French model

One calls French model the large economic and social features of France resting on some political principles and heritages such as:

a relative official state intervention in dialog with managements and labor,
a great importance and influence of the public service in the nation's economy,
an encouragement colbertist with industry,
a protection of the traditional sectors (agriculture, tourism, cinema…)

The political changes however do not make it possible to affirm the existence of a model structured and stable on the long run, the concept of model comes here to reduce the economic complexity of France to these large features, such as they are perceived in France and abroad. The term of model, which returns has several directions is him even contestable. Like diagrammatic simplification of a set of complex interactions, it makes it possible to describe the economic and social mechanisms country in general in order to best apprehend in its globality. As an example, the French model causes polemics. Some defend it while speaking about “cultural exception” or about “public service to the Frenchwoman”. Others, in France and in the majority of the foreign countries, set it up in true “against-model”, some not hesitating to describe it like a synthesis of the defects of liberalism and socialism, being unaware of all at the same time qualities of these two systems. Finally if one regards the “model” as a “exception”, he is opposed to the supposed standardization models of social organizations who would accompany universalization. Insofar as it amounts privileging particularism, it poses problems of economic integration and policy within the European Union and more largely of the world.

History

Before the model

France initially inherited, of the mercenary attitude and French feudality, a certain official interventionism. Richelieu and Colbert in particular had contributed to develop the trade and national industry via the constitution of companies of trade and great royal manufactures. Mercantilists, France in addition preserves a will of autonomy in certain strategic sectors: armament, agriculture… As showed it Alexis de Tocqueville, she also inherits the Old Mode an administrative centralization (later economic) benefitting her capital.

The French revolution and the First Empire bequeath its pride and certain ideals to him. Christian Stoffaës summarizes them with four essential features: ruralism, provincialism, Malthusianism and “worship of small”. France, contrary to the other large European countries knows since the French revolution a low demographic dynamism. The retreat of the religion as well as the Napoleon code contribute to it. This last, by dividing the heritages and successions in an equitable way, encourages in spite of him the latter to make less children in order to avoid the dispersion of the grounds. This dispersion contributes to the “worship of small”: a long time France carries the dream jacobinist of a saving of independent small holders and not in capitalist big industries. Some speak about a “timid and preserving capitalism”.

The Second Empire reinforces the role of the State in the economy like vector of modernization and a social dimension gives him. IIIe République contributes it to the protection of the farmers and defends the ruralism. It imposes the public school like the guarantor of the social rise based on principles meritocratic. Capitalism does not remain less timid about it and the large banks support the sure loans (good Treasury and ready at the foreign governments), seeing themselves rather reproaching even an escape of the French richness towards the foreigner than towards the nation's economy. French capitalism thus remains marked by dispersion, even the absence, of the capital. As example, in the years 1920, France has more than 150 different car manufacturers.

Birth of the model

The French model is born following the three great shocks from first half of the XXe century: two world wars and the crisis of the years 1930. In 1945, not only France is to be rebuilt, but especially the old model lost its legitimacy and it is advisable to fill the industrial backwardness to which one charges the defeat of 1940. Capitalism is in addition attacked by many politicians who denounce the collaboration of many national large companies with the enemy. France wants to then take as a starting point the two great powers of the moment, the USSR and the United States which incarnates the power of industry, the concentration of the capital, mechanization and great work. As national capitalism could not operate itself such a modernization, this one falls on the State. The key sectors of the economy, energy, transport, banks… are nationalized as well as many large companies (Renault). The State wants to be the engine of a fast modernization of the productive apparatus. De Gaulle estimates that:

“It is in the State, today like yesterday, that it falls to build the national power which, now, depends on the economy… Such is in my eyes the principal reason of the nationalizations, control, modernization. ” Memories of war.

To guide this modernization, the State obtains a police station in the plan under the aegis of Jean Monnet who aims to direct the economy in an inciting way (while distributing to certain companies of the funds, like those of the Marshall plan). One creates many organizations aiming at informing the State on the economy like INSEE (National institute of the Statistics and the Economic studies) and the schools having for vocation to provide the elite of the bureaucracy which is set up: one nationalizes Sciences Po and one creates the ENA (National school of administration).

In this context, one creates a system of État-providence which aims at protecting the workers from the need. The creation of the Social security in 1945 aims to increase the moral one and the health of the workers in order to stimulate the economy. One seeks to start again the birthrate. The State in general becomes guaranteeing community property. Ezra Suleiman, specialist American in France explains:

“The idea that the State is in load of the community property is a typically French idea which disconcerts the Americans”.

All these measurements contribute to create an outline of the new French model. Preponderance of the public service and the nationalized large companies which become the engine of modernization, the installation of a more levelling economy and of a concerned State of the community property and planner. One still finds there other effects like the installation of the system of formation of the political elites (for some the French model is that of the “énarchie”) where sources of geographical imbalances of France (the decisions according to war are in particular criticized in 1947 per Jean-François Gravier in Paris and the French desert )

End of the year 1950 to 1968

One can summarize the French model of this period with two sentences allotted to the de Gaulle general:

“the policy of France is not done with the basket”
“the intendance will follow”

Thus the French economy is directed by the State and not by the Stock Exchange (“the basket”). Big industry is concentrated between its hands and one entrusts the remainder, “the intendance”, with the private sector.

Large companies of State

The State encourages the regrouping of the large companies which it controls in order to create of the “national champions” capable of competition the foreign capitalist large companies.

Official management of the inequalities

From 1968 to 1983

From 1983 to our days

The French model today

Its resistance

Against model?

References and notes

Random links: