The four global worlds of welfare capitalism: Institutional, neoliberal, populist and residual welfare state regimes

2022 ◽  
pp. 095892872110505
Author(s):  
Erdem Yörük ◽  
İbrahim Öker ◽  
Gabriela Ramalho Tafoya

What welfare state regimes are observed when the analysis is extended globally, empirically and theoretically? We introduce a novel perspective into the ‘welfare state regimes analyzes’ – a perspective that brings developed and developing countries together and, as such, broadens the geographical, empirical and theoretical scope of the ‘welfare modelling business’. The expanding welfare regimes literature has suffered from several drawbacks: (i) it is radically slanted towards organisation for economic co-operation and development (OECD) countries, (ii) the literature on non-OECD countries does not use genuine welfare policy variables and (iii) social assistance and healthcare programmes are not utilized as components of welfare state effort and generosity. To overcome these limitations, we employ advanced data reduction methods, exploit an original dataset that we assembled from several international and domestic sources covering 52 emerging markets and OECD countries and present a welfare state regime structure as of the mid-2010s. Our analysis is based on genuine welfare policy variables that are theorized to capture welfare generosity and welfare efforts across five major policy domains: old-age pensions, sickness cash benefits, unemployment insurance, social assistance and healthcare. The sample of OECD countries and emerging market economies form four distinct welfare state regime clusters: institutional, neoliberal, populist and residual. We unveil the composition and performance of welfare state components in each welfare state regime family and develop politics-based working hypotheses about the formation of these regimes. Institutional welfare state regimes perform high in social security, healthcare and social assistance, while populist regimes perform moderately in social assistance and healthcare and moderate-to-high in social security. The neoliberal regime performs moderately in social assistance and healthcare, and it performs low in social security, and the residual regime performs low in all components. We then hypothesize that the relative political strengths of formal and informal working classes are key factors that shaped these welfare state regime typologies.

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.


1996 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Walker ◽  
Chack-Kie Wong

This article employs case studies of China and Hong Kong to question the western ethnocentric construction of the welfare state that predominates in comparative social policy research. The authors argue that welfare regimes, and particularly the “welfare state,” have been constructed as capitalist-democratic projects and that this has the damaging effect of excluding from analyses not only several advanced capitalist societies in the Asian-Pacific area but also the world's most populous country. If welfare state regimes can only coexist with western political democracies, then China and Hong Kong are excluded automatically. A similar result occurs if the traditional social administration approach is adopted whereby a “welfare state” is defined in terms only of direct state provision. The authors argue that such assumptions are untenable if state welfare is to be analyzed as a universal phenomenon. Instead of being trapped within an ethnocentric welfare statism, what social policy requires is a global political economy perspective that facilitates comparisons of the meaning of welfare and the state's role in producing it north, south, east and west.


2011 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuela Arcanjo

As from the beginning of the 1990s, almost all European countries have introduced wide-reaching social changes, among others in eligibility, entitlement, benefits structures and in the sources of financing. In this article, we propose that a consequence of those reforms may have been a repositioning of some countries in the welfare clusters. To test this hypothesis, we apply the two bi-dimensional classifications of Bonoli (1997) and Kautto (2002) to ten countries as representative of different welfare regimes. Our results reveal an interesting repositioning of some countries, especially Portugal, the UK and Sweden that represents evidence of welfare state reforms.


2005 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clare Bambra

The nature of welfare regimes has been an ongoing debate within the comparative social policy literature since the publication of Esping-Andersen's ‘Three Worlds of Welfare’ (1990). This article draws upon recent developments within this debate, most notably Kasza's assertions about the ‘illusory nature’ of welfare regimes, to highlight the health care discrepancy. It argues that health care provision has been a notable omission from the wider regimes literature and one which, if included in the form of a health care decommodification typology, can give credence to Kasza's perspective by highlighting the diverse internal arrangements of welfare states and welfare state regimes.


1996 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-227 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Boreham ◽  
Richard Hall ◽  
Martin Leet

ABSTRACTThis paper is concerned with the political determinants of the significantly different rates of welfare expenditure which characterise advanced capitalist countries. The research concentrates on the connections between the organization and mobilization of a key political actor pursing social wage benefits – the labour movement – and different levels across nations of welfare provision, including expenditure on health, social security consumption expenditure and social security transfers. The paper uses disaggregated, pooled time series data on welfare provision in 15 OECD countries, 1974–1988, to test the association between more comprehensive welfare state regimes and state structures that facilitate the intervention of organized labour movements in the policy process.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-32
Author(s):  
Ágnes OROSZ ◽  
◽  
Norbert SZIJÁRTÓ ◽  

In this paper, we provide a macro-comparative assessment of welfare state convergence. Using the welfare state regime approach, the paper analyses the development of main welfare state indicators within in the enlarged European Union. In this study we capitalize on descriptive statistics and a single convergence analysis based on standard deviation in order to capture alterations in national welfare models of 26 European countries and among acknowledged welfare regimes. Our fundamental aim is to seize on long-term processes (convergence, divergence, or persistence), so we cover almost a two-decade period starting at 2000. Our results, in general, suggest that convergence among welfare states (different indicator of social spending) of European countries is particularly weak, however convergence inside welfare regimes is significantly stronger apart from the Anglo-Saxon group. The pre-crisis period was characterized by a stronger convergence among European countries as a consequence of economic prosperity and intense EU intervention.


2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dorota Kawiorska

This  paper  addresses  issues  related to health care in the context of the debate about the typology of welfare state regimes and comparative studies conducted in reference to the debate. Particular attention has been paid to the phenomenon of decommodification as one of the key dimensions that define welfare regimes identified in the literature associated with this debate. The study presents a health decommodification index, on the basis of which an attempt has been made to assess the decommodification potential of health care, taking into account the situation in the 28 EU Member States in 2012. The identification of a widely understood accessibility of publicly funded health care as a basic measure for assessing the decommodifying features of health programs is an important result of the empirical analysis. The study has also confirmed the views expressed in the literature about the existence of practical obstacles standing in the way of developing a universal typology of welfare states.


Author(s):  
David Garland

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.


2016 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Avi Ben-Bassat ◽  
Momi Dahan

AbstractIn this paper we construct an index of constitutional commitment to social security (CCSS) in seven areas: Old Age, Survivors, Disability, Unemployment, Sickness, Work Injury, and Income Support. We have found a positive connection between our measure of constitutional commitment to social security and the extent and coverage of actual measures of social security laws. The constitutional text of each nation seems to play a role in explaining the large variations in welfare state coverage around the world.


2012 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 235-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kjetil A. van der Wel ◽  
Espen Dahl ◽  
Karsten Thielen

In comparative studies of health inequalities, public health researchers have usually studied only disease and illness. Recent studies have also examined the sickness dimension of health, that is, the extent to which ill health is accompanied by joblessness, and how this association varies by education within different welfare contexts. This research has used either a limited number of countries or quantitative welfare state measures in studies of many countries. In this study, the authors expand on this knowledge by investigating whether a regime approach to the welfare state produces consistent results. They analyze data from the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC); health was measured by limiting longstanding illness (LLSI). Results show that for both men and women reporting LLSI in combination with low educational level, the probabilities of non-employment were particularly high in the Anglo-Saxon and Eastern welfare regimes, and lowest in the Scandinavian regime. For men, absolute and relative social inequalities in sickness were lowest in the Southern regime; for women, inequalities were lowest in the Scandinavian regime. The authors conclude that the Scandinavian welfare regime is more able than other regimes to protect against non-employment in the face of illness, especially for individuals with low educational level.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document