Social Risk, Political Detachment and Welfare State: De-Commodification

Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Daniel Fernando Carolo ◽  
José António Pereirinha

AbstractThis paper presents a data series on social expenditure in Portugal for the period 1938-2003. The series was built with the aim of identifying and characterizing the most significant phases in the process leading up to the current welfare state system in this country. The establishment of a social insurance (Previdência) in 1935 was one of the founding pillars of the Estado Novo (New State). Reforms to Social Welfare (Previdência Social) in 1962, while in the full throes of the New State, policy measures taken after the revolution of 1974 and a new orientation for social policy following the accession of Portugal to the European Economic Community (EEC) in the mid-1980s brought about significant transformations in the institutional organizational structure that provided welfare and conferred social rights in Portugal. To understand this process, knowledge is needed of the transformations to the institutional structures governing the organizations that provided welfare, welfare coverage in terms of the type of benefit and the population entitled to social risk protection, the magnitude of spending on benefits associated with these risks, as well as how benefits were allocated between the institutions. We built a data series for the period 1938-1980, which can then be matched to data already published in the OECD Social Expenditure Database from 1980 onwards. As a result, a consistent series for social expenditure from 1938 to 2003 was obtained. The methodology used to create the series enabled us to measure the impact of the variation in population coverage for social risks and the average generosity of benefits on the relative share of social expenditure in GDP. We present an interpretive reading for the full period, covering the New State and the Democracy from 1974, of the process of building the welfare state in Portugal.


Author(s):  
David Garland

To remain vital and effective, welfare states must adapt to changing social, political, and cultural circumstances. For several decades the world’s advanced nations have been transitioning from industrial to post-industrial production. Welfare states have been faced with new kinds of social risk, new forms of economic insecurity, and new difficulties dealing with the older problems for which they were designed. Adjusting to these upheavals is a challenge for welfare state governance everywhere and, although national responses vary, the evidence suggests that a new generation of policies is being developed: ‘Welfare State 3.0’. ‘Post-industrial transitions: towards WS 3.0’ discusses the socio-economic transformations and adaptive reforms that are currently unfolding.


2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 547-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marion Ellison ◽  
Menno Fenger

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).


2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 198-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susanne Alm ◽  
Kenneth Nelson ◽  
Rense Nieuwenhuis

Abstract In this study, we analyse the sharp rise in poverty among working-age singles and single parents in Sweden. In a dual-earner society like Sweden, we show that the return of mass unemployment in combination with the retreat of a generous and inclusive welfare state have substantially increased the poverty risks of single-adult households, who cannot rely on the income buffering effect of the family. Whereas cutbacks to unemployment benefits have been detrimental for the relative income position of single-adult households, the poverty risks of couples with and without children are much less affected. Individual-level characteristics of the poor persons themselves provide little explanatory leverage for why trends in poverty diverge by family form. Our results raise a number of issues of relevance for the wider academic debate about the capacity of the welfare state to adequately respond to both old and new social risk groups.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document