State, Competition and Industrial Change in Ireland 1991-1999

The Economic and Social Re iew, Vol. 35, No. 1, Sp ing, 2004, pp. 27-53 S a e, Compe i ion and Indus ial Change in I eland 1991-1999 SEÁN Ó RIAIN* Na ional Uni e si y o I eland, Maynoo h Abs ac : As job losses inc eased apidly in 2003 amid calls o inc eased compe i i eness, i becomes all he mo e c ucial o unde s and he cha ac e and causes o such indus ial upg ading ha did occu in I eland in he 1990s. This pape a gues ha despi e a con inuing eliance on o eign in es men , he e we e signi ican elemen s o local indus ial upg ading wi hin he I ish economy in he 1990s. Con a y o pe spec i es which emphasise he lea ning e ec s associa ed wi h o eign i ms, he pape sugges s ha such upg ading only eme ged when and whe e local and na ional ins i u ions we e es ablished o suppo ela ions o inno a ion and o ganisa ional de elopmen . The cu en di icul ies in he I ish economy can be aced in signi ican pa o he ailu e o deepen and ex end his eme gen sys em o inno a ion. The emphasis on ‘compe i i eness’ in con empo a y policy deba e h ea ens o unde mine he public in es men , social ela ions and collec i e ins i u ion building ha ha e been, and will con inue o be, cen al o indus ial upg ading in I eland. IINTRODUCTION As he ‘Cel ic Tige ’ uns in o di icul ies, i becomes all he mo e impo an o unde s and he p ecise cha ac e o he ans o ma ions ha occu ed in he I ish economy in he 1990s. This pape ocuses on indus ial change, which was cen al o he imp o ed g ow h and employmen pe o mance o he I ish economy in he 1990s. How signi ican was indus ial change in I eland and wha ac o s migh explain such ans o ma ion ha did ake place? 27 *Thanks o F ed Block and wo anonymous e e ees o commen s and o D . Rhona Dempsey a Fo ás o assis ance wi h da a. This esea ch has been suppo ed by he Facul y Resea ch G an s o he Uni e si y o Cali o nia, Da is. The con en ional explana ion o he e i al in I ish economic o unes since 1987 emphasises he ongoing commi men o Fo eign Di ec In es men (FDI) and ee ade. Ba y (2000) emphasises how a combina ion o shi ing ex e nal ci cums ances and domes ic policies acili a ed ‘con e gence’ wi h economies in he EU and OECD. Ex e nally, a boom in FDI occu ed a he same ime as he Single Eu opean Ma ke p ojec was being implemen ed, c ea ing an eno mous oppo uni y o I eland. P o ec ionis policies, ag icul u al suppo s, low le els o educa ion, p ominen s a e-sec o monopolies and plu alis indus ial ela ions inhibi ed I ish bene i s om he ma ke be ween 1950 and 1988. Acco ding o his iew, ee ade, declining ag icul u e, ising le els o educa ion, s a e de egula ion and ‘ esponsible’ cen al wage ba gaining enabled ma ke s o ope a e mo e smoo hly in he 1990s and s imula ed g ow h. Paul K ugman pu s he con en ional explana ion succinc ly: “Thanks in pa o luck, in pa o policies …, I eland go a head s a o e o he Eu opean loca ions in a ac ing wha became a su ge o inwa d FDI; he ea ly in es men s bo h gene a ed a cascade h ough in o ma ional e ec s and, e en ually, c ea ed ex e nal economies ha u he ein o ced I eland’s ad an ages” (K ugman, 1998, p. 51; see also Ba y, 2000). Al hough inspi ed by dependency heo y, O’Hea n’s explana ion o I ish g ow h sha es wi h he o hodox economis s he iew ha he dynamic o indus ial g ow h is d i en by FDI, acili a ed by a neo-libe al s a e ge ing he condi ions ‘ igh ’ (O’Hea n, 1998, 2001). The logic is e y simila o K ugman’s: “Ame ican co po a ions made majo mo es o inc ease hei p esence in he Eu opean ma ke ; hey ended o agglome a e hei new p ojec s o ake ad an age o he lexibili y his allowed; and I eland was o una e enough o ecei e a majo sha e o Ame ican-owned elec onics p ojec s in Eu ope because hey agglome a ed a ound o he majo i ms such as In el” (1998, p. 153). FDI gene a es sho - e m g ow h spu s, i will no con ibu e o he long- e m de elopmen o he local economy o a wide a ie y o easons – he low le els o linkages be ween TNCs and he local economy, he epa ia ion o capi al and decapi alisa ion o he local economy, he disa icula ion o he local economy be ween an ad anced, o eign domina ed sec o and a backwa d indigenous sec o (O’Hea n, 2001, p. 193). Whe e bo h dependency and o hodox economic accoun s la gely discoun he ole o he s a e in s uc u ing ma ke s, Ce ny (1995) a gues ha neo- libe al globalisa ion has seen a g ea ly inc eased ole o he s a e as an ‘en e p ise associa ion’ which p omo es en ep eneu ialism and compe i ion. D awing on Ce ny, Ki by (2002, pp. 142-144) a gues ha he I ish s a e is bes desc ibed as a ‘compe i ion s a e’ which p io i ises mic oeconomic in e - en ion, lexible esponse o compe i i e condi ions and con olling in la ion and en e p ise o e maximising wel a e h ough expanding he s a e is-à- is 28 THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL REVIEW he ma ke . Fo Ki by, while he s a e is pe asi e wi hin he I ish economy, he s a e-socie y alliance unde pinning wha indus ial upg ading has aken place is seamlessly in eg a ed wi h he demands o global compe i i eness, c ea ing a ‘compe i ion s a e’ (Ki by, 2002, p. 143). Whe e Ki by is igh ly c i ical o he desi abili y o such a delimi ed ole o he s a e in he economy, he concep o he ‘compe i ion s a e’ has been cas mo e posi i ely by ce ain impo an elemen s wi hin he I ish poli y. The Na ional Compe i i eness Council closely moni o s many aspec s o I ish socie y o hei compe i i eness implica ions while An Taoiseach, Be ie Ahe n, decla ed in Ap il 2003: “This go e nmen does no belie e ha ma ke o ces alone deli e g ow h and jobs. We ha e o be sma . We ha e o c ea e he condi ions in which en e p ise can lou ish, while in e na ional capi al lows in o pu ou people o wo k in high alue, high pay ac i i y…. This is he so o S a e ha I wan o lead”. Bo h he app o ing and c i ical accoun s o I eland as a Compe i ion S a e sha e a simila logic o explana ion o indus ial change – an ex ensi e ole o he s a e bu one which adhe es closely o ma ke p inciples. Each o hese se s o heo ies con ibu es o ou unde s anding o he Cel ic Tige . The poin s made by dependency analys s ega ding he limi s o FDI as he