Abstract
Background
Policy is rarely a direct reflection of public opinion. Party systems and patterns of political competition shape the way issues are presented in politics and the incentive politicians have to act on them. Despite the alleged pro-elderly bias of many political institutions in European countries, and the potential for some types of spending on the elderly to provide broader social benefits, policymakers often do not introduce the most effective policies for supporting healthy ageing.
Methods
Political manifestos and voting patterns will be examined in order to determine how/if public opinions are translating into changes in government that want to tear down the welfare state and blame it on ageing.
Results
Although it is true that public spending (e.g. pensions, health) on the elderly remains more extensive and insulated from cuts than other forms of spending, second, in many (not all) countries policies that would help the elderly age in a healthy way are to introduced. These latter policies, which include spending on the poorest elderly, ensuring access to high quality home care and other services, and investing in declining regions where elderly people are often disproportionately likely to live, often are limited.
Conclusions
Where cross-class/cross-generational coalitions come together to address gender inequities (among the elderly and working age), and develop public services, high road models are possible. Where conflict is framed largely inter-generationally, the well-being of pensioners may be preserved in the short-run, but less investment in the long-run infrastructure of healthy ageing emerges. To make these arguments, the paper shows descriptive patterns of policy developments from the 1980s to today, combined with a brief case study of the UK.
De Facto Versus de Jure Political Institutions in the Long-Run: A Multivariate Analysis, 1820–2000
