconomicStabilization and Incomes Policies: European Experience[M]. Washington：Brookings Inst Pr.，1983.
[31] Samuel Beer. British Politics in the Collectivist Age[M]. New York：Knopf，1965.
[32] Samuel Beer. Modern British Politics [M]. London：Faber，1969.
[33] Stein Rokkan. Norway: Numerical Democracy and Corporate Pluralism[M].Bergen, Norway: Chr. Michelsens Institutt,1966.
[34] Suzanne Berger(ed.). Organizing Interests in Western Europe: Pluralism,Corporatism and the Transformation of Politics[M].Cambridge： CambridgeUniversity Press，1981.
[35] Vivienne Shue. The Reach of the State: Sketches of Chinese BodyPolitic[M].Palo Alto：Stanford University Press，1988.
[1] Alan Cawson. Pluralism, Corporatism and the Role of theState[J].Government and Opposition,1978,13(2):178-198.
[2] Alan Cawson. In Defense of the New Testament: A Reply to Andrew Cox,“The Old and New Testaments of Corporatism”[J]. Political Studies,1988,36:309-315.
[3] Andrew Cox. The Old and New Testaments of Corporatism: Is it a PoliticalForm or a method of Policy-making?[J]. Political Studies,1988,36(2):294-308.
[4] Anita Chen. Revolution or Corportism? Workers and Trade Unions inPost-Mao China[J].The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs,1993（29）：31-61.
[5] Anton Hemerijck. Corporatist immobility in the Netherlands[M]//ColinCrouch, Franz Traxler(eds.).Organized industrial relations in Europe: What Future.Aldershot,UK: Avebury,1995：183-226.
[6]Anton Hemerijck and Martin Schludi. Sequences of Policy Failures andEffective Policy Responses[M]//F. Scharpf and V. Schmidt(eds.). Welfare and Workin the Open Economy, Vol. I, From Vulnerability to Competitiveness, Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press,2000:125-228.
[7]Bernhard Ebbinghaus and Anke Hassel. Striking Deals: Concertation in theReform of European Welfare States[J]. Eur: Public Policy,20007(1):44-62.
[8] Bruce J. Dickson. Cooptation and Corporatism in China: The Logic of PartyAdaptation[J]. Political Science Quarterly,2000/2001，115（4）：517-540.
[9] Bruce Western. A Comparative Study of CorporatistDevelopment[J].American Sociological Association,1991，56（3）：283-294.
[10] Charles S. Maier. Preconditions for Corporatism[M]//John Goldthrope(ed.).Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism. Oxford: ClarendonPress,1984:39-59.
[11] Colin Crouch. Pluralism and the New Corporatism: A Rejoinder[J]. PoliticalStudies,1983,31:452-460.
[12] David M. Savino. The Failure of Corporatism in Twenty-First CenturyAmerica[J]. Franklin Business&Law Journal,2001（4)：1-8.
[13] Edward Gu. State Corporatism and the Politics of the State-ProfessionRelationship in China: a Case Study of Three Professional Communities[J]. AmericanAsian Review,2011，19（4)：163-199.
[14] Elizabeth J. Perry. Trend in the Study of Chinese Politics: State-SocietyRelations[J].The China Quarterly,1994（139）：704-713.
[15] Franz Traxler. The Logic of Social Pacts[M]//G.Fajertag and P. Pochet(eds.).Social Pacts in Europe: New Dynamics[M]. Brussels: Europe Trade Union Inst./Observatoire Soc. Eur.,1997:27-35.
[16] Frederic Jr. Wakeman. The Civil Society and Public Sphere Debate: WesternReflections on Chinese Political Culture[J]. Modern China,1993，19（2）：108-138.
[17] Gerhard Lehmbruch. Liberal Corporatism and PartyGovernment[J].Comparative Political Studies,1977,（10）:91-126.
[18] Gerhard Lehmbruch. Concertation and the Structure of CorporatistNetworks[M]//John Goldthrope (ed.). Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism.Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984:60-80.