basis o a de elopmen s a egy a e well aken. Howe e , as he o hodox economis s a gue, o eign in es men can b ing esou ces which can be mobilised in an economic de elopmen s a egy. Nei he pe spec i e o e s a sa is ac o y unde s anding o how local ins i u ions and poli ics shape whe he he cos s o bene i s o FDI a e emphasised. Ki by’s analysis o he ‘compe i ion s a e’ gi es a mo e cen al ole o poli ics and poin s up he deeply p oblema ic ela ionship be ween g ow h and inequali y in he I ish case. Howe e , by comple ely subo dina ing he poli ics o economic de elopmen o he logic o he ma ke , he concep o ‘ he compe i ion s a e’ unnecessa ily na ows ou ield o inqui y in o he social cons uc ion o ma ke s and he possibili ies o poli ical and economic ans o ma ion con ained wi hin he ins i u ions ha play a c i ical ole in cons uc ing hose ma ke s. This pape de elops a ‘c i ical economic sociology’ o indus ial change in he Cel ic Tige ha a gues agains he e ishisa ion o ma ke p ocesses wi hin bo h o hodox and c i ical explana ions. Fi s , I a gue ha , al hough I eland e ained subs an ial elemen s o an en epô economy, he e was signi ican upg ading in he 1990s – pa icula ly in he mos dynamic and echnology in ensi e sec o s. Second, he pape a gues agains he con en ional posi ion o suppo e s and c i ics alike ha his indus ial change can be explained by he g ea e con o mi y o ‘ he ma ke ’ by he ins i u ions o he I ish economy. A shi in he ins i u ions and s a e-socie y ela ions wi hin which indus y in I eland is embedded – mo e na owly pu , STATE, COMPETITION AND INDUSTRIAL CHANGE IN IRELAND 1991-1999 29 a change in he s a e-led na ional sys em o inno a ion – has been c ucial o indus ial upg ading and e idence om a a ie y o s udies suppo s his in e p e a ion o a posi i e ‘s a e e ec ’ on indus ial change. Finally, I a gue ha he ‘compe i i eness’ agenda (pa icula ly when ocused on a ac ing FDI) can unde mine he e y ins i u ions which ha e been c ucial o hose genuine gains ha ha e been achie ed du ing he ‘Cel ic Tige ’ yea s. The ‘Cel ic Tige ’ does no ep esen an ‘end poin ’ o a p e-o dained de elopmen pa h bu i is a e ain o poli ical s uggle whe e much emains o play o and whe e he ins i u ions which p o ided economic success may hemsel es be po en ial ools o social and poli ical ans o ma ion. 1 II INDUSTRIAL CHANGE IN THE 1990S: UPGRADING WITHIN THE BUBBLE FDI has been he bed ock o I ish indus ial policy o ou decades. Th oughou he 1960s FDI g ew apidly wi h o eign i ms accoun ing o 2.3 pe cen o g oss ou pu in 1960 bu 15.9 pe cen in 1973 (O’Malley, 1989, p. 102). The in low o FDI in he 1960s and 1970s ueled a pe iod o apid economic g ow h, al hough only minimally p og essing beyond an ‘expo pla o m’ indus ial s uc u e and ul ima ely unde pinning economic disas e in he 1980s (O’B ien, 1986; Mu ay and Wickham, 1987; Eolas, 1989; Sklai , 1988). Has he FDI boom o he 1990s changed he cha ac e o ansna ional co po a ions in I eland? Fo eign In es men : Upg ading Wi hin En epô s O’Hea n (1998) claimed ha he de iciencies o FDI in I eland ende ed he Cel ic Tige phenomenon a mi age, an a e ac o c ea i e accoun ing a he han a genuine ans o ma ion in socie al and o ganisa ional capabili ies. The e is mo e han a g ain o u h o his a gumen . Honohan, Mai e and Con oy poin ou ha “ he I ish manu ac u ing sec o con ains ‘in isible en epô s’ – in angible ac o s a i ing and lea ing like ca goes h ough g ea anshipmen po s” (1998) which a e concen a ed in he sec o s o chemicals, so wa e ep oduc ion, compu e s and p oduc ion o cola concen a e. These en epô s a e mo i a ed by a desi e o ake ad an age o he ax bene i s o an I ish loca ion in o de o e ain he highes possible 30 THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL REVIEW 1 In his espec , he analysis in his pape has much in common wi h o he pe spec i es which, despi e hei di e se e alua ions o he Cel ic Tige and i s ins i u ions, emphasise he ole o he poli ical in shaping de elopmen p ocesses (O’Donnell, 2000; Munck, 1999; Ó Riain and O’Connell, 2000). sha e o p o i s on he p oceeds o he in ellec ual wo k ypically ca ied ou close o he headqua e s (usually in he US). These dynamics a e u he in ensi ied by he ans e p icing ac i i ies o US mul ina ionals in I eland (S ewa , 1989) and by he cha ac e o much high echnology indus y whe e he cos s ha e inc easingly shi ed owa ds he design p ocess (p ima ily e ained in he US) and away om he p oduc ion p ocess (which is mo e likely o be loca ed in I eland). Clea ly his ac i i y is signi ican wi hin he I ish economy. Honohan e al. (1998) es ima ed ha o e one- hi d o manu ac u ing ou pu and app oxima ely 10 pe cen o manu ac u ing employmen was accoun ed o by hese sec o s. Howe e , we canno ely on his phenomenon, signi ican hough i is, o explain I ish indus ial g ow h in he 1990s. Fi s , his ac i i y has been p esen wi hin he I ish economy since a leas he mid-1970s (Honohan e al., 1998; S ewa , 1989; O’Hea n, 1998) and has pe sis ed ac oss slump and boom. Fu he mo e, ocusing on his ac o alone canno explain he ela i e upg ading o in es men , esea ch and de elopmen , skills and p oduc i i y h ough he 1990s (see Table 1). Table 1: Key Indus ial Indica o s in he Manu ac u ing Sec o by Na ionali y o Owne ship 1991–1999 Na ionali y Key Indica o s 1999 Pe cen age Change in o owne ship Indus ial Indica o s 1991–1999 To al Ou pu Labou R&D Employ- P o es- Ou pu Employ- Cos s as men sional men % o Labou Ou pu Fo ce %%% % I ish 125,401 14,152,497 14.7 185.2 15.3 28.1 45.4 Uni ed Kingdom 12,660 2,308,864 12.7 –2.6 11.3 62.2 O he EU 23,852 3,111,358 14.9 18.7 49.1 98.7 All o eign: 141.6 Uni ed S a es o Ame ica 74,781 35,960,866 4.3 91.7 124.0 453.3 O he non–EU 10,826 3,260,475 6.8 –26.6 –1.8 94.4 To al 247, 520 58,794,060 7.8 141.6 26.5 50.4 181.4 Sou ce: Unpublished Census o Indus ial P oduc ion da a, 1991 and 1999, p o ided by he Cen al S a is ics O ice; R&D da a om Fo ás (1999). STATE, COMPETITION AND INDUSTRIAL CHANGE IN IRELAND 1991-1999 31 In manu ac u ing indus y, in es men lows inc eased and shi ed owa ds ‘in angible’ in es men s such as R&D spending. Manu ac u ing employmen inc eased o e