Abstract
ABSTRACTEast Asia’s economic and social structures came under pressure in the aftermath of the Asian financial crisis in 1997 and the productivist welfare capitalism (PWC) thesis faced a fundamental challenge. This paper explores the veracity of the PWC thesis by exploring six social policy fields, including education, health care services, family, old-age pensions, housing and protective labour market policy, in China, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan using fuzzy-set ideal type analysis (FsITA). The findings suggest that it is inaccurate to talk about one single, homogeneous welfare model in East Asia. Despite persistent similarities in regard to their cultural foundations, cases in Greater China and East Asia have distinctive social policy development trajectories often combining ‘productive’ and ‘protective’ policies in unique ways.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
