Remembering and Rethinking the Social Divisions of Welfare: 50 Years On

2009 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
KIRK MANN
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Public Welfare ◽  
Memorial Lecture ◽  
Welfare Regimes ◽  
Social Divisions ◽  
Analytical Potential ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Welfare State

AbstractThis article revisits Titmuss's essay on the Social Divisions of Welfare (SDW) and reflects on its continuing relevance. Titmuss first presented the SDW in an Eleanor Rathbone Memorial lecture at Birmingham University in 1955, but it is best known from hisEssays on the Welfare Statepublished in 1958. Titmuss challenged the stereotype of ‘welfare’ as simply public welfare dependency and illustrated the different elements of the SDW. Some limitations of Titmuss's approach are identified, notably in relation to how he saw dependency arising, and revisions offered. The article provides a number of examples from the UK but also highlights some significant parallels with the SDW in the USA and Australia, the so-called ‘liberal welfare regimes’ (Esping-Andersen, 1990). Finally, it is claimed that 50 years on we need to be reminded of the insights and analytical potential of Titmuss's essay.

Anti-Social Determinism

Philosophy ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 69 (267) ◽  
pp. 21-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antony Flew
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Think Tanks ◽  
Main Assumption ◽  
Social Determinism ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Welfare State ◽  
Social Affairs

The general moral decline widely perceived to be in process in both the UK and the USA is no doubt the effect of many causes. The present paper attends to only one, the de-moralization more or less unintentionally encouraged by the working of the machinery of the welfare state, and then further encouraged by a deliberate and systematic de-moralization of that machinery. It attempts to undermine a main assumption supporting that de-moralization, and thus contribute to the campaign for re-moralization waged in recent years by, among others, the Social Affairs Unit (SAU) in London and like-minded think-tanks in the USA.

scholarly journals Political Parties’ Preferences about the Volume of Social Spending and its Distribution between Programs and Age Groups: a Comparative Study of France, Spain and the UK

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-98
Author(s):  
Cristina Ares ◽  
Antón Losada
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Regional Integration ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Public Welfare ◽  
Social Spending ◽  
Welfare Regimes ◽  
Welfare Systems ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Welfare State ◽  
Welfare Expenditure

The transformation of the Welfare State is not a standardized response to globalization or a by-product of European Union policies, but rather ‘what parties make of it’ (Burgoon, 2006). Different welfare regimes and welfare cultures contribute to the maintenance of diverse national responses to global and regional integration in terms of their public welfare systems, but there are also meso-level variables, such as parties´ ideologies, that may have an impact on the volume and distribution of welfare expenditure. This article presents a new scheme and procedure to code party manifesto statements in favor of social spending and retrenchment; it applies them in Britain, France and Spain in order to show the possibilities of the new data. The preliminary results indicate that ideologies are linked to parties´ preferences regarding the distribution of social spending between programs, the emphasis on different age groups as beneficiaries of welfare expenditure, and the rationale for social cuts.  

5. Varieties

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Garland
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Welfare States ◽  
Welfare Regime ◽  
Welfare Regimes ◽  
Developed Country ◽  
Social Democratic ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Government Involvement ◽  
Welfare State Regimes ◽  
The Welfare State

Every developed country has a distinctive welfare state of its own. Welfare states generally rely on the same basic institutions, but these institutions can operate in different ways. Welfare state programmes are government programmes, but while public authority is necessary to establish, fund, and regulate these programmes, the nature of government involvement varies. Three worlds of welfare have been identified: social democratic; conservative; and liberal. ‘Varieties’ describes the welfare state regimes that developed in Sweden, Germany, and the USA, each of which exemplifies one of these ‘worlds’ of welfare. It goes on to consider briefly the welfare regimes beyond the ‘three worlds’ and how Britain’s welfare regime has changed over time.

scholarly journals Discipline, debt and coercive commodification: Post-crisis neoliberalism and the welfare state in Ireland, the UK and the USA

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 482-504 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fiona Dukelow ◽  
Patricia Kennett
Keyword(s):  
Global Financial Crisis ◽  
Welfare Capitalism ◽  
The Great Recession ◽  
Social Divisions ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Liberal Capitalism ◽  
International Comparative ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Market Relations ◽  
The Welfare State

Ireland, the UK and the USA are heterogeneous examples of liberal worlds of welfare capitalism yet all three countries were deeply implicated in the 2008 global financial crisis. Examining these three countries together provides the opportunity to further develop an international comparative political economy of instability in the context of the globalised and financialised dimensions of Anglo-liberal capitalism and disciplinary governance. Our analysis is guided by the concept of disciplinary neoliberalism (Gill, 1995) through which we explore: (i) the dynamics that have shaped the impacts of and responses to the Great Recession; (ii) the ways in which state-market relations, shaped by differentiated accommodations to market imperative or market discipline, have been used as disciplinary tools and how these have interacted with existing social divisions and iii) the implications for shaping conditions for resistance. We suggest that the neoliberal pathways of each country, whilst not uniform, mark a ‘step-change’ and acceleration in the operation of disciplinary neoliberalism, and is particularly evident in what we identify as the coercive commodification of social policy.