he pe iod and saw a signi ican deg ee o ‘upskilling’, a leas as measu ed by occupa ional ca ego y. ‘Adminis a i e and echnical’ wo ke s ( hese do no include cle ical wo ke s) g ew by 50 pe cen ac oss manu ac u ing, almos double he a e o gene al employmen g ow h. Al hough ou pu igu es a e ela i ely meaningless o he en epô sec o s discussed abo e, i is s iking ha ou pu expanded s eadily ac oss all na ionali ies o i ms (Table 1) and almos all sec o s (as ou lined below). The e was howe e a ma ked sec o al shi wi h apid decline in ‘olde ’ sec o s such as ex iles, clo hing and lea he , e en as he ‘high ech’ sec o s expanded apidly. Fu he mo e, ou pu pe employee g ew s eadily, wi hin as well as ac oss sec o s, indica ing an inc eased le el o p oduc i i y. In manu ac u ing, US owned i ms a e clea ly he p ima y culp i s in pu suing en epô ope a ions bu hese i ms also had some o he la ges inc eases in in es men and made a signi ican con ibu ion o p o essionalisa ion o he labou o ce. The o eign ‘ ood, d ink and obacco’ sec o appea s o be he only ‘pu e’ en epô sec o wi h in es men and employmen alling as ou pu inc eased. The o he sec o s – ep oduc ion o eco ded media (so wa e design and duplica ion), chemicals and compu e s – all saw expansions in in es men , R&D and some p o essionalisa ion. Howe e , in hese en epô sec o s, p o essional employmen expanded only ma ginally mo e apidly han o e all employmen . ‘O he non-EU coun ies’, p ima ily Japanese companies, we e less likely o pu sue en epô ope a ions, had a much g ea e ela i e a e o p o essionalisa ion wi hin hei wo k o ces and made eno mous leaps in e ms o p oduc i i y. This in es men is o a ‘highe quali y’ han US in es men bu hese coun ies ha e less in es men in I eland and ha in es men inc eased less quickly han US in es men . Accessing he EU is a majo mo i a ion o in es men in I eland as in es men om wi hin he EU has been much slowe han om non-EU coun ies. Howe e , in es men om non-US i ms is mo e capi al-in ensi e and p o essional-o ien ed han he massi e in low o US in es men o e he pas en yea s has been. While he e a e s iking en epô cha ac e is ics o o eign i ms in I eland he e o e, he e is also e idence o signi ican indus ial upg ading ac oss a wide ange o sec o s. We see g ow h almos comple ely ac oss he boa d in in es men , R&D, employmen , p o essionalisa ion and p oduc i i y. Pe haps he cen al con adic ion o I ish indus ial de elopmen ha has os e ed he con o e sies o ecen yea s is ha en epô ac i i y and indus ial upg ading bo h occu ed wi hin he same sec o s and e en wi hin he same i ms. An in iguing aspec o I ish de elopmen is he eme gence o 32 THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL REVIEW local deepening and upg ading om wi hin hese non-p oduc i e lows o capi al. This pic u e o ela i ely widesp ead indus ial upg ading is consis en wi h na ional ends in R&D spending and pe sonnel. G oss domes ic expendi u e on R&D was 0.6 pe cen o GDP in 1981, 0.9 pe cen in 1990, 1.28 pe cen in 1997 and 1.21 pe cen in 1999 ( ailing o keep up wi h he su ge in g ow h in he la e nine ies) – al hough s ill well below he EU a e age o 1.8 pe cen and he OECD a e age o 2.2 pe cen . Consis en wi h he labou in ensi e cha ac e o he I ish ans o ma ion, I eland does signi ican ly be e in e ms o esea che s pe en housand labou o ce – going om 17 in 1981 o 32 in 1989 o 57 in 1995, passing he EU a e age o 49 and he OECD a e age o 55. Among OECD coun ies, I eland and Ko ea show he as es a es o inc ease in R&D spending in he 1990s – a e espec able a e age annual g ow h a es o 6.0 pe cen in he 1980s I ish R&D spending inc eased by an a e age o 16.7 pe cen be ween 1991 and 1995 and 12.0 pe cen be ween 1995 and 1997. The a e age a e o inc ease in he EU om 1995-1997 was 1.9 pe cen . I eland shows by a he as es a e o inc ease o esea che s – wi h inc eases o 7.4 pe cen om 1981-1985 and 9.9 pe cen om 1985-1989 (abo e he OECD a e age o 4.4 pe cen ). In he 1990s when OECD g ow h slowed d ama ically, he I ish esea che labou o ce ook o – inc easing o an a e age o 10.5 pe cen pe annum om 1991-1993 and 15.2 pe cen om 1993-1996 ( igu es om OECD, 2000). The e is also e idence o signi ican ans o ma ion o ac i i ies wi hin i ms. A 1996-1997 su ey o a ep esen a i e sample o en e p ises in I eland, ca ied ou by he G adua e School o Business a Uni e si y College Dublin, ga he ed da a on a wide ange o wo kplace p ac ices and modes o wo kplace go e nance. Roche and Gea y (2000) ind ha , while he e has been apid ecen change wi hin I ish wo kplaces, I eland is no ‘ahead o ’ o he indus ialised coun ies no can he incidence o eamwo k be used o explain i s g ow h pe o mance o he pas en yea s. Howe e , he su ey esul s show ha he e has been a signi ican shi owa ds ‘ eamwo k’ wi hin i ms in I eland (Gea y, 1999; Roche and Gea y, 1999). Employee in ol emen is mos de eloped in he a ea o quali y imp o emen wi hin eams, less so in he o ganisa ion o wo k ac i i ies hemsel es and leas o all in he con ol o eam and o ganisa ional bounda ies (Gea y, 1999, p. 877). Sec o al Di e ences in Local Lea ning The acid es o indus ial de elopmen is he de elopmen o e i o ialised, embedded indus ial and inno a ion capabili ies. Pe haps one o he mos su p ising aspec s o he I ish g ow h expe ience was he g ow h o indigenous I ish indus y in he 1990s. F om 1991 o 1999 (and pa icula ly STATE, COMPETITION AND INDUSTRIAL CHANGE IN IRELAND 1991-1999 33 a e 1994) I ish-owned manu ac u ing indus y saw signi ican ises in in es men , R&D, employmen , p o essionalisa ion and p oduc i i y (see Table 1). This would ha e been inconcei able in he 1980s when employmen in indigenous i ms was plumme ing. None heless, despi e hese less han p omising o igins, an indigenous sec o eme ged. A close look a he s uc u e o I ish indus y con i ms ha he e we e impo an changes alongside he g ow h in ou pu and employmen (see Table 2). Table 2 combines a numbe o sec o s wi h simila cha ac e is ics oge he in o b oade g oupings. The i s g oup o sec o s alls unde he heading o he ‘knowledge economy’. These a e sec o s ha a e undamen ally based on he p ocessing o in o ma ion o whe e, o he mos pa , indigenous i ms spend a simila o g ea e p opo ion o hei e enues on R&D han he OECD a e age o hei sec o (see Fo ás, 1999, p. 12). 