scholarly journals Health inequalities and welfare state regimes: theoretical insights on a public health 'puzzle'

2011 ◽  
Vol 65 (9) ◽  
pp. 740-745 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Bambra
2012 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 858-879 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Richter ◽  
Katharina Rathman ◽  
Saoirse Nic Gabhainn ◽  
Alessio Zambon ◽  
William Boyce ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 399-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clare Bambra ◽  
Gopalakrishnan Netuveli ◽  
Terje A. Eikemo

This article uses data from three waves of the European Social Survey (2002, 2004, 2006) to compare educational inequalities in self-reported health (good vs. bad) and limiting longstanding illness in six age groups based on decade of birth (1930s–1980s) in 17 countries, categorized into four welfare state regimes (Anglo-Saxon, Bismarckian, Scandinavian, Southern). The authors hypothesized that health inequalities in these age groups would vary because of their different welfare state experiences—welfare state regime life courses—both temporally, in terms of different phases of welfare state development (inequalities smaller among older people), and spatially, in terms of welfare state regime type (inequalities smaller among older Scandinavians). The findings are that inequalities in health tended to increase, not decrease, with age. Similarly, inequalities in health were not smallest in the Scandinavian regime or among the older Scandinavian cohorts. In keeping with the rest of the literature, the Bismarckian and Southern regimes had smaller educational inequalities in health. Longitudinal analysis that integrates wider public health factors or makes smaller comparisons may be a more productive way of analyzing cross-national variations in health inequalities and their relationship to welfare state life courses.


2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol C. Guarnizo-Herreño ◽  
Richard G. Watt ◽  
Nathaly Garzón-Orjuela ◽  
Georgios Tsakos

Author(s):  
Espen Dahl ◽  
Johan Fritzell ◽  
Eero Lahelma ◽  
Pekka Martikainen ◽  
Anton Kunst ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Klaus Hurrelmann ◽  
Katharina Rathmann ◽  
Matthias Richter

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
C Rinaldi ◽  
M P M Bekker

Abstract Background The political system is an important influencing factor for population health but is often neglected in the public health literature. This scoping review uses insights from political science to explore the possible public health consequences of the rise of populist radical right (PRR) parties in Europe, with welfare state policy as a proxy. The aim is to generate hypotheses about the relationship between the PRR, political systems and public health. Methods A literature search on PubMed, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar resulted in 110 original research articles addressing 1) the relationship between the political system and welfare state policy/population health outcomes or 2) the relationship between PRR parties and welfare state policy/population health outcomes in Europe. Results The influence of political parties on population health seems to be mediated by welfare state policies. Early symptoms point towards possible negative effects of the PRR on public health, by taking a welfare chauvinist position. Despite limited literature, there are preliminary indications that the effect of PRR parties on health and welfare policy depends on vote-seeking or office-seeking strategies and may be mediated by the political system in which they act. Compromises with coalition partners, electoral institutions and the type of healthcare system can either restrain or exacerbate the effects of the PRR policy agenda. EU laws and regulations can to some extent restrict the nativist policy agenda of PRR parties. Conclusions The relationship between the PRR and welfare state policy seems to be mediated by the political system, meaning that the public health consequences will differ by country. Considering the increased popularity of populist parties in Europe and the possibly harmful consequences for public health, there is a need for further research on the link between the PRR and public health.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  

Abstract Populist radical right (PRR) parties have been steadily expanding, not only in the number of supporters they gain and the seats they win in governments, but more importantly they have been increasingly elected into governmental coalitions as well as presidential offices. With the prominence of these authoritarian, nationalistic and populist parties, it is often difficult to discern what kind of policies they actually stand for. Particularly with regards to the welfare state and public health, it is not always clear what these parties stand for. At times they call for a reduction of health-related welfare provision, despite the fact that this goes against the will of the “ordinary people”, their core supporters; they often promote radical reductions of welfare benefits among socially excluded groups - usually immigrants, whom are most in need of such services; and finally they often mobilize against evidence-based policies. The purpose of this workshop is to present the PRRs actual involvement in health care and health policies across various countries. As PRR parties increase and develop within but also outside of the European continent it is necessary to keep track of their impact, particularly with regards to health and social policies. Although research surrounding PRR parties has significantly expanded over the last years, their impact on the welfare state and more specifically health policies still remains sparse. This workshop will present findings from the first comprehensive book connecting populist radical right parties with actual health and social policy effects in Europe (Eastern and Western) as well as in the United States. This workshop presents five country cases (Austria, Poland, the Netherlands, the United States) from the book Populist Radical Right and Health: National Policies and Global Trends. All five presentations will address PRR parties or leaders and their influence on health, asking the questions “How influential are PRR parties or leaders when it comes to health policy?” “Do the PRR actually have an impact on policy outcomes?” and “What is the actual impact of the health policies implemented by PRR parties or leaders?” After these five presentations, the participants of the workshop will be engaged in an interactive discussion. Key messages As the number of PRR parties increase worldwide and their involvement in national governments become inevitable, new light must be shed on the impact these political parties have on public health. Politics needs to become better integrated into public health research. The rise of PRR parties in Europe might have serious consequences for public health and needs to be further explored.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
VINCENT BAKKER ◽  
OLAF VAN VLIET

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document