Academic

Bubak, Oldrich. 2019. “Perceptions of meritocracy: A note on China.” Asian Journal of Comparative Politics. doi.org/10.1177/2057891118806065

The last decades have witnessed a number of lapses and contradictions in the outcomes of policy and governance. It is no coincidence there has been an increasing interest from both within and without the academe in alternate systems of selection, representation and accountability, and in revisiting fairness, equity, and social mobility. This article engages a set of beliefs seen as fundamental in the debates and critiques of social systems in general, and of equality of opportunity and outcomes in particular. We thus seek to explore the factors influencing the individual perceptions of merit as opposed to chance as the determinant of success. The focus is on China, a sui generis state with a millennium-long Confucian tradition that continues to influence its meritocratic approach to education and governance. The results indicate a significant departure from the theorized explanations established in Western studies. Notably, we find that higher levels of education are negatively related with the endorsement of meritocracy, or views that effort rather than luck determines individual outcomes. At once, as we study the outlooks of Chinese citizens, we respond to and complement the emerging research with a potential to extend our conceptions of meritocracy in general.

Bubak, Oldrich. 2018. “Flexicurity and the dynamics of the welfare state adjustments.” Transfer. 24(4). doi.org/10.1177/1024258918781732

The disruptions of the recent global financial crisis intensified a number of industrial and economic challenges and brought forward a set of often contradictory solutions. Here, we focus on two alternative views on how to (re)establish economic competitiveness and enable growth – flexicurity and austerity. There is much to be learned about the future of these conflicting recipes across changing political economies, particularly considering the importance of the social partners in the development of flexicurity, and their differential ability to influence welfare state outcomes more broadly. Two questions emerge. Attentive to the role and capacity of the social partners, what can we learn about the dynamics of the ongoing welfare state adjustments? How do we make sense of labour market politics in this paradoxical environment? In order to help answer these, we visit the United Kingdom and Denmark – one state offering modest social and employment security, the other a paragon of flexicurity – and find their divergent philosophies, institutional development, and organisational interactions explain not only their respective choices in the aftermath of the crisis, but also their prospects for socially oriented labour policies.

Bubak, Oldrich. 2018. “Gill in Brussels? Towards (re) locating new constitutionalism.” European Politics and Society. 19(2):166-181. doi:10.1080/23745118.2017.1391513

A number of scholars draw on Gill’s new constitutionalism as they engage and critique the outcomes of what is viewed as a neoliberal shift toward new legal norms in policymaking and regulation. This article takes a closer look at the unique constitutional configuration of the European Union and demonstrates that while this environment is the quintessence of a new kind of constitutionalism, it is one considerably different from Gill’s. The focus is on the European Court of Justice, one of the loci of constitutionalization, and, given the logics brought to bear, a prime site for analysis. It thus attempts to show that new constitutionalism is better treated as a multidimensional construct, and calls for its reconceptualization outside of the mainstream understandings.