2 As well as being he mos knowledge in ensi e sec o s, hese sec o s a e he as es g owing, in e ms o employmen , ou pu and R&D spending. The sec o s include: so wa e, elec onic and elec ical equipmen (including compu e s and elecommunica ions), inancial se ices and ins umen s. Wi hin I ish-owned elec onics i ms, Ruane and Go g (2001) show ha he ‘high skill’ sub-sec o s ha e inc eased hei sha e o o al employmen om 9.3 pe cen be ween 1982-85 o 33.3 pe cen be ween 1991- 1995. Al hough OECD s a is ics on R&D a e no a ailable o so wa e and inancial se ices, R&D spending pe employee clea ly indica es ha hey a e among he mo e knowledge in ensi e indus ial sec o s. ‘R&D spend pe employee’ is a use ul measu e as i gi es us a measu e o R&D esou ces om he pe spec i e o employees, p o iding a sense o how much R&D ac i i y and esou ces wo ke s migh be able o a ail o . Gi en he p oblems wi h ou pu igu es in he I ish con ex , his measu e gi es us a signi ican ly di e en pic u e om ha p o ided by ‘R&D spend as a pe cen age o ou pu ’, which is a be e measu e o i m’s ela i e commi men o R&D ( a he han o he in es men , wages, p o i - aking e c.) In ac , he indus ial s a is ics mask a mo e in e es ing se o ela ionships among hese sec o s. Gene ally, so wa e capabili ies ha e become inc easingly impo an in in o ma ion and communica ion echnology indus ies – e en in sec o s which a e os ensibly ocused on ‘ha dwa e’. The indigenous so wa e indus y’s majo sub-sec o s include communica ions 34 THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL REVIEW 2 Gene ally, ca e mus be aken wi h such compa isons ac oss OECD coun ies as he su eys which o m he basis o he igu es a e o en no s ic ly compa able. Fu he mo e, gi en he ange o go e nmen incen i es o inc ease R&D he e is some dange ha i ms ha e in la ed hei R&D spends in hese s a is ics. Howe e , he pa e ns a e clea enough ha we can iden i y basic pa e ns wi hin I ish indus y, pa icula ly gi en ha hese pa e ns e lec case s udy e idence on he eme gence o pa icula esea ch based i ms. STATE, COMPETITION AND INDUSTRIAL CHANGE IN IRELAND 1991-1999 35 Table 2: I ish–Owned Indus y 1991–1999 Sec o Key Indica o s 1999 Pe cen age Change in Indus ial R&D Indica o s Indica o s 1991–1999 Ou pu Employ- To al P o essional R&D R&D as % o R&D R&D pe (million men Employ- Employmen Ou pu (OECD pe P o essional pounds) men A e ages) Employee Employee 1. ‘Knowledge Economy’ (High G ow h, R&D In ensi y simila o o abo e OECD A e age) So wa e 1 N/A 16,504 258% N/A 841% N/A 5,521 N/A O he In e na ionally T aded Se ices 1 N/A N/A 59% N/A N/A Elec onics and Elec ical Equipmen 222.8 4,437 84.7 90.6 570.8 6.3 (5.6) 5,593 29,401 Ins umen s 31.9 719 245.5 199.1 1030.5 5.9 (7.0) 4,343 15,480 2. Manu ac u ing/ Sub–Supply (a) R&D In ensi y low bu simila o OECD A e age Rubbe and Plas ic 219.3 3,720 68.1 121.7 218.8 1.3 (1.2) 1,045 8,243 Me als, me al p oduc s 490.6 9,039 28.7 28.2 79.8 0.7 (0.7) 480 3,957 Machine y and Equipmen 236.7 5,302 46.8 60.8 276.7 2.2 (2.1) 1,557 11,496 (b) R&D In ensi y low and below OECD A e age Pape , P in and Publishing (including Reco ded Media) 776.9 13,297 23.5 37.9 170.5 0.2 (0.4) 153 931 Pha maceu icals and Chemicals 455.4 3,305 35.4 18.4 51.7 1.1 (11.5/3.2*) 1,548 7,761 Non–me allic Mine als 461.1 8,194 7.5 26.0 50.2 0.4 (0.8) 437 3,234 3. ‘T adi ional’ Indus ies Food/ D ink/ Tobacco 5,436.3 31,790 8.9 90.6 44.6 0.3 (0.3) 609 4,968 Clo hing/Tex iles/ Lea he 359.7 11,944 –35.0% 83.4 –19.8 0.8 (0.3) 365 3,537 Wood, Fu ni u e 174.0 3,718 20.0 14.9 1034.7 0.9 (0.2) 741 7,820 1 Expo o ien ed i ms only. Sou ces: R&D da a om Fo ás (1999) and special abula ions; employmen da a o so wa e and in e na ional se ices om Fo ás (2000); all o he da a om special CSO abula ions o Census o Indus ial P oduc ion da a. *11.5% in Pha maceu icals and 3.2% in Chemicals. agencies ocused g an aid almos comple ely on companies p oducing so wa e p oduc s o expo – a emp ing o s ee companies away om he ‘easy’ p o i s o labou con ac ing. The s a e ac ed in impo an ways he e o e o de ine he cha ac e o I ish indus y, wi hou a emp ing o de ine he speci ic s a egies o be ollowed by i ms. Howe e , he s a e has also made mo e di ec con ibu ions. I s second con ibu ion was o ‘making winne s’. P i a e capi al was no a majo ac o in he g ow h o I ish indus y and i is only since 1998 ha p i a e in es men capi al, om bo h domes ic and o eign sou ces, has become abundan e en in leading sec o s such as so wa e. The s a e was he e o e he majo p o ide o ex e nal capi al o indigenous indus y. Fu he mo e, his mo e di ec in ol emen o he s a e was signi ican ly mo e e ec i e in p omo ing p oduc i e in es men han p e ious schemes aimed a p o iding business expansion unds o s a -ups. These schemes, wi h less s a e agency o e sigh , became mo e poli icised and degene a ed in o subsidies o well- es ablished i ms o in o a peculia ly e ec i e means o a oiding ax (see S ewa , 1992). The impo ance o he s a e in p o iding inancing and in s imula ing p i a e in es men is indica ed in Table 4 which p o ides da a on p i a e equi y in es men s be ween 1997 and 1999, he pe iod when p i a e, inc easingly in e na ional, in es men su ged in I eland. These in es men s a e concen a ed in compu e ela ed sec o s, elec onics, ‘o he manu ac u ing’ and (in 1999) communica ions. The I ish sha e o Eu opean p i a e equi y in es men inc eased om 0.3 pe cen in 1995 o 0.8 pe cen in 1998 and 1.2 pe cen in 1999. In 1997 all in es men was om domes ic sou ces and one- hi d o ha was om he s a e. A signi ican po ion o he emaining in es men would ha e been s imula ed by he s a e h ough ‘ma ching unds’ a angemen s – pe haps up o an addi ional 25 pe cen . In 1998 he e is a sha p inc ease in in es men as domes ic in es men inc eases bu , mo e impo an ly, in e na ional in es o s lood in o he inc easingly success ul I ish economy. The p ima y sou ce o unds was now p i a e indi iduals as ins i u ions such as pension unds, banks and insu ance unds lag behind. In 1999 – well in o he boom yea s – ins i u ional in es o s ook he lead in in es men unds. Non-Eu opean sou ces accoun ed o ully one- hi d o unds in 1999, up om a qua e in 1998. By 1999 I eland was well in eg a ed in o in e na ional ins i u ional in es men ci cles and he s a e began o wi hd aw om i s p e iously dominan ole as a sou ce o unds. Howe e , indi idual and ins i u ional in es o s la gely ollowed a he han led he g ow h o he high ech 42 THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL REVIEW indus ies in which mos o his unding was concen a ed. Al hough hese in es o s began o p o ide he la ge amoun s o unding equi ed by he mos p ominen companies, hey only did so once he g ow h po en ial o he so wa e indus y and o he high ech sec o s had been clea ly demons a ed. I onically, he isk ake he e is he s a e, which was he p ima y sou ce o unding h oughou he impo an pe iod o ini ial g ow h and consolida ion. Table 4: T ends in P i a e Equi y In es men 1997–1999 (000s o I ish pounds) 1997 1998 1999 To al Funds 27,713 163,626 316,232 To al S a e Funds 10,048 20,775 12,151 Selec ed Majo Types o In es o s % % % Go e nmen 36.3 12.7 3.8 P i a e Indi iduals 13.7 26.2 21.7 Banks 17.1 3.7 25.0 Pension Funds 7.3 8.2 26.8 Geog aphic B eakdown o P i a e Equi y Raised % Domes ic 100 44.7 42.8 % O he Eu opean 0 35.7 19.6 % O he Non–Eu opean 0 25.2 32.0 Sou ce: Eu opean Ven u e Capi al Associa ion, Annual Repo s. Fu he mo e, s a e agencies p omo ed a gene al company de elopmen p og amme h ough hei g an gi ing p ac ices in a a ie y o a eas including ma ke ing, managemen de elopmen , aining and R&D. G an gi ing became mo e selec i e, as ecommended by he Culli on Repo (1992), and s a e agencies ‘seeded’ en u e capi al unds. The p ecise o m his ook was qui e lexible depending on he company i sel bu he s a e agencies equi ed ha such e o s a company de elopmen ake place. Some IDA execu i es had e en been in ol ed in company de elopmen in he 1980s be o e he policy shi had ound i s way in o o icial policy. Thi d, he s a e played a c i ical ole in he c ea ion o a ne wo k o indus y and ade associa ions, uni e si ies, inno a ion and echnology cen es and o he o a and g oups which p o ide an associa ional in as uc u e o in o ma ion-sha ing, coope a ion and inno a ion. While hese bodies a e ou side he s a e o semi-au onomous om i , in mos cases hey ha e been ounded h ough s a e ini ia i es and unde w i en by s a e STATE, COMPETITION AND INDUSTRIAL CHANGE IN IRELAND 1991-1999 43 gua an ees and unding. None heless, hey o m a dis inc laye o ins i u ional spaces and social ne wo ks be ween he s a e agencies and he companies in he indus y. A di use s a e in luence h oughou he indus y is buil in o he o ganisa ional s uc u e o he ins i u ions. These ins i u ions a e ypically loca ed wi hin he uni e si ies; s a ed by academics and indus y people; usually ha e ad iso y boa ds con aining indus y, academic and s a e ep esen a i es; and ha e ex ensi e ies o indus y h ough consul ing, in o ma ion days and o he ac i i ies unde aken a leas pa ly o unding pu poses. In many ways hese associa ions and ne wo ks pe o m some o he in eg a i e unc ions ca ied ou wi hin he co po a ion in e ically in eg a ed, la ge i ms. Assessing he E ec o Ins i u ional Suppo s The e is signi ican a p io i e idence ha s a e suppo s ha e made a di e ence. Ag icul u e emains pe haps he p ima y ‘clus e ’ wi hin he I ish economy (O’Malley and Van Ege aa , 2000) and ag icul u al upg ading has been unde pinned by he eme gence o signi ican basic and indus ial esea ch capabili ies wi hin he uni e si ies and Teagasc. S agnan since he 1960s, I ish ou ism enjoyed he highes a es o g ow h in he OECD since 1986 and saw a signi ican upg ading in i s ‘p oduc ’ as well as enjoying g ea e in e na ional demand (Ba e , 1997). Ba e p o ides da a ha sugges s ha public subsidy accoun ed o app oxima ely 30 pe cen o he apidly inc easing in es men in ou ism, while he p i a e sec o accoun ed o a ound 22 pe cen . While he commen s on he en -seeking oppo uni ies gene a ed by his unding, i seems much mo e likely ha s a e suppo has enabled his apid expansion by p o iding aluable unds o ‘kick s a ing’ small and medium sized ou ism o ien ed comme cial ope a ions, as well as imp o ing in as uc u e. In manu ac u ing, O’Malley e al. (1992) ind ha in he 1980s “bo h new and al eady exis ing g an -assis ed indus ies ha e made a subs an ial posi i e con ibu ion o employmen , and ha exis ing g an -assis ed indus y has had a subs an ially be e employmen eco d han co esponding non- assis ed i ms” (1992, p. 89). Fu he mo e, hey ind ha g an -assis ed i ms’ employmen pe o mance imp o ed signi ican ly as e han non-g an - assis ed i ms and ha his could no be explained by a one- ime boos gi en by he g an unding. They conclude ha hei analysis “sugges s ha he g an s we e no only awa ded mo e selec i ely by means o e aining om aiding weake i ms, bu ha hey we e also awa ded o he s onge i ms wi h good g ow h p ospec s in a manne o in a con ex which aised he a e age pe o mance o such i ms in succeeding coho s o g an ecipien s … i is clea in he ci cums ances ha job c ea ion in ela ion o s a e 44 THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL REVIEW expendi u e mus ha e imp o ed conside ably since 1984” (O’Malley e al., 1992, pp. 97-98). Resea ch in he so wa e indus y in he 1990s shows ha indigenous i ms ha ecei ed g ea e amoun s o g an aid employed mo e s a , we e mo e likely o ocus on p oduc s a he han se ices, mo e likely o expo and mo e likely o be in ol ed in in e na ional echnology and business alliances (as well as less likely o be in ol ed in subcon ac ing ela ionships) (Ó Riain, 2004). The s a is ical e idence ega ding he posi i e e ec o g an aid on I ish so wa e i ms is suppo ed by he s a emen s o he i ms hemsel es (O’Go man e al., 1997). While many i ms complained abou he adminis a i e demands o illing ou g an applica ions analysis o g an - aided and non-g an aided i ms shows ha h ough he ea ly 1990s a leas g an aided i ms signi ican ly ou pe o med non g an aided i ms – bo h in he so wa e indus y (Cla ke, 1995) and in he economy as a whole (O’Malley, 1992; O’Malley, Kennedy and O’Donnell, 1992). Al hough i is no o iously di icul o assess he e ec s o such ins i u ions on i ms, a se ies o public and quasi-public e alua ions ha e e u ned la gely posi i e assessmen s o a ious ins i u ions and p og ammes – bo h by in e na ional expe panels and by i ms hemsel es. The e is also e idence ha hose so wa e i ms ha ely mos on uni e si ies as a sou ce o inno a ion a e likely o p oduce p oduc s o expo and o be engaged in in e na ional echnology alliances – sugges ing ha in e na ional echno- logical sophis ica ion is embedded in local ins i u ions (Ó Riain, 2004). The e is s ong e idence hen ha shi ing s a e s a egies ha e had a subs an ial impac on i m pe o mance. These s a egies, embedded in he social ela ions and p ac ices o his ‘indigenous inno a ion’ alliance, ha e con ibu ed handsomely o making he connec ions be ween he TNC economy and local upg ading. 