[19] Gerhard Lehmbruch，Consociational Democracy, Class Conflict and the NewCorporatism[M]//Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.).Trends towardCorporatist Intermediation. London: Sage Publications Ltd.,1979:53-62.
[20] Gerhard Lehmbruch. The Organization of Society, Administrative Strategies,and Policy Networks[M]//Adrienne Windhoff-Heritier and Roland M. Czada(eds.).Political Choice: Institutions, Rules, and the Limits of Rationality.Boulder CO:Westview Press,1991:121-160.
[21] Hans Meijer. Bureaucracy and Policy Formulation inSweden[J].Scandinavian Political Studies,1969(4):103-116.
[22] Heath B, Chamberlain. Civil Society with Chinese Characteristics?[J].TheChina Journal,1998(39)69-81.
[23] Honggang Tan and Luozhong Wang. The Policy Influence of Women’sOrganizations in China[J]. Women’s Policy Journal of Harvard,2012,9:42-55.
[24] Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatism and Development in the Iberic-Latin World:Persistent Strains and New Variations[J].The Review of Politics,1974,36(1):3-33.
[25] Howard J. Wiarda. Toward a Framework for the Study of Political Change inthe Iberic-Latin Tradition: The Corporative Model[J].WorldPolitics,1973,xxv:206-236.
[26] Howard J. Wiarda. Where Does Europe End Now? Expanding Europe’sFrontiers and the Dilemmas of Enlargement and Identity[J].Brown Journal ofInternationa Affairs,2005,12(1):89-98.
[27] Jaap Woldendorp. Neo-corporatism and Macroeconomic Performance inEight Small West European Countries(1970-1990)[J].Acta Politica,1997,32:49-79.
[28] James M. Malloy. Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America: TheModal Pattern[M]//James M. Malloy (ed.). Authoritarianism and Corporatism in LatinAmerica. London: University of Pittsburgh Press,1977：3-20.
[29] Jean C. Oi. The Role of Local State in China’s Transitional Economy[J].TheChina Quarterly,1995,144:1132-1149.
[30] Jude Howell. Civil Society, Corporatism and Capitalism in China[J].Journalof Comparative Asian Development,2012,11(2):271-297.
[31] Jukka Pekkarinen. Corporatism and Economic Performance in Sweden,Norway and Finland[M]//Jukka Pekkarinen, Matti Pohjola, BobRowthorn(eds.).Social Corporatism: A Superior Economic System?. Oxford, UK:Clarendon,1992:298-337.
[32] Kazuko Kojima, Jae-Young Choe, Takafumi Ohtomo and Yutaka Tsujinaka.The Corporatist System and Social Organizations in China[J].Management&Organization Review,2012,8(3):609-628.
[33] Leo Panitch, Recent Theoretizations of Corporatism: Reflections on aGrowth Industry[J].British Journal of Sociology,1980,31(2):159-185.
[34] Lucio Baccaro. What is Alive and What is Dead in the Theory ofCorporatism[J].British Journal of Industrial Relations,2003,41(4):683-706.
[35] Lyle N. McAlister. Social Structure and Social Change in NewSpain[J].Hispanic American Historical Review1963,43(3):349-370.
[36] Margaret M. Pearson. The Janus Face of Business Associations in China:Socialist Corporatism in Foreign[J].The Australian Journal of ChineseAffairs,1994(31):25-46.
[37] Markus M. L. Crepaz. Corporatism in Decline? An Empirical Analysis of theImpact of Corporatism on Macroeconomic Performance and Industrial Disputes in18Industrialized Democracies[J]. Comparative Political Studies,1992,25(2):139-168.
[38] MJ. Bull. The Corporatist Ideal-type and Political Exchange[J]. PoliticsStudy,1992,40:255-272.
[39] Olaf Ruin. Participation, Corporativization and Politicization Trends inPresent-day Sweden[C]. Paper presented at Sixty-second Annual Meeting of theSociety for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study, New York,1972,May5-6.
