{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022887323943661973, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007042253521126761, 'mean_word_length': 5.975460122699387, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Hybrid Variety: Lessons in Nonmarket Coordination from the Business System in the Netherlands, 1950–2010

This article develops a historical perspective on the coordinated market economy of the Netherlands and explains why it opted for compartmentalized liberalization. Two related questions are addressed, studying the Netherlands as a case study of a Coordinated Market Economy (CME): to what extent can economic change be accommodated within one “type of capitalism”? And why do specific institutions change while others remain in place? Applying the criteria of “Varieties of Capitalism” I focus on the way the Dutch business system applied nonmarket coordination during the twentieth century. Drawing information from various subfields (business history, labor relations and welfare state studies), I review processes of change and postulate that coordination resulted in the adoption of market-oriented reform in clearly delineated areas. “Varieties of Capitalism” theory addresses the historical roots of institutional arrangements, but historical developments have been underexposed in the comparative capitalism-literature.