5 In he absence o his alliance, and i s ins i u ions and p ac ices, i is di icul o see how he I ish economy would ha e b oken – o e en he ex en i did – ou o i s icious cycle o a ‘hollowing ou ’ o local capaci y by oo loose capi al and mass emig a ion. In each o he h ee b oad ways in which he s a e shaped he o ms o ma ke pa icipa ion o i ms, i s ac ions shaped social ela ions and he cha ac e is ics o socio-economic ac o s such as i ms. The upg ading ha occu ed ook place as some o he elemen s STATE, COMPETITION AND INDUSTRIAL CHANGE IN IRELAND 1991-1999 45 5 One eason why an indigenous chemicals and pha maceu icals indus y has no eme ged in a simila ashion o he IT clus e is ha he pa icula mode o I ish s a e in e en ion is no based on mobilising la ge amoun s o capi al o science-based i ms bu on dis ibu ing ela i ely small amoun s o capi al linked o employmen – a model which has been used e ec i ely by so wa e i ms. The Science Founda ion I eland model o esea ch unding does appea o be based on he o me app oach, al hough i has o da e emained dange ously isola ed om he exis ing sys em o inno a ion and indigenous i ms. o a ‘na ional sys em o inno a ion’ we e s ill being de eloped – signi ican esea ch and in es men unding only eme ged a e g ow h and indus ial lea ning we e well unde way (see Hobday, 1995 o a simila poin ega ding indus ial upg ading in he Eas Asian ‘Tige s’). S a e suppo ed, socially embedded ela ionships o echnological and o ganisa ional lea ning we e c i ical o no only gene a ing economic g ow h bu also o c ea ing he coali ions which buil poli ical suppo o hese new economic ela ions and ins i u ions. IV A CONTRADICTORY ALLIANCE: SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND MARKET COMPETITION As economic g ow h has slowed and indus ial employmen declined in 2002 and 2003, policy deba es in I eland ha e ocused hea ily on compe i i eness. The consis en policy ocus o he Na ional Compe i i eness Council has been he es ic ion o public spending (pa icula ly on social se ices) and he con ainmen o wage g ow h, among o he componen s o cos compe i i eness. Howe e , his esponse o indus ial di icul ies is based on a mis eading o he cha ac e and causes o indus ial de elopmen in he 1990s. The low co po a e ax egime, he declining sha e o public spending in GDP and he ocus on o eign in es men can help explain he en epô economy and he su ge in employmen in o eign i ms. Howe e , i canno explain he elemen s o indus ial upg ading in he 1990s, such as inc easing le els o expo ing, R&D and p o essionalisa ion. The e is no doub ha ‘compe i i eness’ has become cen al o he ac i i ies o he I ish s a e. Assu ing a ‘compe i i e business en i onmen ’ has been a cen al policy goal, ‘compe i i eness’ has become a aken- o -g an ed desi able alue in public discou se and ins i u ions such as he Na ional Compe i i eness Council ha e been c ea ed o en o ce he compe i i eness discou se in socio-economic p ac ice. Al hough Ki by (2002) does no p o ide a sus ained empi ical analysis o I eland as a ‘compe i ion s a e’, I eland clea ly con o ms o many aspec s o he model. Bu he language o compe i i eness obscu es he oo s o indus ial upg ading in a complex o public in es men , social ins i u ions and a ne wo k o poli ical and economic suppo s. The e a e o he espec s in which he I ish expe ience is incomple ely desc ibed by he ‘compe i ion s a e’ model and add essing hese a eas opens up impo an a eas o poli ical s a egy and ac ion. Fi s , he no ion o a compe i ion s a e does no cap u e how he logic o s a e agencies and social ins i u ions di e ed om a pu ely ma ke calculus 46 THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL REVIEW and, he e o e, i unnecessa ily na ows ou unde s anding o he ins i u ions unde pinning economic g ow h. The na ional sys em o inno a ion is be e unde s ood as a s a e and social embedding o ma ke ac ion, no as an ins i u ion which is comple ely subse ien o ma ke compe i i eness. O icial esponses o job losses in I ish indus y ha e la gely aken he o m o o e calls o es o ed compe i i eness when he oo s o hese di icul ies a e in an indus ial sys em whe e he sys em o inno a ion is concen a ed on a small ange o sec o s and whe e i s ins i u ions con inue o ha e o ba le o esou ces wi hin a sys em ocused on he needs o o eign i ms. Second, he no ion o a ‘compe i ion s a e’ ails o ecognise he in e nally con adic o y na u e o “ma ke libe alism” i sel . In ac , as Polanyi (1944) and mo e ecen ly G ano e e (1985) a gued, ma ke ela ions a e simply unsus ainable wi hou some o m o social embedding. The e o e, a s a egy o he c ea ion o a disembedded ma ke socie y, along he lines o he neo-libe al poli ical p ojec , ine i ably sows he seeds o i s own des uc ion – albei c ea ing eno mous casual ies along he way. Fa om being smoo hly in eg a ed wi h ma ke compe i i eness, he ins i u ions o he sys em o inno a ion in ac need o be p o ec ed om excessi e ma ke isa ion o he ins i u ions o he economy and pa icula ly om he g owing inancialisa ion o i s i ms and ins i u ions (Lund all e al., 2002). The ‘sho - e mism’ o inancial ma ke s and ‘ lexible i ms’ o en only se es o unde mine he ongoing social ela ions o coope a i e lea ning and in es men in compe ence building which