Introduction: ‘New’ Welfare in Practice: Trends, Challenges and Dilemmas

2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 547-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marion Ellison ◽  
Menno Fenger
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Welfare States ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
Social Risk ◽  
Social Investment ◽  
Social Risks ◽  
European Welfare States

European welfare states have a tradition of compensating for social risks. But across Europe, remarkable transformations may be observed that shift the focus from a needs/rights based compensatory approach towards a more individualistic ‘social risk management’ approach to welfare (see Schmid, 2006; Abrahamson, 2010). The basic idea of social risk management is that citizens have their own responsibility for preventing social risks. The ‘new’ welfare state mirrors this approach by adopting the role of equipping individual citizens for this task. The concept of the ‘new welfare state’ has been discussed under different labels, including ‘positive welfare’ (Giddens, 1998), ‘enabling welfare’ (Gilbert, 2002), ‘new welfare’ (Taylor-Gooby, 2008) and ‘social investment state’ (Engelen et al., 2007).

scholarly journals After Austerity

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Welfare States ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Social Investment ◽  
The Great Recession ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
European Welfare State ◽  
New Directions ◽  
The Eu ◽  
European Welfare States

European welfare states are undergoing profound change, driven by globalisation, technical changes, and population ageing. More immediately the aftermath of the Great Recession and unprecedented levels of immigration have imposed additional pressures. This book examines welfare state transformations across a representative range of European countries and at the EU level, and considers likely new directions in social policy. It reviews the dominant neo-liberal austerity response and discusses social investment, fightback, welfare chauvinism and protectionism. It argues that the class solidarities and cleavages that shaped the development of welfare states are no longer powerful. Tensions surrounding divisions between old and young, women and men, immigrants and denizens, and the winners in a new more competitive world and those who feel left behind are becoming steadily more important. European countries have entered a period of greater political instability and this is reflected in policy directions. Austerity predominates nearly everywhere, but patterns of social investment, protectionism, neo-Keynesian intervention and fightback vary between countries. We identify areas of convergence and difference in European welfare state futures.

scholarly journals The role of European welfare states in intergenerational money transfers: a micro-level perspective

2010 ◽  
Vol 30 (8) ◽  
pp. 1315-1342 ◽  
Author(s):  
NIELS SCHENK ◽  
PEARL DYKSTRA ◽  
INEKE MAAS
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Welfare States ◽  
State Spending ◽  
Parents And Children ◽  
State Regime ◽  
Micro Level ◽  
Money Transfers ◽  
To Receive ◽  
European Welfare States

ABSTRACTThis article uses a comprehensive theoretical framework to explain why parents send money to particular children, and examines whether intergenerational solidarity is shaped by spending on various welfare domains or provisions as a percentage of gross domestic product. The theoretical model at the level of parents and children distinguishes parental resources and children's needs as the factors most likely to influence intergenerational money transfers. Differences in state spending on various welfare domains are then used to hypothesise in which countries children with specific needs are most likely to receive a transfer. For parents we hypothesise in which countries parents with specific available resources are most likely to send a transfer. We use data from the first wave of the Survey of Health and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) to analyse the influence of welfare-state provisions on the likelihood of intergenerational transfers in ten European countries. The results indicate that, in line with our expectations, the likelihood of a transfer being made is the outcome of an intricate resolution of the resources (ability) of the parents and the needs of a child. Rather large differences between countries in money transfers were found. The results suggest that, at least with reference to cross-generational money transfers, no consistent differences by welfare state regime were found.

scholarly journals Shaping tolerant attitudes towards immigrants: The role of welfare state expenditures

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolin Rapp
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
General Purpose ◽  
Welfare States ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Social Tolerance ◽  
Democratic Principle ◽  
Western European ◽  
State Expenditures ◽  
European Welfare States

This article contributes to the ongoing discussion on how tolerance may be fostered in Western European countries and to the question of how contextual factors such as welfare state expenditures may contribute to this formation. Tolerance is understood as a basic democratic principle that helps civil societies cope with rising levels of diversity stemming from increased immigration and individualism. Within the tolerance literature, it is commonly agreed upon that a comprehensive welfare state is capable of bridging class divides and overcoming social categorization. However, over the past decades, European welfare states experienced an ongoing influx of immigrants, challenging their general purpose and increasing notions of ‘welfare chauvinism’. Drawing on insights from both tolerance and welfare state solidarity literature, we implement hierarchical analyses based on Eurobarometer data to assess the potential influence of welfare state universalism on political and social tolerance in 15 Western European countries. Moreover, we demonstrate that this relationship is highly conditional on the degree of ethnic heterogeneity within a country.

The Redistributive Impact of ‘Old’ and ‘New’ Social Spending

2013 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 513-539 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARIA VAALAVUO
Keyword(s):  
Social Policy ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Action ◽  
Elderly Care ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Welfare States ◽  
Social Spending ◽  
Social Investment ◽  
Social Risks ◽  
The Rich

AbstractThe welfare state literature has recently identified a shift from the protection against traditional risks to social investment. In this new future-oriented and activation-based social policy, the focus is on the redistribution of opportunities instead of income. Even if vertical redistribution from the rich to poor may be only one rationale of social action, it should not be overlooked when directing social policy from insurance to investment. This article has two objectives: first, it investigates how real this shift is in macro-economic terms, and, secondly, whether the increased focus on new social risks and social investment has possibly changed welfare states’ commitment to redistribute from the rich to poor. I compare the distribution of benefits from ‘old’ spending categories (such as retirement or unemployment) with those from ‘new’ ones (such as having care responsibilities). Analysing six European countries representing different welfare state regimes, I find no evidence that new social spending would mean necessarily renouncing egalitarian ambitions. On the contrary, in all countries the distribution of new spending is more equal or pro-poor than the spending on old social risks. Different households benefit in distinct ways: the elderly benefiting the most from traditional spending (with the exception of elderly care that is categorised here as ‘new’ social spending) and families with children and single parents from new spending.

scholarly journals LEGAL STATUS OF INDIVIDUALS AS SUBJECTS OF SOCIAL RISK MANAGEMENT

2020 ◽  
pp. 576-603
Author(s):  
E. A. Istomina ◽  
◽  
M. Yu. Fedorova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Social Security ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Risk ◽  
Social Risks ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Social ◽  
Srm System

Introduction: the article analyzes current legislation of Russia and some foreign countries as well as the views of Russian and foreign scholars on the legal status of individuals as subjects of the social security legal relations in the context of the social risk management (SRM) conceptual framework. Purpose and objectives: based on the modern ideas of social risks, to study the status of individuals as actors within the SRM system having specific rights and responsibilities. Methods: analysis and synthesis of scientific and legal information, historical and comparative methods. Results: today social security is considered a vital part of the SRM system. Having analyzed the specific features and dynamics of social risks, the authors conclude that to some considerable degree these risks are subjective in nature, which should determine a more active role of individuals. The article analyzes not only the legal personality of individuals in the social security legal relations but also – in a broader context – their agency in the SRM system. The authors provide examples of legislative regulation in some foreign countries: the French Republic, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the United States of America. Different models of the individuals’ participation in the SRM system are presented. Based on the extent of different SRM subjects’ involvement and the distribution of the responsibility for the protection against social risks among them, the authors identify paternalistic, market-based (liberal), mixed (complex), and transitional models. Based on the extent of the individual’s interest in the protection against social risks and their readiness for taking actions in this sphere, the authors distinguish active and passive SRM models (with the latter one including indifferent and parasitical models). Conclusions: the paper offers a new approach to the understanding of social risks and protection against these (including through social security), and also to the role of individuals as subjects of social risk management.

A Social Investment Turn in East Asia?

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timo Fleckenstein ◽  
Soohyun Christine Lee
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
East Asia ◽  
Family Policy ◽  
Welfare States ◽  
Low Fertility ◽  
Female Employment ◽  
Industrial Workers ◽  
Social Investment ◽  
Investment Policies ◽  
Employment Participation

The welfare states of Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan were built by conservative elites to serve the project of late industrialization, and for this reason the East Asian developmental welfare state focused its resources on those who were deemed most important for economic development (especially male industrial workers). Starting in the 1990s and increasingly since the 2000s, the developmental welfare state has experienced a far-reaching transformation, including the expansion of family policy to address the post-industrial challenges of female employment participation and low fertility. This chapter assesses social investment policies in East Asia, with a focus on family policy and on the South Korean case, where the most comprehensive rise of social investment policies were observed.

scholarly journals Social Investment, Employment and Policy and Institutional Complementarities: A Comparative Analysis across 26 OECD Countries

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
VINCENT BAKKER ◽  
OLAF VAN VLIET
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Positive Association ◽  
Oecd Countries ◽  
Employment Outcomes ◽  
Social Investment ◽  
Investment Policies ◽  
Employment Rates ◽  
Marginal Returns ◽  
Welfare State Regimes

