Most pluralist systems saw the state developing strength after
industrialization had occurred, and both labor and business interests had
organized collectively. This was the pattern in both the United Kingdom and
the United States. Most corporatist systems saw the development of a strong
state first, whereupon industrialization occurred and business and labor
interests organized, but under the influence of the state. In both China and
Taiwan, the state developed strength before the full onset of industrialization,
predisposing them to state influence on business growth and activity.
The Concept and Utility of Corporatism
Corporatism has meaning in contradistinction to pluralism, which is a bedrock
idea in the formation of civil society. The pluralist approach conceives of the
market (and the broader society) as configured into different interest groups
and associations. The groups are voluntary associations, free to organize and
gain influence over state policy equivalent to their political resources. The
state may or may not intervene regularly in the market, but it serves as a real
or potential arbiter of market conflict. In pluralist systems, the state appears to
be weak, in the sense that it can be penetrated by the strongest interest groups,
frequently by dominant business groups and coalitions. Thus, the direction in
which the state is influenced is the outcome of interest group conflict.
Corporatist systems,^14 on the other hand, are those in which the state may be
strong enough to formulate economic policy without becoming captive to rent-
seeking groups. Whether strong or weak, the state is actively involved in the
market, and attempts to influence the use of both public and private resources
in accord with a vision of how the industrial structure of the country should be
evolving. Unlike pluralism, where there may be open competition between
groups in society and where groups are potentially equal and have access to
centers of political authority, corporatism observes a hierarchy of interest
representation and unequal access that is institutionalized. Both business and
labor unions are hierarchically ordered, which has obvious implications for
environmental movements challenging business power. The corporatist
perspective does not ignore the development of new social forces but denies
them autonomy.
Corporatist institutions configure a system of interest representation in
which a small number of strategic actors (invariably capital, and sometimes
labor), which are organized in peak associations, represent most of the
population in an ‘encompassing’ fashion. Pluralist institutions, on the other
hand, shape a large number of atomistic interest groups engaged in a
competitive struggle to influence national policy. Two recent studies suggest
that corporatist institutions are more likely to reduce pollution levels than
pluralist ones.
138 Governance of biodiversity conservation in China and Taiwan