English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Internationalization and Financial Federalism: The United States and Germany at the Crossroads?

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons41158

Deeg,  Richard
Projekte von Gastwissenschaftlern und Postdoc-Stipendiaten, MPI for the Study of Societies, Max Planck Society;
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA;

/persons/resource/persons41242

Lütz,  Susanne
Problemlösungsfähigkeit der Mehrebenenpolitik in Europa, MPI for the Study of Societies, Max Planck Society;

Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)

CPS_33_2000_Lütz.pdf
(Publisher version), 271KB

Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Deeg, R., & Lütz, S. (2000). Internationalization and Financial Federalism: The United States and Germany at the Crossroads? Comparative Political Studies, 33(3), 374-405. doi:10.1177/0010414000033003004.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0012-556C-7
Abstract
In this article, the authors examine some effects of economic internationalization on state structures, especially in regard to the distribution of power and authority within federalist systems. Using an institutional rational choice model, they analyze changes in financial regulation and market structures in Germany and the United States. The focus is on the financial realm because of its high degree of internationalization and because, in both countries, financial markets and regulation have historically exhibited federalist traits. The findings indicate that internationalization has led to significant convergence in financial market structures and regulation across the two countries and that in each case this convergence has been accompanied by centralization of financial regulatory authority. Although both the German type of cooperative federalism and the U.S. model of competitive federalism proved to be vulnerable to the growing international pressures, the two countries took different paths of change that reflected differences in domestic institutions. Thus, the authors conclude that convergence is, and will likely remain, of a limited nature.