Social Democratic Welfare Regimes Research Articles

Multiculturalism and the Erosion of Support for the Universalistic Welfare State: The Israeli Experience

This article addresses the existing tension between multiculturalism, i.e., the accommodation of different cultural, ethnic, and religious traditions, and the support for a universalistic welfare state. The universalistic welfare state and its distributional activities reflect the institutional expression of the modern state's commitment to the welfare of all its citizens and their integration into the national community. The bonds of belonging to the general national community seem, however, to be seriously weakened by the ethnic, cultural, and religious diversity nowadays dividing some modern western societies and seem thus to be inimical for the support of the universal welfare state and its integrative functions. These tensions are explored within the context of Israeli society. Many critics claim that multiculturalism has its limits. The particular claim made in this article is that the ethno-cultural diversity of Israeli society strongly affects the commitment of the population to a universalistic welfare state, weakening the support for it. This becomes of particular importance at times when the country is in the process of rapidly changing its traditional social democratic welfare regime to a mainly liberal, American, style of welfare regime.

Welfare states and social mobility: How educational and social policy may affect cross-national differences in the association between occupational origins and destinations

Cross-national differences in the association between origins and destinations correspond to differences in both welfare regime type and access to post-secondary education. Socialist and social democratic welfare regimes foster a weaker origin–destination association than liberal, corporatist, or mixed regimes do. Nations with better-educated labor forces tend to also be the nations where the association between origins and destinations is weakest. Furthermore, the social and educational policy interact so that the tendency for educational access to lower the origin–destination association is most pronounced in the liberal welfare setting where the association would otherwise be greatest. Greater access is not necessarily associated with greater equality of opportunity, and we find very weak evidence that equality of educational opportunity itself is a direct influence on equality of occupational opportunity (even though nations that have a strong origin–education association also have a strong origin–destination association).

Do Welfare Regimes Mediate the Effect of Socioeconomic Position on Health in Adolescence? A Cross-National Comparison in Europe, North America, and Israel

This article examines whether different types of welfare states mediate the effect of socioeconomic position on adolescents' health. The authors' main hypothesis is that countries with stronger redistributive policies will be more effective in weakening the association between socioeconomic position and health, thus reducing health inequalities. Analyses were carried out for Israel and 32 countries of Europe and North America. Data in the 2001-2002 Health Behavior in School-aged Children survey were collected through self-administered questionnaires distributed in schools to boys and girls 11, 13, and 15 years old. Socioeconomic position was measured with the Family Affluence Scale, based on reported consumption in the family. Health indicators were perceived health, general well-being, symptom load, and health behaviors. Social welfare regimes were classified using an expanded Esping-Andersen classification. The analysis supports the authors' hypothesis, at least partially. Social democratic and conservative welfare regimes rank lowest in the strength of association between low socioeconomic position and poor health, followed by liberal and other regime types, but it is more difficult to interpret data from Mediterranean and post-communist countries.

Minority nationalism and welfare state attitudes: Québec and Scotland compared

Modern welfare states are not all cut from the same cloth, and much research has been devoted to describing and analysing their similarities and differences. Esping-Andersen (1990) identifies three types of welfare state regimes, the liberal 'anglo-saxon' model, the conservative/corporatist model, and the social democratic model. In the liberal welfare state, exemplified by the United States, Australia and Canada, and to a lesser extent the United Kingdom, the market and the private sector are viewed as the main engine of growth and redistribution. The welfare state is 'residual' in the sense that state intervention is designed to correct or adjust inadequacies of the market. In this model, programmes are often means-tested and targeted rather than universal. In the conservative corporatist welfare state regime, exemplified by Germany, France and Italy, the welfare state was typically built 'from above', often with a pattern of collaboration between Church and State. In the social democratic welfare state regime, found in Scandinavia, the labour movement and left political parties had a key role in shaping the welfare state. In these settings, state programmes are extensive and universal, and their redistributive effect is substantial. In positing that modern welfare states fall into these three distinct regime clusters, Esping-Andersen put forth his typology as a set of ideal-types, allowing for the empirical possibility that within each cluster, some countries might be more typical of it than others. Both Canada and the United Kingdom have often been classified as belonging to the first cluster of liberal welfare state regimes. In both cases, this classification has been nuanced and qualified by researchers who point out that for various reasons, neither Canada nor the United Kingdom are as pure exemplars of the liberal pattern as the United States and even Australia. For example, Esping-Andersen put the UK in the liberal cluster because it was increasingly heading in that direction in the Thatcher years (as quoted by Evans 1996: 189), although analyses of levels of public support for the welfare state during the 1980s and early 1990s clearly put the UK closer to continental Europe than to the United States and Australia (Evans 1996). In similar fashion, it has been argued that Canada's welfare state regime can be seen as a hybrid of several influences, with the dominant liberal residual model coexisting alongside the visible influence of conservative and social democratic impulses. In its level of public support for the welfare state, Canada displays a slightly higher or 'more European' level than the United States, although Canada still resembles the United States more than it resembles any other country (Laczko 1998). Thus in a general sense the welfare state regimes of Canada and the United Kingdom both display characteristics that make them members of the liberal cluster, but not the 'most typical' members. One important feature shared by the United Kingdom and Canada is that both are multinational states, and each has territorially concentrated internal 'national minorities'. This chapter will explore the connection between minority nationalism and welfare state attitudes in Canada and in Great Britain, focusing specifically on differences between Quebec and the rest of Canada and Scotland and the rest of Great Britain. In both settings, there is of course a history of distinct institutions setting the minority nation or territory somewhat apart from the majority neighbour and partner. In both Quebec and Scotland, a separate legal system, a distinct educational system, and a distinctive dominant religion are three factors that have historically reaffirmed the particularities of the minority region in the larger Canadian and British contexts. What is the extent of subnational and regional differences in outlooks on social inequality and welfare state activity? How have distinct subnational historical patterns influenced the structure of opinions today? …

Is there a Connection between Welfare State Regime and Dwelling Type? An Exploratory Statistical Analysis

This exploratory paper tests whether there is a relationship between the nature of a particular society (represented by its welfare state regime), and the characteristics and appreciation of the single-family dwellings and the apartments within this society. In order to grasp differences in the nature of societies, the study uses the welfare state typology of Esping-Andersen (with the addition of a Mediterranean welfare state regime). In this (adapted) typology, four different welfare state regime types are distinguished: a social-democratic welfare state regime, a corporatist welfare state regime, a liberal welfare state regime and a Mediterranean welfare state regime. Different statistical techniques are used to investigate the relationship between welfare state regime type and dwelling type. First, a number of bivariate tables are presented that indicate how the incidence, tenure category, quality and the appreciation of single-family dwellings compared to apartments differ between welfare state regimes. Subsequently, there is an analysis of the bivariate relations between these aspects. To find out whether the typology of Esping-Andersen really is a useful classification system with regard to the characteristics and appreciation of single-family dwellings as against apartments, a cluster analysis is conducted. The clusters that result from this analysis are interpreted and compared with the typology of the four welfare state regimes. Based on the results of these statistical analyses, some conclusions are drawn and some directions for further research are outlined.

The Welfare State and the Home: Regime Differences in the Domestic Division of Labour

Comparative research has provided valuable insights into stratification processes; however, the focus has been on the labour market or economic inequalities. This study examines stratification in the home by looking at the division of household labour. Using data from the 1994 International Social Survey Program (ISSP), I investigate the division of household labour in 10 countries (Australia, Austria, Canada, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Norway, New Zealand, Sweden, United States; n = 4799). Analyses indicate that micro-level processes such as time availability, relative resources and gender ideology are important determinants of division of housework. Grouping the countries into liberal, conservative and social-democratic welfare state regimes, however, suggests macro-level differences in the division of labour across regimes that cannot be explained by differences in levels of individual characteristics. Equal sharing of housework by both partners is rare in conservative countries, regardless of their relative resources, time availability and gender ideology, suggesting that the division of labour at home is not only negotiated by two partners, but also shaped by contextual factors.

Strong Families or Patriarchal Economies? 'Familial' Labor Markets and Welfare States in Comparative Perspective

Strong family networks in Southern Europe are often credited with protecting people from poverty in circumstances where both employment and social benefits are limited. However it may well be that the economies frequently described as are more strongly patriarchal than other market economies, concentrating income in the hands of older, married men through both the labor market and welfare state, and creating the combination of weak welfare states, strong family networks, low female labor force participation, and the concentration of unemployment among young men. This paper uses Luxembourg Income Study micro-data to assess the degree to which the economies of Italy and Taiwan may be said to be more patriarchal than those of OECD countries with liberal, conservative and social democratic welfare regimes. A picture of two types of patriarchal economies emerges. The first is the familial economy and the second is the liberal, American economy where weak social welfare programs are combined with low wages for women and worsening market prospects of the young.

European Anti-Poverty Policies in the 1990s: Toward a Common Safety Net?

Using the notion of the poverty regime as a heuristic device, this paper examines the safety nets of several members of the European Union and three candidate countries: Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland. It addresses two board issues: 1) Has there been a convergence in the safety nets of these member countries of the European Union during the 1990s? 2) What are the implications of enlargement of the European Union for the creation of a common safety net? Initially several dimensions of the poverty regime are employed to compare the safety nets. Subsequently we analyse the incidence of poverty and poverty reduction for the entire population and vulnerable groups - the unemployed, solo mothers and large families, and the elderly - in the countries using data from the Luxembourg Income Study. In analysing poverty reduction effectiveness we utilise both relative and absolute measures to gauge the impact of income maintenance policies, distinguishing between the safety net and other transfers. The analysis reveals that during the 1990s the poverty rate increased in most countries and in many instances for vulnerable groups; an exception was the elderly. Means tested benefits assumed growing importance in alleviating poverty, but reforms also produced diversity in the safety nets across Europe. Contrary to earlier theorising that means tested benefits are marginalized in the social democratic welfare state regime, we find that the safety nets in these countries often equalled or surpassed that of the UK in reducing poverty. Finally, apart from impressive poverty reduction, the policies of the three candidate countries did not form a distinctive poverty regime. Instead they tended to cluster with other member countries.

Rawls in the Nordic Countries

The impact of Rawls's work in the Nordic countries has been wider than expected. The first section identifies some legal, political, and cultural features that would lead us to expect little interest in Rawls's work: Scandinavian legal realism, the social democratic welfare state regimes, and pervasive ethnic and cultural homogeneity. The second section gives an overview of the reception of Rawls's work, both in the academy and in public fora, on the basis of extensive but not exhaustive searches. The third section offers some conclusions and speculates that Rawlsian contributions - and political philosophy in general - will increase, largely due to Europeanization. Appendix 1 provides bibliographical information about first translations and presentations of Rawls's work starting with the 1955 article `Two Concepts of Rules'. Appendix 2 lists appeals to Rawls's work in the academy and the public sphere, ranging from the substantive principles of Justice as Fairness stated in 1971 through the Law of Peoples (1999). Neither appendix claims to give exhaustive accounts.

The Real worlds of welfare capitalism

The Real Worlds of Welfare Capitalism traces how individuals fare over time in each of the three principal types of welfare state. Through a unique analysis of panel data from Germany, the Netherlands and the US, tracking individuals' socio-economic fate over fully ten years, Goodin, Headey, Muffels and Dirven explore issues of economic growth and efficiency, of poverty and inequality, of social integration and social autonomy. It is common to talk of the inevitability of tradeoffs between these goals. However, in this book the authors contend that the social democratic welfare regime, represented here by the Netherlands, equals or exceeds the performance of the corporatist German regime and the liberal US regime across all these social and economic objectives. They thus argue that, whatever one's priorities, the social democratic welfare regime is uniquely well-suited to realizing them.

Family Policy in Germany: A Feminist Dilemma?

The paper provides a detailed description of different aspects of family policy in Germany, including descriptions of financial and employment supports for families in their caregiving role. Family policy in Germany provides strong financial and social support for children. Law and policy, however, are specifically formulated to encourage child rearing to take place in the home, with one of the parents focusing extensively on child rearing and family responsibilities. The paper also examines whether equality for women can be achieved within the framework of a corporatist welfare state regime such as Germany's. It develops the argument that the German route to equality may be a different one from that pursued by countries with liberal or social democratic welfare regimes. This scenario also implies that when and if equality does occur, the structures and meaning of this equality are also likely to differ. Finally, the paper argues that the corporatist welfare state regime cannot be dismissed as incompatible with the achievement of future equality for women. Instead such a model can be viewed as providing the potential of increasing choices for women with children.

Vacations and the Quality of Life: Patterns and Structures

The growing frequency of vacation travel in the developed world has ensured that tourism is seen as an essential element of the quality of life. A cross-comparative analysis of tourism consumption indicates substantial differences in tourism consumption and the structural position of vacations as a social right between nations. Higher levels of vacation entitlement and consumption in Europe can be linked to corporatist or social democratic welfare regimes that recognize tourism consumption as a social right. In the United States and Japan, however, more liberal welfare regimes are linked to lower vacation entitlements and greater inequalities in distribution of income and/or leisure time. The resulting differences in vacation time availability are reflected in time-intensive tourism consumption patterns in Europe, and money-intensive consumption patterns in the United States and Japan. With increasing liberalization, however, there are signs that these international differences are beginning to narrow.