[40] Oscar Molina and Martin Rhodes. Corporatism: The past, Present and Futureof a Concept[J].Annual Review of Political Science,2002,5:305-331.
[41] Paulette Kurzer. Unemployment in Open Economies: the Impact of Trade,Finance and European Integration[J]. Comparative Political Studies,1994,24(1):3-30.
[42] Philip C. C. Huang.“Public Sphere”/“Civil Society” in China?: The ThirdRealm between State and Society[J]. Modern China,1993,19(2):216-40.
[43] Philippe C. Schmitter. Still the Century of Corporatism?[J]. The Review ofPolitics,1974,36(1):85-131.
[44] Philippe C. Schmitter. Modes of Interest Intermediation and Models ofSocietal Change in Western Europe[M]//Philippe C. Schmitter and GerhardLehmbruch (eds.).Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation. London: SagePublications Ltd.,1979:63-94.
[45] Philippe C. Schmitter and Jurger R. Grote. The Corporatist Sisyphus: Past,Present and Future[C].European University Institute Working Paper SPS,1997,4.http://hdl.handle.net/1814/284.
[46] Philippe C. Schmitter. Reflections on Where the Theory of Neo-corporatismHas Gone and Where the Praxis of Neo-corporatism May Be Going[M]//GerhardLehmbruch, Philippe Schmitter (eds.).Patterns of Corporatist Policy Making. London:Sage,1982:259-279.
[47] Philippe C. Schmitter. Corporatism is Dead! Long Live Corporatism![J].Government and Opposition,1989,24:54-73.
[48] Philippe C. Schmitter. Interest Intermediation and Regime Governability inContemporary Western Europe and North America[M]//S Berger(ed.).OrganizingInterests in Western Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press,1981:285-37.
[49] Ray Yep. The Limitations of Corporatism for Understanding ReformingChina: an Empirical Analysis in a Rural County[J].Journal of ContemporaryChina,2000,9(25):547-566.
[50] Richard M. Morse. The Heritage of Latin American[M]//Louis Hartz (ed.).The Founding of New Societies: Studies in the History of the United States, LatinAmerica, South Africa, Canada, and Australia. New York: Harcourt Brace and World,1964:33-58.
[51] Robert J. Flanagan. Macroeconomic Performance and Collective Bargaining:an International Perspective[J].Journal of Economic Literature,1999,37(3):1150-1175.
[52] Ross Martin. Pluralism and the New Corporatism[J].PoliticalStudies,1983,31:86-102.
[53] Shanhe Jiang and Richard H. Hall. Local Corporatism and Rural Enterprisesin China’s Reform[J].Organization Studies (Walter de Gruyter Gmbh&Co.KG.),1996,17(6):929-952.
[54] Samuel Beer. Pressure Groups and Parties in Britain[J].American PoliticalScience Review,1956,50(1):1-23.
[55] Tony Saich. Negotiating the State: The Development of Social Organizationsin China[J].The China Quarterly,2000(161):124-141.
[56] Victor V. Mgagna. Representing Efficiency: Corporatism and DemocraticTheory[J].The Review of Politics,1988,50(3):420-444.
[57] Vivienne Shue. State Power and Social Organization in China[M]//JoelSamuel Migdal, Atul Kohli, and Vivienne Shue(eds.). State Power and Social Forces:Domination and Transformation in the Third World. New York: Cambridge UniversityPress,1994:65-88.
[58] William T. Rowe. The Public Sphere in Modern China[J]. ModernChina,1990,16(3):309-329.
[59] Wolfgang Streeck. The Study of Organized Interests: Before “theCentury”and After[M]//Colin Crouch and Wolfgang Streeck (eds.).The Diversity ofDemocracy: Corporatism, Social Order and Political Conflict. Cheltenham: EdwardElgar Pblishing Ltd.,2006:3-45.