Abstract Raising employment has been at the heart of EU strategies for over twenty years. Social investment, by now a widely debated topic in the comparative welfare state literature, has been suggested as a way to pursue this. However, there are only a couple of systematic comparative analyses that focus on the employment outcomes associated with social investment. Analyses of the interdependence of these policies with regard to their outcomes are even more scarce. We empirically analyse the extent to which variation in employment rates within 26 OECD countries over the period 1990-2010 can be explained by effort on five social investment policies. We additionally explore the role of policy and institutional complementarities. Using time-series cross-section analyses we find robust evidence for a positive association between effort on ALMPs and employment rates. For other policies we obtain mixed results. ALMPs are the only policies for which we observe signs of policy interdependence, which point at diminishing marginal returns. Additionally, our analysis demonstrates that the interdependence of social investment policies varies across welfare state regimes. Together, this indicates that the employment outcomes of social investment policies are also contingent on the broader framework of welfare state policies and institutions.

scholarly journals Social Investment, Redistribution or Basic Income? Exploring the Association Between Automation Risk and Welfare State Attitudes in Europe

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
MARIUS R. BUSEMEYER ◽  
ALEXANDER H. J. SAHM
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Technological Change ◽  
European Social Survey ◽  
Welfare States ◽  
Basic Income ◽  
Social Investment ◽  
Market Outcomes ◽  
Social Survey ◽  
Investment Policies ◽  
Using Data

Abstract Rapid technological change – the digitalization and automation of work – is challenging contemporary welfare states. Most of the existing research, however, focuses on its effect on labor market outcomes, such as employment or wage levels. In contrast, this paper studies the implications of technological change for welfare state attitudes and preferences. Compared to previous work on this topic, this paper adopts a much broader perspective regarding different kinds of social policy. Using data from the European Social Survey, we find that individual automation risk is positively associated with support for redistribution, but negatively with support for social investment policies (partly depending on the specific measure of automation risk that is used), while there is no statistically significant association with support for basic income. We also find a moderating effect of the overall size of the welfare state on the micro-level association between risk and preferences.

Risk Privatisation and Social Investment – Self-Employment in the United Kingdom

2020 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 261-283
Author(s):  
Kevin Caraher ◽  
Enrico Reuter
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Private Insurance ◽  
Social Investment ◽  
Work Related ◽  
Policy Interventions ◽  
Self Employment ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Social Risks ◽  
The One

Abstract With increasing numbers of self-employed persons in the United Kingdom (UK) struggling to protect themselves via personal savings or private insurance against work-related social risks (an issue that has gained further importance in light of the Covid-19 pandemic), this article first discusses self-employment as a type of work that implies intrinsically privatised forms of risk management. Secondly, current social policy interventions towards vulnerable self-employed persons in the United Kingdom (UK) are analysed to identify the mix of instruments used for, on the one hand, investment and support and, on the other hand, conditionality, coercion and activation. Finally, we explore how responsibilities for risk management manifest themselves and argue that the expansion of activation and conditionality increases pressures upon self-employed workers with insufficient incomes and thus indicates a far-reaching risk privatisation, while undermining the idea of a meaningful social investment approach.

scholarly journals Invited Commentary: Social Cohesion, Depression, and the Role of Welfare States

2019 ◽  
Vol 189 (4) ◽  
pp. 354-357
Author(s):  
Mikael Rostila
Keyword(s):  
Social Capital ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Cohesion ◽  
State Theory ◽  
Welfare States ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Neighborhood Disorder ◽  
Welfare Regimes ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract In this issue of the Journal, Baranyi et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2019;000(00):000–000) examine the longitudinal associations of perceived neighborhood disorder and social cohesion with depressive symptoms among persons aged 50 years or more in 16 different countries. An important contribution of their article is that they study how neighborhood-level social capital relates to depression in different welfare-state contexts. Although the authors provide empirical evidence for some significant differences between welfare states in the relationship between social capital and depression, they say little about potential explanations. In this commentary, I draw attention to welfare-state theory and how it could provide us with a greater understanding of Baranyi et al.’s findings. I also discuss the potential downsides of grouping countries into welfare regimes. I primarily focus on the associations between social cohesion and depression, as these associations were generally stronger than those for neighborhood disorder and depression. Finally, I provide some suggestions for future research within the field and discuss whether the findings could be used to guide policies aimed at increasing social cohesion and health.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document