Migrants' Social Rights, Ethnicity and Welfare Regimes

2005 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 637-660 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANN MORISSENS ◽  
DIANE SAINSBURY
Keyword(s):  
Welfare States ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Welfare Regimes ◽  
Initial Attempt ◽  
Expected Performance ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Using Data ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

Comparative welfare state research has devoted little attention to the social rights of migrants or the ethnic/racial dimension, even though societies are becoming more ethnically diverse through international migration. Using data from the Luxembourg Income Study for the UK, the USA, Germany, France, Denmark and Sweden, this article represents an initial attempt to compare the social rights of migrants and citizens across welfare regimes. We examine the substantive social rights of migrants and ethnic minorities by focusing on their participation in social transfer programmes, and the impact of transfers on their ability to maintain a socially acceptable standard of living compared with the rest of the population. The analysis shows that there are major disparities between how migrant and citizen households fare in welfare states, and that the discrepancies widen for migrants of colour. When the analysis is confined to citizen households, the results largely correspond to the expected performance of welfare regimes. However, when migrants are incorporated into the analysis, intra-regime variations stand out in the case of the liberal and social democratic countries.

Environmental Transformation of the State: The USA, Norway, Germany and the UK

2002 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 659-682 ◽  
Author(s):  
John S. Dryzek ◽  
Christian Hunold ◽  
David Schlosberg ◽  
David Downes ◽  
Hans-Kristian Hernes
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
The State ◽  
Historical Study ◽  
Environmental Transformation ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Capitalist State ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Welfare State

Modern states underwent two major transformations that produced first, the liberal capitalist state and second, the welfare state. Each was accompanied by the migration of a previously confrontational movement into the core of the state. In the creation of the liberal capitalist state, the bourgeoisie could harmonize with the state's emerging interest in economic growth. In the creation of the welfare state, the organized working class could harmonize with the state's emerging interest in legitimating the political economy by curbing capitalism's instability and inequality. We show that environmental conservation could now emerge as a core state interest, growing out of these established economic and legitimation imperatives. This examination is grounded in a comparative historical study of four countries: the USA, Norway, Germany, and the UK, each of which exemplifies a particular kind of interest representation. We show why the USA was an environmental pioneer around 1970, why it was then eclipsed by Norway, and why Germany now leads in addressing environmental concerns.

scholarly journals The Political Economy of Regulating for Welfare: Regulation Preventing Loss of Access to Basic Services in the UK, Sweden, the EU, and Israel

2020 ◽  
Vol 691 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-67
Author(s):  
Hanan Haber
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Protection ◽  
Welfare Regimes ◽  
Access To Services ◽  
Regulatory Governance ◽  
Basic Services ◽  
The Uk ◽  
State Context ◽  
The Eu ◽  
The Welfare State

What does the state do to prevent consumers from losing access to basic services in the market due to financial hardship, and under what conditions will this occur? Bringing together the literature on regulatory governance and the welfare state, this article compares regulatory regimes that prevent loss of access to services in the UK, Sweden, and Israel in housing credit, electricity, and water, as well as to the electricity and housing credit sectors in the EU, from the early 1990s to the 2010s. The article finds that regulation to address this issue was introduced in all but the Swedish cases. This highlights the significance of the welfare state context in addressing these issues through regulation, as more residual welfare regimes are associated with more social protection through regulation.

Bossing or Protecting? The Integration of Social Regulation into the Welfare State

2020 ◽  
Vol 691 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-120
Author(s):  
Philipp Trein
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Regulation ◽  
Noncommunicable Diseases ◽  
Welfare Regimes ◽  
Policy Reforms ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Unemployment Policy ◽  
The Welfare State

This article is an empirical analysis of how social regulation is integrated into the welfare state. I compare health, migration, and unemployment policy reforms in Australia, Austria, Canada, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK, and the United States from 1980 to 2014. Results show that the timing of reform events is similar among countries for health and unemployment policy but differs among countries for migration policy. For migration and unemployment policy, the integration of regulation and welfare is more likely to entail conditionality compared to health policy. In other words, in these two policy fields, it is more common that claimants receive financial support upon compliance with social regulations. Liberal or Continental European welfare regimes are especially inclined to integration. I conclude that integrating regulation and welfare entails a double goal: “bossing” citizens by making them take up available jobs while expelling migrants and refugees for minor offenses; and protecting citizens from risks, such as noncommunicable diseases.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document