a e c i ical o inno a ion in a knowledge economy. Simila ly, a emp s o make inno a ion-suppo ing ins i u ions comme cially iable ha e been la gely disas ous. Fo example, pe haps he p ima y eason o he collapse o he Na ional So wa e Cen e in he 1980s was he con lic gene a ed by he demands pu on i o unde ake a mission o ‘upg ading’ he indus y, while a he same ime equi ing i o be comme cially iable. Caugh be ween de ol ing in o a de elopmen se ices o ganisa ion o compe ing wi h he majo i ms in he indus y, he Cen e los indus y suppo and was ul ima ely closed (Ó Riain, 2004). The P og amme o Ad anced Technology (PAT) cen es ha e also su e ed a imes unde p essu es o be sel - unding. One such cen e was he Cen e o So wa e Enginee ing, widely ecognised as an impo an pa o he so wa e indus y’s ins i u ional suppo sys em, bu which has been se iously damaged by ecen cu backs in hi d le el unding. Mo e gene ally, he decline in public spending as a pe cen age o GDP has mani es ed i sel in he p ac ical hal ing o hi d le el esea ch unding, he inc easingly mass cha ac e o hi d le el educa ion and he c isis in p ima y school acili ies and access. The ‘compe i i eness’ agenda unde mines he in es men and collec i e ins i u ion building which is c ucial o indus ial upg ading. I ‘laissez- ai e was planned’ STATE, COMPETITION AND INDUSTRIAL CHANGE IN IRELAND 1991-1999 47 (Polanyi, 1944) hen laissez- ai e also a acks he e y planning which sus ains p oduc i e ac i i y and ul ima ely he ma ke i sel . Finally, his mo e complex, con adic o y pe spec i e on he global and I ish poli ical economies is no simply a ques o complexi y o i s own sake. To simply desc ibe he ins i u ions o a ‘na ional sys em o inno a ion’ (NSI) as o ien ed owa d compe i i eness igno es he many poli ical possibili ies ha he ins i u ions o economic de elopmen p esen o u u e ans o ma ion. The NSI can be unde mined by neo-libe al s a egies o i can be pa o he economic basis o a mo e owa d he social democ acy – indeed he concep o he NSI, in i s b oad o m as he social embedding o inno a ion ac i i y, was de eloped as a way o unde s and he economy which unde pinned Scandina ian social democ acy (Lund all e al., 2002; Mjose , 1992). Ra he han educing he complexi ies o ins i u ions and poli ics in capi alis de elopmen unde globalisa ion o ‘compe i ion’, we need o p o ide be e unde s anding o he e ec s and possibili ies o ins i u ions such as hose o he NSI as well as o he c i ical ins i u ional ealms as indus ial ela ions, social pa ne ship and he wel a e s a e. A c ucial pa o his unde s anding and poli ics will o cou se be he acing o he conc e e o ms o in luence and powe o ansna ional capi al wi hin hese ins i u ions and in indus ial poli ics. VCONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS This pape has a gued ha a signi ican ans o ma ion and upg ading occu ed in I ish indus y o e he 1990s, albei wi hin a ‘bubble’ o en epô FDI; ha his upg ading was p omo ed p ima ily by a s a e-socie y alliance which de eloped new ins i u ions o a sys em o inno a ion whe e he na ional le el in eg a es local, na ional and global elemen s; and ha his alliance should be seen as exis ing in a ense and con adic o y ela ionship o he ins i u ions o he ma ke , no as simply subse ien o ma ke compe i i eness. The analysis o indus ial upg ading shows ha he link be ween FDI and local lea ning and indus ial upg ading is a con ingen one. FDI is less likely han indigenous indus y o gene a e a local dynamic o indus ial ans o ma ion – and i is no likely o p omp indigenous i ms in o upg ading wi hou a u he local coali ion ha mobilises o ha end. Local ins i u ions a e c i ical in s a egically building upon FDI and in suppo ing he de elopmen o a new ‘logic’ o indus ialisa ion wi hin he economy. Pe haps he majo challenge ha FDI poses o such a p ojec o indigenous de elopmen is ha i ends o unde mine he e y ins i u ions ha a e 48 THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL REVIEW necessa y o p omo e indigenous g ow h, by shaping he o ganisa ions o he s a e such ha hey a e ocused on FDI and ee ade a he han indigenous inno a ion and local capabili ies. Howe e , such an e ec is no ine i able i a poli ical coali ion can mobilise agains i . Fu he mo e, he analysis implies ha s a e and social embedding o economic ela ions and he de elopmen o ins i u ions which can shape ma ke ela ions a e c ucial o economic de elopmen . I ax concessions and o he measu es a ac ed a disp opo iona e sha e o FDI o I eland, i was local non-ma ke ins i u ions, and c ucially s a e aids, ha suppo ed he indus ial upg ading a ound hem. This is a pa icula ly c ucial lesson, gi en ha he I ish expe ience o a ac ing disp opo iona e amoun s o FDI, by de ini ion, canno be eplica ed ac oss a wide ange o economies. I also ollows ha low co po a e ax in i sel is no necessa ily desi able o economic de elopmen , as i was he ole o lowe I ish ax in a ac ing disp opo iona e amoun s o FDI which was c i ical. Low co po a e ax in and o i sel has no been c i ical o g ow h and de elopmen . Once again, his is a s a egy ha canno be ‘expo ed’ inde ini ely as he e can only be a limi ed numbe o ‘winne s’ in such a game – and he implica ions in e na ionally o ax e enues a e disas ous. Nei he should we make a e ish o low pe sonal income ax a es – a dynamic economy suppo ed by a ich na ional sys em o inno a ion is compa ible wi h much highe a es o ax han in I eland (e.g. Finland). Indeed, i low ax a es damage in es men in labou and ins i u ions, hey will unde mine economic de elopmen . The mos aluable compa a i e lesson o he I ish expe ience is he con inuing impo ance o s a e in e en ion and s a e-socie y embedding o ma ke ela ions, e en in a con ex o globalisa ion and egionalisa ion. S a e aids we e a c i ical ins umen o policy – no o ‘p opping up’ indigenous i ms bu o p omo ing lea ning and inducing and suppo ing upg ading. Gi en his, he EU a ack on s a e aids is sho -sigh ed and p omises o unde mine he possibili ies o he new EU membe s o ‘ca ch up’ e ec i ely. Finally, he unde s anding o I ish indus y p o ided he e sugges s some possibili ies ega ding ackling inequali y and exclusion in he I ish poli ical economy. Since he mos dynamic i ms in he I ish economy a e embedded in ne wo ks o public and semi-public ins i u ions, he e a e a a ie y o possibili ies o using such ins i u ions o ackle social exclusion. Linking ac i e labou ma ke policy mo e closely o he na ional sys em o inno a ion would gi e communi ies and s a e agencies mo e le e age o nego ia e i m pa icipa ion in aining and labou ma ke access p og ammes. Unions will need o explo e new s a egies and issues o o ganising he mos dynamic new sec o s (see Benne , 2002 o in e es ing examples om he US). The egula ‘skill sho ages’ expe ienced by ‘high ech’ sec o s o e egula oppo uni ies STATE, COMPETITION AND INDUSTRIAL CHANGE IN IRELAND 1991-1999 49 o s a e and social ac o s o ba gain wi h i ms o p omo e measu es o ackle social exclusion h ough he ins i u ions o social pa ne ship and he sys em o inno a ion. All o his oo is unde pinned by a mo al poli ics (Lako , 1996; Block, 2002). The c i ics o he ‘Cel ic Tige ’ ha e igh ly poin ed o he missed oppo uni ies o ackle inequali y and exclusion, bu ha e yielded he s o y o ‘economic success’ o he ma ke and ha e been le wi hou a basis o a guing o he esponsibili y and accoun abili y o hose g oups ha ha e expe ienced eno mous success in he ma ke in he 1990s. The analysis p esen ed he e implies a e y di e en mo al s o y o be old abou he Cel ic Tige han ha o e ed by s o ies ocused on he ma ke . The ‘Cel ic Tige ’ is no a p oduc o he oic en ep eneu s in he ma ke bu is a (pa ial) success made possible by he embeddedness o en ep eneu s and wo ke s in dense social ins i u ions. The e is a signi ican collec i e con ibu ion o he success o hose who ha e bene i ed ‘ om he ma ke ’ and hose social g oups a e he e o e subjec o legi ima e claims om hose collec i e ins i u ions. Socie y’s claim on he echnical-p o essional classes and en ep eneu s who ha e bene i ed mos om he ‘Cel ic Tige ’ is no one o guil o cha i y, bu one o igh , as he success o hese i ms and social classes es s hea ily on collec i e social and s a e ins i u ions. 6 Recognising he impo ance o s a e and social embedding o economic ac ion no only makes o be e economic policy bu also opens up new poli ical possibili ies wi hin he I ish poli ical economy. The s a e s ill ma e s because ( o use Ce ny’s, 1995 e ms) i is bo h a ci ic associa ion, an a ena o ad ancing legi ima e poli ical claims, and an en e p ise associa ion, p omo ing economic de elopmen . Unde s anding ha ma ke ac ions and ou comes a e deeply embedded in ins i u ions o s a e and socie y p o ides no only an accoun o ins i u ions which can shape g ow h, de elopmen and equali y bu also he s a ing poin o a mo al poli ics o he ‘Cel ic Tige ’ which can p o ide a basis o legi ima e claims upon he social esponsibili ies o hose social g oups ha ha e bene i ed mos om he Cel ic Tige . 50 THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL REVIEW 6 This pape has ocused on he collec i e con ibu ion o he na ional sys em o inno a ion o success h ough indus ial upg ading bu we migh also conside , among o he s, he con ibu ions o wel a e s a e ins i u ions and household labou o social ep oduc ion, and o social pa ne ship ins i u ions o collec i e p oblem sol ing and in as uc u e de elopmen . REFERENCES AHERN, BERTIE, 2003. Speech o he Na ional Managemen Con e ence o he I ish Managemen Ins i u e, Killa ney, 4 Ap il. BARRETT, SEAN, 1997. “Policy Changes, Ou pu G ow h and In es men in I ish Tou ism”, I ish Banking Re iew, Au umn. BARRY, FRANK, 2000. “Con e gence is no Au oma ic: Lessons om I eland o Cen al and Eas e n Eu ope”, Wo ld Economy . BARRY, FRANK (ed.), 1999. Unde s anding I eland’s Economic G ow h London: Macmillan P ess. BENNER, CHRIS, 2002. Wo k in he New Economy, Ox o d: Blackwell P ess. BLOCK, FRED, 2002. “The Righ ’s Mo al T ouble”, The Na ion, pp. 20-22, Sep . 30. BREATHNACH, M. and D. KELLY, 1999. “Mul ina ionals, Subcon ac ing Linkages and he Inno a i e Pe o mance o Indigenous Fi ms: Some I ish E idence”, Pape p esen ed a he Eu opean Ne wo k on Indus ial Policy In e na ional Con e ence, Dublin, 9-10 Decembe . CERNY, PHILIP, 1995. “Globalisa ion and he changing logic o collec i e ac ion.” In e na ional O ganisa ion, Vol. 49, pp. 595-625. CLARKE, ANN, 1995. So wa e Suppo P og amme: Final Repo , EU S uc u al Funds Ope a ional P og amme o Indus ial De elopmen E alua ion Uni , Dublin. CULLITON REPORT/INDUSTRIAL POLICY REVIEW GROUP, 1992. ATime o Change: Indus ial Policy o he 1990s, Dublin: S a ione y O ice. DE LA FUENTE, A. and X. VIVES, 1998. “The Sou ces o I ish G ow h” in A. G ay (ed.), In e na ional Pe spec i es on he I ish Economy, pp. 112-134, Dublin: Indecon. DURKAN, JOSEPH, DOIREANN FITZGERALD AND COLM HARMON, 1999. “Educa ion and G ow h in he I ish Economy” in F ank Ba y (ed.), Unde s anding I eland’s Economic G ow h, pp. 119-136, London: Macmillan P ess. EOLAS, 1989. Elec onics Manpowe S udy: T ends in he I ish Elec onics Manu ac u ing Indus y up o 1995, Dublin: Eolas. FORFÁS, 1999. Resea ch and De elopmen in he Business Sec o , Dublin: Fo as. GEARY, JOHN, 1999. “The New Wo kplace: Change a Wo k in I eland”, In e na ional Jou nal o Human Resou ce Managemen , Vol. 10, No. 5, pp. 870-890. GORG, HOLGER and ERIC STROBL, 2002. “Mul ina ional Companies and Indigenous De elopmen : An Empi ical Analysis”, Eu opean Economic Re iew, Vol. 46, pp. 1305-1322. GRANOVETTER, MARK, 1985. “Economic Ac ion and Social S uc u e: The P oblem o Embeddedness”, Ame ican Jou nal o Sociology, Vol. 91, No. 3, pp. 481-510. HOBDAY, M. 1995. “Eas Asian la ecome Fi ms: Lea ning he Technology o Elec onics”, Wo ld De elopmen , Vol. 23, No. 7, pp. 1171-1193. HONOHAN, P., B. MAÎTRE and C. CONROY, 1998. “In isible En epô Ac i i y in I ish Manu ac u ing”, I ish Banking Re iew, Summe , pp. 22-36. IT’s Monday, Feb ua y 1997, E-mail indus y newsle e , Dublin. JACOBSON, DAVID and ZIENE MOTTIAR, 1999. “Globalisa ion add modes o in e ac ion in wo sub-sec o s in I eland”, Eu opean Planning S udies Vol. 7, No. 4. JACOBSON, DAVID and DAVID O’SULLIVAN, 1994. “Analysing an Indus y in STATE, COMPETITION AND INDUSTRIAL CHANGE IN IRELAND 1991-1999 51